:00:12. > :00:16.The battle of the badger cull turns nasty. Newsnight goes undercover in
:00:16. > :00:20.the undergrowth. And learns how threats and intimidation towards
:00:20. > :00:23.farmers could jeopardise the Government's plans. It was
:00:23. > :00:27.harassment, they said you have fantastic garden, a fantastic-
:00:27. > :00:32.looking farm, you must have a lovely lifestyle there. You enter
:00:32. > :00:36.into the badger scheme, you will come up with some consequences.
:00:36. > :00:39.Bill Oddie is against the cull, he is with us. We will ask if the
:00:39. > :00:45.killing of these animals make scientific sense.
:00:45. > :00:49.The budget for overseas aid will sore next year, the PM confirms his
:00:49. > :00:54.commitment, but is he right. There are concerns that the aid budget is
:00:54. > :00:58.growing so fast that the civil servants in here are having to do
:00:58. > :01:01.the equivalent of shovelling money out the door to get it out fast
:01:01. > :01:07.enough. The Liberal Democrats are telling us why we should vote for
:01:07. > :01:11.them in the next election. Tomorrow Nick Clegg will try to rival the
:01:11. > :01:13.speech made by Vince Cable, he will say there is no turning back on
:01:13. > :01:17.deficit reduction, and tell the country he's still strong enough to
:01:18. > :01:27.make the tough choices. How does your brain respond to information,
:01:28. > :01:28.
:01:28. > :01:32.pictures, number, words? Welcome to the art of data visualisation.
:01:32. > :01:39.Good evening. Will badgers be to David Cameron what hunted foxes
:01:39. > :01:44.became to Tony Blair? A totemic, or toxic symbol of the curious
:01:44. > :01:47.relationship the English have with their animals, and something that
:01:47. > :01:56.does not welcome political interference. Since the badger cull
:01:56. > :02:01.received its license, 100,000 people petitioned to stop it.
:02:01. > :02:06.We look at the intimidation for farmers by protesters. Some say the
:02:06. > :02:09.cull will have no significant effect against TB, but the
:02:09. > :02:12.Government says it has to be tried. In the dead of night, disputed
:02:12. > :02:17.territory in the latest clash between farmers and wildlife
:02:17. > :02:21.campaigners. Using a night vision camera, we
:02:21. > :02:26.were secretly shown one of the largest sets in Gloucestershire, a
:02:26. > :02:30.pilot zone for the mass slaughter of badgers. This is one of the
:02:30. > :02:36.first areas where the cull will begin, in the Seth behind me, bait
:02:36. > :02:39.will be -- set behind me, bait will be laid to encourage badgers to
:02:39. > :02:43.come out to eat, when they are in the habit of doing, that they will
:02:43. > :02:47.be shot. Cattle farmers say the move will
:02:47. > :02:51.limited endless spread of TB through their herds. But the plans
:02:51. > :02:55.are provoking fury. Any day now, the silence of the Gloucestershire
:02:55. > :02:59.night will be broken, as campaigners rampage around the area,
:02:59. > :03:02.making as much noise as possible to scare the badgers away. They say
:03:02. > :03:09.that if they see anyone with a shotgun, they will stand in the way
:03:09. > :03:13.to stop the badgers getting hurt. Protestor and farmer, there is a
:03:13. > :03:23.gulf in mutual understanding and sympathy. Both are certain they are
:03:23. > :03:27.right. January has helped organised the Gloucestershire -- Jan has
:03:27. > :03:32.helped organised the Gloucestershire cull, his own farm
:03:32. > :03:36.lies out of the boundary. TB has laid siege to his dairy herd,
:03:36. > :03:40.costing him, he estimates, half a million pounds. We have to do
:03:40. > :03:44.something different now, to sit back and let farmers take the
:03:44. > :03:48.strain. We know DEFRA's budget is coming under pressure, cutbacks are
:03:48. > :03:51.likely, pressure will be ramped up again. There is a huge threat to
:03:51. > :03:54.the cattle industry this the west of the country, if we doesn't do
:03:54. > :03:59.something effective against the disease. This protestor co-
:03:59. > :04:06.ordinates the group Stop The Cull. He's promising direct action, and
:04:06. > :04:11.wants to remain anonymous, in case he's targeted. We will be using
:04:11. > :04:18.megaphones to disrupt the cull directly, so if we see maxmen and
:04:18. > :04:24.see badgers we will make -- marksmen we will make noise to
:04:24. > :04:31.scare them off. He is one of three groups opposed to the cull?
:04:31. > :04:34.largest group RSPCA, with Brian May, they are broadly politically
:04:34. > :04:39.lobbying. We are a direct action group going in, and stop the cull
:04:39. > :04:44.taking place. There is a much more extreme group, which I would guess
:04:44. > :04:47.would be the Animal Liberation Front. What sort of tactics are
:04:47. > :04:52.they threatening? The Animal Liberation Front have put out
:04:52. > :04:58.communiques saying they will superglue the cashpoints of
:04:58. > :05:03.Sainsbury's. If it stocks milk from cull areas? Yes. It isn't just
:05:03. > :05:10.protests, but locals are facing economic consequences too, with a
:05:10. > :05:14.possible consumer boycott. Areas like Tewkesbury rely on the tourist
:05:14. > :05:18.trade, while some supermarkets are reassuring their customers they
:05:18. > :05:22.went stock milk that comes from the cull areas. The protesters claim
:05:22. > :05:26.that farmers in Gloucestershire are losing heart, and support for the
:05:26. > :05:30.cull. With some even pulling out because of the pressure. That's why
:05:30. > :05:33.they are not taking part in the cull? Yes, they initial low said
:05:33. > :05:37.they would, now they are saying they won't. -- initially said they
:05:37. > :05:40.would, now they are saying they won't. What has changed their mind?
:05:40. > :05:44.It is the amount of publicity it is getting and the amount of public
:05:44. > :05:48.outcry. We talk today one of those farm,
:05:48. > :05:53.she told us there was another reason for they are change of heart,
:05:53. > :05:58.a threatening phone call. It was harassment, they said you have a
:05:58. > :06:03.fantastic garden and farm, you must have a lovely lifestyle there,
:06:03. > :06:06.enter in the badger scheme you will come up with some consequences. I'm
:06:06. > :06:14.subsequently thinking about it all whether or not to go ahead, because
:06:14. > :06:18.this is rather frightening. Stop The Cull says it doesn't support
:06:18. > :06:21.such tactics? We condemn the harassment and damage to property.
:06:22. > :06:30.Scientists agree killing most of the badgers in the pilot areas will
:06:30. > :06:35.have an impact on cattle TB. If the full programme goes ahead, as many
:06:35. > :06:39.as 100,000 badgers will be culled. Reducing cattle TB by 16%. The
:06:39. > :06:44.argument between farmers and campaigners is whether that
:06:44. > :06:53.reduction justifies the slaughter. I think the emotion and sentiment
:06:53. > :06:56.about the badger is probably most of the problem. I think when, it is
:06:57. > :07:01.very difficult, as a disease, to tell people all of the problems
:07:01. > :07:05.with it, and how the badger is central in maintaining the
:07:05. > :07:09.reservoir in it. Until we deal with it in a significant way, as yet
:07:09. > :07:14.that may be vaccines and that is not ready for use, we have to look
:07:14. > :07:19.at other ways of getting on top of the disease.
:07:19. > :07:24.Vaccination, promoted as cure, not kill, is being tried over the
:07:24. > :07:29.boarder in Wales. It's labour- intensive, with each badger being
:07:29. > :07:32.trapped and injected. An oral vaccine will be more cost effective,
:07:32. > :07:38.but is still in development. Another approach, the vaccination
:07:38. > :07:43.of cattle, is banned by the EU. With no technical fix, the conflict
:07:43. > :07:46.is moving towards difficult terrain, to be played out in darkness and in
:07:46. > :07:50.anger. The badger minister, David Heath,
:07:50. > :07:56.has gone underground, we are now joined from Leicester by the bird
:07:56. > :07:59.watcher and broadcaster, Bill Oddie, who has campaigned against the cull,
:07:59. > :08:03.and by Peter Kendall, President of the National Farmers' Union, David
:08:03. > :08:07.Bowles from the RSPCA, and the Government aide Daniel Kawczynski.
:08:07. > :08:11.Thank you for joining us. If I start with you, Bill Oddie, if
:08:11. > :08:15.people are pulling out of these pilots, through intimidation, as
:08:15. > :08:20.you heard in the piece, is that a good thing? I think I would
:08:20. > :08:25.probably say it's the right result for the wrong reason. Because the
:08:25. > :08:32.thing that bothers me most, I think, it never seems to get a mention, is
:08:32. > :08:35.that we have, as conservationists, had an ever-improving relationship
:08:35. > :08:38.with farmers for a considerable time now. That was very important,
:08:39. > :08:43.because the British countryside and farmland in particular was losing
:08:43. > :08:47.its wildlife. Not just badgers, losing wildlife all down the way.
:08:47. > :08:53.And it's going to be very sad if we're now being set up against one
:08:53. > :09:00.another. Because believe me, there are plenty of farmers, not just in
:09:00. > :09:03.the cull areas, who have chosen not to go in with the cull. And it
:09:03. > :09:08.would be very detrimental to British countryside and wildlife in
:09:08. > :09:11.general. I certainly don't condone any kind of guerrilla violent
:09:11. > :09:16.tactics. Although, I have to say, the practicality of carrying out
:09:16. > :09:20.this cull is another big problem. I have watched enough badgers and
:09:20. > :09:25.filmed enough badgers to know you only have to crack a twig and Mr
:09:25. > :09:30.Badger is down in his set and he ain't coming out for several hours.
:09:31. > :09:33.How on earth marksmen are going to wander round in pitch darkness and
:09:33. > :09:40.shoot badgers, I simply don't know. There is bound to be confrontation.
:09:40. > :09:46.Let me pick up, first of all with you David Bowles, the RSPCA, you
:09:46. > :09:51.have heard Bill Oddie saying he condemns guerrilla violence tactics,
:09:51. > :09:55.this is the way it is going to happen, people will be intimidated
:09:55. > :09:59.out of participateing? We agree with Bill, we condemn violence on
:09:59. > :10:02.all sides. There has been, what we are trying to do is to highlight
:10:02. > :10:07.the fact that actually badger culling is not going to achieve
:10:07. > :10:10.what we all want to achieve, which is a reduction in bovine TB in the
:10:10. > :10:15.cattle herd. What we have seen is the Government saying to farmers,
:10:15. > :10:19.if you go down this route your problems will be solved. They are
:10:19. > :10:24.not, as you said in the piece, we could see reductions as little as
:10:24. > :10:28.3% in the cull areas, and around about 16% as an average. That is
:10:28. > :10:34.diney in terms of the fact you are wiping out 7 -- tiny in terms it of
:10:34. > :10:37.the fact you are wiping out 70% of an animal. The reason for the
:10:37. > :10:47.judicial review and the way the Government presented its figures,
:10:47. > :10:50.it shows over the average nine years of the I -- scientific
:10:50. > :10:54.reduction unit, if you go to those areas there is a 30% reduction, if
:10:54. > :10:59.you go to Ireland, where they are doing a cull of badgers, there is
:10:59. > :11:02.already over a 30% reduction. This isn't just one solution, we know we
:11:02. > :11:06.have to work on cattle movements and vaccination as well. But,
:11:07. > :11:09.reluctantly, and this is a big reluctant, because of exactly what
:11:09. > :11:12.Bill said about the relationship with the countryside and everybody
:11:12. > :11:16.who loves the countryside. Reluctantly we have to start and
:11:16. > :11:21.wind back the reservoir of disease in badgers. Bill Oddie, I'm going
:11:21. > :11:24.to let you come back. You said this was a friction between the farmers
:11:24. > :11:29.and the conservationists, surely you want to wipe out that disease?
:11:29. > :11:32.Of course, and conhave vaigsists have for years and years and years
:11:32. > :11:38.-- conservationists have for years and years and years T has been
:11:38. > :11:43.going on for many years. Proof in my hand of a publication from many
:11:43. > :11:46.years ago from the Wildlife Trust, it is telling the members what the
:11:46. > :11:49.problem is, and sympathiseing entirely with farmers and saying,
:11:49. > :11:53.basically, we are trying to achieve the same thing. My argument,
:11:53. > :11:58.frankly, if you want to put one set of people up against another set of
:11:58. > :12:02.people, let's put the farmers aside, it is the conservationists against
:12:02. > :12:07.this, flipping Government, who are showing a considerable ignorance
:12:07. > :12:12.and arrogance in everything to do with the countryside and
:12:12. > :12:18.agriculture. For the purposes of this debate you are the "flipping"
:12:18. > :12:22.Government, you can respond? What Bill Oddie hasn't talked about is
:12:22. > :12:26.the suffering of the badgers themselves, they suffer an
:12:26. > :12:32.appalling death because of bovine tuberculosis. You are culling the
:12:32. > :12:37.badgers so they feel better? limited cull of badgers, in hot
:12:37. > :12:41.spot areas, in order to try to tackle this rampent disease, which
:12:41. > :12:44.is blown out of all proportion against England. It is a bit
:12:45. > :12:48.cynical to say the badge letters be feeling better, why not stand up
:12:48. > :12:52.and say it is about industry and protecting those people who need
:12:52. > :12:56.your support? Representing a rural constituency like slowsbury, I have
:12:57. > :13:01.sat on many occasion -- Shrewsbury, I have sat on many occasions with
:13:01. > :13:09.farmers in their kitchens and seen grown men cry when all of their
:13:09. > :13:17.herds have been slaughtered. The devastation it causes to families,
:13:17. > :13:21.to smie Shropshire farm -- my Shropshire farmers and my dairy
:13:21. > :13:24.farmers, I would suggest it that Bill Oddie spend time with my
:13:24. > :13:28.constituents and farmers, and see the devastation they are going
:13:28. > :13:33.through because of the lack of action from the Labour
:13:33. > :13:36.administration for many years? Is it not a political thing that you
:13:36. > :13:39.want to be seen to be doing something, and that is what your
:13:39. > :13:43.Government is about, we have done something. We have a duty and
:13:43. > :13:47.responsibility, Sir, to ensure that there is, that England does
:13:47. > :13:51.continue to have a dairy industry. And unless we take these steps,
:13:51. > :13:54.thousands of dairy farmers will go out of business. That is not true.
:13:54. > :13:58.Let's talk about the dairy question for a second, there is now a
:13:58. > :14:02.campaign that others have signed to try to get supermarkets to register
:14:02. > :14:06.the equivalent of dolphin-friendly tuna, for example, millk from
:14:06. > :14:10.places badgers have not been culled. Is that workable and would you
:14:11. > :14:16.support it, should people be buying milk that hasn't come from those
:14:16. > :14:19.farms? To start off with you said the Number Ten petition had 100,000
:14:19. > :14:23.signatures, one of the fastest- growing petitions in over two weeks,
:14:23. > :14:26.it is still going up. It shows the depth of frustration and anger from
:14:26. > :14:30.the public. We have known from the two Government consultations that
:14:30. > :14:34.the majority of the public do not want to see culling. That is
:14:34. > :14:37.specifically about the culling, would you like people to boycott
:14:37. > :14:42.milk that didn't come from badger- friendly farms? We want people to
:14:42. > :14:46.be given the choice, whether to buy milk from a badger cull area or not.
:14:46. > :14:51.It is a simple consumer choice issue, it is not a boycott. At the
:14:52. > :14:54.moment they don't have that choice. Modern dairy issues are incredibly
:14:55. > :14:58.complicated, sometimes supermarkets buy an aggregated supply, and
:14:58. > :15:02.sometimes from a few producers. You know the problems the dairy
:15:02. > :15:05.industry is having in the UK at the moment, to try to bankrupt and put
:15:05. > :15:11.people out of business and stop people being involved and trying to
:15:11. > :15:17.save an industry. That is what I worry about this debate. In 1998
:15:17. > :15:20.there were 9,000 cattle slaughtered, last year there were 32,000 cattle
:15:20. > :15:24.slaughtered because of TB, this is an explosion of disease, we must do
:15:24. > :15:27.something about it. To try to drive people out of business to stop them
:15:27. > :15:32.tackling the reservoir of disease I think is an incredibly
:15:32. > :15:36.irresponsible line to take. What we don't know, if we get the licenses
:15:36. > :15:41.in both these areas happening, the Government has then said they will
:15:41. > :15:45.go to ten additional culls each year, where do we stop, do we wipe
:15:45. > :15:49.out 70% of the badgers in the south west of England, all over England.
:15:49. > :15:53.This is a protected species. The ironic thing is, just across the
:15:53. > :15:57.border from Daniel's constituency s the Welsh Government, looking at
:15:57. > :16:00.the same science and statistics have decided to go down a humane
:16:00. > :16:03.vaccination route, rather than a cull route. The most important
:16:03. > :16:08.thing to remember here is the Government has had a consultation
:16:08. > :16:10.on this. The scientists. The Government got rid of all its
:16:10. > :16:14.vaccination trials when it came into power, it didn't want to spend
:16:14. > :16:16.the money on it? Over 50% of the Government said they -- public said
:16:17. > :16:22.they didn't want the cull, the Government ignored them.
:16:22. > :16:27.Government line on this, to have a limited cull of badgers has the
:16:27. > :16:31.backing of the High Court. The scam badgers' Trust took us to court and
:16:31. > :16:35.the court ruled in our favour. What all of us have to remember is the
:16:35. > :16:39.High Court has assessed, and taken a huge amount of time to look
:16:39. > :16:42.through all the evidence and they backed us.
:16:43. > :16:47.If this turns into the equivalent of the fox-hunting ban for Tony
:16:47. > :16:52.Blair, which he then said he regreted, would it be worth it?
:16:52. > :16:57.very pleased that my neighbour, Owen Patterson, the new DEFRA
:16:57. > :17:02.secretary, he is committed to this, I, and other rural MPs, who have a
:17:02. > :17:06.duty and responsibility to our dairy farmer, will insist the
:17:06. > :17:09.Government fulfils this obligation in this matter. Let me ask you
:17:09. > :17:19.about the practicalities of this now, do you think they will be able
:17:19. > :17:22.
:17:22. > :17:32.to stop this going ahead? Who was that question to you -- Who was
:17:32. > :17:34.
:17:34. > :17:41.that question to? To you, Bill weeks ago and said I'm afraid this
:17:41. > :17:47.was going to turn nasty. It didn't powers to say that. It is perfectly
:17:47. > :17:51.obvious that it was. It will. It is police will be the next people who
:17:51. > :17:56.guarantee the safety of people in an area where there are people with
:17:56. > :18:03.guns, at night, in the dark, and other people wandering around
:18:03. > :18:13.trying to interrupt them. on this, is more than the amount
:18:13. > :18:14.
:18:14. > :18:16.It is not, the message Bill should be tweeting and the RSPB, is this
:18:16. > :18:23.should not turn nasty, all of the organisations campaigning against
:18:23. > :18:28.the cull should put out a really big signal that lady shouldn't meal
:18:28. > :18:34.will turn nasty, I would like to see all the campaigners for
:18:34. > :18:39.wildlife to say it shouldn't turn nasty, we should put a message out
:18:39. > :18:46.saying this sort of behaviour is beyond the pale. We don't want to
:18:46. > :18:50.there are people who also feel intimidated and scared to speak out,
:18:50. > :18:57.actually against the cull, because they feel that they are intimidated.
:18:57. > :19:02.Thank you very much all of you. It may have been clever once, but
:19:02. > :19:09.does it still make political sense be going up by a third next year,
:19:09. > :19:11.when every other budget is going the Conservative decontamination
:19:11. > :19:13.project, might now look too much like a political gamble, when, say
:19:13. > :19:20.many in the party, there is plenty of suffering close to home. Tonight
:19:20. > :19:22.at the UN, David Cameron will restate his commitment to overseas
:19:22. > :19:27.aid, despite hints that his development secretary has questions
:19:27. > :19:32.of her own, she will be by his side. For all the high-volume campaigning
:19:32. > :19:42.of Live Aid, the commitment to spend 0.7% of GDP is actually far
:19:42. > :19:42.
:19:42. > :19:46.older, it goes way back to the UN in 1970. The United Nations
:19:46. > :19:50.sponsored arrangement in 1970, it had no rhyme or reason, most
:19:50. > :19:53.countries now don't bother about it at all. We are giving now, in this
:19:53. > :19:56.country, more aid than any other country in the world with the
:19:56. > :20:00.exception of the United States, which, of course, is immensely
:20:00. > :20:04.richer than we are. Progress towards this goal has not
:20:04. > :20:10.been very impressive. Only Norway, Luxembourg, Sweden and the
:20:10. > :20:14.Netherlands manage it, according to the OECD, with Belgium not far
:20:14. > :20:18.behind, and then comes Britain on 0.6%. We are committed to hitting
:20:18. > :20:24.the target by 2013. The Prime Minister arrived in New York today,
:20:24. > :20:28.his first stop was to meet a group of young entrepeneurs, but tomorrow
:20:28. > :20:32.he will address the General Assembly of the UN, and tell them
:20:32. > :20:38.that the 0.7% commitment is more important than ever, and he will
:20:38. > :20:42.reaffirm Britain's commitment to it. This is where David Cameron's
:20:42. > :20:48.pledge gets made into reality, the Department for International
:20:48. > :20:53.Development in London. But there is, though, scepticism within Mr
:20:53. > :20:58.Cameron's own party, that this huge increase in Britain's aid budget
:20:58. > :21:04.will be well spent. Peter Bone is a Conservative MP, who almost
:21:04. > :21:09.singlehandedly attempts to get the 0.7% enshrined in British law.
:21:09. > :21:13.are talking from going from �7 billion a year to �12 billion in
:21:13. > :21:17.aid. In other words you could have �5 billion of tax cuts to get the
:21:17. > :21:21.economy going, without affecting any level of overseas aid, just
:21:21. > :21:26.keep it at the same level we have inherited. When we came to power we
:21:26. > :21:33.said overseas aid was poorly spent f we spent it better rather than
:21:34. > :21:36.increasing it, we are hooked on the 0.7%. The rise in the international
:21:36. > :21:40.development budget is spectacular, when set alongside other
:21:40. > :21:44.unfortunate Government departments. It has a rise of 34% over the next
:21:44. > :21:50.few years, the NHS is just about keeping pace with inflation. Wheen
:21:50. > :21:53.mile defence, education, the Home Office, communities and local
:21:53. > :21:56.Government, almost every other Government department is taking a
:21:56. > :21:59.big hit. Some influential Conservatives think this sends an
:21:59. > :22:03.important message about the Government's priorities. There are
:22:03. > :22:07.a number of things that David Cameron did to try to show that the
:22:07. > :22:11.Conservative Party was different from the Conservative Party of old.
:22:11. > :22:15.And things like committing to the poorest people of the world, things
:22:15. > :22:20.like maintaining the NHS budget. Things like gay marriage, are
:22:20. > :22:24.absolute signs that he is still the modernising Tory that he presented
:22:24. > :22:28.himself to the electorate before the election. As Britain's aid
:22:28. > :22:32.budget has increased, critics say all we are doing is spending more
:22:32. > :22:37.money on more marginal and questionable project. Indeed the
:22:37. > :22:40.Public Accounts Committee of the House of Commons has concluded that
:22:40. > :22:45.the Department of Development doesn't have the capacity to spend
:22:45. > :22:50.all this extra money on its own projects, instead it is having to
:22:50. > :22:53.funnel it through outside organisations with lower levels of
:22:53. > :22:56.accountability, it is doing this, say MPs, not because this is a
:22:56. > :23:00.smarter way of spending public money, no, they are doing it, they
:23:00. > :23:04.say, because it is easier. The way the projects are described is
:23:05. > :23:08.extremely vague, for example, �3020 million has gone to improve the
:23:08. > :23:13.Kenyan Government's accountability to its citizens. �94 million is
:23:13. > :23:19.going to improve the quality of life and opportunity for 2.4
:23:19. > :23:28.million in the Kolkata Metropolitan area. If you are worrying that all
:23:28. > :23:33.this is adding to our national debt, you might not like to know that
:23:33. > :23:36.�1,-- �1.4 million is to improve the economic debt of the Government
:23:36. > :23:41.of Jamaica. The House of Lords has admitted that British aid is often
:23:41. > :23:47.counter-productive, with much of it lost to corruption and middle men.
:23:47. > :23:51.It is a bonanza of consultants, it is these who are employed at large
:23:51. > :23:54.costs by the department to help them do their job. It is the
:23:54. > :23:57.consultants who are the main beneficiaries of the aid programme,
:23:57. > :24:01.rather than the poor people in the poor countries one would like to
:24:01. > :24:04.see benefiting from economic growth and economic development.
:24:04. > :24:09.Some Conservatives had hoped that the appointment of Jeremy
:24:09. > :24:15.Greenstock as the new development secretary, and -- Justine Greening,
:24:15. > :24:18.in the reshuffle as new Development Secretary, would help with the
:24:18. > :24:23.downgrading of aid, she is with the Prime Minister in New York, and we
:24:23. > :24:27.are told, fully signed up to the target.
:24:28. > :24:31.Our guests are with us. Ian Birrell, former adviser to David Cameron,
:24:31. > :24:35.now contributing editor of the Daily Mail is with me too. Adrian,
:24:35. > :24:38.when you look at the figures and see the jump in real terms, when
:24:38. > :24:42.every other department is getting cut, it is unjustifiable, isn't it?
:24:42. > :24:45.I don't think it is, firstly because it is affordable, the
:24:45. > :24:50.figure you didn't hear there, and which the British public rarely
:24:50. > :24:57.hears, that actually this costs just over a penny on each pound of
:24:57. > :25:01.Government revenue, Government spending. A penny on the pound, 99p
:25:01. > :25:04.goes elsewhere. Just a penny going towards the outcomes we are seeing
:25:05. > :25:10.from British aid. You are still talking about a jump from �7
:25:10. > :25:14.billion to �12 billion. These are substantialal sums of money at a
:25:14. > :25:19.time when things are not affordable? Taking away that aid
:25:19. > :25:22.budget, if you took it all away, you would barely make a dent in the
:25:22. > :25:26.trillion-pound debt that we have in the UK today. But the difference
:25:26. > :25:29.that aid is making is much more specific, actually, than your
:25:29. > :25:34.report showed there. For the investment that Britain will make
:25:34. > :25:40.in the next few years, the increase you just talked about, 16 million
:25:40. > :25:45.children will go to school, who don't currently go to cool. 80 mill
:25:45. > :25:48.-- school. 80 million will be vaccinated against life-threatening
:25:49. > :25:53.diseases, 77 million will get access to things like bank accounts,
:25:53. > :25:58.and things that help them work their way out of poverty. What kind
:25:58. > :26:03.of place would we be if we said no to that? The other way of putting
:26:03. > :26:10.the figure is it is �300 a household spent on aid. It is very
:26:10. > :26:17.outdated policy, nothing to do with modernisation, it is anachronism
:26:17. > :26:22.based on ideas around years ago. Educating children? The watchdog
:26:22. > :26:26.said �1 billion was spent theoretically on educating children
:26:26. > :26:30.in three African countries, and there was no improvement in
:26:30. > :26:33.literacy or numeracy, it is about achieving targets and not about on
:26:33. > :26:37.the ground. That is the biggest problem, I wouldn't object if the
:26:37. > :26:41.aid was doing something to help. But it is not. I would have no
:26:41. > :26:45.problem if it was going to help, it is corrosive, it is corroding the
:26:45. > :26:49.connection between Governments and people. It is fuelling conflict. A
:26:49. > :26:52.lot of the aid money, two-thirds of aid workers say the projects don't
:26:52. > :26:56.work. This is in this huge great booming industry, where consultants
:26:56. > :27:04.are getting rich. Let's not forget, for all the talk we hear about
:27:04. > :27:08.education and health, actually �1.3 billion goes to the EU and improves
:27:08. > :27:13.food labelling in Iceland and cleans up the EU. The whole thing
:27:13. > :27:17.ising a fast thing, D of IFD don't know what to do with the money and
:27:17. > :27:21.are shovelling out of it and lots of people get rich on the back of
:27:21. > :27:26.it. No money that goes to Iceland does that, it does to accession
:27:26. > :27:30.into the EU. That is the misunderstanding. It comes out of
:27:30. > :27:35.the aid budget. It doesn't. It goes on food labelling. Address the
:27:35. > :27:39.question of consultants which is a major one, �500 million last year,
:27:40. > :27:45.paid to consultants, many of those sums of money go straight into the
:27:45. > :27:49.pockets of the bosses who run them? I think it is absolutely right that
:27:49. > :27:53.Justine Greening take as close look at it and goes through it line by
:27:53. > :27:58.line and see where the money goes. It worries you? Absolutely. These
:27:58. > :28:02.are big challenges, we need experts wrecks need people who have dealt
:28:03. > :28:06.with these problems before to bring it to bear. Some of those will be
:28:06. > :28:09.consultants. Of course she should go through and see is there money
:28:09. > :28:13.to be spent here better spent in other ways. It is very convenient
:28:13. > :28:17.just to say it will do more harm than good. It is very nice if it we
:28:17. > :28:23.can turn around and say, let's keep all the money, there must be better
:28:23. > :28:26.solutions than that? Take the former head. DIFD in Rwanda saying
:28:27. > :28:31.it is the least effective public service there. You would like the
:28:31. > :28:35.pledge to be dropped? It is meaningless and the target
:28:35. > :28:40.ridiculous. It attacks welfare dependency at home and encourages
:28:40. > :28:44.it at home, it says that it distorts targets, and it is based
:28:44. > :28:49.on figures from the 1940s, when the UN looked at the figures six years
:28:49. > :28:52.ago and said the target should be 0.44%. Does it matter to you if it
:28:52. > :28:57.is just about a political strategy of decontamination, does it make
:28:57. > :29:00.any difference to how you see this? In a sense it doesn't matter. It is
:29:00. > :29:03.the policy. I don't believe it is just about that. I understand the
:29:03. > :29:05.argument that is being put across there. It is the policy, it was the
:29:05. > :29:10.policy of all three major parties at the last election, and so,
:29:10. > :29:16.what's happening now is simply the enactment of democracy, in fact,
:29:16. > :29:20.actually when you go out and talk to people. 77% of people oppose it.
:29:20. > :29:27.Not really. A year ago when people were asked in a fair way, not given
:29:27. > :29:32.the recession do you think we can afford the aid budget. Lots of
:29:32. > :29:37.people supported Live Aid? Most recent surveys show support is
:29:37. > :29:41.falling. It is veryiesy for an organisation founded like One, who
:29:41. > :29:44.is founded by rock stars not paying their full whack in tax, shown up
:29:44. > :29:48.for that. To advocate that people struggling in this country should
:29:48. > :29:51.pay out a lot of money on projected that don't work, and shown time and
:29:51. > :29:55.time again that they don't work, and not wanted by ordinary people.
:29:55. > :29:59.If the same amount of money was paid, not in the way it is now, but
:29:59. > :30:03.to disasters and emergencies, you wouldn't have a problem? There are
:30:03. > :30:07.issues, there is so much money, when you have a disaster you have
:30:07. > :30:13.1,000 aid groups turning up and chaos on the ground, and the cost
:30:13. > :30:20.of housing and food soaring. And many of those saying there is a
:30:20. > :30:23.huge problem with aid groups because there is so much aid money
:30:24. > :30:28.sloshing around. Those campaigning every day on the issues snow it is
:30:28. > :30:31.an investment we can afford, it is cheaper than people believe, and it
:30:31. > :30:37.is making a bigger difference than people believe and we should
:30:37. > :30:42.continue with it. Are current Lib Dem tactics working, Nick Clegg
:30:42. > :30:46.will set out how he intends to attract voters in his loader's
:30:46. > :30:51.speech tomorrow. Documents leaked today claim there is no real
:30:51. > :30:55.evidence their current strategy is working. Our political editor is in
:30:55. > :31:00.Brighton now. Take us through the documents, what happened? While we
:31:00. > :31:04.have been on air the Lib Dem leader and his wife walked past us, he has
:31:04. > :31:06.been practising his speech all night. He takes the speech
:31:07. > :31:10.incredibly seriously. Some documents came out today, they told
:31:10. > :31:13.people what they knew here already, that it is very difficult to see
:31:13. > :31:17.what message is working, particularly well for the Lib Dems,
:31:17. > :31:23.in either the south or the north of England. But back to that speech.
:31:23. > :31:27.That speech is why he made that apology last week, to much mirth
:31:27. > :31:31.and muttering from people. He wanted to clear the decks, so
:31:31. > :31:34.tomorrow he would be listened to with a message that they think can
:31:35. > :31:39.last the next two weeks and put them in a better place than the
:31:39. > :31:42.documents do suggest. The trouble is, lots of people here, activists
:31:42. > :31:46.and MPs, wonder about the strategy. The strategy is to carve out a new
:31:46. > :31:49.role for them in the centre of British politics. In the speech
:31:49. > :31:53.tomorrow he will talk about British politics being about three parties,
:31:53. > :31:56.not two, and they will being a small third party. With that he has
:31:56. > :31:59.messages on the deficit. At the start of the week we had soft
:31:59. > :32:02.language for his party, who were worried about the economy and
:32:02. > :32:05.deficit reduction. Today and tomorrow we will start to see them
:32:05. > :32:08.hardening up again as they send their delegates on their way.
:32:08. > :32:12.Saying we will have to find lots of cuts, just like the Conservatives
:32:12. > :32:14.will. So there is that message, there is also something to make
:32:14. > :32:18.them happier. There will be a policy on education and language
:32:18. > :32:22.around the environment. What he's trying to do is position them on
:32:22. > :32:26.the centre. Many MPs and activists are not sure that necessarily works.
:32:26. > :32:29.It may work in 15-20 years time, that is a generational struggle,
:32:29. > :32:33.that doesn't necessarily get them through the next general election.
:32:33. > :32:36.One more thing, people are quoting David Lloyd George, he said if
:32:37. > :32:40.you're going to jump across a chasam, it is best to do it in one
:32:41. > :32:45.step. Thank you very much. The magic of television being what
:32:45. > :32:49.it is, you might, indeed, recognise the next backdrop, the one you have
:32:49. > :32:53.just seen for our guest, the Lib Dem Home Office Minister, Jeremy
:32:53. > :32:58.Browne, who is, as we speak, swapping a quickstep with Allegra
:32:58. > :33:02.to speak with us now, about those issues she has been raising. We
:33:02. > :33:11.will go to him now. Let's start, first of all, Jeremy Browne, with
:33:11. > :33:15.this issue of the leaked document, showing "very little valid evidence
:33:15. > :33:18.that tactics work". I don't know about the leaked development, I
:33:18. > :33:21.don't think that is central to the big choices the party is facing.
:33:21. > :33:25.Nick Clegg will lay out the big choices tomorrow in his speech. As
:33:25. > :33:29.Allegra just said, there are two essential messages that hang
:33:29. > :33:32.together, one is a Deputy Prime Minister message, and the other is
:33:32. > :33:35.a Liberal Democrat party leader message. The Deputy Prime Minister
:33:35. > :33:40.message is the country needs to make the transition from austerity
:33:40. > :33:43.to prosperity. That will require some difficult decisions of us all.
:33:43. > :33:46.The Liberal Democrat leader message is the party needs to make the
:33:46. > :33:50.journey from opposition to Government, protest to power. That
:33:50. > :33:53.will require some tough decisions as well. Those two journeys are
:33:53. > :33:56.interlinked and the suck he is of the Liberal Democrats and the
:33:56. > :34:01.success of the country depends on them both working out what. I want
:34:01. > :34:05.to go back to these reports, that came from. Don't worry about the
:34:05. > :34:10.trivia, worry about the big central message. That's the big central
:34:10. > :34:13.message. Is it trivial. I have just told you what the big...I Have just
:34:13. > :34:17.told you what the strategy is, I have just told you what the
:34:17. > :34:21.strategy is. Because something is leaked doesn't make it inherently
:34:21. > :34:24.interesting. That is for me a side show. The party leader, the Deputy
:34:24. > :34:28.Prime Minister of the country, is talking about what we need to do as
:34:28. > :34:31.a country to ensure Britain's future prosperity and quality of
:34:31. > :34:35.life and standard of living, and about how the Liberal Democrats can
:34:35. > :34:39.make the journey from being a party of opposition for 75 years, to one
:34:39. > :34:43.of the three governing options in this country for the next
:34:43. > :34:46.generation those are really crucial messages right through and beyond
:34:46. > :34:50.2015. As you said before. If your tactics are working and your
:34:50. > :34:55.strategy is getting through to people. Why, on a central issue,
:34:55. > :34:58.like universal welfare, very rich mentioners receiving benefits and
:34:58. > :35:03.Winter Fuel Allowances and all the rest of it, why do we have that one
:35:03. > :35:08.policy, one day, five different views from all the Lib Dem
:35:08. > :35:13.ministers at the conference here. Different views from David Laws,
:35:13. > :35:18.Vince Cable, Nick Clegg, and Mr Foster, you can't even centrally
:35:18. > :35:24.agree on something like that? Government has made the policy
:35:24. > :35:28.completely plea -- completely clear. There is a question for the future
:35:28. > :35:35.if it is a good use of reforce relatively poor people in work to
:35:35. > :35:41.have their taxes used to give a lot of money to people like Alan Sugar
:35:41. > :35:45.and Peter Stringfellow. I would have thought, intelligent people,
:35:45. > :35:49.watching this programme, would be interested in intelligent debate at
:35:49. > :35:54.a party conference about whether poor people in work should
:35:54. > :35:57.subsidise the lifestyle of Alan Sugar, that isn't an issue for the
:35:57. > :36:01.Autumn Statement or budget. There is a big message here, when the
:36:01. > :36:04.Government says we are all in it together, that is true. Maybe
:36:04. > :36:09.people think it is a Conservative slogan or they don't like the
:36:10. > :36:14.slogan. The central truth of it remains, which is we are borrowing
:36:14. > :36:18.as a country a billion pounds every three days. That is not sustainable.
:36:18. > :36:23.If we are not make the journey from austerity to shared prosperity, we,
:36:23. > :36:28.as a country, will have to face up to difficult but hard truths. And
:36:28. > :36:35.he as a leader of a party right in the centre ground of politics will
:36:35. > :36:40.be able to talk about that some. -- tomorrow.
:36:40. > :36:44.Was the apology of Nick Clegg a success. I know you are hoping for
:36:44. > :36:48.number 40 in the UK charts with a turn around of it. Was it a
:36:48. > :36:56.constructive use of the message? There is a serious point here. We
:36:56. > :37:01.are half way through the parliament, the question for the party is
:37:01. > :37:05.whether we spend ages analysing decisions made in 2010 or go on for
:37:05. > :37:09.2015. There are two groups of people, knows who won't give Nick
:37:09. > :37:13.Clegg a hearing whatever he says. Those people will say they don't
:37:13. > :37:18.like him or agree with what he's saying. There are other people out
:37:18. > :37:24.there, those less likely to phone into talk shows and express their
:37:24. > :37:29.views in vosive rus terms, they understand that Nick Clegg hadn't
:37:29. > :37:34.been in Government and the party hadn't been in for many generations
:37:34. > :37:37.and accept that it is a place to make mistakes in politics, and
:37:37. > :37:43.accept that he made the mistake, and are willing to accept the
:37:43. > :37:47.things he has done and give him a fair hearing tomorrow. As minister
:37:47. > :37:51.for state for crime reduction, do you think when a police officer is
:37:51. > :37:55.sworn at by a member of public, do you think that person should be
:37:55. > :37:59.arrested? That is an artful way of asking yesterday another Andrew
:37:59. > :38:02.Mitchell question, which has been a theme of the media through the
:38:02. > :38:06.conference. I think the Prime Minister got it right when he said
:38:06. > :38:10.that what Andrew Mitchell was reported as saying was wrong and
:38:10. > :38:14.inappropriate, that's the point of view put by the Prime Minister, all
:38:15. > :38:20.the people watching will agree with that. Does he have to say more to
:38:20. > :38:24.explain himself, or has he done enough, according to you? I think
:38:24. > :38:28.people watching the programme will agree that if what he is report to
:38:28. > :38:33.have said is what he said, or anything approximating to that is
:38:33. > :38:38.what he said, and of course, Andrew Mitchell denies that he said what
:38:38. > :38:43.the police officer claimed he said. Well, that whole way of talking to
:38:43. > :38:46.a person like a police officer is clearly an inappropriate way, let
:38:46. > :38:49.alone a Government minister. I think for people to behave
:38:49. > :38:57.generally, it is not a question of the law but a question of good
:38:57. > :39:00.planners. Are you an image person or a word person, do you remember
:39:00. > :39:03.voices from the radio or faces from the television, if you had had to
:39:03. > :39:07.learn something off by heart, how would you do it. The science or art
:39:07. > :39:10.of data visualisation, is the growing philosophy of how best to
:39:10. > :39:14.project the material on to our brains when information is
:39:14. > :39:19.screaming at us all the time. The most successful in their field will
:39:19. > :39:23.be recognised at an award ceremony from London's ICA, we will hear
:39:23. > :39:28.from two Evangelists in the field in a moment. Here is a little of
:39:28. > :39:32.what we are talking about. The war is currently costing us �12 million
:39:32. > :39:37.a day. That is the same cost as employing 100,000 nurses and
:39:37. > :39:42.150,000 care workers. How did you feel about what you just heard from
:39:42. > :39:47.Tony Benn, now let's hear it again with the right pictures. The war is
:39:47. > :39:53.currently costing us over �12 mill kwhron a day. That is the same cost
:39:53. > :39:58.-- �12 million day, that is the same cost as 100,000 nurses and
:39:58. > :40:04.150,000 care worker. To theal cost of civilian Afghans dead, like the
:40:04. > :40:09.cost of war is unknown, but cautious estimates exceed 40,000
:40:09. > :40:16.people. Did the visuals heighten the impact. The theory of data
:40:16. > :40:21.visualisation, a sin they sees of story telling, regurpblg station
:40:21. > :40:26.and design, hits different parts of the train, maybe more analytical.
:40:26. > :40:31.Take this one, what American voters care about. You can click on
:40:31. > :40:34."climate change" and see how attitudes have changed year by year,
:40:34. > :40:44.Democrat and Republican. Then click on terrorism instead and do it all
:40:44. > :40:45.
:40:45. > :40:51.again. The process makes you feel stimulated and informed, is it
:40:51. > :40:57.meritricious. In the data bank of power plants and factories around
:40:57. > :41:01.the world, 20 -times more complex than any previous virus code, it
:41:01. > :41:05.had an array of capablities, the ability to turn up the pressure
:41:05. > :41:09.among nuclear reactors or switch off oil pipeline, and they could
:41:09. > :41:15.tell the system operators everything was normal. It looks
:41:15. > :41:19.beautiful, but the visuals are just glorified subtitles, is data
:41:19. > :41:24.visualisation truly a new art form, or the pop culture offspring of
:41:24. > :41:29.real analysis. I'm joined by two data
:41:29. > :41:33.visualisation specialists, the founder of Information Is Beautiful
:41:33. > :41:37.awards, and Kenneth Neil Cukier, the data visualisation expert from
:41:37. > :41:41.the Economist Magazine. Do you have a sense that we are taking more in,
:41:41. > :41:44.or we are just taking it in a different way? It feels there is a
:41:45. > :41:48.lot more data and information around. We are looking for some
:41:48. > :41:57.kind of solution that allows us to gobble that information and
:41:57. > :42:00.understand it on the fly. When we are moving fast. Data
:42:00. > :42:07.visualisingation seems to be able to translate that understanding
:42:07. > :42:15.quicker than text. Is it more polemic, sub blimal messages, the
:42:15. > :42:22.way that used to -- subliminal information in a way it used to?
:42:22. > :42:27.Probably not. The visualisation will have the same shortcomings as
:42:27. > :42:31.words. You can do more with it than words and less than others. It is a
:42:31. > :42:35.new medium, there is a Rennaissance going on of the new tools we have
:42:35. > :42:41.to show highly quantitative information, to say it is more poll
:42:41. > :42:46.lem kal, probably not. Let's look at a few examples, you have brought
:42:46. > :42:49.in favourites, and the viewers will know it as what we call chart porn,
:42:49. > :42:58.a way to get people to look at things they like looking at it.
:42:58. > :43:04.What is this? It is Denmark looking at survey results about Islamic
:43:04. > :43:10.head dress. The designer has done a pie chart and used the medium
:43:10. > :43:16.itself to express it. It is the way of opening up the subject, and
:43:16. > :43:20.stopping the enwit that we have when we look at it. You have the
:43:20. > :43:28.equivalent of the bar chart on the headbands? It is using a different
:43:28. > :43:33.approach to visualise that data. Has more impact and is more
:43:33. > :43:39.memorable. Take us through the next one, the 999 calls? In New York
:43:39. > :43:46.they have 311 for non-emergency phone calls, the municiple services,
:43:46. > :43:51.this, going from left to right is the frequency of certain types of
:43:51. > :43:57.calls in a period. The noise is the pink bar going through the middle.
:43:57. > :44:02.You have dead animal removal, road kill, a big issue in New York.
:44:02. > :44:07.Noisy neighbours, graffiti, and so on. Why is that more effective than
:44:07. > :44:12.a bar chart that could show meet same thing? It is depicting it as a
:44:12. > :44:16.landscape. You can roamit yourself and find your own connections,
:44:16. > :44:19.explore patterns. It is also showing lots of variables all at
:44:19. > :44:23.once. It is showing a vast and extraordinary amount of information,
:44:23. > :44:30.that you can take in immediately. Imagine if you worked in public
:44:30. > :44:33.serves and you wanted to bring those who are specialists to this
:44:33. > :44:37.type of complaint with the complaint that was made. With lost
:44:37. > :44:40.property you want it in the afternoon. You know that now
:44:40. > :44:43.through this. With the dead animal removal, you want to do that
:44:43. > :44:47.quickly, because it could be a source of health hazard. You would
:44:47. > :44:53.know when to put the person there who would be able to interact with
:44:53. > :44:57.the caller better to get emergency people to clean it up. Looking at
:44:57. > :45:01.your examples, they pick out the US map and the states, using it to
:45:01. > :45:06.very different effect. This was a mind-boggle when I saw it, I
:45:06. > :45:11.couldn't get my head round it? Great, it was not so great it was a
:45:11. > :45:16.mind boggle, but it is an interactive map, if you could mouse
:45:16. > :45:21.over it you could see more data. Russia is where Texas is. The map
:45:21. > :45:26.in the United States, in the form of the GDP of the country, that the
:45:26. > :45:30.state corresponds to. Texas has $1 trillion in terms of wealth in
:45:30. > :45:35.terms of the size of the economy. So has Russia, we put that there
:45:35. > :45:41.together. Who knew that Italy, the bot of Europe, should have an
:45:41. > :45:46.economy about the second or eighth largest in the world, also the size
:45:46. > :45:49.of California, $2 trillion. Greece we think is basket case because of
:45:49. > :45:53.the problems they face. Washington state is a small but important
:45:53. > :45:57.economy in America. You have the same in population. They stay with
:45:57. > :46:02.this map and it changes colour, talk us through now. Saudi Arabia
:46:02. > :46:07.has the same number of people as Texas? That's right. 25 million
:46:07. > :46:11.people in Saudi Arabia, it is one of the geopolitically strategic
:46:11. > :46:18.countries in the world. Mexico may not be strategic, depending on
:46:18. > :46:26.butter reet toes, but you can see that Texas punches above its weight
:46:26. > :46:30.in terms of those 25 million people having a presance if it was its own
:46:30. > :46:34.state. Poland has large state, so too California has a massive state
:46:34. > :46:39.for America. It is a way of reconcept actualising the United
:46:39. > :46:43.States, for many people it is breath taking that this one country,
:46:43. > :46:47.without one country in the UN, has the heft that it does. Fascinating,
:46:47. > :46:57.thank you very much. That is all we have time for in Newsnight tonight,
:46:57. > :47:21.
:47:21. > :47:24.Paul Mason is here tomorrow, from Paul Mason is here tomorrow, from
:47:24. > :47:28.all of us, a very good night. The worst is nearly over, certainly
:47:28. > :47:32.by Wednesday things looking better across the northern half of the UK,
:47:32. > :47:36.in terms of the lack of rain out of the sky. Heavy showers further
:47:36. > :47:39.south. A welcome return of sunshine in northern parts of England,
:47:39. > :47:43.Northern Ireland and southern Scotland. One or two showers in
:47:43. > :47:46.Northern Ireland, nothing like the intensity we have seen. Further
:47:46. > :47:50.south a scattering of heavy showers, sunshine inbetween. Temperatures
:47:50. > :47:55.into the mid-teens not feeling too bad. The south west of England,
:47:55. > :48:00.South Wales, could be the focus of heavier downpour. Not the
:48:00. > :48:04.widespread rain seen recently, the ground saturated, so more localised
:48:04. > :48:08.problems maybe. For Northern Ireland it looks like staying dry,
:48:08. > :48:13.temperatures around 14. A cool breeze flowing from the north. That
:48:13. > :48:23.is the story across much of Scotlanded today. 1 degrees in
:48:23. > :48:26.
:48:26. > :48:32.Inverness, and glos co-a fairly ples -- 14 degrees in innerves, but