:00:13. > :00:17.He's gone, nearly, Abu Hamza is tonight being deported to America,
:00:17. > :00:21.to face terrorism charges. This is the scene now at an airbase
:00:21. > :00:25.in Suffolk, where two American planes are set to take off with
:00:25. > :00:30.Hamza and four other accused. But Hamza avoided extradition for eight
:00:30. > :00:33.years. How did that happen? We will discuss that with the Conservative
:00:33. > :00:38.MP and, in his first interview, Hamza's barrister.
:00:38. > :00:42.The BBC is in the firing line, again, this time for helping its
:00:42. > :00:45.presenters avoid tax. I will be asking a senior BBC
:00:45. > :00:51.executive, why it is allowed to happen. Nothing we do is designed
:00:51. > :00:55.to enable either individuals or the BBC to avoid paying tax. And they
:00:55. > :00:59.were beaten, raped, castrated, by the British authorities in Kenya.
:00:59. > :01:09.Now they have they have won the right to sue the British Government.
:01:09. > :01:11.
:01:11. > :01:15.What other chances have the -- have the victims of Cologne yum rule of
:01:15. > :01:19.-- colonial rule have of achieving justice.
:01:19. > :01:21.Justice delayed is justice denied, goes the legal saying. By that
:01:21. > :01:26.definition, the European Court of Human Rights and British courts
:01:26. > :01:29.have manifestly denied justice. It has taken eight years to extradite
:01:29. > :01:33.the radical Muslim cleric, Abu Hamza, to the United States.
:01:33. > :01:38.Tonight, police removed Hamza and four other defendants from Long
:01:38. > :01:41.Lartin Prison, and put them on to two planes set for America. But the
:01:41. > :01:46.case has raised serious questions about the extradition process, and
:01:46. > :01:51.severely test Britain's relationship to the European Court.
:01:51. > :01:57.This report contains flash photography.
:01:57. > :02:00.Just hours after his appeal failed, Abu Hamza was on his way from Long
:02:00. > :02:09.Lartin, maximum security prison, in the West Midlands, to an airfield
:02:09. > :02:14.and a US pen tensionry. Penetenary. One of the most
:02:14. > :02:17.notorious figures in Britain, described by his own lawyers as a
:02:18. > :02:24.pantomime villain, was finally leaving the country. Soon, Abu
:02:24. > :02:30.Hamza and the other four account ofs will be on their way, flying
:02:30. > :02:35.Con Air to the United States. In a US Department of justice plane with
:02:35. > :02:39.US federal marshalls on board. It is many years since the extradition
:02:40. > :02:44.period, why has it taken so long. From the 1990s, among his own
:02:44. > :02:53.followers, he called for violence. Just do it, anything will help the
:02:53. > :02:57.infad da do it, if it is pain do it, if it is ambush, if it is anything
:02:57. > :03:02.poisonous, poison them. television interviews, he refused
:03:02. > :03:06.to condemn Al-Qaeda's bombings of US embassies in Africa.
:03:06. > :03:14.REPORTER: You support the message of killing 200 people in order to
:03:14. > :03:19.send a message? They were not meant to be murdered. You repudiate the
:03:19. > :03:24.attack, you say it was wrong? No I don't say it was wrong. In 200,
:03:24. > :03:29.there was seven arrests at Finsbury Park Mosque, where he preached,
:03:29. > :03:34.police found a stun gun, replica firearms, and CS gas cannister.
:03:34. > :03:40.Just over a year later, in 2004, Abu Hamza was arrested on a US
:03:40. > :03:44.extradition warrant, charges included setting up a training camp
:03:44. > :03:49.in Oregon, and a kidnapping in Yemen. In October 2004 he was
:03:49. > :03:55.charged in the UK with 15 offences under the Terrorism Act, that
:03:55. > :03:58.halted the process. Found guilty, he was imprisoned in 2006. It is
:03:58. > :04:04.largely waste of time, though it was very good lawyers' fees, of
:04:04. > :04:08.course. He should have been sent to the United States. There, perhaps,
:04:08. > :04:12.his defence lawyers would have got him off, so be it. What is it with
:04:12. > :04:16.British lawyers, British judges, British prosecutors, I don't know,
:04:16. > :04:21.nobody knows, that they think justice delayed is something that
:04:21. > :04:25.they can accept. In May 2007, the extradition began again, with a
:04:25. > :04:30.preliminary hearing in London. His lawyers went to the European Court
:04:30. > :04:34.of Human Rights, that halted the process, it took until 2010 for the
:04:35. > :04:39.first hearing. Many thousands of cases have flooded in, in
:04:39. > :04:43.particular from Eastern Europe, in countries such as Russia, Turkey,
:04:43. > :04:47.Romania and Poland. The court is struggling with a very large
:04:47. > :04:52.backlog of cases, something like 80,000, depending on which figures
:04:52. > :04:56.you look at. The court is aunch struggling t has limited resource -
:04:56. > :05:01.- often struggling, it has limited resources, some of the cases have
:05:01. > :05:08.very complex. That tends to slow up proceedings, to some extent. They
:05:08. > :05:14.delivered their ver vibgt in April 20 -- verdict in April 2012 and
:05:14. > :05:17.turned down the appeal against it. They said the conditions would not
:05:17. > :05:21.be degrading. Yet lawyers for Abu Hamza and the other defendant went
:05:21. > :05:24.back to the British High Court. That it has taken so long, has
:05:24. > :05:27.angered the head of the justice system itself. As he made clear
:05:27. > :05:32.last week. I'm not going to comment about an
:05:32. > :05:35.individual case, but any case that takes eight years, through a whole
:05:35. > :05:43.series of judicial processs to come to a conclusion, and you have made
:05:43. > :05:51.the point, that it hasn't yet come to a conclusion, is a source of
:05:51. > :05:55.real fury to me. One veteran MP says it's time for parliament to
:05:55. > :06:01.get involved. I think the Justice Select Committee should be looking
:06:01. > :06:05.at why it is that these incredible delays are there. What is the extra
:06:05. > :06:09.protection that alleged terrorists, terrorists, and convicted
:06:09. > :06:14.terrorists have, why is it that QCs and judges bend over backwards. It
:06:14. > :06:18.is time for a proper explanation. Most MPs are terrified to mention
:06:18. > :06:22.or criticise judges n this case it is overdue that we have a proper
:06:22. > :06:27.parliamentary examination of why justice is so delayed in this area
:06:27. > :06:32.of law and courts. Abu Hamza himself, will soon have left the
:06:32. > :06:39.country. But the questions raised by his extradition remain.
:06:39. > :06:44.Joining me in the studio is Conservative MP Mark Reckless, who
:06:44. > :06:49.sits on the Home Affairs Select Committee, and in his first
:06:49. > :06:52.interview, Abu Hamza's lawyer, Alan Jones QC. You are the man who
:06:52. > :06:56.represents Abu Hamza what has been his reaction tonight to this
:06:56. > :07:00.verdict? I haven't spoken to him today at all. I think he was
:07:00. > :07:04.expecting this. In fact, we were all expecting it. I think it has
:07:04. > :07:09.been clear since the European Court of Human Rights made its decision
:07:09. > :07:13.in April, that it was final. And nobody expected the Home Office to
:07:13. > :07:16.conduct, what we thought were the necessary medical tests, to
:07:16. > :07:19.determine whether he was fit to be extradite. You can't seriously have
:07:19. > :07:26.thought you were going to succeed with today's appeal, it was, in
:07:26. > :07:30.effect, a delaying tactic? No, we had a consultant psychiatrist, who
:07:30. > :07:36.gave his opinion to the Home Office, on the 10th of August this year,
:07:36. > :07:40.that there had been a deterioration in Abu Hamza's mental condition.
:07:40. > :07:46.Attributable to sleep deprivation for eight years. He has been kept
:07:46. > :07:50.in conditions of utmost severity in Belmarsh Prison, with very severe
:07:50. > :07:53.disability. His recommendation was there was an MRI scan, which the
:07:53. > :07:56.Home Office ignored. I don't think those are the main points. I would
:07:56. > :08:00.like to deal with the question of delay, which you have been
:08:00. > :08:04.discussing. Of course, there has been formidable delay. The point
:08:04. > :08:07.which has not been made, and ought to be made loudly and clearly, that
:08:07. > :08:12.Abu Hamza ought to have been tried in this jurisdiction for the crimes
:08:12. > :08:16.alleged against him. We will come to that. But we have the Lord Chief
:08:16. > :08:21.Justice saying now that your achievement here, the eight years
:08:21. > :08:26.of delay, are a source of real fury to him. Surely now, we all have to
:08:26. > :08:29.accept the law here has been made to look like an ass? There are very
:08:29. > :08:32.serious faults in the way extradition proceedings are handled.
:08:33. > :08:37.Don't call it an achievement to delay for eight years. The delay
:08:37. > :08:42.has been built in by Abu Hamza serving a sentence of imprisonment,
:08:42. > :08:46.and criminal proceedings brought in this country in 2004. That caused
:08:46. > :08:50.the extradition proceedings to be interrupted until 2007. The
:08:50. > :08:55.proceedings themselves took place between 2007 and June of 2008, and
:08:55. > :08:58.since then, the delays have been cued in the European Court of Human
:08:58. > :09:00.Rights -- caused in the European Court of Human Rights, where Abu
:09:00. > :09:03.Hamza's complaint of held admissible in part, as were those
:09:03. > :09:06.of the other defendants. It was treated with enormous significance
:09:06. > :09:11.and importance by the European Court of Human Rights, until the
:09:11. > :09:16.appeal was dismissed in this year. Det lays are endemic of the
:09:16. > :09:21.extradition -- delays are endemic of the extradition process. How we
:09:21. > :09:25.sought it out in Europe, I don't know, that court is overburdened
:09:25. > :09:28.with work. This is a consequence of using extradition matters instead
:09:28. > :09:34.of trying the matters as they should have been tried in this
:09:34. > :09:37.jurisdiction. We will come back to that. Stay with us, please. You sit
:09:37. > :09:41.on the Home Affairs Select Committee, you too have met the man,
:09:41. > :09:44.Abu Hamza, you met him in prison, what is your reaction to seeing him
:09:44. > :09:50.arrive just now to get on a plane to the United States? I think most
:09:50. > :09:55.people in the country, at last, it has taken such a long time. It has
:09:55. > :10:01.been a lot of money, including tax- payers' money spent, and finally
:10:01. > :10:06.this extradition is now going ahead. The delays inherent in this process
:10:06. > :10:09.are because we have the European Convention of Human Rights,
:10:09. > :10:14.incorporated, for a decade, into our domestic law. Our own courts,
:10:14. > :10:19.to the highest level, rule on that, and say whether it is Abu Hamza, or
:10:19. > :10:21.anyone else, that they can be deported. We then wait for this
:10:21. > :10:24.separate process, for the Strasbourg court to rule on
:10:24. > :10:28.something our own courts have already determined on the basis of
:10:28. > :10:31.that international law. You think in the detail of today's court
:10:31. > :10:36.judgment, there is some strengthening of the position of
:10:36. > :10:40.British courts? Absolutely, MPs such as myself and Dominic Raab, we
:10:40. > :10:46.have argued for some time that it is entirely lawful for the
:10:46. > :10:51.Government to proceed to deport Abu Hamza or others, put them on plane,
:10:51. > :10:55.and their lawyers might go to the High Court in a week or two and the
:10:55. > :10:59.decisions are upheld. We have the strongest indication yet, from the
:10:59. > :11:04.UK judiciary, that it is their decision that matters. When it is
:11:05. > :11:08.the Government, when they say that a Rule 39 injunction from
:11:08. > :11:15.Strasbourg, prevents the deportation, we see our judges
:11:15. > :11:19.saying no, it is not an injunction, it is aindcation. It indicates that
:11:19. > :11:23.the Strasbourg rules say it is not desirable. There are other people
:11:23. > :11:28.in British jails who could be swiftly on planes themselves?
:11:28. > :11:31.could be, we have the clearest judicial indication that they could
:11:31. > :11:35.be. As I as others have been arguing for a long time, the
:11:35. > :11:38.Government has to test the law, move to put the people on the plane,
:11:38. > :11:41.there may be a quick judicial review in the court. On the basis
:11:41. > :11:46.of what judges in this case judgment have been saying, and
:11:46. > :11:51.other more senior judges, extra judiciary, saying it is UK
:11:51. > :11:55.judgments that matter, and we shouldn't wait for years for
:11:55. > :11:57.Strasbourg to make its own decisions. I agree, it is good
:11:57. > :12:02.British judges are asserting themselves over important
:12:02. > :12:07.international matters. What I would like to hear Mr Reckless discuss is
:12:07. > :12:11.why British judges should not be pronounced upon the merits of the
:12:11. > :12:16.allegations made against people like Abu Hamza, and all the others,
:12:16. > :12:19.whose cases have finished. To in every case the allegation against
:12:19. > :12:22.those people could have been tried in this country, where the judicial
:12:22. > :12:26.qualities that Mr Reckless wants to see brought to bear, could be
:12:26. > :12:30.applied in every one of those cases, which is where the people are found,
:12:30. > :12:33.it is where they were arrested, its where many of them are arrested. It
:12:33. > :12:39.is where their homes or families are, where their defence witnesses
:12:39. > :12:43.R I would like to see a self- assertion, by the UK Criminal
:12:43. > :12:48.Justice Act system, over crimes of an international character, which
:12:48. > :12:51.could be tried in this jurisdiction, and where common sense dictates,
:12:51. > :12:56.and the factors relevant to the case, where the evidence is,
:12:56. > :13:00.demonstrate, should be tried in this jurisdiction. It is the
:13:00. > :13:05.failure to apply any sensible test, any objective assessment, as to
:13:05. > :13:11.where one case should be tried, here or the United States, which
:13:11. > :13:21.has resulted in these delays. me ask in the studio, the European
:13:21. > :13:21.
:13:21. > :13:26.Court itself has been criticised over its own delay ooh and the
:13:26. > :13:31.number of case on -- and on the number of cases on backlog. The
:13:31. > :13:35.British justice system hasn't been perfect here? Abu Hamza was
:13:35. > :13:37.convicted and was serving a sentence, back in 2008 the courts
:13:37. > :13:41.took a year. There is some arguments about changing the
:13:41. > :13:45.statutory appeals and the way they interact with judicial review. It
:13:45. > :13:49.is only over a year of process in our courts, and the last week or so
:13:49. > :13:52.have been the UK courts. Fart bigger delay has been Europe. What
:13:52. > :13:55.we see in this judgment is we shouldn't and don't need to wait
:13:55. > :14:02.for Strasbourg, we should make our own decisions and our Government
:14:02. > :14:07.follow our courts here. Thank you very much.
:14:07. > :14:12.It's not been a brilliant week for the BBC. First, the Jimmy Saville
:14:12. > :14:16.scandal, and now a powerful committee of MPs has accused the
:14:16. > :14:20.corporation of encouraging its star presenters to go on contracts that
:14:20. > :14:23.help them avoid paying tax, and helpfully, avoid the BBC paying tax,
:14:23. > :14:26.as well. Today the focus of the tax
:14:26. > :14:31.crackdown is the BBC. But it was back in February that the story
:14:31. > :14:35.began. A Newsnight investigation revealed
:14:35. > :14:38.Richard Lester, one of the country's top public servants, was
:14:38. > :14:44.being paid through a personal service company, as boss of the
:14:44. > :14:49.Student Loans Company, his salary package was around �200,000, the
:14:49. > :14:51.arrangement meant he could save thoughs of pounds by not paying tax
:14:51. > :14:55.or national insurance through source. Within 24 hours the
:14:55. > :15:02.Government had announced, not just changes to how there are Lester was
:15:02. > :15:06.paid, but a review across -- not just how Mr Lester was paid, but a
:15:06. > :15:10.review across the board. We have to all pay our fair share, I have
:15:10. > :15:15.taken this action to make sure Government departments do not
:15:15. > :15:18.support tax avoidance schemes. review revealed 2,400 public sector
:15:18. > :15:23.workers were being paid using contracts, which meant they weren't
:15:23. > :15:27.paying tax at source. Today, MPs turned the heat on the BBC.
:15:27. > :15:31.A report by the Public Accounts Committee said the public sector
:15:31. > :15:36.should avoid using off-payroll- arrangements, as it creates the
:15:36. > :15:41.suspicion that employees may be avoiding tax. It said it was
:15:41. > :15:45.particularly shocked by the BBC's use of the practice. If you work in
:15:45. > :15:49.the public service, it is beholden on you to lead by example. Hard
:15:49. > :15:53.working families up and down the country are paying lots of money in
:15:53. > :15:58.tax, it is wrong for individuals, working in the public service,
:15:58. > :16:02.whose money comes from the tax those families pay, aren't paying
:16:02. > :16:06.their due share. The BBC said it would carry out a detailed review
:16:06. > :16:13.of these contracts. Earlier I spoke to the BBC's head
:16:13. > :16:17.of human resources, Lucy Adams. Let's get one thing clear, how many
:16:17. > :16:21.people, that we see on our television screens, are being paid
:16:21. > :16:27.through these private companies, that help them pay less tax? There
:16:27. > :16:31.are 1500 people who are, what are known as on-air presenters. There
:16:31. > :16:38.are 467 presenters that you would see on a very regular basis.
:16:38. > :16:42.have asked a tax lawyer to do some calculation about those 467.
:16:42. > :16:45.Suppose one of them is earning �150,000 a year, some of our
:16:45. > :16:50.viewers, they will take a deep breath when they hear that figure.
:16:50. > :16:57.We know some of them are. We have worked out that it saves you
:16:57. > :17:02.�20,000 per employee, or per non- employee here, by doing that
:17:02. > :17:06.alaiingment. You, of course, don't -- arrangement. You, of course,
:17:06. > :17:09.don't have to pay national insurance. The individual is
:17:09. > :17:13.responsible for paying national insurance for both the employer and
:17:13. > :17:17.employee, so HMRC is getting the same amount of money. You don't
:17:17. > :17:20.have to pay it? Because we are not paying that and wouldn't pay them
:17:20. > :17:23.holiday, et cetera, we would be paying them more. So it balances
:17:23. > :17:28.out. You are happy with that. The House
:17:28. > :17:32.of Commons isn't, the Government isn't, they have asked you to take
:17:32. > :17:35.a relook. You have basically decided there is nothing wrong with
:17:35. > :17:41.the arrangement? We are aware of public concern about potential tax
:17:41. > :17:46.avoidance, that is why we have been doing a very view of the situation,
:17:46. > :17:50.which we will be working with the PACR. What is the review, there is
:17:50. > :17:54.worry about that arrangement, not all the people who work for the BBC
:17:54. > :17:58.have that arrangement. Many of the people who appeared on screen pay
:17:58. > :18:02.their tax through their wage bill, like everyone else. Why do you need
:18:03. > :18:06.to many of your employees to be paid like this? We want to do a
:18:06. > :18:09.review because we want to be sure it is working in the way it should.
:18:09. > :18:13.It clearly isn't, there is concern at the level of the PAC and the
:18:13. > :18:17.Government. It isn't working in the way it should. Otherwise the Chief
:18:17. > :18:23.Secretary of the Treasury wouldn't be standing up and saying, hey guys,
:18:23. > :18:27.review it? We are very clear we comply with HMRC guidelines, rules
:18:27. > :18:30.and regulation, waent to make sure everyone we are contracting with in
:18:30. > :18:35.that mechanism is working and effectively to the terms. I will
:18:35. > :18:40.read you what Margaret Hodge says, chair of the committee, it sounds
:18:40. > :18:44.suspiciously like complicity with tax avoidance, what do you say?
:18:44. > :18:49.deny that categorically, nothing we do is to enable individuals or the
:18:49. > :18:55.BBC to avoid paying tax. Is it moral, is it right to have somebody
:18:55. > :19:01.in a foodbank in Coventry, getting turned down an emergency loan
:19:01. > :19:05.claiming benefit, while you quibble about �20,000 in tax, from someone
:19:05. > :19:10.working in this build. What is the moral justification for that?
:19:10. > :19:13.are keen to ensure the right amount of tax is paid to HMRC, that is why
:19:13. > :19:18.we provide all the information to them about everything the
:19:18. > :19:23.individuals have earned. HMRC are able to police they have paid the
:19:23. > :19:27.right amount of tax. Why do so many of your top employees seem to be
:19:27. > :19:32.able to demand a beneficial arrangement, that ordinary Joes
:19:32. > :19:35.cleaning the floor in Television Centre don't have, why? The vast
:19:35. > :19:41.majority of people who are contracted in this way, work for a
:19:41. > :19:45.number of others countries. Actor, musicians, singers, make-up artists,
:19:45. > :19:49.hairdressers. What about the people who are the faces of the BBC, they
:19:49. > :19:52.are not encouraged to work for other companies? Many of them do.
:19:52. > :19:55.One of the things we are doing with our review is to make sure it is
:19:55. > :20:00.working. If it needs changing we will change it.
:20:00. > :20:08.You will change it. They were treated with appalling
:20:08. > :20:12.brutality, raped, beaten, in one case, castrated, tortured. The
:20:12. > :20:16.victims were Kenyan, the perpetrators, British policemen and
:20:16. > :20:19.soldiers, fighting the Mau Mau in the 1950s. Today three survivors of
:20:19. > :20:24.the mistreatment won the right to sue the British Government now, for
:20:24. > :20:29.damage. In a moment I will speak to two historians about the rights and
:20:29. > :20:33.wrongs of historical justice cases like this. First we report from
:20:33. > :20:38.Nairobi. For many here, this has been a very
:20:38. > :20:43.long time coming. For nearly half a century, the UK has sought to avoid
:20:43. > :20:48.being held to account for horrific abuses carried out by its forces
:20:48. > :20:50.during the Mau Mau rebellion, that foreshadowed Kenyan independence.
:20:50. > :20:54.The British Government admits that the people who brought the case
:20:54. > :21:00.were tortured. But, it says, the events took place too long ago,
:21:00. > :21:04.that the key decision makers were all dead, and making a fair trial
:21:04. > :21:07.impossible. Today the High Court disagreed. For these people,
:21:07. > :21:14.today's judgment was a significant victory. When the news filtered
:21:14. > :21:19.through from London, on a mobile phone many of these elderly people
:21:19. > :21:22.got together, linked armed, they were cheering and chanting and
:21:22. > :21:25.dancing. This has been a long time coming for many of them. It feels
:21:25. > :21:30.like a big win for them. The reality is some what different.
:21:30. > :21:35.This may be just another phase in a long, drawn-out, legal procedure.
:21:35. > :21:40.Many of these people are veterans of a 06-year-old conflict. For many
:21:40. > :21:45.of them -- of a 60-year-old conflict. For many of them, time is
:21:45. > :21:51.not on their side? These people are mainly old, if people die of age,
:21:51. > :21:55.these people are near the grave. Why do you want them to go to the
:21:55. > :21:59.grave without the conclusion of their case. Today, though, that
:21:59. > :22:03.didn't really dampen people's spirits. Here there were a couple
:22:03. > :22:06.of hundred veterans of the Mau Mau rising, and were very happy with
:22:06. > :22:10.what they heard. In Kenya, interestingly, there is little
:22:10. > :22:16.coverage of this case. That is because the Mau Mau itself is a
:22:16. > :22:22.some what controversial, and not all together simple part of Kenya's
:22:22. > :22:25.history. The thing is, the people who took over Kenya, and started
:22:25. > :22:32.running it after independence in 1963, many of them had been
:22:32. > :22:36.associated with the Home Guard, those who fought on behalf of the
:22:36. > :22:42.British Colinisers. For many decades the Mau Mau weren't
:22:42. > :22:50.recognised as a legal organisation, they were only unbanned in 1993.
:22:50. > :22:55.There was a sense of a new era here. Even today, not everyone a I grease
:22:55. > :23:00.that the Mau Mau is an I will Luis -- not everyone agrees that the Mau
:23:00. > :23:02.Mau is an illustrious part of history, or has a case for
:23:03. > :23:06.independence. The legal wrangling could drag on for months, some of
:23:06. > :23:09.the claimants may not live to see the conclusion of their case.
:23:09. > :23:14.Today's judgment could have consequences that reach out beyond
:23:14. > :23:18.the Mau Mau rebellion, beyond Kenya. The Government has said it won't
:23:18. > :23:24.comment on this case, as it is appealing the decision. With me now
:23:24. > :23:29.are the historian Lawrence James, and the university of Cambridge
:23:29. > :23:36.academic pre-ia Golpal. The British Government is appealing, these
:23:36. > :23:40.people are elderly. The Government strategy might to be wait until
:23:40. > :23:47.they are no longer around. Isn't it time to pay up, make an apology,
:23:47. > :23:53.and move on? I don't think so. I mean you are asking Mr Cameron's
:23:53. > :23:59.Government to pay compensation, for alleged misdeeds, by the servants
:23:59. > :24:06.of Winston Churchill's Government. If this is so, is David Cameron
:24:06. > :24:09.going to face cases of the misdeeds of say the officials of Lord
:24:09. > :24:13.Palmerstown. Will this become universal. These people are still
:24:13. > :24:16.alive, aren't they, there is not many people still alive from those
:24:16. > :24:20.days. But we have real human decision here who have suffered and
:24:20. > :24:24.want redress? They claif tomorrow suffered, and their claims are --
:24:24. > :24:28.they claim to have suffered and their claims are going through the
:24:28. > :24:31.civil court and we will find out if they are valid. The British
:24:31. > :24:38.Government accepts that violence was done to them? It does, the
:24:38. > :24:42.extent of the violence, by whom and what circumstances? They are still
:24:43. > :24:47.in the middle of civil, leading proceed decommission. What do you
:24:47. > :24:51.think -- Proceedings. What do you think? It is too late to talk about
:24:51. > :24:55.whether the people were tortured or had things done to them. It is
:24:55. > :24:59.widely accepted, two distinguished British historians have written
:24:59. > :25:03.books, using archives and evidence, that establish there was widespread
:25:03. > :25:06.violence, killing and torture. I don't think it does us much good to
:25:06. > :25:10.ask whether or not violence indeed happened. It certainly did. What
:25:10. > :25:14.should happen in this case? I think one thing we have to establish, is
:25:14. > :25:20.this isn't about particular Governments, Cameron's versus
:25:20. > :25:22.Churchill or Palmerston, it is about the British state, as one
:25:22. > :25:29.continuous entity, bears responsibility for what was
:25:29. > :25:33.undertaken in its name, whether it happened in 1960, or 1977. Many
:25:33. > :25:39.people will be saying Mau Mau, Kenya, who are they, do we know
:25:39. > :25:43.enough about you are this period, are our students talked about it
:25:43. > :25:47.enough. What happened in the fall of the British Empire? They are,
:25:47. > :25:52.the fast galy misbehaviour of the Queen and forces have been shown
:25:52. > :26:01.about for over 30 years. It wa brutality. But the currency of
:26:01. > :26:06.violence was partly introduced by the Mau Mau. What we have is an
:26:06. > :26:12.incertificate rexry organisation, a peasant -- insurrectionry
:26:12. > :26:17.organisation, a peasant uprising them. Did grotesque cruelties on
:26:17. > :26:22.their adversaries. A sovereign state did grotesque cruelties back?
:26:22. > :26:26.The British authorities panicked, and there was a lot of bad eggs in
:26:26. > :26:32.that administration, without. Some were court marshalled, not enough.
:26:32. > :26:38.The man who was castrated, it says in my notes, was castrated with
:26:38. > :26:45.pliers, by a white, British civil servant, a servant of the British
:26:45. > :26:50.state. Do you think we need to do more to try to educate people what
:26:50. > :26:54.actually happened. What do we think about it? My students come in at
:26:54. > :26:58.their third year in Cambridge and know very little about the empire.
:26:58. > :27:03.They know next to nothing about Kenya or south Asia. I think the
:27:03. > :27:05.teaching of imperial history in this country is extremely poor, and
:27:05. > :27:10.quite cartoonish. We don't do ourselves a service by not
:27:10. > :27:14.understanding what has happened. There is a huge debate in the
:27:15. > :27:19.United States about reparations about the torture inflicted by
:27:19. > :27:23.slavery. Do you think we are about to enter a debate like that in the
:27:23. > :27:26.UK. Where it is placed on the agenda that we actually pay,
:27:27. > :27:30.individual people, for what happened under colonialism? I think
:27:30. > :27:35.there are two different things we are talking about, one is reckoning
:27:35. > :27:39.with the history of empire as a society. Have we? No we haven't,
:27:39. > :27:43.absolutely. Does paying help? think it brings the debate into
:27:43. > :27:47.focus. There is a very limited number of individuals who are still
:27:47. > :27:50.alive, who can claim payment. That is only the tip of the iceberg.
:27:50. > :27:56.is not really history this, is it, they are real people. We ought to,
:27:56. > :28:00.there is a moral case for Britain to stop dragging its heels, isn't
:28:00. > :28:07.there? We are not dragging our heels, we are allowing this case to
:28:07. > :28:10.proceed. Will you fight tooth and nail if that happens? That is the
:28:10. > :28:14.Government's right. We haven't yet heard their side of the case. I
:28:14. > :28:18.would add one thing, I quite agree we don't know enough about our
:28:18. > :28:25.empire. And in discovering about it, we will remember there is a balance.
:28:25. > :28:31.You have, perhaps, a handful of brutal and callous officials in
:28:31. > :28:35.Kenya. At the same time, you have British authorities establishing
:28:35. > :28:39.veterinary clinics and giving training to Kenyans to look after
:28:39. > :28:43.their flocks. We are aware of the argument there. This was a
:28:43. > :28:49.generation that was addicted to silence. There was no transparency,
:28:49. > :28:54.they didn't talk about it when they came back. We have to talk about it
:28:54. > :29:00.now. It was us discussed in parliament on a few occasions.
:29:00. > :29:05.about the families that did this? hope many were bitterly ashamed.
:29:05. > :29:09.is not helpful to talk about abhor racial, the rotten eggs thing
:29:09. > :29:13.people are talking about. We are talking about a system that was
:29:13. > :29:19.brutal and violent. This sort of denial and silencing doesn't help
:29:19. > :29:22.us as a society. Thank you very much. Kirsty is
:29:22. > :29:32.standing by in Glasgow with the return of the review show.
:29:32. > :29:33.
:29:33. > :29:38.We are back, and full autumn colour, tonight the Beat Generation finally
:29:38. > :29:44.hits the road. JK Rowling's new book is shrouded
:29:44. > :29:49.in history, I will ask my guest about it. They watch the return of