10/01/2013 Newsnight


With Kirsty Wark. Are pensioners getting an easy ride on cuts? A Bollywood star talks about rape in India. And the definitive take on Nick Clegg's new radio phone-in.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 10/01/2013. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Thinking the unthinkable. Why should pensioners carry on being


exempt from welfare cuts. Two distinguished senior citizens give


us their views. We are all in this together, we have to confront the


crisis together, and that means elderly people have to be ready to


give up benefits they don't need. Elderly people have already paid


their share during their working lives, they paid taxes and national


insurance, and are entitled to the benefits of that.


We will debate, does grey power have a politicians running scared


from attacking the state pension and Winter Fuel Allowance. Also


tonight, as the men accused of the rape and murder of an Indian


student appear in court, we will reveal just how appallingly women


in India are treated, kidnapped and sold into sexual enslavement, some


of them. We have an exclusive interview with


a bowl wood veteran and activist. Without a doubt, India is a


patriarchal society, and we have internalised a patriarchal mind set


in which the girl child is not given the value she deserve. Also


on the programme tonight? I'm a Lib Dem who has just torn up his


membership card. I joined the party first in 1973, I'm afraid, I cannot


now say that I want to represent the Lib Dems. On the day the Deputy


Prime Minister begins his very own weekly date with the people, Steve


Smith has the definitive take on the political radio phone-in.


Good evening, David Cameron believes that pensioners should be


a protected species, and the figures speak for themselves. Half


of all benefits spending goes on pensioners. Overwhelmingly on the


weekly pension, but also free bus travel, Winter Fuel Allowance, and


free TV license. And now that the decision has been made not to make


major changes to the way the Retail Price Index is calculated, it is


another boost for older people. Ken Clarke may have hinted that the


next Tory manifesto might not make such happy reading for pensioners,


but right now, when everybody else, including children, have to make do


with less to reduce the deficit. Is it morally right to hold pensioner


benefit as sacrosanct. First tonight, we have two pensioners'


views, Dot Gibson and the author Stanley Johnson. We have to start


with the idea of the road sign, two old people crossing the road with a


stick. It is not that any longer. I think the state pension begins at a


much too early an age, I think the idea that you necessarily qualify


for a state pension at the age of 60 or 65, that just doesn't make


sense now, given the demographic situation we are in, we will all


live until we are 80, 90, 100, you can't, as a country, afford to pay


pensions for decades. I think after 40 years or more of work, people


are entitled to a decent length of time in retirement. I don't agree


with putting up the age of retirement, which both Governments


have now done. We are in an economic and financial crunch and


we all have to contribute to getting out of this. Older people


are suffering very much under the cuts. We know there will be more


they are not wealthy, and do find things extremely difficult to


manage. The younger generation, who have, indeed, been hit by house


prices on the one hand, and the cost of education on the other.


They have been hit by the fact that they are also funding, as I


mentioned a moment ago, state pensions for the elderly, on an


increasing scale, and probably medical care for the elderly. If


you go down the route saying the state will also pay for social care,


then the burdens which will be bourne, by, as it were, the working


population, will be become, absolutely unsupportable. It is the


principle of paying tax and insurance, and then being entitled


to the benefits arising from that. Everybody pays their tax and


insurance, they should get universal benefits. The problem


about universal benefits is that they are universal. And by


definition, they give to some sectors of society, benefits which


they don't actually need. Winter Fuel Allowance, social care, old


people's bus pass, our country as a whole, can't afford these benefits


for people who can well afford to do without them. We have to


understand that the state pension is among the lowest in Europe. We


have already seen cuts in housing benefits, cuts in day centres,


meals on wheels and things like this, which are really affecting


many millions of pensioners who feel lonely and isolated. I would


say we are the luckiest generation, we are what is called the "baby-


boomers", we left school and university at a time when jobs were


easy to get, we earned large salaries. Look at the younger


generation, the cost of education is tough, and the work market is


tough. They have a huge amount of bills to pay for the generation


that have preceded them. We shouldn't push our luck too far.


The generation I belonged to, I was ten at the end of the Second World


War, has benefited greatly from the welfare state. But I think that


this generation, the younger generations today have to


understand that welfare state didn't come into being out of thin


air, it was fought for, and they have to stand up and defend it,


alongside us. Elderly people have to realise that a large part of the


nation's wealth is now spent on dealing with the problems of the


elderly. We have to say to ourselves, can, as a nation, we


afford, can we afford that? Well, there you have two personal views.


But we love our hard data here on Newsnight, we crunched the number.


Welfare is by far the biggest element in Government spending. By


2016, it will account for nearly one pound in every three spent by


the state. The Government has already set out cuts in welfare,


amounting to �18 billion by 2014-15, and, this week, they successfully


introduced a bill that would limit the rise in certain benefits to 1%


a year for the next three years. That's a cut in real terms. However,


none of these changes have had any great impact on pensioners, despite


the fact that Treasury figures show, that over half of all welfare


spending goes on them. Mostly the state pension itself, but also


benefits like the Winter Fuel Allowance, which costs �2.1 billion


each year. And goes even to millionaires. On top of this, there


are other benefits, like free TV licenses for the over 75s: �588


million a year. And concessionary bus travel, which could be costing


up to �1 billion a year. David Cameron made a specific pledge in


the 2010 election campaign, to protect these benefits. He's


insisted that this is a promise he does not intend to break in this


parliament. Pensioners have also benefited from the called triple


lock, introduced by the coalition, through which the state pension


would rise by whichever is higher, out of RPI, prices, or 2.5%. Last


year, as inflation peaked, the increase was set at 5.2%, giving


pensioners the biggest-ever cash increase in their pension. So, is


it all sunny in the retirement garden? Far from it, the coalition


change the inflation -- changed the inflation measure, used to up-rate


occupational pensions from RPI to CPI, which is, generally lower.


They also introduced the change to the age-related income tax


allowance, which was quickly dubbed the Granny Tax. This, according to


the Institute for Fiscal Studies, will particularly affect people


retiring next year, they will be worse off by nearly �270 a year.


People who buy anuts with their pensions have also been --


aknewties with their pensions have also been affected by Government


policy, as bank rates have been so low, the yield from these is low as


well. In any case, any talk of immunity from cuts, is likely to


prompt a hollow laugh from the two million pensioners judged to be


living in poverty, and the million said to be living in fuel poverty.


They have to spend more than 10% of their income on heating. This


consideration, combined with the naked political fact, that older


people vote more, will give any politician pause for thought before


making significant cuts to pensioners' benefits. Stanley


Johnson and Dot Gibson are both here, as is Ann Pettifor, director


of Prime Economics, and Ruth Porter from the Institute of Economic


Affairs. We will begin with the Winter Fuel Allowance. Tomorrow


morning's front page in the Mail, says it is enough to make you


shudder, and the temperatures are set to plunge to minus ten, and the


average heating bill for the elderly soaring to �1,350. It is


only �2 billion plus of the spend on the Winter Fuel Allowance, but


the very universality is as divisive as it is cohesive.


spent �2 billion bailing out the City of London and that wasn't


devisive. We spend 2% of the social security budget on some of the


perks that the pensioners get. Of course, as a society and democracy,


we might want to shift where we put the burden, and where we reward


pensioners and whether we do or not by margins, but, honestly, it is so


minuscule, in terms of our economy. What we are doing is we are looking


at one side of the balance sheet, the spending side. We are doing


nothing about generating income. To pay for that. We are shrinking the


income side of the economy. You know, so I find this really


infantile, the economics. Infantile economics, but it is getting the


Winter Fuel Allowance at 60, it is totemic? We might want to have an


argument about this, it is such small beer, and to break a


political principle of universality, which is a moral, and philosophical,


do we want to live in a society where the rich get richer. We have


just done it with child benefit, therefore, the argument would be,


if we are all in this together, then, you cut child benefit, you


actually cut the allowances for childcare from 80% to 70%, they are


taking the hit at that end of the scale. You know, presumably there


is an argument which says that everybody has to take a hit? You


talk about people, you worked for 40 years, and you want to enjoy


your retirement, but let's say and hope that you live to the ripe old


age of 95. Yes. Are you really saying there will be enough in the


pot to pay you Winter Fuel Allowance, free bus travel, and


increased state pension, all the way there? You know they fix the


pot, and then they tell us that we have to be bound by the things that


they say. In actual fact, the rich are paying less tax, the poor are


paying more, people are on short- term contracts, very low pay, and


are living on benefits, and it isn't a question of pensioners


against younger people who are at work, or who are unemployed, it is


a question of rich and poor. The pensioners come within that


category. There is this myth that the amount of money which has been


paid into the system is enough to care for us in our old age, it is


simply not. We have now got a situation where a large part of the


bill for old age is being passed on to future generations. Part that


have is through the national debt we have accrued, that future


generations will have to pay back, part of it is younger generation,


the working generation, are, at the moment, facing massive cuts to


their benefits. Also a large part of it is through tax rises on those


who are working. The calculation was when the pension was set at 65,


that people would live to the age of 66, now, thankfully, people are


living longer, and what was put in during their lifetime, is not


enough for their healthcare and everything else. That is right, we


have not grasped the demographic situation. One third of the babies


born today are going to live to 100. That is what they say, is that


really true? Unless global warming intervene, it may do. Is that


really true? My generation had a good diet, we were given cod liver


oil, orange juice and the rest of it, we didn't overeat on all these


fast foods, but there is a generation now that has got this


problem, together with the fact. People are living longer, and all


the Government is doing, they are increasing. We are living longer.


They are increasing the retirement age by 67 by 2028, it should be 678


in the next ten years. You are living longer because of the


benefits that have accrued because of better medicine, and so forth?


The welfare state. They cost money? The we is do we want to live in a


civilised society, a society in which we say, first of all, we make


our young people unemployed, we strip our mothers of child benefit,


we impoverish our children, and impoverish our elderly and allow


the City of London to get richer. That is not civilised. Taking away


the City of London for a moment, there was a huge issue, and it


still goes on, that in a way there was a moral duty, there was a


social compact here. Post-war, the war generation, that lived through


terrible depravation, and so forth, and there was goodwill towards them.


Now we are going to people who are pensioners, who actually, probably,


lived high on the hog, and who are now in their late 50s and early 60,


and are actually going to have to pay back. We worked very hard.


Younger people work very hard? you think a man. A large number of


people are unemployed thanks to the Government's policies. Could a chap


intervene in this argument, I'm slightly outnumbered here. They are


not abolishing the Winter Fuel Allowance, it is not abolishing the


gas. The issue is, should the people who are very well off


benefit from those? Would you suggest that the evidence, the


evidence would suggest from what happened with child benefit reform,


actually means testing, the bureaucracy of that could be


incredibly counter-productive. that case, where do you cut it off.


There are only 250,000 pensioners out of 11 million who are actually


paying the higher rate of tax. It won't mean anything. It is peanuts.


What about the intergenerational point, do we have a duty? It is


interesting, if you go back and look at what Beverge intended with


the welfare state, it was something that was very minimal, something


there to ensure the most vulnerable people in our society were


protected. Everyone agrees that is still what we want. Everyone wants


vulnerable elderly people to afford to heat their homes, that is not in


question. But the point is, if we want to live in a civilised society,


where we get along with each other, where we don't resent each other,


we need to live in a society where we're not overly taxed, where we


are not putting bebt on to the next generation. -- Debt on to the next


generation. What would you do to the state pension, would you like


to see it raised so everyone is on �10,000, what would you like to


see? The most important thing is we put up the retirement age, that is


part of why we have ended up in a lot of the problems that we have


ended up with. The Government should be looking at putting it up


probably to 68, within the next ten years, as a start. I think also we


need to move to a system where we say we care for ourselves in our


old age through saving, and at the moment, it is very difficult for


people to save, because taxes are so high, because they are paying


for things like Winter Fuel Allowances. Interest rates are so


low. There are 60% of people at work are getting benefits, it is


not that the unemployed are getting most of the benefits, it is people


at work that are getting the benefits, the wages are so low.


What do you say to Ruth Porter's idea that actually, it is not about


means testing, it is not necessarily even about things like,


you know, fuel poverty and the Winter Fuel Allowance, it is about


a fundamental change to raise the retirement age successively and


quickly towards 70, because actually n your middle to late 60s


you are not old? If Ruth is happy to go on working until she's 70,


that's fine. It should be 80, come on. And you know, if Ruth that's


fine. But people get very tired, I know that people that have worked


very hard that are very grateful for their pensions. I wonder if you


would like to work on a building site when you are 80, you might be


able to write, but you won't be able to work on building sites.


have done a lot of jobs in my life. Would you expect somebody in their


mid-70s still to be working on huge big projects on the City as steel


workers? Somebody in their mid-70s today might hope to retire at 75 or


whatever. I'm saying the way the demographics are going, we will be


living much longer than 70, into the 80s and 90s t makes sense to


raise the retirement age. It is about harmony between what Ruth


seems to be suggesting, and the more likelihood of


intergenerational conflict and resentment, if something's not done


about this, do you believe that? don't believe particularly in the


intergenerational conflict, we will go in that direction if we do


ridiculous things. I take the question of social care. There is a


whole lot of ideas going around now, that some how society must pay for


the old age of people, not just the health of people, but the general


caring for people in old age. Can you imagine how we could possibly


afford that. Why should people who benefit from house price rises not


have to sell their houses to fund their old age. I can't see that.


Dot? The whole point about social care, and healthcare, is that it is


possible to have a national care system, like the NHS, paid for


through, just 1.5p in the pound on tax. Social care? Let me make this


point, what is left out of the picture completely, the Women's


Royal Voluntary Service did a survey, which is generally accepted


as a correct survey that shows, that the benefit to the state of


pensioners volunteering, caring and the work that they do, is actually


�40 billion a year. That is a huge A money, Ruth Porter. It is a huge


amount of money. Obviously retired people make a huge contribution.


Which can't reduce everything down to some monetary value. That's what


you are doing. I think actually it is about having decent


relationships within families. I think by making it monetary you


reduce it, in the same way that you take care of elderly relatives.


Delhi, amid heavy police presence, and the on going protests, suspects


in the case of a fatal gang rape of a 23-year-old student in a moving


bus in New Delhi appeared in court. Thousands have demanded justice for


the young woman whose death shocked India, and which prompts anguish


soul--- anguished soul-searching in a country where violence against


women goes further than this case. The widespread killing of female


foetuses is well known. But less well known is trafficking of young


women to make up for the shortages. We have a World Service


Investigation. Calcutta, the capital of West


Bengal, choking roads and bustling markets, where young women face a


growing threat. This girl was 15, when two years ago neighbourhood


boys invited her to a local fair. There someone, a stranger, offered


her a soft drink. The next thing she remembers is waking up on a


train. A day later, she found herself in a brothel, in Delhi.


Where for seven months every day she was raped by countless


Her mother finally tracked her down, and, with the help of police,


rescued her. She got her daughter back, but not the life she has


worked so hard to build. Neighbours don't talk to them any more. Their


house has been stoned, and those Every year tens of thousands of


girls across India are either tricked or forced into making a


journey that changes their lives forever. Many, like the young woman,


come through this Calcutta train station. This place is just


overwhelming. It is so easy to become invisible in this crowd. I


couldn't tell you whether a man I just passed is father who is


travelling with his daughter, or a trafficker who is transporting his


victim. What I can tell you, is that right at this moment, at this


very station, there are girls who have been sold. Police sources tell


us this train alone carries dozens of trafficking victims every day.


Some are as young as ten. It took us weeks, but finally we managed to


He tells me he traffics, an average, 200 girls a year, and makes around


$1,000 on each. Most of them are 12, The trafficker also said that,


while he still pays local politicians and individual


policemen for protection, the central Government's recent


awareness campaign has made his operation more difficult. And at


the police headquarters in Calcutta, they deny charges of any


involvement. This is one of the allegations which is brought


against us as police. The police is doing very, very well in this field


of human traffics. The allegation of corruption against police is


very negligible. The fight is daily on. Activists say that at the


police level things have improved. But change is slow. Every police


station in India is now supposed to have anti-trafficking police


officers, and at district levels they have even set up anti-


trafficking unit. That looks good on paper, have a look at the


reality of India's fight against one of its greatest organised crime


networks. This is the centre of anti-trafficking activity for the


whole of West Bengal. Two computers, a few phones, and


thousands of cases. This detective and her small team are overwhelmed.


We are trying to solve this problem, how do I get more man power, some


digital support, some other support, Xerox machine, some telephones,


laptop, we need those. Traditionally there is dark and


secretive trade of humans, which has been driven by prostitution,


and more recently, demand for domestic workers among India's


growing middle-class. But that is changing.


We travelled across the country to northern India, where there is a


new and growing market for brides. This is a man's world, the men of


this town are famous for being strong, fit and single. Fortunate


to be born in one of India's wealthiest states, fortunate,


perhaps, to be born at all. One estimate suggests that ten million


girl foetuses have been aborted in India in the last two decades. The


UN says it is a problem of genocide proportions. The Indian Government


disputes these estimates. But the reality of life in Haryana is hard


to argue with. It is such a social issue that every house is facing


this problem. Every house is facing that there are young boys who are


not getting girls. And when you talk to them, they are frustrated.


Rishi Kant took me to see how this frustration fuels organised crime.


There is a minor child, she has been traffiked, we will go and see


and do the raid. If the girl is there we will do the rescue


operation. So we're going to have your group, as well as the police


from Bengal, and police from Haryana, working together to rescue


this 14-year-old. Exactly. You know where she is? The family knows.


Ruksana, the girl, is at home when we enter. But minutes later, the


Before she lets her go, she takes out the earrings she had given her.


As police lead her away, she follows. Rishi Kant orders her out


of the police car, the trafficker and the victim have to be separated,


it's the law, he says. But she is not scared of me, she is screaming.


A couple of hours later, at a police station, she is still


insisting she has done nothing wrong. We don't have enough girls


and many people are buying girls from Bengal, she cries. She swears


she had treated her well. But in the car outside, Ruksana tells the


police a different story. She talks about daily humiliation, beatings,


rape. Her father listens, overwhelmed. Soon he will be able


to take his daughter home. This is incredible, the whole village is


basically following us to Ruksana home, I'm sure this is more


attention than she's used to. She is still haunted by memories of


She was never even allowed outside. She doesn't want to talk about the


rape. Her parents are worried about She just wants to be at home, she


told me. But with so much attention, so much gossip, Rishi tells the


parents it is not safe for her to stay. Everything is at stake, her


life, her identity, her marriage, and her image in the society.


Everything is lost. And if you don't get any support from the


state, the administration, that's ten-times more problematic. This is


probably where Ruksan will end up, at least for the time being. This


private shelter in Calcutta is the best in the state. It is home to


150 girls. Here too they tell us they have noticed that the number


of girls sold into marriage is on the rise. And the real struggle,


activists say, is to get politicians on side. They are not


interested, you know, because you know why, do we have to still go


and tell them this is happening in our country. When so many girls are


dying, when so many girls are being traffiked, and you know, we are not


talking about hundreds, we are But attitudes here show no sign of


changing. In a village in Haryana, we visited a meeting of influential


local elders, even before the notorious Delhi rape case, they


came to discuss the worrying rise in rapes in Haryana. Here is how


one of them explained the problem These women don't get much of a


choice. This is a community support centre for victims of trafficking,


some of them have settled here, some don't leave because they are


too ashamed to go back. All are expected to produce sons. 25-year-


old Rupa was traffiked from Bihar, she says she was forced to have two


abortions until she finally gave Fuelled by poverty, corruption, and


attitudes towards women, in India, this cycle of abuse carries on.


Earlier today in Mumbai, we filmed a veteran Indian act stress, who is


also a prominent -- actress, who is also a prominent women's activist


and former member of the Upper House in parliament. I began by ask


She Lay Down Deep Beneath the Sea believed that India did not love


its -- by asking if she believed that India did not love its girl


children? It comes from the complication of being a complex


society. So it is with the position of women. On the one hand we have


had a woman President and Prime Minister, several women are in top


positions in politics and business and the arts and all of that, but


on the other hand, female foeticide is also being practised. It is,


essentially, a country living in contradictions and trying to come


to terms with it. Having said that, without any doubt. India is a


patriarchal society, and we have internalised a patriarchal mind set


in which the girl child is not given the value that she deserves.


The victim of December's gang rape was a middle-class student living


in the capital city, where the majority of the country live


poverty striken and voiceless. I asked her if she believed India's


lingering caste system was an issue in the rape? There are problems in


the rural areas where certain women where nobody pays the attention to


them. This was a case that was given tremendous visibility, and


people came to know the horror that is associated with rape. Somewhere


the deadening of our senses has really been brought into sharp


position. I think it is about time something like this happened, and


the outrage of complete demand for justice became central to our


system. The week since the rape has seen an extraordinary outpouring of


public anger in India, much of it directed at the police. The fact is,


that the police have internalised the same patriarchal mind set, and


what happens is most often girls do not even go to register cases of


rape, or trafficking, for fear that they are really going to be treated


to a verbal abuse amounting to a second rape. Because of the


insensitivity of the police, and the tendency to some how blame the


victim for having invited the rape. And that is a shocking state of


affairs, because it is not enough to say they have internalised their


mind set, because when they occupy a chair, and they wear a uniform,


then there has to be a process of training in which they are


disabused from the horrible values they have. She has made her name as


a star of more than 100 Bollywood firms over four decades, did she


believe the industry was responsible for suggesting that in


terms of women and sex, "no" didn't necessarily always mean no. We have


to tread careful grounds here. Because to blame Bollywood for


everything that is wrong in society would be factitious, and not true.


I think there is definitely a churning within sections of the


film industry, of the Hindi film industry, where they are indulging


in some amount of self-reflection and analysis. But they are his tent


to verbalise what they feel, for fear of being appropriated by the


moral brigade. We cannot have a situation where this gives an


opportunity to the moral brigade to stand waving their flags and saying


women are responsible because they are wearing short skirts or they


are being emancipated or what have you.


I think, for the film industry, we have to understand that the


business of cinema is about images. And when you show fragmented images


of a woman's body, she really loses all autonomy it commodifies herself.


However, I do want to insist that celebration of senuality is welcome,


and something that is healthy. But there is a thin line between


celebration of sexuality and a surrender to the male gaze. We have


come a long way from films made in the 1960s where, "I will remain


silent", was considered a virtue. We have seen more visibly working


women in India. There is still a lot left to be desired, it is for


us to stand up, and also, for female actors to say they demand


more. Could the student's gang rape and


murder prove a turning point in the way India's women are treated.


Could it prove a watershed for women's rights? I think the outrage


has been so universal, and so persistent, that I will be very


surprised if there is no change at all. But ultimately what we are


dealing with is a mind set change, a societal, mind set change, which,


as you know, takes a very, very long time. There is a bit of skill


in handling a radio chat show, the witty one-liner, a bit of flirting


and being kind to granny, Terry Wogan, and Jonathan Ross spring to


mind. But Nick Clegg? For coalition spin doctors, for some reason, they


have decided he could make it big on the airwaves, he has a lot to


live up to. Time to call in Steve Smith?


Hello Newsnight? What you mean now, on now?


You may have heard about the BBC's state-of-the-art new HQ in central


London. This is where we maintain our all-important links with our


audience. Would you mind one second?


Hello Newsnight? Yes. No. The vital connection, talking in


real time, to real people, politicians want it too. Nick Clegg


has become the first cabinet minister to launch what is promised


to be a regular weekly phone-in, on London's LBC Radio. What support is


the Government going to be able to offer families and couples who are


being forced to leave their jobs within the army or other forces,


jobs within the ministry. Stay on the line, this is to do with the


military review, and many jobs have been shed, some on the frontline.


As you know better than I do, we have been upfront with you and your


husband, and said because defence expenditure was so mishandled in


the past, we have to bring things down to a level which we can


properly support. There isn't that uncertainty. I honestly don't think


it does any harm to the reputation of politics in general for a


politician to make himself accessible. It is a big commitment


for him. Yes, I think in a newsy week, in a week with a lot of


political news, I might listen, and I might even ring up. Let us know


when you do. This is the Newsnight Awards Line, if you think we


deserve...hello...$$NEWLINE # Hey how you doing


Politicians and their handlers, believe there is nothing like


direct contact with the great British public. Good morning Mr


Major. Good morning. I would like to know why I should vote Tory?


They are talking straight to voters, and they are being seen, or at


least heard, to do so, but it doesn't always end well. Someone


has just handed me the tape, let's play it and see if we can hear it.


You should never have put me with that woman, whose idea that was? It


is just ridiculous. That Gordon Brown bigot-gate moment, all


triggered by contact with maybe of the public. It was played back on


my show, and he didn't know it was filmed. It was a catastrophic for


Brown and it happened in the middle of an election. It takes you back


to all the other election moments, how often it is the member of the


public who changes the weather. The all-time classic was a woman called


Diana Gould. Why, when the Argentinian battleship, was outside


the exclusion zone, and actually sailing away from the Falklands,


why did you give the orders to sink it? It was not sailing away the


Falklands, it was an area which was a danger to our ships. And it


stopped the then Prime Minister in her tracks.


One second, hang on? Hello. Hello Jeremy, I wondered why we kept this


phone. Direct dialogue with the people is a hallmark of strong men


among world leaders. Including Chavez of Venezuela. And Russia's


Vladimir Putin. I'm wondering are you a man of the people, and have


you worn a onesie? From your constituency, have you ever worn a


onesie? I was actually given a big, green onesie in Sheffield, which I


have kept in its packaging, I haven't worn it yet. Actually,


Newsnight imagined that look last month. This programme's meaningless


if it doesn't set the agenda. What's he got to lose. Everybody


hates him, everybody thinks he's like the daft lad. This morning he


showed, you know, quite a few sparks of humour. How many stars


would you give it? As a show four stars. That is pretty good? Yes, I


would. Hi Kirsty. It's going well. What's that? Get off?


Nuisance caller. Figures out today show there are


still 13,000 black and white television licenses in the UK, so


tonight's farewell is tailored especially for viewers watching


tonight in glorious monochrome, Colder weather on the way for the


UK in the next few days. Friday quite a chilly affair, and a rather


grey one for many of us as well. The best of any sunshine likely


across Wales in the south west during the early part of the day.


Elsewhere it is a mixture of low clouds and outbreaks of rain and


stubborn patches of mist and fog. And wintery across the hills of the


north-east of England, maybe the bit of sleet mixed in with the


showers across East Anglia. For the south west and Wales, after the


sunshine first thing, more cloud piling in come the afternoon, that


will have a tendency to bring increasingly heavy showers as the


afternoon progresses. Perhaps there is brightness to be found across


the likes of Devon and Dorset, and up into the Welsh marshes and the


afternoon. For Northern Ireland a dreary day, a foggy start making


way to a foggy afternoon, with outbreaks of rain. In the far north


of Scotland it may brighten during the afternoon. Elsewhere cloud


around or misty and murky weather. For the weekend, the prospects turn


colder still, the threat of wintery showers across eastern Scotland and


the north-east of England. Further south, an area of low pressure


pushing in, making for a bit of a forecasting headache for us, it


looks like it will bring heavy rain to the southern most counties of


In-depth investigation and analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines with Kirsty Wark. Are pensioners getting an easy ride on cuts? A Bollywood star talks about rape in India. And the definitive take on Nick Clegg's new radio phone-in.

Download Subtitles