29/01/2013 Newsnight

This programme contains repetitive images from the start.

Britain deploys troops to west Africa, more than 300 to train and

shore up the military, not to fight. Are we going to get dragged into

someone else's war. After French paratroopers helped secure Timbuktu,

David Cameron heads for Nigeria, to meet their Prime Minister. What

will our role be, and for how long? We're in Mali.

Anti-semetic, anti-Israeli, or just anti-Netanyahu. After Rupert

Murdoch apologises for Gerald Scarfe'S grotesque cartoon in the

Sunday time, we have our panel to discuss whether or not it is anti-

Semitic. Plastic pollution is killing wildlife across the world,

it causes hormonal changes to life in the oceans, what is it doing to

us humans. The plastic particles are sponges for other contaminants,

they absorb the materials and become toxic. The Government

finally unveils its changes to childcare, in weeks where we see

financial help given to millionaires and struggling mothers

alike, we consider universalism in the age of austerity. Why shouldn't

it go to someone like me, I have paid my tax, I'm not earning now, I

should be entitled to something back from the Government. Even

though your husband earns well? Even if my husband earns well.

There is no stopping Hilary Mantel, tonight she's added the Costa price

to her two man bookers, for her portrayal of Thomas Cromwell.

We will hear from her -- ol letter Cromwell. We will hear from her

shortly. -- Oliver Cromwell. We will hear

from her shortly. Good evening, when the Defence

Secretary announced today that approximately 330 British troops

are being sent to west Africa, to support the French mission against

Islamist rebels in Mali, 40 military advisers to Mali itself,

and others to train in nearby countries and others made up of

support personnel, Philip Hammond assured MPs the soldiers wouldn't

have a combat role. They are very clear about the risks of mission

creep. According it a previous incumbent in the job, Malcolm

Rifkind, there was the risk of years of asymmetrical conflict

without solution. In a moment we will go live to the

Malian capital, first, here is our diplomatic editor, Mark Urban.

So, with French intervention in Mali just weeks old, Britain has

joined the fray. Hundreds of troops are to be sent on what the

Government insists is not a combat mission. It is not our intention to

deploy combat troops, we are very clear about the risks of mission

creep, and we have defined very carefully the support that we are

willing and able to provide to the French and the Malian authorities.

He had been responding to fears that the Helmand mission too had

started with hopes that not a shot would be fired. We need greater

clarity, Mr Speaker, on the exact role of our British troops. The

Government has said that they are not going to be placed in a combat

role, but there are a host of grey areas between combat roles and

support roles. Given America's reluctance to lead,

at the moment, this type intervention could become the norm.

Western countries have very few forces to spare, and even France,

with a few thousand in Mali, has talked with cutting back soon.

So, increasingly, the emphasis will be on training up African troops to

do the job. Britain already has 160 or so

troops in East Africa, centered on Kenia. They have helped train

African contingents in Somalia, which is now regarded as something

of a model for future operations. There is an enduring commitment of

about 50 in Sierra Leone, and a small team in South Africa too.

Today's announcement of 40 trainers to Mali, and 200 to other parts of

west Africa, follows the deployment of 60 RAF personnel to Senegal, to

support a Sentinel surveillance plane, and 20 to Bamako to assist

with airlifting operations. The shift signalled eight days ago is

becoming real. More than ever this evolving threat demands an

international response. It must be one that is tough, intelligent,

patient and based on strong international partnerships. First,

we should be clear that this murderous violence requires a

strong security response. We must be realistic and hard-headed about

the threats that we face. Our role is to support the Governments of

combat this menace, as many are doing at a high cost.

Contingents from several west African countries, co-ordinated by

will be several thousand in all. But whether that will be enough,

and how effective they might be, are open to question. The force is

is going to have to be supported and backed by that country. Whether

Nigeria can afford to send many It already has troops deployed, or

committed to Somalia and Sudan, and is currently fighting two counter

insurgency campaigns at home. France's assault on Timbuktu

Airport, and taking of the town, has scattered the opposition. It

may also have been enough to create and the more numerous Tuareg

seperatists who play host to them. had now split from the Al-Qaeda

militants. So far so good, then, for the

French intervention. In the longer term, it could get more complicated,

though. The Malian army that collapsed a few month ago, had,

afterall, been trained by foreign advisers. And the British found

several years back in Sierra Leone, that one of their advicey teams got

kidnapped, and they had -- advisory to rescue them, taking many lives

in the process. The aid promised by success.

operating across the country, it business. But given the cuts to

forces, their existing commitments, and public anxiety about entering

another shooting war, the recent that outside powers are prepared to

do. What's the reaction there to the news of the deployment in

Bamako? Well, I talked to the Malian military spokesman this

evening. He said the news of the British involvement was very

welcome. For most ordinary Malians on the streets, they are much more

aware at the moment, at least. French inter, and the support of

other west African -- French troops, the to get the north fully under

control. We shouldn't look past the idea of guerrilla war going too far.

The speed of the French advance shows there is a comparatively

small number, it appears, of hardened Jihadi fighters. They

don't have that much support among the general population. And the

tactical alliance that they formed last year with ethnic Tuareg

seperatists, now appears to be seperatists, want, if that is still

possible, a negotiated route to awe Monday me. While everybody was

really shock -- autonomy. While everybody was really shocked last

year by the speed that the Islamists took the north. That was

partly due to the Malian army being in disarray following the coup last

year. Maybe those Islamists overreached themselves by moving

south as they did at the beginning of this year, and therefore,

provoking the French intervention. As we heard in the film one of the

Tuareg leaders said they are indeed breaking away. Joining me is John

Deverell, former director of defence and diplomacy at theed MoD,

crisis resolution, and assisted several African Governments on

a former Colonel and assistant to Sierra Leone crisis, in his first

British interview. First of all, do you think, of us going in a

possibility of mission creep. My own view is this could happen. It

is possible, but very unlikely. I think we will see in the

experiences of the last few years. Clearly there are risks in terms of

Whilst we are only there in a training capacity, there will be a

need to potentially defend ourselves. Because exactly as what

there could be a kidnap, or, indeed, British training forces could be

operations like this, unless we are prepared to deal with the risks,

which are themselves a measure of our sincerity in taking on the

operation in the first place. the point about mission creep, what

is your view? What Malcolm Rifkind said, is without a political

In Sierra Leone, funnily enough, it is a similarity here, we were

focused, from the beginning, for role to play in bolstering up the

local forces, and it was very much tied into a regional view of the

situation, and a political solution. In Mali, at the moment, I think

that is going to be the focus. Our force, from what I see, seems to be

very much designed on the medium- term state, the training, much of

which won't happen in Mali. Part of an EU training mission, and then

the various assets, intelligence assets, which are really going to

Mali, to be able to capitalise on to go hear the report on the Tuareg

political -- heartening to hear the It may be in terms of a future

solution to Mali, something on the political side working well to do

it. As was said, there is a possibility the trainers could be

targeted. You have been in a position where there had to be a

complete change of gear in Sierra Leone, that is very much possible.

countries but in Mali itself, where that is true. We have a small force

Mali, the French are in the lead what they are intending to do, and

political discussions. I think the important post-9/11, the Jihadist

dealing with there. We were dealing with something that was a potential

failed state. Earlier on today about failed states being a much

That issue about Mali, the Government not being entirely

needing to be shored up repeatedly, having problems in the north. It

could be as David Cameron has said and said again on his way to

Algeria, before he goes to Algeria, this is a generational move. A

generational move doesn't sound like two or three years? You have

an interesting paradox, on the one operation this involves, on the

Leone is indicative, as other places have been, in the dangers of

taking our attention away from somewhere, because we think the

to take a wide view, the classic case of the needor burden-sharing.

As Mark has said we have limited numbers, if more were needed, how

resources, certainly in the short- term, which is why nations need to

support each other in this venture. British might be called on to give

difficult situation very quickly our specialist advice, our training

and our intelligence assets can be exactly the right level, which

gives support without getting us tied into a long haul ourselves.

A cartoon in the Sunday Times, by one of Britain's most famous and

depicting the Israely Prime Minister building a blood red wall

called a furore. The caption read "let the peace continue", the board

of British Jews reported the picture, saying it is reminiscent

of the pictures found in the anti- semetic press. Rupert Murdoch

described the cartoon as grow tes international Holocaust day. He

says he has never been anti-Semitic. The controversy has stirred up

different sentiments in different parts of the Jewish community, not

all agree it is anti-Semitic. One Jewish newspaper described it as

grossly unfashion but not anti- Semitic. Firs I'm joined by the --

first I'm joined by my guests. When you opened the paper on Sunday and

saw the cartoon, what was your first reaction? I just saw a

cartoon. This was one fair, this was offensive on Holocaust Memorial

but it is political comment. One might argue it is bourne out of a

us depict Israel and understand Israel in this way. As comment I

didn't see it as anti-semetic, there was no big noses, or none of

that Nazi imagery found in anti- Semitic cartoons. You would defend

the right of the artist to be hard- hitting what about the timing?

is very unfortunate. It takes me back ten years to a cartoon of Dave

Brown, of Arial Sharon eating a baby. That appeared on Holocaust

similar stir. timing and he's not anti-Semitic,

and he didn't think it was? I know any are anti-Semitic. Do you think

there is a particular issue. I mean, tell me about the blood libel, the

idea that there is blood cementing the bricks in the wall. A lot of

is? It is this 19th century notion that Jews would eat the blod of

children. It goes back to 1144. Christian children to use their

is the problem with visual imagery, I think it is the blood that has

that mean, in essence, that you deibgt -- blood in any cartoon

That is a taboo? It is a bit of a taboo. This whole subject, religion

is an emotional minefield, as the to it as. You have to tread very

carefully. If you think that this cartoon is simply a political

cartoon. Is it always legitimate, do you think, to attack a political,

Netanyahu was democratically elected, if people don't think he's

doing a good job, he's always a legitimate target? It depends on

how you attack him, the last time was political comment and not anti-

of different Israeli flags if your recalled, and in the cartoon --

furlled and in the cartoon they turned into missiles with the Star

of David on them and he's depicted as a puppetmaster? That made no

sense without anti-semitism, the notion of Israel as a puppetmaster.

I hope the ambassador you will have on in a minute will forgive me,

Israel is crass in its diplomacy, rather than Israeli. Is the whole

lot to vilify the Jews. Is that a bit of history a lot of people

don't know or don't care about. Do we have to, as it were, get past

that? It wasn't only the Nazi, if you look at mainstream press after

the wa, especially in Australia, you get grotesque, Jewish

stereotypes, hook-nosed, wealthy Jewish bankers, week after week

after week, in the national press. It is nothing compared to the sort

of imagery we have seen here. Steve Bell made the point on the

radio this morning, he said that Mr batted an eyelid. Which was a very,

he was right, but it was a very thought to have killed, what,

60,000 people in the last year, or been poncable for their deaths, in

the last incursion to Gaza 158 Netanyahu are considered to be

similar figure, without comment. I would like to turn to the

ambassador to the UK, Daniel Taub. Clearly Hugo and Tim have a

different view to you. Why are they wrong, and you believe it is an ity

Semitic cartoon? I'm not sure if that is the main question here.

Board of Deputies of British Jews said clearly that was what they

believed? In a statement I put out on this, I did point out I thought

this cartoon, which clearly echos images that have been used to

from medieval times. It is not that demonise Jews but in Nazi times

atmosphere that led to these disasters, these are images that

have led to vicious murder and genocide, even. I think that coming

from Israel, there is another cause for concern. Unfortunately, images

like this are all too familiar to anyone from the Middle East,

because we see them general low in the most extreme elements of --

generally in the most extreme elements of the Arab press, where

they are used to incite hatred, as part of a culture, including in

suicide bombers. That is the background you say in

the Middle East, but of course that of the concerns we are seeing is

Murdoch, but the editor of the paper today he actually apologised

unreservedly and said it was have heard said that there aren't

other cartoons. The blood, are you not allowed to have blood? With

complexity, but the notion of a Jew withed blood, is something, which I

aware of. There is another question. semitism question isn't the real

fair and acceptable comment? My feelings as an Israeli is clearly

it isn't. The wall here is a to build. The decision to construct

-- Israeli wanted to build. The decision to construct the barrier

was taken after a month where there small parts a wall, and it is

would agree but and many would not. Because Binyamin Netanyahu is a

very grown-up politician, he has times. Surely it is legitimate, as

idea of the construction of the Netanyahu's, it was actually the

previous Government. The notion have been referred to has anything

to the -- misleading, far from a were a resuscitation of the Israeli

potentially deliberately misleading. Is there a danger that by the

reaction to this, a perfectly legitimate reaction, that there is

a danger of shutting down argument? Anybody who has spent more than

five minutes in Israel will not be afraid we are shutting down

argument. We have lively debate and cartoons, but I don't think that

respecting lively debate means that barred. I think everybody in

newspapers concerned, and credit to the Sunday Times for apologising

for this terrible mistake. You know, when historic and current

sensitivities have to be respected. Later in the programme, we will be

speaking to Hilary Mantel who has just won the Costa prize. First,

you may have seen dramatic images of plastic debris left over from

miles from where people leave. We know the stuff we can see. It can

affect wildlife, seals around our coastline, to the albatross living

in the ark pel geo. What are the plastic we can't see, tiny

particles on other creatures and on Albatross spend most of their time

at sea. Only venturing on land to raise their young.

These legendary birds populate the Hawaiian islands of the north

Plastic washed into the oceans from people living thousands of miles

away is killing them. We can see with our own eyes the affect that

having an impact that is much more far reaching. A tome from the BBC's

natural history unit, filmed here broadcast next year. They found

turtles nesting in amongst plastic bottles, cigarette lighters and

toys. And they found dead and dying birds. Albatross parents,

unwittingly killing their young by feeding their chicks plastic,

carried in as they forage for food in the sea. Some chicks die when

sharp plastic punctures their bodies, others from star vague, as

their stomachs fill with plastic they can't digest. You saw

Yeah, what we found is every day we would be filming and there would be

more and more carcasses on the beach. We can't tell ourselves what

it was that killed them, what we do know from American scientists is

they have autopsyed many of these birds, and they have found plastic

in every single stomach of the dead bird. Ellen was part of the crew

These are examples of the kinds of things found on the island.

tops, the arm of a child's doll. She showed us some of the items

scientists have found in albatross stomachs. There is this really

jagged bit of plas he can. There is lots of different -- plastic. There

is lots of different plastics from lots of different origins. Some of

the plastic is illegally tipped at sea or litter from fishing, most

machines. But how does it get here? Floating debris and plastic is

carried to the Hawaiian archipelago, by systems and winds. It sits in

the north tropical high, made up of It is one of five giantic

interconnected systems of ocean currents, each spiralling around a

central point, drawing material inwards, which carries the plastic

to Hawaii. These spirals can eject material out towards the Arctic and

Antarctic, spreading material across the globe over time. It is

in the Pacific will occur in the Atlantic. Just how far does the

problem of plastic in the ocean see if it can be found in the

coastal waters of Britain. Simon Vauxhall from the National

net through the water, the water but all the particles and the

plankton are trapped within the net. They eventually come into this

bottle at the end. minutes, and it will allow us to

filter through around 400 tonnes of water.

There has been a lot of research in the United States looking at how

the plastic gets into the food chain. Certainly it is shown it

gets into the valves, the mussels and the oysters in the seabed, they

it. As we are filtering the water. They concentrate the plastics, it

has been effect. It turns some of them into hem MAFF free indicts, we

don't know -- hermafphrodites, and chain these plastics go. The idea

that these plastics can cause disturbing sex changes might sound

bad enough. Another worrying affect is beginning to emerge. That is the

filtration of just under 400 tonnes of water. We can see a few feathers

to the lab and have a look under the microscope to see exactly what

we have got. We can't see chunks of plastic debris like the pieces the

team saw in Hawaii. It is tiny we are looking for. This is where

You can see in there we have some plankton, we have some sea plankton,

they are the animals and the plants. You can see the cell particles, you

can see distinctively the plastic particles. With the sharper edges?

Yeah. You can see down here there is zoo plankton tucked in amongst

all the rubbish, the soil and so on. You can see heads and tails. We

know big plastic has an affect on wildlife, whether plastic bags or

bottles. Eventually it breaks down mechanically to smaller and smaller

particles. The question is does have an impact? A few years it was

assumed it was like roughage and didn't have a major impact. We know

those very small plastic particles can mimic certain things like

oestrogen, we know that has been impact. But also, these plastic

particles are like spoings, they are like -- sponges, like magnets

for other things, they absorb the material, and effectively they

become quite toxic particles. creatures in some parts of the

world. But there is new evidence about our own food chain. I went to

Plymouth to find out more. At the marine biology and ecology

centre of Plymouth University, they study the impact of pollutants on

our oceans and rivers, and the creatures that live in them.

Marine scientist, Richard Thomson, was the first to describe the tiny

fragments of broken plastics as microplastics, back in 2004. There

is two concerns from a tok logical point of view. There is the the

issue of absorbing chemicals from sea water, and the second question

is about chemicals introduced into plastics from the time of

manufacture, in order to achieve specific qualities of the plastic,

its flexibility, as flame retardant, or microals. Is it when we don't

have plastics as whole eye tomes but small particles, is -- items,

but small particles, will chemicals be released then. We don't know the

discovering, as in Hawaii, plastic is making its way into creatures in

the wild. He look at fish in the English Channel, 500 or so across

ten species, including mackerel and whiting. He found it, in small

quantities, one or two particles per fish. It shows microplastics

are widespread in the environment, not just in beaches, but the

creatures that live in some of those environments. The next steps

are to take information like that, from fish and other crewures, to

understand, OK -- creatures, to understand OK, what are the

concentrations, what is the plastic varying from species to species. In

order to understand which particular combinations might

the potential for the microplastics anything being done to cut back on

largist cosmetic manufacturers, Unilever, said this month it will

stop using plastic microbads, it adds to shower shells and other

products. Should the plastic industry do something? We are

unhappy the plastics are in the ocean, we don't illegal leave it

there and dump it in the sea. We need it back, first and foremost

for recycling, but it is also a valuable form of heat and power.

We know the plastic we can see is affecting wildlife in place like

Hawaii, in front of our eyes. We know tiny fragments are being found

all over the world, we know it is causing disturbing sex changes in

some creatures. Its vital now more work is being done to find out

the wild, and what that means potentially for all of us.

The Government has finally announced plans to align our

childcare with some of our European partner, bringing the number

children looked after from four to five and six, depending on their

which the Government will soon answer, is whether funding to pay

for childcare will go to everyone, regardless of income, or targeted

to need. This is a big ideolgical debate between universalism and

means-tested awards. Bringing the magic of averages to

the rescue of millions. One Winston *Beveridge rej did it. A system of

insurance, marked out by one thing, oversized safety net, for the rich

as well as more the rest. Because it announced something for

everyone, when the Beveridge report was published here, in 1942, there

were queues up and down the block. Soon when the coalition published

their new childcare policy, it would be principles that are

familiar, they would go for a tax same. If the system is to continue

to work, does it need to have a little something for everybody.

benefits universal. As things stand, with childcare to the tune of

�1,000 per family. This is what the minister in charge had to say this

morning. We want to help working families,

we know what a massive issue it is for people. All families, there is

some debate about whether the better off should? All familiar

lose who go into work, we want to help with their childcare --

families who go into work, we want to help with their children's

childcare. For mums like Ruth, you would have thought it would be

welcome, and if it came to pass a welcome U-turn. In 2010 the

coalition had signalled something time of scarcity there will be an

end to policies for the rich as well as the less well off. Child

benefit would be means-tested, she thinks that they made an error, her

husband earns many times the average Sally. I have paid into the

system and work -- Salary. I have I get it. I have worked hard to pay

my tax, I'm not earning now, I back from the Government. Even if

who get the extra benefits, they get free council flat, and money

towards milk for children. I have twins, I'm going through two tubs

of milk, a week, which costs a lot of money. Sources in Government say

their new universal policy should reward women to stay in work. It is

good for gender equality, they say, and living standards. But they will

have their critics. On childcare I think they are making a terrible

mistake, they are bending over backwards to give a tax break to

people, so long as they pay someone want to support their own children,

and perhaps share the work and share the caring. Newsnight

policy chief, is currently trying to iron out a rather serious

wrinkle in their possible childcare offer. Right now the rich do stand

to gain from any possible tax relief. Elsewhere, lower down

system, the less well off stand to lose out. This is because of

changes to tax credits, changes, and indeed cuts to other benefits,

and the bringing in of the Universal Credit. Unless there is

serious action, David Cameron might preside over a rather funny find of

universalism, where the rich benefit and other people lower down

get left behind. This is what they are worried about.

Currently a middle become family with two children in childcare

stand to make no more money, if the second earner ups their hours from

ten to Thierry hours. My sources in not worth it, I have to pay the and

food, it is so expensive now, if the Government are willing to pay

think people would be more willing to go back to work.

As the result of much study into questions of social security...Many

Thought Beveridge's baby, universalism, would be out with the

bath water of benefit cuts, a policy for plenty, not many.

Winter fuel, TV licenses, and other benefits vulnerable. In an era of

fiscal restraint, choices have to be made about where universal is

more or less important, where to proceed and where to advance.

Universalism is most important where it is imbodied in shared

services, people coming together meeting people from different

backgrounds and making a common bond with each other, like in the

NHS. It is more like a cash transaction between bank accounts.

North of the border in Scotland, the Labour leader says universalism

universal is important for the less well off as well as for the better.

One of the key things, when than it does to the people who are

better off. You get this extraordinary thing that people who

You get some of the nonsense stories, like free bus passes

leading to millionaires taking the buses. I haven't all that many

The case for universalism is made, so important, that universal

provision is what is require. Prime Minister agrees with him.

Hilary Mantel has won this year's Costa prize for Bring Up The Bodies,

her second installment of the trilogy about Thomas Cromwell,

which began with Wolf Hall, both giving her a lot of booker win. She

says she is flying through the air. I spoke to Hillary from a noisy

awards ceremony earlier. I asked her reaction to winning the scam

booker and the Costa prize in the same year? I'm astonished, I'm

gratified. It is almost too much to take in. I laboured away for so

many years in apparent obscurity, couple of years. It is all down to

your historical novels have a modern sensibility? I don't think I

of the reasons he was such an unusual man, I made such -- and

made such an impact on English history, is he was, in many ways,

ahead of his time. I have not tried to force contemporary parallels f

the reader wants to draw them, that - Hillary, I know you like to work

trilogy. Any clues, we know the broad story, how will you portray

Thomas Cromwell? Cromwell has four more years to rise in the world.

Until he is Earl of Essex, and in command of most of the great

offices of state and the business of England. Life is dangerous,

every day is a crisis, there is no down time. He's a tougher, harder

man. His fall from grace will come very suddenly, in the summer of 540,

as the reader well knows he will go to the scaffold, leaving his master,

Henry VII, very soon -- Henry Viii you find so joyful about writing?

don't know if it is a joyful experience all of the time or most

of the time. It is an endlessly experience. I never claimed that it

makes you happy. It leaves you a lot of the time in a state of

jittery vulnerability. But sometimes, just occasionally, once

or twice in a writing life, you have the feeling that you are

saying what you meant. Finally, are you heading for a Booker hat trick

with The Mirror And The Light? Fortunate light for my stability I

don't have to think about that for morning's front pages. Hillary is

Apology for the loss of subtitles for 42 seconds

That's all from us tomorrow. More from us tomorrow night, a very good

from us tomorrow night, a very good night.

Stormy wind in northern Scotland overnight. Rising rifle river

levels in the south west, the rain -- rising river levels in the south

west. Welcome sunshine in the west, some thundery. The heavier showers

are pushing into northern England. Especially the North West, possibly

arriving into the north Midland as well. We will see showers for a

while across the south Midlands and southern England. During the

afternoon those will tend to fade away. We should get more sunshine,

a brighter day than it was today. Windy, gusty winds here, it won't

feel as mild as it did today, when we saw temperatures of 14 degrees

widely. Gusty wind across Wales, and across northern England,

blustery winds in Northern Ireland. Most of the showers here probably

in the morning, brighter during the afternoon. Sunshine in Scotland.

Again some heavy showers in the morning, again it is very windy in

the far north where the rain is still around. The showers will be

on the sharp side, the possibility of hail and thunder on Wednesday,