30/01/2013 Newsnight


In-depth investigation and analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines with Emily Maitlis.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 30/01/2013. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



What exactly are you eat when you bite into a burger? As we learn


that horse meat could have been on our shelves for a year, why do we


know so little about our food? Welcome to London Airport, in


Istanbul. As the competition hots up for British passengers, we head


to the gateway for Asia. This is the meeting point of two continents,


Istanbul is in the world economic market for nearly 3,000 years.


Also tonight a Barclays insider attacks levels of pay in banking,


and says the boss, Bob Diamond, should never have taken his bonus.


We speak to a former Deputy Chairman of Barclays, and Lord


And the Oscar-nominated film that portrays the toppling of Augusto


Pinochet. The Mexican star of the film, Gael Garcia Bernal, is here


with me now. Good evening. Remember those horse


meat burgers? Well, today it emerged they could have been sold


in British supermarkets for up to a year. One leading supermarket,


Tesco, vowed to end its relationship with the firm that


supplied those burgers, insisting it was a breach of trust. Now if


horse meat, pork meat and God knows what else has been on the shelves


for 12 month, what does it tell us about the health and transparency


of our food industry. Tonight we go behind the scenes to find out where


our food comes from, and what is in Let's have a quick look around. How


about a quick snack? That's where the beef burger comes in, feed it


one pound of fine mincemeat, and in less than no time it makes beef


burgers ready to be fried or grilled. The beefburg certificate a


regular British dish for decades. Ten million have been taken off the


shelves, after the Irish food agency found horse meat from Poland


in a Tesco burger. The supermarket cancelled its contract with the


supplier responsible. Today, MPs grilled the British agency, wanting


to find out why it wasn't spotted here. If you don't use those tests,


how do we know that the FSA UK would have picked up the


contamination if FSA Ireland hadn't. Interesting thing, we have


accredited test, and we have a mixture of DNA and other tests,


that we could use. We have tests available that, had we tested, and


had there been the wrong stuff there, we would have found. The


real issue is that we wouldn't have tested, because we have our


surveillance approach which is risk-based. The burgers could have


been on sale for a year. The retailer, bears prime


responsibility for food quality. Tescos said the company had tests


and audits right the way up the chain, but the sub-contractor went


outside it. If somebody decides to step outside that process, in a


deliberate attempt, for whatever commercial reason, it is impossible


to check a supplier in Poland who we don't know even exists. Unless


you check the product when it comes to you? Which is why we have


instituted a programme of DNA testing, starting today. Now?


Exactly. The horse meat came from blocks of powered filler, one of


the many ingredients in burgers. Burgers rarely contain 100% beef.


The FSA has two classifications for burger products, a standard beef


burger, need only contain 62% beef, a chicken burger, 55% chicken, and


a pork burger, 67% pig meat. For called economy products, the


These days we expect our food to be fresh all year round, and food


supply chains stretch right round the globe, ensuring food security


has become ever more difficult. At the same time, testing is more


sophisticated, and you can identify all kinds of alien substances,


alien DNA, but you have to decide what you are looking for.


Technicians analysing meat samples like this can test for horse DNA,


donkey DNA, zebra DNA, or maybe all at the same time. It is up to the


client to decide. The technicians can't just look for DNA that


shouldn't be there. It is a specific test, because it is a very


selective test, targeting on specific he will empts of the DNA


of the species of interests, it can't be a scatter gun approach.


That is not to say that multiplexing can't be performed if


a laboratory is asked to set up an as say or PCR for a variety of


spees she is, that can be done, but it must be named species


deliberately sought for in the analysis. Nearly ten years ago, the


Food Standards Agency found donkey DNA in salami sold in Yorkshire and


Tyneside. They checked over 100 salami samples, right across the


country, but didn't find it anywhere else. It doesn't surprise


me that the issue has reemerged. It is well known that maybe 80-90% of


food problems are problems that have happened before, and then


reemerge into the system. The problem is, we don't know when that


reemergence is going to take place. Others say this issue shows the


need for tougher enforcement in this industry now. With public


confidence undermined. DNA testing of meat, once the exception, could


become far more common. Professor Philip James is a food


policy expert, who drew up the blueprint for what became the Food


Standards Agency, and lelen Browning leads the farming group,


the Soil Association. We invited executives from the meat and


supermarket sector, they said they were unavailable. Warm welcome to


both of you. The extraordinary thing is even Tesco hold us it was


surprised by all this, Tesco doesn't know where its own meat


comes from? All you have to do is look at the food chain, and when I


try to work out how to get a valid system, so that people can be


assured, that was during the BSE crisis and the E-coli. It rapidly


became available that there was the issue of control of abattoirs,


which was far from perfect, and then there was the whole issue of


where do all these components come from? I didn't realise at the time,


and I told parliament in an inquiry about a year or two later, I hadn't


realised just how much food and ingredients were coming from abroad.


And in the nature of the Food Standards Agency, I realised it was


essentially impossible to have a monitoring system that would track


every portion of ingredients and food that came from abroad.


Completely impossible. And so that then leads us into the EU, where if


the majority of our food comes from the EU, you are then dependant on


the European system, monitoring it, but you have to remember that this


is not an isolated case. In about the SE, we worked out when I was in


Brussels, that -- BSE, we worked out when I was in Brussels, a


animal cut up in Germany, and sent to Denmark and be in ten countries'


food products. Whose responsibility is it to trace what is in the food.


Is it the supermarkets, the suppliers? I think that the problem


we have here is we do have a global food industry, which is all about


trying to produce food as cheaply as possible. We have a consumer and


retailer putting a lot of pressure on the supply chain for cheap food.


You would want prices to go up? think you cannot expect, if you are


putting pressure all the way down the chain, on every part of the


chain, from the farmer to the processor to the retailer even,


because shareholders are demanding short-term profits from those


retailers as well, then you are going to get all sorts of strange


things happening. We have seen it over the years, we will see it


again. I wonder whether there is even a sense that the consumer


minds this. Sure, when the headline is horse meat people get very


agitated, as we saw from the report there, the breakdown is also on the


packet. You are told exactly what is in a cheap-end burger, people


buy them, they don't mind? They don't actually realise some of the


implications. I'm also in the nutrition game, the health problems


of Britain are extraordinary. People haven't got it into their


heads yet that actually what's in that stuff, and it is quite


difficult to tell really its impact, except for this traffic light


labelling, which was an attempt to get there. But that's nothing to do


with ingredients in terms of validating where it comes from,


food safety and so on, which is the only subject the FSA is having to


handle. I wonder if the labelling is something of a middle-class


obsession, if you are interested in your organics and phosphates you


will read it. If you are short of time and money you don't sit down


and wonder about the countries listed on a packet? I agree a lot


of people aren't reading the labelling properly, but a lot of


people are driven by the price on there. You sound as if you are


surprised by that, we are in the middle of a recession? Absolutely,


the pressures during the recession are greater than they were five


years ago. We have had huge food scandals in this country over the


last ten 20 or 10 years -- 10 or 20 years. We have done a lot to try to


remedy the situations around. When the supply chain and all the


businesses are under pressure, actually, there are only a few


people who care enough to read the label, who really want to look at


the prefnens, who really want to make sure they know where the food


comes from. You were at the heart of repairing what was a massive


scandal, the BSE scandal, you sound like you still don't understand the


transparency of the system? If you don't, who does? The fact is, it is


exceptionally difficult. anything properly changed since


then? We know that the abattoir system is different? The abattoirs


have changed. The nutritional labelling has changed. The called


validation process is now in a mode where you are essentially relying


on intelligence as to what probably might be there. If you have a


thousand tests, do you put a thousand tests into all these


products. You cannot do it. Therefore, the question is...This


Goes back to the test for the DNA of zebra? Precisely. If you are


going for cheap food, you will fill that food, sorry, with essentially


rubbish, fat, sugar, gristle, all sorts of things, just to fill it.


That has been recognised for a long time. Don't forget the farmers have


a very small proportion of the cost of that food that the retailer gets.


Should anybody be apologising for what is going on, and should there


be legal implications for this. This came up before MPs and the


Food Standards Agency today, should Tesco and other supermarkets be


thinking in terms of the legal fees this will cost them? I think they


should be thinking very hard about their reputation, and the security


of their supply chain going forward. Actually one of the things that has


happened as we have increased the amount of regulation around food,


is it has driven a lot of the smaller business, and smaller


abattoir, the smaller meat processors, out of business. The


whole system is even more globalised than it was 10 or 20


years ago. When you get a problem somewhere, it will spread really


fast. It doesn't feel like food is cheap, food inflation is on the up?


Food inflation is on the up, these pressures will get greater. We need


to take short-term thinking out, we need to plan for the long-term. We


need Governments to think about the long-term. And we need retailers to


be working fairly with the businesses who are supplying them


with the farmers supplying those businesses, to make sure we really


do know where food comes from into the future.


Thank you very much. This week, the Government announced


a concrete plan to build the second stage of the high-speed 2 rail line


from Manchester to Leeds. That won't be built until much later, so


much for speed. That crawls through the planning stages and Britain


should have decided what to do with the other big infrastructure


headache, airports. The review into aviation capacity won't report


until after the next general election in 2015, whereupon it


could take a further decade before anything is built. While Britain


delays, dozens of rival airports are eating our proverbial lunch. We


have been to Amsterdam and Istanbul, to view the competition. Long


before mass air travel, long before Skye Bridges, travel lators or duty


free were words. London's principal airport was in fact in Croydon,


south of the city. These pictures were shot in 1920s, these are the


earliest ever air passengers, flying between Amsterdam and


Croydon. Which is where air traffic control was invented and much of


the Battle of Britain was co- ordinated. King George VI trained


as a pilot here. Now it is a museum in the middle of an industrial


estate. Croydon's failure to adapt, it was literally just grass fields,


was replaced by an Rafah sillity in west London called Heathrow. Other


large airports developed around the capital, notably Gatwick and


Stanstead. They are not hubs, all passengers using those airports


start or end their journey there. Heathrow, like it or loathe it, is


Britain's only true hub airport, where travellers can connect with


flight to almost anywhere in the world. But as most people will


agree, Heathrow is now full, its owners are screaming out for


permission to build another runway. The fifth major review since the


1960s into airport capacity in the south-east is now under way.


Although it won't report until late 2015, it could suggest expanding at


Heathrow, or Gatwick, or Stanstead. Or even building a completely new


hub airport in the Thames Estuary. So, while London dithers, I want to


find out what airports in other cities are doing. First stop


Birmingham. Ten million people live within an hour of Birmingham


Airport, which has a gleaming new terminal, plenty of spare capacity,


and is well served by road and rail. But being just over an hour away


from London is one of the problems. British Airways pulled out a few


years ago to focus on Heathrow. And now Birmingham is a bit like a


beautiful bride, waiting for a suitor.


We have Jaguar Land Rover in sight of where we are, yet Jaguar Land


Rover's chief executive can't fly to us from India. How many


investors is this putting off. We have an aviation policy that


concentrates on an airport close to the capital. London is the greatest


city in the world, we don't deny that, and there is a lot of


concentration on financial services. As we rebalance the services, we


have to be real about getting access to markets and manufacturing.


We have to change what is a broken system.


It is not just regional airports which are hoping to steal a march,


while London delays. I joined the 2.3 million people who


fly from regional British airports, on KLM, into Amsterdam. In fact,


people outside London are as likely to use Schiphol to get to their


final global destination, as they are to use Heathrow. Schiphol is a


large aiorn in a small country, which means in order to -- airport


in a small country, in order to expand it needs to lure customers


from other countries, Britain is the target. While Britain as


prevaricated and delayed about capacity enhancement, Schiphol has


six full-length, full-use runways. 70% of all people who use Schiphol


are transfer passengers, they have no intention of getting out in


Amsterdam. The equivalent for Heathrow is around 30%. So,


Schiphol has built its entire airport around passengers changing


planes. Something that might not make sense in London. We have the


one-termal concept, which makes it very easy for passengers who come


in to connect to flights. It is not huge distances they have to travel.


And, of course, our airport capacity is also built on making


connections, facilitating with a lot of gates, in order to make sure


that passengers can connect efficiently to their new flights


and then they can go out quickly again. KLM says it will wrap up its


presence in Britain even further while London prevaricate. We will


continue our expansion strategy into the UK, it is a prime market


for us. With the marketing slogan "welcome to Schiphol". Yes. Even


though you are in Kent? Schiphol airport was voted as Best British


Airport in the UK, why not! Even though Amsterdam is growing, like


many of Europe's older hubs, it faces stiff new competition from


the near east. Ten years ago Heathrow was Europe's busiest


aviation hub, with 63 million passengers, Schiphol had 40 million,


and Istanbul's airport only 10 men I don't know. Heathrow squeezed an


extra 11% out of its two extra # Come fly with me


It's the only way to fly. # Come fly with me


# Let's fly away I will have the prawns and some


peppers as well. Great choice, sir. All this pampering was, alas, on


the ground. The facility where Turkish airlines trains chefs to


serve food in the air, that they have prepared on the ground. It may


be a gimmick, but it is part of the ambition and focus of an airline


that few of us had heard of 20 years a but is now the fastest-


growing airline in the world. Taking the advantage of its key


geographical location, where Asia meets Europe. # Come fly with me!


The boss of Turkish Airlines says the cost of building a new runway,


is roughly what he spends on a new jumbo jet, so his success in the


air is only possible if it is matched by expansion reinvestment


on the ground. I'm the decision maker, I spend millions of dollars


on the ground, because we are on the ground, and make the passenger


happy, when checking in and boarding, spend more on the ground


and your nation becomes a big player in the airline business.


My youthful co-pilot encapsulates the vigour of this rapidly growing


and modernising economy. Supported on the ground, and in the air, by


the Government. She's one of the 2,400 trainee pilots earning their


wings on simulators just like this one every year. While London hasn't


built any new runways in decades, Istanbul will have five new runways


by 2017. As for my first go on a Boeing 777, I think I might stick


to journalism. So, will all this recent growth


eventually run out of road? There will be a saturation point, which


we know. There are 150,000 motorways in the air from Europe to


the other parts of the world. There is not any other economic activity


which can replace this economy, even the Internet. Otherwise you


wouldn't be here. Then, the location of Istanbul is another


advantage for us. Istanbul is the meeting point of two continents,


Istanbul is in the world's economic market nearly for 3,000 years.


Istanbul of the capital of three empires, east Roman, Byzantine and


out toeman empire. It is now the -- Automan empire, now it is the


capital of the Turkish Republican lick.


-- Turkish Republic. Back to the centre of the debate, where the


home of the Industrial Revolution seems to find it so tough to build


more runway, when the demand from passengers is at least there. The


man who wants the additional capacity the most, he's almost


philosophical. I would like the answer to come as quickly as


possible. But, if, a quick answer is even more quickly undone,


because it is a, say First Minister, it is a party political issue,


every time there is a new election there is a reversal then, there is


no benefit to the British public. We need something that will survive


through several political cycles long enough to be delivered.


think it is to do with the nature of the democracy in the UK. We have


situations where providers of the infrastructure want to develop the


infrastructure, local opposition is very strong, either on social,


economic or environmental grounds, and there is the constant conflict


between those who want to build and those who want to delay or stop


building. The Government tends to sit in the middle. It doesn't take


sides, and very often if it does take sides, it supports the


objectors, which is what has happened at Heathrow.


Europe and North America used to be the only shows in town when it came


to air travel. Those days have gone the way of Croydon Airport. The


question is, not whether, but when Heathrow lose its top dog status,


and whether it too becomes a museum in west London.


The former head of remuneration at Barclays Bank has criticised the


size of bankers' bonuses, saying a culture of entitlement in the


sector led to obscene levels of reward. She also laid bare her


anger, for Bob Diamond, who received �20 million for his pay


package. She said she had been overruled when calling for him to


forego his bonus, she had been amazed her suggestions had fallen


on deaf ears. You have been grounded for a month


and you can take us through what she's saying. Pretty uncoloured


words there? She has turn the banking equivalent of turning


states evidence. She has said the dogs in the street have known for a


long time that the investment bankers are overpaid, a lot of the


reward leads to risk-taking, which has led to the problems over the


past few years. She was speaking before the banking commission in


her capacity of the former chairman of the remuneration committee in


Barclays, who decide how much big guys like Bob Diamond get paid. She


recommended he gets zero bonus for 2011, because they had an


"unacceptable" year. That was overruled by the chairman. And the


chairman who is no longer with the bank either, prevailed. The think


she was saying to the commission is that shareholders have suffered.


The owner of the bank have suffered, whilst the big boss, who were paid


so much, have not. Shares are down 70% between 2007 and 2012 yet the


remuneration, the total remuneration is stuck at about �12


billion. That is indicative of the problem, the wider problem in the


banking sector. What is Barclays saying about all this? Well,


Barclays are officially saying nothing about Alison Carnworth's


statement, other than the current are you numberation chief disagrees


with the analysis. Supporters of the bank are saying, while she may


have proposed a zero bonus for Bob Diamond, she voted for the �2.7


million bonus and spoke up in favour for it at the AGM last year.


As to why he was paid the money, the insider world is it was Bob's


ego, it had to be paid to placate Bob's ego. Joining me now is the


former Chancellor, Lord Lawson, and sir Martin Jacob, a former Deputy


Chairman of Barclays. Thank you for coming in. How should we see this


woman in this, brave to speak out, or too late after the event. What


do you read into what we have learned today? I don't think her


evidence is all that important. What is important is the basic


remuneration that bankers are paid is too high. That is just a


Barclays problem it affects all bank. The reason Alison Carnwath's


evidence is note worthy, is she said all this, or she claims she


said all this at the time. It is not a revelation, and it was


ignored. How can we be in this situation, four years after the


credit crunch, where this kind of stuff is still being ignored?


tell you it certainly wouldn't have happened in my day. I can't comment


on the internal workings between the remuneration committee, and the


main board of Barclays. I would have thought that if you were the


chairman of the remuneration committee and you didn't get your


way, on an issue like this, I would have thought you wouldn't have


continued in that role and resigned right away. But I would like to


just say something more general about the pay of bankers. There are


a couple of things which boards in general fail to take proper account


of. One was that these high salaries are very unpopular with


the public at large, with the customer, and that unpopularity is


picked up by the Governments, and political leaders. That has a very


bad effect in terms of the actions Governments take against banks.


is very interesting that. You will not find a politician on the scene


today, apart from Boris Johnson, who bigs up bankers and the bonuses,


but none of them do anything to change it, do they? That is locked


at the present time. One of the things the banking commission is


looking at is bankers' remuneration. I remember asking Alistair darling


about that four years ago? I'm not talking about Alastair Darling,


nice fellow that he is. It is successive Governments? It is


something we are looking at as a commission, among other things in


the banking area. That is why we had the hearing with Alison


Carnwath today. One of the striking things, one of the alarming things,


Martin is absolutely right, bankers a pay has gone completely out of


hand. It is not as if these are particularly special people, a lot


of them. They are intelligent, they work hard, but they are readily


replacable, most of the time. million Bob Diamond got, for 2011,


the leer of LIBOR? For Barclays, in the run up to the crash, what they


called structured capital products. Structured capital products, was a


euphamism for tax avoidance. They were in the tax avoidance business


in massive way. That was earning them something like �100 billion a


year. The people doing that were paid enormous bonuses. You know, it


was no great skill. Your last point, Sir Martin, it is very unhealthy


when Governments bash bankers, but what happens? Nobody actually


leaves, nobody goes to Geneva, or takes their business elsewhere,


that is just an empty threat, isn't it? I don't think it is, I think it


has a highly undesirable combination of events. It makes the


existing people running the banks, right now, much more cautious of


everything they do, with the result that they are not functioning.


current head of Barclays, should people be looking at what he gets


now? There are questions over what his bonus is? The current head of


Barclays got exactly the same what the previous head of Barclays got,


with no bonus, he is not taking any bonus and no pay increase. Should


there be a position to clawback bonuses for years that have proven


to be ...I Think so. There is one thing which I think, just before I


answer that point, which I think people forget when they are in the


boardrooms, deciding on the pay. That's this, that you may have a


really star trader, he may be very, very valuable, and you may think


you have to pay a lot to get him, and he may make a lot of profits,


but those profits are made by the combination, not by him alone, but


by the combination of him and name of the bank he's working for.


People forget that. That is why bankers aren't the same. Presumably


banks have proved that they cannot deal with this question on their


own. If we are still hearing testimonies like this, four years


after the beginning of the crunch, five years some would say. They


can't do this themselves can they? They need regulation. I'm not sure


whether regulation. There needs to be some regulation, of course, I'm


not sure regulation is the whole answer, I'm sure it is not. I'm not


sure it is the main part of the problem. It will always be gamed.


You have to have structural changes of various kind. But three things,


first of all we do want to have a strong banking industry in this


country. It is good for the economy. We shouldn't give it away. We


should clean it up, and the third thing, you are absolutely right,


these people are not going to up stick and go somewhere else. Thank


you both very much indeed. In a few Government moment we will speak to


the Mexican actor, Gael Garcia Bernal, about his new film about


the fall of Pinochet. First, to help the poorest six million pay


their council tax, it is the most widely means-tested benefit in


Britain. It is a major headache from tomorrow for local authorities,


the Government has decided to cut the budget by 10% and relinguish


administration of it, councils have to decide whether to swallow the


cut or make savings elsewhere, or start charging people a portion of


their council tax. One former Conservative cabinet minister said


the changes could be a new poll tax for the Government. Wind the clock


back to the start of the 60, and not go lamb was the setting for the


classic film Saturday Night, Sunday Morning. A young, bed-hopping


chancer of a character, played by Albert Finney, enjoys chasing the


city's women by night. But he doesn't exactly ooze enthusiasm


about the day job. At a bike factory run by Raleigh.


No wonder I always have a bad back, don't let the bastards grind you


down, I have learned that. coalition have promised to make


work pay people like this bike- building anti-hero, it has also


promised to make the benefits system simpler and fairer. Many


locals here, including here in Nottingham, are pretty sniffy about


a change that will make them responsible for helping poorer


families with their council tax. It will be the job of the devolved


administration in Scotland and Wales, Northern Ireland still has


the rates. The Resolution Foundation think-tank said that


over half of local authorities that replied to them, over three-


quarters plan to bring in a council tax repayment for two thirds of the


lowest paid households of working age. Nottingham is one of them.


Government has given us the council tax benefits system to manage, they


have cut the budget by 10%, it is going to get worse because we have


been told to exempt pensioners and there is no inflation. In addition,


it has sold a way that is dividing society T has told everyone that


people on benefits are scroungers, a lot of people, we know, are not.


All working-age households in Nottingham will have to pay at


least 8.5% of their council tax bill, around �82 a year for a


single parent in a band B property. Across England, many of the 2.5


million households with no-one working and currently exempt from


council tax will have to start paying it, typically between �96-


�255 a year. 70,000 families with one person working will be affected.


A single parent with children working part-time could see their


bill rocket from �173 a year, to �750. I have come to meet one of


those who will be affected by the changes. Jo Scott works 25 hours a


week and has two school-age daughters. She knows a new bill


will soon land on her doorstep, but doesn't know for how much. I do


work here in school hours, which is very convenient, but obviously


means I'm only working part-time. I'm an admin assistant, I do a lot


of computer work and paperwork, I'm concerned about how it will affect


us as a family, we do struggle as it is being on a part-time wage and


being a single parent already. Anything additional taken away from


that is a concern. Back in 1960s Nottingham, Arthur Seaton is still


chasing skirt, where will this benefit change now leave the


political parties in their chase for votes.


Councils are also rushing to meet a deadline this week to work out how


they should implement this idea in their own areas. Remember the


question of what people make of it, what political blow-back there


could be, with some people suggesting they are asking lots of


people on relatively moderate incomes to make some contribution


to their local services, has something of the whiff of the poll


tax. Nonsense say Conservative MPs, who see this change as sensible and


logical. Ultimately we are in a desperate financial mess. There is


also a real psychological situation, where if you get something for free,


you really don't value it. Now, you put those two together, and there


has to come a point where everybody has to pay something towards where


they live. But, the Conservative peer who designed the poll tax has


warned this could be the poll tax mark two. It shunting that grim for


the Tories, he hopes, but...If have a large number of people who


who have never paid anything, and are expected to pay relatively


small sums, it is that which created the fuss. For you, once


bitten twice shy, you don't want the Government coming up against


the same thing you did? I didn't persuade colleagues of that. This


change will happen, and plenty of people here in Nottingham and


elsewhere are preparing for an unwelcome raid on their already


squeezed pockets. What happens when a dictator gives


his people the chance to vote him out of power? That unlikely


scenario is the story of Chile's Pinochet, who after a decade of


unrelenting control offers a referendum. This is captured in a


film called starkly No. A young advertising hot shot recently


returned from exile played by Gael Garcia Bernal is the hero. First a


glimpse of No. It's 1988, the feared Chilean


dictator, Augusto Pinochet, has succumbed for a referendum on his


leadership. A coalition of opposition parties campaign for a


No vote. And decide to bring in a young skateboarding executive, to


convince a demoralised population to vote against Pinochet and for


democratic elections. This is the first-ever Chilean work to be


nominated for Best Foreign Film at the Oscars. Shot using grainy 1980s


cameras. It weaves in real-life foot j from the rather to give the


-- footage from the era. He decides to run a positive campaign, under


the banner "Chile Happiness Is Coming". Some say it looks like a


soft drinks advert. But for him that is the genius.


This is one of the advertising executives the film was based on,


he worked with the actors during the shoot. You can offer more


violence and more blood, we needed to change this emotion. We needed


to change this para dime, we proposed another pardigm, if we can


live together we can live in peace. The star of the film, Gael Garcia


Bernal, is no strange Tory such political roles. As well as taking


on parts like che gre var ra, in The Motorcycle Diaries, he has worn


his political heart on his sleeve, working for Amnesty International,


turning his back on Hollywood to some extent, in favour of more


arthouse roles. There are rumours of blockbuster offers from


Hollywood for Mexico's favourite son, but will the love affair be


mutual. Gael Garcia Bernal is with me now.


Thank you for coming in. You are attracted to what, revolution, or


revolutionaries, it is an attractive role for you? Yeah, I


think the films that shake up the established narrative are the ones


that interest me. Ultimately the ones that I get called for. I don't


usually get called for films that are... Playing the banker? You know


how it is going to end in a sense. This film, I think, it taps into


something that has a change of pardigm, definitely. One of the


biggest and more heroic feats that democracy has seen in the world.


And it gives also a critical point of view about democracy and the


compromise that was made as well. This election was won, but there


was a compromise within it. Many things changed, but there was also


the open question. What did it really change? And also, the whole


nature of selling politics like McCrown knee cheese, or coke --


macaroni cheese, or Coca-Cola, almost a cheapened message for the


end. What was your thought about that? There is this thing that


Pinochet became a classical tragedy himself, you know. He came and


imposed, or was a puppet of this imposition of an economic model,


which is calling for the markets. And he did reform it? He did. But


it was through the tools that he imposed which was the way they


chuck him out of power. It was through publicity, the most


perverted version of a publicity, which they used it in favour of the


No Campaign, already a big political campaign. But I call it


perverted because at the end of the day it was very technical. It was


like, they didn't want to sell violence, they didn't want to use


the message of, the ideas that were in opposition to Pinochet, meaning,


showing everything that he had done before, you know, all the


disappeared people. They twisted and they shifted into a kind of


happy campaign. And you have said that politics in South America, in


Latin America, is everything. It's daily life. And here, or in other


parts of the world, where you have lived, it is more of a recreational


sport? Yes, I think, it is, it has that kind of maybe it has to do


with the connection that ever since we were kids, and politics is very


engrained into our day-to-day life, where you buy this or that.


everything is about La Luce, the struggle, the fight? I was lucky


enough to be born into a point where my generation was the first


one in Latin America to see, more or less, the kind of stablised


democracy. The first time I voted of the first time that the PRI, now


in power, when I voted of the first time that the PRI went out of power,


after 72 years. You have lived here, I know, you have shaken cocktails


and bars and in Islington and all the rest of it, when you look at


the politics now, we were chatting, David Cameron's launching his


referendum, if gets in, on the EU, how do you see something like that


being run? Do you run that as a campaign for happiness? It depends


on the question being asked, and how the question is being asked. I


think it is definitely a call for an urgent discussion, back in those


days, in 1988, the referendum was basically the only way that


Pinochet could legitimise, and could appropriate democracy. He was


going to be elected dictator, in a way. That was a very particular


thing. But also in those days, there was less media. Television


meant everything, you know, in the sense. Nowadays, the discussion can


be much more open, it will be a little bit less serious, on some


levels. It can be manipulated on a very "democratic" way. Does it feel


manipulated here, or superficial, or do you think it is just not a


tragic time? It is interesting to see how much participation there


would be in a referendum like this. In this referendum in 1988, 7% of


the voting population voted, -- 97% of the voting population voted,


that is one of the biggest turnouts. In recent elections in Chile 30-40%


of people voted in the elections. We're kind of also where the


discontent for democracy is a credible one, we are questioning it.


Democracy is a word that has been used and tampered. Let me --


Stafrpled. We talked about Hollywood's love affair with you,


you have been offered Zorro would you like to become part of that


world now? I would like my own pathway, in a sense, that is what I


have been lucky enough to be doing. If it involves every now and then


getting a glimpse of how it is to work in Hollywood, yeah, I will.


But just for the fun of it, really, it is another option. If I have to


do only films in Latin America, I'm more than happy to do films in


Latin America, no problem. Gael Garcia Bernal thank you. Thank you.


Just before we go we will take you quickly through the front pages of


That's all tonight. Join us again tomorrow.


Goodbye for now. Hello, wind will strengthen again


overnight. There is a belt of rain sweeping across the country. It


should be clear by rush hour from England and Wales. But the rain


lingering across Scotland. Some snow over the higher ground,


elsewhere a lot of sunshine, it is the gusty winds that will be a


particular feature, especially in northern England. Gusts of 50-60


miles an hour. A westerly wind, if you are travelling on the A1 it


could be tricky. Very few showers across England. Not as many as


today, fleeting, few and far between. A good deal of sunshine.


But the winds are going to be strong and gusty just about


everywhere, I suspect. They will take the edge off the temperatures,


just as they did today.-10 degrees. In Northern Ireland a windy start


in the morning, possibly a bit less wint windy in the afternoon.


Largely dry. The The wettest weather in Scotland, stuck across


central areas, snow over the higher ground. It will feel cold across


northern Scotland, not as windy as it was today. Lighter winds today.


Turning colder across the north in particular. Thursday lots of


sunshine across the southern half of the UK, for a while on Friday we


Download Subtitles