12/02/2013 Newsnight

Tonight, a big blow to the Government's flagship back to work

scheme. A Court of Appeal declares the way it has been organised is

unlawful. You can't be made to work for no

pay without being told your rights to refuse and appeal. Today an

unemployed graduate won our challenge to being owe bliepbled to

work at Poundland, what about the others. What about those thrown off

benefits because they didn't do the volumity work they were required to

do. They may have compensation claims. Why hasn't the Employment

Minister been running a work experience programme within the law.

Last tonight, the murder of PC Yvonne Fletcher in London in 1984,

by agents of the Gaddafi regime. The real targets, anti-Gaddafi

protestors, they speak out for the first time. I like justice, an

innocent young woman doing her duty got killed.

The horse meat scandal at home in Britain. This time it's a Yorkshire

slaughterhouse and a west Wales food processing plant. Raiding on

suspicion of passing off horse as beef. The minister says he's

shocked, we will ask his Labour shadow, whether she trusts mince

now. North Korea stages another nuclear bomb test which is

described as provocative, is East Asia becoming the world's most

dangerous flash point. Good evening, Cait Reilly, a university graduate,

who work at Poundland for no pay to keep her state benefit has won her

court case, which is seen as a major blow to the way the

Government run their back to work scheme. Cait Reilly claimed that

all those who have been striped of benefits have a right to claim

their mn money back, since it was taken -- their money back, since it

was taken from them unlawfully we will hear from the minister in a

moment. The Government's back to work

schemes had been compared by some of their harshest critic, to little

more than the kind of slavery depicted in the film Metropilis,

where skilled but unemployed people were forced to do unpaid work,

which they didn't want and was no use to their career.

A lightninging rod for the issue was a 24-year-old geology graduate,

Cait Reilly, who was told to work, without pay, in Poundland for a

fortnight. She claimed it was akin to forced labour. I have brought

this case because I knew it was wrong when I was prevented from

doing my voluntary work in a you museum, and forced to work -- in a

museum and forced today work in Poundland for free. Those two weeks

were a complete waste of time and the experience didn't help get a

job. I was given no training, and I was left with no time to do

voluntary work or search for jobs. The only beneficiary was Poundland,

a multibillion pound company. Although the Court of Appeal found

the law underpinning the programme was unlawful, the principle of

being asked to work for free, in order to get benefits, ufs fully

upheld. It is -- Was fully upheld. It is important to understand what

the court did and didn't fine, it didn't find that forcing people to

work or lose their benefits breaks human rights law. That would be

forced labour or slavery, and this was not. Parliament did not tell

the court in detail what the schemes entail. Parliament didn't

get the opportunity to debate those schemes. These are the seven

schemes affected by today's ruling, which are designed to help those on

jobseeker's allowance to get back into the work force. Around 130,000

people have already been sanctioned in some way for refusinging to work

on one of these schemes, including being striped of their benefits

entirely. If today's judgment is upheld in the Supreme Court, it

could force the Government to repay millions of pounds to thousands of

unemployed people. What about people who were thrown

off benefits because they didn't do the voluntary work they were

required to do. Well, they may have compensation claims, because the

legal authority under which that happened, didn't exist, in reality.

And the TUC says it's time the goiplt Government got back to the

drawing board, to design -- the Government got back to the drawing

board to design a waterproof scheme to people off the dole. We are

supportive of schemes that get people back into work, and we think

there is a role for good-quality work experience within the benefits

system. We think there is a need for those claiming benefits to take

action and find jobs, and if they are offered real paid work to take

it. Nobody is arguing for people to be able to turn down real offers of

paid work. What we are arguing against is schemes that require

people to participate in unpaid work, in return for their benefits.

This case also highlights that for many people their chosen career

path and what the British economy can offer them are moving in

different directions. In you are trained geology, archaeologist or

journalist, big British business may not be beating a path to your

door to offer you a work placement. This raise the question as to

whether we are training people in career paths for which there are

very few jobs. What's interesting is, who wants the really focused

careers? Is it the individual or economy? If the economy wants it

they will fund them. I think it is up to universities and business to

work together to say we do need more geologists, we need

archaeologists, whatever it happens to be, and make sure funding is in

place for those individuals so, they can move through

apprenticeships and internships and into industry. The Government is

there to educate most of us with the mass of skills for the broad

economy. And the higher education system does that broadly very well.

You have to be prepared to take the jobs on offer.

And now the lawyers are busy again, as the Government immediately

introduced new rules, allowing she is unpaid back-to-work schemes to

continue operating, whilst it appeals to the Supreme Court.

The Employment Minister is with me. Minister, why has your department

within so incompetent it can't even run the scheme? The court today has

been very clear. That we can require people looking for work to

take part in schemes like this, schemes that will help people get

back into the labour market. Where the difference of opinion between

ourselves and the court was how much detail there should be in

regulation. We don't agree with the court's view. We think we should

have the capacity to be flexible, to be creative and look at new ways

to help people into work. But we respect the cower, we will appeal

against it, in the meantime we have laid regulations today to make sure

it is business as usual, and make sure we get people on to courses to

help them into work. It is not just a difference of opinion, the Court

of Appeal has found that a central scheme for this Government, getting

people back to work, and using the methods you have is wrong and

unlawful? No it has quashed the regulations t hasn't said we can't

do it. That is like saying they agreed today is Tuesday, it said

any scheme is as such as authorised by parliament and this wasn't, in

their opinion? They wanted more detail in the regulations than we

had allowed for. We're going to make sure the regulations are in

place to do that. Why didn't you do that? What we need to recognise is

that people have different needs about how to get into work. Sorry.

This is an important point. course it is, but the real point is

how you were so incompetent, why were you so incompetent in doing

it? Because what we felt was important was to have the

flexibility to design schemes to help people back into work, rather

than have the unprescribeed regulation set out in fine detail.

We have to respond quickly to what is happening in the labour market

and find work. Fine detail is telling parliament what you are

going to do and have parliamentary authorisation, such as authorised

by parliament, this is not a legal hiccup it is a major blow? It is

not a major blow. What is happening as a consequence of the regulations

laid to is business as usual. Job centres refer people on to the work

programme and on to schemes that help people get the experience that

they need to get back into work. The fundamental point at the heart

of the debate is was this forced labour, were people being forceded

into slavery. That was another issue? This is hardly a vindication

of you, to be declared by the Court of Appeal that you operated a

scheme in which the regulations were unlawful, is not a

vindication? I think it is right for the taxpayer to expect that

people are looking for work accept the help we offer them. That is at

the heart of it. There is a difference of opinion about how

much detail should be in regulation. We have tackled that, and that is

why people will be back on the schemes. We do need to give people

the help they need to get back into work. This is what we are aiming to

do. How much provision have you made in terms of how much public

money you are going to have to spend to the 130,000 people that

your department says, who have been sanctioned on various schemes,

which have now been found to be unlawful? I don't think the tax-

payers expect anyone who has broken the rules to get repaid benefits

money. You have made no provision? We are very clear that people

should be taking part in these schemes F they don't take part in

the schemes they have broken their contract with the Government and

the tax-payers. It helps them back into work. We do not believe it is

appropriate to repay this money. Two people have won their cases of

the 129, 998, they could also make claims against you, couldn't they?

That is why I think it is clear and it is not in the tax-payers'

interest to repay the money. People who are offered help through these

schemes should take that. That is their obligation to other tax-

payers funding these schemes. you made no provision whatsoever?

What we are doing is appealing against the judgment. We don't

think it is right. And we're taking this to the Supreme Court. I think

it is an important point to resolve. But I think the fundamental point

is this, tax-payers expect people who are offered help to take it f

they don't take that help to get into work, then they expect those

benefit to be removed. That is an important point, I think. Are you

saying Cait Reilly and Jamie Wilson were, basically, workshy? I think

there are schemes out there to help people back into work. Were they

workshy? Are they scroungers? not saying they are scroungers, I'm

saying when we offer help we expect people to take it. Miss Reilly said

it was a complete waste of time as the experience did not help her get

a job. Mr Wilson said he knew it wouldn't help find employment? You

want to offer help, but you are offering help they say isn't

working for them? That is perfectly reasonable for them to say that?

What do people need to get back into work. They say, not what you

gave them. I say we need to give people help, that is why we have

tailored, personalised support to help people back into work.

Sometimes it is a lack of experience on a CV is a barrier to

get them into work. So stacking shelves in Poundland and cleaning

cars is what graduateed need? Somebody who has demonstrated an

ability to turn up on time, knowing what it is like to be employed and

part of a team. The work experience we offer helps that. These are

effective schemes for getting people back into work. I don't

think people should be allowed to turn the schemes down if they are

looking for work. Many people will agree but, the courts want you to

do it correctly and you accept that point? We will appeal that point.

There are doubts over the prove fishcy of some of the private

agencies, A -- proficient sis, A 4. E, for example, and only 3.5% of

those in place stayed long enough to get the payment. You would

expect it to be 5%. You are doing something? 200,000 people found

work through the work programme in the first few months. 3.5% of the

people, not 5%? The people on the work programme have been without

work for over a year. There is real barriers to tackle. Through the

work programme we have personalised support. I don't think it is right

for people to feel free to turn down these schemes to say they

don't want to be part of that, and expect the taxpayer to pick up the

deal bill, tax-payers expect people to look for work and accept the

help we give them. In a moment, what's in the burgers

and kebabs you have been eating, now British processors have been

raided. First, among the many forgotten victims of Muammar

Gaddafi's dictatorship in Libya, are those in the embassy shootings

in Britain, Yvonne Fletcher was killed. The 11 anti-protestors hit

that day have remained silent for fear of reprisals, with Gaddafi

gone, they are able to tell the story for the first time. Two have

spoken to Newsnight's Glenn Campbell.

It is just like it happened yesterday. I feel like the whole

thing is a dream. I remember it every day of my life, I was facing

death here. I could be dead the same day as Yvonne Fletcher died.

Peaceful protest is part of every day life in London. And policing

demonstrations like this is a matter of routine for the

Metropolitan force, but it was at a demonstration of about this size,

here in St James's square, that Yvonne Fletcher was killed and 11

others wounded. And 30 years on, the case is still open, because no-

one has ever been brought to justice. Back in 1984, Colonel

Gaddafi was a major exporter of terrorism. He ordered murder of his

Libyan opponents throughout the world. It was the Libyan

RevolutionyRy Committee's job to hunt down these called stray dogs.

By the 17th of April the revolutionaries had taken complete

control of the Libyan embassy in London.

The night before that fateful day, the British ambassador in Tripoli

received a warning. I came back quite late in the evening after

dinner to the embassy and found a message saying would I go around

immediately to the Foreign Ministry. I went round wondering what the

hell was going on. It was midnight. I found one of the senior people in

the Foreign Ministry with another man, who I believe was a

Revolutionary committee representative, I didn't know him.

They told me there was a demonstration outside their office

in London the following morning, and I was to get it stopped. And I

said, in effect, you must be joking, you have had demonstrations outmy

embassy and you protected it and the same thing happens in London.

They said this is different and it must be stopped. It must be stopped.

And I said there is no way I can stop it. Oliver Miles reported his

conversation to London were two Libyan diplomats urged the Foreign

Office to stop the demonstration. An arms dealer informed the police

of the considerable arsenal inside the Libyan embassy. GCHQ

intercepted a telegram from Gaddafi's Government giving orders

to use violence, it was not decoded until after the shootings. A worker

putting up the barricades was told by another Libyan that they had

guns and were intend to go use them. Later, the anti-terrorist squad, C-

13, claimed that had they been aware of all this information, they

would have cancelled the demo. came here to deliver a very strong

message to Gaddafi's regime. The stop the harassment for the

political prisoners. Gaddafi kills students! Gaddafi

hangs students! The atmosphere was extremely bonderful. We were all

heart-to-heart. We were all gathered and with a strong will. We

had been calling for this for a long time. We had never bowed down

to Gaddafi or his ideas, or his pathetic green book of theories, or

the revolution committees. Revolutionary Committee ordered a

counter demonstration by Gaddafi supporter, the atmosphere was noisy

and tense. Those opposed to the Libyan regime had no idea what was

about to happen. I remember Yvonne Fletcher and her great smile. She

stood right in front of me. And I stood about, I would say, about

here, I was facing the embassy, you know. She stood right in front of

me. And she had her hands behind her back like this. I remember her

saying good morning, she had a great smile on her face. I remember

she was smiling, yeah, she had a smile. And her standing for her

duty, basically. Then we just started chanting "down, down to

Gaddafi", "stop the killing", things like this. A few seconds

later the firing started. (gunfire) We thought it would be a major

fight happening between us and them. But to be honest I have never

expected it could be a serious machine gun out of beautiful

Georgian buildings. I saw her fall when the shot happened. And she was

squeezing her stomach. It must have been very painful for her. She was

going down. I was looking at her. I remember when I got shot I was very

hot. All the demonstrators were falling over each other. When the

police were shouting at us to move, because people were piling on top

of each other, I tried to move but I fell on the ground, that is when

I started shouting to the police, that I had been hit, I had been hit.

I remember a couple of guys carrying me, as quickly as they can

to safety. There was 11 people shot, and obviously Yvonne Fletcher was

12. I would say we were quite lucky because nobody else was skilled.

The The men were seriously wounded by sub mn gunfire that police

believe came from within the building. Because of fear of

reprisals by Gaddafi's henchmen, both have kept quiet until now,

both men want to know who attacked them. Those murders were committed

by individuals who knew the policy was to rub out oppositionists, and

didn't need direct orders to do so. In view of what I have told you

about the message made through me to the Foreign Ministry in Tripoli,

we can rule that out in the case of Yvonne Fletcher. It must have been

ordered from Tripoli, I think. Logically, I don't know now that,

but that is what I'm assuming, I deduce from the way that things

developed. So that now, you might say we are not just looking for the

man who fired the gun, we are looking for the man who ordered him

to fire the gun, or the men who did that. It may be that whoever pulled

the trigger was allowed to walk away. After an 11-day siege, all

Libyan diplomats were thrown out of the country. Britain had no

diplomatic relations with Libya for the next 15 years. By the time Tony

Blair emed Colonel Gaddafi in 2004, lib -- embraced Colonel Gaddafi in

2004, Libya had taken responsibility for Yvonne

Fletcher's death and paid compensation to her family. Libya's

Prime Minister last year paid his respected at the Yvonne Fletcher

memorial, last year, and promised the post-revolutionary authorities

would help find her killer. The Metropolitan Police have never

forgotten their fallen colleague, officers have visited Libya several

times, but have not yet made any arrests.

I'm, quite frankly, very disappointed and concerned about

the lack of progress that has been made on this issue. Libya has now

been a free country forecoming up to two years, and it is very

important -- for coming up to two years, and it is very important

that our own country gets some immediate feedback from the Libyans

as to what files will be opened up, and what access will be given to

the Metropolitan Police and others who are still officially

investigating this matter. You have to remember that in Libyan eyes

this is not a big priority. It obviously is a crime, and there

they are ashamed of the fact that a British woman was murdered. No

doubt they are ashamed of the fact that Libyans were also injured, and

some of those Libyans are now very much respected, and in some cases

in positions of authority. There is some drive. But compared with the

other crimes which took place under the Gaddafi regime, this is small

beer. When Gaddafi's Foreign Minister

Moussa Koussa defect today London during the revolution, he was

questioned about the Lockerbie bombing, some victims of the

embassy shootings believe he can help solve their case too.

police don't have to go far, go to Qatar and Jordan to Moussa Koussa,

he is the man and knows about this more than anybody else. The one man

who may hold the key to who opened fire on the protest outside the

embassy is Colonel Gaddafi's former intelligence chief. He's described

as the black box of the Gaddafi regime and the crimes it committed.

He was extradited from Moritania to Libya, where he's currently

languishing in prison. But so far the Metropolitan Police have not

been to interview him. The Libyans have one of the best witness, which

is Mr Abdullah. We need to find out if he has spoken about this. We

need to find out from the Libyan regime if there are steps being

taken right now to find out who did it. I think he will be critical. He

has spent three decades being the most senior security intelligence

chief for Gaddafi. If anybody knows who was behind this, it will be him,

it will be him. It is extremely important that the Metropolitan

Police are given access to him in prison. The man who is usually

regarded as the evil genius of Gaddafi, and who was thought to be

responsible for all his crimes, Abdullah Sanusi, if he was

responsible for this, they will want to pin the crime on him. But

not before they have dealt with the prison massacre in by 1200 Libyans

were killed. There were many victims of the Gaddafi regime. But

those shot and wounded on a sunny day in St James's square, are tired

of -- St James's Square are tired of waiting for justice for

themselves and Yvonne Fletcher. angry that nobody has been brought

to justice. It has been 28 years, we need it find out who did it.

like justice to be implemented. This is a matter of life and death.

As a result of that an innocent young woman, doing her duty, got

killed for that. I think it has to be justice done.

We have further developments, what has been going on? It has emerged

that police investigating the embassy shootings have made a

fourth visit to Libya, since the revolution. The Metropolitan Police

has confirmed that detectives flew to Tripoli on Sunday, and were

returning to the UK today, having met with Libyan officials to

discuss how a joint investigation into Yvonne Fletcher's murder and

the other shootings can be taken forward. Now this follows David

Cameron's recent visit to Libya, where he announced new co-operation

with the Lockerbie bombing investigation, Downing Street

confirming today that he also raised the Fletcher case with his

Libyan counterpart. They say they have been getting good co-operation

from the new Government in Libya. So whilst there has been many false

dawns in this case. I think the Fletcher family, the others who

were shot and wounded that day, as the 29th anniversary of the

shootings draws nearer, I think they will feel that justice is

perhaps more within grasp now than ever before. One of the few

consolations about the horse meat scandal has been that British

slaughterhouses and meat processing plants were believed not to be

involved. In fact, yesterday the National Beef Association suggested

stamping the words "United Kingdom origin" on packaging so we could

trust what we are eating. Tonight things look a bit different, police

and Food Standards Agency officials raided the Peter Boddy Licensed

Slaughterhouse in Yorkshire, and Farmbox Meats in west Wales, and

the FSA has said horse meat has ended up in burgers and kebabs. The

minister, Owen Paterson, was outraged. It is outrageous that we

found the meat here. We will be following it up with the full

rigour of the powers invested in the Food Standards Agency. If there

is criminal activity I expect the police to bring in the full force

of the criminal law. We have the details. What actually happened in

these raids? Of course, this is an on going investigation, these are

allegations not yet proven. Having said that the FSA did confirm to us

tonight that they have definitely found horse meat purporting to be

beef. They said the agency and the police are looking into the

circumstances through which meat products, purporting to be meat for

kebabs and burgers were sold when they were horse. They said they

raided these two premises, the Peter Boddy Licensed Slaughterhouse

in West Yorkshire, Farmbox Meats in Aberystwyth, they have kept all the

meat and stopped production at both place, they have seized paperwork

including customer lists. They couldn't tell me tonight who is on

the customer lists. BBC Wales managed to speak to the owner of

Farmbox Meats in Aberystwyth this evening. He says he has been

cutting horse meat on the site for about three weeks. And that it

comes from a source in Ireland. Now he said the business is perfectly

legitimate and above board. The meat goes to a place that is

licensed. Though he didn't say where the meat goes. He said he

knew nothing about the second plant in Yorkshire, he's now taking legal

advice. We tried to contact the plant in West Yorkshire, we

couldn't reach anyone for a comment. Now, all of this is going to make

things pretty uncomfortable, I think, for Owen Paterson, when he

heads to Brussels for a big European meeting on this. They will

look at the network of suppliers and agents behind the processed

meat supply chain. Spreading across a number of European countries, we

now know, this all started, remember, in Ireland, it has spread

to include France, the netherlands and Romania, which, until now, had

been under the spotlight. So what else have we been learning today?

Interestingly today there has been a suggestion from a former head of

food authenticity at the FSA, he now works as a food consultant,

this is a Dr Mark Wolf, he believes a decision to reclassify a type of

minced meat could have played a part in it. It is meat called

desinewed meat, which was used widely in the UK supply and value

processed meals, the cheaper meals. Last year European rules said this

desinewed meat could not any longer be classified as meat content. He

says this forced suppliers to look for cheaper sources outside, the

FSA says this change is not to blame. The shadow Environment

Minister, Mary Creagh, is with me now. This is pretty shocking, isn't

it? It is a very dramatic turn of events, until now we thought it

could have been a rogue batch in the Irish plant. Then we had the

news from Findus that shows it was more widespread across Europe. The

news tonight that horse is being passed off as beef in the UK is a

very worrying new development. are here as a spokesperson for your

father, as a consumer or mother, would you feed mince, burgers or

kebabs to your children now? I look for the red tractor mark, that

means it is made, slaught, grown in the UK. I have confidence that the

audits that are carried out are proper in the red tractor mark.

What is not clear, though, is any food system can withstand systemic

cim nat adultation. Once might be an accident, twice might be a

coincidence, three is starting to look like a pattern. You look for

the red tractor mark, if you are buying a burger or something at a

store you haven't a clue? If you are a child at school or patient in

a hospital or prisoner in a prison, you don't have those choices either.

I have been keen to get advice from the minister about what public

sector caters should do. That advice came out very late on Sunday

night from the FSA, and basically said to schools and hospitals that

you have to check with your suppliers. If we don't know if

these companies are dodgy, how do we know where to look and take

action. I suppose it all comes down to a question of trust. If you go

to any of the big supermarket chains, most of us, most of the

time trust what they are selling us. Don't they have a responsibility to

look at their suppliers, it is not just the Government or the FSA.

Surely they have to find out what is in our meat? They do, and they

have reassured me, they have told me about the spot checks that they.

Do but clearly, the system has broken down, and broken down in a

shre big way. Not just the -- very big way. Not just the supermarket

system, after this we will have to see random DNA testing in all

supermarket lines. That was mentioned in the debate we had in

the House of Commons today. Again, if you are going out and having to

get a sandwich or something from anywhere, that you can't actually

source the meat yourself, what do you trust, do you trust the stuff

you are eating? People have to know where they are buying from, and

they have to be not afraid to ask questions. We have seen with a

spike in local butcher shops over the weekend reporting a big incos

in sales as people go back to local butchers who they know and trust

That is also a question of money, everybody now is looking for

cheaper stuff, because everybody is suffering one way or another,

because of hard times. Therefore, you will get more demand for the

stuff you can't trace? I think it is a real gross injustice that this

systematic adulteration seems to have been perpetuated. People on

lowest incomes, pensioners on ready meals, and students with kebabs,

people who don't have much money to spend. Some of those families

already tipping over into food poverty, they are finding life very

difficult. They trust these products and we have to make sure

that the system is fit for purpose and can reassure them about what is

safe to eat. In a few hours time Barack Obama

will do what US Presidents have done for decades, deliver a State

of the Union speech, telling Americans their union is strong.

There may be some last-minute revisions. North Korea, which has

missiles apparent low capable of reaching the continetal United

States, has just staged its third nuclear test. President Obama

called it provocative and threatening, his outgoing secretary

said North Korea was a serious threat to the United States. Is the

simple truth we will have to get used to the fact that one of the

world's most bizarre regimes has nuclear bombs and capacity to use

them, and that East Asia is a dangerous flash point.

The Mercury is rising in north Asia, with a combination of nationalist

rivalry, high spending on defence, and war-like rhetoric. Now with the

situation already tense, North Korea has chosen to flout UN

resolutions and mount a nuclear test. There is a recognition that

North Korea is getting better at this. This is becoming less of a

theoretical threat down the line, and it is something we are going to

have to deal with in the near term that we would really not deal with.

So, it is real watershed in terms of North Korea technological

development, coming after the missile test in December.

North Korea announced a successful test of a device smaller and more

powerful than those previously tried, and warned the US in advance

they were about to do it. That left the international community,

notably the UN Security Council, with little choice but swift

condemnation. I strongly condemn Pyongyang's reckless act, which

shows outright disregard for the repeated call of the international

community to refrain from further provocative measures. The test is a

clear and grave violation of the relevant resolutions of the

Security Council. And the Americans promised more of the punishment

that has so far failed to bring North Korea into compliance.

address the persistent danger posed by North Korea's threatening

activities, the UN Security Council must and will deliver a swift,

credible and strong response, by way of a Security Council

resolution, that further comes against the ballistic weapons

programmes, and its ability to engage in proliferation activities.

The underground test has produced regional shockwaves. Neighbouring

China condemned it, but retains an interest in the survival of the

north Korean regime. There is another problem, chino Japanese

tensions over disputed islands are running high. With the United

States bound to both South Korea and Japan by defence agreements,

that could produce an international crisis. The Washington position,

the position of the Obama add mints traigs, has to take into --

administration, has to take into account that China is in some way a

competitor, but also a potential partner, not only in addressing the

problem of North Korea, but other global problems. It can't be seen

to be locked into defensiveness against North Korea. But there is a

limit to their power and control the domestic agenda in both Japan.

Certainly in China and to a degree in South Korea. Therefore, the

United States is confronting the limitations of what is often

described as its "soft power", its ability to win friends and

influence people. Japan's new Prime Minister has raised the stakes in

his country's maritime dispute with China over the islands. The scope

for miscalculation is all the greater, because of new leaderships

in China, Japan, north and South Korea. With Korean or Chinese

feelings about Japan still heightened by memories of war time

brutality, a region of the world long frozen in Cold War certainties

now seems to be entering a period of instability. The situation is so

tense now that some have compared it to Europe on the eve of World

War I. The risk being, that countries with a history of using

provocations to dramatise their concerns, might get it wrong,

miscalculate, and spark a conflict drawing in the US and China. The

only positive aspect to today's news, is that at least those two

great Security Council powers can agree, that North Korea's act is

provocative and dangerous. If anything it could be a

galvanising opportunity for the region. Because it brings South

Korea a little closer with Japan. They want to co-operate more, visa

advise North Korea. For China it is in, vis a vis, North Korea. And we

are going to take stronger defensive actions against North

Korea. For each of China and Japanese, maintaining a balancing

act will be tough, as increasingly assertive allies throw down

challenges. North Korea's test is the latest, but it certainly won't

be the last. Before the end of the programme we will have the front

pages. First, at a time when Britain is deliberating whether to

leave the European Union, there is one country which has been knocking

on the EU's doors for years, without success, Turkey. The

British Government has been a big supporter of Turkey joining the EU,

and the Turkish minister responsible for negotiations is in

London tonight to lobby ministers and MPs. We will hear from him in a

moment about why Turkey wants to join a club that has gone through

an unhappy few years. Over the past six decades the EU has expanded

from a handful of states to current membership of 27. It has evolved

into the world's biggest trading block and transformed the

continent's map. Turkey is one of eight countries hoping to join. It

has been a long journey, an associate member since 1963. Turkey

applied for full membership in 1987 and has been negotiating terms ever

since. Under law countries have to comply with tests to show they are

politically, financially and psychologically ready to join. The

head of turkey has set a deadline of 2023 to invite them to join the

party. Fears over Turkish migration to person Europe remain obstacle.

Earlier today I caught up with Turkey's minister responsible for

negotiations to join me. Minister, after some 25 years of trying to be

a full member of the EU? What 25, 54 years. From the very start. In

terms it of the formalities of it, since the 1980s, why are you still

trying to become full members of the EU? Because we believe the EU

is the grandest peace project of the history of mankind. If it has

helped you guys live with the French, despite Waterloo, it shows

that it is a very important peace project. But this peace project is

still a continental one, but when Turkey joins the EU, we can help

transform it to become a global one. But do you think the EU is actually

negotiating with you in good faith. Because I've talk today quite a lot

of Turkish people who think you have been strung along for years.

There are more people in the EU, there are more countries in the EU

who are since seerl in -- sincerely in favour of Turkey's accession, in

contrast to others who have other ideas in the back of their mindss.

I think in the long -- minds. I think in the long run, this great

rent day have you, Turkey and Europe joining together, -- rend

day have you, Turkey and Europe joining together, will be based on

concrete needs. This is a very important project. It is based on a

win-win. If you look at the EU your growth over the last five years has

been higher than the EU average. Britain may be getting out of the

EU at precisely the point you are joining. How does that, and given

that Britain is one of your big supporter, how does that affect the

way you look on the EU, a club that some people may actually want to

leave? Prime Minister Cameron's messages are very clear. I think

these messages will help Europe put itself in order. Put its houz --

house in order and shape. I think we can all work together towards

creating a brighter future for all of us. Do you also see the big

worry in Britain, and elsewhere, about immigration. There is worries

now that many Bulgarians and Romanians when free to travel will

come to this country and there won't be jobs for them and it will

be a drain .5 million Turkish people? I don't think as concern.

We were discussing the Polish plumber concept for years. I

haven't seen many Polish plumbers in the UK or France. A lot of

people in the UK have seen a lot of Polish plumbers? It is a huge fear

that if there was freedom of travel for Turk, many Turk would travel to

Europe. About according to German Government -- but according to

Germany Government statistic, more Germans are migrate to go Turkey

than the other way around. In the aftermath of the economic crisis,

prospects of living in Romania, Bulgaria and eventually Turkey,

might be better compared to some of the countries who are concerned.

will look to see the British immigration to Turkey in the

future? Well, there is huge in throw of real estate purchasing by

British citizens in Turkey, and the more the merrier. We have bright

Mediterranean sun 300 days of the year. And with the British pension

salary, they can enjoy a much greater life with higher standard

in Turkey compared to what they can hardly afford here in the UK. So

they are more than welcome to come. Just a final thought, which is

about Turkey's role. You are playing a big role in Syria, and a

big role in the Middle East, do you regret the fact that the Americans

are not doing more. Perhaps the Europeans haven't woken up to the

fact that it is their problem too, and they will have to do more n

Syria and the wider Middle East? Syria, on average, 100 people are

being killed by their own Government every single day. I I

don't think -- I don't think anyone has the right to look the other way.

I believe in the fact that nobody is safe until everybody is safe. If

we let the current bloodshed continue, it's going to hurt all of

us. Therefore, we have to commence our friend in Russia, China, a --

convince our commends in Russia and China to put the necessary leverage

on this Assad dictator in Syria, to leave and let Syrian people choose

their new democratic Government. Thank you very much. Quick look at

Apology for the loss of subtitles for 63 seconds

That's it from us tonight. Before we go an item of interest to

Beyonce and others, when the Bakersfield Conned dors played ice

cocky, it was thought a real life Condor would attend the singing of

the National Anthem. The condor of # The land of the free

Hello there, a change in our weather through the course of

tomorrow, as we start to see more significant snowfall returning,

particularly across the higher route of Scotland and northern

Englandment even some at lower level for a time, acompany by

strong to gale-force gusts of wind. That will cause some problems on

the higher routes if you are travelling by car through the

afternoon. Across East Anglia and the south-east corner, it is a grey

and cold day, dry during daylight showers. Temperatures around 6-8

degrees, rain rather than snow. A period of time of snow, turning

back to rain, to finish the day out. For Northern Ireland the rain clors

away. A quieter end to the afternoon. -- clears a quieter

afternoon. By the middle of the afternoon the significant threat of

snow will start to ease away from Scotland. We could see as much as

10-15cms to higher ground before clearing through. There will be a

spell of snow turning to rain, a milder feel behind double figures

during Wednesday afternoon. For England and Wales, again, some snow

into the Midland, elsewhere it will be rain, a milder feel from