17/10/2013 Newsnight


An investigation into the attacks at the Westgate shopping mall in Nairobi; an interview with the energy secretary on rising fuel bills; and Kirsty Wark talks to Donna Tartt.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 17/10/2013. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



One of the four murders who killed indiscriminately in the attack on


the shopping mall in Nairobi grew up, not in poverty-stricken,


war-torn Somalia, but in peaceful Norway.


As horrifying new pictures emerge of what happened during the attack, we


can identify one of the killers. We trace his story to the non-descript


town which took him in and which he rejected for life as a Jihadi.


Also tonight: Why nt doesn't the energy secretary do something to


stop people being fleeced by the suppliers. -- why doesn't.


I had worn my solitude stowically enough without realising how aLen I


was. And we have a rare interview with Donna Tartt, the woman who


wrote the Seek re History and is about to release her latest novel.


-- Secret. I feel lucky I can devote this amount of time to doing what I


do. This is what I think about all the time. I'm obsessed.


It's now over three weeks since the terrorist attack on the Westgate


attack in the shopping mall in Nairobi, at least 63 people were


killed. It was almost immediately attributed to the Al-Shabab


organisation. Tonight a Newsnight investigation can disclose that one


of the four attackers wasn't a Somali, but we have traced him to


his Norwegian home town. Gabriel Gatehouse's report contains


distressing pictures. It's a foggy road that winds its way


south from Oslo as the dark, long, nordic winter sets in. We are a long


way here from Nairobi. This is the story of a journey - the


journey of a young boy who fled war in his native Somalia. This country


is the country who took them with open arms. A boy who found a new


life in Norway. I don't know if it's right to call him extreme. It was


just different from me. But, who apparently turned his back on the


West and the life it had offered him.


Investigators believe this man is that boy from Norway.


So, we think we've identified one of the Westgate attackers. We think


we've found his home town, a small place called Larvik, south-west of


Oslo. So that's where we are going now.


Newsnight is on a journey to find out who he is and why he might have


turned to terror. As dawn breaks, we reach Larvik, a


modest town on Norway's southern coast. This quiet become water seems


about as distant as it's possible to imagine from Somalia's


two-decade-long conflict. That war gave rise to Al-Shabab,


meaning literally The Youth, which on 21st September announced in


spectacular fashion, it's intention to join the international A-league


of Al-Qaeda-linked terrorist groups. Shortly after midday that Saturday,


gunmen stormed the Westgate shopping mall. A four-day siege ensued.


Dozens of hostages were thought to be stuck inside the complex, held


there, the authorities said, by 10 to 15 heavily-armed terrorists. But


when the CC TV footage came out, it only showed four attackers, fevered


speculation about their identities did little to establish any clarity.


There is a lot of rumours circulating and we have to be


watchful, since the Kenyans before have had somewhat very broad focuses


in their investigations. In Nairobi, all the investigators really knew,


was what the attackers were wearing. They dubbed them "black shirt"


"white shirt" "blue shirt" and "pink shirt." Then from Oslo came an


unexpected twist. In a bland statement the Norwegian Security


Service said it was investigating whether one of its own citizens was


involved in the attack. They didn't mention a name. But sources, in


Kenya and in Norway v be pointed us to this man. -- have pointed us.


Black shirt, seen firing a kalashnikov rifle inside the


supermarket on the first day of the siege. Newsnight can reveal here for


the first time that the man under investigation is dew dew dew. He's


-- Hussan Dhuhulow. He is 23 and is a nor weedge


citizen. Dramatic footage which emerged for the first time today


shows the man investigate os believe as Hussan Dhuhulow shooting a man


already in a pool of blood. He and his family came to Norway as


refugees in 1999. They ended up in sleepy Larvik. Hussan was nine.


Informs in this block of flats that we understand that Hussan Dhuhulow


lived as a teenager with his family, until a few years ago. A neighbour


told us he disappeared and moved to Africa. Mortem Henriksen took a look


from the CC TV footage from inside Westgate. It might be him. This one


in the blackjack et. Hussan Dhuhulow left for somal why in 2009. --


Somalia. So he hasn't seen his neighbour for about four years, but


he points, without prompting to black shirt, apparently


corroborating our other sources. He was pretty extreme. In what way? He


was talking about the Koran all the time. So, he didn't like the way we


lived here. His father told me that he didn't


like the way it was going. Was his father worried about him, did you


sense? Yes, he was worried. What did he say? He was talking about -- when


he was small, he was fighting with his school friends. He was in


trouble in school. There are other links, too, between Norway and


Somalia. Two weeks after Westgate, US Navy Seal Team 6. The same guys


that took out Osama Bin Laden, carried out an ambitious raid on a


small town on the Somali coast. Their target was a senior Al-Shabab


operator who goes by the name of Ikrema. The raid wasn't a success,


the Americans didn't get the man but he is understood to be a senior


recruiter of foreign fighters for Al-Shabab and he spent time here in


Norway. Between 20 and 30 Norwegian citizens, almost exclusively of


Somali origin, are thought to have travelled to East Africa to join the


fight. Of particular concern is a group known as Generation 1.5, those


who were born in Somalia, but came to Norway at a relatively young age.


They need people that really are quite ignorant on Somalia, which is


dangerous. Because that will give them a more internationalist agenda


against these people and it might also make them more dangerous when


they return back to their home countries. There is a sizeable


Somali community here. Attempts to help them integrate into Norwegian


society have had mixed results. This man is a success story. Like Hussan


Dhuhulow, he came to Norway at the age of nine. But today he holds a


seat on Oslo City Council. He says he knows many who feel alienated in


their adopted homeland. I have seen people who I know - not


my close friends - that have been radicalised, that have been changed


a lot. Some people who I know or I know their parents who have


travelled back and, yes, I have... Who travelled back specifically to


fight? Yes, to fight. Here in Larvik, few people are willing to


talk openly about Hussan Dhuhulow. We have, though, spoken to one


family member, who didn't want to go on camera. But they spoke of


infrequent and erratic phonecalls home, each time from a different


Somali mobile number. The last time he called, they said, was this


summer. He said he was in trouble and wanted to come home. Larvik's


Somalis came together this week to celebrate Eid. But this is a


community under pressure. This police had, we understand, been


keeping tabs on Hussan Dhuhulow for quite some time. We showed the CCTV


footage to his relative. "I don't know what to think or feel", they


said, "If it is him, he must have been brain washed.


With James Ferguson is the author of World's Most Dangerous Place a book


about Somalia and the terrorist group, Al-Shabab that is based


there. Are you surprised by this discovery? Not really. I this I it


fits the profile. This has been going on for sometime. We know that


there are - there is a brigade of international fighters with


Al-Shabab from all over Europe, from America and Canada. This happens to


be from Norway but not so very surprising, no. This one is believed


to be from Norway. He's representative of the general


disaffection in the Somali communities, or what? I think we


need to be very careful about that and not to demonise the entire


community. The diaspora is enormous there are something like 2 million


Somalis living outside Somalia proper. 22,000 in Norway. Far more


in this country. The vast majority are not potential terrorists. I want


to stress that. But there are a significant number who might be.


They have been going back to fight for Al-Shabab for some time in some


numbers. When you say "some numbers", what do you mean? Well


last year the Royal United Services Institute suggested there were 200


fighters, fighting for Al-Shabab, of woman, 50 are British. We know in


the States 48 American Sol alleys have gone back to fight for


Al-Shabab for the last five or six years and so on. A population of


22,000 in Norway t would be surprising if thereby weren't some,


among a population of that size, who were also enticed back to fight. You


say the biggest European Community in this this country? By far. No-one


quite knows. The official census is something like 108,000 but actually


if you ask the police they say 200,000 or 300,000 British Somalis


here. It is not quite clear how many. But it is very large and by


fart largest in Europe. Presumably they come and go, these young men


who are going to see action or... Correct, yes. Or exercise an


affiliation with Al-Shabab in some way. They are British passport


holders. There is a lot of traffic. They are entitled to come and G the


diaspora is very much engaged with its home country. There are so many


Somalis going back to Mogadishu now because things are getting better


and there is a minor property boom and people are going back to build


stuff there. This is what worries the security forces here, of course


it does. The danger is someone goes back to Somalia, getss weapons'


training and explosives' training and come backs on a European


passport, back into Europe and does something here. That's the great


fear. Thank you very much. Another of the big energy companies hiked


its prices today. Centrica, owner of British Gas, is going to charge


customers over another 9% a year on average for gas and electricity.


That is more than three times the rate of inflation. The Prime


Miinister used the unenergetic adjective "disappointing" to


describe the price rises. As for doing anything about it, the advice


remains the same - shop around. This is - no pun intended - a


highly-charged issue - because Labour has promised to cap energy


costs for a while if elected. The companies themselves blame


Government taxes and obligations. Andy Verity reports. British Gas is


advertising today for a new social media manager. Successful applicants


may have to inviet customers on Twitter to hashtag "ask BG" but with


these tweets after their price-rise today would you take the job? Which


items of furniture do you you in your humble opinion think people


should burn first this winteder? British Gas, freezing pensioners,


not prices. Do the British Gas board prefer to a bit in ?20 or ?50 notes.


When you tell 8 million households they'll pay ?100 million extra a


year for their energy, there is no problem generating heat. These are


very disappointing announcements by British Gas. There are things we can


do and we are intervening. We are legislating to say these companies


have to put their customers on to the lowest tar Eve. I think we need


relief from rising energy prices and a Government to stand up to the


energy companies and fix the broken market. Why are these prices going


up? Because we have a market that's not working and companies that are


over-charging people. Against that blizzard of public


criticism, ask BG sought shelter in a fact: does the big bad energy


company have a pint? The power companies point out most of the


costs pushing your bill up aren't within their control. If the market


price rises they have to pay it, but, they point out, theres a chunk


of your bill which is under politicians' control.


Government-imposed costs like subsidising the likes of that.


If you have given down the M4 near reading you might recognise this.


When the wind is too high it can't general rate electricity. Too low


and it won't generate much. Running at 16% of its capacity it is one of


the least effective wind turbines in the company. As with half of the


turbines, half its income comes from subsidies. -- as with other


turbines. They are not driving down costs or


providing an alternative to cool the developing world. It is


counter-productive. Is it this that brings misery to your letterbox when


the bill arrives? Well actually you will pay more for this, a British


Gas campaign under a the so-called eco-scheme. The inner joy company's


obligation forces firms to hit targets for helping people on low


incomes or old draftee homes but first they have to find them. They


cannot use data from the benefits' system because of privacy laws, so


it costs hundreds of pounds to find each needy household, you pay. For


those who prefer light to heat this is what it does to your bill. Now it


is the blue slice, 9% of the bill or ?112. Of, that the biggest amount,


?57, subsidises insulation and new boilers for hard-pressed households.


?11 bays for rebates to 2 million people in fuel poverty, the


warm-home discount. ?7 rewards households that generate energy from


wind turbines and solar panels. ?8 is what firms are forced to pay for


permits to emit carbon. ?5 is to keep the price of carbon up and ?3


for smart betters and better building. -- for smart metres.


And 2% of the bill goes on windfarms.


In five-year's time your bill-money won't be paying to subsidise these,


you will also be paying nuclear generators to produce energy at far


more than the market price. You can buy wholesale electricity at a


market price of ?52 per mega Watt hour but reports today say you'll Jo


v to pay nuclear generators nearly double the market price which will


come off your bill. The renewables have made everything else


uncompetitive. Not make a living S nuclear economic? Nobody knows, what


we know is they can't make a living in this distorted market. They want


a subsidy. Ever wants a subsidy because renewables have a subsidy.


-- ever. These are the Government's figures showing the total effect of


all the policies on your bill. This year they'll add 17%. In 2020,


they'll add, 33% and by 2040, it'll be 41%. Politicians don't all blame


the power companies. This whole George Osborne criticism of green


taxes is extraordinary. Because it was George Osborne and the Tories


who insisted on putting a cashen price floor in the coalition


agreement. The Liberal Democrats didn't want T the Department of


energy and climate change didn't need it to make sure the electricity


sector decarbonises. It was a straight revenue-raising measure. It


is utter hypocrisy on the part of George Osborne. He caught to trap T


The institute for fiscal studies say green taxes on bills is so high it


is as if VAT was paid at the top rate.


Companies are paying things like the climate change levy they are clearly


paying the European emission trading scheme costs, and they are paying


this thing called the carbon-reduction commitment. Of


course, someone has it pay for that. It maybe that we'll pay higher


prices. It maybe that the profits of the companies are lower. It maybe


that their workers are earning less. Those effects, whilst hidden, in


terms of households, are there. The man proposing to freeze bills once


imposed new green taxes and his opposition counted part supported


him. Those policies were designed the make energy more expensive. The


trouble s they succeeded. -- the trouble is.


In a moment the energy secretary, the Liberal Democrat, Ed Davey but


first Caroline Flint, the Labour shadow. What is it that you think


that bill pay remembers having it pay for that they shouldn't? -- bill


payers? They are being over-charged. We have looked closely at the


wholesale costs of electricity and gas over the last four years. We saw


they went down substantially in 2009. It was never reflected in


bills and the mark-up between wholesale costs and the retail


price, we reckon about two-thirds cannot be accounted for. One-third


is issues around the green levies and installations. What is it they


shouldn't be having it pay for? The bill payers? Yes. What they should


be paying for. What they should not be paying for? Well, what they


shouldn't be paying for is unreasonable profits that the energy


companies are making. And you determine whether they are


reasonable or not, do you? Well, we have looked very closely, Jeremy, at


the wholesale costs. Because that's something that the energy companies


always tell us, put up prices. We believe, looking at the evidence,


that actually, there is no case for that. But the truth is, we need to


reform this market because we have a vertically integrated structure


which means these companies create energy, renewables, gas, other forms


of energy, nuclear, sell it to themselves and sell it on to us. We


want to break it open. You are perfectly happy with bill payers


paying for green energy, paying an insulation subsidy and all that sort


of thing? I think it is the case - from nationalisation from


privatisation, there has always been some sort of social tariff or


obligation to help the fuel poor. You are happy with it. I think it is


a good thing to help people insulate homes. On the green levies, a


fraction of the bill, something like only 5% or even less of the bill, it


is about investment in our future. But you are happy with that I'm


happy with investing in a cleaner... It is the profit you object to I


object to the distortionist market we have with six companies


dominating it. If you feel strongly why don't you advocate


re-nationalisation? I don't think that is he at answer either. I think


it it is about making the market transparent and competitive. If you


look at the big six they reflect where regional mob op poise under


nationalisation. -- monopolies. How can it be transparent if you in


Government are setting the price? We are saying we will have a temporary


freeze for 20 months which one, recognises over-charging but two,


allows us to bring in legislation to reform the market. You speak on


behalf of the party that in Government saw the average energy


bill double? They did go up but they are going up at three times the rate


in the last three years as we have seen bills go up by ?300 and ?400.


Which is why we recognise, that spanning several governments,


including our own, something has gone wrong with this market and why


we have come to the view that it needs to be changed. That means


reorganising the way this, McEt works, opening it up -- market.


Breaking it down and having a power exchange where all energy is in an


open space where energy can be bought and sold on to us. To be


clear about this - you would fix the market because you would set what


price could be laid. You would also continue to pass on to bill-payers,


the charges that Government is currently loafying, both of those


things are true, are they? -- levying? We would have having a


temporary price freeze but would give a new regulator the power to


monitor more closely the wholesale costs and if they fall and those


reductions aren't reflected in the bills a new regulator would have the


power to force those companies to pass that reduction on. But I have


to say, whilst it is quite right that we keep a close eye on


subsidies for renewables and nuclear, and make sure we are


getting a fair deal. While it is quite right that we should keep


under review the money we ask bill payers to support to energy


efficiency schemes, they have to be part of what will be a cleaner and


cheaper future in terms of our energy supply. Thank you.


Well, Ed Davey is here now, the energy secretary.


What is your advice to people who may have a genuine belief they


cannot pay these new bills? Well, I do think they can switch. We have


seen a big increase in competition under this coalition government. We


have deregulated. There are now eight independent suppliers


challenging the big six thanks to our approximately sis. People can


make big savings. -- policies. Which companies should they switch to?


Well there are eight independent suppliers. They are on the uSwitch


website. People can go and see them and can see the energy advice


available on our hotline. Given what we know of how the energy companies


behave, only a fool would change from a company which has already


raised its price to one which is about to do so, when they don't know


what they are going to raise to it. To. If you look now, you will find


one company will allow you to fix for two years to April 2015, and on


the British Gas tar Eve, before this tariff. You could have saved ?150.


After this price rise you will be able to save ?250. So there are some


really big savings to be had out there, thanks to the competition


that we have now got into the market. When did you last switch


your energy supplier? Earlier this year Who did you switch to


Sainsbury?s energy. I did the big London energy switch. Hour idea, to


enable people to come together to get a better deal in the market,


pulling the purchasing power. I was part of that and saved over ?200.


What do you set your thermostat to at home? I'm not absolutely sure, to


be honest, Jeremy. My wife tends to take care of that. But do you advise


- you do give advice, don't you? You say there is no need to overheat


your home or have the air conditioning on, if you have air


conditioning. You do. What do you recommend? Well, to my wife or... ?


What is a sensible temperature for people to have in their home? A lot


depends on, of course, the building and the insulation because what we


are trying to say is insulate your home more. Do things like the green


deal, use the energy company obligations, so if you insulate your


home more you can turn heating down. Are people too accustomed not to


wear jumpers? Well, I'm sure people wear jumpers. I wear jumpers at


home. You do? You are missing the point here. We need to help people


with the bills. I am extremely worried about them. We can use


competition the way we have but we can make our homes warmer and we can


use less electricity and goes by going energy efficient and that's


what the Government is trying to do. About 17% of these bills is


Government charges, right? No. What is it? 4% is the green levies and 5%


is the social charges on things like fuel poverty, helping the poorest in


our society manage their bitches I'm very supportive of those. I'm also


-- manage their bills. I'm very supportive of those.


What about nuclear? I hope to make an announcement shortly about that.


That will raise the price of energy, won't it? The first time a nuclear


power station is likely to be generating is in the next decade,


possibly even as far as ten years ahead. If it is that far ahead, we


won't be paying for that nuclear energy for ten years' time. When we


do pay, we'll be in quite a different world. We'll probably see


higher gas prices. We will see carbon prices. And therefore, it is


quite likely and I hope to be able to set this out in due course, that


nuclear can be very xetedtive. Why -- competitive.


Why do you believe that people who are paying bills should pay for all


of this, as opposed to the taxpayer? Well, it does make sense through the


energy industry rather than the taxpayer paying it. If it was paid


by the taxpayer there would be something progressive about it? We


get progressivity and fairness in the system through thingses called


the warm home discount. 2 million of the most vulnerable people in the


society, over a million of the poorest pensioners get money, ?135


directly off their bill and that produces fairness in the way we


balance our social and our environmental policies. Do you think


the system is working well? We need more competition. We inherited from


the last lot, the big six. We think the big six have been a real problem


and that's why we have deregulated. We have now got eight - your


eyebrows are going up. The question was whether you think the system is


working well? It is working better. We need to do more. It is not


working well, then? Well, it's been working better since we improved


competition in our energy bill before Parliament we are helping to


simplify tariffs, to make bills simpler and get more competition in


the wholesale market. I'm not satisfied at all. I think what we


inherited before was not good enough. We are dramatically


increasing competition. It be isn't just a case of what you inherited,


though, is it? I mean you, for example, set the carbon floor,


didn't you? We did indeed. And as Chris Huhne has testified in that


piece of tape we saw a moment ago, that was something that was insisted


upon by George Osborne, was agreed to by you, and which has raised


bills. Is Well, it is about 1%, slightly less. I don't think you can


put all of prices on to that. The money is not being spent upon


energy. It is being given to the Treasury? Well, it is very important


to send a very important price signal to investors in low carbon.


What we are seeing - and this is the other missing part of the equation -


how much investment have we seen? We have seen ?35 billion of investment


in clean energy and electricity infrastructure. We need that


investment urgently. We have an energy security problem in this


country. You can read reports about it. Why do we have that problem?


Because we have had over a decade-and-a-half without that


investment. The coalition government is turning that be around. We are


now seeing tens of billions of pounds in investment. I can say to


you - under this Government - we will be able to keep the lights on


and we will be making investments for the future. Not only will bills


be lower in the future because of the investments we are making but we


can have energy security in this country.


Thank you very much. Now, there isn'ted a mainstream --


isn't a mainstream politician who speaks out against social mobility


even if it means for every rung of life's ladder that one person climbs


so someone else must suffer a fall but for all the bluster, the


Government stands accused by the very people it asks to assess its


performance of willing the ends but not the means. The minimum wage is


too-low. Two-thirds of children defined as in poverty are in a


family that works. Jim Re, d reports.


-- Reed. 46 years ago this end-of-terraced


home kick-started a quiet revolution. A brick layer from


Romford became the first tenant it buy his house from the Greater


London Council. -- to buy. 2 million sales later and for many,


home-ownership in estates like this is still a sign of aspiration, of


getting ahead. This man, Jim Reagan paid just ?2,500 for his home in


1967. Less than twice his annual income. Matching his father make


history was son Mick, filmed here as a 20-year-old.


Four decades later, we brought him back to his childhood home. London


was changing and all we had was a garden with chickens in. A pub in a


corner. No grass in the garden. They all came around, the media and press


and had tea and sandwiches. It was embarrassing. I think, at the time,


being a working man, it was a step up the ladder but it was security


for me and my brother Danny. He now lives in Peterborough. For us to say


-- if anything went wrong, we would be safe for the future. That's all


really. By working hard, saving and buying their own council house the


likes of Jim Reagan and millions of others felt they were investigating,


building a better life for themselves and their families. What


today's report in all it's 348 pages is saying is that those days have


gone and even many working parents will struggle to pull themselves out


of poverty. The transient poverty that's


stalling mobility is now a big problem, not just for low income


families but for middle income families. Many of those parents are


feeling that for the fist time in a century, their children when they


grow up, will have lowest living standards than they have enjoyed.


Sadly, that prospect, may well come to pass. The message today was that


hard work is no longer the clear route out of poverty it once was.


Most children living in households considered to be poor now have at


least one parent in a job. Over the last 15 years wages have


simply not kept up with economic growth. Weekly earnings are now


lower in real terms than they were back in 1996. -- 1997.


Consider We have seen a flatlining of earnings and incomes, for a large


part of society. The growth we saw in the pre-crisis jeers was very


much skewed and concentrated in the hands of a minority at the time.


That was to do with the industrial structure we had with


financialisation and the dominance of the financial services industry.


It is also down to global trends which means we have a growing


Polarisation of the labour market. High rewards for high-skilled jobs,


low rewards for low-skilled jobs and a hollowing out in the middle. The


the first-ever council house sold has changed with the times. The


two-bed semi seen in 1967 has been extended three times and is now a


six bedroom house worth over ?300,000. Jim Reagan sold his


council house own. It's now owned by Joseph and Nicola Duffield. They


might live in a six-bedroom property but they sthar with elderly parents


and two sons in their 20s who can't yet buy their own place. -- but they


share it. For us there was jobs. You could work from one to the next. If


you wanted overtime you could do it. That's what we Z it didn't matter


how many hours we worked, so long as we paid everything I was willing to


do that. But the youngsters today don't have that opportunity. There


is not the jobs, you are right. There is not the jobs now. If they


are in the opportunity where they can do more hours for al-Muntasser,


that's -- more hours for more money that is how they can get on to the


property ladder but they are not there. Everything has changed. It is


a changed world. Social mobility can't be measured just by


home-ownership, of course. Today's report recommends raising the


minimum wage and shifting welfare payments from some pensioners to


working families to close what the author's call the country's fairness


deficit. Joining us now is the author and


columnist, Bidisha and David skeleton founder of a think-tank


trying to make the Tories more appealing to working-class voteders.


This is a really striking finding, that work is no longer the way out


of poverty, the way you can make yourself socially upwardly mobile.


What has gone wrong? For me what it shows is more needs to be done to


ensure that, as hasn't been the case for the past 15 years, that wages


keep up with prices. But, also, it shows, over the past few decades,


our education system has quite simply failed some of the poorest in


society. In the long term, what we have to do is boost our skills.


That's the only way to really increase earnings, over a long term


and really boost social mobility. What do you think has gone wrong? I


think it is an incredibly striking report. I second what you say but


this is about the fundamentals, isn't it? What this reports does is


look ahead to the generation who are now 10, 11, and 12. What future are


we giving them? Where do we need it put the money? Education, health


care, childcare, disability benefit. The classic things. What is so


interesting about this report, is that it makes visible the invisible.


It looks ahead to 2020 where there will be 2 million children living in


poverty. 15% of working-age adults, 16% of pensioners, it is a very


striking and damning prognosis. And work not being the way out


Absolutely and there being all sorts of other obstacles. Work is not the


way out. If you want a university education, it is expensive. You may


not be able to find a job when you get to the end of it. It is also


about empowering those people who aren't at the stage of thinking - I


want to go to a great school and top university. It is about saying -


where are the apprenticeships? If you get a job that doesn't require a


degree, will you be paid a wage, even the minimum wage, that is


liveable? This is a really bleak and depressing future? Which for me show


the importance of education reform which is the only way out in the


long term. We should think about ways of increasing the minimum wage


if we can safeguard jobs by reforming the tax system but in the


long term we need to make sure we reform education so that people from


the poorest parts of society do get this opportunity. I'm passionate


about this. I went to a school where only 10% of people were getting five


good A to Cs but there were so many great people but they weren't


allowed to make the most of their potential. It is important to reform


education to make sure people can make the most of their potential and


we build more houses so people can get on the housing ladder. What


about the report saying that the cards aren't being dealt evenly, as


between the old and too much that the young are getting too much and


the old too little I absolutely disagree with some of the


recommendation of the report which is that we look at the furthest


edges of society and say to the mythical rich - OK you don't have


to... But there are some. Yes but that's not the answer. If you want


education reform. If you want long-term reform of all of other


things we care about in society - which by the way we have been


talking about for 20 years - you raise money. How do you do that? You


don't penalise pensioners, regardless of whether they are rich,


poor or medium. You raise money by taxing those individuals who are


still working and those corporations who are making millions and you tax


them by 0.5% more. I almost made a Freudian slip by saying 5% more,


which is secretly what I think. But 0.5% and that will raise the money.


You can't go through the rigmarole to find the rich pensioners and get


their TV licence money back off them. When we talk about social


mobility, assuming we fleed mobilitied upwards -- we moon


mobility upwards. Presumably there are some people who are socially


mobile downwards. Is that a problem? Not necessarily. I think social


mobility is about making the most out of their potential. For me the


problem is you have people at the age of five... If somebody goes up,


somebody else has to come down. You need people to make the most out of


their potential. At five the vocabulary gap between swung brought


up in a poor or rich household is about one year. We need to think


about that and make sure the people make the most out of their


potential. But for that to happen society needs to be more flat,


doesn't it? Not at all. If you look at the dynamic successful socially


mobile societies in the world they are not more flat but they are


prosperous. What is the model? There are various. What are they? If you


look at Sweden, Sweden has done education and welfare reform over


the past few years, because the flatter model wasn't working for it.


So, the model which is - socially mobile and economically prosperous


is what we are looking for. Can I say something - which is... Of


course you can, that's why you are here. It is not bh flatness. I think


the model has to be more flexible. It bothers me when I sea see reports


saying two-thirds of people living under the poverty line, one parent


works. What that means is they work outside the home. It means the other


parent is doing the childcare which is a huge amount of work done for


free. We are getting on to an entirely different subject. I am not


about to do that. Of what is it that is keeping them home if they want to


work? It is the lack of meaningful and worthwhile well-remunerated


flexible work. They know if they work outside the home, they can't


afford the childcare. Thank you both very much.


Now to the bit of the programme that I certainly have been waiting for.


As no-one can read knows, the American novelist, Donna Tartt is


one of the most exciting perpetrators of fiction in the


world. The Seek re History somehow managed to be both an international


best-seller and a cult classic. -- the Secret History. It came out 20


years ago and her latest, only her third novel, the Goldfifshling is


published next week. She rarely gives interviews. Kirsty leapt at


the chance and leapt into a plane to New York.


I can write anywhere. I can write curled newspaper a corner in a spare


airchair -- armchair in somebody's house. I write on the Madison Avenue


bus. I write all over the place. Always have been able to. In the


bathtub. I can write anywhere. In the library? I can write in the


library. I wrote a lot of Goldfinch in the New York Public Library. In


the Allen Room there, which was wonderful. That because there were


wrenches books. What makes the -- because there were reference books


there? I know a lot of writers would be horrified to be in a public


space. If you need a character all you have to do is look up at people


walking back and forth and it is like being an artist sketching in


the a sidewalk cafe. People, walk-on characters, everybody you need is


right there. Of course, books - this was a book for which I had to read a


lot. If you are at home, for example, if you are in the


countryside, do you a a routine? Do you write every day? Every now and


then life will intervene. I write every day. If I have guests I will


slip away to my little room where I work and, always, yes. You are a


net-taker, then, too? I ka area anotebook wherever I go -- I carry.


If I don't write it down when I think of it, I will never think of


it again. Most of my notes are "bits of the mind's string too short to


use" which is a phrase that has been used. So many of my notes are bits


and bobs and little magpie gleamings and glintings and they won't turn up


in any piece of finished work. What about at night? Are you a night


writer? I do. A night writer. I like that. I do. Well t depends - if I


have had a hard day I will quit, I will knock-off and go do something


else. But if I'm - if I'm on a run, doing well, I'm like a gambler, I


don't want to get up from the table. You have written, then, if you are


saying you write every day. Yes. You have more or less written solidly


for the past 21 years. I have written solidly. But I have written


solidly in scraps. Not every day do I sit down and write a tremendous


block of finished prose. But I'm always fiddling around and writing


little bit and bobs, sometimes when I'm out and about wane my notebook


in a pocket it is bits and bobs. When I say I can write on the bus, I


don't imagine I'm writing pages of finished proseb things will occur to


me and very often they are the germs of things that will become pages of


prose. That's writing too. Do you ever think you have made too many


sacrifices for this? It is not a sacrifice. I feel lucky I'm able to


devote this amount of time to doing doing what I do. It is what I think


about all the time. I'm obsessed. Are you really? You seem quite


balanced to me? Um, well - well, I mean you are encountering me when I


have just finished a book, not in the middle. Maybe I wouldn't be


quite so balanced when I'm working. In the same way as you hit great


streaks. How do you hit bad streaks? Of? Of thinking - the last 50 pages


I have to strike. Absolutely. There was a point in this book where I


realised I had taken a bad turn and it was just about eight months of


work. I realised to really get to where you knead to go, sometimes you


must run through the other options. There was no way that I could have


gotten to that point, had I not spent those eight months. They are


invisible, not in the book but I needed to spend them in order to be


where - to get to where I was, yeah. Does that mean that in that way you


keep your sense of balance because you know it is not in vain?


Hemingway used the metaphor of - and it is very correct - of an iceberg,


even if you obviously only see it. With writing sometimes you only see


the tip. Everything else will be cut but there is the sense of weight


underneath the water. The real world is there, even though it's not going


to be in fl verbatim, which you have done -- in there.


But still I was lonely. It was Borris I missed. The whole impulsive


mess of him, gloomy, reckless, hot tempered, I a Paulingly thoughtless.


-- appallingly. Borris, peal pale and pasty, with his gnawed down


finger nails. Borris, Budding alcohol influshes f fluent curser in


four languages who snatched food from my plate when he felt like it


and who nodded off on the floor, face red like he had been slapped.


You want people to read your books. What do you want them to read them


for? Fist, I want them to have fun. Reading is no good, unless it is


fun. -- first. What I wallsant is - it is the one


quality I look for in books. It is hard to find but I love that


childhood quality of just that gleeful, greedy reading, can't get


enough of it, what is happening to these people, the breathless turning


of the pages. That's what I want in a book. But I also want something


that's well-constructed, too. I like to be able to drop down. Dicksens


goes so fast, like lightening, but at the same time any sentence you


can lift up and it is a marvel and a miracle. So, to me, I want those two


qualities. The two qualities of any great art. Density and speed.


Density and speed. You also bring secrets. Your books are about


secrets. I guess they are. I never thought about that. But all books


have miseries at their heart. Every book has some secret. There is


always a secret. Donna Tartt thank you very much. Thank you. That was


Donna Tartt talking to Kirsty. A longer version of that interview for


the Review Show is on the iPlayer. Tomorrow's front pages, many papers


are interested in a speech by the Health Secretary, Jeremy Hunt b


grandparents and old people being neglected. On the Mail, the


Independent and Telegraph front pages and the Daily Mirror is


exercised still about energy bills as is the Guardian.


That's all from us for tonight. Before we g as if life wasn't


miserable enough, Morrissy has revealed that he was once asked to


play the part of Dot Cotton's son in EastEnders.


Well, heavens to Betsy, we've only gone and found the screentest.


# Heavens knows I'm miserable now... # Every day is like Sunday


# Every day is like... # EASTENDERS THEME TUNE


hello the potential for widespread fog first thing on Friday.


A lotted of low cloud, the odd spot or two of rain. More significant


rain guess in the west. It will be heavy and persistent perhaps into


Northern Ireland. Really we are just looking at some bits and pieces of


rain through western fringes of Scotland. A fair amount of cloud and


still a chilly feel with the breeze coming from a north-westerly


direction. Bits and pieces of rain as kro the Lake District and to the


west of the Pennines. Head further east and it'll stay predominantly


dry, quite mild. The odd spot or two of rain but nothing significant.


Brightness along the south coast. The rain more persistent, albeit


fairly patchy, the further south and west you come. Here mild with 15 or


16 the high. A similar story for Wales. Overcast with showery


outbreaks of rain. Rain moves north overnight Friday into Saturday. It


tends to anchor itself across Scotland. Showers easing away from


the south-east corner. Blustery showers across England, Wales and


Northern Ireland for the start of the weekend. Let'slike at some of


our major cities. For Scotland and northern England, Saturday will be


the worst day, brighter and drier on Sunday. By contrast further south,


lighter showers on Saturday. The showers become more heavier and


perhaps frequent on Sunday.


An exclusive investigation into the attacks at the Westgate shopping mall in Nairobi; an interview with the energy secretary on rising fuel bills; and Kirsty Wark talks to author Donna Tartt. Jeremy Paxman presents.

Download Subtitles