:00:13. > :00:18.One of the biggest industrial areas in Scotland will be closed down.
:00:19. > :00:22.Might someone be found who could make it pay? I have been talking to
:00:23. > :00:27.Scotland's for instance as he tries to broker last-ditch deal. As part
:00:28. > :00:31.of the apology that we have already given there should be included in
:00:32. > :00:37.that apology, if we are going to give that apology we should give it
:00:38. > :00:42.personally and not in this forum. You are planning to see Mr Mitchell
:00:43. > :00:48.and give him an apology. If there is one due with regard to... (laughter)
:00:49. > :00:53.Mr Hinton this is not a television game show. Why did the police who
:00:54. > :00:58.met Andrew Mitchell in this room give such misleading accounts of
:00:59. > :01:03.what happened. Why won't they give a proper apology. Totally there will
:01:04. > :01:08.be a revolution, it is totally going to happen. I haven't a flicker of
:01:09. > :01:11.doubt, this is the end. A highbrow interview with Russell Brand. This
:01:12. > :01:16.is the green grass where I take my dogs and I just let them do what
:01:17. > :01:20.they want. This little bit of green here? Because it is quite a small I
:01:21. > :01:25.can't remember, there is a lot of dog mess. And has childhood finally
:01:26. > :01:39.been divorced from nature? And does it matter? There are elements of the
:01:40. > :01:43.industrial dispute at the petro-chemical plant at Grangemouth
:01:44. > :01:48.which promise a trip straight back to the 1970s. A loss-making factory,
:01:49. > :01:51.a work force that believes it has cast iron agreements about pay,
:01:52. > :01:54.conditions and pensions which the management are now going back on. A
:01:55. > :02:01.Government says it cannot and will not be a mere speck taker. It ought
:02:02. > :02:07.-- spectator. It thought to be washed out in colour, it is real and
:02:08. > :02:15.worrying enough if you are one of the thousands likely to be badly
:02:16. > :02:18.affected. Today the owners of EOS announced they were shutting the
:02:19. > :02:21.gates. After hearing the announcement workers began to leave
:02:22. > :02:27.the site which employs 800 people directly with a further 2,000 jobs
:02:28. > :02:32.reliant on the site. I'm sorry, no. It is going to be HOR rendous trying
:02:33. > :02:38.to live -- HOR rendous trying to live after this. The owner, InEos
:02:39. > :02:42.said they were willing to invest ?300 million, but only if the unions
:02:43. > :02:49.agreed to their survival plan, which included accepting a pay freeze,
:02:50. > :02:53.cuts to pensions and a no-strike guarantee. Blackmail. The workers
:02:54. > :02:57.narrowly rejected the proposals in a ballot. The company said it could no
:02:58. > :03:03.longer continue to fund the site and the business had no option but to go
:03:04. > :03:11.ahead with liquidation. The trade union Unite, described it as an act
:03:12. > :03:20.of industrial vandalism. Make no mistake, one man is holding this
:03:21. > :03:24.work force and country to Rand some, that is Jim Ratcliffe, the owner.
:03:25. > :03:29.Unite can do no more, and the ball is now the court of Jim Ratcliffe
:03:30. > :03:32.and the respective Governments of Westminster and Edinburgh. The
:03:33. > :03:36.Scottish Executive says if an agreement between the company and
:03:37. > :03:40.Unite isn't achievable, it will pursue options to find a potential
:03:41. > :03:43.buyer for the site. Just before we came on air I spoke to the First
:03:44. > :03:49.Minister of Scotland, Alex Salmond, about the stand-off. Alex Salmond do
:03:50. > :03:56.you accept it is now inevitable that Grangemouth is going to close? No I
:03:57. > :04:00.don't. The reason for that is I know how close both management and unions
:04:01. > :04:04.were to agreement last week, twice actually, once to an underlying
:04:05. > :04:09.agreement and then secondly to reignite the plant. We were within a
:04:10. > :04:12.hair's breath of that on Friday morning. Given that both sides were
:04:13. > :04:16.very close to agreement last week, both sides agreed there was, in
:04:17. > :04:21.their words, an outstanding further for this facility. I don't see why a
:04:22. > :04:25.week later the game should be up. I'm determined not to give up on
:04:26. > :04:30.Grangemouth. It is clearly uneconomic isn't it? No, there were
:04:31. > :04:35.challenges certainly in the chemical side and its competitive position.
:04:36. > :04:39.The petro-chemical side is losing ?10 million a month, that can't go
:04:40. > :04:44.on indefinitely? That depends where you put the figures. Let's have some
:04:45. > :04:49.common sense here. In the refinery there is no proposal to close it,
:04:50. > :04:53.the refinery is pretty well placed compared to other UK refineries. In
:04:54. > :04:56.the chemical side which has competitive pressure for particular
:04:57. > :05:00.reasons, the company had an investment plan to secure the future
:05:01. > :05:05.of that facility for the next 15-25 years. Both sides agreed that was an
:05:06. > :05:09.investment plan that they wanted. Unfortunately the negotiations
:05:10. > :05:13.brought down over other matters. Given we are a week on, given we
:05:14. > :05:16.were so close last week, I don't see why we can't have a renewed effort
:05:17. > :05:21.to find that common ground and secure a future for this facility.
:05:22. > :05:26.So should the workers have accepted the cuts to pay and pensions? I
:05:27. > :05:29.think the work force, certainly the unions were prepared to address
:05:30. > :05:33.that, a significant development this afternoon is new proposals have been
:05:34. > :05:38.made by Unite to the company. Now I hope the company is consider these,
:05:39. > :05:41.I spoke to both Unite and Jim Ratcliffe this afternoon, I hope
:05:42. > :05:47.these can be favourically considered. They do seem to me, as
:05:48. > :05:51.least at first sight tie dress the cost issues the company brought
:05:52. > :05:55.forward. Perhaps over the next few days we can get to a more positive
:05:56. > :05:59.place and see this crucial facility. Above all the livelihoods of
:06:00. > :06:02.thousands of people in Scotland protected. Would you like to see it
:06:03. > :06:07.sold to somebody else if there cannot be an agreement reached? We
:06:08. > :06:10.are going to concentrate, let's make one last effort to get that
:06:11. > :06:16.agreement, given the new proposals that Unite have made. It is bait
:06:17. > :06:20.late is it? -- it is a bit late? It might be five minutes to midnight
:06:21. > :06:28.but not past the witching hour as yet. The petro-chemical company has
:06:29. > :06:34.not been liquid dated yet, it won't -- liquidated yet, it won't be for
:06:35. > :06:38.several days. I will work as hard as I can as First Minister of Scotland,
:06:39. > :06:42.because of the facility and livelihoods at stake, let's make the
:06:43. > :06:45.one last effort to get the agreement that secures the future of what is a
:06:46. > :06:50.very, very important plant. When you spoke to the chairman, was he up for
:06:51. > :06:54.a new set of talks? Well he certainly did not say that he
:06:55. > :06:57.wouldn't consider the things coming forward. They have to come forward,
:06:58. > :07:02.as he put it, from the local management. The sequence of events
:07:03. > :07:06.that unite have made proposals to the local management. They have to
:07:07. > :07:11.reflect that and put it forward to the shareholders of the company who
:07:12. > :07:19.decide on the investment. But I hope that process can now happen because
:07:20. > :07:24.Grangemouth is worth it happening and the leavelihoods of these people
:07:25. > :07:30.are worth -- livelihoods of these people are worth it. We are prepared
:07:31. > :07:34.to encourage and if sillity where agreement could be -- facilitate
:07:35. > :07:38.where agreement could be reached. Where was he when you spoke to him
:07:39. > :07:42.on the phone? He was in London and I was speaking from Aberdeen. So it's
:07:43. > :07:48.not true, as has been alleged in the house of Lord this evening, that
:07:49. > :07:53.he's swanking around on yacht in the Mediterranean? No and I could say
:07:54. > :07:58.that Mr Rathbone was in DLON when I spoke from Aberdeen. Can I say from
:07:59. > :08:02.all this stuff, I'm prepared from past exchanges as you know, to
:08:03. > :08:05.engage in all sorts of stuff with other politicians and you know for
:08:06. > :08:09.debate and all the rest of it. Right now when there are thousands of folk
:08:10. > :08:14.who are waiting to see if they have a job and livelihood, whether people
:08:15. > :08:18.are in the House of Lords and Commons or Scottish Parliament, we
:08:19. > :08:22.should address the issue, our role right now is to try to get people to
:08:23. > :08:26.agree, to try to get common ground to secure the future of the
:08:27. > :08:39.facility. The rhetoric and inSULTs and all that nonsense should wait
:08:40. > :08:43.for another day. Have you heard anything about the proposal from
:08:44. > :08:47.Unite? I haven't as yet. We will wait and see if that comes through
:08:48. > :08:51.tomorrow. What I'm hearing is that if what they are saying through it
:08:52. > :08:56.is diametrically opposed to what they were saying only two days ago,
:08:57. > :09:00.which was they totally rejected our survival plan and that is what
:09:01. > :09:05.caused most of the Unite represent people on site to vote against it.
:09:06. > :09:09.So there is a possibility of, Alex Salmond there was talking about
:09:10. > :09:13.something five minutes to midnight. It is five minutes to midnight as
:09:14. > :09:15.far as you are concerned, because the negotiations are not over? The
:09:16. > :09:19.problem is the negotiations are over, which is why we announced
:09:20. > :09:23.today we have to close the site. The difficulty we have been put into is
:09:24. > :09:27.we made a clear statement to our employees because we couldn't talk
:09:28. > :09:31.to Unite, they refused to talk about on the issue, they wanted to talk
:09:32. > :09:35.about the treatment of the union convener. We have addressed it
:09:36. > :09:39.directly to the work force, and encouraged by Unite they rejected
:09:40. > :09:43.it, or half of them rejected it. Are you willing to reopen negotiations?
:09:44. > :09:48.The reality is, and I think you heard Alex Salmond say it, that in
:09:49. > :09:53.his discussions with Jim Ratcliffe and the shareholders, the management
:09:54. > :09:56.team on the site will obviously take back to the shareholders something
:09:57. > :10:02.if it changes significantly. I don't know whether that's the case or not
:10:03. > :10:07.at this stage. So you are in principle prepared to reopen
:10:08. > :10:11.negotiations, or you, I mean if people were willing on-site you
:10:12. > :10:18.would? The reality of the situation is that we have been forced by t
:10:19. > :10:22.rejection of the proposals we made to start a process that sees the
:10:23. > :10:26.site close, that is the reality, I can't say what will happen tomorrow,
:10:27. > :10:30.I have no idea what else is being offered. We have no idea what is on
:10:31. > :10:34.the table. It is clearly not over. You are not talking like man who is
:10:35. > :10:39.saying it is over, it is finished, it is done? The reality is we have
:10:40. > :10:43.had to announce today the petro-chemical site will close.
:10:44. > :10:46.There is a huge discussion to be had about restarting the refinery, that
:10:47. > :10:50.has to start to continue. Whether that impacts on the petro-chemical
:10:51. > :10:56.site I have no idea. As far as you are concerned the refinery can
:10:57. > :11:01.continue to operate? Absolutely. Fine, can you help us with the
:11:02. > :11:06.petro-chemical figures, this figure of your company losing ?10 million a
:11:07. > :11:11.month, Alex Salmond disputes that, you heard him say that there that he
:11:12. > :11:15.can't accept that was necessary the right figure, is it the right
:11:16. > :11:20.figure? The overall site is losing ?10 million a month. That is the
:11:21. > :11:24.whole site, both refining and petro-chemicals. Petro-chemicals is
:11:25. > :11:27.a big piece of that. The reality is we have had to invest so far about a
:11:28. > :11:33.billion pounds into the site. We have now to invest, if we want to
:11:34. > :11:39.continue petro-chemical, they have to a further ?300 million, that was
:11:40. > :11:44.put to the work force, are you willing to support us, if we are
:11:45. > :11:49.going to put the ?300 million is, the answer was a resounding no. To
:11:50. > :11:53.muck about with people's pension expectations is pretty tough? If it
:11:54. > :11:58.were mucking about, I would agree with you. All we have asked to do is
:11:59. > :12:00.for the pensions to go for a normal situation. Something most people
:12:01. > :12:05.would consider very generous. The current pension scheme is costing us
:12:06. > :12:10.65% of salary, for everyone we employ we have to add another 65% on
:12:11. > :12:20.top of their salary which currently is about ?55,000, add the # the 65%
:12:21. > :12:23.on it is costing over ?100,000 for every person on the site. Can you
:12:24. > :12:27.imagine anyone else in your line of work to take on the commitments? It
:12:28. > :12:31.is difficult to see who would do it. Everyone would face the same issue
:12:32. > :12:34.we have, not enough gas from the North Sea, we can't run the site
:12:35. > :12:38.full because of that. We have to invest in new facility to bring more
:12:39. > :12:43.gas in. That is a big bill, on top of that big bill you have to keep
:12:44. > :12:46.shelling out for the losseses on site until you have sort -- losses
:12:47. > :12:50.on site until you have sorted that out. That will take two or three
:12:51. > :12:55.years. What about workers who think they have no jobs? My message is one
:12:56. > :12:59.of huge and deep regret. My major deep regret is their union has not
:13:00. > :13:04.represented its interests, it has represented its own iterim political
:13:05. > :13:07.interests and advised them extremely badly.
:13:08. > :13:11.Thank you very much. Not since medieval philosophers debated how
:13:12. > :13:16.many angels can dance on the head of a pin has Westminster seen a display
:13:17. > :13:19.to compare with the appearance of three very experienced police
:13:20. > :13:22.officers spending much of the afternoon trying to explain how they
:13:23. > :13:26.came to describe a conversation which did not take place. In the
:13:27. > :13:30.end, though, they couldn't bring themselves to apologise to the then
:13:31. > :13:34.cabinet minister, Andrew Mitchell, but the senior officer who
:13:35. > :13:39.investigated whether they ought to place disciplinary proceedings still
:13:40. > :13:45.believes they should. The scene of wrongdoing? Or as the
:13:46. > :13:50.police contend nothing to see here, move along please! Just over a year
:13:51. > :13:54.ago the MP for Sutton Coldfield, Andrew Mitchell turned up here at
:13:55. > :13:58.his constituency Association for A crucial meeting. If he could
:13:59. > :14:01.convince three local representatives of the Police Federation that he had
:14:02. > :14:08.done nothing wrong, well he just might be able to save his career.
:14:09. > :14:12.What happened in this room around this table has already been the
:14:13. > :14:16.subject of an internal police investigation that concluded the
:14:17. > :14:20.officers had no case to answer. And a statement by the Independent
:14:21. > :14:25.Police Complaints Commisssion that concluded, well there were issues of
:14:26. > :14:31.honesty and integrity that needed to be examined. Today it was the turn
:14:32. > :14:36.of MPs to look at the issue and pick up the detective's magnifying glass.
:14:37. > :14:39.Over more than four hours we heard from three Chief Constables, the
:14:40. > :14:42.police officer who carried out the initial internal investigation, two
:14:43. > :14:45.senior figures from the independent police watchdog, and of course the
:14:46. > :14:49.three police officers themselves, and, well, we ended up more or less
:14:50. > :14:53.as baffled as we were at the start. Let's remind ourselves what the
:14:54. > :14:58.officers said after the meeting a year ago. I think Mr Mitchell now
:14:59. > :15:04.has no option but to resign. He is continuing to refuse to elaborate on
:15:05. > :15:07.what happened. I think his position sun tenable. That statement piled
:15:08. > :15:12.the pressure on Mr Mitchell and he ended up resigning. Despite the fact
:15:13. > :15:17.that he had an audio recording of the meeting that clearly showed that
:15:18. > :15:22.the officers' version of events was, well, wrong.
:15:23. > :15:28.I did say, you know, under my breath, but audibly, in frustration,
:15:29. > :15:34."I thought you lot were supposed to BEEP help us," I did say that, for
:15:35. > :15:39.that I apologise. That was the assessment of the independent Police
:15:40. > :15:43.Complaints Commisssion, and the man who investigated on behalf of the
:15:44. > :15:47.police. Did you end the draft report with the words "by giving a
:15:48. > :15:52.misloading account of what took place at the meeting I believe the
:15:53. > :15:58.officers have a case to answer for misconduct and bringing discredit on
:15:59. > :16:01.the Police Service". Yes I did. Do you still consider the three
:16:02. > :16:15.officers concerned and we will hear from them later, have a case to
:16:16. > :16:19.answer in respect of misconduct have a case to answer. Yes I do. It took
:16:20. > :16:27.several minutes of close questioning to work out what apology was for and
:16:28. > :16:31.for whom? Is it an aa polling to Mr Mitchell or everyone in the public.
:16:32. > :16:35.That you didn't pause and think before you went to the press? It is
:16:36. > :16:38.an apology for the choreography not being properly dealt with. Not an
:16:39. > :16:42.apology for anything you have done. You don't think you have done
:16:43. > :16:47.anything wrong? At the moment no, I'm not convinced that we have done
:16:48. > :16:52.anything wrong. You would know now after a year, wouldn't you, after a
:16:53. > :16:57.year? I'm not convinced we have done nothing wrong. You have nothing to
:16:58. > :17:01.apologise that is your view? Yes. I I gave what I believed to be an
:17:02. > :17:05.accurate account of the meeting. At one point the third officer came
:17:06. > :17:09.been a truncheon's-length of an apology to Mr Mitchell before
:17:10. > :17:12.eventually drawing back. As part of the apology we have already given,
:17:13. > :17:16.it should be included in that apology, but that is an apology if
:17:17. > :17:20.we are going to give we should give to Mr Mitchell personally not in
:17:21. > :17:24.this forum. You are planning to see Mr Mitchell to give him an apology.
:17:25. > :17:30.If there is one due, and if there is one due with regard to... (laughter)
:17:31. > :17:36.Mr Hinton this is not a television game show! The MPs were clearly not
:17:37. > :17:42.satisfied with this. Because this is just NON not the nature of what was
:17:43. > :17:51.said. I just understand why even if you didn't mean it you wouldn't
:17:52. > :17:58.apologise to Mr Mitchell? Mr Jones? I can you say that again I'm not
:17:59. > :18:01.sure I fully understand? But all agree that perhaps it would be
:18:02. > :18:05.better in the future if serving police officers didn't go around
:18:06. > :18:13.during working hours taking part in highly political campaigns and
:18:14. > :18:16.calling for cabinet ministers to resign.
:18:17. > :18:19.As you would imagine our producer spent much of the day trying to get
:18:20. > :18:24.someone in a police uniform to appear tonight. Despite our best
:18:25. > :18:29.efforts, the Independent Police Complaints Commisssion, the police
:18:30. > :18:31.fed rail strikes the association -- the Police Federation, West Mercia
:18:32. > :18:35.police weren't able to find anyone to come on. We did have a yes from
:18:36. > :18:39.the Chief Constable of Warwickshire, but 25 minutes before he was due to
:18:40. > :18:43.appear we were called by his assistant to explain he had a long
:18:44. > :18:48.day and could no longer make it. Let's hope he's having a long lie
:18:49. > :18:51.down. Guess who wrote this, "when people talk about politics within
:18:52. > :18:58.the existing Westminster framework I feel a dull thud in my stomach and
:18:59. > :19:02.my eyes, involuntarily glazed like when I'm conversing and the subject
:19:03. > :19:10.changes from me and moves on to another topic." The combination of
:19:11. > :19:15.distaste for mainstream politics and vanity defines it as Russell Brand,
:19:16. > :19:22.actor, comedian and now it seems political they arist. For is there
:19:23. > :19:28.no -- theorist. He's now the guest editor of the New Statesman. He
:19:29. > :19:34.wants a revolution, he says. Who are you to edit a political magazine? I
:19:35. > :19:38.suppose like a person who has been politely asked by an attractive
:19:39. > :19:42.woman. I don't know the criteria, I don't know many people who edit
:19:43. > :19:48.political manage SDEENs, Boris, I'm a person with crazy hair, a good
:19:49. > :19:52.sense of humour, know nothing about politics. Is it true you don't vote?
:19:53. > :19:56.No I don't. How do you have authority to talk about politics? I
:19:57. > :20:00.don't get my authority from the preexisting paradigm that is narrow
:20:01. > :20:06.and only service a few people. I look elsewhere for alternatives that
:20:07. > :20:10.might be of service to humanity. Alternate means all TRNate political
:20:11. > :20:14.systems. They being? I haven't invented it yet, I had to do the
:20:15. > :20:18.magazine last week and I had a lot on my plate. This is the thing it
:20:19. > :20:22.shouldn't do, it shouldn't destroy the planet, shouldn't create massive
:20:23. > :20:30.economic disparity and ignore the needs of the people. The burp is on
:20:31. > :20:36.The burden of proof is on the people in power. How do you imagine people
:20:37. > :20:41.get power? There are hierarchical systems that get them elected. There
:20:42. > :20:45.is democratic system, you can't be arsed to vote? It is something that
:20:46. > :20:49.changes. In a democracy it works? I don't think it is working very well
:20:50. > :20:52.given that the planet is being destroyed and economic disparity of
:20:53. > :20:56.a huge degree, you are saying there is no alternative, just this system.
:20:57. > :21:01.I'm not saying that, if you can'ting arsed to vote why should we be cars
:21:02. > :21:05.today listen to your political point of view? You don't have to. I'm not
:21:06. > :21:10.voting out of apathy, but out of absolute indifference and weariness
:21:11. > :21:14.over the distortion and lies and political deceit of the political
:21:15. > :21:19.class going on for generations now, and reaching fever pitch where we
:21:20. > :21:22.have a disenfranchised and disillusioned despondent underclass
:21:23. > :21:28.not being represented by that system. There is tacit complicity
:21:29. > :21:31.with the system. Why not change it? I'm trying to. Start by voting? I
:21:32. > :21:35.don't think it work, people have voted already and that is what
:21:36. > :21:39.created the current paradigm. When did you last vote? Never. You have
:21:40. > :21:44.never voted? Do you think that is bad. You struck an attitude before
:21:45. > :21:48.the age of 18? I was busy being a drug addict, because I come from the
:21:49. > :21:53.social systems that are exacerbated by the system, that administers to
:21:54. > :21:57.lar corporations. You are blaming the political class for your drug
:21:58. > :22:01.problem? I'm saying I was part of a social and economic class that is
:22:02. > :22:05.underserved by the current political system and drug addiction is one of
:22:06. > :22:09.the problems it creates when you have huge underserved impoverished
:22:10. > :22:13.population, people get drug problems and don't feel that they want to
:22:14. > :22:16.engage with the current political system because they see it doesn't
:22:17. > :22:20.work for them. They see it makes no difference. They see they are not
:22:21. > :22:26.served. I say that the apathy. It don't work if they don't vote? The
:22:27. > :22:29.apathy doesn't come from us the people, it is from the politicians
:22:30. > :22:33.apathetic to our needs. They are only interested in servicing the
:22:34. > :22:37.needs of the population. The Tories taking the EU to court because they
:22:38. > :22:41.are trying to cartel bank bonuses, is that what is happening in our
:22:42. > :22:45.country. Why should I tune into that. You don't believe in
:22:46. > :22:48.democracy, you want a revolution? The planet is being destroyed,
:22:49. > :22:51.creating an underclass and exploiting poor people all over the
:22:52. > :22:55.world. The genuine problems of the people are not being addressed by
:22:56. > :22:58.the political class. All of things may be true?. They are true. I
:22:59. > :23:02.wouldn't argue with you about many of them? How come I feel so cross
:23:03. > :23:07.with you, it can't be because of the beard, it is gorgeous, if the Daily
:23:08. > :23:13.Mail don't want it, I do, I'm begins them, grow it longer and tangle it
:23:14. > :23:18.into our armpit air. You are a very trivial man? I'm trivial, a minute
:23:19. > :23:22.ago I want a revolution and I'm trivial, I'm bouncing all over the
:23:23. > :23:26.place. Many people want a revolution, I'm asking what it will
:23:27. > :23:30.be like? What it won't be like is a huge disparity between rich and
:23:31. > :23:35.poor, where 300 Americans have the same amount of wealth as the 85
:23:36. > :23:41.million poorest Americans. Where there is an exploited and
:23:42. > :23:44.underserved underclass that being continually ignored, while welfare
:23:45. > :23:47.is slashed while Cameron and George Osborne go to court to defend the
:23:48. > :23:52.rights of bankers to continue receiving their bonuses, that is all
:23:53. > :23:57.I'm saying. What is the scheme, you talk vaguely about revolution, what
:23:58. > :24:04.is it? I think a socialist equaltarian system en massive
:24:05. > :24:08.redistribution of wealth, and massive -- I think the very concept
:24:09. > :24:13.of profit should be hugely reduced, David Cameron says profit isn't a
:24:14. > :24:16.dirty word, I say profit is a filthy word, wherever there is profit there
:24:17. > :24:20.is deficit. This system currently doesn't address these ideas. Why
:24:21. > :24:24.would anyone vote for it. Why would anyone be interested in it. Who
:24:25. > :24:29.would heavy the taxes? There needs to be a centralised administrative
:24:30. > :24:32.system. There needs to be a Government? Maybe call them
:24:33. > :24:35.something else, call them the admin BODs so they don't get ahead of
:24:36. > :24:41.themselves. How would they be chosen? Don't ask me to sit with you
:24:42. > :24:46.in an interview in a hotel room and devise a global utopian system. You
:24:47. > :24:50.are calling for revolution? Absolutely, I'm calling for change
:24:51. > :24:55.and genuine alternatives, when there is one and option vote for that.
:24:56. > :25:01.Until then, don't bother, why pretend and be complicit in this
:25:02. > :25:06.ridiculous illusion. By the time somebody Kims along you might think
:25:07. > :25:11.worth voting for it might be too late? The time is now, the movement
:25:12. > :25:16.is occurring, we are at a time where communication is instainous, and
:25:17. > :25:21.there are communities all over the world. Occupy introduced to the
:25:22. > :25:25.popular public lexicon the idea of the 99% against the 1%. People for
:25:26. > :25:30.the first time in generation are aware of massive corporate and
:25:31. > :25:34.economic exploitation, these are not nonsense and they are not being
:25:35. > :25:37.addressed. Nobody is doing anything about tax havens or their political
:25:38. > :25:39.affiliations and financial affiliations of the Conservative
:25:40. > :25:43.Party. So until people start addressing things that are actually
:25:44. > :25:48.real, why wouldn't I be factitious, why would I take it seriously and
:25:49. > :25:52.encourage a constituency of young people indifferent to vote. Why
:25:53. > :25:55.wouldn't woo we. Aren't you more bored than anyone, you have been
:25:56. > :25:58.talking to them year after year, listening to their lies and
:25:59. > :26:02.nonsense, this one getting in, that one. The problem continues. Why are
:26:03. > :26:07.we going to continue to contribute to this facade. I'm surprised you
:26:08. > :26:12.can be factitious when you are that angry about it? I am angry, for me
:26:13. > :26:16.it is real. For me it is not just some peripheral thing that you turn
:26:17. > :26:20.up to the church fete from, this is what I come from and what I care
:26:21. > :26:24.about. Do you see any hope? Yeah, totally, there will be a revolution,
:26:25. > :26:29.it is totally going to happen. I ain't got a flicker of doubt. This
:26:30. > :26:33.is the end. This is time to wake up. I remember I see you in that
:26:34. > :26:39.programme, where you look at your ancestor, you saw your grandmother
:26:40. > :26:45.had to brass herself or got locked over by the aChris crates that ran
:26:46. > :26:49.the house, that was unfair and you cried, because it is a century ago.
:26:50. > :26:54.I have been talking to a woman today being treated like that. If we can
:26:55. > :26:59.engage that feeling, instead of some moment of sentimentality set out on
:27:00. > :27:03.the TV for people to pour over emotional porn, if we can engage
:27:04. > :27:07.that feeling and change things. Why wouldn't we, why is that niave, why
:27:08. > :27:10.is that not my right because I'm an actor. I have taken the right, I
:27:11. > :27:15.don't need the right from you or anybody, I'm taking it. Russell
:27:16. > :27:19.Brand. It has been the despairing LAment of one parent after another
:27:20. > :27:24.for years, "can't you get off that screen and get some fresh air for a
:27:25. > :27:29.change"? They are showing their age and day after day they are reminded
:27:30. > :27:34.of how aling, DHOUL, how muddy, had you damp, how remote the natural
:27:35. > :27:38.world is by comparison with the easily accessible delights of cyber
:27:39. > :27:44.reality. A film maker called Bondarenko was so depressed by what
:27:45. > :27:48.seems to be becoming -- David Bond, was to depressed about this that he
:27:49. > :28:09.did what film makers do and made a film about it. I'm David Bond, I'm a
:28:10. > :28:14.father, I'm the marketing director of nature. This is Ivy, she's five,
:28:15. > :28:17.she loves the television. How much do you love the television? One
:28:18. > :28:24.hundred billion, I love sitting in front of it all day long. Why? It is
:28:25. > :28:29.so relaxing. Like all parents, I want my children to be happy. As a
:28:30. > :28:34.child I was happiest playing outdoors. When I got back from
:28:35. > :28:41.school I would throw down my books and go straight out to play. My
:28:42. > :28:46.children don't do that. Across the western world children spend less
:28:47. > :28:49.and less time outdoors. The generational shift to an indoor
:28:50. > :28:55.existence has been strongly linked to a sharp decline in children's
:28:56. > :29:03.well being. Cases of childhood obesity, depression and behavioral
:29:04. > :29:09.difficulty are at a record high. I can't persuade my children to go
:29:10. > :29:14.outside. Modern marketing is a mighty persuader. I want to use it
:29:15. > :29:21.to sell the ultimate free wonder product. The outdoors. I'm going to
:29:22. > :29:27.attach a camera to Ivy to see how things have changed. This is how she
:29:28. > :29:34.spends her time. 32% in school, 15% watching TV, 15% playing indoors,
:29:35. > :29:38.12% on the computer, 10% eating, 5% in the car, 4% in the bathroom, and
:29:39. > :29:45.4% playing out doors. Is this a problem? There is no hard
:29:46. > :29:50.evidence that technology is bad for children. But it definitely
:29:51. > :29:57.displaces nature from their lives. As the marketing director of nature,
:29:58. > :30:02.new technology is my competitor. Can children escape the screens. The
:30:03. > :30:13.first step is to find out what my target audience currently thinks
:30:14. > :30:21.about my product. I have got nature in my box here. What do you think of
:30:22. > :30:28.when you think of nature? Dull, boring. I like it when it is sunny,
:30:29. > :30:33.but I just like staying at home. The reason I don't really go out is
:30:34. > :30:36.because I live on Plumstead common and a lot of people have their dogs
:30:37. > :30:41.there and people get mauled to death. Yeah, that's interesting. The
:30:42. > :30:44.reason a lot of people I know and myself don't go to the woods and
:30:45. > :30:48.nature, you don't want to mess up your clothes that you are wearing.
:30:49. > :30:56.And the clothes I want to get messy I wouldn't want to wear outside in
:30:57. > :30:59.public. Look at your model, outdoors doesn't look like that, it looks
:31:00. > :31:04.completely different. If it looked like that I would want to go
:31:05. > :31:14.outside, but it really doesn't. Oh no. These girls hate my product.
:31:15. > :31:20.I will show you where we play. We play up in this square. There is the
:31:21. > :31:24.sign that pays "no ball games" but we don't listen. Who put up the
:31:25. > :31:29.sign? The housing office, that owns all the houses. People moan at us
:31:30. > :31:35.for playing ball games but we don't listen so. I am GLAED to hear it.
:31:36. > :31:39.What What would happen if they caught you playing ball games? I
:31:40. > :31:45.think we will just get an ASBO. You get an ASBO? Yeah. This is the green
:31:46. > :31:49.grass where I take my dogs and I just let them do what they want.
:31:50. > :31:52.This little bit of green here? Because it is quite a small I can't
:31:53. > :31:57.remember, there is a lot of dog mess in this little area? But East End
:31:58. > :32:01.homes do come and trim it and just try to grow the patches that have
:32:02. > :32:12.not come up and all that. It is not a very big space is it? My dog comes
:32:13. > :32:17.on here a lot, she likes it. Are these children really missing
:32:18. > :32:24.out? What's the scientific evidence for the benefits of nature? Never in
:32:25. > :32:29.human history have we spent so little time in physical contact with
:32:30. > :32:34.animals and plants. YUFR University students with natural views score
:32:35. > :32:38.better on tests. Workers who see trees and flowers are less stressed
:32:39. > :32:45.and report fewer illnesses. And that's just a view of nature. If you
:32:46. > :32:50.actually go into it, the results are amazing. Being among plants produce
:32:51. > :32:53.lower concentrations of stress HOER moans, lower blood pressure and
:32:54. > :33:00.boosts the immune system. The more nature we get during childhood the
:33:01. > :33:07.more we want as adults. Unless children really notice nature around
:33:08. > :33:13.them, they will never care about it. I worry that children spent more and
:33:14. > :33:17.more time staring down at screens. If we fail to market nature to them,
:33:18. > :33:22.they are bound to choose the alternatives. The competitors may
:33:23. > :33:35.have got the budget, but I think we have got the best product.
:33:36. > :33:40.Well David Bond joins us now as does the journalist, and Sorayah July,
:33:41. > :33:45.with a four-year-old child, also with us is Eve King doing what
:33:46. > :33:51.11-year-olds are actually doing things now.
:33:52. > :33:54.Sir Tom Arnold you are -- David you are instinctively an urban person
:33:55. > :33:59.what is wrong with the countryside? It is lovely, but what is wrong is
:34:00. > :34:03.the notion you will be ill if you don't go there. The whole thing is
:34:04. > :34:09.predicated on the idea that there is something called Nature Deficit
:34:10. > :34:13.Disorder, in which you make yourself ill if you are not taken back to
:34:14. > :34:18.your natural state which is thought to be evolutionary us hunting
:34:19. > :34:22.antelopes across the vale and eating their livers. The closer you get
:34:23. > :34:27.back to that idea the closer you are to your real self. It is a romantic
:34:28. > :34:30.idea without evidence behind it. There is plenty of evidence and it
:34:31. > :34:34.is growing all the time. The evidence is children need nature,
:34:35. > :34:38.they develop better, it is good for their brains, it is fun for them.
:34:39. > :34:42.The evidence is pretty clear that without it they tend to spend their
:34:43. > :34:46.time inside on screens, if they are watching screens a lot then obesity
:34:47. > :34:49.levels are higher. There is a lot of evidence that attention deficit and
:34:50. > :34:54.depression in children is raised significantly if they spend too long
:34:55. > :34:57.indoors. There are links between the indoors and problems, there is a
:34:58. > :35:01.clear evidence that the indoors is pushing nature away. Maybe not a
:35:02. > :35:05.precise causal link but it is pretty clear it is there. It is clear the
:35:06. > :35:11.more time you spend indoors the less cases of RIKTs there are -- rickets
:35:12. > :35:15.there are for example? That may be the case, what we wanted to show
:35:16. > :35:19.was, go on. You are just saying that life has changed, we live in
:35:20. > :35:24.different circumstances? We do. And those circumstances are harming
:35:25. > :35:30.children. It is pretty clear without time and nature, children are less
:35:31. > :35:35.well off. And that's a serious problem. You have a how old is your
:35:36. > :35:39.daughter? She's four. And as lovely as it would be to be able to get out
:35:40. > :35:47.in nature, and see the lovely birds in the trees, thele reality -- the
:35:48. > :35:51.reality is we don't live near somewhere. When we can get out we
:35:52. > :35:55.do, but it has to be day out that is planned and a lot of thought put
:35:56. > :35:59.into it. Do you feel deprived because you are not exposed to
:36:00. > :36:02.nature? It is not something I really put much thought in to. Do you think
:36:03. > :36:06.your daughter is worse off because she is less exposed to nature? She
:36:07. > :36:09.has everything she needs at home. She is not sitting at home in front
:36:10. > :36:13.of the television, she is doing things at home, we do get out of the
:36:14. > :36:18.house, just not necessarily running through fields. It does make a
:36:19. > :36:22.certain amount of instinctive sense? If what David is saying is parks are
:36:23. > :36:25.nice, we didn't need a whole film to tell us that, we have a great urban
:36:26. > :36:29.movement for parks. It was interesting seeing the little boy.
:36:30. > :36:34.His circumstances in there were pretty much exactly the same as my
:36:35. > :36:38.father's were in the East End in the 1920s and 30s, that hasn't changed
:36:39. > :36:42.much. So if the proposition is let as give people a range of possible
:36:43. > :36:46.opportunities to enjoy different things, I'm in favour of it. What I
:36:47. > :36:50.can't stand is the notion that some how we are deficient parents. At one
:36:51. > :36:53.point in the trail of the film David says his children's generation will
:36:54. > :36:57.be the first generation to die earlier than their parents. They are
:36:58. > :37:00.not David, that is completely nonsense. That will not happen.
:37:01. > :37:04.Unfortunately I won't be around to be able to bet on it with you. But
:37:05. > :37:09.if I were I would take a substantial bet. There is no evidence of that. I
:37:10. > :37:13.have seen actual assessments suggesting that may well be the
:37:14. > :37:16.case, it is not necessarily affected that they are doing with what Eve is
:37:17. > :37:20.doing there and playing on a screen. She looks a healthy child? She
:37:21. > :37:23.clearly is, but probably has a good balance of what she is doing. What
:37:24. > :37:28.we are trying to say is there ought to be some sort of balance between
:37:29. > :37:31.screen time and wild time. If you can change a bit of the time you
:37:32. > :37:35.spend on screens and switch it out for a little bit more wild time, it
:37:36. > :37:41.is likely to do you good and make you healthier. This idea that some
:37:42. > :37:44.how the urban child is at a disadvantage, that doesn't seem to
:37:45. > :37:48.be the case, some of the kids we met making the film, some of the best
:37:49. > :37:55.kids connected to nature were urban children. The RSPV report suggests
:37:56. > :37:59.that some rural children are less connected, they are faredied in cars
:38:00. > :38:04.and social media all the time because they can't connect. Do you
:38:05. > :38:08.think this is a bit boring? Sometimes. This conversation, this
:38:09. > :38:12.issue, do you think it is boring? I think you meant the iPad. Sometimes
:38:13. > :38:20.I get bored of the iPad eventually. Do you? ? Do you go outside then?
:38:21. > :38:24.Yes. There we are. Can I ask do you have a guarden? Yeah. That is
:38:25. > :38:26.another issue we don't have the garden and don't have the
:38:27. > :38:30.opportunity to go out and see the worms and bugs and things like that.
:38:31. > :38:34.We go to the park and when we do it is the playground that the time is
:38:35. > :38:40.spent in not the grass and trees. So the urban child doesn't get as much
:38:41. > :38:43.opportunity to get out. Also we are being sold something here, let's
:38:44. > :38:46.face it. There is a complete conflation between outdoors, nature,
:38:47. > :38:52.the two things are not the same and then the wild. There is nothing wild
:38:53. > :38:56.about what you are suggesting. Urban kids see squirrels all the time, in
:38:57. > :39:00.a sense that they are wild, but we are not in the wilderness and not
:39:01. > :39:04.wild in that way. If what you mean is that a bit of greenery cheers you
:39:05. > :39:09.up a bit, I completely understand that. But in so far as the
:39:10. > :39:15.proposition is a kind of guilt proposition on parents. In your film
:39:16. > :39:21.at one stage you go past the Apple store, shouting at people on a
:39:22. > :39:26.loud-hailer saying stop buying your kids iPads and take them outdoors.
:39:27. > :39:32.We could really do without that hectoring. I had run out of money
:39:33. > :39:42.for campaign so I moved to guerrilla tactic, including. There is a huge
:39:43. > :39:47.amount of natural symbols encouraging us to trust things, and
:39:48. > :39:52.very little is done to sell us nature. Is it wrong that apple have
:39:53. > :39:56.an apple? He very much appreciates that we are sitting on the wooden
:39:57. > :40:00.chair, hand crafted earlier this week by the editor of news night. He
:40:01. > :40:07.has to have some main talent, obviously. Do you feel that there is
:40:08. > :40:11.anything real about this issue? You feel obviously the absence of the
:40:12. > :40:16.opportunity is this a real issue? You are a student teacher? I am a
:40:17. > :40:22.student teacher, I believe there is some element of truth in it. If you
:40:23. > :40:26.do, sorry, if you do spend your whole day in the house you start to
:40:27. > :40:30.feel depressed, it is nice to get out to the countryside, you feel
:40:31. > :40:34.better. I don't think, as David said, it is going to make us
:40:35. > :40:38.deficient if we don't get out into the wild every single day. It is
:40:39. > :40:43.nice to get out sometimes. I don't know if it is unwealthy to not do it
:40:44. > :40:47.all the time. Do you think this campaign will have any effect at
:40:48. > :40:50.all? There is about 300 organisations who joined up to
:40:51. > :40:54.encourage children to get out doors more. Including the National Health
:40:55. > :40:59.Service and various mental health charities. All of whom see benefits
:41:00. > :41:04.for various reasons, health benefits, mental health benefits.
:41:05. > :41:07.Lots of schools now have got forests systems going on. That seems to
:41:08. > :41:12.really encourage children to learn in a more effective way. Why don't
:41:13. > :41:16.we consentrate on that, these things like lots of other things we do Co
:41:17. > :41:21.Do, music and so on are fun and good things to do, why couch it in terms
:41:22. > :41:25.of spurious statistics about people's mental health and strange
:41:26. > :41:31.disorders we created, especially for the moment that create a sense of
:41:32. > :41:34.guilt amongst people who are quite often doing their best and don't
:41:35. > :41:38.really relate. I would query loot of the things that you were -- query
:41:39. > :41:41.quite a lot of things you were saying about the evidence.
:41:42. > :41:50.Briefly respond to that? The evidence is clear, I really strongly
:41:51. > :41:55.disagree. Have you won yet? No, I wasn't playing a winning game!
:41:56. > :41:58.Thanks any way. As we all know, because the
:41:59. > :42:03.newspapers tell us every day, alcohol will kill you, as will salt,
:42:04. > :42:06.coffee, red meat, buns and more or less anything or possibly they can
:42:07. > :42:11.all be good for you in the right doses. Just about everything gives
:42:12. > :42:15.you cancer or heart attack, if one could only live without eating and
:42:16. > :42:20.drinking at all, how wonderful it would be, possibly without reading
:42:21. > :42:28.at all. We asked Michael Mosley, one of the few qualified doctors in this
:42:29. > :42:32.tatty trade to give us a guide. There is a lot of confusion about
:42:33. > :42:36.which foods are good for you and which are bad for you. Part of the
:42:37. > :42:41.reason for that is there is a lot of studies that are really quite
:42:42. > :42:45.flawed. A decent study is one called a Prospective Cohort Studio. You
:42:46. > :42:49.take a group of people who don't have a disease, you test them and
:42:50. > :42:53.follow them for a long period of time and you see what happens. When
:42:54. > :43:01.you do that sort of a study then you get some big surprises.
:43:02. > :43:06.Now for 40 years we have been told that saturated fats like butter are
:43:07. > :43:09.bad for us, when they did a prospective cohort study they found
:43:10. > :43:13.there is very little evidence that saturated fats lead to heart
:43:14. > :43:18.disease. Margarine on the other hand, which
:43:19. > :43:23.starts out as a liquid sunflower oil and has to be turned into a solid,
:43:24. > :43:28.that processing leads to something called transfats, it turns out that
:43:29. > :43:37.they are the villain. So given a choice between butter and margarine,
:43:38. > :43:42.I personally opt for butter. I like the taste of smoothies, and that's
:43:43. > :43:47.because they are incredibly sweet. In a survey done of 52 commercial
:43:48. > :43:52.smoothies they discovered that 41 of them had more calories and more
:43:53. > :43:55.sugar in them than you would find in a Coca-Cola. The other problem with
:43:56. > :44:01.smoothies is once you take the fruit, you remove the peel and fibre
:44:02. > :44:10.by mashing it up, well you have got rid of most the benefits. You would
:44:11. > :44:14.be far better off eating fruit. Without a doubt this has been one of
:44:15. > :44:19.the Government's most successful campaigns. The problem is fruit and
:44:20. > :44:24.vegtables good food, yes, but lots of other things didn't get included
:44:25. > :44:30.in the five-a-day. For example when you get a processed food where it
:44:31. > :44:37.says one of five-a-day. Yet that contains huge amount of sugar and
:44:38. > :44:40.salt. There have been conflicting studies
:44:41. > :44:44.but I think the evidence is quite strong that if you reduce the amount
:44:45. > :44:48.of salt in your diet that will reduce blood pressure and therefore
:44:49. > :44:52.your risk of having a stroke. The problem is just getting rid of the
:44:53. > :44:56.salt dispenser is not going to be enough. Because there is lots of
:44:57. > :45:01.added salt all around. Even things that don't taste salty like bread
:45:02. > :45:09.and muffins. There is, however, one piece of good news.
:45:10. > :45:14.Coffee has something of a bad boy image, because down the years it has
:45:15. > :45:19.been blamed from everything from heart disease to cancer. When they
:45:20. > :45:23.did a prospective cohort study, they found that coffee seems to be good
:45:24. > :45:29.for you in all sorts of ways, not least of cutting your risk of
:45:30. > :45:34.suicide. It seems something like caffeine acts as an antidepressant
:45:35. > :45:43.and boosts neurotransmitters in your brain that give you a "feel-good
:45:44. > :45:47.factor". That was rather useful, Dr Michael Mosley, back tomorrow night
:45:48. > :45:56.on BBC Two in his series on health matters, , Trust Me I'm A Doctor.
:45:57. > :46:33.Now the That's all from us tonight, before
:46:34. > :46:36.we go we were treated today to the results of David Cameron's latest
:46:37. > :46:40.happiness survey, it reveals that Londoners, surprise, surprise, are
:46:41. > :46:45.the most miserable and anxious people in the country. One of our
:46:46. > :46:47.producers wondered if Beano, the Newsnight clown, might be able to
:46:48. > :47:11.help? The mobile phone is more interesting
:47:12. > :47:26.than me. Londoners must be happy.