:00:10. > :00:16.Remember this? It is the right thing to do, not to go ahead with the
:00:17. > :00:20.third runway at Heathrow. Except now Heathrow expansion is firmly back on
:00:21. > :00:25.the cards. Well a report out next week give thepm cover for a U-turn?
:00:26. > :00:30.When it comes to airport expansion it looks like the Government is
:00:31. > :00:35.heading for a bit of political turbulence. Goldsmith is here.
:00:36. > :00:39.Removed from office on Sunday, executed on Thursday, what is North
:00:40. > :00:43.Korea telling us about the way it deals with dissent. We talk to
:00:44. > :00:47.someone who spent years in the hermit kingdom. I expect to make
:00:48. > :00:51.anywhere from ten to 100 times my money back on those if I'm
:00:52. > :00:58.successful. So marijuana has been very good to me so far. If you're
:00:59. > :01:03.over 21 marijuana is now legal in Colorado and Washington state, is it
:01:04. > :01:07.also becoming a normal way to earn a living? So it is agreed we should
:01:08. > :01:13.return? I don't know anything about the gold standard I'm afraid, but I
:01:14. > :01:18.do love little kitten, they are so soft and furry. Is this the template
:01:19. > :01:28.for a successful marriage afterall, we have someone willing to argue
:01:29. > :01:32.that it could be. Hello and good evening, our goal is
:01:33. > :01:36.to make Heathrow better not bigger, we will stop the third runway,
:01:37. > :01:41.proclaimed the Conservative election manifesto of 2010, three years on
:01:42. > :01:43.there is a strong chance that vote-winner of a pledge may be
:01:44. > :01:47.quietly forgotten, this programme understands that expansion at
:01:48. > :01:51.Heathrow Airport is looking increasingly likely, with a
:01:52. > :01:56.publication of a report early next week. Three of the favoured option,
:01:57. > :01:59.including construction, have a new runway in there. If true it will
:02:00. > :02:04.prompt a fight between David Cameron and some of his MPs. We will talk to
:02:05. > :02:09.one of them in a moment. First we have this. The captain has very
:02:10. > :02:15.definitely put the seatbelt sign on, politically this could all get very
:02:16. > :02:18.bumpy. Since the last election the Government's aviation policy has
:02:19. > :02:21.been in something of a holding pattern, doing lazy figures of eight
:02:22. > :02:26.across the skies of the south of England. Now, well it's about, if
:02:27. > :02:32.not to come into land, at least give us an indication of where we might
:02:33. > :02:37.be heading. With an eye perhaps on the precious marginal seats in west
:02:38. > :02:40.London and beyond, in opposition the Conservatives campaigned hard
:02:41. > :02:44.against expanding Heathrow. High-speed rail, said Mr Cameron
:02:45. > :02:48.made it unnecessary. So when our economy is overheating in the
:02:49. > :02:53.south-east, but investment is still required in the north, it is the
:02:54. > :02:57.right thing to do not to go ahead with the third runway at Heathrow,
:02:58. > :03:01.but instead to build a high-speed rail network. David Cameron has
:03:02. > :03:07.little room to manoeuvre on this, not east because of pressure from
:03:08. > :03:11.the London mayor, Boris Johnson. I think you have heard him today, hold
:03:12. > :03:15.on, we will do this. I want to make one final point that is relevant to
:03:16. > :03:20.this area. And there it is, you can hear it, I will not support, in fact
:03:21. > :03:24.I will oppose a third runway... After the election, the coalition
:03:25. > :03:29.agreement ruled out a third Heathrow runway. But there were still urgent
:03:30. > :03:32.questions to answer on airport provision. To answer these the
:03:33. > :03:36.Government appointed an expert commission under Sir Howard Davies.
:03:37. > :03:40.Well there has been so much politics as far as concerns of airport
:03:41. > :03:45.capacity, particularly hub airport capacity in the UK. There was a
:03:46. > :03:48.White Paper under the Labour administration in 2003. The current
:03:49. > :03:52.Government issued its own White Paper, but the discussion continued
:03:53. > :03:55.at political level. Finally you could say common sense prevailed.
:03:56. > :04:00.But an independent commission was set up with experts taking the
:04:01. > :04:04.political sting out of it so that a neutral, well informed, well
:04:05. > :04:11.researched conclusion could be reached. The commission was -- is
:04:12. > :04:14.expected suggest next week that expanding Heathrow is a serious
:04:15. > :04:18.option that should be considered. The huge expansion in the numbers of
:04:19. > :04:22.people using air travel is testament to the fact that lots of people love
:04:23. > :04:29.flying, they love going somewhere exciting. What they are less keen
:04:30. > :04:37.on, of course, is having a runway or flight path near them. Boris
:04:38. > :04:43.Johnson's solution, a Thames Estuary airport to replace Heathrow, it is
:04:44. > :04:48.unlikely, believe commentators, to give Boris Island clearance for
:04:49. > :04:51.take-off. There is to credibility in establishing a brand new airport in
:04:52. > :04:56.the eyes of the airport community, those who operate the hub model,
:04:57. > :04:59.because it takes too long. The complexity of running an airport,
:05:00. > :05:03.the specialist skills in the work force at an airport, you can't close
:05:04. > :05:08.the doors of one hub airport overnight and the next morning open
:05:09. > :05:12.a brand new one elsewhere. According to Heathrow's owners this is what
:05:13. > :05:14.the third runway option looks like, without the extra capacity London
:05:15. > :05:20.and Britain could start losing business. Labour's position too is
:05:21. > :05:24.politically tricky. As climate secretary, Ed Miliband, threatened
:05:25. > :05:27.to resign from the Brown cabinet if a third Heathrow runway was
:05:28. > :05:32.approved. Now, according to reports at least, he and Ed Balls are more
:05:33. > :05:37.worried about economic growth. Whatever this review suggests next
:05:38. > :05:41.week, well the Government isn't exactly going to be rushing towards
:05:42. > :05:46.the final destination, this is only an interim report coming out. The
:05:47. > :05:58.final report, when is that due again? Zac Goldsmith, the story MP
:05:59. > :06:02.who has long campaigned against Heathrow expansion is here. That may
:06:03. > :06:06.be the truth, we won't know what the final decision will be for some
:06:07. > :06:09.time, if what we are hearing about Tuesday is correct there could be
:06:10. > :06:13.several options on the table and most of these roads are now leading
:06:14. > :06:17.towards Heathrow expansion? That was certainly the case a few days ago.
:06:18. > :06:21.This review we have just heard about was always supposed to be an
:06:22. > :06:25.independent, arms length review. It seems very clear now it is nothing
:06:26. > :06:28.of the sort. It looks very much like George Osborne, in particular, has
:06:29. > :06:33.been knocking it about in the last few days, so that what finally
:06:34. > :06:36.emerges on Tuesday will not just be about Heathrow expansion, and we
:06:37. > :06:40.will have a few synthetic options thrown in to allow the Government to
:06:41. > :06:44.maintain ambiguity, cynically until after the election I believe. Why do
:06:45. > :06:48.you think that? We will have to wait and see onture, but very, very
:06:49. > :06:53.compelling sources are saying that there has been massive activity in
:06:54. > :06:56.the last few days. And the three options you have identified, which
:06:57. > :07:01.are absolutely in the report, will be supplemented by a few extra
:07:02. > :07:05.non-Heathrow-based options as well. The idea of that is this is not
:07:06. > :07:09.genuinely to expand the choice, this is about enabling, I think, all
:07:10. > :07:12.three party leaders to defer any kind of decision making until after
:07:13. > :07:16.the election. None of them, frankly, have the courage to front up the
:07:17. > :07:20.voters before the election when it really matters. It could just be
:07:21. > :07:23.that the case is now overwhelming, that Heathrow expansion is looking
:07:24. > :07:28.commercially like the most sensible thing to do. Your argument is
:07:29. > :07:32.bluntly discredited? I think there are a growing number of voices, I
:07:33. > :07:36.would say majority voice, both from within business, and I'm not just
:07:37. > :07:43.talking about people like myself who could be described as him in bees,
:07:44. > :07:49.-- NIMBYs. The idea is not to double the size of Heathrow, there is
:07:50. > :07:52.congestion nobody has looked at, 50 million extra passenger journeys
:07:53. > :07:56.every year backwards and forwards from Heathrow, it is impossible to
:07:57. > :08:02.look at that working out. People say it is impossible to create a
:08:03. > :08:05.foreign-owned monopoly on the edge of the city. It would create a
:08:06. > :08:09.monopoly, when we see competition has liberated Gatwick, it is a good
:08:10. > :08:14.airport and doing things we were told it couldn't. Stanstead is a
:08:15. > :08:19.good airport. Why not have a multicompetitive and ait delivers
:08:20. > :08:25.more choice every time for customers. Will we not know this
:08:26. > :08:29.until after the general election? Because we know what was in the
:08:30. > :08:32.original first draft of the report. Irrespective of what is produced on
:08:33. > :08:35.Tuesday, we know if the parties accept this report in general they
:08:36. > :08:39.are accepting Heathrow expansion, they need to come clean about that.
:08:40. > :08:42.What will you do if that is the case? I have always said to my
:08:43. > :08:45.constituents if the Government changes its position, which it
:08:46. > :08:48.hasn't yet, if it changes its position on Heathrow expansion I
:08:49. > :08:52.would trigger a by-election. If it happens in the manifesto in the next
:08:53. > :08:55.election, I wouldn't stand as a Conservative. This is a massive
:08:56. > :08:58.issue for people in my parish. You have always talked about the need
:08:59. > :09:01.for this to be this positive tension between backbenchers and the
:09:02. > :09:05.Government. Why don't you stay around to enact that now? David
:09:06. > :09:10.Cameron himself has to take, has to really think very carefully about
:09:11. > :09:13.this, politically a U-turn on this issue would be catastrophic for him.
:09:14. > :09:17.You have to remember it wasn't just a few party speech, David Cameron
:09:18. > :09:22.went to every single constituency effected, he stood up and said no
:09:23. > :09:26.ifs, buts, there will be no Heathrow expansion. It was not a throwaway
:09:27. > :09:28.line at the end of a speech, he went to places like Richmond and
:09:29. > :09:32.delivered that one line. People voted for him on the back of it to
:09:33. > :09:37.give him a chance. If he does a U-turn on this, it will be an off
:09:38. > :09:41.the scale betrayal, he will never be forgiven in west London, people
:09:42. > :09:44.outside west London, even if you don't care about Heathrow, they will
:09:45. > :09:47.take note, they will wonder how many promises can be trusted, how much
:09:48. > :09:52.can the Prime Minister himself be trusted if he's willing to break a
:09:53. > :09:56.promise so crystal clear. It is a big deal for David Cameron, he will
:09:57. > :10:01.have to think about this. This is close to your heart, when you became
:10:02. > :10:06.an MP, the green dream was all the rage for the Tories. I'm wondering
:10:07. > :10:10.if you feel slightly used? I think there are a lot of things said by
:10:11. > :10:14.all parties before elections that turn out to be synthetic, it is one
:10:15. > :10:17.of the reasons people don't like politicians or attach a lot of
:10:18. > :10:20.significance or importance to manifesto promises because they are
:10:21. > :10:24.broken so easily. I do think in certain respects the things that
:10:25. > :10:27.were promised in our manifesto in relation to energy, for example, we
:10:28. > :10:30.are more or less delivering, I think the language that has been used by
:10:31. > :10:33.the Prime Minister, reported low, and other people at the top of the
:10:34. > :10:40.Government, has been very loose and has done some harm in terms of
:10:41. > :10:43.investor confidence. In signalling a potential change of policy. What
:10:44. > :10:47.about the green side of energy, any of the green issues? I'm not sure,
:10:48. > :10:50.if you want to criticise the Government in terms of its green
:10:51. > :10:53.energy issues, which is what you are talking about, you don't look at the
:10:54. > :10:57.policies. In terms of policy we are doing what we said we would do. We
:10:58. > :10:59.are, it stands up to scrutiny, we are not doing enough, some of our
:11:00. > :11:04.policies haven't worked as well as they should have done. Green Deal
:11:05. > :11:07.could have been boosted in my view, we are doing what we said we would
:11:08. > :11:10.do. The problem is the language, when you have loose talk between the
:11:11. > :11:15.Prime Minister and the leader of the opposition and you hear reports in
:11:16. > :11:18.the Sun of words I'm not allowed to use on this programme in terms of
:11:19. > :11:23.green policies, I think the investors out there are beginning to
:11:24. > :11:29.panic. If it is the case we need ?120 billion just to get our energy
:11:30. > :11:32.infrastructure up to scratch. You won't achieve that creating the
:11:33. > :11:36.uncertainty when you use the loose language we have heard. A lot of it
:11:37. > :11:43.is politic rather than policy and I think, I hope the Prime Minister has
:11:44. > :11:47.taken that on board. ??FORCEDWHI. Perhaps it was the speed rather than
:11:48. > :11:51.the event itself that shocked the world fours days after North Korea's
:11:52. > :11:56.second-most powerful politician was removed from his post. He was, we
:11:57. > :12:10.ups, machine gunned to death, for state treachery. It mark as
:12:11. > :12:13.humiliating fall from grace It mark as humiliating fall from grace. It
:12:14. > :12:21.was an announcement that was in keeping with the flour I had --
:12:22. > :12:28.florid language used in Korean state media. A man has been executed,
:12:29. > :12:34.described as a dog, despicable scum, words used to describe South Korean
:12:35. > :12:38.leaders. No-one, not even family has immunity against the leader's wrath.
:12:39. > :12:45.Found guilty of a military coup, Jang Song Thaek was accused of
:12:46. > :12:49.trying to overthrow, Kim Jong Un, it is a far cry from when he was at the
:12:50. > :12:53.side of his nephew, not just at state events, but also guiding him
:12:54. > :12:57.when in power. He was considered the chief architect of economic policy,
:12:58. > :13:04.focussing on partnering his country with its neighbour and ally, China.
:13:05. > :13:10.He ascended to a post that put him second in power only to Kim. His
:13:11. > :13:14.Petersburg is being watched by allies and those with serious
:13:15. > :13:18.concerns. Already removed from official document TREESHGS either
:13:19. > :13:24.the message of no mercy is being sent, or some analysts believe
:13:25. > :13:32.serious instability may be around the corner.
:13:33. > :13:37.My guest was in North Korea for ten years and worked to produce
:13:38. > :13:41.sanctions against the country. Even by North Korea's standard this is
:13:42. > :13:44.pretty extreme, isn't it, do you understand what has gone on? They
:13:45. > :13:48.have never done this before. They have purged people in the past, but
:13:49. > :13:52.purging people in public like this, with state television showing his
:13:53. > :13:57.removal from a party meeting and then we see him absolutely at the
:13:58. > :14:02.tribunal on the front page of the paper. North Koreans must be aghast
:14:03. > :14:08.at what is going on. They are calling this reverse perestroika, a
:14:09. > :14:13.buttoning, a battening down maybe of the hatches. Was this a show for the
:14:14. > :14:17.outside world rather than North Korea itself? I think it was a show
:14:18. > :14:21.for both. It was a show for North Koreans so THAEFSH knows, not just
:14:22. > :14:25.Jang Song Thaek the man is dead, but also the vision he stood for, of a
:14:26. > :14:29.less closed North Korea, of a North Korea that earned some money by
:14:30. > :14:32.trading rather than trying to manufacture everything by itself,
:14:33. > :14:35.which he was severely criticised in the indictments. He was what we
:14:36. > :14:39.might call a moderate in North Korean terms? He was less
:14:40. > :14:44.conservative than many of his colleagues, let's put it that way. I
:14:45. > :14:48.wouldn't paint him as a saint everythings an unpleasant man, but
:14:49. > :14:52.he believed the best interests lay in a more open economy. This put him
:14:53. > :15:03.on a foothold with the Chinese. He was the closest that China had to an
:15:04. > :15:06.ally in the Government. The Chinese regarded Jang Song Thaek as their
:15:07. > :15:10.man at Kim's court. Their reaction after his sudden purge has been very
:15:11. > :15:21.telling. Firstly you had a stunned silence, then a statement and then
:15:22. > :15:28.military exercises on the border of North Korea. Maybe nervous about a
:15:29. > :15:32.flood of refugees. What about this submission to his alleged crimes. Is
:15:33. > :15:37.there any truth in the kind of things they were accusing him about?
:15:38. > :15:42.Parts of it may well be true. We know for a fact that some of the
:15:43. > :15:49.trade referred to there did indeed take place. They did, for example,
:15:50. > :15:55.sell the Chinese a five-year lease on parts of the zone. That is not a
:15:56. > :16:00.crime, but he did it. It is rare for show trials in North Korea that
:16:01. > :16:03.people convicted are found to be plotting against the Government. How
:16:04. > :16:08.far any of that is true we really don't know. But interestingly, and
:16:09. > :16:14.importantly, he is accused not just of plotting against Kim Jong Un, but
:16:15. > :16:17.of doing so in contact with senior military officers who were appointed
:16:18. > :16:24.by Kim Jong Un's father and grandfather. They are not going to
:16:25. > :16:30.sleep now? Not for a long time. You think essentially a purge is on the
:16:31. > :16:37.way for anyone who he has talked to? How does it work, the language, the
:16:38. > :16:41.handshake of the banquets, how do you have the conversations and
:16:42. > :16:45.taking people aside? People purged in North Korea find their friends
:16:46. > :16:50.desert them, nobody answers their phone calls and their e-mails are
:16:51. > :16:53.scrubbed. And people cross the street to avoid them, when it
:16:54. > :16:56.happens you know you are in deep trouble. I suspect that is precisely
:16:57. > :17:03.what is happening to a lot of Jang Song Thaek's former confidents. They
:17:04. > :17:07.will be blacklisted? Yes and eventually court martials by the
:17:08. > :17:11.military, and made just disappear. A lot of people will be very
:17:12. > :17:16.frightened right now. We look at this country with something like
:17:17. > :17:19.purance, trying to get a sense of what it is about. Does anything that
:17:20. > :17:27.has happened bear any relation to our own safety or our own position.
:17:28. > :17:31.All the west cares about is nuclear might? It does affect the rest of
:17:32. > :17:34.the world. We ament what the North Korean Government does to its own
:17:35. > :17:39.people, but there is a serious risk that in trying to cover up his own
:17:40. > :17:43.weakness, and clearly a purge this weak shows a big split in the North
:17:44. > :17:49.Korean regime. But North Korean will seek a foreign diversion. We have to
:17:50. > :17:56.remember that in 2010 North Korean sank a South Korean cor vet, and an
:17:57. > :17:59.island. We have been watching the helicopters fly to the southern sea
:18:00. > :18:04.board. There is a risk, I think that we may be in for further
:18:05. > :18:09.provocation, we can't be sure that South Korea will treat them with the
:18:10. > :18:13.patience th did in 2010! . A year ago this week in two of
:18:14. > :18:17.America's United States marijuana was legalised for the over 21, the
:18:18. > :18:21.change has meant not simply that authorities are burning a blind eye
:18:22. > :18:25.to those using it but that many in Colorado and Washington are looking
:18:26. > :18:29.to this new found freedom as a business opportunity to make a
:18:30. > :18:36.livelihood. We have been to Seattle to see how the state has ponded
:18:37. > :18:45.responded a year on and whether it means the war on drugs is dead.
:18:46. > :18:49.Public enemy number one in the United States is drug abuse. In
:18:50. > :18:56.order to fight and defeat this enemy, it is necessary to wage a
:18:57. > :19:01.new, all-out offensive. How things are changing in America. For more
:19:02. > :19:06.than 40 years the only answer to drugs has been declaring war on
:19:07. > :19:13.them. And then, all of a sudden, legalisation came along. It
:19:14. > :19:17.literally happened overnight, for us dinosaurs it takes a lot more to get
:19:18. > :19:20.our mind around it than the brand-new younger officers. With the
:19:21. > :19:30.new law comes a lot of new opportunities. I'm no crusade e I'm
:19:31. > :19:35.in it for the money. I view it as buying distilleries and breweries
:19:36. > :19:39.right before prohibition ended. The last time I was in a room like this
:19:40. > :19:43.it was on a police raid. But the growing of marijuana is emerging
:19:44. > :19:49.from the shadows. It has been legalised, not just for medicinal,
:19:50. > :19:53.but recreational use, in Colorado and in Washington state where a huge
:19:54. > :19:57.experiment is going on and a multibillion dollar industry is
:19:58. > :20:02.blooming. This particular strain is great for variety of things,
:20:03. > :20:06.headaches, cramps, anything with pain. Can you make comparison
:20:07. > :20:10.between this and let's say alcohol in terms of strength? Yes, so these
:20:11. > :20:17.are going to be more like a light beer, OK this is going to be more
:20:18. > :20:20.like a whiskey. Angel is in the medical marijuana business, as soon
:20:21. > :20:27.as her license comes through she will sell it for recreational use.
:20:28. > :20:32.She used to be avid anti-cannabis, her daughter had lifelong digestion
:20:33. > :20:38.problems, but it only improved when her college friend gave her hash
:20:39. > :20:43.cookies. I was very upset, explaining her how horrible an idea
:20:44. > :20:48.it was, she would lose our scholarship and all the wonderful
:20:49. > :20:53.things in life. The plant was not nearly as lethal as I was led to
:20:54. > :20:57.believe. Legalisation of cannabis means people know how strong the
:20:58. > :21:02.dose is, however they take it. There will be licensed producers and
:21:03. > :21:08.retailers, it will be taxed heavily, 25% at every level. And this is what
:21:09. > :21:12.legalised recreational cannabis looks like. A career to the day
:21:13. > :21:19.since voters backed a ballot measure, proposed by marijuana
:21:20. > :21:25.activists, they hosted party. The first time they were ever given a
:21:26. > :21:30.permit to smoke dope in public. Well, in a big tent, out of view and
:21:31. > :21:33.a long way from the nearest school. There have been many challenges for
:21:34. > :21:37.those tasked with creating a legal industry without of something that
:21:38. > :21:40.was illegal. And as far as the federal Government is concerned it
:21:41. > :21:47.is still a category I controlled substance, like heroin or cocaine.
:21:48. > :21:51.It is a crime under US federal law to lawneder money and introduce the
:21:52. > :21:57.proceeds of criminal activity into the banking system. Since cannabis
:21:58. > :22:01.growing is a criminal offence under federal law, banks are refusing to
:22:02. > :22:07.open accounts for cannabis stores. It means the customers can't use
:22:08. > :22:10.credit cards, and the store can't deposit receipts at the end of the
:22:11. > :22:14.day. Washington State has had a liberal approach to marijuana for a
:22:15. > :22:19.decade, as the police reclassified it as the lowest priority. In the
:22:20. > :22:26.city where the first ever Starbucks opened, there are now twice as many
:22:27. > :22:34.outlets for dope. Loopholes around its legality is attracted all sorts
:22:35. > :22:41.of entrepeneurs and investors. We used to fly planes. Jim used to fly
:22:42. > :22:46.for the Navy, chasing drug shipments across America, he never touched
:22:47. > :22:51.drugs and voted against legalisation. Then realised there
:22:52. > :22:56.was money in it. It never occurred to me that I would be an investor at
:22:57. > :23:00.this industry at the time when we were trying to put the people in
:23:01. > :23:04.jail. The irony of that, the supreme irony of that cannot be missed.
:23:05. > :23:10.Security systems, software to help businesses keep track of tax,
:23:11. > :23:16.Jimmy's found a whole variety of new investment opportunities.. When I
:23:17. > :23:23.earn money it is at least 18% return, and my bank is paying me 1%.
:23:24. > :23:33.My investments in these two start-up companies, I expect to make anywhere
:23:34. > :23:39.from one to ten-times my money if I'm successful. -- 10-100-times my
:23:40. > :23:44.money, marijuana has been very good to you. For somebody who knows
:23:45. > :23:51.nothing about marijuana, it has been very good to me. It has been a huge
:23:52. > :23:55.change for the police to deal with, both in the mind set of officers,
:23:56. > :23:59.and also the public. As many people still believe cannabis should be
:24:00. > :24:05.illegal. We are, whether we want to be or not, on the forefront of some
:24:06. > :24:09.what of a, if not a revolution, at least a pretty quick low-moving
:24:10. > :24:15.evolution. We don't know where we're going to be in a year let alone five
:24:16. > :24:20.years. Do you think this marks an indicator that the war on drugs has
:24:21. > :24:25.been a failure? The way we have addressed it, yes. The majority of
:24:26. > :24:29.the people that we have addressed are people who are addicted. In the
:24:30. > :24:33.old war on drugs it was only how many people have we put in prison,
:24:34. > :24:39.how many pounds or kilos have we seized. That did nothing towards the
:24:40. > :24:45.prevention side and nothing towards the addiction. The green revolution
:24:46. > :24:50.is accelerating fast, but there are still things to iron out F it is too
:24:51. > :24:54.cheap or too expensive, it could spark illegal trade over state
:24:55. > :24:58.borders. Medical users want to keep growing their own, and tax dollars
:24:59. > :25:02.have to be spent properly on keeping it out of the hands of the under
:25:03. > :25:05.21s. The big challenge remaining is how to prevent a big increase in
:25:06. > :25:09.drug abuse, given that you are making a drug cheaper and easily
:25:10. > :25:17.available and taking awhat the legal end and social stigma. That's going
:25:18. > :25:23.to have to be addressed. How is that done? Maintaining price, limiting
:25:24. > :25:29.marketing, providing consumer information that will help people
:25:30. > :25:32.behave reasonably. In the extreme that is not something either state
:25:33. > :25:36.has considered yet, I would urge them to consider it. Require every
:25:37. > :25:49.consumer to register as a consumer and to set a personal quota. There
:25:50. > :25:52.is a lot more to this than just people who have been smoking dope
:25:53. > :25:56.for years doing it legally. It costs a huge amount of money to put and
:25:57. > :26:01.keep tens of thousands of people in prison because of marijuana
:26:02. > :26:05.offences. Over half of America supports legalisation, which state
:26:06. > :26:08.wouldn't want the tax, like booze there is a lot of money in
:26:09. > :26:17.marijuana. This is one battle the war on drugs has lost. A new book
:26:18. > :26:22.about submission between the sexes has hit the best seller list. It has
:26:23. > :26:28.nothing to do with Fifty Shades of Grey. Casate y Se Sumisa, Marry and
:26:29. > :26:34.Submit Yourself is proving to be a hit in Spain and Italy where it sold
:26:35. > :26:38.more than 100,000 copies. It is a how-to manual for newly-married
:26:39. > :26:42.women, teaching them to accept criticism of their cooking and house
:26:43. > :26:48.keeping and how to keep the peace in the marital home. What to make of
:26:49. > :26:52.it, the author joins me now. Explain to us submission, it is a
:26:53. > :27:03.provocative word in English, what do you mean by that? First of all I'm
:27:04. > :27:13.sorry for my English. I'm just starting with my four children I'm
:27:14. > :27:16.at lesson number two, so the English is not great. I don't know the
:27:17. > :27:24.colouring the word has in English but I don't use it in a negative
:27:25. > :27:37.way. It is a word taken from the letters to St Paul to Ephesian, it
:27:38. > :27:45.is not to be a dormat for your husband. It is about being
:27:46. > :27:51.underneath, providing the support like a column supports a roof.
:27:52. > :28:02.Because we as women we are stronger, we are able to put people in
:28:03. > :28:07.relation, St Paul wrote the woman has the genius and the talent of the
:28:08. > :28:12.relationship. We are able to be the head, the heart, not the head, the
:28:13. > :28:19.heart of the family and submission is something very, very good for a
:28:20. > :28:27.woman. Why then has the Spanish Health Minister tried to ban your
:28:28. > :28:33.book? She wants it withdrawn? I really don't know because I thought
:28:34. > :28:40.it was because of the word "submission", but I found that there
:28:41. > :28:49.are many books with the word "submission" in the title sold in
:28:50. > :28:56.Spanish shops. Like (titles in Italian) I think the problem is with
:28:57. > :29:03.the word "marry", because I think that being submitted to a husband is
:29:04. > :29:09.felt like something terrible. I don't know why, because I think
:29:10. > :29:15.that, I have to say that I have also written a book for the men we can
:29:16. > :29:24.translate "marry her and die for her", I think that the main flow,
:29:25. > :29:29.the main temptation for women is to subjugate men and dominate. Do you
:29:30. > :29:40.understand why the book has made so many women around the world angry? I
:29:41. > :29:49.think because maybe we are not free from the need to be recognised from
:29:50. > :29:55.an outer eye. I think that when a woman is completely at peace with
:29:56. > :30:02.herself, is completely fulfilled, she doesn't need to be recognised
:30:03. > :30:14.and she can make a step back, not in the sense of being a doormat, but of
:30:15. > :30:22.being completely able to be the column. Is the thrust of your book
:30:23. > :30:31.that feminism, that freedom of work, has damaged marriage? I'm a worker,
:30:32. > :30:37.I work as a journalist during the day, and I write books during the
:30:38. > :30:44.night. And I have four children. I think that women who ask the same
:30:45. > :30:48.rights as men are lacking in imagination and in ambition, because
:30:49. > :30:53.we are so different from men. We don't need to ask the same rights,
:30:54. > :30:59.we need different rights. Because we can have all, but in a different
:31:00. > :31:03.way. And we can also say that in some periods... Of our life. I'm
:31:04. > :31:08.sorry we have to end it there I'm very impressed with lesson two,
:31:09. > :31:16.thank you very much indeed. Just before we go we will take you
:31:17. > :31:42.through the front pages of tomorrow's
:31:43. > :31:48.That's just about it from us this evening. We don't on this programme
:31:49. > :31:53.pay lip service to mumbo jumbo superstition about Friday 13th,
:31:54. > :31:58.indeed we urge people out there to take a leap out of our book, but it
:31:59. > :32:03.is reassuring to know we got to the end of the day without any
:32:04. > :32:10.catastrophes, from all of you, we wish you good night!