03/02/2014 Newsnight


Analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines, including the former UKIP spokesman who led a kidnap gang in Pakistan, education reform, and Hillsbororough.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 03/02/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



The UK Independence Party pride themselves on being unlike other


politicians, here is one thing that is certainly different about them.


Until December, this man spoke for UKIP on the Commonwealth. When the


gates open, now the benefit migrants start coming. We don't know the


number. Four million Romanian gypsies alone. Tonight we reveal he


was the ringleader of a kidnap gang in Pakistan. Your starter for ten,


Michael Gove, plans more changes for schools, true or false. True. And


this... I feel like you're spiting me. You think I took it job to spite


you. I don't think there is any doubt or argument that he was, and


how terrible that verb is in the past now, the greatest character


actor of our time. Richard Curtis and Will Self on Hoffman and Heroin.


He's been one of the poster boys for the United Kingdom Independence


Party, his name is Mujeed Bhutto, usually described as UKIP


Commonwealth Spokesman. Tonight Newsnight can disclose that Mr


Bhutto was the leader of a notorious kidnapping gang in Karachi. In 2004


he threatened to behead the son of a wealthy Pakistani businessman. He


fled to England and was arrested in leads. -- Leeds when the ransom


money was found under his bed. In the past two years he has campaigned


for UKIP and making the most of television appearances. UKIP say


today he has left the party and may join the Conservatives.


In the media he's been very much the young Asian face of UKIP. Mujeed


Bhutto was a party member for more than two years. Shown here on a


Sunday morning debate show. What are you worried about, as UKIP's


Commonwealth spokesman? It is mass immigration, in the last few years


3. 7 million people have come in. How many have gone? We don't know


because Government is not keeping up the numbers, they don't know who is


coming in and going out. This Pakistani national has a remarkable


past. Newsnight has found out that Mujeed Bhutto came to this country


in 2004, not to work or visit relatives but to collect a bag full


of cash from this car park in central Manchester. It is a story of


blackmail, imprisonment and death threats. It starts thousands of


miles away in Pakistan. In a wealthy neighbourhood of Karachi a gang of


armed men stopped the Carreiraying the son of a well known businessman.


He was bundled away at gun point and held in a house in the city for two


months. Five days after the kidnapping Mujeed Bhutto flew to


England. He negotiated a ransom to be dropped off at the Arndale Centre


in Manchester. There was threats vive lens and torture, he claimed to


be the boss of the man. At one point saying he would have the victim's


head cut off and sent back to his father. There were two things, the


city of Manchester being involved in this, 5,000 miles away from


Pakistan. It is a lot of work for someone to come down to Manchester


and then arang for the ransom to be paid here and all that. The other


important thing, or interesting thing was that everybody connected


with the gang, everybody, this was a fairly big gang, apparently, seems


to have been found out and apprehended and punished, which


regrettably does not always happen. The ?56,000 ransom was found hidden


underneath Bhutto's bed in a house in Leeds where he was staying at the


time. He later admitted conspiracy to blackmail and given a seven-year


sentence to be served in a British jail. The judge at Manchester Crown


Court said he should be deported to Pakistan, but he claimed political


asylum so that never happened. Just a few months after he was released


it appears Mujeed Bhutto joined the Conservative Party, a few years


later he defected to UKIP. Since 2011 he has hosted conferences and


last autumn organised a trip for Nigel Farage to two mosques in Leeds


and Bradford. Over the past year he has been on and off the airwave,


arguing strongly against unrestricted immigration. Mujeed


Bhutto is the Commonwealth spokesman for the party and he's here. What


are you saying to a Muslim in a mosque about UKIP? We are giving our


message and about what people have their reservations about the party


about racism and other things. Thank you for joining us Mujeed Bhutto?


Thank you, this is a multiculturalism gone too far, and


we are not in Afghanistan, we are in Britain.


I'm a British Muslim, the thing is... Is Britain full? We are full,


other over capacity, over the limited now. Then over Christmas his


Facebook and Twitter pages vanished, he suddenly disappeared from UKIP's


list of spokes people in Yorkshire. He now claims he rejoined the


Conservative Party last week. This is not of course the first time


questions have been raised about UKIP members, whether it is Godfrey


Bloom or David Sylvester, blaming floods on gay marriage. If you don't


have any discipline as a political party, and you don't have tight


screening of candidate, you are perpetually going to be in trouble,


and without party discipline a revolt against the mainstream


parties will be doomed to fail before it has even got going.


Despite that guilty plea, Mujeed Bhutto now claims he was the victim


of a political rivalry, as his father was well connected in


Pakistan. The rest of the gang were caught in Karachi and given the


death penalty, he said he had to take a jail sentence here to avoid


that possibility. He claims his case has now been thrown out by the


Supreme Court in Pakistan. But the agency which handles kidnapping case


there is has told Newsnight he's still a wanted man. My As of last


month Mr Bhutto may no longer be an active member of UKIP. However this


is the strongest example yet that Nigel Farage may have some way to go


in his desire to clean up and professionalise the party.


We asked UKIP whether they would come on to news night to talk about


their erstwhile spokesman, they told us:


The Education Secretary, Michael Gove, has been accused of many


things, but reticence or modesty isn't one of them. He has more plans


for reforming schooling than the European Union has directives. Today


he started off by thanking schools for coping with the demands he has


made of them, but he couldn't stop himself making more demands. His


ambition, he said, was to create an environment in which you can't tell


whether a school is in the private or state sector. Back in the 1990s


our Secretary of State for Education was part of a "top club". Mime'


Michael Gove. Then, as today, he knew how important extracurricular


activities could be, helping, as he would put, to "build character" and


"instill grit". His main hobbies are real ale and real grit. Back then he


was good at politics? Jimmy Carter. A gift, his critics say never left


him. They point to his dismissal, announced this weekend, of the


Ofsted head, Sally Morgan, as the case in point. I'm really worried


what we are seeing is a politicisation of such an important


body such as Ofsted really when it has so much to do on school


standards, school improvement, on collaboration, what we are seeing is


a the Secretary of State playing politics with this really important


post. What do you say to that Michael? False. How much is it about


politicisingation of the -- politicisation of the role, as


claimed by the Liberal Democrats and Labour, and how much is it as part


of a wider vision. Man who has such a clear idea of what he is


determined education should be about, that doesn't want anyone,


least of all anyone at Ofsted, to get in his way. Holland Park school,


name checked by Michael Gove in his speech this morning, as a vision of


ethos and excellence he wants to see everywhere. It is a state school


that has changed dramatically in the last ten years, from the state it


found itself by Ofsted to the outstanding rating in 2011. I asked


the head if he worries about politicisation of Ofsted? Inevitably


one worries about that, it would be regrettable if the political


landscape and the educational landscape were so fused that they


had become inacceptable. It has not been my experience in any Ofsted


inspection that I felt any degree at all of politicisation. I think


certainly in 2011 one felt a particular brand that one hadn't


felt in previous inspections. Michael Gove is ambitious, he


believes the success story of places like Holland Park can be repeated


throughout the state sector. And today sounded the death knell on


that well worn phrase of the Blair administration, "the bog standard


school". Fact show beyond a reasonable doubt that English


education is starting to show a sustained and significant


improvement. The Government vision isn't just sweetness and light,


today's speech also told teachers to punish where they see fit. He even


told them how to do T Schools can insist on a detention, lunch break,


afterschool or weekends, they do not need, as they used to under Labour,


to give parents notice. They ask students to do extra work or repeat


unsatisfactory work, to write lines or an extra essay. Mr Government has


seen himself as locked in a struggle with this little fella, the blob,


the slime of quangos and those against change. If the Secretary of


State has a strong feeling of passion about the direction Ofsted


should be going in, shouldn't he be allowed to exercise that?


Secretaries of state should have autonomy and power, what we are


facing at the moment is a situation where everyone is saying Sally


Morgan is doing a good job, and we are seeing Ofsted inspecting in a


new and creative manner in certain circumstances, she is working well


with Michael Wilshaw, and yet the Secretary of State is getting rid of


her for essentially party political purposes. I understand a lot of this


hinges on the relationship between the Chief Inspector of Schools and


Michael Gove himself. Sir Michael was brought in as a man who shared


Mr Government's passions and understanding of the need for a


formal Ofsted, and yet, some way, he struggled to bring the institution


with him. Two weeks ago Michael Wilshaw say red, angered that plans


were being drawn up to reform and replace Ofsted. And last week David


Cameron appointed to the office a campaigns officer, a move Labour


fears will fill the jobs with more top Tories. Michael Gove insists


this isn't part of a Number Ten plan and the Morgan move was all his own


work. The Education Secretary is man known for his zeal and a sense of


doing things his way, as the "top club" might have once sung.


# It's got to be... # Perfect! We asked Michael Gove and


any of his backing group of education ministers to come on and


discuss his speech, they said no-one was available. I'm joined by the


headmaster or headteacher of the London Academy of excellence, are


you headmaster or headteacher? I call myself headmaster. The free


school where Michael Gove made his speech. Fiona Miller who chairs the


Local Schools Network, which campaigns to promote local state


schools, and David Green who runs the Civitas think-tank. He as right


isn't he in a way in saying that the "bog standard" school is leaving


England? I think so, personally I think that the creation of numerous


academies and a fairly large number of free schools has made a big


difference. It depends on whether you think competition drives up


standards or whether you think it doesn't. Personally I think it does.


The great problem we have had in the last 30 years that we have had 25 or


30% of pupils usually from disadvantaged backgrounds going to


schools where they have just not achieved their potential, hah that


couldn't be solved under state system with local authorities in the


driving seat, if not directly controlling schools in the way they


used to. His introduction of free schools and academies has


transformed the situation. To that extent it is a reasonable inference.


What do you make of the fact that he seemed to take the independent


sector as the benchmark, the desirable benchmark? He always does,


that I thought his speech today was a little bonkers, if you don't mind


me saying so. To talk about state schools introducing lines, bringing


in common entrance tests. There is no reason why they couldn't if they


wanted to? Why would they want to? He talked about a lot of things that


states schools are already doing as if they weren't. That is par for the


course, he likes to set up the straw men, the trendy progressive state


schools not doing rigour, not doing Duke of Edinburghs and debating, all


these things are going on in state schools and parents know that well.


It is a false dichotomy, he talks about state and independent schools,


rather than good schools and not issed God schools, it is up to good


schools to help make the not so good will, it is about sharing with


schools what is not fully imbedded. That is happening in London and what


London Challenge achieved, that is why London schools are a lot more


successful. Because they have had more money? And focus and attention.


Did you think the speech was bonkers? As I said afterwards, it


was my school it was given at, I said a good lesson, some things we


heard before some we hadn't and lots to think about. Some aspects, having


come from the independent sector, the school I used to work did one of


the most sensible things they did is get rid of the common entrance.


There used to be a test at 14 that got away with, it all turned into a


complete shambles. I seem to recall that he was actually rather in


favour of getting rid of it? I can't remember, it was Ed Balls who got


rid of it. The thing about Michael Gove the language he uses is


detatched from what goes on in real schools, he's alienating a lot of


heads and teachers who are working very hard to do all the things you


are talking about, by demonising them, presenting them as this


mythical blob that doesn't exist, apart from in the minds of the


Telegraph leaders. What about some of these other pro-Mosal --


proposals that there be lines given and other forms of punishment in


schools? The way to look at it is like this, the big structural


changes have happened, now there is free schools and academies, and the


next stage is to go on to, which is partly what you were saying Robert,


is what makes for a good school. What should schools be doing. What


he is saying is there's been this problem of discipline in recent


years, and he's saying let me make it clear that there is more you can.


Do I didn't think it was in the least bit bonkers, and he was saying


that, for example, he will know perfectly well if you look at the


international study, it tries to work out what makes the difference


between an independently managed school and why they do better in the


state schools. And one of the things is they put in more time. So he's


saying let me make it clear you can put in more time. Let's talk to


Fiona's point that he refers to, the "blob", explain what that is? I


don't know. It is a creation of Michael Gove and the Telegraph. Does


anyone know what it means? It is way of referring to the inertia in a


system. For the last 0 -- 30-odd years there is focus on what is


called progressive, child-led, child-focussed education, and it has


dragged down standards. Do you think Fiona is part of the blob? Yes, she


is. I'm a journalist, and there is a lot of blobby journalists. You are a


chairman of governors and active in local schools network. Anyone who


criticised child-centered he education is making a big mistake,


it should be child-sendered. It is child-led or teacher-led. That was


false dichotomy. One of the things we have encountered is Ofsted


inspectors going around, giving a school "outstanding" for


achievement, and good for teaching quality, because they were too


diadactic. We are talking about the way Michael Gove deals with people


who work in the frontline. It is not a separate issues. That is what the


blob is, it is because the inspectors are endorsing doctrines


that do not work for children from disadvantaged backgrounds. There are


teachers and head teachers, these are the people that run our schools


make them work well. We want to encourage them to do better if they


are not doing well enough, and celebrate the ones doing well. The


way Michael Gove deals with it is to demonise everybody in the state


system and saying everyone in the private system is doing brilliantly.


We need to switch the rhetoric and focus on support and collaboration.


Do you feel part of the blob? No I don't. You know what the blob is


don't you? It is some construct put together by the media isn't it


really. I mean in the same way. You don't recognise that there is an


orthodoxy in academic circles about what teaching ought to be, what the


style ought to be, what its methodology ought to be? I don't


think that is true, that might have been true ten years, but not now.


Just talking about Ofsted, only last week Michael Wilshaw published an


open letter to the inspectorate saying stop saying the lessons was


bad because there was too much teacher talk. He needed to do that


because it was a problem. The point being is the Chief Inspector is


saying the most important thing about a lesson, which seems fairly


obvious is whether the children learn something or not or make


progress. And the method, sometimes that will be through teacher talk


and sometimes through impact learning and sometimes through group


work and sometimes through some other method, what matters at the


end of the lesson is do the children walk out knowing more than when they


went into the room. Part of the madness of Michael Gove is he talks


the language of autonomy and being free, but then does nothing but tell


people how to do their job, disMRNing children and how to teach.


You think there is no problem? Yes, of course, many schools do need to


get better, I fully accept that. As our elected representative, isn't it


his job to try to make things better? I'm making the thing that he


says he wants to give power to heads and teachers to decide how to run


their schools, let's let them do it, they don't need to be lectured by


him about how to instill discipline in their pupils or how exactly to


teach a lesson. If he wants autonomy let's talk about that. David's point


is crucially. You will be backed centrally. He want to control it


centrally. He's making it clear that from Whitehall they will back the


teachers who use these methods. What are we trying do? Some of the things


talked about today in the speech sounds like education hasn't


developed a new purpose apart from preparing people to work in clerical


jobs that no longer exist. The best schools now are teaching, as well as


knowledge, the skills of creativity, of independent thinking. Piajet says


people are intelligent are those who know what to do when they don't know


what to do. That is what schools should be doing, that is what Dilnot


Williams and others are talking about all the time. We come back to


conversations about methods of teaching rather than the purpose of


teaching. Those are discredited doctrine, Piajet is discredited. I


think this is going off topic here. It has become a by-word for cover-up


and injustice, survivors of the Hillsborough disaster has told


Newsnight they were intimidated and threatened by police sent to take


their statements. Seven months ago the Illsley independent panel


reported that accounts from Yorkshire Police, the local force,


had been changed, apparently to shift the blamen to the fans. For


the first time a number of fan who is survived the disaster have come


forward to tell us how West Midlands Police took their statements. Peter


Marshall, who was at Hillsborough in 1989 has been investigating. S.


Peter Marshall, who was at Hillsborough in 1989 has been


investigating. If you were there you know. If you were on the terrace


inside, 3,000 were backed behind the goal, you thanked mercy you


survived. 96 didn't. But for untold numbers, escaping the crush was only


the start of decades of trauma. I wasn't the same person, the top had


come off for me, I couldn't keep it all within any more. I just didn't


want to carry on. Some feel their trauma was made far worse by the


attitude of the officers whose job it was to mount an Independent


investigation into what went wrong at Hillsborough. Survivors will tell


you certain of these officers from the West Midlands force seemed to


regard them not so much as vulnerable but invaluable witnesses


more as though they were the accused. He told me he was going to


put together a case to charge me with wasting police time. I'm a


19-year-old boy, three weeks out of Hillsborough, traumatised, and he's


threatening me that he will put together a case for wasting police


time, because he didn't like my evidence. Nick, a 19-year-old


Sheffield student at the time was an Ipswich fan, a neutral, excited to


be going to a cup semifinal with friends from Liverpool. But as soon


as he arrived outside the ground he saw the chaos. It was a very


dangerous crush outside the stadium, which developed, there were very few


place around, no directions, no filtering, no barriers, nothing at


all. Nick and over 1,000 others went into the ground when police ordered


the opening of an exit gate. Within seconds they were in a lethal crush


on the terrace. John was just 17. The sound that still resonates with


me to this day is the sound of a crash barrier just snapping. And


everyone seemed just to topple in a domino effect. I went down under and


through the crowd. I think I passed out underneath and within the crowd,


I came to near the front left of the pen, and came to amongst people that


I now know were dead or were dying. As luck was within a matter of


metres to gate that led on to the pitch. There was a policeman on the


gate, the cries are suitable cries. People are dying, the guy turns his


back on us, he turned his back on us and ignores us. He didn't comprehend


what was going on in front of his eyes. He could not have understood


it. I remember standing next to a guy with dark greasey hair from the


sweat, we were totally pushed against each other in such a way


that it is impossible to describe. It was just me and him fighting for


our lives. And I don't know if he was one of the 96, I don't know if


he got out. But I know that I had to stand on him to get out. John helped


carry the dead and dying and then collapsed. In the following weeks he


and Nick and others were asked to make statements to the West Midlands


Police who had been called in to investigate. The questions weren't


what they had expected. The questions were along the line of how


can you give evidence against the policemen, how can you make


statements like that. Who are you to try to stitch us up and all this


nonsense. He then turned quite aggressive and started to question


me, was I a left-wing agitator, was I a student agitator or a member of


the Socialist Workers' Party. It was observed the day before I had been


wearing a "free man Dell had a" T-shirt, that made me a left-wing


agitator. What did you say to it? I laughed initially. It was just are


you serious, I'm just a fan of the game of football. John, the


schoolboy, says two officers came to his house and sent his parents away,


supposedly to spare their feelings. He told them everything, including


his plan to join the police. He says they dismissed his account as


unimportant. They had heard it all before. I hadn't told them anything


they didn't already know, and although I had been talking I didn't


know what he had written. N. They They stood around me and I wanted to


read it because I wasn't happy so I stood up. They stood around me, that


was oppressive behaviour, they were physically intimidating, two grown


men, detectives, in my house, I felt I had no power to tell them what to


do. You were a child? Yeah. They simply told me to sign it. They said


you don't need to read it, I have written what you have told me, all


you need to do is sign this now. So what happened? I signed it. You


didn't read it? No, they wouldn't let me. Nick says to him the police


became increasingly hostile? He then turned on me as to whether I was a


criminal with a grudge against the police. He told me he was going to


check my criminal record, he just you know just said I wasn't there, I


couldn't have been there. Couldn't have been at the game? I said you


have my match ticket, what more do you need me to prove I was there. He


said well you could have found that. What's particularly troubling is


that these stories of survivors feeling intimidated and abused are


not uncommon. Many now see a thread stretching from the south Yorkshire


force, who bungled the organisation at Hillsborough, to the West


Midlands Police, now teamed to have failed in their investigation. As


the main author of the Hillsborough Panel Report, and after 25 years


researching the disaster, this professor believes survivors, like


the bereaved, weren't interviewed, they were interrogated. There was a


mind set amongst the police investigators, and that mind set


hinged on crowd-related violence hooliganism, for want of a better


phrase, drunkenness, late arrival and ticketlessness. That was the


mind set. What I think is so significant about this is that if


you put that alongside knowledge that the police statements were


being reviewed and altered, it brings into question the entire


evidential base upon which the inquiries and investigations were


conducted. He says the way statements were taken only added to


the unresolved trauma. John was both typical and unique. He joined the


police, the Met's murder squad, but was haunted by what he called


survivor guilt. 15 years on he tried to kill himself. The sound of the


barrier, the screams, still the feel of that guy's hair in my face, still


feel it, I feel it now, I feel it today. I didn't want it any more. I


didn't think I at the served to still -- deserved to still be on.


What did you do? Tried to drive a car into a tree. John resigned from


the police and has now rebuilt his lifeuilt his life. At the Warrington


Police Complaints Authority they are rebuilding the inquiry. All the


original statements were handed to the original Hillsborough panel and


stored here. Nick sees his and says it doesn't reflect the truth. He has


also seen internal West Midlands Police memos and notes. And there,


hand-written are the lines referring to him, "came across as totally


antipolice, at first doubted he had been at the match, then there is the


Nelson Mandela T-shirt, left-wing type, actual motif not known". What


do you think of what they have written down? It is nonsense, it is


a cover up of a cover up, if you like. John's finally got to see the


statement he was refused sight of 25 years ago. He says it even places


him in the wrong part of the ground. The way they dealt with me on that


day, I felt dirty when they walked out the door. I felt they didn't


want to listen to me and they had come with an agenda. It totally


vindicates my thoughts then. West Midlands Police aren't commenting on


any of this, they say they are awaiting the explanation of


continuing investigations and the fresh Hillsborough inquest.


The shock of the news that the actor Philip Seymour Hoffman had been


found dead with a needle in his harm as hardly abated. There is universal


agreement he was an outstanding performer, and some great surprise


at the circumstances of his death. I'm going to talk about drugs and


addiction and creativity shortly with Will Self. First though Richard


Curtis, who worked with Hoffman on his film The Boat That Rocked


remembers the factor's -- actor's work. Philip Seymour Hoffman was a


wonderful, mysterious and complex man, who gave an astonishing range


of performances in his 60 or so films. He had that talent that the


great actors do of extending your understanding and sympathy for human


beings. So it is no coincidence that one of his great stage performances


was in Death of a Salesman, the key line of which is "attention must be


paid". Philip's performances made us pay attention to strange or lonely,


uncool, unusual men. There's a very telling and strangely apt line in


his wonderful performance in Almost Famous. I'm glad you are home? I'm


always home, I'm uncool. Me too? You are doing great, the only true


currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone when you


are uncool. He made no mistakes in his extraordinary career. I remember


him sitting around with people on The Boat That Rocked. I asked him


was there any film he was unsure of, and he said Twister, and the howl


went up and said you were fantastic, it is a fantastic film. Even in that


effects-driven Hollywood commercial firm there was something


extraordinary about what Phil did. He was good at everything. He was


very good at being bad, he was a great stage Iago, and this is a


glimpse of him as someone who wants to kill Tom Cruise which is bad, I


suppose. What are you saying, that wasn't it? What I gave yo I'm going


to count to ten, you will tell me where the rabbit's foot is or she


dies. He was exceptional at portraying goodness or sweetness.


Like he did in the film, beautiful film Jack Goes Boating, that he


himself directed. Maybe a little good night kis Maybe. Nothing


overwhelming? OK. I don't think there is any doubt or argument that


he was, and how terrible that verb is in the past now, the greatest


character actor of our time. I remember the first part I ever fell


in love with him in was The Talented Mr Ripley. Extraordinary rhythms


like you had never seen someone do before. Are you living here? No, no,


I'm staying here for a few day It is a new piano, you probably shouldn't.


(hits piano keys) His explosive performance in Charley Wilson's War,


almost unrecoginsable from any other film you have seen him in. I have


neutralised champions of communism, I have spent the past three years


learning finish, which will come in handy in Virginia, and I'm never


sick at sea, I want to know why I'm not going to be the Helsinki chief.


You are coarse? Excuse me. He was a proper leading man, as seen in his


amazing performance as Trueman Capote, for which he won an Oscar,


he should have won ten. I had lunch with Jimmy Barredman the other day.


How is he? He's a lovely man, he told me the plot of his new book, he


said to me I just want to make sure it is not one of those problem


novels, I said, Jimmy your novel is about a negro homosexual who is in


love with a Jew, wouldn't you call that a problem?! All I can say is


perhaps you seek out one or even five of his extraordinary films from


Magnolia to The Mast e from Punchdrunk Love to The Savages, I'm


sure you will marvel at it, and enjoy it and know a little bit more


about what it means to be human. That is what great actors do. And


Philip Seymour Hoffman was such an actor. Richard Curtis on Philip


Seymour Hoffman. Joining us now is the writer Will Self. I would like


to talk about the drugs aspect of this. Were you surprised? I knew


nothing about Philip Seymour Hoffman's involvement with drugs at


all. Surely one of the reasons why we have all cleaved to him so


strongly is he was somebody who managed to keep his private life


largely out of the public eye, which is an achievement in this day and


age. Do you understand the involvement with drugs? Addiction is


no respecter of persons. There is hardly anywhere you can point a


finger high or low in society and not hit somebody who has addiction


issues. Heroin is a drug we associate most strongly with


addiction, but people can be addicted to all sorts of things. I


think the fact that heroin was involved in his death is what people


find very shocking. Largely because of the image that heroin has in our


culture. I think that is shocking. The old saw-horse of whether he was


such an amazing actor in some way was connected, his creativity was


connected with the drug use, or the pressures of his life led to the


drug use. I dare say that's in the mix, you can go to any kind of poor


or deprived part of our country and shake a stick, throw a stick and you


will hit somebody who probably has a heroin habit. We have the highest


per capita registered heroin addicts in Europe. It is often represented


as a loser's drug, which is the environment you are talking about


there, by no stretch of the imagination was this man a loser?


No, and you will find heroin addicts in every walk of life. I think in


America, in particular, there is a very strange culture, there is a


strange one here as well. But a strange culture surrounding opiate


drugs, and the broader family of drugs which heroin is one. What is


heroin like? You are asking me personally. I think for people that


don't have, you know, who don't have a reason to be anaesthetised, it


probably is experienced as, yes euphoric, as yes a kind of drug that


they wouldn't mind taking, but they wouldn't necessarily feel a pull


towards taking it again. It is one of the paradoxes. One of the strange


things is most of the people watching us now at some time or


another will take medical diamorphine, which is heroin. If


they are in pain they will experience simply the removal of the


pain. It is not instantly addictive then? No, it takes a fairly


concerted effort to get addicted to opiate drugs, so you can say that


people who do become addicted, maybe they have a predisposition to it.


But they have to make some decisions and decide to take it. But I think


at some point, and presumably this had happened to Hoffman and from the


bare bones account we have of his history of drug use, it probably


happened to him shortly after he left acting school. Because he went


to rehab after that. You don't really go to drug rehab without a


drug problem. The points get switched, you have made so many


decisions to take the drug that the taking of it becomes compulsive at


some level. Apparently he spent 20 years clean? Yes, that may well be


true. Of course we don't know whether he had other addictive


behaviours so to speak, and kept the addiction dormant. I think the way


the story is being reported suggests this idea that addiction is like a


kind of ugly spirit that was could youed -- cowed and pushed into the


background and reared up in that way. I'm not sure that is useful. It


seems a rather medieval perception of it, we don't know is the truth of


the matter, what led to him being in that situation, again very sadly,


but this is only supposition, often people who returned to using heroin


after a long period of be a Nantes, they can't judge the dose. You know,


this is happening quite freakily. -- frequently. There is something about


injecting isn't there? It is the combination of his brilliance as an


actor and the very, very, and it is pushed as a gory detail, it is a


lurid detail, it is a bit of sensationalism that injecting is


involved is very shocking. I think that is because, again, most of us


will be injected with heroin at some point in our lives. Usually just


before we die. You know anybody who has been in hospital and had pain


relief has been injected with heroin often, or morphine. Do you think


doing it yourself is different? That is the point, going right back to


the, heroin was originally synthesised in St Mary's Hospital in


Paddington, near to where we are now. It was a medical THIVENLTH


opiate addiction has always been appropriating what should be


rightfully a medical role. I don't mean to be trite about this, it is


quite serious, addiction comes about at the same time as the full


professionalise of medicine and the elevation of medicine to our modern


priesthood, our kind of spiritual priesthood, the idea that somebody


should appropriate th thing that only doctors are meant to do and do


it to themselves is very, very shocking. Now the last British


combat soldiers should be out of Afghanistan by the end of the year.


This country's claim and the claim of all of NATO is the deadline


doesn't mark the end of commitment, merely a change of activity. They


would like to have agreed with the Afghan Government precisely how that


will work, but that has not been possible, either because of


President is a lame duck and won't be in office much longer, or perhaps


because he's just difficult. So our defence correspondent jumped at the


chance to find out how the NATO secretary-general, Anders Fogh


Rasmussen, saw things. NATO combat troops must be out of Afghanistan by


the end of this year. And there is no agreement over what will follow.


So, plans to create a force of NATO advisers, even the details of who


will pay the Afghan Army, are up in the air, and western security chiefs


are deeply unhappy. I'm concerned that if there is no present


international presence in Afghanistan, after 2014, it would


also be difficult to generate financial resources to sustain the


Afghan security forces, that means they will not be able to pay


salaries. Of course that won a -- would be a major security concern. A


security force of that size goes well beyond the financial capacity


of the Afghan Government. And if we can't generate financial support,


they will be faced with major problems. And this is the reason why


I do believe that at the end of the day we will get the signature on the


security agreement. It is interesting that you are confident


about that. What does that then say about the behaviour of President


Karzai, in initially assembly tribunal tribal leaders to ratify


that, and then saying he would never sign it. Is that playing politics?


Obviously it is politics but it is remarkable that representatives from


the Afghan society at large conveyed a very clear message to President


Karzai as well as the international community, we want an international


military presence after that date, and we urge the President to sign as


soon as possible. To go to the bottom lion, I don't think President


Karzai will sign. So probably it will be for a new President, after


the presidential elections to sign a security agreement that would allow


us to stay after 2014. When you hear the things President Karzai says


about this agreement. Saying he won't sign it, leaving the problem


for his successor, about the sacrifice of NATO soldiers, his


assertions that there was no improvement of security in the


south, it would have been better if they had never gone to places like


Helmand Province, you must despair at his statements sometimes?


Personally I have an excellent relationship with President Karzai.


But having said that, I also have to say that such statements are


something like playing with fire. Because we shouldn't underestimate


the damaging effect on public and political support for our presence


in Afghanistan when people hear such statements. We have invested a lot


in blood and treasure in Afghanistan. Also because of our own


security, but through our efforts we have created a framework for a


better Afghanistan. So honestly speaking I do think people in our


countries would expect some lines of gratitude from the Afghan political


leadership. There is another worry too, about Syria, after two


shipments of chemical weapons under an international deal, Syria has


stopped delivering. Citing security concerns. Some American decision


makers think it may be time to reconsider military options. I


really urge the Syrian Government to live up to its obligations according


to the UN Security Council resolution. And I also hope the


Russians will put a lot of pressure on the Syrian Government. When does


that threat have to go back on the table do you think? If this deal


continues to faulter? The Americans have declared that it is still on


the table but I think we should give diplomacy a chance. Now the Syrian


Government has actually agreed to eliminate chemical weapons. They


have joined the international treaty against the use of chemical weapons,


so far so good. But now it is a question about the implementation,


and they must, of course, comply with the UN Security Council


resolution. Lastly you are the head of a military-based organisation,


how do you feel that the leaders of that organisation are reluctant to


commit their troops to new military adventures, and to pay the sort of


amount they used to pay towards their common defence? When


Governments are forced to cut deficits and carry through deep cuts


across the board, it is difficult to suggest that defence should be


exempted, but it is matter of concern taking into account that


other powers in the world invest more and more in security and


defence, and at the end of the day it means that we will have less


influence on the international scene, the vacuum will be filled by


other powers, and they do not necessarily share our interests and


our values. That was the secretary-general of NATO. The front


pages now: That's all from us, the video we


will leave you with tonight, it has been suggested, may be a fake, not


that it bothers us, but if it is real then the people involved are


very stupid indeed. You decide. Good night.


In-depth investigation and analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines, including the former UKIP spokesman who led a kidnap gang in Pakistan, education reform, Hillsbororough, and Richard Curtis on Philip Seymour Hoffman. With Jeremy Paxman.

Download Subtitles