03/03/2014 Newsnight


With Emily Maitlis. The latest news from Russian-controlled Crimea and the government in Kiev. Plus, Michael Gove and Benefits Street's White Dee.

Similar Content

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



America warns it will isolate Russia, if it doesn't back out of


Crimea. But here the UK Government inadvertently shows its hand and


lets slip it has ruled out military action and tough financial sanction.


No wonder he looks confident and in command as he watches the Russian


army flexing their muscles. Here in Sevastopol Ukraine says Russian


forces have surrounded all of its bases on the peninsula, Russia


denies giving the Ukrainians an ultimatum to surrender by morning or


else. We will be live in Kiev asking the new Ukrainian Government what


they are going to do. We will hear from John McCain and voices from


around the world about where the crisis goes next.


The he had case secretary says he doesn't care how posh his cabinet


colleagues are, even if the voters do. It is an English disease to pay


too much attention to where someone went to school. From Benefits


Street, white White Dee, has the show changed her life and what does


the fame mean for her benefits? Good evening, reports tonight that Russia


has issued an ultimatum to the new Government in Ukraine to surrender


or face full military assault. In five hours that ultimate, then


denied by Russia, runs out. Tonight we will ask the interim Government


how it intends to respond. President Obama warned Russia it was on the


wrong side of history and threatened to isolate the superpower. Here a


document that has revealed the UK Government's hand and shows it is


unwilling to contemplate any military action or take tough


financial sanction. We have ask if the west has any power in this


conflict. First, Gabriel Gatehouse has been monitoring events in


Crimea, he joins us live. It is less than five hours now until


this supposed ultimatum runs out. The Ukrainians say they have heard


from Russians and they have been told their bases, now surrounded,


will be stormed if they don't vacate them by 5.00am local time. The


Russians say it is nonsense and they have no intention of doing any such


thing. Whatever the case this has perhaps the desired affect of making


everyone jittery, especially inside the bases. Interestingly, talking to


ordinary people here, despite all of this going on, many people genuinely


do feel pleased towards the presence of Russian forces here. But, they


know this is very, very tense and they know that any park could ignite


something and nobody here wants a war. We also heard today, again from


the Ukrainian authorities, about a supposed build up of Russian troops


on the east of the peninsula, just across Into Russia and many more


Russian troops coming over here, whatever the case we will see that


tomorrow. We have been travelling around the peninsula and seen that


the Russians have many of their own forces here, and many seem to have


come from the Black Sea base here in Sevastopol. Not a shot has been


fired. But in years to come historians may well write that this


was how Russia took back Crimea. What would once have been normal


every day scenes have now taken on a more frightening aspect. Russia's


Black Sea fleet leases its base here in Sevastopol from the Ukrainian


Government. Or at least it did. Now its forces aren't guests any more,


they have become the masters. On the road out of Sevastopol checkpoints


have appeared. These apparently manned by civilians, but they are


flying the Russian flag. Moscow's control now extends across the


peninsula. Ukraine says all of its military bases have been surrounded.


We were south of the capital shortly after the troops arrived. The


Ukrainian commander emerged from negotiations with his unseen Russian


counterpart. I asked him whether any of his men were prepared to


surrender? He told me no-one was surrendering, and it was a Ukrainian


brigade and that's that. And so, the stand-off began. The Russians have


called on the Ukrainians to vacate their bases. For now they are


holding out. Essentially they are prisoners behind their own gates.


The Russian troops are well armed and clearly well disciplined. Their


uniforms hold no clue as to their identity. But no-one is in any doubt


who they are. And many are glad they are here. TRANSLATION: We don't want


people to come here with their Molotov cocktails and create chaos


like they did in the capital. These troops are here to keep us safe. Not


everyone is in agreement. An argument broke out when one man


suggested the Russian soldiers were an occupying force. He was quickly


shouted down. As more Russian supporters arrived, Ukrainian


soldiers watched nervously from the top of the buildings. When we


returned today reinforcements seemed to have arrived, and yet more


flag-waving supporters blocking movement on and off the base. And


so, the Ukrainian troops are relying on locals to rePlehnish their


supplies. We watched a Lada deliver shopping to the besieged Ukrainians


with the tacit agreement of the Russians, every soldier understands


the need to eat. TRANSLATION: Everyone knows perfectly well whom


Crimea belongs to, says I can't imagine these guys are pleased to be


here es. He added that pointing to the Russians. These men are Crimeas


tartares, they fear a Russian takeover. To understand why you have


to come to this place. The capital of the Crimea area when the Tartas


ruled the peninsula from the 16th century, all of that came to the end


with Russia's southward expansion under the Tsars. For many crimian


people this is still their home and repositry of their history.


Katherine the great's conquests is celebrated here as a great


historical event, one that puts Crimea within the Russian umpire for


more than two centuries. But for the cry mean -- the people here, this


was just one in a series of tragedies that be fell them under


Russian rule. This woman is 84 years old, she was 11 when Stalin ordered


the whole population to be deported, he suspected them of collaborating


with the Nazis. They were herded on to freight trains bound for


Uzbekistan. The memory is still painful. The people only returned


after Ukraine gained its independence from the Soviet Union.


She says the thought of another conflict with the Russians is simply


unbearable. She wouldn't wish it on her worst enemy, just let there not


be war, she says. This evening Ukrainian naval officers began


barricading themselves inside their head quarters in anticipation of a


possible Russian assault. Earlier they gathered in the parade ground,


to hear an appeal from their new Admiral, not to heed Russian calls


to abandon their posts. They tried to break our lines of communication,


to break our lines of supply and to, they do a severe psychological


pressure on our personnel to betray our motherland. Many people here are


deeply suspicious of the new Government in Kiev, and the way in


which the previous one was overthrown. Russia may have lost an


ally when Viktor Yanukovych was toppled in Kiev, but in a sense they


got what they really needed out of him. One of the first things


Yanukovych did when he came into office in 2010 was to extend


Moscow's lease on this base, right into the middle of this century.


There were those Ukrainian politicians on the nationalist side


who argued against it and said this base was a Trojan horse, and so


indeed it has turned out to be. Not for the first time in history,


Crimea finds itself at an epicentre of conflict with great global


powers. While the west scrambles to calibrate a response, Russia is busy


creating facts on the ground. In Washington tonight, could we be


seeing signals of a tougher stance. President Obama's ambassador to the


UN promised to stand strongly and proudly with the people of Ukraine


at the UN Security Council meeting tonight. We will pass to Washington


and speak to John McCain, the former Republican Presidential Candidate


who sits on the Senate foreign relations committee. Thank you very


much for joining us. Are you hearing tough words from America tonight?


I'm hearing a lot of rhetoric, so far the only action to be taken is


to boycott the preparatory meeting to take place of the G8. There is a


lot of rhetoric, but I frankly don't see a lot of action. What do you


think should happen? I think we should do a lot of things, beginning


with a fundamental revamping of our policy towards Mr Putin. Our


President has been incredibly niave in his dealings with him. The reset,


the overheard conversation with him and Medevev, saying tell him he


would be more flexible. This is not east-west or Cold War, Mr Putin said


the greatest disaster of the 20th century was the fall of the Soviet


Union. He believes this is east-west, he believes it is Cold


War and he believes that Crimea and particularly the base is essential


to the old Russian empire which he continues to seek. How do you


respond to western powers who will rule out military I engagment, or


indeed tough financial sanctions? I rule out military action, it is just


not an option that would be viable. This is the result of five years


niave relations with Russia. If the Europeans decide that the economic


considerations are too important to then impose severe sanctions on


Vladimir Putin, which you get from the statement from Angela Merkel


today, then they are ignoring the lessons of history. If Vladimir


Putin is allowed to take this Crimea, because of protecting


"Russian population", do you remember back in the 1930s when


Hitler took Czechoslovakia and other places because of the German


population, and finally could I say there are significant Russian


populations in the Baltic countries and Poland and Romania. Russia will


say at this point that the west stood by whilst a democratically


elected Government in Ukraine was overthrown, not even stood by, but


supported that coup? I think that when you see what Yanukovych did


with his corruption and his repression and killing of people, he


forfeited all legitimacy in the eyes of anybody who has been objective


view. They can say that pigs fly, but the fact that Yanukovych


forfeited any claim he may have it to governing the country. Tonight we


saw developments from the UK Government, inadvertently, that


showed they were not for now supporting trade sanctions or


closing the financial centre to Russians, is that the right


approach? Of course not. Of course not. I'm not astonished, to be frank


with you. Disappointed but not astonished. Here in the United


States we have a bill which targets people with sanctions and with


penalties who are responsible. We can renew the missile defence


systems that we abandoned in an attempt to appease Putin and in the


Czech Republic and Poland. I think we can do a lot of things, if


necessary, unilaterally. Thank you very much indeed for your time for


joining us this evening. Our diplomatic editor joins me now,


and we have also been looking at the market implications. There is


diplomatic embarrassment here, certainly for the Government from


those documents that were spied, that essentially, removed some key


tools? Well, you have a situation and let as face it, it is not a new


one, where the members of the EU in particular, there was a foreign


ministers meeting today in Brussels of the EU not agreeing on the way


forward. You have Poland in particular in both EU and NATO


insitsing that people address this -- insisting that people address


this question and in a resolute American. On the other side of the


equation we know in this meeting, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands


were all against taking sanctions against Russia. Having heard all


that we see the documents, glimpsed on the way into Downing Street for a


National Security Council meeting, excluding on the one hand anything


that would have a negative effect on trade relations between the two


countries, and then, with regard to what NATO might do, ruling out even


planning for some sort of military preparation. Even the window


dressing, if you like, was ruled out by the British Government. In this


situation, once again, we look at precedents like the Balkan wars,


people will look to the Americans, and judging from the language being


used in the UN tonight by their ambassador and by President Obama


today, there is more likely to be some substantive American movement


on this issue, perhaps Magnitski act or clauses, perhaps something that


goes the G8 issue. I think we should look to Washington in the next day


or two on this. Laura, I'm wondering how relevant any of these threened


sanctions are from bodies and Governments when the facts on the


ground in terms of the markets are so stark? As the diplomacy grinds


away ineffectively, the markets are different, they are live beasts. We


have seen a harsher verdict on what is going on and Putin's credibility.


The rouble fell to record lose, Russian stocks had huge amounts of


money wiped off them. On the streets of Russian cities there were stories


of exchange booths running out of dollars, as some Russians themselves


sought to get their roubles out and turn them into a safe currency. We


are kidding ourselves if we think this is some how happening in


isolation. One former director of the Bank of England says he thinks


it is certain Ukraine will default. One of our biggest companies, BP,


huge stakeholder in the biggest oil company in the world. It lost huge


amounts of value from its company today. The biggest thing is oil


prices, already in the last couple of weeks they have been shoved up.


That has been impact on almost everything, our FTSE, the French,


the German markets. The markets are nervy and they don't like it. This


is hurting Russia too, what does Putin's end game become. We have


heard several things where is it going? The whole question is so


repleat with history. We saw in Gabriel Gatehouse's report, the


sense in which Ukraine and Crimea are part of Russia's history. There


are people in Russia who want to reabsorb the country, that is


clearly not on the cards in the near future. I think the key things that


Russia wants in the near future is to have an important influence in


the shaping of this country and of the Government that follows. Some


people think they are trying to get the constitution turned into a more


federal one, where Russian speak he is in the east of the country have


far more -- speakers in the east of the country have far more influence


and can influence decision making in the Ukraine. With Crimea with


separate status within Ukraine, the question has to be open whether that


will be in some sense absorbed by Russia. That's the theory, what do


those on the front line make of it. Joining me down the line from Kiev


is Ukraine's interim economics minister. Was there an ultimatum,


what did you understand by it earlier today? Can you repeat the


question once again? We understood there was an ultimatum issued from


Russia? It seems like the ultimatum has expired and nothing serious has


happened. We survived the first ultimatum, it is not the first and


won't be the last one. How do you read what Russia has done so far? We


read if that is not an intervention, then what is? How will you respond?


We respond like during the last week, keeping calm, we believe that


this escalation has to be deescalated. Exclusively and only


through the peaceful means. Through negotiations, through the


discussions, we want to figure out what is the reason of this


escalation. The Ukraine is governing itself. Like any other nation it


discusses in a democratic way, we don't really understand why Russia


is so concerned. Russia is on your military base, do you call that


negotiation? Well we do not particularly like that Russia is at


our military bases, it should be at its own military base. How far will


you let Russia go before you take action we really hope that Russia


will seize these actions. These unfriendly actions. Come on, we live


together, virtually peacefully almost through the whole history


that we had. We are brotherly and orthodox nations, so I think that it


is some kind of you know, we treat it as some kind of misunderstanding


maybe Russia did not read properly the signals and events happening in


Kiev. For some reason they took it as the offence against them as if


they were moving completely westward, against Russia, which is


absolutely not true. What was happening in the main square in


Midan is our absolutely internal issue, we were just protesting


against the corruption and against the violation of human rights and


actually killing human lives. That is what we are protesting against.


Let me just clarify then, it sounds from what you are saying that you


are ruling out any kind of military response to what is going that there


now, is that right? The Ukrainian Government does not plan to use any


kind of military response because we do not believe it is the right way


to solve the issue. This issue should be solved only through


peaceful means. We are being provoked already for five or six


days, and I really command the calm and the strength of the Ukrainian


forces that did not allow to be provoked.


Let's hear now from the Kremlin former adviser, and Ming Campbell.


We did have the former US Ambassador but he has sadly just left our


studio without an explanation, perhaps we can shed a bit more light


on that. You have heard the charge against you, five or six days of


provokation on sovereign Ukraine land. What is Russia doing there?


First of all you are forgetting that we have had a coup in Kiev. Which


was financed and encouraged and senator McCain was there during the


protests, encouraging those protesters to continue. With


protesters killed on the streets? And protestors shooting at police,


and by the way 20 police dead means protesters were armed. We have to


stop and count the dead people. I think the problem here is this,


everyone is asking what is President Putin's end game, I would like to


ask in return what is the west's end gam What is the end game of the


Government in now in Ukraine because it was waiting for billions to come


from the west. And now it doesn't know what to do. All day the


ultimatum the western press was banging on about, it was denied by


the minister of defence in Russia and said it was nonsense, yet it was


reported all day. You are showing the Security Council of the UN


gathering, who called for that meeting? Russia, not a word


anywhere. Let me set something straight, Yanukovych wrote to Russia


saying military action is visible in the Ukraine in Crimea, is this is


what happened? Yanukovych it doesn't matter what he wrote. He was the


legitimate President and Joan thrown by a coup. What he wrote, if he was


a legitimate President what he wrote was obviously of significance. What


do we want? We want the people of Ukraine to have the opportunity to


determine their own future without the influence of Russia. And of


course we know, last time round, it was south Ossetia, there is always


an excuse for intervention for political reasons. I think it is


inexcusable in the UK that a document is photographed going into


Downing Street. It is particularly significant in this case, since


military options are ruled out and there are not many shots in the


locker but economic sanctions would be one of those. That was foolish on


two counts? You show your hand in a democratic exchange of this kind


uncertainty is enormously important and significant. Particularly when


we hear that the Moscow Stock Exchange has collapsed and the


rouble is under severe pressure, the economy is the soft underbelly of


Russia in this matter. I wonder how you think this is going for Putin


now, when you look at the state of Gazprom shares or the rouble, is


this going according to plan? Putin had to respond. It would have been


political suicide for Putin not to respond. It could be economic


suicide the way he's going? That would be a disaster. A


western-backed coup would have been a disaster. A western-backed


disaster? The credibility of the country is not based on President


Putin. There is a breach of the United Nations charter, they are


talking about regime change. These are the very people when it came to


President Assad's regime in Syria, allow me to finish. What about Libya


and Syria. Let him finish his point. You can't talk about that on Ukraine


on your conscience there is Iraq, Libya and Syria, I'm sorry. I have a


conscience about Iraq and I will not take any challenge to the contrary


from you. But these are the people who when it came to trying to deal


with President Assad's regime said they, went out of their way to veto


or said they would veto any suitable UN resolution. Why? Because they


said it would amount to regime change, they are practising regime


change at the moment. There is me moral authority with Putin's actions


it looked like bare-chested thuggery? No it doesn't, nobody is


planning to invade. They have invaded. So this is not invasion? Of


course it is not an invasion. What do you call this when you occupy or


stand on the edge of every single military installation? I would call


an invasion is Kiev when armed thugs were killing policemen and troops.


Did you hear any shot fired in Crimea, or anyone hurt or anything.


The reason the bases are surrounded because in other cities in the


Ukraine they stole arms from those bases. This is a very strange set of


affairs, we have not had one shot? That's a good thing. We shouldn't be


surprised by that. Of course I'm responding to this here? Because in


circumstances like those we are talking about, provokation or


miscalculation can result in a shot. If we have one shot we will probably


have a conflag grace. Does it tell you that Putin's approach is a


benign one if he doesn't want to make sure of the people of Crimea? I


must say the use of the word "benign" in these circumstances does


take me aback. The garrisons are being surrounded, people are being


told by their commanding officer they have to give up their loyalty


to Kiev, give up their loyalty to Ukraine and subordinate that loyalty


to Putin and those acting on his behalf. That is not benign in any


circumstance. Where is safe, if Crimea is not safe from this kind of


approach, where else in the Ukraine is safe, are there any borders?


Crimea is part of the country. Because not a single time in the


past the people of Crimea were given a chance for a referendum,


Khrushchev, a murderous thug, hold on, threw away Crimea to the


Ukraine, you know why? Because he killed and presided over the MRDers


of so many Ukrainians, he had to give them a President. Nobody asked


the people in Crimea where theyn't wanted to be, they were given them


away. Nobody asked the people of Georgia, or South Ossetia, they


should have been the subject of a Russian takeover. I'm sorry. They


were provoked. It was with American money and weapons. They were


provoked into doing it, you know that.


We will leave it there, thank you very much we understand that John


Bolton had a prior engagment he had to hurry away to.


The English are obsessed with their old school, suggested the Education


Secretary today, calling the habit an English disease. Michael Gove


defended the number of old Eatonians in the cabinet, and said it was


indefensible that so many actors and board members were privately


educated. He dismissed his critics of state schools as being a bit di


As far as higher education is going on the visit to Formula One


manufacturers, McLaren, he told us that middle-class parents should


aspire for their children to be apprentices and insists businesses


provided more places. You have said this morning there is no excuse for


businesses not to take on apprentices, what happens if they


don't? Business has said in the past, apprenticeships have been too


bureaucratic and the method of funding apprenticeships hasn't


necessarily suited us. We have removed that. There is no excuse.


And if businesses choose not to engage they will have to justify


themselves in the public square. Should there be any comeback. You


say they ought to justify themselves in the public square, what do you


mean, should there be comeback for those who want to engage? It


shouldn't be that we penalise them, it is in the self-interest of any


company to engage with the apprenticeship programme. We should


ask business what they are doing to play a bigger part in the education


system. In policy terms I would say it is a nudge rather than a direct


intervention. If you look at a Rolls-Royce or British air he row


space apprenticeships, it is better to go there than a university. It is


a superior option to university, it provides not just an experience of


the work place and income, but also with the level of intellectual


challenge greater than some universities. Many apprenticeships


are noin that sphere. Today advertised on the Internet swathes


of apprenticeships, they were jobs but are now apprenticeships paying


?2. 90. Are you saying you want parents to aspire to that for their


children in the same way as they would aspire to universities?


Absolutely situate rite that parents should want their children to have


the option certainly to go to university, at the same time I don't


think there is anything wrong and there is a lot that's admirable


about saying you want to experience the world of work. You are in a


sense trying to change aspiration. You in your speech made a link


between vocational and academic education and working and


middle-class children. It is a class issue isn't it? We have had, I


think, a damaging view in this country that success, narrowly


designed as academic success, is only available to a limited number.


As you know, that view doesn't hold and hasn't held in other countries


from Scotland to Singapore. It is not a class issue, it is an England


issue. It is one we have to overcome if we're going to make sure that


every child achieves their full potential. Specifically an English


issue in your view? It is an English problem that we have not valued the


practical and technical in the same way as we value the academic. I


think it is an English issue that we have an unequal education system,


with opportunity distributed in such a way as to mean that children who


go to independent fee-paying schools and the best state schools have many


more opportunities than children who have gone to other state schools,


but that is changing. Some people might suggest that the picture has


gone into reverse around the cabinet table, even many of your own MPs


believe that the very top bracket of politics, the cabinet table and the


Prime Minister's team is far too dominated by those who have been


privately educated? It is a consequence, isn't t of the


education system that we have inherited. David Cameron isn't


responsible for the school to which he went, neither is George Osborne.


The fact that we had social mobility go backwards in this country was a


consequence of some mistic it is a we made in the education system in


the 1960s and 1970s. Are you suggesting there aren't people with


equivalent abilities in the rest of the Conservative Party. There are


many Conservative backbenchers who argue this is a problem? There are


certainly people, it is an English disease to pay too close attention


to where someone went to school, but, since we are, if you are


sitting round the cabinet stable, then some of the voices who are most


influential come from those people who have not come from guilded and


privileged backgrounds. It is defensible to have so many private


companies run by public schoolgirls and boys. Is it defensible that so


many actors, sports stars to whom our children are encouraged to


aspire come from private schools. It is not defensible, of course, so we


need to change. Does it disappoint you that the warm-up for the next


Conservative leadership contest, which is evidenced all over the


place now also seems to be playing out between two public school boys?


I'm not aware of any speculation about leadership other than the


choice between David Cameron and Ed Miliband in the next election.


Haven't you been reading the papers? You will have to quote me the


speculation, the only leadership question that counts is whether or


not we want David Cameron or Ed Miliband leading this country after


the next election. You described in this speech this extraordinary place


as being like a Bond villain's layer. Do you care that quite


significant swathes of the educational establishment,


professional people, see you as a bit of a villain in terms of what


you are doing, does it bother you? I don't go out of my way to solicit or


invite opposition, you will never get unanimity about any set of


political changes until after the politician driving them through has


long left the field. The argument I find is that some people say


sometimes your changes are too great in scope and introduced too rapidly.


But no-one, that I'm a ware of, has been -- aware of has been able to


argue against higher standards in schools, more autonomy for head


teachers, and or rigorous exams. The opposition you allude to tend to be


the inertia of defenders of the status quo, rather than a desection


of anything we are doing. -- desection of anything we are doing.


She was the biggest thing to come out of Benefits Street, a Channel


four reality show that showed one street in Birmingham that rocked to


infamy. Today we ask White Dee, the self-styled mother of the street


what she made of the show and how it has changed her life and community.


She has been described as the Queen of Benefits Street, the one-woman


citizens advice bureau, and the patron saint of drug addicts and


dropouts. White Dee became the star of Benefits Street with their fourth


right advice on everything, from staying sober to dealing with the


benefits office. Suspending your claim because there is a change in


your income. Don't worry about it. The self-pro-claimed mother of


Benefits Street, a convicted street who has been out of work for seven


years, has divided opinion and generated headlines almost as much


as the series itself. Since it has broadcast, the show has triggered


impassions debate, about the exploitation of poor people for


entertainment, the rights and wrongs of the benefit system in its


entirety. And whether or not the show's protaganists were misled


about the show. It was clear about the nature of the programme, why


they were and the end product. What does the unlikely celebrity at the


heart of it, now with a PR manager, calling her a "working-class hero",


really feel about how they were portrayed. With news of a music


deal, a plus size modelling opportunity and Big Brother house,


and a chance to become an MP, what now for White Dee and her benefits.


How has your life changed over the last couple of months? It hasn't


personally changed in the way that I'm still, you know, I'm still a mum


of two children. But it is like being thrown into the limelight when


you are just not completely, you are not used to it at all, is just a


real shock. Does it feel like -- Does it feel like things are better


or worse? Busier, I wouldn't say better. Everyone knows you, the


street has turned into a bit of a tourist attraction. You cannot drive


up and down that road on a Saturday or a Sunday. So this is the poverty


porn in action is it, do you understand why that phrase came


about? Not particularly. We still dispute the fact and we would argue


to Channel four that at no time whatsoever did they tell us it was


in any way related to benefits. With regards to "poverty porn", we don't


class ourselves as in poverty. We are fine we survive with the help


and support of each other. So they never told you it was about


benefits? No they did not. When did they tell you it was going to be


called Benefits Street? About two weeks before the show aired. It


wasn't done officially. Somebody just let slip that it was called


Benefits Street and that's when we all went absolutely mad. We went...


What did you think it would be called? They asked us for


suggestions as to what maybe we think the show would be called. Some


said Friends With Benefits, others said We Will Survive. The kids made


their Ghetto This, the teenagers. Why bother asking us if they knew


what they were going to call it. When you found out it was going to


be called Benefits Street, you said you went mad. Did anyone try to


change that or pull the show or step in? Obviously we hadn't viewed the


episodes by the time, when we actually found out it was going to


be called benefits street. We did make calls to Channel four and Love


Production. Not just me a few of the residents. At the end of the day


they had named the show what they wanted to name the show. So no


matter what we did, they had no intentions of pulling it or renaming


it. They told us that this was a fair and balanced reflection of life


on the street, would you go with that? No. What would you call it?


How could it be fair and balanced when basically all they are doing is


focussing on four or five people. Most of the people they have


focussed on don't actually live on the street. They spent time with


many a working couple, pensioners. So they didn't live on the street?


No, they did, but quite a few people that were shown in the programme


don't live on the street. They told us that contributors were briefed


extensively before the show was aired. And they had been in regular


contact since? They didn't brief us extensively about the name of the


show. They briefed you about the show? No, basically we have a local


councillor who has written confirmation saying the show is


about community spirit. There are quite a few people who have it in


writing what the show was supposedly about and it wasn't benefits. At the


end of this experience, how do you view Channel 4 and the show itself


then? They were very clever. Obviously we can't regret. We have


done it, it has happened. People are talking about it. But basically I


think it is just the fact that it is sort of them against us. You know.


We have no reason to lie, you never said it to us. Did they lie to you?


Yes they did. People will be watching this and saying you, many


on your street have done pretty well from this, you have rocketed to


fame, you must be making money from this now aren't you? Not


necessarily. It is, a lot of people do presume, they presume that the


second you appear on the telly, all of a sudden you are getting money.


It doesn't work like that. Am I getting paid for sitting here


tonight? Your agent said that you have had a lot of offers as a result


of this? I have had a lot of offers, yeah. Are those offers that you are


getting paid for? Not all of them, no. But you are getting paid now? If


I accepted the offers then yes I would, I haven't accepted anything


at all at the moment. So you haven't made any money yet from this? As of


this precise moment in time, no. Why not? Because I don't know, it is


like if someone offers me to go on a radio station, basically I will go


on the radio station. I'm having to justify myself. And say what you


have seen is a little bit of my life. You are still on benefits now,


do you intend to stay on benefits? Not if I start getting an income. Is


that the direction you would like to go in now, you would like to earn


money from this now and come off benefits? Not necessarily from this.


But obviously I would like to get a job, yeah. A lot of people will be


watching and saying hang on a second, you are on ?214 a week, why


carry on claiming those when you, offers have been coming in, we know,


we have spoken to your agent that says there are offers on the table


now which could mean you could leave the life behind, why wouldn't you


take that? I don't want to leave my life behind. Your life on benefits


though? That is a different kettle of fish. Just because there are


offers on the table it doesn't mean I'm going to get money today,


tomorrow or next week. But you are still getting money from the


taxpayer then as things stand? I'm still on benefits because I'm not


receiving any other income at the moment. You have been asked to be on


Big Brother, is that something you will take up? Not necessarily. I


have a lot to think about, it is like they have approached, they


haven't made any offer. I don't know any figures involved. I haven't


signed anything. What about other jobs, the doors must be open to you


to do a lot of other things now. Are you applying for other jobs now? I'm


not applying for jobs at the moment. I still have my down days and up


days. I have just been thrown into the public and I just I'm not 100%


sure how to cope with it, I have never been in this situation before


with people wanting to talk to you and interview you and I have just


never, you know, it at thes completely new to me -- it's


completely new to me. Thank you for coming and talking to


us. We're going to take you through a look at some of the papers before


we da tonight. There is one which has taken the front page of the


Daily Mail. Child porn Number Ten aide arrested. They are saying one


of David Cameron's closest aides has resigned after being arrested on


child pornography allegations. Perhaps we can go to Laura. You have


been looking at this, can you shed any more light? Number Ten has


confirmed that one of David Cameron's advisers, Patrick Rock,


the deputy director of policy was arrested in the middle of last month


over allegations of child pornography and potential abuses


relating to child abuse imagery. He resigned immediately and not in his


post, Number Ten has arranged for police officers to go in and look at


files or IT that they see as being appropriate. From what we understand


there were previous allegations of harassment made against Mr Rock


while he was working in Downing Street where he has been since 2011.


Not associated to these potential charges, but interesting


nonetheless. This is tricky, embarrassing loss for Number Ten.


Not just because of the humiliation of the police having to go into


Downing Street over such kinds of allegations and also because when he


went into Downing Street he was seen as someone well trusted. He had been


in the Conservative Party for a long time and had been close to David


Cameron for a long time. They were special advisers together back in


the late 1990s. This is an embarrassment and blow for the Prime


Minister. , the I arrest of his -- the arrest of his fixer, Patrick


Rock. Any word from him th evening? No official statement. One of the


things that makes it doubly awkward is he was involved in advising the


Prime Minister on child internet pornography. Anything awkward but


right to point out we have no official statement from Mr Rock


himself. That is all for tonight, but Kirsty is here with much more


tomorrow. From all of us here good night.


A live report from Russian-controlled Crimea and the latest from the government in Kiev.

Plus, Michael Gove on what he calls the 'English disease' - judging people by the school they went to - and White Dee from Benefits Street.

Download Subtitles