06/03/2014 Newsnight


The former cop who says he infiltrated the Stephen Lawrence campaign to help stop it. Ukraine and the EU. Immigration. The man who invented Bitcoin (allegedly).

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 06/03/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Tonight, the match put in police officer who says he was sent


undercover inside the campaign to get justice for Stephen Lawrence.


What was he doing? The thing early on was to find any intelligence to


stop the campaign. Stephen Lawrence's father, Neville


Lawrence, will give his reaction. What are the limits of undercover


policing in Britain? In Brussels, despite the pressure,


the EU is finding sanctions against Iran or Syria is one thing, putting


them into practice is another. It is not easy to get your's 28 leaders to


agree on anything. They were in danger of being taken over by


events. This, believe it or not, is a


visualisation of how Bitcoin has evolved since its birth five years


ago. What is missing is the face of its creator. That has always been a


mystery. Has it now been sold? Good evening. The Lawrence family


must wonder if they will ever find the truth out about their son's


Stephen's death and the Metropolitan Police investigation into it.


Today's report by Mark Ellison is a disaster for the Met. Theresa May


called it profoundly shocking and truly chilling. Mr Ellison found


that an undercover police officer infiltrated the Lawrence family


group, spying on them in the run-up to the MacPherson Inquiry and he


also discovered evidence to suspect that one of the detectives on the


original investigation, Detective Sergeant John Davidson, acted


corruptly. There is now to be in new judge-led enquiry and Dame Doreen


Lawrence has called for proceedings against officers involved. Here is


Jim Reed. It is more than two decades since a


teenage boy was stabbed to death by a group of racist thugs in south


London. Stephen Lawrence would be 40 years old this year. What has


happened since his murder has told us something about how British


society has changed and maybe how much it has not. It has taken nearly


21 years since Stephen was killed and the fact that we as a family...


Had to go through all this and still there is more to come out. Today's


damning report is the latest embarrassment for the Metropolitan


Police in this case. Already labelled institutionally racist and


ineffectual, it was confirmed today that the force infiltrated groups to


spy on the family. Just an hour after the report went online, the


Home Secretary was on her feet to announce a public enquiry into the


use of undercover officers. Undercover officers, sometimes


working in difficult and dangerous conditions have helped bring


criminals to justice. They have stopped bad things happening in our


country. But the Ellison Review reveals very real and substantial


failings. The picture which emerges about the SDS from this report, and


from other material in the public domain, is of significant failings


of judgement, intrusive supervision and leadership. Under the spotlight


now is that Special Branch unit, the SDS, which was meant to come back --


combat domestic extremism. One of those has told us he was ordered to


undermine the Stephen Lawrence campaign. The day-to-day thing early


on was to find any information, any intelligence which could be used to


stop the campaign. It was felt by the police at that time, that that


disorder was, the campaign was being taken over by militant groups and it


was causing potential for disorder on a vast scale. So any intelligence


that could be used to stop the campaign, that is what they wanted


from me. Even more serious word the actions of another SDS officer,


still known only by his code number. According to today's report, they


infiltrated groups close to Stephen Lawrence's parents and reported back


with personal evidence about the family. The presence of this


undercover officer was highly questionable. In particular, the Met


was strongly criticised for arranging a meeting between this


bike and a senior officer, drafting a response into the MacPherson


Inquiry into the handling of the original investigation. One of the


men who raped the final MacPherson report described the actions of the


police as deplorable. What you are asking for is the damage to the


enquiry is the police were spending time about how they could defend


themselves rather than assuming the investigation. The goal was to find


better ways for policing. A second report into undercover policing


today found no evidence that police officers had intentionally smeared


the Lawrence family. We do recognise that allegations like this go to the


heart of people's trust enough as a police service. We are absolutely


clear that the work we have been doing over a number of years and the


work we have collectively done is around trying to maintain high


levels of trust and confidence in policing in London. But the role of


undercover officers there is much wider than the case of Stephen


Lawrence. It was at a safe house here in this blog in west London,


that members of the SDS or special demonstrations quad net to share


stories. Some were embedded with extreme right-wing groups, others


with environmental esters or animal-rights activists. Their role


was so secret that some senior police officers had no idea they


were next listed. The SDS was formed in 1968, in the wake of anti-Vietnam


War demos to infiltrate home-grown protest groups. By the 90s, the


target had switched to political activists. Among the most


controversial allegations, the claim that one of the operatives planted


an incendiary device on behalf of animal-rights protesters, and the


undercover police officer Mark Kennedy had sexual relations with


several women during the time he was with environmentalists. We felt we


were outside the law but we felt we were protected by another law, the


national secrets act. -- official secrets act. When some of our


officers transgressed into areas of criminality, and were investigated


by the uniform side, they always had the official secrets act blanket to


stop any serious investigation taking place. The enquiry will also


look into the allegation that the names of 42 dead children were used


to create undercover identities. In 2008, a group of environmental


activists were arrested. In a freight train at the Drax power


station. There are rich and was quashed when it emerged that


evidence was used with false identities. There are about 110


former officers, almost every one of them have got skeletons somewhere.


You would have multiple litigation claims. Claims like that could have


big implications, not just for the net but for policing across the of


the UK. The Stephen Lawrence case may have triggered what will now be


a lengthy public enquiry. The final consequences could be much wider and


far reaching than that. Some of what emerged today was not


as prize to the BBC, namely that a former Met officer, Detective


Sergeant John Davidson is suspected of corruption. In 2006, the BBC


published allegations made by a colleague of John Davidson, that he


had been taking bribes in the form of protection money, from the father


of one of Stephen Lawrence's killers, David Norris, to keep him


from prosecution. He said he was looking after Norris, that meant he


was protecting him and his family against arrests and any conviction.


You are telling me that he was corrupt and in the pocket of the


father of one of the suspects? From my conversation I had with John


Davidson on that day, I would say that John Davidson was receiving


cash from Clifford Norris. He was getting a little earner out of it.


And that in my mind was corrupt practice.


I'm joined now by Mark Daly, the reporter you saw in that clip who


has been following the story closely for several years. The film that you


made discussed and accused a police officer of corruption. What happened


next? The Lawrence family had long suspected that corruption had played


a corrosive role in the investigation of their son's murder.


This film broadcast those allegations and put them into the


public domain for the first time properly. These are allegations by


the way that John Davidson denied then and continues to deny today.


What happened next was the IPCC launched an investigation into Neil


Putnam's claims. It concluded there was no evidence to support them and


the allegations were effectively dismissed. This led to a credibility


problem for Neil Putnam, it led to the Metropolitan Police launching a


blistering attack on the BBC for what it called irresponsible and


sensationalist journalism. But thanks to the tenacity of the


Lawrences, these allegations refuse to go away. What the review today by


Mark Ellison has done, it appears to have got underneath the corruption


allegations in a way that the IPCC failed to do. The IPCC is heavily


criticised today in Ellison's report and questions will be asked why it


did not seem to see what Ellison saw. But make no mistake, today's


report is a vindication for the 2006 BBC journalism but more importantly,


it is an acknowledgement that for the first time the Lawrences were


right to be suspicious about corruption. One further point on the


interview there, Neil Putnam wanted his evidence to go forward to


MacPherson, what happened? The IPCC said they were satisfied that the


Met put everything forward to the MacPherson Inquiry. Ellison said


today that simply did not happen. The Met were in possession of


information about corruption relating to John Davidson.


MacPherson was suspicious of Davidson and had he been aware of


the existence of some of this information, his conclusions might


have been very different. But as recently as 2012, Mark Ellison has


concluded that the Met was still misleading the public and misleading


the Lawrences. They said all the information had been handed to the


enquiry when it clearly had not been. Thank you. Dame Doreen


Lawrence said the Metropolitan Police to this day cannot be


trusted. Earlier, I spoke to the policing minister Damian Green and I


started by asking him if she was right.


I do not think you can tie the whole Metropolitan Police with this


allegation. The vast majority of the police do a job which is difficult


and dangerous and with complete integrity. But what we have found


two days there were even more serious problems, both what happened


after the terrible murder of Stephen Lawrence and the whole issue of


undercover policing than we knew before which is why we have taken


the steps we have. And undercover police officer was ordered to


infiltrate the Lawrence campaign to get dirt on the Lawrence family.


Should there be criminal proceedings? It is not for


politicians to say that somebody should be accused of a crime. That


is why we have police and the Crown Prosecution Service. But clearly


there needs to be any the more thorough investigation than we have


seen in the past. MacPherson did not know there was an undercover cop


with the Lawrence camp. Does he deserve an apology? Who,


MacPherson? Yes. Everyone who has been a victim of this clearly


deserves an apology. I do not think anyone will defend the conduct of


the officers at the time who appeared to be involved in this or


those who perhaps shredded the evidence. One of the evidence --


Ella didn't -- Ellison evidence is that information was shredded.


Should the Metropolitan Police have put someone to discredit the


Lawrences? That is something for them to answer. MacPherson famously


found there was institutional racism in the Metropolitan Police at the


time. I do not think there is any more but clearly, all these issues


need to be fully investigated and we need to get to the bottom of them.


Also, Detective Sergeant John Davidson, formerly of the Met,


Ellison has looked at him and found he was trying to aid and abet Dobson


to get him off the hook, what do you make of that? What everyone else


makes of it. That sounds appalling. That is precisely why we have


introduced a raft of new actions now say that every individual aspect of


this is properly investigated either by the National crime authority, so


it is not being investigated by the Met or by a judge leading quarry. --


a judge lead in quiet. Do you think the squad was out of control at the


time? All the evidence suggests it was out of control by modern


standards throughout its existence. We have, not just this government,


previous governments have tightened up the way undercover operations can


happen. It does seem, from what we have seen from the reports, that


what was happening then was outside the rules even at the time. There


are allegations that members of the squad engaged in sexual relations in


order to hide their identities. Should there be legal redress? That


is one of the things that has been investigated by one of the


investigations into this. If illegality is proved, clearly, there


should be prosecutions. Neville Lawrence said he did not think he


could bear to go through a second enquiry. I can sympathise, but not


just the family themselves, but also society as a whole, will feel, it


has taken 20 years to get this far, it is worth getting to the truth, it


is so important, so many things seem to have gone so wrong, it is worth


carrying on. The allegation is that John Davison was aiding David


Norris, not Dobson. The Met Police's Special


Demonstrations Squad would often spend years undercover, and even


strike up romantic relationships with their target. Then, they would


disappear, leaving holes in the lives of those who had grown close


to them. We have spoken to one woman whose identity we are protecting, we


are calling her Alison. She lived with a man she did not know was an


undercover cop. At this address in Hackney in East


London nearly 20 years ago, a group of political activists would meet.


They were a broad church of campaigners. One day, a new member


presented himself, not the predictable middle-class north


London. He was working-class, from Liverpool. He had a van to get the


group around in. We are in the A1, heading north. To one woman, he was


down-to-earth, practical, sociable and warm. She fell in love with him.


This is Alison's story. How would you describe your life together with


him? It is characterised by Thomas display. -- domestic life. He was


fully integrated with my friends and family. We led a conventional life


in many ways, I was a schoolteacher, he used to get up


early. I thought he then went to work. His name was Mark Cassidy, he


began a sexual relationship with Alison. He moved into her house and


lost to live with her there for four years. Eventually, Alison wanted


children. Mark said he was not ready. For a year, they went to


relationship counselling. She went into detail about her background, in


contrast, his story was scant. He was skilled at averting attention


away from himself. At the time, he seemed humble and charming. But


Alison suspected something was being kept from her. She discovered a


credit card in a different name and challenged him. He said, I cannot


believe how stupid I have been. Please, do not tell anyone, I bought


it in a pub, I have only used it once, to buy petrol. Please promise


never to tell anyone, I am so ashamed to appear like a petty


thief. I put it over the dustbin and cut it up. I never told anybody. The


break-up was convoluted. According to Alison, he behaved as though he


were clinically depressed. She found a goodbye letter on the kitchen


table. She called him in hysterics, he came back, briefly. A few weeks


later, he left for good. What effect did his disappearance have? It was


devastating, like a bereavement, it was so sudden. Without explanation.


I could not grieve in any normal way, because in a normal


relationship, somebody leaves you, there are normally family members or


friends who you might have in common you can talk to. You might get some


answers. Doubles the end, they were out walking when Alison spotted a


car driving past them repeatedly. She said she thought they were being


followed, he said not to worry. After he left, she became paranoid.


In the middle of the night, I would look out the window, at 3am, 4am,


logging the number plates of cars that were outside my house, and


logging the times they were there. On my way to work, park keepers


would smile or nod at me, I would think they were members of the


state, keeping tabs on me. I was acutely paranoid, very frightened


and very disturbed. That lasted for several years. She try to find out


who the man she shared her bed with for nearly five years really was.


She could only find out who he was not, and that was Mark Cassidy. I


went to the family records office, and I searched for his father's


death, because I knew the dates when his father died, and there was no


record. I hired a private detective to do a run on his national


insurance number and other details. All this person could prove was that


he was not who he said he was, there was no record at the DVLA and other


places. Eventually, she learned he was Mark Jenner, and undercover


police officer working for an elite division of the Metropolitan Police.


Further investigations revealed the time of their village and ship -- at


the time of their relationship, he was married with three young


children. I suspect he was going home, to his wife and children. He


was a strong personality. I loved him very much, I'm sure they do.


Alison eventually rebuilt her life. She has two children. But she says


her experience made her feel as though she had been raped by the


state. She is now taking a civil case against five police officers.


She wants to know what information the Met Police holds on her and


whether they knew about and authorised the intimate relationship


that Mark Jenner sustained with her for so long. She agreed to this


interview because she believes the police will ask the courts to


dismiss the case on the grounds that continued secrecy is vital to


operational security. We approached Mark Jenner for a


response to Alison's claims, but he did not provide any comment. The


police gave a statement which said, there is a thorough review and light


investigation... Fear our Neville Lawrence -- here


are Neville Lawrence, Janet Hill 's and Peter Kirk. We will talk about


the wider issue of undercover policing, but let's deal with the


report. Can you give me your reaction? I was there the stated


when I listened to the Home Secretary talking about something


that we have been talking about for 21 years. I felt I knew this was


happening, but to hear this being said so the wider world could hear,


I was vindicated that my family had been talking about this, and if


people had listened earlier, every thing would have been different.


What did it feel like, knowing you were being spied upon? I did not


realise all know that I was spied upon, I just had feelings. Because


of the attitude of the three officers who came to my house on the


morning after Stephen's death, who was not prepared to tell us how he


died or even said what had happened, I felt they were not being


helpful at all. Every time we as Christians, they would not answer.


-- every time we were asking questions. They were asking who the


people were in my house. I said, these people had nothing to do with


my son's death. Could there be any justification whatsoever with


putting undercover officers into the family campaign? There could not if


that was the aim, to gather evidence to discredit the family. If you read


what Mark Ellison has found, the right hand of the much about and


police, the murder enquiry, did not ask the left-hand to do anything.


The left-hand hammer a secret unit within a secret unit, was charged


with looking at the issues of trying to prevent serious violent disorder,


you have got to look at the context, there had been violent disorder, the


Met Police would have been failing if it did not ask itself, is the


issue of the enquiry, are the problem is going to rebound into


major public disorder? But we have heard from a former officer who


alleges that he was part of that operation. That what he was being


asked to do was to discredit the family. It does not matter, it is


the Met Police. I would challenge you and say, you analyse what he


says, he does not say that at all. He says he is being asked for


information, and the officer was deployed not into the family got


into one of the campaign creeps that was seeking to influence and attach


themselves to the campaign. -- the campaign troops.


We were not part of any kind, we were not affiliated to any violent


things. Nobody said that. What you just said implied that, there were


bad things going on. If the various groups that were affiliating


themselves... You are a serving officer. In your view, was there any


justification for putting undercover officers into any aspect of the


campaign? With undercover policing, it has its place. But it still needs


to act within the law. There needs to be accountability and scrutiny


around what it is they do. Should they have been involved in this


campaign? No, it is as simple as that. What was the impact of that,


in terms of how they were conducting the investigation? It clouded the


issue of the murder, the racist murder, of Stephen Lawrence.


Therefore, they never got to the truth of it. This is about trust,


and for do, you were involved with an undercover officer, not that you


knew, tell me how you felt when you found out that you had been duped.


It is hugely shocking, it affects your sense of trust and judgement, I


was one of thousands of people who had been duped by hundreds of


officers, you have got a whole policing culture, they try to tell


us it was one rogue unit, but now there is a whole policing culture


that can differentiate between a threat to national security and a


threat to police could ability. Damian Green said that the problem


with the Special Demonstrations Squad. They were completely out of


control. I agree, but they have been around since 1968, created at the


behest of politicians, they were funded by the Home Office, big-time,


they were secret within a secret organisation. They were secret even


within special Branch. And yet Peter Francis said he was congratulated. I


am not saying they did not know about it, but they were not known


widely within the organisation. Janet, you say there is a role for


undercover operations, what do the parameters have to be? Doing to a


job as a police officer, you are policing by consent. Even though


they are doing an area of work which is vital to policing, they still


have to come under the same regulations, they still have to be


accountable and open to the public scrutiny. The whole question on this


case, what will that do to trust, particularly in the black community?


It is another knock-on effect of the trust and confidence within the


black community. A lot of people say, this is no set prize. It does


nothing to increase that trust and confidence -- this is no surprise.


In the case of Alison who is bringing a case, can there ever be


any justification for what happened to her? Personally, I do not think


so but that is part of a much wider issue. That will be one thing you


welcome, but how confident are you that finally the truth will out?


From what happened with MacPherson, I'm very, very wary about what will


happen now. The Metropolitan Police seemed to be always trying to hide


what they are and put a different face out there all the time. I now


feel that we will never be able to trust these people. Thank you very


much indeed. Today Yulia Tymoshenko, the Ukranian


leader recently released from jail, called on Europe to take a strong


line over any attempt by Crimea to join Russia. She warned that


otherwise Vladimir Putin would move to take over the rest of Ukraine.


Her words were intended to galvanise today's emergency EU summit in


Brussels, where it was decided to suspend talks with Russia on an


economic pact and visa agreement. But the EU moves are far less


stringent than actions taken by America, and some European members


think Brussels needs to toughen up. Our diplomatic editor Mark Urban is


in Brussels. On Brussels' Churchill Avenue,


appeasement, -- appeasement's greatest oppose meant is honoured.


Leading the charge to get health measures against Russia, Poland and


the Baltic republics. Russia is not keeping at all its obligations,


neither economic nor international agreements. If Europeans will be


only talking, complaining or discussing, Russia is doing. At the


centre of it is Ukraine's acting Prime Minister, here to lobby the


big EU players who have so far failed to back meaningful sanctions


against Russia, trying to impress on them the importance of this moment.


We are really grateful to our European partners, to the heads of


state, heads of government, for having these kind of talks with


Ukrainian government, in order to stabilise the situation in Ukraine


and fix this ongoing political, economic and military crisis. While


they spoke, Russian deputies in Crimea, an autonomous region of


Ukraine, tried to upstage the EU by voting to bring forward a referendum


on joining Russia. All the time, thousands of Russian troops besieged


Ukrainian bases in the territory. Some are pessimistic that situation


can be reversed. No one can win if there are foreign ships which are


going further and further. I do not know how realistic it is but at


least we have to work for it. The meeting ended with an agreement on a


3-phase approach, steps towards a new visa situation for Russians,


giving Ukraine $15 billion aid package and a commitment to


introduce sanctions such as travel bans and asset seizures against


Russians, if they do step back. Do you think it will be possible to


agree a swift transition into those measures if circumstances require


it? First of all, I think Russia is more dependent on the European Union


than the other way round. But I think yes, we are prepared to take a


third step if we do not see a de-escalation in the conflict


because I think we understand what is at stake here. We now have a


Russian president, Russian country which actually excuses in fading


another country, just by pointing at people saying we are Russians, we


feel threatened. We cannot find these people but that is how they


talk about it and that kind of reaction is in conflict with


international law, with the security structure we have built up together


since the end of the Cold War. So there are real stakes that we now


need to meet. The EU's measures might be limited but they are more


than many who arrived here this morning expected. The diplomats are


of the view that external pressures, for example from Russian deputies in


the Crimea, or from the White House announcing its own sanctions against


Russia, may have tipped the balance and convinced the doubters led by


Germany to sign up to this new package. Perhaps also the sense of


that burden of history will influence their deliberations. David


Cameron did not mention Churchill by name but he certainly alluded to his


legacy. We know from our history that turning a blind eye when


nations are trampled over, that stores up greater problems in the


long run. With the leaders departed and Crimean referendum now ten days


away, it is clear the moment could still be upon us when those


additional sanctions agreed-upon today will either have to be


implemented or shown up as so much waste paper.


On Tuesday, Newsnight revealed the Government was suppressing a


slightly embarrassing report on the impact of immigration on


unemployment. And both Conservative and Lib Dem ministers have been


trading blows on the issue. Chris Cook, our policy editor who broke


the story, reports. It must have been an exhausting


night for someone in these buildings. This morning, the Home


Office and business department published a report into the impact


of immigration on unemployment. Two days ago we were told it was an


internal report, not intended for release. Yesterday, we were told it


was not ready for publication. But this morning, by some miracle, it


was published. So here it is. And it is nuanced. On the one hand, it


shows immigration is not associated with a rise in unemployment among


British people during normal times. That is irritating for the


Conservatives who are trying to cut immigration. On the other hand, it


does say that non-EU immigration during recession does create


temporary unemployment among British people. That is irritating for the


Lib Dems who are generally more relaxed about immigration. Will this


document provides a foundation for a new coalition solidarity on


immigration? Well... No. Vince Cable has made a number of statements


about immigration in the last week and to be frank, a lot of them were


simply incorrect. Wrong, wrong, wrong again. Not much nuance on


display from the Immigration Minister this morning. How about his


Home Office colleague Damian Green? We are two different parties in the


coalition. We believe in controlling immigration, the Liberal Democrats


appear to not believe in that. Not very friendly either. How is the


Business Secretary Vince Cable feeling? I do not want to get into a


personal argument with a junior colleague. I want to stick to facts.


The fact is our two departments have published a report today which shows


quite clearly that overall there is very little impact on migrant


workers displacing British jobs when the economy is growing. There is


research from UCL showing there is an effect on wages at the lower end


from immigration. If you are one of the people affected by that, the


fact that the national effect of that is quite small will not be much


of a consolation will it? We have got to look at the facts. The


evidence is such that does suggest that when we have had periods of


very deep recession as we had in 2000 and nine and 2010, some British


workers were displaced. We have to be honest and upfront about that.


The negative effects do bear down on the unskilled. For that reason we do


not argue for unlimited immigration. Are you more sympathetic to


immigration by no Conservative colleagues because you think the


researcher shown it is positive or because you are a liberal who thinks


people should have self-determination? A lot of my


Conservative colleagues agree with me, particular things like overseas


students when they are worried that damage is being done to the British


economy by excessive bureaucratic controls. I may have use as an


individual on the subject and I am an economist and I like to think I


understand economic data which is quite clear in this case, and I am


actually arguing as head of a major government department, that is here


to promote economic growth and recovery, and that includes having


an open approach to good, skilled migrant workers and overseas


students. That is the battle I am fighting. The indication is you


might take a different view if you were at the Home Office. I do not


criticise. Theresa May and James broke and try our colleagues in


government. They interpret their job in a way which fits their


departmental expertise. Today's report did not contain a killer fact


for the opponents or supporters of immigration reform. It was supposed


to settle arguments about the Labour impact on immigration. It did not


manage that. And this is an area where the impact of immigration is


relatively simple. Don't expect a coalition reconciliation on


immigration any time soon. Chris joins us now. Where first of


going to see the impact of that fault line. The European elections


will be the next obvious place. The Conservatives and Lib Dems are


slightly different in shaping themselves. Also remember that Nick


Clegg will be debating with Nigel Farage the UKIP leader. One of the


interesting things in this immigration reporters while there


are substantial effects... Sorry, while there are significant findings


relating to non-EU migration during a recession, one of this things that


researchers can find is an impact on EU migration. If there is this


debate between Clegg and Nigel Farage, the danger is Nigel Farage


makes Liberal Democrats look weak on immigration, it then serves to make


the Conservative look stronger which will not do Nigel Farage much good?


Not at all. One of the things we put to Vince was whether we thought that


he thought he was on the centre ground. He gave us a slightly feeble


answer. Vince cable likes to bring things bubbling up to the surface


and when he has got a bit of traction on it he sets things


underground again. You No he was not keen to have this story rumbling on


for a day or so. Will we now see the fault line on immigration carry us


all the way to the general election? I do not think it will close up.


There are serious philosophical differences. Reasonable people can


differ about this. It is not just economics. There is also culture,


religion and race even. Thank you. We do apologise for not being able


to bring the Bitcoin story to you. Our line to America has gone down.


We have tomorrow's front pages for you.


In the Daily Telegraph, Baroness Lawrence addresses the House of


Lords. And further down, the US sends six fighter jets to the


Baltic. Just before we finish, we go back to


the Daily Telegraph and a story there that actually, the Vicar of


Diddley, Dawn French, is to deliver the thought for the Day on March the


29th. That is it from us which was also a World Book Day. To celebrate,


children across the country went to school dressed as their favourite


literary characters. To honour all their parents' efforts, we thought


the final note tonight should go to the children of Muswell Hill Primary


School in North London. Good night. Hello, the rain will peter out.


Brighter skies following. Let's take a closer look around. A cold wind


across Northern Ireland. Particularly cold across Scotland.


There are snow showers. Further south into northern England, Chile


and the sunshine compensating. -- the winds are chilly. Not bad going


for the early part of March. A lovely afternoon for south-west


England. 12 degrees will feel quite pleasantly warm. More of a breeze in


Wales taking the edge across the temperatures but quite a springlike


day. Pleasant enough tomorrow once the sun breaks through.


Download Subtitles