27/03/2014 Newsnight


Analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines with Laura Kuenssberg, including gay marriages, carbon emissions in oceans and Afghanistan war veterans.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 27/03/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



thanks to an invitation to a gay wedding. A poll says one in five of


us would refusing to. As the new comes into force on Saturday, choirs


and couples across England warm up for the big day. Being married by a


gay Irish registrar and Britain's longest serving female black


registrar, and that is happening in the heart of the country. That is


what makes Britain great for me. Why do some people not want to witness


the new kind of "I do". We know about global warming but are quash


Bonn emissions turning our oceans into acid. These bubbles seep out of


volcanic vents, this gives scientists a clue what oceans will


look like as man made O2 gets dissolved into sea water everywhere.


The trauma of Afghan war veterans as told by their children. He pulled me


under the table and said take cover because the door banged and it made


a loud noise like a bomb! . Good evening, witnesses to wedding


ceremonies have been asked for centuries to support the happy


couple with a rousing "we will". But for gay marriage, legal from


midnight tomorrow t appears a sizeable chunk of the population


would still say, "we will not". An exclusive poll said we would refuse


to attend a friend or relative's wedding if it was to the same-sex.


With the Archbishop's announcement that the church may be softening. Is


it stubborn prejudice that refuses to disappear of the or has the law


run ahead what some parts of society find difficult to accept. The music


might be traditional, and the lyrics from the Middle Ages, but the event


is very modern. This weekend the Fourth Choir, formed six months ago


by members of London's gay community will be performing live at a series


of events in the capital. 47 years after homosexuality was legalised,


nine years after the first civil partnerships, same-sex couples are


about to get the right to marry. One of the first couples to exchange


vows will be John and his Spanish fiance Barnardo. Their wedding just


past the stroke of midnight on Saturday is being filmed and


broadcast next week on BBC London. When we get married tomorrow night


it will be the first time in our history in the gay community you


have total equality. But there is a long way to go in hearts and minds,


there is homophobia there. We live a very boring, for us it is a


contented life here, and when you read homophobic sort of comments in


the newspaper, you listen to what people have to say about us, and the


recent floods apparently because of gay marriage, this is a monster out


there that doesn't exist. A poll for BBC five life -- BBC five live show


just how far things have come on It was especially true of young


voters. Eight out of ten supported gay marriage compared with 44% of


over 65s. Four out of ten still don't see same-sex marriage equal to


hetrosexual marriage. And 22% of British adults wouldn't


attend a ceremony. It is only 22%, that is a huge change to 40 years


ago when I was going to school and realised that I was gay. I think


that's quite encouraging it is only 22%. For those 22%, they are missing


great party. This change to the law still leaves some loose ends, it


won't be possible to convert a civil partnership into full marriage until


next year. As things stand same-sex couples will still struggle to get


married in most churches. In an interview with the Guardian


tomorrow, the Archbishop of Canterbury will signal he accepts


gay marriage will soon be law and says he will not resist the change,


but Anglican Clergy will still be banned from conducting same-sex


ceremonies. Sharon Ferguson is the Pastor of the metropolitan community


church a non-C of E congregation. It is sad for members of the lesbian


gay and Christian movement who are members of the Church of England. It


is sad for them, whilst they could go to other churches who are


registered, they are not going to be able to get married within the


church where they perhaps regularly worship. And that is a sad


situation. It is very sad for the priests within the Church of England


who would like to be able to marry members of their congregation as


well. This Saturday is then an important date for the gay rights


movement, a time of celebration for many. But the day when same-sex


marriage really means completely equal marriage may still be some way


off. With us to talk about this tonight are my guests. Melanie, this


poll suggests there is a sizeable minority of people who just wouldn't


go to a gay wedding. Why do you think that is the case? Speaking for


myself I'm very much in favour of going to a party, and never


knowingly turn down a wedding invitation, but if one is opposed to


the principle of gay marriage it would be a bit hypocritical to go to


the ceremony. You clearly would not attend a gay wedding, even if it was


from a close relative or a good friend? As I say I would be loathe


to turn down a fabulous party but I think it would be hypocritical if I


were to do so because I have an objection in principle to the notion


of gay marriage, though I would perfectly happily attend a civil


partnership ceremony. Is it the reality that politicians pushed


through this legislation for gay marriage specifically at such a


speed that some parts of society just haven't been willing yet to


accept that. And they have the right not to? They have the right not to,


they perfectly have the right not to go to celebrate the relationships,


the family bonds of even people they know very well. That's people's


liberty. Certainly politicians sometimes push something through


that they believe is right, even if they don't think that everybody is


with them. Even if they think that it's a minority this is going to


benefit. But in this case the politicians I believe took the view


this it wasn't going to affect every member of society, it was going to


affect a small minority, a relatively small minority about 10%


of the population, but for those people it is going to change their


lives, it really is. For the rest of the population who it is going to


affect them indirectly or it might not affect them at all. I think they


just did the right thing. Why do you think there are still a sizeable


chunk of society, a sizeable chunk like Melanie who wouldn't want to go


because they still object? I think it is unfamiliarity to be honest, in


most cases I think it is unfamiliarity. It would be


interesting to see if the 22%, if they had spent time or related to


gay person. But for Melanie it is not familiarity it is an objection


to the principle, there are still many people still object to the


principle? People are entitled to their own principles, people don't


have to go to parties. I really don't mind Melanie's freedom of


speech, she can protest against my wedding outside my wedding if she


wants, we will bring her out a Di Canio pay. Melanie sometimes -- A


canepe. Isn't it up to politicians to lead public opinion? I think also


they have to saying could go conthis sans of -- cognissance of the people


too, and he was out-of-touch with his own party and even his own


mother. Plenty of people opposed the idea of giving people the vote and


divorce law, minorities can't always get their way? I'm in entirely in


favour of politicians acting on principle, one could only hope they


did so more often. You are suggest ago principle when it is one you


agree with. Do you accept the status of gay relationship is the same in


status as that between a man and a woman? No, because it lacks the


potential fruitfulness of a hetrosexual relationship, which


isn't to say it isn't a good and valuable thing in itself, but it


lacks that element which is fundamental to matterage. --


Marriage. That is something I can't engage with, there are very happy


marriages of all sorts that have no prospect of fruitfulness. But how do


you feel tonight when this is the law that is changing tomorrow at


midnight when you still hear that? I'm very relaxed about difference of


opinion, so long as this difference of opinion doesn't then descend and


presume to tell me how I may live my life with my husband. Briefly who


has had an invite yet? I haven't, oddly enough. Maybe that is my


reckless and friends going on living in sin, I don't know. Melanie, even


the receptions not the first part of the ceremony? Tragically not even to


a civil partnership which I would like to attend very much. One can


wish people well in their relationships even if one stops at


celebrating and reworking the institution. Thank you for coming


in. It will be facinating to see how this all unfolds. 15 years of


privatisation and we still haven't got it right. It is not much


surprise to energy customers staggered by rises in their bills.


But should we be puzzled that the energy regulator seems to have just


cottoned on to the fact that the market doesn't work that well.


Politicians have been falling over themselves to welcome the idea of


investigating the big six energy companies. But Ofgem's review of the


sector doesn't really tell us that much we didn't know. Is our policy


editor asking why start another investigation now, could it just be


a political fix? More to the point perhaps is it a good idea? We like


competition, it is supposed to bring the best out of people. It is meant


to create fitter, faster and crucially leaner specimens. But in


the energy market it hasn't quite had the effects that some had hoped


for. Between 2009 and 2013 energy prices rose by 24%. Over the same


period, other prices only rose by 1%. Profit margin force the so


called "big six" energy companies rose too, from under 1% on sales of


gas and electricity up to 4. 3%, hardly scandalous numbers, but it is


a sustained rise. That's why, as you will know unless you have been


living without power for the last year, energy has become a major


political flash point. Ed Miliband, the Labour leader, has promised to


freeze prices for 20 months while he holds major reforms of the energy


market. But today, Ofgem, the independent energy regulator has


gone ahead of him. It has asked the competition authorities to hold an


investigation into the energy markets. What will they be looking


at? In an ideal world you will have some competition in the market and


some switching between pliers suppliers, that should drive down


prices for everyone. But energy companies use sophisticated analysis


to understand different behaviours for different groups of customers.


When they work out that a certain group of customers are unlikely to


switch under any circumstances, they charge them a high price. And for


the customers they think are likely to switch they offer them a very low


price, what actually happens is you have a competitive market that only


some get the benefit of. There are barriers for smaller independent


companies that want to enter the market. Not least that with almost


two thirds of people never having consciously switched suppliers they


struggle to grow. Some companies also find they can make more money


if they stay small. That all means there is a lack of new competitors


and that might be why Ofgem suspects so called "tacit co-ordination"


between the big six. That doesn't mean that Ofgem thinks the major


energy suppliers are running some sort of cartel, it is just that


without effective competition they tend to move a little bit more like


a pack than they ought to, and don't do enough jostling for new


customers. That is why, Ofgem suspect, they are quite fast to put


up prices when costs rise, and pretty slow to pass on savings when


the prices fall. This is nothing new, it helps the Government and


causes a problem for Labour, it makes it harder for them to campaign


on energy, some are suspicious. Unfortunately Ofgem have appeared to


have bowed to both political and media pressure to be seen to be


doing something. Which is understandable that they have done


that, but it does undermine both their credibility as an independent


regulate to and it does I'm afraid damage independent economic


regulation for the UK. Government insiders deny actively pushing


Ofgem, they say the regulator feels it should have held this review


years ago. But some energy companies say it is going to cause them


trouble. Centrica has told journalists today that plans to


invest in gas-pyred powertation -- gas-fired power stations have been


delayed. We wouldn't want to delay diversing in a few years time. Our


investors would naturally want us to wait and see the outcome of this


review. Of course Centrica is one of the regins energy market champions.


Unsurprisingly smaller companies who have much more to win from easier


competition are a lot keener on a review that might give them just


that. Earlier I went to speak to the new boss of the regulator, Ofgem,


Dermot Nolan. Given your report does not come up with new analysis and


talk about persistent problems, either job Geoff just hasn't --


Ofgem hasn't been doing its job and there should have been an inquiry


much, much earlier or this is a result of political pressure? This


is nothing to do with political pressure. I would like to stress


very clearly this is three independent organisation, three


independent boards, all looking at the evidence, all forming the view


and coming to a very clear and unambiguous answer that the market


is not working well. But a few months ago there were plenty of


insiders in the industry who believed your review wouldn't turn


up very much new. You haven't turned up very much new, what is new is


that last month the Secretary of State wrote a very public letter


saying that he wanted there to be a reference. If that isn't political


interference and pressure what is? What is the case is that the


evidence is persistent, I want to stress that, persistent, clear,


easily meets the test in our view for a market reference. Persistent


evidence over time that competition is not working effectively. The


Secretary of State wrote, the Secretary of State is perfectly


entitled to many reviews Today energy companies have said


they will move out of other projects. You will note most of the


companies will welcome the view. That is because they thought it was


inevitably going to happen? They offered it as an opportunity to


state their case and make sure the competition is effective. They will


have every opportunity to make their case. Investors like certainty and


will need to be reassured that consumer trust is still in the


market. That is very much the right thing. We are taking actions to make


sure the lights stay on in the short-term in any case. To make sure


the lights stay on in ten, 20, 50 years at affordable prices it will


what the review will help. Some politician, particularly Labour this


morning, are suggesting that the fact after years there should be a


reference, suggests that Ofgem has basically failed in its job, there


should be a replacement, Ofgem has wasted years, this review should


have taken place a long time ago? Ofgem has not wasted years at all.


It has put in place good recommendation that is will improve


consumer experience and engagment. Not if it is allowed this


anti-competitive behaviour to go on? It has seen a consistent pattern,


that is why the markets authority set up in legislation to look at the


very issues, was set up to say if a market isn't working well it should


be referred to the competitions and markets authority. What consumers


don't like is high prices. And high prices have been driven in the main


by the rise in wholesale gas prices and there is nothing that a


competition review can do about that. Two things on that I


absolutely accept that the main driver of electricity prices is


fossil fuel price, that is something we can't effect, it is something we


are stuck -- affect, that is something we are struck with. This


review won't affect prices in the main? It will, given the fact we


can't affect fossil fuel prices it is more incumbent on us to


concentrate the resources on the areas of price we can affect. All


the suggestions that effective competition can drive prices. A


final thought, given that prices are some of the lowest for UK consumers


in Europe. We pay some of the cheapest price, do consumers have to


wise up? No, as I said earlier, consumers I understand, we listened


to them, they are concerned about the scale of increases. They don't


trust the sector so they need that confidence restored. That confidence


can be restored best through an independent, thorough and exhaustive


process. But prices will go on going up any way, what is the point?


Prices may go up, it depends on fossil fuels. We need to bear down


on the areas of price West can affect. If we can drive those down


consumers will have more trust. Thank you very much indeed.


We're used to hearing politicians and bunked pundits talk about


climate change. But we have an alarm now about C O2 in the seas.


Scientists say the gas in the oceans are turning it to acid, at levels


not seen for 300 million years. As we discovered that means danger for


life under the water. These bubbles are poisoning the sea. They are


carbon dioxide, as they dissolve they make carbonic acid. This unique


site off the tip of Papua New Guinea is nature's warning as humans pump


out more and more C O2, because it is clear that many creatures won't


survive. These bubbles seep out of volcanic vents and they are making


the water here much more naturally acidic. This spot gives scientist as


clue as to what the world's oceans will look like. As emissions of man


made CO2 continues to get dissolved into sea water everywhere.


We have been invited to join a scientific research boat on a


journey to the volcanic vents. We're not the only ones curious. Sea water


is already about 30% more acidic since we started burning fossil


fuels. That could be five times worse by the end of the century. It


is bad news for this part of the ocean the coral triangle, the most


deverse ecosystem in the seas. The impact of rising emissions will fall


on countries like Papua New Guinea, which rely on the coral for a


living. With a dawning awareness of its own fragile environment. The


research team arrive at the island with its own volcano, right on what


is known as the Pacific ring of fire. But first they need permission


from the villagers for their research, they own the reef. The


bubbles here they are carbon dioxide, it is clean but a gas that


is also in the air, and especially if person countries burn so much


fuel and coal there is more of this gas in the air and it goes into the


ocean. Welcome. Katerina is the expedition leader, she's collecting


samples from the boulder corals, they are stuff enough to cope with


high CO2, she's also laying a tape, starting at the volcanic events and


stretch ago I way to the point where the effect of the bubbles has


disappeared. Here it is. You don't need a science degree to see the


difference. These spectacular corals provide shelter for juvenile fish.


They can't survive under conditions of high CO2. We are losing a lot of


biodiversity, coral reefs are really suffering, and they are built out of


calcium cabonate which is highly sensitive to more acidic waters.


Once we lose the structure in it we are losing the biodiversity. Another


experiment, dislodging boxes they fix today the seabed two years ago.


The boxes are designed to attract creatures looking for a home. This


site has the level of CO2 expected in all the oceans for the end of the


century. The experimental boxes come on shore for analysis. They will use


DNA testing to establish how many species have taken up residence. We


need to work very quickly here, because a lot of the creatures here


are releasing toxins out as we speak, and those toxins are killing


the creatures living in the sampling device and we are losing their DNA.


She can make a preliminary assessment just by looking. I'm


extremely surprised by how poor this is. Usually I'm used to seeing a lot


of groups, so a lot of different crabs and a lot of different


mollesc. Here I only see a few. A day later s examples the sample from


the unpolluted site. Today this tray is full of organism, lots of


different species. They are all different, it is very diverse this


tray. All the species are the building blocks of the diversity of


the reef and the base of the food chain. The tiny features will have


their DNA established back in the lab, so the work is not finished.


But it is a warning, a warning that's welcomed by the people in the


frontline. The rich world is slowly wake to go


what they call the other carbon problem. I have tracked the acid


oceans story for a decade now, it is still largely unknown to the public,


but some Governments are taking notice. In Townsville on the


north-east coast of Australia, a new centre researches the impact on the


seas of high CO2, this research facility uses industrial technology.


This is a brand-new build to go try to address the issue of ocean


acidcation. It helps her to further her experiments from the field. We


still know very little about what it does to the different life stages


and we can use the organisms we are keeping here, put them under


controlled conditions and then test what temperature and what ocean


carbon does to the organisms. We can manipulate the nutrients, the carbon


eye dock side in the -- dioxide in the water and in a fairly controlled


way. Many species will lose under the changes to come, but seaweed


will gain, and that is not all. Our hypothesis is as corals decline,


sponges may do better. This tiny animal here is a one-year-old


sponge, and this sponge is jam packed with tiny microscopic


bacteria that contribute to the nutrition of the animal. What we are


proposing is this bacteria may photo syntesise more under CO2 enabling


them to grow faster and do better in the CO2 world. It sounds like a good


thing for the ecosystem? It depends, they essentially filter the reef,


and if there is contaminants they can be sensitive to that, they are


filtering all the compounds out of the water. They can also


potentionally, if there is a huge biomass of sponges create what we


all feeding shadow, areas where they have removed all the nutrients out


of the water, which wouldn't provide sufficient nutrition for other


animal who is live on the reef. As the scientists are finding, once you


start shifting the brick that is build an ecosystem, it is immposible


to say exactly what will happen. On the boat they are working late to


try to wrap up today's experiments. Scientists have made enough progress


already in this new field of research to know that CO2 will bring


enormous changes on the oceans. What I know as a scientist is what we are


recording here is pure chemistry and physics. The carbon dioxide in the


air is going into the ocean and making the ocean more acidic,


because it is one chemical of carbon eye dock side and one of water it


forms carbonic acid. We know what we are doing, it is


time to wake up to the reality that we just can't continue as we do


today. For more than 10,000 troops at its peak to now just two bases


remaining in Helmand Province where much of the war's worst fighting has


taken place, British forces have been involved in Afghanistan for 13


years, 448 have died. Operations will finish by the end of this year.


But the experiences of those who fought will stay with them and with


their families and their children. The BBC's children's programme,


newsround, has been hearing some of their stories, here are Nathanal and


Ellie. My brother he was searching for IEDs and he was going along a


bridge and he stood on one and got blown up. We got to see him in


intensive care. I remember walking in and just thinking it was all a


bad dream that and I would wake up soon. It just kicked in and it was


really emotional. I couldn't believe that he was there, my brother,


laying in a coma. It is unbearable when you walk in there and see him.


He didn't look like he was going to make it at all. I don't understand


why we went into Afghanistan, because so many people have either


died or been injured out there. I don't understand why we had to go


over there in the first place. When he's by himself, when he thinks that


no-one can see he's pretty down. You can't really see any physical


injuries on my dad, but he suffers with mind injuries, because of what


he has been through in the war. When he came back from the army I found


it hard to cope because every time there was a loud noise or like the


wind or anything like that, he would shut the doors through the house, if


there was a window open he pulled me under the table one time and said


"take cover", because the door banged and it made a loud noise like


a bomb. He used to scream in his sleep and shout. I would wake up and


think "my dad's a freak". He found a way of coping with it and it was to


put a war film on or a loud film. He had to sleep with the film on to be


in that atmosphere again. The thing I struggled with is he wouldn't talk


to me about it. He doesn't really show emotions, he never cries. His


saying is "the weak only cry". With us now is retired Brigadier Mike


Griffiths, the former director of personnel for the British Army, who


lost his own son in the war on Afghanistan. And went on to train


visiting officers who break the news to friends and family. We have heard


how profoundly the families are affected. And you have seen this on


both sides. Yes I have. My son was wounded in Afghanistan in 2010. He


survived the IED and was flown home. Rather like you saw in the film


became back to the ICU in Birmingham where he lived for 12 days and sadly


succumbed to his injuries on the 5th of September 2010. I have seen that


side and I have also been on the knock when somebody has come to your


door to tell you that your son has been hurt. How did you find out? I


was actually on leave and my wife was about to go out the door to


work, she's a midwife. And there was a knock on the door and it was my


boss, he was stood there, and there was absolutely no reason for him to


be there. As soon as I saw him I knew it was going to be bad news. In


fact the bad news was bad, but actually he was alive, he was in


surgery and he had a fighting chance. So from immense low we


picked ourselves up, prepared to go to Birmingham because there was


still hope. And then once he was in hospital you were there obviously as


a military man, but as a father, a family member, presumably before


anything else? Oh definitely, and Andrew flew home with Darren who was


wounded the day before in the same company. The family were all there


too and many other families. But of course we were close because our


boys had been together and had been wounded almost on the same day. So,


yes you are, you are just a father, you are part of a machine that picks


you up and looks after you, amazingly well I have to say. They


took the load off us so we could concentrate on one thing, and one


thing only, which was Andrew. And then you spent your professional


time trying to train others to help families more effectively. But how


do you prepare people for that knock, how do you cope with that


doing the knock from the other side? The army has taken the view that we


do it by regimental systems, so that when the person comes to the house


they are from the same unit, the same organisation as the man or


woman who has been injured or indeed has died. And so what you have got


automatically is the regimental family helping to support people


through it. Which is hugely important. That's our decision. We


have also taken a very conscious view that the person who gives the


bad news is not the person who looks after you long-term. So we have a


notifying officer and then a visiting officer, so that actually


that awful news which really does hurt, immediately almost within


hours, somebody else is there who actually brings in all the welfare


support and other agency, they almost come as a sort of package to


look after you. A very professional system then,


perhaps. But still a human-to-human contact that must have a profound


impact? It does, and most of these people are volunteers, and we don't


train them separately, so this is in addition to their day job. And most


of them take a huge pride in doing it properly, because it is a fellow


soldier. And of course they are human and some things don't go as


well as they could do. Is it made harder when it is a conflict like


Afghanistan and there has been a lot of public misgiving about it for the


families, for your family. Was it worth it? That is the most difficult


question to answer. I take great comfort in the fact that Andrew was


doing a job he absolutely loved, he was a good soldier, he was a good


officer and he died in the service of his nation. And I hope that this


nation respect that and will respect all those others who died alongside


him. But as father that is a very difficult question to answer on


daily basis in a positive way. Do you think you will ever be able to


answer it? I'm very proud of my son, I'm also proud of having been in the


army for all those years, and I'm proud of a nation that sends its men


and women to international operations rather than just a nation


who looks its own borders. And I think being part of a nation like


that should make us all proud. So I'm enormously proud. Thank you so


much for coming in and sharing air memories of your son and your own


experiences thank you. Democracies are rarely born without pain, but


after just three years, post the revolution, has Egypt given up all


together. The head of the army, Abudl Al Sisi, has surrounded his


job, but not to retire quietly, but to stand as the country's President.


Despite violence against his opponent as swell of popular support


looks likely to put the strong man into power. Dignity, bread, liberty.


The battle cry of 2011. As Egypt's people ended six decades of military


rule. But three years on, after an attempt at democracy, a strongman


looks set to return. But it seems this is what many Egyptians actually


want. Field Marshal Abudl Al Sisi, the head of Egypt's army has


resigned so he can fight as President, a fight he's almost


certain to win. TRANSLATION: I stand before you in my military uniform


for the last time. For I have made up my mind to retire as the minister


of defence. He's something of a celebrity since he ousted the Muslim


Brotherhood last year. For many he has brought stability after three


years of chaos. The Muslim Brotherhood's Mohammed Morsi had


treated his 2012 victory as winner takes all, stacking the state with


Islamists, giving himself extensive powers. But after clashes with the


Brotherhood, the army seized power, for many it felt simply like a


traditional coup. This week an Egyptian court sentenced 528 Morsi


supporters to death, the largest mass sentence in Egypt's history. It


is not yet clear what a return to strongman rule will mean for Egypt.


The early signs are not encouraging. But if Egyptians can't have all


three, dignity, bread and liberty, faced with chaos will most of the


population in the end choose bread? With us now is Abdullah Al-Haddad


from the Muslim Brotherhood party which won the democratic election in


2012 and Dr Mona Makram-Ebeid, form MP in the parliament of Egypt.


Firstly to Cairo, will there ever be democracy in Egypt? Why not? Why are


you so sceptical, we are all very hopeful we will have a civilian


democracy, in fact. But in the meantime, we will have a guided


democracy. And a progressive one, we won't have it overnight, it will be


a progressive civilian democracy at some time. You call it a guided


democracy. But you have what looks like a regime threatening to execute


more than 500 of its opponents? It is not threatening to execute


anybody. That was the court judgment yesterday. But it is unlikely that


the sentence will be carried out, and if it is not struck down on


appeal, it will likely be commuted either by the President or by the


grand mufti. You say a guided democracy, that is not a free


society where people are able to live as they choose, or object to


what is happening politically! They are absolutely free, they are all


expressing ourselves very freely, nobody is stopping us. With hundreds


of people being arrested? Some people are being arrested if they


are found not guilty they will be released as many of them have been


released. So If this is what people are happy with, a guided democracy,


if it is what people want it is what people should get isn't it? I


disagree with what was said. I think we will have a mass murderer like


Stalin and Pinochet who committed the worst state-led massacre against


the anti-coup protesters in their cities, and he's now using the


Egyptian judiciary as another oppression tool to continue his


violent crackdown against anyone who opposes him. You are comparing Al


Sisi to Stalin? Yes, of course, what we have seen two days ago the dead


sentence to more than -- death sentence to more than 500 people.


Stall Len who went on to be response -- Stalin who was responsible for


many millions of peoples death, you are comparison, you are happy with


the comparison? He will not hesitate in killing hundreds of thousands,


women, children, men or anyone who opposed him. The suggestion is Al


Sisi will be a new Stalin, convince add pattern of dictatorship is


already there? You can suggest to anybody, you can suggest Hitler, to


husband he is a hero, to us he as going to be a reformer. To us he


saved us from a Civil War. To us he is the one we called upon and he


didn't come on his own, certainly he came out of necessity and not out of


desire. This is one thing. One forgets all the attacks against the


police, all the attacks, the persistent murder of policemen, of


army people, and of ordinary civilians, who have been living with


that since the 30th of June. You are clearly never going to sign up to Al


Sisi. The wider point is an attempt at democracy in 2012 failed. The


Muslim Brotherhood grabbed extra powers for the President and people


do want some kind of stability? I totally disagree, there were


mistakes from the Muslim Brotherhood but within a democratic system, the


only tool to determine whether this is right or wrong was the ballot


box. What Abudl Al Sisi did on the 3rd July was a military coup. He


ousted the first democratically elected President ever in the


history of Egypt. Now there are more than 22,000 innocents in jail,


children, women, even journalist, now he is killing committed


atrocities. Mass killings against anyone who opposes him. In the day


that he announced his presidential bid, a 14-year-old boy was killed by


his forces. Where should people in Egypt accept that kind of crackdown


on their political opponents? First of all the former President was


removed not by military coup but popular impeach: Meaning the people


have asked that -- impeachment, mean the people asked that the President


who has violated his mandate to be removed. Other people are protesting


for the last nine months, don't they have the right? I am afraid we must


leave it there, it will be fascinating to see how it unfolds,


the two of are you very opposed to each other's views, we must leave it


there I'm afraid. That is all for tonight. But just in case you missed


it, the Education Secretary was taking questions from schoolchildren


as part of the BBC's School Report, he let slip as you well know his


well known love of Chap Hop. I was wondering could you give us a taster


of your favourite rap, as you have recently said you liked rap. I have


got so many, the first rap I liked was the What happens Rap, with


Andrew ridgely and George Mike KACHLT "take a look at me, I have


credibility, I have good time with the boys I meet on the line"


# What happens balm # I am the man


# You can't tell me that I'm not # Do you


# Enjoy what to do ?


Heavy showers in south wells, rain in Northern Ireland, but not all day


long. There will be sunny spells across