:00:00. > :00:10.It's a Titanic battle for what we are told is a vitally important
:00:11. > :00:14.British company. But the boss of AstraZeneca admits to Newsnight that
:00:15. > :00:24.for all his posturing he will sell the company to Pfizer if the price
:00:25. > :00:27.is right. We can't hold out to do a deal, because ultimately we have to
:00:28. > :00:34.represent the interests of shareholders. This Nobel
:00:35. > :00:37.Prize-winning scientist thinks a cut in research will be inevitable and
:00:38. > :00:42.will be disastrous. In his own words, the life of a gang
:00:43. > :00:46.member on a London estate. I remember seeing one of them with a
:00:47. > :00:50.machete, I thought he was Superman and try my hardest to disarm him and
:00:51. > :00:59.end up using it on him. That did not work. And Debbie Harry talks to us
:01:00. > :01:00.about 40 years of Blondie. # Soon found out
:01:01. > :01:15.# A pain in the ass! If the great American pharmaceutical
:01:16. > :01:20.company, Pfizer, succeeds in its attempt to take over the British
:01:21. > :01:23.drugs manufacturer, AstraZeneca, jobs will vanish and combined
:01:24. > :01:28.research spending will probably fall. That much was confirmed today
:01:29. > :01:31.by Pfizer's boss when he appeared before MPs. Although it may have
:01:32. > :01:35.been frank, that did little to reassure much of the political class
:01:36. > :01:40.who have been worrying very publicly that however good the takeover might
:01:41. > :01:44.be for shareholders, it could be catastrophe for British science. Yet
:01:45. > :01:49.the boss of the British company he's stalking, although he turned up with
:01:50. > :01:56.a had he rehearsed story of the damage done to public health has
:01:57. > :02:00.other concerns all together. How is this for corporate speak? Pfizer
:02:01. > :02:05.gives employees their own special coin to carry, one side stamped the
:02:06. > :02:10.words "own it", to encourage accountability, on the other is
:02:11. > :02:15.etched "straight talk", apparently to empower staff. But MPs and
:02:16. > :02:21.employees of the rival Pfizer is trying to buy, rather hoped for both
:02:22. > :02:24.from its boss Ian Reid. REPORTER: Good morning Mr Reid why should MPs
:02:25. > :02:28.here in Britain be able to he is trust your assurances on jobs? I'm
:02:29. > :02:32.looking forward to talking to the committee today. What chance of
:02:33. > :02:38.Pfizer's promises on jobs coming unstuck? The commitment of 20% of a
:02:39. > :02:45.global company's R in the UK is an unprecedented commitment. Yes, but
:02:46. > :02:48.in terms of numbers that is no hard commitment to either sustain or
:02:49. > :02:54.increase the numbers employed. There is a hard commitment of how many
:02:55. > :02:59.employees are successful growing company is prepared to put in the
:03:00. > :03:03.UK. Your two previous sizeable increases in company size have meant
:03:04. > :03:07.a sizeable reduction each time in the number of jobs? We will be
:03:08. > :03:12.efficient by some reduction in jobs, what I cannot tell you is how much
:03:13. > :03:16.or how many or where. You must have some indication and forward planning
:03:17. > :03:20.about the number of such staff you are going to drop, how many? I can't
:03:21. > :03:23.tell you today how many people are going to be in research and
:03:24. > :03:27.development in the combined company. I haven't even seen the books of
:03:28. > :03:32.AstraZeneca. So far so not quite clear on job numbers. But what about
:03:33. > :03:41.that big fat tax cut? Pfizer stands to gain if they global gobble up the
:03:42. > :03:45.firm? That is sensitive information and premature to disclose that this
:03:46. > :03:50.early in the process. Would you agree there is substantial tax
:03:51. > :03:55.benefits to your company and their shareholders if this merger goes
:03:56. > :04:01.ahead? Yes there are. Thank you. Mr Reid was short on specifics, but the
:04:02. > :04:04.committee was introduced to that special corporate coin. Remember the
:04:05. > :04:08.one Pfizer's staff get to keep in their pockets. But MPs believed he
:04:09. > :04:12.flipped it the wrong way. I believe you span it this morning and got
:04:13. > :04:16."own it", and we haven't had the level of straight talk we needed,
:04:17. > :04:23.perhaps you should toss is again when you come tomorrow. I can
:04:24. > :04:26.straight talk right now. Ian Reid had more than an hour trying to
:04:27. > :04:30.answer repeated questions fromp. He said again and again he's a man of
:04:31. > :04:35.his word and he can trust the commitments. But the sense was that
:04:36. > :04:39.MPs inside just did not believe him. MPs were entirely more sympathetic
:04:40. > :04:47.to the Frenchman in charge of the British company AstraZeneca. He
:04:48. > :04:54.claimed the proprosed takeover of his business pritt bithe Americans
:04:55. > :04:59.could claim lives and it could delay the release of certain drugs. One of
:05:00. > :05:03.the medicines was delayed and a father died from lung cancer, it was
:05:04. > :05:08.relaid because in the meantime the two companies were involved in
:05:09. > :05:12.savings costs and taxes. Quite a charge. Pfizer's desire to save tax
:05:13. > :05:17.could harm patients, later I asked him if he was willing to stick to
:05:18. > :05:23.it. You say lives are at risk if the deal goes ahead, is an emotive way
:05:24. > :05:29.to get your way on this and push it away? I'm only highlighting
:05:30. > :05:34.potential risks associated with this transaction. You know, we have a
:05:35. > :05:39.very broad portfolio, we built it over the last 18 months and we have
:05:40. > :05:44.made enormous progress. We have a few product that is are really
:05:45. > :05:47.exciting and moving very quickly, and addressing cancer types for
:05:48. > :05:51.think which there is no option today. Isn't it the case though that
:05:52. > :05:57.if the price was right, you would accept this deal? We will consider
:05:58. > :06:02.proposals, offers that are made to us in the context of the value, the
:06:03. > :06:06.price that's offered and the potential other terms. But certainly
:06:07. > :06:12.the price that is offered is a very important dimension. But you can't
:06:13. > :06:22.rule out doing a deal then? We have a if you had dubry duty - fiduciary
:06:23. > :06:28.duty and we have to represent the shareholder, if the price reflected
:06:29. > :06:32.is good for the company and justifies the transaction and tax,
:06:33. > :06:38.we will have to make a positive recommendation. You would recommend
:06:39. > :06:42.a deal even though you say the disruption could cause lives? The
:06:43. > :06:48.disruption is substantial but manageable, but it is certainly a
:06:49. > :06:52.big risk that we would have to manage as best we can. Ultimately we
:06:53. > :06:56.have a large number of stakeholders that we are responsible to, but of
:06:57. > :07:02.course very importantly our shareholders, so the value that is
:07:03. > :07:06.offered we will certainly have to consider. You have said the
:07:07. > :07:09.disruption is manageable if the price is right? It is a risk, that
:07:10. > :07:14.is what I'm saying, what we are looking at is an overall proposal
:07:15. > :07:18.that reflects the value and the operating model. We don't know what
:07:19. > :07:22.the operating model will look like and how we would conduct the
:07:23. > :07:24.business of the new company. Therefore it is hard for us to
:07:25. > :07:28.understand whether we would be able to manage this risk or not. Pfizer
:07:29. > :07:31.are committing for five years, how long do your commitments to jobs and
:07:32. > :07:35.investment in the UK run? Our commitment
:07:36. > :07:39.investment in the UK run? Our UK is ten years, 20, 30
:07:40. > :07:40.investment in the UK run? Our committed to this country. We
:07:41. > :07:48.investment in the UK run? Our you butt this isn't some kind
:07:49. > :07:53.investment in the UK run? Our David versus Golaith battle, you are
:07:54. > :07:55.investment in the UK run? Our companies, both of whom who have
:07:56. > :07:55.investment in the UK run? Our made job cuts in recent years in
:07:56. > :07:59.investment in the UK run? Our UK. Both of whom are taking
:08:00. > :08:02.advantage of UK tax rules U said this morning you didn't pay any
:08:03. > :08:07.corporation tax here last year? I think we have gone through a
:08:08. > :08:09.transition, suddenly we have, you know very well we have our own
:08:10. > :08:14.challenges in terms of revenue. But challenges in terms of revenue. But
:08:15. > :08:16.I think we have made the point clear that we are reaching the end of our
:08:17. > :08:20.transition, we that we are reaching the end of our
:08:21. > :08:24.pipeline, we are going to be launching new products over the next
:08:25. > :08:27.few years and we want to return to growth as quickly as possible.
:08:28. > :08:32.few years and we want to return to you very much for talking to us.
:08:33. > :08:34.Now we have a physicist at the University of Manchester, who won a
:08:35. > :08:37.Nobel Prize for University of Manchester, who won a
:08:38. > :08:45.FRAF even if, a virtually University of Manchester, who won a
:08:46. > :08:47.graphene, a virtually indetruckedable material made from a
:08:48. > :08:54.layer of atoms, and guest from Oxford.
:08:55. > :08:55.The kerfuffle is all about the future of science in this country,
:08:56. > :08:59.if the takeover future of science in this country,
:09:00. > :09:02.share that worry? I'm sharing future of science in this country,
:09:03. > :09:17.worry about this country developed the model in which it is
:09:18. > :09:26.very profitable to be my on pick, -- myopic, it is easy to get the gold
:09:27. > :09:29.and not care about the goose. Professor you have had
:09:30. > :09:32.and not care about the goose. sponsored by both companies, do you
:09:33. > :09:34.and not care about the goose. worry? So I do worry. I also worry
:09:35. > :09:38.that we will worry? So I do worry. I also worry
:09:39. > :09:43.pharmaceutical industry that the country really needs as well. So we
:09:44. > :09:45.have been funded both by Pfizer and AstraZeneca to do
:09:46. > :09:51.have been funded both by Pfizer and research. And I would say there is
:09:52. > :09:55.one positive aspect of this merger or takeover, and that is that
:09:56. > :10:02.Pfizer, or it looks as if they are going to invest very substantially
:10:03. > :10:06.into the UK. Well, for what the assurance is worth?
:10:07. > :10:10.into the UK. Well, for what the business person, so if they do
:10:11. > :10:12.invest as I understand 20% of the R budget into the UK, it may be
:10:13. > :10:16.business reasons for R budget into the UK, it may be
:10:17. > :10:22.would like to think that is the science base and infrastructure here
:10:23. > :10:27.is excellent? Although the cumulative total of both Pfizer and
:10:28. > :10:31.AstraZeneca if the merger goes ahead according to the boss, the amount
:10:32. > :10:36.spent on R will be slightly smaller than it is now? I don't know
:10:37. > :10:40.the details of that, if we can attract Pfizer to invest or reinvest
:10:41. > :10:44.in this country what I would like to see is multiple other pharmaceutical
:10:45. > :10:48.companies following their lead. It isn't just Pfizer who have downsized
:10:49. > :10:51.their research in this country over the last decade or so, there is
:10:52. > :10:56.other pharmaceutical companies. If we can provide an environment to
:10:57. > :11:00.attract three or four pharmaceutical companies back to the UK it would be
:11:01. > :11:05.fantastic. It is not a perfect analogy but the car industry might
:11:06. > :11:09.be one. We have Honda, Nissan, Toyota here, I would like to see the
:11:10. > :11:18.same kind of thing happen in the pharmaindustry. -- pharma-industry.
:11:19. > :11:22.Can you see that happening here? I wish I would be that optimistic,
:11:23. > :11:28.that we as human beings developed a completely new model of the economy
:11:29. > :11:33.when we don't have an external strategy. We forget about basic
:11:34. > :11:37.science and fundamental knowledge. Because look at executive boards,
:11:38. > :11:42.what they are interested in, they are human beings, they are
:11:43. > :11:49.interested in appreciation, imagine someone from the board would say we
:11:50. > :11:52.will invest a lot of money 50 years from now, they would be immediately
:11:53. > :11:58.taken to an asylum. They are interested in bringing shareholders
:11:59. > :12:02.value. And one of the ways to cut research and that is what has been
:12:03. > :12:07.happening, with companies, with Governments. It didn't stop you
:12:08. > :12:15.inventing a completely revolutionary substance did it? At some intuitive
:12:16. > :12:19.level people do understand that we need fundamental knowledge that it
:12:20. > :12:22.is eventually the basis for the technology, but the disstabs between
:12:23. > :12:29.fundamental knowledge and the market, it is a very long chain and
:12:30. > :12:34.the chain is very obscure, try for example how many people will you
:12:35. > :12:40.find who would understand how quantum mechanics plays a role in
:12:41. > :12:45.computers. Some people at school will probably learn that Bill Gates
:12:46. > :12:50.invented the computer and Steve Jobs invented the mobile phone. It is 40,
:12:51. > :12:54.50 years between the discovery. But, yes, we still understand, but there
:12:55. > :12:59.is always a pressure on both Governments to cut fundamental
:13:00. > :13:07.research at the universities and the companies have this model operating,
:13:08. > :13:10.new models operating that will have everything fundamentally done at the
:13:11. > :13:17.universities. Why are you so optimistic aboutifier? -- Pfizer?
:13:18. > :13:22.I'm not optimistic about Pfizer, if we can attract them here, the idea
:13:23. > :13:25.will be to get other companies come in, it is not just a question of
:13:26. > :13:28.optimisim it is a question of need as well. In this country we have an
:13:29. > :13:33.ageing population, looking forward decades ahead. There will be very
:13:34. > :13:37.serious medical problems, for example, with Alzheimer's disease,
:13:38. > :13:41.and at the moment there are no real cures for those in prospect at the
:13:42. > :13:45.moment. This is basic science problem that will involve investment
:13:46. > :13:51.for tens of decades. Is that investment more likely if this
:13:52. > :13:55.takeover goes ahead? Yeah, I can't comment on, that I think the
:13:56. > :13:58.translation of the basic biomedical research in this country, which is
:13:59. > :14:02.very strong at the moment, into actual medicines is much more likely
:14:03. > :14:08.if we have a strong pharmaceutical industry, local to the basic
:14:09. > :14:12.research. That would imply that you this is it is better AstraZeneca
:14:13. > :14:17.isn't taken over, wouldn't it? Obviously the best thing would be if
:14:18. > :14:20.both companies were super-strong and doing super-well and both located in
:14:21. > :14:23.the UK and we had two or three others. Are you in favour of the
:14:24. > :14:28.takeover or not? I can't comment on the business side, from the science
:14:29. > :14:32.side if it does happen there is potential to use it to engage or
:14:33. > :14:39.encourage other industries to come to the UK. This idea that there is a
:14:40. > :14:44.sort of critical mass at work, when you get a successful company,
:14:45. > :14:51.successfully relocated here, or developing here. Does that work in
:14:52. > :14:57.your experience? There should be a critical mass, of course, when the
:14:58. > :15:01.mass becomes too critical it becomes what is happening now. That was a
:15:02. > :15:10.bad idea to come at you with a science metaphor, I agree! It can
:15:11. > :15:13.become an explosion, yes! But big companies in terms of research, they
:15:14. > :15:22.are looking at what is happening at the universities, that's where
:15:23. > :15:27.fundamental research is based these days, it was not like that 30, 40,
:15:28. > :15:29.years ago, a lot of fundamental research was in companies
:15:30. > :15:38.themselves. Has something happened in capitalism? Yes indeed. What has
:15:39. > :15:43.happened then? I said before there is no external looking, that makes
:15:44. > :15:48.us saying imagine the moon programme, it is unimaginable
:15:49. > :15:53.because the moon programme was only because people were afraid of
:15:54. > :15:58.nuclear war and people did understand that technology is very
:15:59. > :16:05.important. And now it is more we are living in a safe world and we are
:16:06. > :16:10.sinking, OK, not 50 years, not many parents think what their children
:16:11. > :16:15.how they would go to the university in 10, 20 years, so you would like
:16:16. > :16:21.both of the companies to think what will happen with this company in 0
:16:22. > :16:26.years. This isn't a specifically Pfizer problem? It isn't,
:16:27. > :16:35.AstraZeneca is presented like a bullet company. It is the same. A
:16:36. > :16:43.couple of years ago to tell you an anecdote, I had a dinner with the
:16:44. > :16:49.chief executive officer, he was complaining that their shares went
:16:50. > :16:55.up and he was disappointed, I said why not close all the research labs,
:16:56. > :17:01.well it is not of course because of my advice, but he later, he was
:17:02. > :17:08.later following exactly the same scenario, and their shares precisely
:17:09. > :17:12.went up, positively. Thank you very much. The European Court of Justice
:17:13. > :17:18.handed down a fascinating ruling today, a Spaniard had complained
:17:19. > :17:24.that when you googled his name, you can discover once upon time he was
:17:25. > :17:30.found guilty of an unchess charged debt.
:17:31. > :17:33.found guilty of an unchess charged listen when there are complaints
:17:34. > :17:40.about this, and comply with requests to have personal information removed
:17:41. > :17:46.from requests. It is personal to celebrities who Google themselves
:17:47. > :17:50.and find untrue stories. But it has implications for everyone. What are
:17:51. > :18:03.we entitled to know about others and what are others entitled to stop us
:18:04. > :18:07.knowing. ??FORCEDWHI What happens when you Google yourself, don't
:18:08. > :18:10.pretend you haven't done it. If you don't like the results that come
:18:11. > :18:14.back, perhaps it would be nice to make them go away. Two more or less
:18:15. > :18:19.everyone's surprise the European Court of Justice, which is there to
:18:20. > :18:23.interpret EU law has concluded that an individual can get Google or
:18:24. > :18:28.another search engine to remove a link that is either out of date or
:18:29. > :18:37.damaging. This is the man who wanted to be forgotten but
:18:38. > :18:44.damaging. This is the man who wanted come. Mario Gonzales, he had his
:18:45. > :18:48.home repossessed in 1998, he was unhappy that this embarrassing
:18:49. > :18:54.feature appears when his name is searched. He believes today's an
:18:55. > :18:58.important ruling. TRANSLATION: If Google is great tool it is
:18:59. > :19:01.important, if people have a problem with an image or photo that is
:19:02. > :19:05.damaging and the data isn't relevant, they ask for it to be
:19:06. > :19:09.withdrawn. The ruling is only about the search engines and the links
:19:10. > :19:13.they return, it doesn't say that the original article has to be removed.
:19:14. > :19:19.It can stay on-line, just unlinked to. Particularly confusing his Emma
:19:20. > :19:25.Carr from Big Brother Watch, since the judges have gone against a
:19:26. > :19:29.previous decision? The Advocate-Generals are right that
:19:30. > :19:32.saying to Google that you have to remove legitimate content is wrong,
:19:33. > :19:36.it d have a chilling effect on free speech. For this new ruling to come
:19:37. > :19:40.out and say completely the opposite was a huge surprise. We need to
:19:41. > :19:45.digest what this really means, and whether this in practice can happen.
:19:46. > :19:49.Previously it was accepted that the original publishers of the
:19:50. > :19:53.information were responsible for it. If they took the information down it
:19:54. > :19:58.would eventually disappear from search engines. Now, under the terms
:19:59. > :20:03.of EU law it appears that the search engines control the information.
:20:04. > :20:06.That's absolutely delighted the European Commission who have been
:20:07. > :20:10.pressing for just such a change. The ruling is good news, because it
:20:11. > :20:14.confirms the position of the European Commission. First that
:20:15. > :20:18.European law can apply to a search engine and that Google is a
:20:19. > :20:22.controller of data, and can be regarded as a controller, and this
:20:23. > :20:26.is the position the commission has taken in this case, this is also the
:20:27. > :20:30.position that we have taken in the European data protection forum, so
:20:31. > :20:35.it is, above all, not only good for the commission but citizens who will
:20:36. > :20:38.see their data better protected. The European Commission is at the moment
:20:39. > :20:42.trying to bring in new data protection rules that would give
:20:43. > :20:46.people the so called right to be forgotten. This was mainly about
:20:47. > :20:49.social media, to prevent web sites keeping data about you if you decide
:20:50. > :20:53.to close your account. But should we worry that the EU judges want to
:20:54. > :20:58.include search engines as well? The court had to strike a very difficult
:20:59. > :21:02.balance between the fundamental freedom, fundamental rights they are
:21:03. > :21:06.called of freedom of expression and privacy, all it did was say that
:21:07. > :21:11.Google isn't outside the law. It kicks the ball back into play, it is
:21:12. > :21:15.actually national courts that then have to decide whether somebody's
:21:16. > :21:24.complaint is really excessive and invasive of low privacy. It is often
:21:25. > :21:28.said the Internet is written in concrete, but that could be
:21:29. > :21:33.crumbling, giving us more control about what people see about us when
:21:34. > :21:36.they search. Some of the most senior figures in
:21:37. > :21:43.the British defence establishment, including the former Secretary of
:21:44. > :21:48.State Jeff Hon, Hoon, are being investigated by the International
:21:49. > :21:52.Criminal Court in the Hague, it is set up to bring to justice those
:21:53. > :21:56.accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity. The United States
:21:57. > :21:59.doesn't accept its jurisdiction, precisely to avoid this sort of
:22:00. > :22:06.embarrassment. The current British Government says it will help with
:22:07. > :22:12.the examination, but it doubts much will come of it because this country
:22:13. > :22:17.is already investigating the claims. Videos shot in Iraq in 2003, it
:22:18. > :22:22.shows a British corporal shouting and swearing at hood the detainees,
:22:23. > :22:27.some are held in stress positions, meant to have been banned. A day
:22:28. > :22:31.after that was filmed this man was found battered to death in British
:22:32. > :22:39.custody in the same detention centre. Corporal Donald Payne, who
:22:40. > :22:42.we can't identify, was the only person punished forped what, he was
:22:43. > :22:46.jailed for a year and expelled from the army. For years campaigners have
:22:47. > :22:52.argued abuse was far more widespread, through six years of
:22:53. > :22:55.military action in Iraq. In 2006 the International Criminal Court in the
:22:56. > :22:59.Hague was first asked to look at allegations of war crimes. At the
:23:00. > :23:05.time they determined the required threshold was not met. In 2010,
:23:06. > :23:10.after calls for a wider inquiry, the MoD set up a team to investigate
:23:11. > :23:16.allegations of historic abuse. It has paid out more than ?15 million
:23:17. > :23:22.to settle 200 claims of mistreatment and unlawful detention. Then in
:23:23. > :23:27.January, a file containing 250 new pages of factual and legal analysis
:23:28. > :23:32.was passed to the ICC by lawyers representing detainees. It contained
:23:33. > :23:36.evidence of what they said was more than 400 new cases of mistreatment
:23:37. > :23:42.and unlawful killing. Among those named in the file a former Armed
:23:43. > :23:46.Forces Minister, and former Defence Secretary, Jeff Hoon. Today the
:23:47. > :23:50.international criminal court said it would now open its preliminary
:23:51. > :23:59.examination into the allegations. It is the first time the UK has ever
:24:00. > :24:03.been the subject of an ICC probe. We are not saying we will go after the
:24:04. > :24:07.military or we will go after the civilian or political, we will be
:24:08. > :24:11.looking at the persons, whoever they are, who bear responsibility for
:24:12. > :24:15.those crimes. The MoD has long claimed the vast majority of
:24:16. > :24:19.soldiers served in Iraq with professionalism and decency.
:24:20. > :24:24.Ministers say they completely reject the suggestion that abuse was
:24:25. > :24:28.systematic. I have never seen any suggestion made that there was a
:24:29. > :24:31.policy of abusing prisoners being carried out by Her Majesty's forces,
:24:32. > :24:36.and it would be an extraordinary thing if it were true, it would be
:24:37. > :24:42.contrary to every tenet under which British forces have always operated.
:24:43. > :24:47.But more than a decade after Mr Mousa was killed in this detainee
:24:48. > :24:51.facility, accusations of wider abuse will not go away. When Britain
:24:52. > :24:54.signed up to the International Criminal Court, it surely would not
:24:55. > :25:00.have seen itself being the subject of any investigation. Even at the
:25:01. > :25:03.earliest stage. The decision to reopen the
:25:04. > :25:08.investigation into the MoD was taken after a 250-page dossier was
:25:09. > :25:14.submitted to the ICC by the British law firm Public Interest Lawyers,
:25:15. > :25:18.headed by the human rights lawyer Phil Shiner. I spoke to him earlier.
:25:19. > :25:26.The gist of the case is throughout the period that the UK were in Iraq
:25:27. > :25:30.there was systemic issues leading to a detention and interrogation policy
:25:31. > :25:34.that was completely unlawful, which means there are now hundreds and
:25:35. > :25:40.hundreds of Iraqis coming forward and saying they were subjected to
:25:41. > :25:43.prohibited interrogation practices and techniques, and there are also
:25:44. > :25:48.unfortunately lots of people skilled. Killed. Are you really
:25:49. > :25:52.suggesting that soldiers on operations were given orders to
:25:53. > :26:00.behave in ways you believe to be illegal? I'm suggesting that the
:26:01. > :26:05.training materials and training manuals I have seen and we have all
:26:06. > :26:12.seen, and in the inquiry they were analysed and made public, makes it
:26:13. > :26:17.absolutely clear that at Chick Sands, the interrogation training
:26:18. > :26:25.for questioners and ingators was completely unlawful. I'm also
:26:26. > :26:31.suggesting that there are at least 11 other deaths in custody just like
:26:32. > :26:35.Mr Mousa that we know of and the Ministry of Defence point blank
:26:36. > :26:40.refuse to tell us of. Or how many deaths in custody is the Ministry of
:26:41. > :26:45.Defence aware of. You are alleging it goes right to the top, up to the
:26:46. > :26:51.Defence Secretary himself? I am indeed, Geoff Hoon was in charge to
:26:52. > :26:55.the run up to the invasion of Iraq, that is when all these people were
:26:56. > :26:59.trained. If he didn't know he ought to have known. But the fact that he
:27:00. > :27:07.didn't know specifically isn't going to help him one bit. Are any of your
:27:08. > :27:12.claimants former insurgents? As far as I'm aware every single person who
:27:13. > :27:16.is claiming, and making allegations of torture, cruelty and inhuman
:27:17. > :27:21.treatment is a civilian in the wrong place at the wrong time. So there
:27:22. > :27:31.are no claimants who are former insurgents? I think you are making a
:27:32. > :27:34.reference to the on going inquiry, I thought you were, and the Ministry
:27:35. > :27:39.of Defence are trying to make a great deal. We will have to wait and
:27:40. > :27:44.see what is said about the very serious allegations of torture,
:27:45. > :27:48.cruel and inhuman treatment which he will report upon in December. But is
:27:49. > :27:52.it the Ministry of Defence's case then that if you are an insurgent
:27:53. > :27:58.you can do what you like to them. That is obviously not the case, and
:27:59. > :28:02.that didn't help marine A in the recent murder case from Afghanistan.
:28:03. > :28:08.But it is the case, is it not, that some of your witnesses there are
:28:09. > :28:17.former insurgents? I have just said and I will say it again, as far as
:28:18. > :28:24.I'm I aware, none of my clients who are breaches to the prohibition of
:28:25. > :28:28.torture before the prosecutor are insurgents. If some of my clients
:28:29. > :28:32.are it will come out. It makes no difference whatsoever. You are
:28:33. > :28:42.saying that you have done this entire case free, gratis and for
:28:43. > :28:46.nothing, correct? Correct. Why? Because I'm a principled human
:28:47. > :28:51.rights lawyer, and it seemed to me with the evidence that I had,
:28:52. > :28:57.particularly after the Mousa inquiry that it was the right thing to do. I
:28:58. > :29:00.know that is not what the Ministry of Defence want to hear. But it
:29:01. > :29:05.happens to be the truth. Some lawyers, like myself, actually
:29:06. > :29:09.believe in the rule of law. We actually believe in fairness and
:29:10. > :29:15.justice and democracy. We are prepared to pursue that, at times at
:29:16. > :29:19.our own quite considerable expense. That is not what the Ministry of
:29:20. > :29:23.Defence want to hear this evening, it happens to be the truth. They
:29:24. > :29:31.know it really. Thank you very much for joining us. Major General Tim
:29:32. > :29:36.Cross was the most senior general involved in the planning for a
:29:37. > :29:39.post-war Iraq, and is part of the House of Commons defence committee.
:29:40. > :29:43.He joins me from his home in Hampshire. When you hear that sort
:29:44. > :29:47.of dedication from Mr Shiner, taking the case for nothing, his commitment
:29:48. > :29:52.to the cause shining through at every level. It is rather impressive
:29:53. > :29:56.isn't it? In one sense it is, but I would say his comment that some
:29:57. > :29:59.people believe in the rule of law I think is a bit unfair. I would
:30:00. > :30:04.suggest that the vast majority of people, lawyers, Government
:30:05. > :30:09.ministers, and certainly senior military people, absolutely believe
:30:10. > :30:13.in the rule of law and would want to ensure as far as possible that rule
:30:14. > :30:18.of law is followed on operational theatres. We shouldn't be holding
:30:19. > :30:22.him up as a par gone of virtue. I don't know him but I know his
:30:23. > :30:27.reputation, his reputation is a bit sullied, it has to be said. If
:30:28. > :30:33.indeed no wrong has been done, the British authorities surely have
:30:34. > :30:45.nothing to fear from an inquiry by the international criminal -- --
:30:46. > :30:49.criminal court. I have been a witness, and they are long and
:30:50. > :30:52.ponderous, if the ICC have a look at this inquiry again, and we have
:30:53. > :30:57.signed up to the ICC, as your reporter said. We should do all we
:30:58. > :31:02.can to assist in that process. It is important to say that the ICC was
:31:03. > :31:09.set up to investigate issues like genocide and mass war crimes and so
:31:10. > :31:13.on, it wasn't established to investigate individual or relatively
:31:14. > :31:16.small cases, nor was it set up to do this inquiry if the host Government,
:31:17. > :31:21.in our case the British Government, were doing an inquiry themselves
:31:22. > :31:25.into this instance. And the UK is doing an inquiry. If British
:31:26. > :31:30.soldiers were mistreating Iraqis, prisoners or otherwise, that is
:31:31. > :31:32.surely something that should be investigated and for which people
:31:33. > :31:37.should be brought to justice, isn't it? Absolutely it should be. That
:31:38. > :31:42.has happened and the British Government have set up an Iraqi
:31:43. > :31:46.inquiry unit to look at some of these issues, and that is absolutely
:31:47. > :31:50.right. And anybody who would suggest that over the last 10, 12 years the
:31:51. > :31:53.tens of thousands indeed hundreds of thousands of soldiers who have
:31:54. > :31:57.served in Iraq they there haven't been issues like this would be
:31:58. > :32:02.kidding themselves. They need to be investigated. But I do think the
:32:03. > :32:05.point I'm trying to make sheer is the International Criminal Court, we
:32:06. > :32:09.are not talking about genocide, I don't believe we are talking about
:32:10. > :32:13.systemic or systematic abuses, which have been supported by the chain of
:32:14. > :32:16.command, all the way up to the Ministry of Defence, I think that is
:32:17. > :32:20.idle to suggest that. But individual cases, yes, there have been mistakes
:32:21. > :32:24.and yes they should be investigated and if people are found to have done
:32:25. > :32:29.criminal actions they should be punished. That has happened. Your
:32:30. > :32:33.initial response to this accusation from Mr Shiner is to respond his
:32:34. > :32:40.reputation was some what sullied, for which you have no evidence? I
:32:41. > :32:43.said I haven't met him but heard a lot about him, that is the
:32:44. > :32:47.impression I got. The House of Commons defence committee report
:32:48. > :32:51.that was sub illusioned recently has look -- published recently has
:32:52. > :32:54.looked at some of these issues, it is a very good report and I
:32:55. > :33:01.recommend people read it. There are potential conhe is uences from all
:33:02. > :33:04.of these issues, I don't know -- cons sequences from these issues, I
:33:05. > :33:08.wouldn't suggest anything other than I have heard. You have no evidence
:33:09. > :33:17.for that? I'm sorry. You have no evidence for your claim then? I have
:33:18. > :33:22.said what I have said Jeremy, no I would say it is more than tittle
:33:23. > :33:25.tattle. But there is no point in entering that debate, I have said
:33:26. > :33:29.what I have said. The important issue here is I have no objection at
:33:30. > :33:33.all to these investigations being conducted, but we need to look at it
:33:34. > :33:36.in the context is it right for the ICC to be doing this work, should
:33:37. > :33:41.our own Government be doing it, in my view this is a UK Government
:33:42. > :33:48.issue and I regret the fact it has gone to the International Criminal
:33:49. > :33:52.Court. It is generally thought to be one of
:33:53. > :33:55.the most difficult things a young man can attempt, how do you escape
:33:56. > :33:59.from the world of gangs. We are going to hear now the story of one
:34:00. > :34:04.young Londoner who spent nearly a decade rising through the ranks of
:34:05. > :34:08.his gang, and until the futility of it all dawned upon him as he was
:34:09. > :34:12.treated for serious knife wounds. He spoke to us through the offices of
:34:13. > :34:17.the charity Gangs Line, to tell us how he changed his life or jumped
:34:18. > :34:23.off. For fear of retribution, he asked us to call him JT, his words
:34:24. > :34:31.are spoken by the actor, Ashley Thomas.
:34:32. > :34:36.Gangs, I seen them when I was younger, I saw a stabbing when I was
:34:37. > :34:39.nine, I was sleeping and someone was shouting, I opened my curtain, there
:34:40. > :34:44.was a green door and blood on it, the guy was holding his body, I
:34:45. > :34:48.called my dad and he told me go back to bed. So yeah I see that. I
:34:49. > :34:52.enjoyed football a lot, that is what I should be now, a professional
:34:53. > :34:56.footballer, I had to stop going training and started hanging around,
:34:57. > :35:01.that is when I messed up. There was a football cage and a lot of older
:35:02. > :35:04.boys there, they were having problems with others, that was how
:35:05. > :35:11.the rivalry started, always violence. We saw one of the olders
:35:12. > :35:15.killed and that got to us, I was 15, the older guys told us how to do
:35:16. > :35:19.things, beef and make money, don't leave your boy, don't run, don't
:35:20. > :35:24.snitch, don't get caught slipping, telling me not to slip it telling me
:35:25. > :35:27.to have my wet on. If I meet someone a they have a knife and I don't, I
:35:28. > :35:31.will get stabbed. I have hurt people, when you are jumping, when
:35:32. > :35:37.you are in this life you know what's coming, and I knew in the back of my
:35:38. > :35:40.head I would end up in a peak situation, I would get stabbed or
:35:41. > :35:44.killed. I would never go out of my way to hurt an innocent, never, I
:35:45. > :35:49.always go someone that I have got beef with. Innocents, they are
:35:50. > :35:54.intimidated by me, I don't like that. You hear the car lock, you are
:35:55. > :35:57.walking and the person will cross the road, it is not nice. I didn't
:35:58. > :36:04.think about my actions, I just did what I did and kept it moving. And
:36:05. > :36:09.get respect, girls, girls love a bad boy innit, fee MRAELs are impressed
:36:10. > :36:12.by violence, I don't know -- females are impressed by violence, I don't
:36:13. > :36:17.know why. The olders told us go shop for this guy and that way, they will
:36:18. > :36:21.give you say an eighth of weed broke down into shots, it was instinct, we
:36:22. > :36:26.knew what to do and how to get rid of it, sell it on, sell it on to the
:36:27. > :36:31.cats to anyone You know what keeps people going, money, nobody wants to
:36:32. > :36:36.run around stabbing and shooting people, if you make money because
:36:37. > :36:40.you are on the roads and seeing dough people will continue. I was
:36:41. > :36:45.seeing from weed ?450 a day, that is too much work, it is not like you
:36:46. > :36:49.finish at this time, 24-hours, sleepless nights, it starts getting
:36:50. > :36:52.long. I clocked on stupid when I was sliced, I remember clearly I got a
:36:53. > :36:57.phone call, one of my lot was sitting waiting to go to court, it
:36:58. > :37:05.is peak, it can be anyone from any area there, I met this pig and he
:37:06. > :37:10.smack in my face, and we do it together, he was come, come, I got
:37:11. > :37:14.there, there was there lot, three cars came, I thought I know what I'm
:37:15. > :37:19.doing, I will run at him, my lot have legged it, thinking it would be
:37:20. > :37:25.a fist fight, I was getting my head kicked in, they got closer and it
:37:26. > :37:29.was a blur, one had a machete, I thought I was Superman, and I
:37:30. > :37:34.thought I would disarm him and end up using it on him, that did not
:37:35. > :37:41.work. Flaps were coming out of the arm of my jacket, my arm was split,
:37:42. > :37:44.I thought this is peak, when I was going into hospital and I was
:37:45. > :37:48.thinking about revenge, as soon as I came out and I would do what I was
:37:49. > :37:52.doing, I was operated on straight away. They put you to sleep, I woke
:37:53. > :37:56.up not angry, I thought what is the point in getting out of the bed and
:37:57. > :38:03.doing something knowing I will go to jail for it or someone coming to do
:38:04. > :38:06.me again. I don't tell my friends I would jump off, none of them jumped
:38:07. > :38:10.off, everyone is thinking the same thing, this is getting long. If you
:38:11. > :38:16.told one they would say you are soft. Then I met a girl, I met a
:38:17. > :38:19.girl, and started seeing opportunities to make good money and
:38:20. > :38:24.keeping it without getting arrested and put in cells, I thought yeah,
:38:25. > :38:29.man, the beef goes on. Even now if I have to see someone from them sites
:38:30. > :38:33.I would have to do something. If I want to go to west London I will be
:38:34. > :38:37.carrying something just in case it gets political. I'm much happier
:38:38. > :38:41.though, much less stress, I will never fully go back on the block,
:38:42. > :38:46.that is over for me. My little brother is ten, he got stopped and
:38:47. > :38:51.searched, they said he was looking suspicious, older guys make younger
:38:52. > :38:55.boys carry for them, he's a good boy, for him it is football, that's
:38:56. > :39:00.it. If he wants to carry anything for a guy I would kick his cars.
:39:01. > :39:07.Yeah man, I would kick his cars. Then I would confront the guy.
:39:08. > :39:13.You know you are old when the band to which you danced is releasing its
:39:14. > :39:18.40th anniversary album and you discover its rock goddess singer is
:39:19. > :39:25.68. That is the state untold number of us find ourselves in with the
:39:26. > :39:30.release this week of Bondar's Ghost of Download album. They are playing
:39:31. > :39:34.Glastonbury this summer. Because the restraining order is still in place
:39:35. > :39:43.I wasn't allowed to go when the invitation came to meet them. Kirsty
:39:44. > :39:47.went and spoke to Debbie Harry and Chris Steyn and saw them performing
:39:48. > :39:53.at the studios. This record is a very collaborative effort, there are
:39:54. > :39:59.a lot of people involved. There is never a grand overview scheme to
:40:00. > :40:03.what we do, I just do what I like as far as music goes. I think some of
:40:04. > :40:12.the fans were upset when I say it is a character and I'm playing a part.
:40:13. > :40:18.# They tell me I should try it # Each way not that sky
:40:19. > :40:26.# What I know that I would learn to # Do the mile high When you started,
:40:27. > :40:34.in a way when Blondie came about, it exploded, you weren't an ingenu, you
:40:35. > :40:38.came out fully formed. I wasn't. You knew what you were doing.
:40:39. > :40:42.came out fully formed. I wasn't. You different to what anyone had ever
:40:43. > :40:48.seen? I guess so. You know, I certainly had an idea that what I
:40:49. > :40:51.wanted to do. But I also feel that a lot of the girls that had strong
:40:52. > :40:56.personas and ideas, you know, lot of the girls that had strong
:40:57. > :41:00.how they didn't get past a certain point. We were very much in the
:41:01. > :41:06.moment back then, I don't know if we were aware of what the effect was as
:41:07. > :41:08.much as in retrospect. There was a certain kind of incredible
:41:09. > :41:15.detatchment, it certain kind of incredible
:41:16. > :41:27.effortless coolness to that. Inside it was trauma! Every minute was
:41:28. > :41:29.trauma! # Inbetween
:41:30. > :41:34.# What I find is pleasing # And I feel it come
:41:35. > :41:38.# Love is so confusing. Did you ever think you still be touring in your
:41:39. > :41:41.60s? It is the same answer as previously, which is we are very
:41:42. > :41:46.much in the moment, I don't think anybody was thinking ahead. But also
:41:47. > :41:48.you know when we were kids the only people in their 50s and 60s were
:41:49. > :41:56.jazz and blues musicians, no musicians were that old. Rock 'n'
:41:57. > :42:00.roll is a young form. When you were young I read that you had actually
:42:01. > :42:03.thought perhaps that you had been Marylin Munro's daughter? Yeah, but
:42:04. > :42:06.I don't think I was ever young actually. I think that I have always
:42:07. > :42:14.I don't think I was ever young # Call me I'm in love
:42:15. > :42:19.When I met her she was 26, I think, and there was a really big deal when
:42:20. > :42:25.Cream Magazine outed her as being 33 years old in the beginning of our
:42:26. > :42:34.career, and that was like whoooo. I just flashed my underpants a took
:42:35. > :42:38.care of that! You said I think you were so glad you had all the radical
:42:39. > :42:43.experiences in your life that you had. Does that also include, you
:42:44. > :42:46.have talked about this so long, the drugs period, are you glad in a way
:42:47. > :42:51.you had that, is that still something you don't regret? I think
:42:52. > :42:59.I regret certain aspects of it for sure. But you know it is part of,
:43:00. > :43:04.definitely part of the culture and the times and I certainly think I
:43:05. > :43:11.was you know of a mind to experiment and I think that I stillam perhaps
:43:12. > :43:16.not in the drug world but I think experimentation and trying things is
:43:17. > :43:20.that's deeply rooted in me. It is a problem with drugs and smoking pot
:43:21. > :43:24.every day is it makes everything have the same importance. You know
:43:25. > :43:27.that the little things are as important as the big things, and I
:43:28. > :43:40.don't know if that is a good mental state to be in. We're going to do
:43:41. > :43:45.rapture, after the guitar solo how do you want to do that? We never do
:43:46. > :43:50.the same thing twice. You are funnily rude to Clem? He's a
:43:51. > :43:55.complete pain in the ass but he's great drummer. His playing gets
:43:56. > :43:59.better, he's living the dream. It is like this old family situation, it
:44:00. > :44:03.gets like that. The band is pretty stable now, really, but there are
:44:04. > :44:09.aspects of that. All right, whatever. The creative partnership,
:44:10. > :44:19.you had to have each other for this didn't you? Yeah, it is a weird
:44:20. > :44:23.thing, click, it goes on. # That's very close
:44:24. > :44:27.When you actually split up romantically did it not make any
:44:28. > :44:32.difference to the work? While there was some moments of... There was a
:44:33. > :44:37.period when we weren't working for a year or so, and then it just started
:44:38. > :44:42.up again. Debt is the godmother -- Deb is the godmother to the kids?
:44:43. > :44:48.Are you good at fairy godmother things? I'm terrible. I still
:44:49. > :44:57.haven't left them with her yet? What age are they? Eight and ten? Really?
:44:58. > :45:01.You have had a life and rock 'n' roll, do you feel you are a lifer,
:45:02. > :45:06.that has been in a sense that has been the entire focus of your life?
:45:07. > :45:15.God forbid we are on death row, we are lifers! You know I don't know if
:45:16. > :45:18.we will retire ever, I keep hearing that as soon as you retire you are
:45:19. > :45:29.dead in five years, you have to keep working. We are lucky and appreciate
:45:30. > :45:34.it and I mean I certainly never expected to have this kind of life,
:45:35. > :45:40.I don't know if my kind of life actually existed when I was a child,
:45:41. > :45:45.there was nothing really to pattern myself about. I think you know I
:45:46. > :45:50.knew that I wanted to perform and you know I think originally I was a
:45:51. > :46:00.little girl and I wanted to be a movie star! My ideas were probably
:46:01. > :46:14.always very visual and that has attributed to me sort of creating
:46:15. > :46:20.this Blondie persona. Is there anything you regret that you haven't
:46:21. > :46:25.done yet or you still want to do, are you two cooking up something
:46:26. > :46:29.else? Sure, plenty of stuff. There is this little comedy workshop I
:46:30. > :46:37.have enjoyed doing recently, so I'm not funny you know but I play it
:46:38. > :46:46.very straight. You are pretty funny! Are you funny? Him? He's funny!
:46:47. > :46:53.She's funny too. We can be funny. She has a good sense of humour. That
:46:54. > :46:58.was nice. That was Kirsty talking to Blondie, you can see the full
:46:59. > :47:02.Blondie sessions if you press the red button on your remote at the end
:47:03. > :47:07.of the programme. It is on iPlayer too. That's it from us, the BBC's
:47:08. > :47:12.body clock day today revealed among other things that smartphones and
:47:13. > :47:16.computers trick the body by emitting blue light which makes it think that
:47:17. > :47:20.it is not really time to go to sleep. At last we all understand the
:47:21. > :47:23.reason for this programme's colour scheme. Well it's finished now.
:47:24. > :48:12.Sleep well. (Soft jazz music) After the big downpours that many of
:48:13. > :48:15.us experienced during the course of Tuesday, Wednesday is looking a lot
:48:16. > :48:18.better although it is not going to be a perfect day. There is some
:48:19. > :48:23.cloud and rain in the forecast. Let's start with Northern Ireland
:48:24. > :48:24.first of all where the weather is not looking all that great. Cloudy