:00:00. > :00:13.From tea boy to Prime Minister, Mhodi wins a landslide in the
:00:14. > :00:18.world's biggest democracy, what can India and the world expect from such
:00:19. > :00:22.a controversial figure. We ask an Indian historian where he comes
:00:23. > :00:26.from. He may have been hated by the liberals but he soon became the
:00:27. > :00:31.darling of the urban middle-classes of Gujarat. He concentrated on
:00:32. > :00:35.simple things like bringing transparent good governance, rooting
:00:36. > :00:39.out unnecessary bureaucracy, investment and decent he can
:00:40. > :00:45.treesity supply. We will ask what's wrong with him? Where to start,
:00:46. > :00:55.India has dreamed itself a dream, with a mass murderer as its main
:00:56. > :01:01.character. And... I had a girlfriend once called Double Decker, happy for
:01:02. > :01:17.you to play upstairs. The Premier League's premier sexist, this
:01:18. > :01:23.England striker isn't impressed. As a boy he told tea at a railway
:01:24. > :01:28.station. Those close to him say he's so obsessed with personal hygiene he
:01:29. > :01:37.changes clothes four times a day. To others he has blood on his hand.
:01:38. > :01:40.He's Mr Modi. He's India's most devisive politician, he was an
:01:41. > :01:47.international pariah after being implicated in a massacre in Gujarat
:01:48. > :01:50.state in 2002, it left more than 2,000 Muslims dead. Tonight he
:01:51. > :01:54.stands on the vernal of leading the world's largest democracy. In part
:01:55. > :02:01.of the programme we recorded earlier we will hear from a Modi supporter,
:02:02. > :02:11.and one of the observers of Indian life and history, but here is this
:02:12. > :02:16.take on Modi's extraordinary story. India is great country, bursting
:02:17. > :02:24.with youth, beauty and talent. The world's largest democracy, home to
:02:25. > :02:32.850 million voters. So why is it just electing this man,
:02:33. > :02:36.Narendra Modi, an aesthetic and authoritarian Hindu nationalist,
:02:37. > :02:41.with a decidedly murky record with minorities. Man who some say bears
:02:42. > :02:46.the responsibility for the massacre of hundreds of Indian Muslims in
:02:47. > :02:54.2002. The man you see is what you get. A strong man, populist leader
:02:55. > :03:03.of the masses. He's always work on what is beneficial to him. Narendra
:03:04. > :03:08.Modi's early life was associated with a tea stall like this one. His
:03:09. > :03:17.father from the low caste oil cast and didn't have much cash to feed
:03:18. > :03:21.hungry mouths started a chai stall, and in the early mornings Modi used
:03:22. > :03:24.to help his dad before crossing the tracks to go to school. According to
:03:25. > :03:28.the traditions tracks to go to school. According to
:03:29. > :03:33.pushed as a teenager into an arranged marriage. After a month he
:03:34. > :03:38.whacked out, to go on a -- he walked out to go on a pilgrimage to the
:03:39. > :03:43.Himalayas and never came back. When he did he set up a tea stall in a
:03:44. > :03:46.different town, and here he did he set up a tea stall in a
:03:47. > :03:52.under the influence of the far right. He
:03:53. > :03:56.under the influence of the far modelled on the Hitler
:03:57. > :03:57.under the influence of the far moved over to the BJP and moved to
:03:58. > :04:01.New Deli to the headquarters moved over to the BJP and moved to
:04:02. > :04:02.he lived a very austere life in the party headquarters,
:04:03. > :04:08.he lived a very austere life in the from a regional politician into a
:04:09. > :04:12.national figure. The BJP swept to power in India in the 1990s, in the
:04:13. > :04:18.wake of growing religious tension and mass bloodshed between Hindus
:04:19. > :04:25.and Muslim, as the Hindu nationalism movement began to flex its muscles.
:04:26. > :04:30.The destruction of the B temple by Hindu nationalists, whipped into the
:04:31. > :04:35.frenzy by the BJP leaders shocked the world. Ten years later Modi had
:04:36. > :04:39.risen through the ranks to become chief minister of Gujarat. It was on
:04:40. > :04:49.his watch that religious violence erupted again. Over three days of
:04:50. > :04:51.riots hundreds erupted again. Over three days of
:04:52. > :04:57.murdered and thousands erupted again. Over three days of
:04:58. > :05:02.the initial massacre until five hours after it had finished, but
:05:03. > :05:05.the initial massacre until five on camera claiming
:05:06. > :05:07.the initial massacre until five bloodshed had Modi's blessing and
:05:08. > :05:14.the police had been ordered not to intervene. Modi became a pariah. And
:05:15. > :05:19.was banned from entering Britain and America. Indian liberals are
:05:20. > :05:21.frightened of Mr Modi's history of riots in Gujarat. They are
:05:22. > :05:29.frightened of anybody on the right any way, and Mr Modi's much more
:05:30. > :05:34.unabashedly on the right of society, and the economy. That any leader in
:05:35. > :05:38.the BJP has ever been. Modi may have been hated by the liberals but he
:05:39. > :05:42.soon became the darling of the urban middle-classes of Gujarat. He
:05:43. > :05:45.concentrated on simple things like bringing transparent good
:05:46. > :05:51.governance, rooting out unnecessary bureaucracy, bringing investment and
:05:52. > :05:55.a decent supply of electricity. For ten years Gujarat has enjoyed double
:05:56. > :06:00.digit economic growth. And while economists point out that the
:06:01. > :06:03.Gujarat model has done little to alleviate poverty, or improve
:06:04. > :06:07.education, nutrition or health care for the poor, the burgeoning
:06:08. > :06:11.middle-class have given him credit for their rising living standards.
:06:12. > :06:16.It is this rapid growth of other Indians now looking to Modi to
:06:17. > :06:22.unleash across the rest of India. So how will he govern? Will we see Modi
:06:23. > :06:24.unleash across the rest of India. So the technocrat, who only wants to
:06:25. > :06:29.revive India's smutering economy? Or will it be Modi the Hindu
:06:30. > :06:33.nationalist, should Indian liberals and especially India's religious
:06:34. > :06:37.minorities be worried? I think he wants to come back as Prime Minister
:06:38. > :06:42.five years from now. So he will do everything that he possibly can to
:06:43. > :06:51.remain popular five years from now, rather than to polarise the country
:06:52. > :06:56.and allow communal tension to grow or scare away investors. India has
:06:57. > :07:03.today taken a terrific gamble on its future. It has voted into power an
:07:04. > :07:09.Indian equivalent of Pete President Putin, effectively choosing to
:07:10. > :07:14.ignore Modi's record on human rights in return for putting in place a
:07:15. > :07:17.decisive and hugely charismatic leader who millions hope will
:07:18. > :07:28.provide the strong Government and economic management this country is
:07:29. > :07:33.craving. We have our guest with us now and. These are dramatic results,
:07:34. > :07:39.what is the overwhelming reaction across the country? Well, I think
:07:40. > :07:43.one of both exhileration and relief. He can sell racial because I think
:07:44. > :07:47.those who were committed -- exhileration, because those who were
:07:48. > :07:50.committed to the Modi project are absolutely delighted that their
:07:51. > :07:57.efforts have come to such a wonderful fruition, and it is the
:07:58. > :08:02.BJP who have a simple majority on its on and they have 300 seats, much
:08:03. > :08:08.more than any coalition or a single party has ever got since 1984. So it
:08:09. > :08:13.is a great thing. That sense of stability that you actually elected
:08:14. > :08:19.a Government for five years and rather than have to negotiate with
:08:20. > :08:24.fragile coalitions. That sense of relief is also very evident. I think
:08:25. > :08:30.it is a mixture of two moods which are there in Delhi at present. How
:08:31. > :08:35.significant is this in Indian politics in life? Some people are
:08:36. > :08:40.even talking about it being like a second Republic, he is within 30
:08:41. > :08:43.votes of being able to change the entire Indian constitution. In many
:08:44. > :08:48.ways you could say this is the most significant day in Indian politics
:08:49. > :08:54.almost since partition, or certainly since the emergency. And this is a
:08:55. > :08:58.man who rose from nothing, he was from a low caste, a tea boy at a
:08:59. > :09:03.railway station, what does this say about the mood in India right now?
:09:04. > :09:10.Well I think it constituency a very decisive rejection of the politics
:09:11. > :09:16.of entitlement, which marked the Gandhi family's direct or indirect
:09:17. > :09:20.rule for a very long time. I think Congress willy nilly had got to be
:09:21. > :09:26.identified with privilege, with a sense of being born in the right
:09:27. > :09:30.place and Mr Modi, who was incidentally taunted by various
:09:31. > :09:37.Congress supporters as a mere tea boy who could set up a tea shot in
:09:38. > :09:41.the Congress office, used it very adratly droitly to his advantage and
:09:42. > :09:47.managed to convoy the sense that in India there are no glass ceilings
:09:48. > :09:52.and India presents an opportunist society. It is a very good point, in
:09:53. > :09:55.a sense it was as muches the failings of the -- in as much the
:09:56. > :10:00.failings of the Congress that handed this election to Modi. He waged
:10:01. > :10:03.fatastically brilliant campaign, he turned out to be a much better
:10:04. > :10:08.public speaker than anybody thought, and had the ability to whip up large
:10:09. > :10:12.crowds into a frenzy. As we have been hearing, Narendra Modi is one
:10:13. > :10:17.of the India's most devisive politician, his involvement in the
:10:18. > :10:28.2002 Gujarat riots has been especially controversial, one critic
:10:29. > :10:33.is Anish Kapur, I asked him what is wrong with this Indian Prime
:10:34. > :10:37.Minister Narendra Modi? India has dream add dream with a mass murder
:10:38. > :10:49.as its main character, there is something wrong with that. So who am
:10:50. > :10:53.I to say against supposedly democratic politics, but I think we
:10:54. > :11:02.have to watch and see what happens next. The story isn't great. When
:11:03. > :11:07.you say mass murder, what do you mean? I mean a mass murderer, there
:11:08. > :11:18.is an on going trial, Modi claims to have a so called clean chit, he does
:11:19. > :11:23.not. The trial is on going. Huge intimidation of witnesses, etc.
:11:24. > :11:28.That's well documented, I'm not making it up. Modi has a certain
:11:29. > :11:42.authoritarian ability, is that what we need? I grew up in Gandhi's
:11:43. > :11:49.India, Neru's India, Kabir's India Krishna's India. One that spoke of
:11:50. > :12:01.inclusive, gentle, nonviolent approach to all kind of issues. Here
:12:02. > :12:05.we are on the edge of a sectarian, partisan violent approach, which is
:12:06. > :12:10.completely different. But to call him a mass murderer, when he
:12:11. > :12:14.actually hasn't been charged, is far fetched isn't it? I don't think so,
:12:15. > :12:19.I feel this is the way it is. I'm not alone, by the way. There are
:12:20. > :12:26.many, many who have said before me. Let's have a look at his economic
:12:27. > :12:29.policy, because he did run his campaign on business and development
:12:30. > :12:34.and really that shows that's what the Indian people want, the
:12:35. > :12:39.aspiration of jobs, a better economy and stronger economy. His record in
:12:40. > :12:44.Gujarat proves that. It has had a 10% growth, the rest of the country
:12:45. > :12:49.has had a 5% growth? If so called growth is at the cost of Muslims, at
:12:50. > :12:56.the cost of the poor, at the cost of women, at the cost of child
:12:57. > :13:02.undernourishment. 50% of Indian children are undernourished on a
:13:03. > :13:09.daily basis, etc. If that's the cost of 10% growth well then I don't want
:13:10. > :13:12.it. You have just heard what was said there, do you think that
:13:13. > :13:19.India's new Prime Minister has blood on his hands? Well, I'm infuriated
:13:20. > :13:24.by what I heard said, I have a great respect for Mr Kapoor as an artist.
:13:25. > :13:29.But as an artist who tries to dabble in politics I think he gets it all
:13:30. > :13:34.wrong. Firstly, the use of the term "mass murderer", to me appears like
:13:35. > :13:40.an indictment from a kangaroo court. Nobody, there is no on going trial,
:13:41. > :13:44.nobody has accused Mr Modi, there is not even a first information report
:13:45. > :13:49.on it. That is not true, Human Rights Watch released a report
:13:50. > :13:54.saying that Modi's administration was complicit? In India we take our
:13:55. > :14:02.judiciary far more seriously. I think what Anish is referring to the
:14:03. > :14:05.wife of the Congress MP Jafrey, who was killed in the riots, what
:14:06. > :14:18.happened to him lies at the centre of the charges against Modi in 2002.
:14:19. > :14:22.Jafrey was in the colony, he was calling for help, he was calling the
:14:23. > :14:28.police. He was an ex-MP and calling civil servants, police chiefs and
:14:29. > :14:32.no-one was coming to help him. Now the report done by the SIT for the
:14:33. > :14:36.Supreme Court, which cleared Modi of this, which is a controversial
:14:37. > :14:44.report, none the less it is the report submitted to the Supreme
:14:45. > :14:48.Court and commissioned by the Supreme Court. It says the police
:14:49. > :14:52.were in camera the whole day. It is hard to believe he was not told this
:14:53. > :14:56.man was calling. His wife charges that he called Modi and that Modi
:14:57. > :15:01.laughed at him and expressed surprise that he was still alive.
:15:02. > :15:06.How do you respond to that? Well, firstly I respond to it in the way
:15:07. > :15:09.that there has been a full fledged investigation done on it. There is
:15:10. > :15:15.nothing found to incriminate Mr Modi. The attempt was to have Mr
:15:16. > :15:21.Modi charged as a part of a conspiracy to kill him. It did not
:15:22. > :15:26.stand judicial scrutiny. To my mind therefore calling him a mass
:15:27. > :15:31.murderer, on the strength of one allegation is offensive. You reject
:15:32. > :15:35.these comments, but what about Modi's remarks about how he felt
:15:36. > :15:43.about Muslims being killed. He compared it to a puppy being run
:15:44. > :15:48.over? It was a colloquialism. It was a colloquialism to compare Muslims
:15:49. > :15:52.being run over like a puppy? It was a colloquialism that was badly
:15:53. > :15:56.translated and the person who interviewed Mr Modi from Reuters
:15:57. > :16:01.wrote that she found nothing offensive about it and it had been
:16:02. > :16:06.misconstrued. Do you buy that? One could buy it if it was a unique
:16:07. > :16:09.instance of Modi being mistranslated. And you know this to
:16:10. > :16:17.be true, that Mr Modi has not apologised for the riots. He said
:16:18. > :16:21.that he if he apologised when he was guilty of mass murder he should be
:16:22. > :16:25.put on trial and hung. He has made a whole variety of similar statments.
:16:26. > :16:28.He told the New York Times, what does it matter, it is all in the
:16:29. > :16:32.past, it is the future we should look to. Whether we like it or not,
:16:33. > :16:36.it is the future we now have to deal with. He is in power, he has been
:16:37. > :16:41.voted in which a very large number of Indians and I think the hope is
:16:42. > :16:46.that he has left that Hindu nationalism. That is the hope that
:16:47. > :16:51.many people have. Today Mr Modi said he would unite all Indians, given he
:16:52. > :16:56.is so devisive, do you think he can do that? He's not devisive, certain
:16:57. > :17:00.people have painted him to be devisive. He has always maintained
:17:01. > :17:04.the campaign as economic development for all Indians. Just because he
:17:05. > :17:09.does not mention particular sectarian appeals he does not divide
:17:10. > :17:13.Indians into Hindus, Muslims and others. That is why you call him
:17:14. > :17:17.devisive? I would say he's great unifier because he's trying to make
:17:18. > :17:20.a composite citizenship. And development at the end of the day,
:17:21. > :17:25.if you get development, if you get progress, if you get growth, it is
:17:26. > :17:28.not merely for Hindus or a particular community. It is for
:17:29. > :17:32.everybody. It is for all castes and communities. We will have to leave
:17:33. > :17:36.it there, thank you both for joining us on Newsnight.
:17:37. > :17:41.Here there is less than a week to go before local and European elections.
:17:42. > :17:47.One party is dominating the coverage so far, UKIP, but they weren't the
:17:48. > :17:50.only insurgents out there. The Green Party first made waves in European
:17:51. > :17:56.elections 25 years ago, but their progress since has been some what
:17:57. > :17:59.stop-start. After the 2010 general election some believed the party had
:18:00. > :18:03.a golden opportunity, they had secured their first MP, they took
:18:04. > :18:08.control of their first council the following year, and, with a centre
:18:09. > :18:12.left vote fleeing the Liberal Democrats, a space seemed to have
:18:13. > :18:15.opened up for a fourth party of the radical left. Things have turned out
:18:16. > :18:18.rather differently. It is UKIP on the right rather than the Greens on
:18:19. > :18:22.the left who have made their breakthrough. At the last local
:18:23. > :18:27.elections UKIP gained 139 councillors, the Greens a mere five.
:18:28. > :18:31.They are currently polling at around 4% in national opinion polls,
:18:32. > :18:38.although the picture for the European elections looks a little
:18:39. > :18:42.rowsier. -- rosier. With one poll putting the Greens ahead of the Lib
:18:43. > :18:47.Dems. They are not afraid of making bold promises, a living wage, the
:18:48. > :18:53.abolition of tuition fees and an end to fracking is part of the Green
:18:54. > :18:59.message. The question is under their newish leader Natalie Benefit and
:19:00. > :19:05.the centre vote uniting around the Labour Party, whether the Greens can
:19:06. > :19:09.break out of the polling. I'm joined by Natalie Bennett, the leader of
:19:10. > :19:13.the Green Party. When it comes to Europe are you closer to th European
:19:14. > :19:17.mind set or UKIP? We very much want to remain in Europe, we also say yes
:19:18. > :19:23.to a referendum, because we trust in democracy. That was not the
:19:24. > :19:28.question, are you closer to the mind set or UKIP? I'm not sure about the
:19:29. > :19:33.mind set, we are wanting to remain in the European Union, it provides a
:19:34. > :19:37.foundation of standards, standards of rights, standards of consumer
:19:38. > :19:40.rights, human rights and environmental standards. You only
:19:41. > :19:44.have to look at the polls to see who is closer to the European mind set,
:19:45. > :19:49.what people are thinking, what they are more connected with? If you look
:19:50. > :19:53.at the last poll on whether or not people would vote to remain in
:19:54. > :20:00.Europe in-out referendum it was a clear majority, 54%. These polls
:20:01. > :20:03.speak for themselves, 26% for UKIP, Greens 10%? We have seen a lot of
:20:04. > :20:08.dissatisfied voters on the right, understandably, people are fed up
:20:09. > :20:11.with the three largest parties. And dissatisfied voters on the left as
:20:12. > :20:18.well. Let's lock at Europe as a whole. Is it true though that if you
:20:19. > :20:22.vote Greens you are voting for more regulation from Brussels? Very much
:20:23. > :20:26.not. We very much support the principle of subsidiarity, written
:20:27. > :20:31.into the Lisbon Treaty, local decisions should be made locally, we
:20:32. > :20:35.want a reformed Europe, but we need 180 degrees different from David
:20:36. > :20:39.Cameron, we want a Europe working for people not multinational
:20:40. > :20:43.companies. We can't look at everything, but looking at your
:20:44. > :20:54.policies, this call for a directive on minimum income, What what does
:20:55. > :20:58.this mean? You should earn enough money to live on. How much are you
:20:59. > :21:03.looking from? We are talking in terms of Britain, in London ?8. 80
:21:04. > :21:07.an hour. Is this wage or guaranteed income? This is a wage we are
:21:08. > :21:12.talking about. Is it conditional? We need to separate two things which I
:21:13. > :21:15.think perhaps have got confused. Conditional or unconditional? He
:21:16. > :21:19.want to make the minimum wage a living wage for people working. In
:21:20. > :21:21.the long-term we are looking at a basic income which would be the idea
:21:22. > :21:27.that everyone had sufficient money to live on. So the tax-payers will
:21:28. > :21:31.have to fork out. Where is the incentive to work here? It is
:21:32. > :21:34.interesting in Switzerland they will have a referendum on this, it is the
:21:35. > :21:38.principle if you are a member of society you should have access to
:21:39. > :21:43.resources to feed yourself, put a roof over your head. The fact that
:21:44. > :21:48.Britain, the world's sixth richest country, last year one million
:21:49. > :21:54.people depended on charity from food banks. If you vote for greens, you
:21:55. > :22:02.have said pay for taxes? We are looking at your record in Brighton
:22:03. > :22:06.where you wanted to impose an almost 5% tax, when you couldn't through
:22:07. > :22:11.the referendum you pushed as much as you could which was 2%? I pick up
:22:12. > :22:15.the word "impose", we wanted to pick up with the people of Brighton that
:22:16. > :22:19.austerity had gone too far, and paying for the fraud of the bankers
:22:20. > :22:24.was being laid far too much on the poor and disadvantaged, we wanted
:22:25. > :22:30.that 5% council tax rise to pay for social care. What does success look
:22:31. > :22:34.for yo We only need a swing of 1. 6% in the proportional representation
:22:35. > :22:41.in the elections on Europe to treble our MEPs. Ahead of the Lib Dems? I'm
:22:42. > :22:44.confident we will see the Lib Dem is tanking their vote. I'm up
:22:45. > :22:46.confident we will see the Lib Dem is re-election in September it will be
:22:47. > :22:50.up for the Green Party members to decide where
:22:51. > :22:52.up for the Green Party members to They were meant to
:22:53. > :22:55.up for the Green Party members to between friends, but do chief
:22:56. > :23:01.executive of the Premier between friends, but do chief
:23:02. > :23:07.Richard Scudamore's e-mails reveal how deeply entrenched sexism is in
:23:08. > :23:15.football. He has apologised but is under pressure to resign. Should
:23:16. > :23:18.private e-mails end a public career. After a season in which ten Premier
:23:19. > :23:23.League managers have parted company with their clubs over on-the-field
:23:24. > :23:29.matters, there are growing calls for the league's chief executive to
:23:30. > :23:32.leave his post too. Richard Scudamore, dishing out medals to
:23:33. > :23:37.champions Manchester City last weekend is in trouble over private
:23:38. > :23:42.e-mails he sent on his work account. In the e-mails, which were leaked to
:23:43. > :24:03.a newspaper by his former PA, he wrote:
:24:04. > :24:10.team condemned Mr Scudamore's remarks. It is not just
:24:11. > :24:21.made. And however jokey he was trying to be with that, it
:24:22. > :24:26.made. And however jokey he was totally unacceptable in this day and
:24:27. > :24:29.age. Mr Scudamore has apologised, but it is emerging he wrote to the
:24:30. > :24:33.chairman of the Premier League clubs asking them if they found his
:24:34. > :24:36.comments sexist. Until yesterday I thought he might be able to ride
:24:37. > :24:39.comments sexist. Until yesterday I if he apologised properly. But now,
:24:40. > :24:43.especially given the revelation about his e-mail to the chairman
:24:44. > :24:46.especially given the revelation think his position is untenable. A
:24:47. > :24:51.Premier League panel will decide next week whether to take action
:24:52. > :24:52.against Mr Scudamore. If the final whistle has not already blown on his
:24:53. > :24:58.career by then. I'm whistle has not already blown on his
:24:59. > :25:05.the women's whistle has not already blown on his
:25:06. > :25:07.footballer, and a member of Campaign Group Women in Football, and Claire
:25:08. > :25:11.Fox from the Institute of Group Women in Football, and Claire
:25:12. > :25:14.Shouldn't man who says these sorts of things and has the kind of
:25:15. > :25:18.responsibility he has take responsibility for his words Claire?
:25:19. > :25:23.He can take responsibility for his words but I think an important
:25:24. > :25:27.principle is at stake here, which is I do think we should be able to
:25:28. > :25:32.distinguish between what is said privately and
:25:33. > :25:34.distinguish between what is said I think that even despite his gross,
:25:35. > :25:38.distinguish between what is said crude, sexism, not the kind of guy I
:25:39. > :25:42.will invite round to dinner some time soon, but nonetheless he said
:25:43. > :25:45.these privately. If all of the things we all said privately in
:25:46. > :25:49.e-mails or confidences we shared were made public, probably
:25:50. > :25:52.us couldn't face the day. Not because we say things like that, but
:25:53. > :25:56.because there has to be a place where you can speak off the record.
:25:57. > :26:02.So that's what I want to defend, it is a very important point, I'm not
:26:03. > :26:04.prepared to let this idiot's ill-spoken e-mails mean that we
:26:05. > :26:08.sacrifice something which is going to affect all of us very seriously,
:26:09. > :26:12.dangerously. Do you agree with Claire, these were just jokes
:26:13. > :26:16.between friends, and they weren't for the public arena? I agree
:26:17. > :26:21.partially in the idea that there should be a private sphere for
:26:22. > :26:26.people to say what they feel like saying, however I think there needs
:26:27. > :26:30.to be you know a differenciation between what is said privately and
:26:31. > :26:36.publicly, this was a work e-mail that was exchanged and seen by a PA
:26:37. > :26:41.working in her working capacity. So I think that's the case here. This
:26:42. > :26:47.is something that Mr Scudamore said in his capacity as chief executive
:26:48. > :26:52.of the Premier League and it was on a work e-mail. That is a technical
:26:53. > :26:56.point, he wasn't intending it to be a public e-mail. It is not a
:26:57. > :26:59.technical point, the e-mails are the property of the Premier League, they
:27:00. > :27:02.were circulated between colleagues at the Premier League, they were
:27:03. > :27:05.about, in particular, one female colleague at the Premier League, and
:27:06. > :27:09.the person who viewed those e-mail, rather than being seen as the
:27:10. > :27:13.perpetrator who should be punished for leaking those e-mails she was a
:27:14. > :27:17.victim, she was instructed to access those e-mails as part of her daily
:27:18. > :27:22.job, instead she was confronted with all this sexism and she was really
:27:23. > :27:26.upset. If it came from a private e-mail should it get this attention?
:27:27. > :27:30.It didn't come from a private e-mail. The point is this is a
:27:31. > :27:35.person who in his professional capacity has publicly pledged, if it
:27:36. > :27:39.had come from a private e-mail and -- If it had come from a private
:27:40. > :27:43.e-mail would you have felt the same way? You can't argue about those
:27:44. > :27:47.sorts of things. It was on a work e-mail and he has made extremely big
:27:48. > :27:51.gestures about discrimination and equality, and that is the basis.
:27:52. > :27:54.Isn't that fascinating, one of the things I have no interest in this
:27:55. > :27:59.particular individual, one of the things is in the public sphere he
:28:00. > :28:02.seems to have done huge amounts for women's football, which is the
:28:03. > :28:06.professional basis on which I would want to hold him to account and for
:28:07. > :28:10.the Premier League. That is the point, that publicly there is a
:28:11. > :28:14.disparity. But there is a disparity between a lot of the way that I am
:28:15. > :28:18.publicly and the way I am privately, as with us all. Now that it is out
:28:19. > :28:24.and people are aware of his views. It is out because it has become de
:28:25. > :28:27.rigueur that we take things to newspapers, we take private
:28:28. > :28:31.information put into the public domain. I'm saying can we just stop
:28:32. > :28:36.a moment and think of the consequences that every time we
:28:37. > :28:41.write an e-mail that we consider to be going to mates, or off the
:28:42. > :28:45.record, that it is going to be on the front page of the newspaper. We
:28:46. > :28:50.will behave, it will be a tyranny, we would never, ever be frank. Do
:28:51. > :28:56.you think we are taking political correctness too far? That is one of
:28:57. > :28:59.those cliches I'm nervous of. What I do think is we have a situation
:29:00. > :29:03.whereby we are frightened, we are talking on egg shell, even when we
:29:04. > :29:08.are talking off the report, I don't think we are able to cultivate
:29:09. > :29:15.ourselves as individuals or be honest, ever. If this was a race
:29:16. > :29:19.e-mail would it be different? I don't think it would be,
:29:20. > :29:22.discrimination is discrimination. Would he have been forced to, would
:29:23. > :29:27.they have taken swift action against him? That is a speculative question,
:29:28. > :29:31.but I think it is a concern for me that there is not different ranks of
:29:32. > :29:38.discrimination, discrimination is discrimination, the argument whether
:29:39. > :29:41.if it was a racist e-mail or anti-semetic, would it have been
:29:42. > :29:46.dealt with more strongly, possibly yes. Any e-mail that comes out,
:29:47. > :29:51.people should lose their jobs? You have to put everything into context,
:29:52. > :29:56.I'm making a point about the private sphere and the distinction between
:29:57. > :30:00.the public, I'm not here to say if it was about women it is not as
:30:01. > :30:04.serious as race issue, that would be ludicrous. I think it portrays
:30:05. > :30:07.attitudes I don't like, there is lots of people who have attitudes I
:30:08. > :30:11.don't like that express them privately. That is the point I'm
:30:12. > :30:15.making, if he stood up making a speech arguing this, fine, I do not
:30:16. > :30:20.think at the moment we should drive him out of his job. That is not for
:30:21. > :30:24.me to say. I think you know there are policies in place, the Premier
:30:25. > :30:29.League are signed up. What do you think will happen to him? I think
:30:30. > :30:33.there is policies in place that will lead to protocols and a decision
:30:34. > :30:40.will be made. Again it is not for me to say. But I think obviously we are
:30:41. > :30:44.disappointed in somebody in that capacity saying such sexist things.
:30:45. > :30:47.Thank you very much all for joining us. That's all for this week. As
:30:48. > :30:54.Downing Street ponders the best format for the election TV debates,
:30:55. > :31:00.we leave you with the republican primaries in Idaho, where they are
:31:01. > :31:06.less fussy about who takes part. David and Ed take note. Thank you so
:31:07. > :31:13.much your closing remarks. I was living in Fat Jack's Cellar because
:31:14. > :31:21.my wife had restraining orders out. I have 77 defendants. Fat Jack's
:31:22. > :31:27.wife said get this lunatic out of my cellar. I think half of the
:31:28. > :31:31.democrats are lunatics. My Bible says it will get worse and worse and
:31:32. > :31:36.worse, I said do you mind putting that in writing, he said sure and he
:31:37. > :31:40.put it in writing and I have the original at home. It is time to get
:31:41. > :31:51.out, thank you for the time tonight, and thank you
:31:52. > :31:54.for watching and we will see at the poll.
:31:55. > :32:01.Good evening to you, in the last few days we have been advertising some
:32:02. > :32:02.very warm weather heading for the weekend and the