15/07/2014 Newsnight

exclusively to the man who secured convictions for the murder of

Stephen Lawrence, he says senior interference stopped him

investigating child abuse allegations in the 1990s after he

named the suspects. I was informed that was inappropriate and that in

fact I would be moved from my post. That information included

politicians' names? Yeah, correct. Former detective Clive Driscoll also

shares fresh revelation about how the inquiry into Stephen Lawrence's

murder looked from the inside. Stephen's friend Dwyane Brooks is

here. The longest walk in politics, Michael Gove goes into Number Ten as

Education Secretary and comes out as something rather more junior. Why?

What happens when you send an artist to Helmand? I wish on reflection

that I hadn't gone to Helmand, sending an artist to a warzone is a

complex moral and ethical responsibility. Making work under

those conditions is life-changing. Good evening. It took 18 years after

his death before two of his killers were put behind bars. But tonight,

the detective who built the case against Stephen Lawrence's killers

has told Newsnight that inside the Met some people never wanted a

successful prosecution. Speaking exclusively to Newsnight for the

first time since he retired Clive Driscoll says he believes there were

disruption tactics during his inquiry. He also claims that when he

was investigating child abuse that took place in the 1980s he was moved

from his post when he revealed suspect he is wanted to investigate

including politicians. Here is his story.

Getting to the truth few criminal cases have done more to test that

promise than Stephen Lawrence's murder. When truth was be a secured

by mistakes and fear, trust in the police fell away. Crimes they just

could not or would not resolve. The detective who convicted Lawrence's

killers is now ready to reveal how obstacles were put in the way of his

investigations. Some people did not want a successful prosecution.

Tonight I tells us how in that case and his inquiry into child abuse in

1980s Lambeth, barriers, even politics, appeared. At the time I

just felt that it was all too uncomfortable to a lot of people. In

these most contentious of cases has truth been a victim too?

Clive Driscoll worked for the Met for more than three decades until

just a few weeks ago, his detective work led finally to the successful

convictions of Stephen Lawrence's killers. What he describes as his

for that politically-charged case was perhaps just as contentious. At

that time the detective's involvement had a very different

autooutcome. In 1998 he worked in child protection and was moved to

investigate allegations of child abuse in children's homes in Lambeth

in south London, alleged to have taken place in the 1980s. But his

lines of inquiry quickly proved just too awkward. There was a mistrust on

both sides. It appeared that certainly that people didn't trust

the Metropolitan Police Service and I think the Metropolitan Police

Service possibly didn't trust some of the people it was working with. A

bit like young Stephen's investigation, I never felt there

was wall of silence, but whenever people spoke to you and shared their

fears and their story about what they had seen, it was almost on a

proviso that they wouldn't make a statement and that they would be

scared if you released who those people were that were talking for

fear of reprisals. It was a very, very difficult climate for people to

come forward in. But, very bravely, in my opinion, they did come

forward, and I passed the names on that had been passed to me as

potential suspects. When he revealed those names, including politicians

at a case meeting he was taken off the investigation and subjected to a

disciplinary. After discussing internally with the Metropolitan

Police Service whether or not I should release certain information

to Lambeth Council, which I hadn't done up until then, it was agreed by

my senior management team that That is That is what -- that is what I

should do. And I disclosed suspects' names and I was informed that was

inappropriate and I would be moved from my post. That information

included politicians' names as potential suspects? There was

actually a mix. There were certainly some of the names of people that

were locally working, some people that were, if you like, working

nationally, but there was quite a mix really, because of, it appeared

that it was connected to other boroughs and other movements around

the country. To be clear, when you say a mix, you mean some local

political figures? Yeah, correct. And MPs? That's correct, yeah. Do

you fear that you were stopped from investigating those claims because

you suspected more than one politician of being involved in

child abuse? At the time I just felt that it was all too uncomfortable to

a lot of people. After Clive Driscoll moved, investigations

continued to look at more than 20 children's homes and are still on

going. There have been several convictions, the Met is now looking

into his claims concerning his removal from the investigation and

have called him to a meeting in Scotland Yard this week. Stephen ran

crossing the road and he ran and eventually died up on the right-hand

side of the road there. That experience made Clive Driscoll more

determined to pursue the truth, ultimately in the Lawrence case,

equally controversial. The Met's initial flawed attempts to find his

killers in the weeks that followed his death got nowhere. We are in a

position today where we have an opportunity to learn and we have an

opportunity to maybe put right some of the wrongs that have come out in

recent times. There was no doubt that there were mistakes made in

this decision. There was much debate about whether those mistakes were

corruption mistakes or incompetent mistakes. Prosecutors then didn't

find enough evidence to charge anyone the family's own private

attempts to prosecute collapsed. Despite in 1999 a major inquiry,

where suspects had to give evidence, and the first investigation was

found to be flawed, in 2004 again the CPS ruled out another trial. In

your view were most of the mistakes down to competence, or was there

something more sinister? The difference betwe incompetence and

corruption is a bit like a bad tackle in football. The person who

knows is the person who made the tackle. I can be incompetent all day

long if you want. What was your sense? My sense was I couldn't work

certain things out. There was certain incidents and inquires that

didn't appear to be progressed. There were certain parts of the

investigation that really didn't make any sense to me at all. But I

never investigated whether that was corruption or incompetence. In 2005

the Government changed the law. It was now possible to try suspects for

the same crime twice. Clive Driscoll was put in charge, after years of

disappointment he first had to persuade the Lawrences and the key

witness, Stephen's friend, Dwayne Brooks to trust and confide in him.

It is your deeply-held belief that there were people at senior levels

in the Met that were almost hoping this investigation would fail. You

felt that pressure? There were certainly people in senior levels in

the Met that weren't enthusiastic about the investigation, I certainly

felt that. You know, as I have said before, it is a very serious

allegation to make and I don't have evidence that I could present to any

tribunal for that. It is certainly what I felt was that people in

places I would have expected to have had the enthusiasm didn't. And you

were so concerned about that you even made that complaint to senior

officers? I actually did send an e-mail to senior officers explaining

that I felt that it could be seen, if somebody came behind and actually

looked at what was going on, I think they would probably see it as a

disruption tactic. So yes, I did put that in writing. David Norris and

Gary Dobson were convicted of murder. But still the handling of

the original case continued to challenge the Met's reputation. This

year an independent review found failures and reasonable grounds to

suspect corruption. That inquiry asked the met for full disclosure,

even then Clive Driscoll says there were discussions about handing

everything over. Including a document on covert recording of key

witness Dwyane Brooks. He have been told of incidents where senior

officers were accused of holding back documents? That's correct. I

would urge them to think about that and think about it and I would urge

them to think about it was the Home Secretary and the Home Secretary and

the mayor have every right to know what we are doing. You know that

very senior officers discussed holding back some documents with

lawyers? You could call it a culture, it could be just a mind set

that you have to defend the Metropolitan Police. That is the

only reason you have a lawyer there, to defend, well you don't have to

defend the Metropolitan Police Service, if the Home Secretary or

the mayor ask for something, well you give it to them. But one bad

decision around disclosure undoes the remarkable work that police

officers do up and down the country. And for me, just be open and honest,

warts and all. The Met told us no relevant material was intentionally

withheld, their policy was to be open and transparent, and they are

still committed to continuing the Lawrence investigation. Doreen

Lawrence still speaks to Clive Driscoll most days. She has little

contact with the rest of the Met. He says the relationship is as bad as

just after Stephen's death. Although he believes there could yet be more

convictions. If you were the Lawrence family would you trust the

Met? If I was the Lawrence family, no I probably wouldn't. How do you

feel about that given the years of hard work, effort, struggle almost,

first of all to win their trust, and then to finally prosecute the case?

I actually feel desperately sorry for them. I think that they have

lost their son, let's never forget, that they lost a much-loved son, it

is almost like reliving the trauma of that. For Driscoll the priority

for the police past and present must now be complete and total openness,

after the Lawrence case tore trust away, suspicions is the only path to

go. Before you said you weren't sure if it was incompetence or corruption

in the early investigation. What does corruption look like? A

question I have asked myself many times, what is corruption? Is it

going behind a pub somewhere and getting an envelope of ?50 notes, or

is corruption that you don't go down a certain path, you don't follow a

certain inquiry and therefore you make someone very happy that you

haven't followed that inquiry, therefore your next promotion is

easier for you, your CV looks a bit more glamorous. By the time you

finish your career and at the end of your pension you could have earned

considerably more than what you would ever stuff in an envelope, so

what is corruption? My concern is that the result for the grieving

family or the victim or for justice is exactly the same, is that justice

has been thwarted, and that can't happen at any cost, because the

reality is that is the rule of law, it is part of our freedom. Dwyane

Brooks who we saw in the film is with us tonight. Thank you very much

for coming in. You would be forgiven, with everything that

happened with the Met for not trusting them at all, what was it

about Clive Driscoll when he took over the case that was different?

Clive just comes across as a very honest person, down to earth, south

London person. Bit of Cockney, every now and again in his language. For

me he was just completely different from all the other officers that I

had dealt with. I gave him a chance. He said to me, Duwayno I can crack

this case! I thought let's give him a go. Did you believe him? No, I

didn't believe him. But he made a tremendous amount of effort to

convince me that it could be done. I had no other choice but to trust

him. And Clive and his team came through. When he did come through

and there were successful convictions in the end, what were

your feelings and the Lawrence family's feelings about this? I felt

that the Met should have come out and said well done Clive and Peter

and members of the team, well done. You have done something that nobody

else thought was possible, but it didn't happen. I'm still baffled as

to why senior members of the Metropolitan Police haven't come out

and said thank you to Clive and his team. Why do you think that might

be? We have seen from the clip why it could be. Because there were

senior officers in the Met who just did not want there to be a

conviction in this case. You felt that too? Along the way, yes, up

until Clive got involved. Once life was involved the communication we

had was constant he kept kept me up-to-date about the issues and what

had was constant he kept kept me he needed to do. For me it was just

a matter of time. As we saw we had two convictions. The Met would say

they were always committed to the investigation, they were always

committed to trying to get convictions, but now Clive has

retired, just a matter of weeks ago, do you believe there is still a

prospect of there being more convictions in the case? Without

Clive leading a team, no. I don't think it is possible. All the work

that Clive and his team have done over the past seven, eight years, it

will all be lost. It is all going to be lost? I don't think the officers

who have taken over now are in the same league as Clive and his

previous team, I don't think they have got the leadership or

communication skills. On communication, do you talk to them?

Would you talk to them? I communication, do you talk to them?

spoken to any of the new team at the moment. When I speak

spoken to any of the new team at the see everybody who was involved

convicted. Would I be able to trustn them, I don't know. Why not? Because

the way Clive would have been treated, is not how I would expect

the Metropolitan Police to trust a person who has got a conviction when

anybody else could. Clive is leaving for retirement and in perfectly

reasonable conditions and nothing improper has gone in any way. Do you

feel you would ever have been able to trust the force again, without

him you have said you wouldn't? In relation to the Lawrence case it

would be difficult for me to trust officers coming in now, because of

the way Clive has been treated. But if we were talking about the

Metropolitan Police on the whole, well of course I trust them. We have

thousands and thousands of rank and file officers that do a great job

day in and day out and they protect us all in this fabulous city. In the

Lawrence case it is a bit different from generally the Metropolitan

Police who I do support, who I do trust. What do you feel about

documents, including those relating to you being bugged during those

early days of the inquiry. How do you feel about those being withheld,

the Met says absolutely not intentionally, what do you feel

about that? Saddened, but I'm not surprised. But it is astonishing

that the Home Secretary can order an inquiry, order the Met to disclose

all relevant information and the Met take legal advice and do the

opposite. So we have heard in that piece that the Met say they are

open, they want to be transparent, fine, let's be transparent. Publish

the legal advice tomorrow. Let's see how transparent the Met really are.

The Met says it is still committed to this investigation, they have

still got resources on it, they have got that new team they talked about,

do you believe they are committed to it? You are not talking to them yet?

I haven't seen any evidence of that. So at the moment in time I don't

believe so. The only evidence I have seen around this investigation is

the way they have treated Clive Driscoll and his team, a team that

secured a conviction that we all believed wasn't possible. Briefly,

how often, how much do you still think about what happened all those

years ago? It will stay with me forever. It was a night that I

wished didn't happen. If I had the chance to turn back time of course,

I would turn back time and make different decisions on that night,

but it has happened, we have to move on, we have to be successful. To

show that even though you do have bad times in your life you can move

on and be successful, so I have been trying to do that. But also the

message needs to go out to other victims of crime that even though

things may be hard, at the end of the day justice is still possible.

Thank you very much for coming in and talking to us tonight.

Reshuffles are the equivalent of tacking up a couple of new pictures

on the walls of the Cabinet Room. Others moving a couple of shares an.

This time well there has been proper heavy lifting. David Cameron has

striped two of his biggest and brightest names of the full comfort

of a full season cabinet, he's a modest number of women into the

room, sent a relative unknown into Europe to represent our interests,

and finally put one of his most devisive colleagues in charge of,

wait for it, team work. You may wonder what the Government will do

differently, very much? It took eight hours to carry out, eight

hours you don't have, so here is Newsnight's eight things you need to

know about the reshuffle. # Every day I'm shuffling

So first thing this morning one of those oldies explained David

Cameron's strategy. He doesn't have many reshuffles which is a very good

thing. And then he wants a reshuffle which gives a Government which looks

like the sort of Government he wants in the next parliament. Who does

that mean in practice. Chances are if you are male, pale and a

middle-aged Tory minister then yesterday afternoon you were asked

to David Cameron's private study in parliament over there and asked if

you want to retire. If you didn't want to retire you would have been

retired in time for Newsnight last night when we got a slew of

resignations from the Government. This morning Newsnight was up with

the lark to find out who the lucky ones are, including the chap who has

walked behind me, the new Welsh Secretary. The guys who walk through

the door today are who the Tory Party think are the face of modern

Britain. Average outgoing age 48, in coming 32. He wasn't lucky, the

biggest jobs went to men, Philip Hammond, Foreign Secretary. The

number of women attending cabinet today nearly doubled from five to

eight, new roles for women in education and environment. But we

have been told it would rain women in this reshuffle and in the end it

was more of a light shower. No female Defence Secretary for

instance, Esther McVey had been tipped for a full blown cabinet

post, in the end she said stayed in her current job and got added

permission to attend cabinet. Stow stow Tina Stowell is the leader of

the Lords, but not a full blown cabinet minister, strange. David

Cameron once criticised people, to put it mildly, for tweeting too

much, but today every appointment came on Twitter. One tweet shocked

everyone. The news that all of us here are digesting is that Michael

Gove is being moved from his position as Education Secretary to

become Chief Whip, which is something that nobody expected.

After 30 years of friendship the Prime Minister removed Michael Gove

from his job and vocation. That's fantastic, this is the very hungry

catterpillar. Cameron's pollsters decided he was too unpopular with

teachers, and the zeal that landed the Cameron Government its radical

chick was now a problem. As whip's central to the next campaign, but

colleagues told Newsnight he feels very bruised. Spin was also a winner

today, Esther McVey, William Hague, Michael Gove and Grant Shapps, who

stays as chairman, these people are all in jobs not purely frontline

politics, but communicating the Tory vision. I'm flattered to be asked by

the Prime Minister to be at the heart of his team, deciding on the

people, the ideas and the policies shaping not just the next nine

months but we hope the next Conservative Government. The Prime

Minister has asked me to make sure we have the team in place and the

ideas in place to ensure that the long-term economic plan, which is

now at last generating economic growth can benefit everyone in the

country. This reshuffle didn't really have a bias, the cabinet did

lose big right-wing hitters, but the wider Government saw many on the

right promoted. Instead the Tories seem to be pressing pause on all of

policy. Today we learned Lord Hill is the Prime Minister's choice to be

our EU Commissioner. Nigel Farage was quick to ask Lord who? But there

was substantial movement today on Europe. We have a more euro-sceptic

cabinet on that sending a signal both to voters here at home but also

to Europe that Cameron is serious now, this is getting real it is also

laying the ground work for the big renegotiation that is meant to take

place ahead of that potential 2017 referendum. The Chancellor's

tentacles tightened their grip on Government. George Osborne's former

aide Clare Perry, pretending to be a train, she went to transport, one of

many promoted, all potentially readying George Osborne for a

leadership bit in 2018. That is a long time away. Tonight David

Cameron's last reshuffle before the 2015 election is done, and the great

offices of Whitehall have become glorified election campaign

headquarters. Our political editor is with us now, Allegra what does

this all mean the Government will actually do differently in the next

ten months? I don't think they are going to do very much in the next

ten months. They will look different, so we have this massive

change of people coming on programmes like our's. So they will

look given. Different. There will be a lot of manifesto pledge, we will

get what they would like to do the other side of a general election. In

terms of what they will actually do, it won't be very much. Michael Gove

has been embarrassingly nothing at all, for no reason the change. What

really happened there? Michael Gove is still in a team with colleagues,

he's still David Cameron's friend of 30 years and George Osborne's friend

of a long time, but what actually happened we believe he was happy to

go to it because he wanted to pull together, but the idea that this

radical idealogue, whatever you want to call him, was happy to be moved,

is far fetched, I know from colleagues he feels bruised this

evening. What we will be look to go see in the next couple of days is

quite whether he manages to keep a lid on it. It would be a first in

politics, somebody happy to be demoted. Descriptions of Michael

Gove range very far and wide, as Education Secretary he will be

thanked by generations to come for his radical reforms. A demented

Dalek trying to change the teaching profession, or a charming bully who

lost out for overstepping the mark too many times. Whatever you think,

and he's still Chief Whip, he has never committed the ultimate faux

pas, being dull! Will his reforms really last?

The teaching unions don't always reflect the views of their members,

but when it came to Michael Gove, the former Education Secretary, they

did. In general teachers wanted rid of him, and today they got their

wish. He's not even a Secretary of State any more. A lot of teachers

have been celebrating today. So this reshuffle will be seen as wane for

the educationalists who oppose Mr Gove's reform, often bbed "the

blob". Should they be celebrating? Let's see what he Z his first move

was the introduction of converter academies, more than half of

secondary schools took part in the programme. It meant for those

schools instead of being funded by and overseen by local authorities,

they were instead directly answerable to the Department for

Education. They also got a lot more freedom over their teachers' pay and

the curriculum, that gave them the ability to depart from national

norms when it came to hiring and what they chose to teach.

The second of his big policies was the introduction of so called free

school, he introduced a presumption that new schools should be opened by

private groups, rather than by local authorities. The idea was that

rather than having the same old people running schools, you will get

dynamism and choice and competition by allowing new providers into the

schools' market place. Michael Gove also tried to reform what was being

taught inside schools, he tweaked the cirriculum to put more emphasis

on knowledge and less on skills. He changed the structure of exams so

there was less course work and more so called linear exams, that is old

fashioned exams at the end of the course. Many of the ideas are long

in the tooth. For the last four years in education it has been a

period of enormous change, many of the changes are changes that are

really accelrate rating change -- accelerating change and processes

already in place, especially new types of schools, academies,

converters and free schools, moving power to schools. Not only did Mr

Gove's opponents fail to stop the reform which is have weakened local

authorities and union, but they have been losing for decades. One novelty

is in his hurry Mr Gove accrued a lot of power to the Department for

Education. Perhaps the contradictions, public and private,

have become overwhelming. Public in terms of preaching that there should

be complete autonomy for schools, and then imposing from the

department and other agencies absolute direction from the centre

personally, because when you talk to him in private he's both charming

and prepared to listen. But in public he appears beligerant and

unprepared to listen. It seems that the oversight of schools will change

in the coming years, but there is no support for less school autonomy,

and high-content curriculums are current teaching fashion. A recent

poll found he was the Tory politician most disliked by members

of the public. Perhaps his approach to people who disagree with him is

something to do with it. What I can tell you is that outstanding

teachers and outstanding head teachers are I find overwhelmily in

favour of what we are doing. It is the bad ones that don't get it? Yes.

Maybe he needs to learn that even if you are winning against the blob,

you didn't do everything alone. We did invite the Government's new

Chief Whip and the man David Cameron says has an enhanced role doing

broadcast interviews, to come on Newsnight again, for a broadcast

interview tonight, he was unavailable, nor was any other

Conservative cabinet minister able to come on. Rather than leave the

chair empty, fortunately Labour's Shadow educational secretary is

here. Were you shocked that your opposite number was out? I got the

sense that the Education Secretary had rather run out of road in recent

months. What we saw was David Cameron realising what pupils and

parents and teachers have realised is that Government education policy

is damaging school standard. So whether it was unqualified teachers,

whether it was taking money from the schools' budget for free schools.

Whether it was downgrading technical and vocational skills, all of this

was affecting the Government popularity and finally the Prime

Minister acted. It was really his very public spat with Theresa May

and politicking around Take That got rid of him? That played a part, but

also what we need to realise tonight and my message tonight is the

architect might have gone but the ideology remains n terms of an

atomised schools system, and focus on unqualified teachers the

classroom. All of these things remain Government policy even with

Michael Gove moving on. Most of them in their origin were actually new

Labour ideas? The academy programme was a new Labour programme, school

autonomy was a new Labour programme. When Michael Gove built on those

issues in the early years was fine. We are only in year four? You saw in

the last interview, maybe it is what happens to a Secretary of State, but

he became more ideolgical and antagonistic and more devisive, we

didn't take the teaching profession with him. If you want real

sustainable change over time, the people delivering that in the

classroom are the teachers f you antagonise them so much you won't be

able to make the changes you want, whether knowledge-rich curriculum or

linear exams or the other elements. For teachers and parents watching up

and down the country, it is really about the changes he wanted to make,

not whether or not he wound people up with how he made them. You said

yourself in certain situations his reforms build rather successfully on

Labour Party policy? I think there is now a growing consensus about the

need for autonomous schools, strong leadership. Where we differ from the

Government is we think schools should be co-operating, challenging

and partnering each other. We have a Government that likes to think of

schools in isolation. We saw the results of that law in Birmingham FA

want to think about a symbol of results of that law in Birmingham FA

atomised, fragmented education system, you have to look at

atomised, fragmented education events in Birmingham. The big

principles and the reasons why some people might think about choosing

Labour rather than voting Conservative, is because they didn't

like the sound of what Michael Gove was doing. In fact, you would not

get rid of existing free schools, you support performance-related pay

that is one of the things so contentious with the unions. On the

big principles you agree? The biggest difference between us is we

know that the most important element in a young person's education is the

quality of teaching. In this Government we have focus on

relentless structural reform, as if changing the name of a school to a

free school or academy does the job, it doesn't. The most important

element is improving the teaching and leadership in the school. That

is a big policy difference. This Government has let more and more

unqualified teachers into our classrooms. It has downgraded the

teaching profession and the best education systems around the world

has have qualified masters level teachers. You know the vast majority

of teachers in classm radios right now, in new schools as a product of

Michael Gove's reforms are still qualified teachers, and the

important point for our viewers and parents around the country tonight,

would you not get rid of existing free schools and you support

performance-related pay, the things that Michael Gove had such trouble

convincing the teaching profession of, and you wouldn't get rid of

either of those things? We are not interested in simply change for

change's sake. We see a lot of grandstanding and party politicking.

We will keep the reforms that are sensible, we won't throw things up

in terms of curriculum. We will focus crucially on the forgotten 50%

of young people who want to pursue technical and vocational pathways.

We will focus on teacher quality and rebuild local oversight and

accountability. Thank you very much for coming in. To discuss the events

of the day, not just Michael Gove's departure is my guest, a columnist

for the Times and the Guardian are both here. Thank you for coming in.

You made it your stock and trade to know what is really going on in the

Conservative minds. What really happened with Michael Gove, was he

shoved out uncermoniously, he's going around saying he's pleased

with his new job, are we to believe him? He didn't want to go and leave

this position. But the Conservative Party has admired what Michael Gove

has tried to do. He has been perhaps one of the great education reformers

of the in the post-war years. He has tried to tackle the fact that the

British taxpayer puts more and more money into education and hasn't been

keeping one the rest of the world. His reforms matter. Sometimes the

person building the house or invents the product is not the best person

to sell that product. And Linton Crosby, the Australian adviser to

the Prime Minister saw the opinion polls and this was not a popular

Education Secretary. If you are going to win an election you can't

have an Education Secretary that seems to be antagonising, not just

teachers but parents as well. The mums in particular, the women who

haven't always supported the Conservative Party. And Nicky Morgan

is the David Cameron choice not to unwind the Michael Gove reforms but

to sell them. Does Nicky Morgan believe in the reform, some unkindly

have suggested she doesn't believe in very much, smart, efficient and

pragmatic, can you tell us what she believes in? I think she's someone

who on the gay marriage issue she took a different position, she

opposed it and stood up to David Cameron, she wasn't just someone who

agrees with what the Prime Minister wants. She as an independent

thinker, but crucially will Gove's reforms survive? Look at the junior

ministers, Nick Gibb and others they are people who believe in reforms,

there is no great retreat. Polly what do you make of it? Jo I think

it is worth pausing for a moment for observers and commentators to think

how hellish political life is. You get to the top of the tree and get

stuck into something you care about passionately and suddenly you are

yanked out and gone forever. It happened to Andrew Lansley. It is a

better business. Is this you showing sympathy for Michael Gove? Yes, I

feel sympathy for politicians, I think sometimes as comment it aors

-- commentators, we say what we think about them, they come and go.

It is a rough, rough trade, in that sense I feel sorry for him. He said

it was a great wrench. On the other hand I think, as Tim was suggesting

i think he really had to go. Here is man who will pick a fight with

himself if you put him in an empty room. Partly because he was a

commentator at one time. Part of his job is to debate. He sees everything

in ideolgical terms, whatever the debate he is on one side and you are

on the other. He doesn't bring anyone along with him. What else

does the reshuffle bring, do you think this will fundamentally

reshape what the Government looks like and what the Conservative looks

like in the public mind or not really? Not radically, I think there

is two things that matter, the Conservative Party has moved in a

euro-sceptic direction, we have a Foreign Secretary who is prepared to

countenance leaving the European Union. That is new. This is another

ratchet to the Conservative Party moving in that way. The euro-sceptic

move is huge, if you think who we have lost, we have lost the

moderate, sensible wise heads, we have lost Keneth Clarke, Dominic

Grieve, Damien Green, the people who understand why Europe works and why

it matters to us. Instead we have a lot of much more abrasive, young

people who have been chosen by Conservative Parties who are deeply

euro-sceptic. This is a real shift towards Euro-scepticism. It may be

euro-sceptic for the Guardian but not the population. The Conservative

Party is in touch more with the public than it has ever been. I

don't think so, because when people are asked what they care about

Europe is right down the list? But they care about immigration and

issues that can only be solved. David Cameron was right saying we

mustn't bang on about it, we are in danger of having both sides banging

on. You said there was one other thing we should take note of?

Everyone is looking at the coming together from women in the party,

but it is Tories from a more modest background, it is the son of a

milkman, or the son of a single mother. That is the big problem, not

the gender problem, it is the sense that the Tories are the party of the

rich. It is only two more women and 2011 figures, it looks pretty much

the same, I doubt if it will make a huge amount of presentation or

difference. Poetry or paintings, the work of war artists can bring light

to the gloryies and horrors of war. When the grand exhibition halls of

the imperial war museum open in a couple of days after a major

renovation, with the stories of the first and Second World Wars, we will

be joined by a new tail, the British artist documenting the life of the

modern military. As an artist I work at the

intersection of art and documentary, engaging with working communities

facing difficult circumstances. I'm interested in exploring the social

function of art and asking one central question. How can films and

photographs impact upon the real world? In 2010 I was awarded a

two-month commission to work as a war artist in Helmand, Afghanistan.

It was commissioned by imperial war museum, and First Sight an arts

organisation. I was hosted by 16 air afault brigade, the largest in the

British Army, otherwise known as the Paras. It had never really occurred

to me to take work in the warzone before. It was inexperience that

changed my life in a very profound way. When the invitation to go to

Afghanistan came, it suddenly seemed relevant to my life and my

grandfather's life, I became very curious. My grandfather was captain

of a ship during World War II. He came back from four years at sea

suffering from what I now recognise as PTSD. After the war he took a lot

of amateur photographs, his perspective on life seemed to be

about lens. When I decided to make the commission, I wanted to move

away from the conventions of ne coverage that made us immune to feel

anything new about what is happening in Afghanistan.

In preparation to go to Helmand I attended a three-day course, a death

by power point, which retrospectively left me cold

thinking about living in a warzone. It became apparent, unlike previous

projects that allowed me an extraordinary collaboration with

local communities, it would not be possible in Helmand. The work talks

about this unspanable gulf. My desire to make work that gave the

locals a voice was frustrated on every level. This piece, Bolan

Market was filmed in an area previously part of Taliban-occupied

territory. It began to flourish under ISIS force, but there is a

complex relationship between the local population and the British

soldiers. I asked if I could get out of the tank and film. We were told

by the command I would be killed orchid napped within 20 minutes.

Whilst some of the locals are apparently untroubled by our

prosession, others are obviously feeling disturbed or angered by the

presence of the camera or tank. Which for some might be seeing a

spaceship land in Corby. I left the film mute in an attempt to

communicate the feel Iing had about being trapped in silent nightmare.

Before I left for Afghanistan I made backdrops for my work, based upon

images from previous conflicts. I chose paintings and photographs that

have a strong resonance or emotional charge, and make a blunt telescopic

connection between the past and what is happening today. How many times

have the Brits gone to war in Afghanistan, and has it ever worked

out well, for anyone In Helmand the patrols would last two or three

hours and often frightening, I was shot at. On one occasion there was a

massive explosion after two soldiers stepped on an improvised explosive

device, one lost his legs and the other blinded. During my time in

Helmand the soldiers were closing limbs every day, but these injuries

go largely unreported. The experience was profoundly affecting.

At first when I returned to the UK I felt invincible, everything to do

with life here seemed banal and meaningless, e-mails, supermarkets,

paying bills. I felt I no longer had any re connection to who I was

before I went to hell moneyed, and I have had -- Helmand, and I have had

to remain embedded and carry the work alone until the public dissell

nation three years later. I think validation of one's work, be it as

an artist or photo correspondent is healthy for readjustment to healthy

civilian life. I wish on reflection I hadn't gone to Helmand, sending an

artist is a compolitician and moral responsibility. Making people work

under those conditions is life-changing. It is removed from

the pristine experience of viewing art in a museum, or the academic

experience of curating an exhibition. Aside from the military,

so few of us know what it really means to be involved in a tour of

duty. I was niave in my imagining of it and so were those who sent me.

That's it for tonight, we leave you with the German World Cup team as

they brought that trophy back to Berlin today to an incredible

reception. They are probably still singing now at the Brandenburg

Gates, they were found chant ago few English fans favourites, what is the

opposite of schadenfreude?! Good night.

# It's coming home, it's coming home # It's coming,

# Football's coming home # It's coming home

# Football's coming home # It's coming home

# Football's coming home # It's coming home, it's coming home

# It's coming football's coming home.

# Three lions on a shirt # Jewels

#30 years of hurt Early risers in Northern Ireland

some