:00:00. > :00:07.You wouldn't have thought you could hear a report about drug cheats or
:00:08. > :00:10.corruption in international sports and still be shocked.
:00:11. > :00:21.But here's one, on Russia and athletics.
:00:22. > :00:26.Have happened without everybody knowing about it or consenting to
:00:27. > :00:28.it, so it's worse than we thought. Layers of the Russian sporting
:00:29. > :00:32.establishment, the Government there, and international athletics
:00:33. > :00:36.and anti-doping authorities. We'll ask this former Olympic
:00:37. > :00:38.athlete how, why and with what consequence has
:00:39. > :00:43.the sport been sullied. Also tonight,
:00:44. > :00:55.Europe has always been a tough issue Are you enjoying the Common Market?
:00:56. > :00:57.Come and join us in this protest march to Downing Street. Get Britain
:00:58. > :01:00.out! Things may have changed since 1974,
:01:01. > :01:03.but David Cameron is set to officially list
:01:04. > :01:04.his renegotiation demands tomorrow. Can he win enough to break the
:01:05. > :01:07.Euro-sceptic case for getting out? Ukip's Susan Evans is
:01:08. > :01:18.here to suggest not. To these scientists the continuous
:01:19. > :01:19.journey for understanding all that is...
:01:20. > :01:21.Step aside Nobels, science gets the Oscars treatment.
:01:22. > :01:23.Will the Breakthrough Prize make the laboratory seem sexier,
:01:24. > :01:43.It was a German television documentary that
:01:44. > :01:49.It prompted a follow-up inquiry into doping in athletics,
:01:50. > :01:56.And that has proceeded to a more dramatic outcome than anyone
:01:57. > :02:00.You can download the inquiry report and read the charge sheet.
:02:01. > :02:05."the acceptance of cheating at all levels is widespread and
:02:06. > :02:10."Russian athletes were often willing participants.
:02:11. > :02:13.However, there are documented cases where athletes who did not want to
:02:14. > :02:16.participate in 'the program' were informed they
:02:17. > :02:23.would not be considered as part of the Federation's national team".
:02:24. > :02:25."The reported presence of the security services (the FSB)
:02:26. > :02:32.And "the practice of doping in athletics in Russia remains very
:02:33. > :02:34.much current, even following the German documentary".
:02:35. > :02:39."The Olympic Games in London were, in a sense, sabotaged by the
:02:40. > :02:49.admission of athletes who should have not been competing" And be
:02:50. > :02:52.clear, the most explosive chapter of the report has not been published -
:02:53. > :02:54.the one on the International Association
:02:55. > :02:57.Material has been given to Interpol for
:02:58. > :03:02.a proper criminal investigation into charges of corruption and bribery.
:03:03. > :03:06.The journalist Mark Daly has been investigating doping in sport
:03:07. > :03:25.The prediction was that it would be one of athletics' darkest days,
:03:26. > :03:28.publication of the World Anti-Doping Agency independent commission's
:03:29. > :03:36.findings into doping at the heart of athletics. The reality it was so
:03:37. > :03:41.much worse than that. For 2016 our recommendation is that the Russian
:03:42. > :03:44.Federation be suspended. Dick Pound's commission was launched
:03:45. > :03:47.after allegations were made in a German doubtry last year that the
:03:48. > :03:51.Russian athletics federation was riddled with corruption and was
:03:52. > :03:54.involved in covering up positive dope terrorists by its athletes.
:03:55. > :04:02.Today the documentary was proved correct. Russia had been involved in
:04:03. > :04:07.state-sponsored doping, perhaps even reminiscent of the old Soviet days,
:04:08. > :04:12.corruptly covering up positive drug terrorists and destroying more than
:04:13. > :04:17.1,400 test samples. Russia has been the Wild West of dopings if illtated
:04:18. > :04:21.by officials who acted more like gangsters. Now they could be banned
:04:22. > :04:25.from the next Olympics. It is not just Russia that is in the frame.
:04:26. > :04:32.There's a second part a this story that's missing from this report. And
:04:33. > :04:35.that's because the former head of athletics governing body, the IAAF,
:04:36. > :04:39.Lamine Diack, and several others, are subject to a criminal
:04:40. > :04:44.investigation. But what the report does say is that it found corruption
:04:45. > :04:51.and bribery at the very highest level of the IAAF. So, what does
:04:52. > :05:00.that mean for its newly crowned President, Seb Coe. . Is Seb Coe the
:05:01. > :05:07.right man to lead the IAAF out of this mess? I believe that Seb Coe is
:05:08. > :05:10.somebody who can grasp this and be transform arable enough to bring
:05:11. > :05:15.about change in athletics. I hope so, because his sport is at risk if
:05:16. > :05:20.he doesn't. I think the difficulty that Seb's got is he was there
:05:21. > :05:24.throughout the period, he was a Vice-President under Lamine Diack
:05:25. > :05:28.and he has long-standing links to the IAAF. He that to get on the
:05:29. > :05:32.front foot and create a separation between his era and that of Lamine
:05:33. > :05:38.Diack. He will find that difficult to do. Just three months ago when he
:05:39. > :05:42.took the presidency Lord Coe was fulsome in his praise for Lamine
:05:43. > :05:46.Diack, calling him the spiritual leader of the IAA. If. Those
:05:47. > :05:51.comments must haunt him. He said yesterday he wasn't in favour of
:05:52. > :05:55.banning Russia. Today he's been forced to recalibrate his comments
:05:56. > :06:01.and is now seeking approval from his fellow IAAF members to consider
:06:02. > :06:07.sanctions. Dick Pound, well he's been heralded as the man who might
:06:08. > :06:20.save athletics. And that's a role that Seb Coe was hoping to fill
:06:21. > :06:26.himself. This will not with a swift road. So can Lord Coe, who famously
:06:27. > :06:29.delivered the Olympics to London, deliver the rehabilitation of his
:06:30. > :06:33.sport's wounded reputation? It is not the first time that Seb's been
:06:34. > :06:38.quick to defend someone who is under investigation. We saw it in the case
:06:39. > :06:42.of Alberto Salazar. We are waiting for the report into those
:06:43. > :06:46.allegations. Yet he was quick to come out and say that Salazar would
:06:47. > :06:51.be cleared of those claims. Likewise with the Russians he's said they
:06:52. > :06:55.would probably refer to rehabilitate them from within and within 24 hours
:06:56. > :07:02.Dick Pound has said they should be banned. He would have been wise er
:07:03. > :07:05.to have kept his powder dry. Dick Pound publicly thanked the
:07:06. > :07:11.journalist who broke the story, Hajo Seppelt. The only thanks he says
:07:12. > :07:18.he's received so far was a threat to sue him. We can talk to that German
:07:19. > :07:23.journalist who got all this going for ARD, the German broadcaster,
:07:24. > :07:31.Hajo Seppelt. He joins us from Geneva. Congratulations on scoop of
:07:32. > :07:35.the decade. Tell us, all the talk of suology you presumably has gone out
:07:36. > :07:42.of the window. What are they saying to you now, the IAAF? Nothing so
:07:43. > :07:46.far. I have no contact with IAAF officials. No-one contacted us since
:07:47. > :07:52.the beginning of the year. We tried several times to get interviews, Seb
:07:53. > :07:56.Coe is the first time we tried to get, in Monaco after our first
:07:57. > :08:01.documentary was aired in December 2014. Refused to talk to us. I was
:08:02. > :08:07.waiting for five hours. He promised me to come but he didn't show up.
:08:08. > :08:11.Later on we sent him several e-mails, official requests by ARD
:08:12. > :08:17.German television to get interviews in regards to our second documentary
:08:18. > :08:21.about the suspicion of widespread blood doping in athletics. But
:08:22. > :08:25.refused to comment. In Beijing at the World Championships it was
:08:26. > :08:31.exactly the same. He refused to talk to me and he gave an interview to
:08:32. > :08:35.ARD German television but not to me. He was insisting on the interviewer
:08:36. > :08:41.has to be something else. Sorry, the he in this case is who? Excuse me?
:08:42. > :08:47.When you say he refused to give you an interview, you are talking about
:08:48. > :08:52.who, Seb Coe? Yes, I talk about Seb Coe all the time, yes. Yes, and have
:08:53. > :08:56.you been surprised by anything that Dick Pound has uncovered that you
:08:57. > :09:01.hadn't uncovered? Maybe you are surprised that it has been going on
:09:02. > :09:05.since you made your documentary about it? Sorry, I didn't understand
:09:06. > :09:10.the questions. The line is very bad, can you repeat. I'm sorry. Have you
:09:11. > :09:16.been surprised by anything they found, Dick Pound found? I was
:09:17. > :09:23.surprised, the Russians continued since your documentary, it is going
:09:24. > :09:26.on now. I tell you to be very honest I'm not surprised about the Russian
:09:27. > :09:30.reaction. It is always the same. When we aired the first documentary
:09:31. > :09:36.the Russians said it was a pack of lies what we did. They told me I'm
:09:37. > :09:42.an ignorant journalist, that I have no clue about anything. I'm working
:09:43. > :09:44.on doping stories as a doping research investigative journalist
:09:45. > :09:50.for 20 years and the Russians claimed I don't know the rules or
:09:51. > :09:55.how to work on this. To be honest always in sport people react in a
:09:56. > :09:59.harsh way. Maybe the Russians a little more aggressive but in
:10:00. > :10:07.general you have always to consider that in doping in sports, mostly the
:10:08. > :10:11.mess I thinkers are the sports, mostly the mess I thinkers are the
:10:12. > :10:14.people who are -- maybe the messengers will be blamed by the
:10:15. > :10:19.federation and not the people responsible for the doping problem.
:10:20. > :10:21.Hajo Seppelt, your point haw now been taken and reported the world
:10:22. > :10:25.over. Thank you very much indeed. Now, there were two layers
:10:26. > :10:27.of charges today. First are the ones against at the
:10:28. > :10:30.Russians, as if there weren't enough complicated relationship issues with
:10:31. > :10:32.the Russians at the moment. The second, though, are the ones
:10:33. > :10:47.against the IAAF - the international I'm joined by the European
:10:48. > :10:53.Championships 10,000 metres medallist, Jo Pavey, from her home
:10:54. > :10:57.in Devon. She lost out to athletics subsequently disqualified for
:10:58. > :11:03.doping, including missing out on a medal in 2007. With in the studio is
:11:04. > :11:09.Mihir Bose. Good evening to you both. How aware of you at the time
:11:10. > :11:17.were you that the Russians were doped? If I'm honest, I did have my
:11:18. > :11:21.suspicions about certain athletes, but I think this report has been
:11:22. > :11:25.shocking to everyone in the sport. You have your suspicions about
:11:26. > :11:30.certain athletes, but the fact that it has uncovered that a nation was
:11:31. > :11:33.involved in systemically doping their athletes. You thought the days
:11:34. > :11:39.where that could happen in sport were behind us. It is very
:11:40. > :11:43.devastating and shocking. Times were I finished lying flat on my back on
:11:44. > :11:47.the track giving it everybody I've got and I've missed those moments on
:11:48. > :11:54.the podium. I can never get those back. It is really disappointing.
:11:55. > :11:58.What now, Jo, sorry to interrupt you. What now do you think the
:11:59. > :12:06.effect of Russian cheating was on your career? I think there has been
:12:07. > :12:11.Russian athletes at times that have finished ahead of me. It will be
:12:12. > :12:15.hard to mention certain names, but one of them has been banned in
:12:16. > :12:21.certain competitions and she's an athlete that in the past has kept me
:12:22. > :12:25.out of medal positions. The fact it seems that it was systemic in that
:12:26. > :12:30.country is devastating. It is likely I might be awarded a bronze medal
:12:31. > :12:35.retrospectively from 2007 World Championships. I finished fourth
:12:36. > :12:39.that day lying on the track flat on my back, I gave it everything.
:12:40. > :12:42.Rather than it being a moment of disappointment it should have been a
:12:43. > :12:46.moment where I was on the podium having won a medal for my country.
:12:47. > :12:52.Can I never get that moment back. It is destroying not just my career but
:12:53. > :12:56.other athletes' career. Mihir Bose, let's start with the Seb Coe
:12:57. > :13:01.question. Who's a popular guy, he ran London 2012. Do you think he's
:13:02. > :13:08.the guy to clean up athletics? He's been an insider in the IAAF hasn't
:13:09. > :13:14.he? Seb is a trusted guy. He got the games and ran it very well. He was
:13:15. > :13:17.eight years Vice-President and he comes in as Lamine Diack's
:13:18. > :13:20.successor. If you notice what the head of the Russian Federation has
:13:21. > :13:26.said is that any suspension will have to go to the IAAF council.
:13:27. > :13:30.There again you go back if you like into the old council, which is still
:13:31. > :13:35.existing, deciding on suspending a federation member. So how does Coe
:13:36. > :13:37.step outside and become the man who cleans everything up? That's a
:13:38. > :13:43.difficult thing to do. I'm not saying he can't do it buts
:13:44. > :13:50.difficult. We'll be saying Sepp Blatter can't clean up Fifa and
:13:51. > :13:53.suddenly our guy is in charge of an institution that's been systemically
:13:54. > :13:57.corrupt. Where does this one stand, do you think? This takes the gold
:13:58. > :14:01.medal. First of all Fifa's corruption is if you like business
:14:02. > :14:05.corruption. Very bad, no question about it, but the banks could have
:14:06. > :14:09.done it in other walks of life. People taking money, envelopes
:14:10. > :14:15.passing because you want to bid for the World Cup. This is about sport.
:14:16. > :14:19.If you watch Messi score a goal you don't want to believe he's passed a
:14:20. > :14:22.five er to the goalkeeper. Similarly in athletics, you don't want to
:14:23. > :14:25.believe that the one who won the gold medal has done it through
:14:26. > :14:30.cheating. That's one aspect. And the second aspect is in the last 15
:14:31. > :14:36.years we've believed or been led to believe with the existence of WADA,
:14:37. > :14:43.laboratories like Moscow and so on, that we are coming to grips with
:14:44. > :14:48.this, but the system doesn't work. There's a flaw that can't be
:14:49. > :14:54.corrected. Jo, do you trust Seb Coe as the man who clean up athletics?
:14:55. > :14:57.It is your sport. I think Seb Coe is very passionate about sport. I think
:14:58. > :15:03.he would admit himself that it is going to be a much harder job than
:15:04. > :15:07.even he first realised. Realised. He said he's been shocked and dismayed
:15:08. > :15:16.by the report and has got a harder job to do than he first thought. But
:15:17. > :15:19.his ideas of an independent Anti-Doping Agency, all athletes
:15:20. > :15:22.worldwide need to go through the same rigorous testing procedures and
:15:23. > :15:28.there should be nowhere for anyone to hide. Even when there's talk of
:15:29. > :15:31.considering banning Russia from the Olympic Games, if that's what is
:15:32. > :15:37.necessary to make sure that there's no cheats on the start line, tough
:15:38. > :15:43.measures are going to be carried out. Clean athletes could suffer in
:15:44. > :15:49.that respect but if that's what's necessary at this stage.
:15:50. > :15:57.If Russia isn't banned... It will raise enormous questions about the
:15:58. > :16:00.Olympics. It will raise enormous questions about the International
:16:01. > :16:04.Olympic Committee. It doesn't run the individual sport. It provides a
:16:05. > :16:08.festival of sport over two weeks. We will ask the question: How powerful
:16:09. > :16:13.is it? Remember, this is sports connected with politics. There is as
:16:14. > :16:17.you mention, Mr Putin who sees sport and if you like a weapon of Russian
:16:18. > :16:23.foreign policy. Is he going to accept a ban? You've been involved
:16:24. > :16:29.in a lot of sports, covering them for many years, why is sport, why
:16:30. > :16:33.international sporting organisations so prone to corruption of one form
:16:34. > :16:36.or northerning? Because they're badly run. Because the people who
:16:37. > :16:40.run them are not very good. The best people don't come in to run sport.
:16:41. > :16:44.They go elsewhere. The best people are actually the advisors. They make
:16:45. > :16:47.a lot of money out of sport, the lawyers and accountants surrounding
:16:48. > :16:52.them. The best sportsmen don't come in. They've got their honours and
:16:53. > :16:56.they go away. That is the basic problem with sport. Sport has become
:16:57. > :17:00.business. As it has become business it hasn't acquired any ideas of how
:17:01. > :17:05.accountable it should be, how transparent it should be. It's run
:17:06. > :17:07.by very, very incompetent, not always corrupt, very incompetent
:17:08. > :17:12.people who can be easily corrupted. Thank you both very much indoed.
:17:13. > :17:15.Tomorrow David Cameron will write to the president of the
:17:16. > :17:17.European Council, the former Polish prime minister, Donald Tusk, to
:17:18. > :17:20.spell out how he wants the EU, and British membership of it, reformed.
:17:21. > :17:23.We've got a pretty good idea of a lot of what's
:17:24. > :17:25.on the shopping list, but this will be the official version.
:17:26. > :17:28.To prepare, the PM was speaking at the CBI conference today,
:17:29. > :17:31.saying he was deadly serious about reform, in a speech that was briefly
:17:32. > :17:47.First though, here's our diplomatic correspondent, Mark Urban.
:17:48. > :17:53.Come on guys. If you sit down now, can you ask me a question rather
:17:54. > :17:57.than making fools of yourself by just standing up and protesting.
:17:58. > :18:01.Even as David Cameron tried to make his case this morning, evidence that
:18:02. > :18:07.those who want out will only get more vocal. Even I can remember that
:18:08. > :18:11.script without any notes. This audience was on side, at least as
:18:12. > :18:16.far as wanting to hear the PM's shopping list. The things I want
:18:17. > :18:19.fixed, whether it's making a more competitive Europe, whether it's
:18:20. > :18:23.making sure we're out of ever closer union, whether it's making sure
:18:24. > :18:28.there's proper fairness of those in the eurozone and those out of the
:18:29. > :18:32.eurozone or whether it's reducing the pressures that we face through
:18:33. > :18:33.immigration, these are big and important changes. I think it's
:18:34. > :18:50.vital that we achieve them. The EU concept of ever closer union
:18:51. > :18:52.is part of its founding Rome treaty language, long cherished by
:18:53. > :18:58.federalists and offensive to sceptics. Number Ten want the phrase
:18:59. > :19:03.dropped. Other countries will try to limit such linguistic back sliding
:19:04. > :19:07.to Britain alone. If you look at what's happened electorally in
:19:08. > :19:12.places like Greece and Portugal, the political elites may be trying to
:19:13. > :19:15.take the European Union in One Direction, but the people going to
:19:16. > :19:20.the ballot boxes are saying something different. The Portuguese
:19:21. > :19:24.people made it clear at the recent elections they do not want to see
:19:25. > :19:34.ever closer union. That's something very much not on the table for the
:19:35. > :19:37.British people. Election of a more Euro-sceptic government in Poland is
:19:38. > :19:44.just one sign that Downing Street optimists see that the UK may find
:19:45. > :19:48.supporters for its ideas, both at non-eurozone countries shouldn't be
:19:49. > :20:02.put at a competitive disadvantage or outvoted. Accommodations will be
:20:03. > :20:05.urged by those who really don't want brexitment Ireland regards the
:20:06. > :20:10.prospect of their leaving the European Union as a major strategic
:20:11. > :20:15.risk. In truth the full risks are unknown. As much would depend on the
:20:16. > :20:23.process and detail of what the process would actually look like.
:20:24. > :20:33.However, it's an outcome that the Irish government does not wish to
:20:34. > :20:37.see materialise in the first place. That kind of support will also help
:20:38. > :20:44.with Mr Cameron's suggestion that the single market should be extended
:20:45. > :20:48.to some areas, like energy, where it still operates very imperfectly. But
:20:49. > :20:53.while the CBI might like that, is it really a winner on the doorstep? The
:20:54. > :20:56.things that resonate on the doorstep and in the boardroom might be
:20:57. > :21:00.different. I think the Prime Minister is absolutely right to look
:21:01. > :21:02.at a whole range of issues that will make a real difference to the
:21:03. > :21:12.British people and the British economy. So what about that key
:21:13. > :21:18.doorstep issue - migration? The ongoing crisis keeps it in the
:21:19. > :21:23.public eye. But internal EU migration poses Mr Cameron with his
:21:24. > :21:27.toughest challenge. He talked before about stopping benefits, but that
:21:28. > :21:31.won't be easy. In all the other areas he can get something. This is
:21:32. > :21:35.going to be really hard. The thing he probably can't get is his
:21:36. > :21:39.requirement that EU migrants shouldn't be able to claim in-work
:21:40. > :21:45.benefits like tax credits until they've lived in the UK for four
:21:46. > :21:48.years. That would be incompatible with the treaty's provision on
:21:49. > :21:52.nondiscrimination on nationals from another country. It's hard to see
:21:53. > :21:56.how he could get that. In the months ahead, it will be important for the
:21:57. > :22:01.Prime Minister and his allies to maintain a sense of jeopardy, that
:22:02. > :22:07.they are really trying to get the best deal and that it may not work
:22:08. > :22:12.out. But those close to him insist that the jeopardy is very real and
:22:13. > :22:18.that on some of these key issues, he may have to say that he hasn't got
:22:19. > :22:23.exactly what he set out to achieve. Long-term economic security...
:22:24. > :22:26.Today's skirmish was hardly the first and it certainly won't be the
:22:27. > :22:30.last. At some time in the coming months, David Cameron will have to
:22:31. > :22:32.pick his moment to say whether the deal he's got is really worth voting
:22:33. > :22:36.for. To discuss another crunch week
:22:37. > :22:38.for Britain's upcoming referendum on the EU, we're joined from Poland
:22:39. > :22:41.by Radek Shikorski, Poland's former foreign minister, who has just been
:22:42. > :22:44.appointed as a senior fellow at Harvard University,
:22:45. > :22:58.and from Edinburgh, UKIP's deputy Radek Shikorski, do you think it's
:22:59. > :23:06.possible for David Cameron to win the sorts of things we suspect he's
:23:07. > :23:09.asking for? First of all, I'd rather be talking about British leadership
:23:10. > :23:14.in Europe and it's there for the taking, for example, in the area of
:23:15. > :23:21.defence, of foreign policy, where Europe needs it and it would give
:23:22. > :23:27.Britain a great deal of influence. But yes, this is very cleverly
:23:28. > :23:33.crafted, because on the issues that have been mentioned, David Cameron
:23:34. > :23:38.will find allies in Europe. Energy union in particular in Poland. But
:23:39. > :23:45.also, completing the single market, a British idea in the area of
:23:46. > :23:52.digital trade, of services. Here, he is entitled to speak for millions of
:23:53. > :24:00.Europeans and to make the EU itself a better organism. I expect this to
:24:01. > :24:05.chime well with the kinds of governments that he needs to support
:24:06. > :24:10.his agenda. Aren't you overspeaking here? Sorry to interrupt. You're
:24:11. > :24:13.going too far here. You're meant to say, oh, it's going to be very
:24:14. > :24:20.difficult. There will be enormous fight over these. His main objective
:24:21. > :24:24.is to look as though he's having a big fight with you. Well, there will
:24:25. > :24:31.be problems with the benefits business. Remember, we in Poland do
:24:32. > :24:39.not encourage our citizens to travel for work to Britain. We would rather
:24:40. > :24:44.see our Poles coming back to Poland. But any Polish government will not
:24:45. > :24:48.agree to anything that smacks of discrimination or picking on
:24:49. > :24:54.particular nationalities. Remember that countries that are outside the
:24:55. > :24:58.EU, but are inside the European Economic Area, Norway for example,
:24:59. > :25:05.also has had to open its labour market. There are 100,000 or so
:25:06. > :25:10.Poles working in Norway. To avoid that, Britain would have to leave
:25:11. > :25:14.not just the EU, but also the European Economic Area. Then you are
:25:15. > :25:25.on a very long journey into the unknown. Let me just ask, sorry let
:25:26. > :25:29.me put that point to Suzanne Evans. Firstly, do you agree that David
:25:30. > :25:33.Cameron can win most of what he's going to ask them for? I know that's
:25:34. > :25:37.not enough for you, can he win that? I don't think he can actually. I
:25:38. > :25:41.think what David Cameron is doing is making a jolly good show. He's
:25:42. > :25:45.trying to show that he is committed to reform, that he can win reform.
:25:46. > :25:49.The fact is in order to get what most people want in Britain, which
:25:50. > :25:52.is sovereignty back to the Westminster Parliament, to get
:25:53. > :25:56.control back of our democracy, control of our economy, get control
:25:57. > :25:59.back of our borders, that involves treaty change. David Cameron clearly
:26:00. > :26:04.isn't even asking for that. What he's asking for, the shopping list,
:26:05. > :26:08.as far as we know, is a simple set of questions. He's, despite the
:26:09. > :26:13.economic crisis in the eurozone, despite the immigration crisis, when
:26:14. > :26:17.actually arguably, he could be making significant demands, he's set
:26:18. > :26:21.his sites very, very low. He should be setting his sights at a much
:26:22. > :26:25.higher target. But he's setting his sights at a low target and he seems
:26:26. > :26:30.to be expecting to miss it. The target on benefits and trying to
:26:31. > :26:33.restrict the tax subsidies, tax credits to migration through the
:26:34. > :26:38.benefits system that, for you, is not big enough, he needs control of
:26:39. > :26:41.the border in full? This isn't a referendum about the benefits
:26:42. > :26:49.system. It is a referendum about our membership of the European Union. Of
:26:50. > :26:53.course, Ukip and both the out campaigns we have are making a
:26:54. > :26:59.strong case that we can survive outside the European Union, but we
:27:00. > :27:05.can thrive. We will make that case until referendum day. Let me ask
:27:06. > :27:12.Radek Shikorski whether if Britain was to leave, vote to leave, WWEed'
:27:13. > :27:17.have to negotiate -- we'd have to negotiate with access to the
:27:18. > :27:21.European market, and the terms, how easy would it be for Britain to
:27:22. > :27:28.negotiate trade deals with partners with whom the EU has trade deals?
:27:29. > :27:30.Well, let me just also pick a point on what Suzanne has said. You do
:27:31. > :27:38.have control over your borders. You're not part of the Schengen
:27:39. > :27:43.area. In fact, I was taking the EuroStar from Paris to London and
:27:44. > :27:47.you had British border control in Paris. Of course, we still have to
:27:48. > :27:52.have the free movement of people. And controls in Calais. Let's not
:27:53. > :27:58.get bogged down. We have a bit of control but not full control. How
:27:59. > :28:05.easy will it be for us to negotiate trade deals and the like, if we
:28:06. > :28:09.leave? Well, this would be the mother of all divorce cases.
:28:10. > :28:16.Divorces like this are always messy and very expensive. If you were to
:28:17. > :28:20.leave, you would need to conclude new trade agreements with over 100
:28:21. > :28:28.countries. I suspect you wouldn't get as good a deal on your own as we
:28:29. > :28:31.get as the EU, when the commission negotiates on our behalf,
:28:32. > :28:37.representing us, the largest economy on earth. Also remember, that for
:28:38. > :28:44.the continent, trade with the UK is about 10% of our trade. Whereas for
:28:45. > :28:50.you, the UK, your trade with the continent is 50% of your trade, no
:28:51. > :28:55.prizes are given as to who has the advantage in such negotiation.
:28:56. > :28:58.Suzanne Evans, you say we have to negotiate treaty change for you to
:28:59. > :29:03.be satisfied. We will have to negotiate treaty change if we leave,
:29:04. > :29:06.aren't we? We will have to negotiate a free trade deal. What people
:29:07. > :29:10.always forget, they talk about the EU as being the only negotiating
:29:11. > :29:13.factor here. Of course, at the moment, we have a seat on the World
:29:14. > :29:17.Trade Organisation that we are not allowed to sit on. Once we leave the
:29:18. > :29:20.European Union we take back our seat on the World Trade Organisation.
:29:21. > :29:27.Then we have that powerful body behind us in order to secure free
:29:28. > :29:30.trade deals. To pick up on what was said, the European Union needs us in
:29:31. > :29:34.terms of trade far more than we actually need them. We have a 50
:29:35. > :29:38.billion trade deficit with the European Union, which means that we
:29:39. > :29:41.actually buy a lot more from them and they could not do without our
:29:42. > :29:47.trade. That's the simple matter of fact. If you talk to somebody, I
:29:48. > :29:51.remember a few years ago, Sir Dig by Jones, the former president of the
:29:52. > :29:55.CBI said such is the European Union's need of Britain that he
:29:56. > :30:00.reckoned we would be negotiating a free trade deal with the EU upon
:30:01. > :30:07.brexit very quickly, within a matter of hours. There's a long way between
:30:08. > :30:08.the two of you on that. We'd better drill down to that later. Thanks
:30:09. > :30:11.both very much. The Indian Prime Minister, Narendra
:30:12. > :30:14.Modi, visits the UK this week. And it means that
:30:15. > :30:16.for the third time in about three weeks, there will be a controversial
:30:17. > :30:19.foreign leader here, generating Modi is Hindu nationalist,
:30:20. > :30:23.who was Chief Ninister in Gujarat state back in 2002, when communal
:30:24. > :30:25.rioting there caused the death Our reporter, Secunder Kermani, has
:30:26. > :30:43.been talking to one of the British Prime Minister Modi is coming to
:30:44. > :30:46.London... Narendra Modi was boycotted by Britain for a decade.
:30:47. > :30:50.Now he's India's Prime Minister and this week will get a massive
:30:51. > :30:54.reception at Wembley Stadium and an overnight stay with David Cameron at
:30:55. > :30:58.Chequers. That's angered human rights activists, who projected this
:30:59. > :31:05.image on the Parliament last night. Night. They accuse him of being a
:31:06. > :31:10.Hindu fundamentalist who allowed deadly communal riots to unfold in
:31:11. > :31:16.2002 while in charge of Gujarat, something he denies. Hindu mobs
:31:17. > :31:20.burned their neighbours alive and raped women, while the police and
:31:21. > :31:28.authorities were accused of standing back and at times encouraging it.
:31:29. > :31:37.The violence began when a trainful of Hindu pilgrims was set alight.
:31:38. > :31:46.Many Muslims were killed. There was a big gang of people surrounding us.
:31:47. > :31:50.We were pleading for our lives, showing our passports, saying we
:31:51. > :31:55.were from the UK, but no, they didn't want anything to do with it.
:31:56. > :32:00.They said to us, take your trousers down, we want the to see if you've
:32:01. > :32:07.been circumcised, if you are a Muslim. If you are, we'll kill you.
:32:08. > :32:12.I got stabbed in the leg. Hit in the head. God knows how I'm still here
:32:13. > :32:20.today. Imran was on his first trip to India, with his uncle Syed and
:32:21. > :32:23.their friends. Driving from the Taj Mahal into Gujarat they were
:32:24. > :32:28.attacked by a mob. This is what was left of their car. Despite his
:32:29. > :32:34.injuries Imran survived. The family only later discovered how the others
:32:35. > :32:42.were killed. Killed. They had lost consciousness. They had been taken
:32:43. > :32:51.to a nearby factory and they had been tortured and they had been
:32:52. > :32:56.brutalised and murdered. Narendra Modi, a self declared Hindu
:32:57. > :33:01.nationalist, was cheer Minister of Gujarat at the time. No case against
:33:02. > :33:05.Modi has been successful so far. He strongly denies any wrongdoing,
:33:06. > :33:10.though he once said he regretted Muslim suffering as he would a puppy
:33:11. > :33:13.being run over by a car. His critics say he should not be getting this
:33:14. > :33:21.kind of welcome from Britain. They've behaved in a very shameless
:33:22. > :33:28.way, because they are no longer putting human rights and what
:33:29. > :33:38.happened in 2002 on the agenda. That's quite disgusting. The English
:33:39. > :33:45.Government has shown a lack of sensitivity towards family and this
:33:46. > :33:48.isn't acceptable. After the murders, the families travelled to India to
:33:49. > :33:53.try and gather evidence along with the Foreign Office. But they still
:33:54. > :33:57.haven't got justice. Six men accused of the murders were acquit canned
:33:58. > :34:02.earlier this year after witnesses turned hostile. Human rights groups
:34:03. > :34:07.say many are intimidated. With Modi due to arrive in Britain, the family
:34:08. > :34:13.wants an apology, justice and for the remains of their relatives to at
:34:14. > :34:19.last be returned. The saddest thing is 13 years on we still, this
:34:20. > :34:27.remains in India of the family, haven't been able to get hold of and
:34:28. > :34:33.put closure. Having an apology would be a start. And not to just push it
:34:34. > :34:38.under the carpet. Until 2012, Britain cut all ties with Modi
:34:39. > :34:43.because of what happened in Gujarat. America even denied him a visa, but
:34:44. > :34:49.that's changed as he has risen in power in India. Here politicians
:34:50. > :34:53.like Priti Patel have championed him as someone Britain should engage
:34:54. > :35:00.with. The significant ran date that Narendra Modi has is as a politician
:35:01. > :35:04.inspiring to see... The family say beganment shouldn't mean a welcome
:35:05. > :35:13.with open arms. They want to do business with India, that's up to
:35:14. > :35:17.them, but at least honour the dignity of the families, the
:35:18. > :35:23.victims. What meme would you like to send out to the British Government?
:35:24. > :35:29.They are actually not justlying what happened in Gujarat but they are
:35:30. > :35:33.actually perverting British values. When Modi came to power last year
:35:34. > :35:37.there were fears of more communal violence. In September a Muslim man
:35:38. > :35:43.was lunched after wrongly being accused of eating beef, considered
:35:44. > :35:47.sacred by Hindus. Modi has been accused of not condemning it
:35:48. > :35:51.strongly enough. But does the Government here care about that when
:35:52. > :35:56.lucrative contracts are at stake? If we don't honour the memories, if we
:35:57. > :36:03.don't speak for the truth, then history can repeat itself. Does it
:36:04. > :36:04.make you feel like the Government is, cares about you, effectively?
:36:05. > :36:09.No. Simple as that. Imran Dawood ending that report
:36:10. > :36:13.from Secunder Kermani. The geneticist John Hardy, from UCL,
:36:14. > :36:16.finds himself a couple He was awarded something less
:36:17. > :36:21.well known but considerably more It's called a breakthrough prize,
:36:22. > :36:28.funded by a Russian billionaire with a bit of help from Facebook
:36:29. > :36:35.founder Mark Zuckerberg and others. Now, awards were made to several
:36:36. > :36:37.scientists, and the awards event appeared to be modelled on
:36:38. > :36:40.the Oscars rather than the Nobels. Here is John Hardy and others
:36:41. > :36:46.having collected their prizes. The whole thing appears designed
:36:47. > :36:51.to bring glamour to science, to It has to be said that celeb label
:36:52. > :36:58.is not one that fits Professor Hardy very well, who is generally seen
:36:59. > :37:02.as more substance than style. And I'm happy to say he joins
:37:03. > :37:14.us now from California. Good evening to you. How did you
:37:15. > :37:18.find the ceremony? Not the sort of thing you are accustomed to, I would
:37:19. > :37:22.imagine? No, it was great actually. Of course it was woks. I really
:37:23. > :37:27.appreciated it. Maybe I could get used to it. We do think of
:37:28. > :37:31.scientists as not worrying about how they dress or look, worrying about
:37:32. > :37:37.the substance, not style. Do you want science to have more glitz, for
:37:38. > :37:40.goodness sake? I think it is good that scientists are held in more
:37:41. > :37:46.esteem and so on. That's a very good thing. Not me personally of course.
:37:47. > :37:51.Anyone who knows me knows that I'm not famous for my dress sense, so I
:37:52. > :37:56.think there's a good thing for science, science itself to be made
:37:57. > :38:02.more glamorous perhaps. For sure I do. Tell us a little about what it
:38:03. > :38:08.is you won the prize for. It is a series of things to do with
:38:09. > :38:17.dementias really. We found in the early 1990s in Alzheimer's disease
:38:18. > :38:22.mute aces in the ameloid gene, which is deposited in Alzheimer's disease.
:38:23. > :38:26.That led us to suggest that amyloid is the essence of the start of the
:38:27. > :38:30.disease. Later we found other genetic causes which fitted with the
:38:31. > :38:34.process started from amyloid and going through other things to cell
:38:35. > :38:39.death and then to dementia and so on. So it allowed us to map out a
:38:40. > :38:43.pathway to disease. What we of course hope is that this pathway to
:38:44. > :38:47.disease will be something we can intervene in and stop the disease
:38:48. > :38:54.process. That's of course the purpose of the work. It is great to
:38:55. > :38:58.have it acknowledged, obviously. You won about ?2 million, but you have
:38:59. > :39:04.to pay tax on that. How much do you get out of the end of that? I don't
:39:05. > :39:08.know exactly, but something well over, considerably over ?1 million.
:39:09. > :39:11.And of course it is an amazing, of course that's amazing. Of course it
:39:12. > :39:15.is. What are you going to do with the money? Is it one where you are
:39:16. > :39:21.obliged to give it back to science, or are you allowed to buy a two
:39:22. > :39:27.bedroom flat in Camden with it? That's right, I am allowed to buy a
:39:28. > :39:32.two bedroom flat in Camden. We are trying to build a new Institute of
:39:33. > :39:37.Neurology building and an institute of dementia there. I'm going try to
:39:38. > :39:40.push that fundraising for that new building along, but yes I am going
:39:41. > :39:44.to build a little house in London. That's exactly what I will do. It
:39:45. > :39:49.doesn't go very far if you want to by a house in London. This kind of
:39:50. > :39:54.thing isn't a substitute for serious science funding presumably. No, it
:39:55. > :40:00.isn't, but I think it is very important that the public realise
:40:01. > :40:06.what science is about. Indirectly I think that helps science funding. I
:40:07. > :40:10.think it is very important to scientists that we explain what we
:40:11. > :40:13.are doing. That's a virtuous circle. If we explain what we are doing to
:40:14. > :40:17.the public, the public put pressure on the politicians and science
:40:18. > :40:22.funding increases. So if we can get into a virtuous circle for science
:40:23. > :40:26.funding, that's a great outcome. And you've worked in the UK, you have
:40:27. > :40:31.worked in the United States. I wonder if three sentence which is of
:40:32. > :40:38.those do you think is now a better environment for scientists to
:40:39. > :40:41.discover things in. You know, America had consistently good
:40:42. > :40:46.funding, which hasn't been the case in the UK. It goes up and down with
:40:47. > :40:51.political will. One thing that we have in the UK has they don't have
:40:52. > :40:55.in the US, which is immensely powerful and for example the
:40:56. > :41:02.Institute of Neurology is very important, we have the NHS and the
:41:03. > :41:06.single unitary NHS behind us, which makes clinical research so much
:41:07. > :41:12.better in the UK than it is in the US. So some things are easier in the
:41:13. > :41:14.US but much research is better in the UK. John, well done. Thank you
:41:15. > :41:18.very much for joining us. It's a pleasure. Thank you very much.
:41:19. > :41:22.If you had a bad weekend, spare a thought for the customers
:41:23. > :41:24.at the IHOP restaurant in Meridian, Mississipi, on Saturday
:41:25. > :41:29.night where a 50-foot-wide sink hole gobbled up the carpark.