:00:00. > :00:07.As the Chancellor mulls major reforms to the pension system,
:00:08. > :00:11.Radical changes to pensions tax relief could hit millions of higher
:00:12. > :00:14.earners. But would the Chancellor do something so drastic -
:00:15. > :00:23.and potentially unpopular - just before the EU referendum?
:00:24. > :00:26.If we Republicans choose Donald Trump as our nominee,
:00:27. > :00:28.the prospect for a safe and prosperous future
:00:29. > :00:35.The Republican Establishment fights back.
:00:36. > :00:40.But will Mitt Romney's attack actually help Donald Trump?
:00:41. > :00:49.David Cameron's former adviser has been watching the race.
:00:50. > :00:52.Also tonight - could an ancient Chinese board game help build
:00:53. > :00:56.A piece of software developed in London could just herald
:00:57. > :00:58.the biggest step forward in artificial intelligence
:00:59. > :01:13.Death and taxes might be civilisation's only certainties,
:01:14. > :01:17.Some of us already draw one, some of us pay into one,
:01:18. > :01:21.some of us don't, but all of us expect to receive one one day.
:01:22. > :01:24.But what can the modern British worker expect their pension to look
:01:25. > :01:30.like and when can we expect to get it?
:01:31. > :01:33.How much should Government be doing to ensure that the most help goes
:01:34. > :01:36.to those with greatest need and should the age at which we get
:01:37. > :01:39.one depend not just on how old we are, but also on the kind
:01:40. > :01:46.As the Chancellor prepares to address at least some of these
:01:47. > :01:48.questions in his looming budget, Newsnight's Chris Cook has taken
:01:49. > :02:05.The world of work is always changing, but one question
:02:06. > :02:08.is a constant - how do you get people to pay
:02:09. > :02:13.Tax policy is a critical lever and we may be the cusp
:02:14. > :02:22.I think major changes are more likely than not.
:02:23. > :02:25.There's been a lot of pension reform already and tax relief is,
:02:26. > :02:32.Workplace pensions are all about deferring income,
:02:33. > :02:35.delaying the moment when you receive a portion of your pay,
:02:36. > :02:37.until the time when you can actually enjoy it.
:02:38. > :02:40.Pensions get the benefit of tax relief.
:02:41. > :02:43.That means the state waives income tax on money that people put aside
:02:44. > :02:48.Now, there are critical discussions going on about the future
:02:49. > :02:53.At the moment, any income you put into your pension
:02:54. > :03:01.Any gains your pension pot makes are also not taxed.
:03:02. > :03:03.You're not taxed on money while it's in there.
:03:04. > :03:06.It's only at the end, when you start drawing an income
:03:07. > :03:17.This arrangement is known as exempt-exempt-tax or EET.
:03:18. > :03:20.Your pension is tax exempt when you put money in,
:03:21. > :03:26.exempt as it's invested and it's only taxed as it's withdrawn.
:03:27. > :03:29.Paying tax at the end of the process means your tax payments
:03:30. > :03:34.reflect your actual income in retirement.
:03:35. > :03:37.In any given year, the Chancellor foregoes tens of billions of pounds
:03:38. > :03:39.of tax because when people put their money into a pension,
:03:40. > :03:42.he doesn't get the tax on that wage, he says -
:03:43. > :03:45.don't worry, I won't tax you now, I'll tax you when you
:03:46. > :03:49.The question is, could you lose that money in the current year and get
:03:50. > :03:52.more people to do more saving, better than we do now,
:03:53. > :03:56.and, unequivocally, the answer to that is, yes.
:03:57. > :03:59.A radical idea currently being considered by the Treasury
:04:00. > :04:00.would completely change how we tax pensions.
:04:01. > :04:03.Rather than waiting until the end, until you're drawing an income
:04:04. > :04:06.to claim tax off you, the taxman would instead tax money
:04:07. > :04:12.as you're putting it into your pension scheme.
:04:13. > :04:14.So this changes things to tax-exempt-exempt or TEE.
:04:15. > :04:16.You'd pay into your pension scheme after you've been taxed,
:04:17. > :04:18.meaning that the tax burden falls on current earnings
:04:19. > :04:20.and then your pension would be totally tax-free,
:04:21. > :04:33.At the moment, the Government offers a few eases, notably a tax-free lump
:04:34. > :04:35.sum to bribe you to save in a pension.
:04:36. > :04:38.Any new system would needed a top-up bribe, too.
:04:39. > :04:41.But the Chancellor would certainly benefit now.
:04:42. > :04:43.This would raise tax revenues in the short-term,
:04:44. > :04:52.but cut them in the future, and that might not be wise.
:04:53. > :04:55.You've got the fact that this is a policy that brings forward tax
:04:56. > :04:57.revenues from future years, from a time when there'll be
:04:58. > :05:00.an older population, putting more pressure on the public
:05:01. > :05:01.finances, through state pensions, through the health service
:05:02. > :05:07.The fear would be that that might make future governments a bit more
:05:08. > :05:10.desperate and maybe a little more likely to renege on the promise that
:05:11. > :05:21.withdrawals from these pension ISAs would remain tax-free.
:05:22. > :05:24.So what about a less radical reform, say of tax relief?
:05:25. > :05:27.At the moment, if someone in the 40% tax bracket want to put ?1
:05:28. > :05:29.in their pension, they only need to pay in 60p.
:05:30. > :05:31.The Treasury puts in the remaining 40p.
:05:32. > :05:35.But people in the 20% bracket have to put in 80p because the taxman
:05:36. > :05:46.The reality is we're giving more money today to the better off,
:05:47. > :05:48.who are already putting more money into pensions, and that's not
:05:49. > :05:51.the best use of money when we have a savings crisis.
:05:52. > :05:54.So my preference would be to level things up, up for lower
:05:55. > :05:56.rate taxpayers at 20%, down for higher rate taxpayers.
:05:57. > :06:04.The pensions industry likes this idea.
:06:05. > :06:07.It would be a less disruptive change.
:06:08. > :06:10.This model might also save about ?6 billion a year
:06:11. > :06:13.for the Treasury, but it looks a lot more like a straight tax hike
:06:14. > :06:15.on higher earners, it would also cause an administrative headache,
:06:16. > :06:18.and the Chancellor may not want to upend the pension system,
:06:19. > :06:28.David Grossman is our Political Editor and he's
:06:29. > :06:43.Was dreaming or was there a promise that a Conservative Government
:06:44. > :06:46.wouldn't go near tax relief? We can quote from a central office briefing
:06:47. > :06:50.note from April last year, which says we believe the pensions tax
:06:51. > :06:53.relief system will be fair and affordable and we will not propose
:06:54. > :06:58.any further changes to that. Is during the next Parliament. So in
:06:59. > :07:01.the process, the Chancellor could be accused of going back on commitment
:07:02. > :07:04.made before the election and annoying large numbers of people who
:07:05. > :07:07.have voted for the Conservatives, because not only were they told
:07:08. > :07:11.there aren't any plans to do that, they were told the only way to stop
:07:12. > :07:17.Labour doing us wit to vote Conservative. Why is he suggesting
:07:18. > :07:21.he might be doing it? The ansz is ten, maybe 15, maybe ?20 billion of
:07:22. > :07:27.extra income he could get in the process. Income as one of our
:07:28. > :07:31.interviewees suggested, a future Chancellor could be left feeling the
:07:32. > :07:37.pinch of. Exactly. What he is doing is perhaps taking the money, that
:07:38. > :07:40.future Chancellor might earn, or tax, pensioners with, but that
:07:41. > :07:45.Chancellor may not have been born yet. And it is not just voter, there
:07:46. > :07:49.will be Conservative MPs who are a little troubled by this. Why and how
:07:50. > :07:57.long a shadow the referendum cast over this whole process? Well,
:07:58. > :08:01.partly kith MPs are annoyed about going back, annoying their core
:08:02. > :08:04.voter, some activists in the constituency ises, there is this
:08:05. > :08:09.referendum of course, the wisdom is, that if you are going to do
:08:10. > :08:12.something unpopular or something you are voters might not like get it
:08:13. > :08:17.down early, that is when your mandate and majority are freshest
:08:18. > :08:21.and the voters have time to forgive you. We are going into a referendum
:08:22. > :08:25.in 120 days' time, a bit less than that, The, one of the core groups
:08:26. > :08:29.that are wavering in the middle of this are some of the affluent people
:08:30. > :08:33.whose hearts may tell them they would like to vote to leave the EU
:08:34. > :08:36.but their heads maybe susceptible to arguments that the Chancellor is
:08:37. > :08:39.making about their best economic interests. If they don't trust the
:08:40. > :08:42.Chancellor, if they feel the Chancellor hasn't got their best
:08:43. > :08:44.interests at heart they maybe harder to win over in all this. So the
:08:45. > :08:48.stakes are high. Let us Mark Garnier, a Conservative MP
:08:49. > :08:53.who sits on the Treasury Select Committee, and Josephine Cumbo,
:08:54. > :08:55.the pensions correspondent for the Financial Times,
:08:56. > :09:04.whose reporting has led the coverage You are splashing tomorrow with a
:09:05. > :09:07.warning to the Chancellor from one of his own Pensions Ministers he
:09:08. > :09:12.perhaps needs to calm down, if not slow down. Think what we are seeing
:09:13. > :09:16.now is the tensions and concerns and fears are really starting to
:09:17. > :09:21.surface, that what the Chancellor is going to announce in the budget,
:09:22. > :09:26.while saving the Treasury billions of pounds could cause deep damage to
:09:27. > :09:30.the retirement system. In July last year, he announced the consultation
:09:31. > :09:34.on the future of saving incentives for retirement and at the time he
:09:35. > :09:39.said it was going to be an open consultation, but the only option he
:09:40. > :09:43.really mentioned at the time was the pension ISA, during the consul
:09:44. > :09:48.location there has been a core Corus of industry representatives and MPs
:09:49. > :09:53.queueing up to say that this is a wrong idea, it could lead to severe
:09:54. > :09:57.complications for the industry, you will have two systems running at the
:09:58. > :10:02.same time, you will have an old pension system and a new pension
:10:03. > :10:07.system. There are concerns that a futures Chancellor might say well, I
:10:08. > :10:11.am going to start taxing the income that George Osborne promised was
:10:12. > :10:15.going to be tax free, so that could really hit pensions saving and
:10:16. > :10:21.confidence in pension savings at a time when the UK is starting to
:10:22. > :10:24.enrol people in pensions through automatic enel rollment. There is
:10:25. > :10:29.two possibilities on the table really. There is the ISA and you
:10:30. > :10:34.explained and the flat rate of tax which was very well explained in the
:10:35. > :10:38.film. I sense from your journalism you are too wise to place bettings,
:10:39. > :10:43.which would you say he is closest to? He is attracted to the pension
:10:44. > :10:48.Isa. He likes to make bold decision, let us think back to 2014, when he
:10:49. > :10:52.stood up at the despatch box and said no-one will have to buy an
:10:53. > :11:00.annuity. That came out the blue, there must be a big temptation for
:11:01. > :11:05.him to do that again, in spite of the range of opponents he has had to
:11:06. > :11:09.doing anything drastic. Something has to give doesn't it? The notion
:11:10. > :11:13.that the lowest earners get the least help to save for their few
:11:14. > :11:17.while the highest get the most help. If it wasn't true it would be
:11:18. > :11:23.unthinkable. O Think you are right. The numbers speak for themselves. If
:11:24. > :11:25.you look at the 10% of people who earn more than ?50,000, they
:11:26. > :11:30.represent 47% of pension contributions and if you look at the
:11:31. > :11:36.1% who earn more than ?150,000, they represent 14%. So clearly, it is
:11:37. > :11:39.skewed in favour of the richer people, who have more disposable
:11:40. > :11:44.income. So it could be partly to do with the incentive and the fact if
:11:45. > :11:49.you have ?150,000 you have a lot more disposable voluntary income
:11:50. > :11:54.than if you are on ?12 nap,000. I think what we have done so far is
:11:55. > :11:57.like House of Lords reform. We have done a bit but haven't finished the
:11:58. > :12:01.whole journey. There is talk about this pension Isa where it will be
:12:02. > :12:05.taxed on the way in and there is a possibility there may be a
:12:06. > :12:09.contribution by the Government. If the contribution is 50-50, for each
:12:10. > :12:12.pound put in everybody, including the high rate taxpayer's will be
:12:13. > :12:15.better off. I think one of the problems facing the pension
:12:16. > :12:19.industry, and facing pensions in general is that the Holy Grail of
:12:20. > :12:24.this is getting people to put as much money as they can in to their
:12:25. > :12:28.pension pot as early as they can. I think that really clever thinking on
:12:29. > :12:32.this would be able to work out a system where by people can look at
:12:33. > :12:38.their entire lifetime savings schemes, and perhaps we could come
:12:39. > :12:43.up with a system where by the pension system can be allied with
:12:44. > :12:47.mortgage guarantees, so people could start looking at this sort of,
:12:48. > :12:53.together rather than a separate entities. You are proposing a third
:12:54. > :12:56.way, you don't like the idea of equalising the playing field so
:12:57. > :12:59.however much you earn the amount of help you get remains the same It
:13:00. > :13:03.will cause a lot of the problems, if you are going to create the problems
:13:04. > :13:08.you need to have something really important that is going to come
:13:09. > :13:12.along with it. If we go to the flat rate of, the flat rate of discount,
:13:13. > :13:15.then you end up with this problem of the hybrid, you have half in one
:13:16. > :13:19.type of pension and another in another type of pension, you have
:13:20. > :13:22.the administration, it will be very difficult for pay role managers so
:13:23. > :13:26.that will be difficult. Then you have the contribution of the vt go,
:13:27. > :13:30.so that could be expensive. Anything is going to be difficult. I was
:13:31. > :13:34.thinking more of fairness. Yes, I think one of the inthises which I
:13:35. > :13:38.would be keen on, if he is going to make change, I think you have to
:13:39. > :13:41.give people a lot of warning, what, I am getting people who are writing
:13:42. > :13:46.to me and stopping me in the street, saying is he going to do something?
:13:47. > :13:50.Should be I be worried about my tax free lump sum? If you are saving for
:13:51. > :13:54.your pension you have spent your life focussing on the one point when
:13:55. > :13:57.you retire. At the closer you get to that the less options you have
:13:58. > :14:00.available in order to mitigate any changes, so the key thing I, I
:14:01. > :14:05.think, would be if he is going to make changes he has to give really a
:14:06. > :14:09.decade's warning before they come into play. Very briefly, what do you
:14:10. > :14:14.say when you are stopped in the street, to the voters who say you
:14:15. > :14:18.promised they wouldn't go near this issue and they are. They are looking
:14:19. > :14:25.at it. It is right to have a look at it. At the end of the day the tax
:14:26. > :14:29.credit given to pensions in this country is worth billions they get
:14:30. > :14:33.back 13 billion on taxes, paid on pensions coming out. It is not as
:14:34. > :14:38.simple as it sounds but that is the problem they have got. But I come
:14:39. > :14:42.back to this remaining point point, which is if eare going to change
:14:43. > :14:46.something people like me and my colleagues will be advising the
:14:47. > :14:51.Chancellor we have to give people plenty of warning. A decade is not
:14:52. > :14:55.unreasonable I think. I don't think that would happen. He would be
:14:56. > :14:59.looking for savings to balance the books by 2020. People are diving in
:15:00. > :15:02.and maxing owl their pension contributions on concerns that high
:15:03. > :15:05.rate relieve is going. He would have to do something in the budget to
:15:06. > :15:09.clamp-down on that. Many thanks indeed.
:15:10. > :15:11.Start any observation about the performance or prospects
:15:12. > :15:14.of Donald Trump at the moment and you run a very real risk
:15:15. > :15:16.of being comprehensively disproved before you've
:15:17. > :15:24.But, it's probably fair to say, that much of his appeal lies
:15:25. > :15:29.in his supporters' deep dislike of mainstream politicians.
:15:30. > :15:32.So the fact that very senior mainstream politicians
:15:33. > :15:35.from within his own Party are now queueing up to condemn him,
:15:36. > :15:37.in the strongest of terms, could be construed as evidence
:15:38. > :15:46.If we Republicans choose Donald Trump as our nominee,
:15:47. > :15:48.the prospect for a safe and prosperous future
:15:49. > :15:55.If Donald Trump's plans were ever implemented,
:15:56. > :15:58.the country would sink into prolonged recession.
:15:59. > :16:02.Doesn't he know what he's talking about?
:16:03. > :16:12.Look, his bankruptcies have crushed small businesses and the men
:16:13. > :16:19.He inherited his business, he didn't create it.
:16:20. > :16:21.Mr Romney was joined in his condemnation of Mr Trump
:16:22. > :16:25.by another former Republican presidential hopeful,
:16:26. > :16:28.John McCain, who said he "shared the concerns about Donald Trump"
:16:29. > :16:39.and criticised Mr Trump's "uninformed and indeed dangerous
:16:40. > :16:43.Mr Trump had a few choice words for Mr Romney in return.
:16:44. > :16:45.Look, I'll just address it quickly, because it's irrelevant.
:16:46. > :16:53.Steve Hilton, David Cameron's former strategy director,
:16:54. > :16:55.now based in San Francisco, joins us to make sense
:16:56. > :17:06.That's quite a big ask, Steve Hilton, can you make sense of it for
:17:07. > :17:12.us? I'll have a go. Good to be with you. I think what's going on here is
:17:13. > :17:15.actually pretty profound. We live in a world run by bankers and
:17:16. > :17:20.bureaucrats and accountants, people like Mitt Romney. Those people,
:17:21. > :17:25.regardless of who has been in power, for the last few decades have been
:17:26. > :17:30.pushing an agenda, an ideological agenda, that it favours big
:17:31. > :17:32.businesses over small. That champions globalisation and open
:17:33. > :17:38.immigration, whatever the cost of that. It's been pretty inhuman and
:17:39. > :17:40.callous about the impact of that approach to government on the real
:17:41. > :17:44.lives of working people. Basically, I think people are sick of it. They
:17:45. > :17:48.are sick and tired that. They are sick and tired of being told to suck
:17:49. > :17:53.it up and deal with it because it's the world we live in. That is what
:17:54. > :17:58.is driving support for Trump. On the left for Bernie Sanders. Someone
:17:59. > :18:02.like Mitt Romney, who pretty much epitomises that approach to
:18:03. > :18:05.government, which is being comprehensively rejected. Is about
:18:06. > :18:11.the worse person you could ask for to make the argument against Trump.
:18:12. > :18:18.Judd Trump trump has dealt with John McCain by questioning his heroic
:18:19. > :18:22.status. Neither Romney or McCain have learnt the lesson, they feel
:18:23. > :18:25.the way to get him is conventional weapons. He doesn't recognise
:18:26. > :18:30.conventional warfare in political terms? I think that's right.
:18:31. > :18:34.Actually, we need to dissting swish somewhat between the froth of the
:18:35. > :18:37.campaign, Trump is very good at that, getting attention for
:18:38. > :18:41.statements which every now and again go beyond the boundaries of what
:18:42. > :18:48.people might consider to be acceptable. People di discounted,
:18:49. > :18:52.dissupporters discount it, because they identify with the substantive
:18:53. > :18:57.argument that underlice that. The other point is his character and
:18:58. > :19:01.temperament. Mitt Romney made the argument that his character and
:19:02. > :19:04.temperament disqualifies him from being President. Again, it's
:19:05. > :19:07.precisely his character that people are responding to. The idea that he
:19:08. > :19:11.is not some smooth-talking politician. He is actually a strong
:19:12. > :19:14.guy who is going to get in there and shake things up. That is exactly
:19:15. > :19:17.what people If you were want. Looking after one of his opponents,
:19:18. > :19:23.what would you advise them to do next? Well, I don't know. I'm not
:19:24. > :19:27.that involved, so I don't think of it necessarily in those terms. I
:19:28. > :19:34.think one thing that is clear is that, as the race is going on, there
:19:35. > :19:38.is more time, for example, in the Presidential debates, another one
:19:39. > :19:42.here in the States, for focus on the actual policy agendas of these
:19:43. > :19:45.various candidates and to look at the substance of what they're saying
:19:46. > :19:49.it. Seems to me there is more concentration on that. That will
:19:50. > :19:54.only increase once you get into the general election setting. I think
:19:55. > :19:58.someone like John Kasich, who is around right now in terms of the
:19:59. > :20:03.state of the race, he is the governor of of Ohio. A distant
:20:04. > :20:07.fourth in the race right now. He is still sticking to a positive agenda,
:20:08. > :20:12.setting out how he would solve these same problems. His analysis is
:20:13. > :20:16.pretty much consistent with the same arguments Trump is making he is
:20:17. > :20:20.putting something which is a little more tangible. That could over the
:20:21. > :20:25.next few weeks, prove to be quite a good way of approaching it. Tangible
:20:26. > :20:32.versus toxic, if you like. I was reading a piece, # 0 years old, from
:20:33. > :20:36.the New York Times, they explained that Adolf Hitler's anti-Semitism
:20:37. > :20:40.wasn't here, exaggerated but to carry favour with the sentiments
:20:41. > :20:44.that American voters are feeling. History suggest that is over
:20:45. > :20:50.optimistic. Do you think Donald Trump is as nasty as he seems with
:20:51. > :20:54.his descriptions of Mexicans, Muslims, building of walls and hi
:20:55. > :20:58.bans of people of the wrong religion? I don't think so. It's
:20:59. > :21:05.something about him. The truth about Donald Trump is that he is a pretty
:21:06. > :21:08.non--ideological, pragmatic, problem-solving businessman who says
:21:09. > :21:14.the first thing that comes into his head much I don't think he makes
:21:15. > :21:16.these statements because there an underlying, bigoted or ideologically
:21:17. > :21:20.driven point of view about people from other countries or races. I
:21:21. > :21:25.just don't think that's how he is. He is very much someone who speaks
:21:26. > :21:29.off the hoof. There is another important point, it might be easy in
:21:30. > :21:33.people in the UK to follow the race from afar to conclude from some of
:21:34. > :21:36.the things that Trump is saying he is pretty much another crazy
:21:37. > :21:40.right-wing American politician. In fact, it's the opposite. One of the
:21:41. > :21:44.reasons that the Republican establishment is really worried
:21:45. > :21:50.about Trump and rounding on him, is not that he's too right-wing, it is
:21:51. > :21:54.not that he's right-wing enough. They think his positions on abortion
:21:55. > :21:57.and immigration are not right-wing enough. The other candidates in the
:21:58. > :22:02.race the establishment would like people to get behind, Marco Rubio
:22:03. > :22:05.and Ted Cruz, are to the right of Trump on abortion and immigration
:22:06. > :22:08.and some other issues. You are quite right to suggest that we are
:22:09. > :22:13.following it from afar. Of course, the vote we're following more
:22:14. > :22:17.closely is the looming vote on EU membership, the referendum on that.
:22:18. > :22:22.Your former boss has laid out his stall fairly effectively. Are you
:22:23. > :22:27.impressed by it? Look, one thing I think is important for such an
:22:28. > :22:34.important debate is for me not to get involved from afar. I don't want
:22:35. > :22:39.to wade into that from a long distance away. Let's pretent tend
:22:40. > :22:43.you are next door. I don't want to get involved. Better to leave the
:22:44. > :22:48.debate to you over there. You haven't made a secret in the past
:22:49. > :22:51.about your scepticism of the European project, I presume that
:22:52. > :22:55.hasn't changed? Neither has David Cameron. He himself has said there
:22:56. > :22:59.is no way he sees the EU as being perfect or an organisation or an
:23:00. > :23:05.approach to governance that absolutely ideal. So I think, being
:23:06. > :23:08.a critic of the EU doesn't necessarily put you in one camp or
:23:09. > :23:12.the other. I fully appreciate you don't want to endorse David
:23:13. > :23:17.Cameron's position or condemn it, but in many ways that speaks volumes
:23:18. > :23:21.itself, doesn't it? I think it's not right to get involved from a long
:23:22. > :23:26.way A former director away. Of strategy at Number Ten Downing
:23:27. > :23:29.Street doesn't feel it would be right to get involved about the
:23:30. > :23:32.biggest issue that the residents of the Number Ten Downing Street is
:23:33. > :23:38.going to tackle in his career, come on? I don't think it's reasonable to
:23:39. > :23:42.get involved from a long way away. It's a vivid and highly energised
:23:43. > :23:46.debate right now. I just don't think it would be right, beamed into your
:23:47. > :23:51.studio for me to make an intervention. Do you think we might
:23:52. > :23:55.leave, leaving aside the battle. Do you think the result might go the
:23:56. > :23:58.way of the Brexit campaign? You have months of campaigning and, as we
:23:59. > :24:01.have seen here in the US, anything can happen. Indeed. Steve Hilton,
:24:02. > :24:05.many thanks indeed. You may remember the excitement
:24:06. > :24:08.in 1997 when Deep Blue, a computer, defeated
:24:09. > :24:09.the chess grandmaster, That moment was considered a great
:24:10. > :24:13.leap forward for artificial intelligence - a sign that computers
:24:14. > :24:16.could now better mankind at even Now, almost 20 years later,
:24:17. > :24:20.technology developed in London is about rewrite the rulebook again
:24:21. > :24:25.as it takes on the World Champion at the ancient Chinese
:24:26. > :24:30.board game of Go. If it wins, some experts believe
:24:31. > :24:34.this will be the greatest breakthrough yet in the quest
:24:35. > :24:38.for robots to mimic minds. Former Downing Street tech adviser,
:24:39. > :24:41.Rohan Silva, is one of them and he's Until recently, computers have
:24:42. > :24:57.been relatively simple. Even the most powerful machines can
:24:58. > :25:00.only carry out the specific tasks This limits the scope
:25:01. > :25:05.of what they can do, After all, the real world
:25:06. > :25:15.is messy and unpredictable and computers aren't good
:25:16. > :25:17.at dealing with that. But what if machines
:25:18. > :25:20.could think like humans? What if software could learn
:25:21. > :25:23.new things by itself? That's been a goal of scientists
:25:24. > :25:26.working on artificial intelligence since the very dawn
:25:27. > :25:28.of the information age. But it's proved
:25:29. > :25:31.a near impossible task. A piece of software,
:25:32. > :25:41.developed in London, the biggest step forward
:25:42. > :25:43.in artificial intelligence It was developed playing simple
:25:44. > :25:52.computer games and now it's about to take on the best
:25:53. > :25:54.player in the world, A game of such complexity
:25:55. > :25:59.and intuition, no machine has ever AlphaGo's creator is the British
:26:00. > :26:06.start-up, Google Deepmind. So the game of Go has just two
:26:07. > :26:10.rules, but out of those rules There are more possible board
:26:11. > :26:14.configurations in the game of Go than there are atoms
:26:15. > :26:16.in the universe. So really, it takes a whole
:26:17. > :26:18.lifetime to master. We're ready for the next step
:26:19. > :26:21.for us, which is the ultimate challenge - to take on one
:26:22. > :26:26.of the world's top Go players. So we've decided to challenge
:26:27. > :26:29.Lee Sedol in a $1 million Lee Sedol is the greatest Go
:26:30. > :26:33.player of the last decade. Probably one of the greatest Go
:26:34. > :26:36.players of all time. I describe him as the Roger Federer
:26:37. > :26:39.of Go and, you know, the press and the excitement
:26:40. > :26:42.there is just huge from the general population, because they really love
:26:43. > :26:50.technology and they love Go. Human professional players,
:26:51. > :26:52.at the top of the game, they're extremely creative
:26:53. > :26:54.and they'll do unexpected things So we're pretty confident,
:26:55. > :26:58.our internal tests are saying we should do pretty well,
:26:59. > :27:01.but Lee Sedol has been interviewed by the Korean press and he's very
:27:02. > :27:07.confident of winning, so it's going to be a very
:27:08. > :27:09.interesting match-up. Of course, this isn't the first time
:27:10. > :27:12.computers have beaten humans But what really marks out AlphaGo
:27:13. > :27:19.from the machines that mastered noughts and crosses in the 1950s,
:27:20. > :27:22.and eventually chess, in the 1990s, is not
:27:23. > :27:25.just its ability to play a much It's the way it plays
:27:26. > :27:29.the game - by learning. AlphaGo actually learns how to play
:27:30. > :27:32.in quite a human-like manner. So the way we start off training
:27:33. > :27:37.AlphaGo is by showing it 100,000 games that strong amateurs have
:27:38. > :27:39.played, that we've downloaded We first initially get AlphaGo
:27:40. > :27:44.to mimic the human player, so we give it a position,
:27:45. > :27:48.and we train it to predict the move But of course, ultimately,
:27:49. > :27:55.we would like AlphaGo to be stronger than human amateurs, and compete
:27:56. > :27:58.with the top professionals. So the way we do that is,
:27:59. > :28:02.after we take that first version, that's learned to mimic human play,
:28:03. > :28:06.we then allow it to play itself 30 million times, on our servers,
:28:07. > :28:10.and using reinforcement learning, the system learns to improve
:28:11. > :28:13.itself incrementally through avoiding its errors,
:28:14. > :28:18.and increasing and improving its win rate against older
:28:19. > :28:21.versions of itself. After all these games,
:28:22. > :28:25.then you end up with a new version that can beat the old version,
:28:26. > :28:27.the original version, The computer Deep Blue has tonight
:28:28. > :28:34.triumphed over the world chess It's the first time a machine has
:28:35. > :28:38.defeated a reigning World Champion Kasparov, after the move
:28:39. > :28:46.C4, has resigned. This is in many ways a more
:28:47. > :28:49.interesting piece of software than Deep Blue, which was the piece
:28:50. > :28:53.of code that did beat Garry Kasparov Why are people excited
:28:54. > :28:58.at the moment? I think that's because these machine
:28:59. > :29:01.learning techniques have made a little bit of a breakthrough,
:29:02. > :29:06.at the sort of lowest level of functionality that's
:29:07. > :29:08.really important for AI, So being able to take raw data,
:29:09. > :29:13.large quantities of raw data, such as images or sounds,
:29:14. > :29:17.and to be able to do the basic processing and recognise
:29:18. > :29:20.what's there. Key to understanding why AlphaGo
:29:21. > :29:23.could be a much bigger breakthrough than Deep Blue is to see just how
:29:24. > :29:27.differently the two machines work. Deep Blue was programmed
:29:28. > :29:30.to recognise the value of each piece It then used raw computing power
:29:31. > :29:36.to search every possibility, It's a bit like trying every
:29:37. > :29:43.password combination until the safe unlocks, but ask Deep Blue to do
:29:44. > :29:46.anything other than play chess, like even play a much simpler game,
:29:47. > :29:50.and it just won't know Like a human, it can't measure
:29:51. > :29:58.all the possibilities in Go. Instead, AlphaGo teaches itself
:29:59. > :30:04.to play the game by watching thousands of others,
:30:05. > :30:08.playing matches against itself, When historians come to write
:30:09. > :30:14.about the 21st Century, I believe this match will be seen
:30:15. > :30:18.as a pivotal moment in our Because as Deepmind software shows,
:30:19. > :30:23.we may be entering an age of thinking machines and general
:30:24. > :30:27.artificial intelligence, capable of carryling out a huge
:30:28. > :30:30.number of tasks currently Whether or not Deepmind wins
:30:31. > :30:35.the game, it's likely that intelligent machines
:30:36. > :30:38.are going to have a profound impact AI can make great contributions
:30:39. > :30:48.to things liked medical imaging diagnosis, to self-driving cars,
:30:49. > :30:50.to image recognition processing, so that computers can understand
:30:51. > :30:53.what they see. Going beyond this, real general AI
:30:54. > :30:56.means that these systems can do all of these things together,
:30:57. > :31:00.and maybe can guide robots to make the right decisions,
:31:01. > :31:04.so that they can behave with humans The whole point about general AI
:31:05. > :31:11.is to not put bounds on any specific thing they can do, but to provide
:31:12. > :31:15.a general technology whereby computers can make smart decisions,
:31:16. > :31:22.can understand what they're doing. That's the really open challenge
:31:23. > :31:25.for AI, is to try to make AI more and more general, and more and more
:31:26. > :31:29.robust to situations that it The next step for Deepmind's
:31:30. > :31:36.technology is applying it to real world situations,
:31:37. > :31:39.not just games. The idea is that, you know,
:31:40. > :31:44.these algorithms that we're working on are general purpose and can be
:31:45. > :31:48.translated into these new domains, so we'd love to use these types
:31:49. > :31:53.of algorithms for things like health care and science, and improve
:31:54. > :31:57.the speed of breakthroughs in those areas by helping human
:31:58. > :32:04.experts achieve more. The match against the world's best
:32:05. > :32:07.Go player is a key milestone It could represent the dawn
:32:08. > :32:12.of machines that think like humans and open up the possibility
:32:13. > :32:15.of advanced artificial intelligence, This may all sound like science
:32:16. > :32:21.fiction, but now it might really be The beautiful game is at its ugliest
:32:22. > :32:36.when attention turns to the personal morality and apparent sexual
:32:37. > :32:38.incontinence of some players. The conviction this week of former
:32:39. > :32:40.Sunderland and England winger, Adam Johnson, for engaging in sexual
:32:41. > :32:43.activity with a 15-year-old girl, has brought many attendant issues
:32:44. > :32:45.into particularly sharp focus, with swathes of social media
:32:46. > :32:47.contributors blaming Johnson's victim for his crimes
:32:48. > :32:49.and the players' union calling today for footballers to receive more
:32:50. > :32:51.education about "personal COMMENTATOR: Now for Adam Johnson.
:32:52. > :33:08.Shooting in. Like so many young Premiership
:33:09. > :33:11.footballers, Adam Johnson A multi-million-pound contract
:33:12. > :33:14.and a great playing career But it was a sexual encounter
:33:15. > :33:20.with a girl he knew to be under age In one series of messages,
:33:21. > :33:26.the victim clearly tells In the next, he makes it clear
:33:27. > :33:35.exactly why he wants to see her. He finishes by telling her to keep
:33:36. > :33:37.deleting their exchanges. Now those who supported Johnson
:33:38. > :33:43.are coming to terms with his crimes. I was aware of his plea
:33:44. > :33:49.for all charges to be not guilty. Just before the trial started,
:33:50. > :33:52.to hear that he had pleaded guilty was a massive shock to everybody,
:33:53. > :33:54.everybody at the football club, which the football took
:33:55. > :33:56.swift and direct action As Johnson awaits sentencing,
:33:57. > :34:07.it leaves football asking more Can the game do anything
:34:08. > :34:12.to stop its allure being used With me here, Mihir Bose,
:34:13. > :34:19.a sports journalist who has written Joining me from Sheffield
:34:20. > :34:22.is Richard Caborn, who was Sports Minister under
:34:23. > :34:31.the last labour Government. O something in the budget to
:34:32. > :34:34.clamp-down on that. Many thanks indeed.
:34:35. > :34:39.Obviously, Adam Johnson particular crime is not one thankfully we see
:34:40. > :34:45.replicated across football, but it was committed against a backdrop of
:34:46. > :34:48.a sort of moral vacuum. We use the word veteran perhaps rudely in the
:34:49. > :34:53.introduction, as you look back over the years you have been covering
:34:54. > :34:57.football. Is that new development or has there always been a sense of
:34:58. > :35:01.impunity about the top players? There have been bad footballers who
:35:02. > :35:04.have done bad things, what we have is a dysfunctional system. Football
:35:05. > :35:08.has become business. Club has become business. At the same time it
:35:09. > :35:14.portrays itself as a community thing, it has a moral sense, and
:35:15. > :35:17.what this case shows is where is the club's moral sense? Because what
:35:18. > :35:22.Johnson did, what the club knew, we don't know for a fact what the club
:35:23. > :35:26.exactly knew, what did it do, to, if you like educate Johnson, it is not
:35:27. > :35:30.just the players union thing, the clubs have a responsibility and the
:35:31. > :35:36.club claims to be a community club, the club of Sunderland, this was a
:35:37. > :35:39.young 15-year-old, who was, who worships Sunderland, worships
:35:40. > :35:43.Johnson which is how the whole thing started, where is the duty of care
:35:44. > :35:48.to the season ticket holder o the fan? This is where the moral vacuum
:35:49. > :35:53.has come. The clubs have spent too much time becoming businesses, and
:35:54. > :35:56.forgetting how they originated and also what they say their main
:35:57. > :36:00.appeal, that we are not just a business, we are more nan a
:36:01. > :36:06.business. How, education is one thing, how do you discipline or
:36:07. > :36:11.punish a man, earning 60,000 Bourne a week whose presence on the pitch
:36:12. > :36:15.will have a direct affect on the profitability of the club or company
:36:16. > :36:19.he works for? But in any proper situation, he would have been
:36:20. > :36:23.suspended. Not played. They originally suspend him, brought him
:36:24. > :36:26.back, the question is not whether he should have been dismissed but the
:36:27. > :36:30.club new a serious charge is made, then they howl not have played him.
:36:31. > :36:33.They should have suspended him but the club was then facing a
:36:34. > :36:37.relegation battle, he is a very important player and the question
:36:38. > :36:41.the club hasn't answered is why did they remove that suspension? Is it
:36:42. > :36:46.because they needed to stay in the Premier League and all the money it
:36:47. > :36:53.brings or is there some other reason? Sunderland are themselves in
:36:54. > :36:59.the dock, but if you could step away from that particular case and tell
:37:00. > :37:02.me what you as a man who didn't have a background in professional support
:37:03. > :37:05.was struck by between the relationship between football and
:37:06. > :37:10.morality. I agree to some extent with that. It is wider than that. It
:37:11. > :37:14.is about the responsibility of the world of football, to put its house
:37:15. > :37:17.in order. And some of us have been asking for that, that, I have worked
:37:18. > :37:21.with a group of people who for the last ten years have been saying why
:37:22. > :37:26.don't we have an independent service set up that can advice, give
:37:27. > :37:31.counselling, education, to, we are taking young people now, into, young
:37:32. > :37:35.people into this profession, the profession of football at nine years
:37:36. > :37:39.of age, and that is really where it ought to start. We put forward the
:37:40. > :37:44.players' programme where there ought to be this education programme, we
:37:45. > :37:47.ought to have a proper counselling service, the other part in this
:37:48. > :37:51.profession is how these players are dealt with. They are not dealt with
:37:52. > :37:57.as people, they are dealt with as commodities by the agents, so the
:37:58. > :38:01.whole structure is actually artificial, yes, ?60,000 a week they
:38:02. > :38:05.were paying to Johnson, but that, I think when you look at the round,
:38:06. > :38:09.when you are taking young people into what is a very artificial
:38:10. > :38:13.world, without any counselling, without any support, I think the
:38:14. > :38:17.profession of football ought to be looking at it. There are demands and
:38:18. > :38:21.for the PFA to say it is about education, I have been asking the
:38:22. > :38:26.PFA and the League Managers' Association, and the Premier League,
:38:27. > :38:30.and the FA to set up an independent service for the last ten year, and
:38:31. > :38:35.they have not done that. Briefly why not? , why do you think they
:38:36. > :38:40.haven't? I don't know. I think that is a question that football itself
:38:41. > :38:45.has to ask. It is no good, the PFA saying they want education, we have
:38:46. > :38:48.put on the table to them, a programme, what we call the players
:38:49. > :38:54.programme to start at nine years of age and help these young people to
:38:55. > :38:57.be able to manage much more responsibly the profession of
:38:58. > :39:04.football. It is a wake up call they ought to take to heart.
:39:05. > :39:09.In a sentence, how optimistic are you that football will learn any
:39:10. > :39:13.lessons from this? I don't think football will learn lesson, we have
:39:14. > :39:15.have a lot of sound bites and football will say it is not our
:39:16. > :39:18.responsibility. We are present aggregate game. The Premier League
:39:19. > :39:25.is a wonderful product. And that will be the end of the story. Watch
:39:26. > :39:28.this space. Many thanks. As the sighs of panicking parents
:39:29. > :39:32.subside for another year, we thought we would mark World Book Day not
:39:33. > :39:36.with costumes, cobbled together at the last minute, guilty. But with a
:39:37. > :39:40.celebration of what is really important about books. What is on
:39:41. > :39:40.the outside. Here are some of our favourite covers.
:39:41. > :39:43.Good night.