:00:00. > :00:07.It took a few days, but he finally got there.
:00:08. > :00:10.The PM says yes, he did have a stake in his Dad's offshore fund.
:00:11. > :00:18.We'll ask Labour's deputy leader why he thinks it might be
:00:19. > :00:26.We had a joint account. We owned 5,000 ewe anies in Blairmore
:00:27. > :00:28.investment trust which we sold in January 2010.
:00:29. > :00:32.We'll ask Labour's deputy leader why he thinks it might be
:00:33. > :00:38.The Government promises the unions that Tata Steel
:00:39. > :00:42.We'll ask the front runner to buy it, Sanjeev Gupta,
:00:43. > :01:06.Does satire tell us more about politics than politicians do?
:01:07. > :01:10.He's not quite in Prime Minister of Iceland territory,
:01:11. > :01:13.but David Cameron is paddling in a pool of poo this evening,
:01:14. > :01:15.admitting he had benefited from offshore investments
:01:16. > :01:17.of the kind everybody in public life is now embarrassed
:01:18. > :01:25.He had a personal stake in his father's Blairmore fund,
:01:26. > :01:29.the offshore nature of which was exposed
:01:30. > :01:36.But, you might argue, he thinks it's enough a problem
:01:37. > :01:38.that he didn't want to tell us about it.
:01:39. > :01:42.After all, we've had a series of statements this week
:01:43. > :01:44.about his financial affairs that now look crafted to avoid lying,
:01:45. > :01:47.but avoid telling us the whole situation.
:01:48. > :01:50.The holding statements didn't hold, and he came on ITV to tell all.
:01:51. > :01:59.Units in Blairmore investment trust which we sold in January 2010.
:02:00. > :02:04.After days of evading and avoiding questions about his finance, the
:02:05. > :02:08.Prime Minister's finally come clear about Blairmore holdings, the
:02:09. > :02:14.company set up by his father. Samantha and I had a joint account.
:02:15. > :02:20.We owned 5,000 units in Blairmore investment trust, which we sold in
:02:21. > :02:25.January 2010. That was worth something like ?30,000. Was there a
:02:26. > :02:31.profit on it? I paid income tax on the dividend but there was a profit
:02:32. > :02:34.on it but it was less than the capital gains tax allowance, but it
:02:35. > :02:38.was shouldn't to all the UK taxes in the normal ways. A former tax
:02:39. > :02:45.inspector explained to us why the funds are based in places like
:02:46. > :02:49.Panama. The idea you would get some quiet serious tax advantage, people
:02:50. > :02:53.could invest in a fund in somewhere like Panama, and when that fund
:02:54. > :02:58.earned income, they wouldn't be taxed on it. So income would roll
:02:59. > :03:01.up, offshore for as long as they wanted and they would only be
:03:02. > :03:06.taxable when they took the money out, either as dividends or by
:03:07. > :03:10.selling their shares, in which case there would be capital gapes tax. A
:03:11. > :03:14.major problem for the Prime Minister is how the information emerged.
:03:15. > :03:20.On Monday the Prime Minister's spokesperson said where his money
:03:21. > :03:24.was invested was a private matter. On Tuesday, this was Mr Cameron's
:03:25. > :03:30.reply to a Sky News question on whether he had previously invested
:03:31. > :03:35.in Blairmore. I own no share, I have a salary as Prime Minister, and I
:03:36. > :03:39.have some savings, which I get some interest from and I have a house,
:03:40. > :03:43.which we used to Li in, which we let out while we are living in Downing
:03:44. > :03:48.Street. That is all I have. I have no share, no offshore trust, no
:03:49. > :03:51.funds, nothing like that. A statement issued later on Tuesday
:03:52. > :03:57.said that the Prime Minister, his wife and her children do not benefit
:03:58. > :04:00.from any offshore funds. Yesterday, Downing Street clarified further,
:04:01. > :04:03.there are no offshore funds or trusts with which the Prime
:04:04. > :04:08.Minister, Mrs Cameron or their children will benefit from in
:04:09. > :04:15.future. And that leads us to today. This is obviously not good for the
:04:16. > :04:18.Prime Minister. First of all, he eshoed several opportunities to come
:04:19. > :04:24.clean about this and he chose not to take them. O so today he looks
:04:25. > :04:29.slippery. Secondly and this is less important because we know this
:04:30. > :04:35.already, it shows how privilege his back ground was, it brings up the
:04:36. > :04:38.job his if o father hand and the name of the fund itself is a
:04:39. > :04:44.testament to the grandness of the Cameron family.
:04:45. > :04:48.Blairmore is nameled after the Cameron's home, here in
:04:49. > :04:52.Aberdeenshire. And now, a Christian retreat.
:04:53. > :04:56.Today, above all, Mr Cameron was keen to defend his late father's
:04:57. > :05:02.reputation. I think a lot of the criticisms are based on a
:05:03. > :05:05.fundamental misconreception -- misconception which is Blairmore was
:05:06. > :05:10.set up with the idea of avoiding tax. It wasn't, it was set up after
:05:11. > :05:14.exchange controls went so that people who wanted to invest in
:05:15. > :05:18.dollar denominated shares in companies could do so.
:05:19. > :05:23.I am not clear why he said that this fund was set up so that investors
:05:24. > :05:27.could put money into non-sterling assets. I am not clear why they
:05:28. > :05:33.needed to go to Panama to do that, they could have done that in London.
:05:34. > :05:39.One thing in particular, raises some suspicion, and that is why Blairmore
:05:40. > :05:43.is constituted as a company with bearer share, because those shares
:05:44. > :05:46.don't require the owners to identify themselves, so it becomes more
:05:47. > :05:52.difficult for tax authorities to trace who has taken the income from
:05:53. > :05:58.those companies. The Inland Revenue was once relaxed about funds like
:05:59. > :06:05.that. Ministers wanted PMQs like Mr Cameron's father do what he did. But
:06:06. > :06:06.one person's investing is another 's tax avoidance.
:06:07. > :06:10.Joining us now from his West Bromich constituency is Labour's
:06:11. > :06:21.Ho outraged you tonight? Well, I am confused really, we have had a
:06:22. > :06:25.series of answers from the PM, that are, just seem the lead to more
:06:26. > :06:31.questions. What I think people will expect him to do tonight, is be very
:06:32. > :06:37.clear about what other investments and vehicles he has had as an MP.
:06:38. > :06:41.There was a relative confidence his financial affairs were in good order
:06:42. > :06:46.until he had that dragged out of him earlier this evening. Now people
:06:47. > :06:51.need to know what other shares did he have many Blairmore? Did he
:06:52. > :06:57.dispose of any other shareholdings, has he used any other vehicles as a
:06:58. > :07:01.way of generating income, and offshore accounts we don't know
:07:02. > :07:07.about yet? Can I be clear, are you accusing, you think he was doing
:07:08. > :07:13.this to avoid tax? Or do you think he in any way evaded tax, or... What
:07:14. > :07:18.exactly is the offence that he has committed here? Well, I don't know
:07:19. > :07:22.the Prime Minister's full circumstances, none of us do yet. We
:07:23. > :07:27.have been getting these incremental admittances that he had an
:07:28. > :07:31.investment in an offshore vehicle, that most people think is used to
:07:32. > :07:37.avoid paying tax. Now, that is fine, if you are a normal investor, it
:07:38. > :07:41.might, we might not agree wit it is fine, when you are the Prime
:07:42. > :07:45.Minister, the most powerful man in the land, responsible for framing
:07:46. > :07:50.tax reform, and clamping down on tax avoidance, and you have made
:07:51. > :07:55.speeches, that you are in favour of transparency, heralding a new age
:07:56. > :07:59.and sunlight being the best disinfectant and naming high profile
:08:00. > :08:04.individuals who use things like this and describing them as morally
:08:05. > :08:10.wrong, to admit you have had similar style investment lends you to the
:08:11. > :08:13.acquisition of being a hypocrite. He wasn't Prime Minister, he sold them
:08:14. > :08:17.before he became Prime Minister, didn't he. Is it impossible as a
:08:18. > :08:22.human being to say I have done this, I am a poacher turned gamekeeper, it
:08:23. > :08:25.is better if people like me don't do things like this, I become Prime
:08:26. > :08:30.Minister and try and stop it, what is wrong with that in Well, he was
:08:31. > :08:35.leader of the op six and the point is, he has made judgments on people
:08:36. > :08:39.as Prime Minister, for doing what he used to do, and I don't think it is
:08:40. > :08:48.a good look for a Prime Minister to use the line say as I do, do as I
:08:49. > :08:50.say, not as I do. And it, the avoidance of legitimate journalistic
:08:51. > :08:56.questions in the last three day, just means there are going to be
:08:57. > :08:59.more questions about what his financial arrangements both as
:09:00. > :09:04.Leader of the Opposition and as an MP. I don't think it is unreasonable
:09:05. > :09:09.for people to ask nose questions. You suggested there may be an issue,
:09:10. > :09:13.I am not wanting to overstate what you said, you said there may be an
:09:14. > :09:20.issue of resignation here. Seriously? He has invested in a tax
:09:21. > :09:25.efficient offshore fund, is that seriously something a Prime Minister
:09:26. > :09:29.thinks about resignation over? I have not suggested that and I don't
:09:30. > :09:32.know the facts of the Prime Minister's financial arrangements to
:09:33. > :09:37.be able to draw that. I was asked in another interview if it was a
:09:38. > :09:45.resignation issue, I said maybe but we don't have the facts. What I
:09:46. > :09:49.think we need to do, is you know, what other questions does that
:09:50. > :09:56.rather Eva sieve three days of answers give us? I think we
:09:57. > :09:59.certainly need to know what other investments David Cameron had when
:10:00. > :10:04.he was Leader of the Opposition. Aren't you coming to the conclusion
:10:05. > :10:08.that anyone in very senior office, like the candidates for Mayor of
:10:09. > :10:11.London, basically have to open up their tax returns and tell us Egg.
:10:12. > :10:18.You are really saying you are not accepting anything he says on trust,
:10:19. > :10:22.he just has to keep telling us until we have every last penny in his bank
:10:23. > :10:25.account I need to be careful about this. He said tonight he thinks he
:10:26. > :10:30.is going to get to a position where he could publish his tax return, but
:10:31. > :10:34.that won't show what investment vehicles he had. And the issue, the
:10:35. > :10:37.issue, the difficulty for the Prime Minister is, this is a particular
:10:38. > :10:40.vehicle that most people think is used to avoid paying tax, and I
:10:41. > :10:42.don't think people want their Prime Minister to be in that situation,
:10:43. > :10:48.and I don't think they want any politicians to be, so we are
:10:49. > :10:51.certainly moving to a point where there will have to be more
:10:52. > :10:54.transparency for powerful people, particularly ministers who are
:10:55. > :10:59.responsible for tax legislation. ? One last question, do you accept his
:11:00. > :11:03.word, when he says, he paid all the tax, the capital gains tax he didn't
:11:04. > :11:09.need to pay, because he didn't apply, and the income tax, he paid
:11:10. > :11:12.all the UK tax, that were due, on a legitimate and legal overseas
:11:13. > :11:17.investment? Well, I certainly hope he wasn't lying to the British
:11:18. > :11:19.people. He certainly wasn't answering all the questions the
:11:20. > :11:24.journalists were asking on their behalf. The point is it has taken
:11:25. > :11:28.three days to get to this point. Had he given a straight answer he would
:11:29. > :11:33.be be in a much better position this evening. As it happens he has
:11:34. > :11:39.aroused curiosity and it makes you think, if he had to admit tonight,
:11:40. > :11:40.what other shareholdings may he have, he will need the clean that up
:11:41. > :11:58.tomorrow. we start on the cover up not the
:11:59. > :12:02.crime. Isn't that the problem for David Cameron, he has obfuscated
:12:03. > :12:07.over this and then had to admit it. In so far as there is political
:12:08. > :12:13.damage it is because he didn't make a full disclosure, about exactly how
:12:14. > :12:17.he benefitted from his father's investments, and offshore fund, on
:12:18. > :12:22.day one, so he has created the impression that he has something to
:12:23. > :12:27.hide, but now he has come out, and made what looks very much like a
:12:28. > :12:30.full disclosure and is about to publish his tax return, it turns out
:12:31. > :12:33.he had nothing to hide in the first place. I can see why Labour are
:12:34. > :12:38.trying to do their best to make as much capital out of this as they can
:12:39. > :12:42.and make it look like he has been engaged in an attempt to cover
:12:43. > :12:47.something up. Now that we have the full tacts were us, which it looks
:12:48. > :12:51.like we do, it looks like we do, it doesn't seem as if he was covering
:12:52. > :12:55.something up. I used the word crime. You don't think there is any crime
:12:56. > :12:58.here, you don't think there is any problem here of being Leader of the
:12:59. > :13:02.Opposition, he was not Prime Minister, he did it before the
:13:03. > :13:07.election made him Prime Minister, there is no problem Leader of the
:13:08. > :13:11.Opposition, investments, in an offshore fund, that had bearer
:13:12. > :13:18.shares which everything knows are the not the best, in an up right way
:13:19. > :13:24.of issues documentary support for your holdings, a smell of any kind?
:13:25. > :13:30.I am not a tax lawyer, so I don't know why Ian Cameron set up the fund
:13:31. > :13:34.in Panama, but... It was very tax efficient. The Prime Minister said
:13:35. > :13:41.it wasn't a tax avoidance vehicle, it was set up for the purposes of
:13:42. > :13:46.dealing in, non-sterling shares and so forth, and when it was set up in
:13:47. > :13:47.1982, unlike what Richard Brooks said in the report earlier, you
:13:48. > :14:02.couldn't do that. Do you think the Prime Minister is
:14:03. > :14:06.going to have to release more, now? Tom Watson has said, basically,
:14:07. > :14:13.every statement begets the next statement, because it follows on.
:14:14. > :14:18.You said this was followed and final, but is it, he's now told us?
:14:19. > :14:28.But Tom Watson had a huge list of more questions. Where does this end?
:14:29. > :14:31.He started off by saying he was not benefiting in the present, then he
:14:32. > :14:34.said he would not benefit in the future, it doesn't look like he has
:14:35. > :14:38.any more shares in Blairmore. He sold his holding in 2010 and has
:14:39. > :14:42.acknowledged he did benefit, he did make a few thousand pounds from
:14:43. > :14:50.selling blame or shares in 2010, but that looks like the extent to how he
:14:51. > :14:55.has benefited. -- Blairmore shares. When we look at the nation, the
:14:56. > :14:59.relationship with the public and politicians, tax avoidance is quite
:15:00. > :15:09.high up in the ranking of sins, between having an affair and
:15:10. > :15:13.investing in a supremely tax efficient investment, I think the
:15:14. > :15:17.average politician would say they would probably rather be caught
:15:18. > :15:22.having an affair than investing in an offshore fund? Certainly, the
:15:23. > :15:27.public dislike revelations that politicians are engaging in tax
:15:28. > :15:30.avoidance, it confirms the generally poor view of politicians. But I
:15:31. > :15:36.think it is not a party political issue. The Labour Party benefits
:15:37. > :15:40.from donations from trade unions that engage in tax avoidance, the
:15:41. > :15:43.largest single donor to the Labour Party at the time of the last
:15:44. > :15:51.election was PricewaterhouseCoopers, Margaret Hodge herself, a tax
:15:52. > :15:55.avoidance, said had been in involved in tax avoidance on an industrial
:15:56. > :15:58.scale. This Government, to its credit, has done more to combat tax
:15:59. > :16:02.avoidance than the previous government did in 13 years in
:16:03. > :16:06.office. I don't think it is specifically damning to the Tories.
:16:07. > :16:10.Margaret Hodge is not here to defend herself, so we will put that aside.
:16:11. > :16:12.Put aside affairs Panamanian, and the man of the week
:16:13. > :16:15.is Sanjeev Gupta - a potential buyer of the UK steel
:16:16. > :16:19.Rather little is known about him, and he has a complex network
:16:20. > :16:22.of companies registered in Singapore and one in the Isle of Man.
:16:23. > :16:25.Many have struggled to see how he can really make a viable business
:16:26. > :16:30.He admitted yesterday that his plans for steel in the UK were undeveloped
:16:31. > :16:34.So earlier today we managed to get half an hour of his time,
:16:35. > :16:37.to talk through his vision and his business.
:16:38. > :16:39.A key factor in any deal will be whether a prospective
:16:40. > :16:42.buyer can actually afford to run the Tata business.
:16:43. > :16:44.I started by asking Sanjeev Gupta what his existing business
:16:45. > :17:01.My father's business, my businesses, which I rely on are currently worth
:17:02. > :17:05.about $1 billion. $1 billion, does that give you enough financial
:17:06. > :17:17.muscle to take over a steel business that is losing maybe 2 million or
:17:18. > :17:22.more pounds per day? We would not undertake the exercise if we could
:17:23. > :17:26.not make money. We will make the analysis and a business plan, and we
:17:27. > :17:30.believe it can be profitable. If it can, we will undertake it. The
:17:31. > :17:35.business plan will be shared with all stakeholders, not least my own,
:17:36. > :17:41.who all have to re-sign off, and it will be shared with other parties
:17:42. > :17:46.like the Government and Tata. We have encountered some degree of
:17:47. > :17:50.scepticism that the purchase of Tata Steel's UK operations, some
:17:51. > :17:53.scepticism that it can be made to fly. I think scepticism is natural
:17:54. > :17:57.when a business has been losing this much money and it has not been able
:17:58. > :18:02.to make profit, despite a lot of effort. Scepticism is natural. But
:18:03. > :18:05.my point is that the reason is exactly that, if it was just a
:18:06. > :18:11.question of money, it would have been sold already. Tata has enough
:18:12. > :18:14.money. The point is that it needs a new model, there is something wrong
:18:15. > :18:18.with the model, rather than just resources. How much money do you
:18:19. > :18:23.think the taxpayer needs to give you to make it work? The Government
:18:24. > :18:26.cannot give money anyway, it is against EU regulation, so even if
:18:27. > :18:35.they wanted to, they would not be able to give tax payer money towards
:18:36. > :18:39.it. Can I ask... What we want is resolutions to the issues. We don't
:18:40. > :18:44.want to take over liabilities, and we need a solution to the power
:18:45. > :18:47.base. A very crucial thing you have said, that you say you don't want to
:18:48. > :18:53.take on liabilities, you don't want to take on the pension liabilities
:18:54. > :18:59.of the existing workers? Yes, we want a solution to that. Any
:19:00. > :19:04.prospective buyer that wants to look at this will want a resolution. 52
:19:05. > :19:09.companies we have counted in the UK, in the last three or four months,
:19:10. > :19:16.they have lots of names, Natural Gas Tubes Limited, they don't seem to be
:19:17. > :19:21.doing anything at the moment. Why have you registered 52 UK companies
:19:22. > :19:28.in the last four months? We own the something like 20 businesses in the
:19:29. > :19:32.UK. There are probably 15 or 20 companies, various companies doing
:19:33. > :19:34.various things. Often you have dormant companies waiting for
:19:35. > :19:39.acquisitions or businesses to be started. This is nothing... I mean,
:19:40. > :19:45.there is nothing wrong or unusual about holding companies. They are UK
:19:46. > :19:48.companies, audited and perfectly compliant with everything. I am not
:19:49. > :19:52.sure what these questions are about. There is a degree of capacity and
:19:53. > :19:57.complexity that has made it quite difficult. This is a private group,
:19:58. > :20:06.and it complies with every regulation. All of these companies,
:20:07. > :20:09.in the UK, all registered companies, public information. A private
:20:10. > :20:13.company does the structures in the best possible way to organise
:20:14. > :20:16.itself, all of the information is available publicly. Can we talk
:20:17. > :20:22.about what has happened in Scotland, and what the implications are? You
:20:23. > :20:27.have taken over two plants. That is correct. Can you throw light on the
:20:28. > :20:31.mysterious transaction? You bought it from Tata, the Scottish
:20:32. > :20:38.Government owned it for half an hour, or a short period in between.
:20:39. > :20:42.What was the purpose of that complicated transaction? The
:20:43. > :20:47.Scottish Government, very helpfully, acted as the middleman, the broker.
:20:48. > :20:52.What did they do by buying and selling it to you? We didn't
:20:53. > :20:55.negotiate the deal bilaterally, it was a back-to-back deal. The
:20:56. > :20:58.Scottish Government negotiated the deal with Tata and we negotiated
:20:59. > :21:02.with the Scottish Government. Did they take any risks, did they take
:21:03. > :21:06.the pension liabilities away from the company before selling it to
:21:07. > :21:11.you? Is there something the Scottish taxpayer... There was different
:21:12. > :21:16.versions negotiated. In the end, what was finalised was a clean, back
:21:17. > :21:21.deal, they took no risk. There is a very bad experience in the not too
:21:22. > :21:26.distant British memory of Rover, which fell out of business, put on
:21:27. > :21:31.the market by BMW, who owned it, a buyer came forward, everybody wanted
:21:32. > :21:34.the buyers to make it work. They took it over, they got a lot of
:21:35. > :21:39.help, the Government promoted the purchase of the company for ?10, and
:21:40. > :21:42.then it failed several years later. It left everybody much worse off
:21:43. > :21:47.than perhaps if it had failed earlier. I just wonder, if the
:21:48. > :21:51.British had been stung by that experience, and maybe whether they
:21:52. > :21:55.think, or many will feel, the same is going to happen here, that you
:21:56. > :21:59.will take it over, we will hope you can make it work, and somehow, at
:22:00. > :22:07.the end of it all, it will fail in a few years' time, rather than now. Is
:22:08. > :22:12.that prospect, do think, for steel in the south-west? Any buyer that
:22:13. > :22:15.comes forward, the businessman must be examined very carefully. This
:22:16. > :22:19.business has not been easy, it is not an easy environment to make
:22:20. > :22:23.money in steel. The turnaround plan must be something that is different.
:22:24. > :22:26.Now before we move on, let's have another look at that
:22:27. > :22:31.On June the 23rd, the UK will make its most important
:22:32. > :22:34.political decision for a generation - whether to leave or remain
:22:35. > :22:43.But if you're struggling through the quagmire
:22:44. > :22:46.of competing arguments, we'll do our best to help.
:22:47. > :22:49.Over the next two months, Newsnight will be devoting a set
:22:50. > :22:53.of special programmes to some of the key issues,
:22:54. > :22:58.like migration, security, the economy and sovereignty.
:22:59. > :23:04.But we can arm you with some of the information
:23:05. > :23:17.So join us for the first of these special shows this Monday.
:23:18. > :23:19.Our subject on Monday will be sovereignty.
:23:20. > :23:24.Can you stop a paedophile before they've abused a child?
:23:25. > :23:28.That's the aim of a unique clinical trial in Sweden, in which
:23:29. > :23:30.researchers are hoping to prevent potential abusers ever carrying out
:23:31. > :23:32.an offence with just a single injection.
:23:33. > :23:34.Researchers at the Karolinska Institute, one of the world's
:23:35. > :23:36.leading medical universities, believe that a drug called
:23:37. > :23:38.Degaralix, which stops the brain from making testosterone can combat
:23:39. > :23:41.hyper-sexuality and aggression, turning off the need to seek out
:23:42. > :23:45.The drug has been tested on five Swedish men who called
:23:46. > :23:47.a sexual offenders' helpline because they were concerned
:23:48. > :23:49.about their paedophilic inclinations, and now a trial
:23:50. > :23:51.using 60 volunteers, half of who will receive
:23:52. > :23:59.the drug and half a placebo, is to take place.
:24:00. > :24:07.The trial raises ethical questions about if therapies can be introduced
:24:08. > :24:11.for the most dangerous offenders before they have broken the law.
:24:12. > :24:14.To discuss the approach I am joined now by Belinda Winder,
:24:15. > :24:16.a forensic psychologist, who has pioneered a trial of giving
:24:17. > :24:18.libido-repressing drugs to sexual offenders in prison in Nottingham,
:24:19. > :24:20.and Gabriel Shaw, Chief Executive at the National Association
:24:21. > :24:24.for People Abused in Childhood, Napac.
:24:25. > :24:32.Good evening. Belinda, you have been using a different chemical mix, but
:24:33. > :24:38.does it work, I suppose that is the first question. The medications we
:24:39. > :24:42.have been using, yes, they work to reduce sexual arousal. First, I want
:24:43. > :24:45.to take issue with the first question about spotting a
:24:46. > :24:49.paedophile, we need to be clear that many paedophiles do not offend
:24:50. > :24:53.against children. Many people have entrenched preference for children,
:24:54. > :24:56.they will know about this from puberty, but they never offend
:24:57. > :25:00.against children. We then have some paedophiles who are struggling not
:25:01. > :25:05.to offend against children. Some blues that struggle. Some
:25:06. > :25:08.paedophiles do not really care in terms of the damage they do. -- some
:25:09. > :25:13.blues the struggle. They will go on to offend. We should applaud the
:25:14. > :25:20.good group of paedophiles that never offend against children. Many people
:25:21. > :25:25.who offend against children are not actually paedophiles, they are
:25:26. > :25:28.people that are sexually indiscriminate and will offend
:25:29. > :25:32.against any available outlet, and children are easy pickings. That is
:25:33. > :25:36.an interesting starting position, I just want to see if you agree with
:25:37. > :25:39.that, is that how you view the spectrum of conditions? That is
:25:40. > :25:43.right. Belinda laid it out very carefully. One of the concerns I had
:25:44. > :25:47.about the story was that there is a thought that it might be a magical
:25:48. > :25:51.silver bullet, that by giving a drug, it would be a panacea to
:25:52. > :25:54.everything. Let's remember that the abuse of children is not purely or
:25:55. > :26:00.solely driven by sexual desire. There is a whole range of issues. It
:26:01. > :26:06.is about power, control, coercion and manipulation. It can't just be
:26:07. > :26:10.seen as you have this drug and it cures everything. I want to be
:26:11. > :26:23.clear, do you accept that there are, if you like, and benign paedophiles
:26:24. > :26:26.that deserve sympathy rather than condemnation? There are people that
:26:27. > :26:31.have urges, but it is about what they do with them, the
:26:32. > :26:38.self-determination. Let's go back to the drugs. People will hear what
:26:39. > :26:42.you're saying, that there is no such thing as a paedophile that deserves
:26:43. > :26:49.respect, they might say, but I want to park that. The drugs work in
:26:50. > :26:55.affecting the way that people who worry about the inclinations, they
:26:56. > :26:59.were? They work on reducing sexual arousal, sexual preoccupation,
:27:00. > :27:03.thinking about sex constantly, and having persistent urges for sexual
:27:04. > :27:09.outlets. They work on reducing that aspect of sexual offending. It is a
:27:10. > :27:12.big aspect of sexual offending, but not the only aspect. You probably
:27:13. > :27:16.have two people here that will agree with each other. Do you think that
:27:17. > :27:19.they should be promoting these drugs to people that worry about their
:27:20. > :27:24.inclinations? It's about child protection, anything that helps
:27:25. > :27:30.protect a child from the risk of harm has to be welcomed. Let's
:27:31. > :27:33.promote it, yes. If we take it more widely, it is about resources. You
:27:34. > :27:39.can understand survivor anger, if it was felt that too many resources
:27:40. > :27:44.were being placed on this issue, whereas we know that there is
:27:45. > :27:47.support for survivors, who have been traumatised and abused as children,
:27:48. > :27:51.and it is just not there, it is patchy across the UK. There is a
:27:52. > :27:57.balance to be struck with scarce resources. Where do you place the
:27:58. > :28:01.most? The idea is also promoted that you might say to convicted
:28:02. > :28:04.paedophiles, people that have abused children, maybe your sentence will
:28:05. > :28:10.be shorter if you agree to some kind of treatment. The survivor community
:28:11. > :28:16.thinks... What? Do they say that as a practical way of proceeding, or
:28:17. > :28:23.no, no way do you trade off? The first thing is that survivors are
:28:24. > :28:27.not a homogenous group. That is a bit dangerous. Survivors can
:28:28. > :28:32.differentiate, as Belinda said, about who feel they have these urges
:28:33. > :28:36.and will not offend, and those that well. For convicted paedophiles,
:28:37. > :28:39.this is the other concern, the drug works because people have identified
:28:40. > :28:45.and have self referred. They want to be helped. For people that do not
:28:46. > :28:49.want to be helped, how are you going to apply this? It is all about
:28:50. > :28:57.cooperation, taking it properly. I have concerns it may not be the
:28:58. > :29:03.answer for convicted offenders. You have been trialling this in prison.
:29:04. > :29:06.Tell me how you do it. Do you say, you get something in return? People
:29:07. > :29:12.do not get anything in return, the only thing they get is the benefits
:29:13. > :29:15.of medication. Many guys in prison do not want to reoffend, they don't
:29:16. > :29:20.want to return to prison, they do not want to offend against children.
:29:21. > :29:26.They are not paedophile offenders, necessarily, they are men offending
:29:27. > :29:30.against children, which includes paedophiles. It might sound like
:29:31. > :29:34.language, but it's important society takes on board the different parts
:29:35. > :29:36.of terminology. We will leave it there, thank you.
:29:37. > :29:38.There have been some unlikely leading men over the years,
:29:39. > :29:41.and none more so than the star of a new musical which opens
:29:42. > :29:45.The spotlight falls on the Labour leader in Corbyn the Musical,
:29:46. > :29:47.a light-hearted romp which also features Dianne Abbott,
:29:48. > :29:51.Declaration of interest - the show, at Waterloo East Theatre,
:29:52. > :29:53.was co-written by a former Newsnight producer, but don't
:29:54. > :29:57.Does political satire do a better job of connecting politics
:29:58. > :29:58.with people than election campaigns and PMQs?
:29:59. > :30:11.Our man in the stalls is Stephen Smith.
:30:12. > :30:17.# The world in my hands # Sleep safe at night
:30:18. > :30:20.# Mow with the left, we are getting it right
:30:21. > :30:24.# Didn't sell out, # I didn't give in
:30:25. > :30:28.# You needed a hero # You got Corbyn. Jeremy Corbyn, as
:30:29. > :30:37.you never thought you would see him. As the star of a musical comedy.
:30:38. > :30:43.# Austerity is mean. # I did a portrayal of Peter Mandelson
:30:44. > :30:48.last year. I was kind of Peter Mandelson this
:30:49. > :30:55.time last year and now I am Jeremy Corbyn this year.
:30:56. > :30:59.# You're with the left, we're getting it right. #
:31:00. > :31:05.Isn't this liberating. I am having such a great time. It is feel good
:31:06. > :31:10.romance of year, the show spares no expense to recreate a motorbike tour
:31:11. > :31:14.of east Germany that Mr Corbyn supposedly took with Diane Abbott.
:31:15. > :31:23.It must be terrible to be trapped behind there. Imagine never to be
:31:24. > :31:27.able to visit the other side. The The story going on a trip to east
:31:28. > :31:31.Germany which may or may not have happened. Have you done your
:31:32. > :31:35.research like the former Newsnight journalist you are? Of course I have
:31:36. > :31:40.done my research. Even better than when I was on Newsnight if that were
:31:41. > :31:46.possible. We will leave that! We have found that the motorcycle trip
:31:47. > :31:50.probably didn't happen. Whoa. They went on holiday together. They did.
:31:51. > :31:55.They defy they went to east Germany that is for the reasons we describe.
:31:56. > :32:01.We are here now, I can't wait to experience the life of a Communist
:32:02. > :32:06.country. I was so excited... Showing her as not just Diane the
:32:07. > :32:13.politician, Diane the human, the slightly sexual predator. It is a
:32:14. > :32:21.bit fruity? It is. At times, at times. It is family fruit. If the he
:32:22. > :32:28.lands up in... Are you capable of speaking English? I went to Eton. So
:32:29. > :32:34.yes. Boris is in it. Boris is the opposite of or bin. It is no a nasty
:32:35. > :32:38.musical. It is funny. It pokes fun at Conservatives and Labour, and you
:32:39. > :32:42.know, if you can't laugh about politics, what is point of being in
:32:43. > :32:47.it I am standing as I have stood before in this election on a single
:32:48. > :32:56.issue. The one way system round our supermarket. One way? No way. The
:32:57. > :33:01.director of this political comedy says the genre can take audiences to
:33:02. > :33:06.places that the news media fails to reach. Long after it was possible to
:33:07. > :33:10.do anything about it. People say to me, can't you co-something about
:33:11. > :33:15.Brexit. I can't think how you could get into that as an issue. I think
:33:16. > :33:19.that political stories tend to work really well when they are chamber
:33:20. > :33:23.piece, so when you find the room you weren't in, the meeting that you
:33:24. > :33:28.weren't at, when you get that glimpse behind the scenes into
:33:29. > :33:33.moments of decision making or crunch points, in a way it is a media's
:33:34. > :33:37.role I think to give its access to what politicians do, very publicly,
:33:38. > :33:41.so to those moment of great event, sometimes it is theatre's role to
:33:42. > :33:45.get behind the scenes and imagine ourself into those spaces so we can
:33:46. > :33:51.look at humanity of making those decisions.
:33:52. > :33:58.# A lawyer is never more than six feet away. #
:33:59. > :34:00.# All our children engage in gender nonspecific play. Feet away. #
:34:01. > :34:02.# All our children engage in gender nonspecific play. #
:34:03. > :34:06.? Well it takes us into the Camelot, the Brigadoon of his north London
:34:07. > :34:12.postcode. And perhaps some will see him in a new light.
:34:13. > :34:18.Jez, we can-can. # It is the place for which I truly
:34:19. > :34:23.care # Islington
:34:24. > :34:35.# I will fight to save my people there. #
:34:36. > :34:38.It doesn't seem that long ago, we were all talking
:34:39. > :34:40.Seeing value in taking time over things.
:34:41. > :34:43.Well, it took a bit of time, but the counter
:34:44. > :34:47.A book that takes an optimistic view of our hurried lives.
:34:48. > :34:52.It sees some of the downsides of rushing things -
:34:53. > :34:54.in the media for example, what's been called the 24
:34:55. > :35:04.But ultimately it comes down in favour - acceleration
:35:05. > :35:06.is something we have actively chosen, says the author,
:35:07. > :35:16.Good evening to you. It is a grand sweeping boobs, because you explain
:35:17. > :35:19.everything. In terms... Try to. Let us take an example, politics today
:35:20. > :35:25.and Donald Trump, because you managed to squeeze this into the
:35:26. > :35:31.kind of accelerated lives thesis, how does that fit? So Trump is in
:35:32. > :35:34.some ways a product of acceleration and the dislocation to the economy,
:35:35. > :35:39.the fact that people are angry and feel they are losing out is because
:35:40. > :35:44.you know, the fast paced globalised economy, there are people who don't
:35:45. > :35:47.do well from that. He uses Twitter, he doesn't have campaigners, he
:35:48. > :35:53.reaches people directly with this technology, but it is more than
:35:54. > :35:57.that, Trump is perfect instant politician, silver in the US did a
:35:58. > :36:01.fascinating thing, he found that Trump as we would expect dominated
:36:02. > :36:05.the news cycle day after day but he never dominated it with the same
:36:06. > :36:09.story. When he was insulting the Pope, by the next day the caravan
:36:10. > :36:15.had moved on to something else. He could chuck these grenades and move
:36:16. > :36:19.on to the next one. So you are kind of quite sympathetic to the great
:36:20. > :36:24.acceleration, but I am guessing you are not like a big Donald Trump fan?
:36:25. > :36:32.You have kind of talked against your own thesis here, this is what you
:36:33. > :36:35.get. Yes, so I think, I mean, as you said my thesis is there are bad
:36:36. > :36:40.things and good thing, but one of the things with the media it does,
:36:41. > :36:44.it is not so much everything gets faster, what it does it poll rice,
:36:45. > :36:49.you have the sort of fast paced breaking news stuff but you have
:36:50. > :36:54.more people than ever doing good considered, long reads or writing
:36:55. > :36:59.analysis pieces or like, I mentioned naught silver, doing data driven
:37:00. > :37:05.study, there is more good stuff out there as well as the... That is
:37:06. > :37:08.because books have shrunk down into long reads. Let us take another
:37:09. > :37:16.example. This is an interesting one. This, and you do devote a section o
:37:17. > :37:19.which is dating and relationships. I think people would worry that
:37:20. > :37:24.swiping right on tinder, or constantly going online to sort of
:37:25. > :37:31.or speed-dating as the kind of, the sort of end point, I mean, you, can
:37:32. > :37:35.you see any advantage in dating in numbers in that way? Absolutely,
:37:36. > :37:39.dating is horrible. In many way, if you are out there on a the market
:37:40. > :37:44.you are trying to find the right person, it takes ages and you have
:37:45. > :37:49.all the meetings with people and you don't quite click, just increasing
:37:50. > :37:54.the number of people you meet is sort of pretty good. Being able to
:37:55. > :37:59.have that thing with speed-dating, so knowing, OK this person and I
:38:00. > :38:05.click and you know, the two of us should never have met in first
:38:06. > :38:09.place, rather than having to... Even online dating isn't that efficient.
:38:10. > :38:14.People, you spend a lot of time honing your profile and scrolling
:38:15. > :38:19.and looking for, and looking for Mr Right and rejecting this one. Who
:38:20. > :38:24.wants online dating when you have tinder? That is instant. It leads to
:38:25. > :38:30.a hook up culture, people are more likely to go out and have a good
:38:31. > :38:33.time, but it is hard to begrudge then that, I don't think there is
:38:34. > :38:37.much evidence people don't want to get married and settle down. You
:38:38. > :38:41.talk about The Great Acceleration. Are you talking about your life,
:38:42. > :38:47.because it is Metropolitan, I can think of lots of people, elderly
:38:48. > :38:52.people at home who have quite pleasantly paced lives, they are not
:38:53. > :38:56.rushing round I have been accused of being London-centric, the larger the
:38:57. > :39:01.community we are in the faster the pace of our live, it isn't, I hope
:39:02. > :39:05.it is not just me. Erne I meet says gosh, yes, I feel my life is getting
:39:06. > :39:10.out of control. It is speeding up. Apart from the people who go off and
:39:11. > :39:15.live in the countryside and good luck to them. Thank you.
:39:16. > :39:19.That is all we have time for. I will be back with more tomorrow, just to
:39:20. > :39:25.say The Papers are all going very big on Cameron, the Telegraph, I did
:39:26. > :39:32.have money offshore, the Mail, PM. I did profit from tax haven. He
:39:33. > :39:39.finally admits to link to father's fund. And the Guardian using one of
:39:40. > :39:43.its yellow backed headline. I will be back in this seat
:39:44. > :39:56.tomorrow, until then very good night.
:39:57. > :40:01.Hello. Another day of sunshine and shower, the showers have been fading
:40:02. > :40:03.through the evening and that will continue through the night. The
:40:04. > :40:05.winds fall light. It is going