19/05/2016 Newsnight


The search for the missing EgyptAir jet, the spectre of antibiotic resistance, plus what will happen to the Northern Irish border with Ireland if Britain leaves the EU?

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 19/05/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



But who or what brought down EgyptAir Flight MS804?


Tonight we'll assess the expert's theories on an aviation disaster.


And we're in France, where a country is coming to terms


A Harris, this could be an act of terrorism is at the forefront of


people in the minds as the investigators pour over every detail


in search of clues. -- Kear in Paris. Also tonight... I think it is


important we emphasise that it is real, it is current, and we are


dealing with it on a daily basis. A new report hammers home that


antibiotics resistance will take us back to


the dark ages of medicine. So what exactly are big pharma


going to do about it? One of the most unlikely political


figures of the 21st century gives The money what's being wasted,


over and over, every year. And did writer and legendary atheist


Christopher Hitchens contemplate A new book about his life has some


controversial revelations. It's hard to remember a world


where aviation disasters didn't automatically prompt speculation


about terrorist acts. Tonight, search and rescue teams


continue to collect wreckage from the EgyptAir flight MS804


in the sea off the Greek And officials say


that the Airbus A320 - en route from Paris to Cairo when it


vanished from radar shortly after midnight -


is more likely to have been brought down by terrorism


than technical fault. The 10 crew and 56 passengers


aboard, including one Briton named today as 40-year-old


geologist Richard Osman, remain missing, while the Egyptian


vice-President has said that what began as a rescue operation


was turning into one Newsnight's Gabriel Gatehouse


is in Paris. This is a city that over the past


year and a bit has experienced and perhaps even come to expect act of


violence carried out or inspired by the group that calls itself Islamic


State. And so when an aeroplane that originated here drops inexplicably


out of the sky in the early hours of this morning, thoughts inevitably


turn in that direction and is now an investigation ongoing here at


Charles de Gaulle airport into whether there was a security breach.


I should emphasise that we do not know what caused MS804 to drop out


of the sky. All we know is that it appears to have done so in the early


hours of the morning. Francois Hollande confirmed that earlier


today. And there is now a search and recovery operation ongoing jointly


between Greek and Egyptian navies in the Aegean Sea, aided by the Royal


Air Force. They are looking for debris. There has been some dispute


and disagreement over whether any of that debris has been found already


but when it is, it will provide vital clues to the investigators


looking to find out what caused this crash. There were six of six people


on board, 56 crew. 56 passengers, rather. Ten crew, of whom three were


Egyptian security officers. Of the passengers, more than half were


Egyptian with 15 French citizens and the citizens of a number of other


nations. We have mentioned one British man, including people from


Canada, Portugal, Kuwait and Iraq. Some of their relatives came here


earlier today looking for answers. We do not need to see the familiar


pictures of anguish at Sheldon Doyle airport. MS804, MH17, MH270. The


flight numbers change but the scene is always the same, people drawn in


disbelief to the place where those they suddenly last embarked on their


final journey. Authorities are not ruling any theory in or out yet. But


in Paris, especially here in Paris, the idea that this could be an act


of terrorism is at the forefront of people's minds as the investigators


pour over every detail in search of clues. EgyptAir flight 804 departed


Paris at 9:11pm local time on Wednesday evening, and three and a


quarter hours later, the pilot spoke to Greek Air Traffic Control.


Everything seemed normal. 11 minutes after that, at 2:37pm Cairo time,


after the plane had entered Egyptian airspace, it disappeared off the


radar. -- 2:37am. Weather conditions were said to be ideal last night.


The aircraft was relatively modern, an Airbus A3 20. So how did it crash


without warning into the Mediterranean? TRANSLATION: The


plane, 10-15 miles inside Egyptian airspace made a 90 degrees turn to


the left at 30,000 feet and then a 360 degrees turn to the right,


descending to 15,000 feet. Then, 360 degrees turn to the right,


picture was lost. A state of emergency is still in force in Paris


after the attacks on the 13th of November last year. Five days after


that, security forces foiled what they said was a plot to attack shall


the goal airport, where today's flight MH804 originated. And then


after Islamic State managed to smuggle a bomb aboard a plane in


Sharm el-Sheikh, bound for Russia last supper, the fear is that


Islamic State could infiltrate European airports, too. -- last


October. A lot of European security experts will be worried about planes


landing from all over the Middle East. Imagine a bomb was put on a


plane in Egypt, which is easier, you then prohibit EgyptAir from flying


in Europe or you need to check every single airliner arriving from an


Arab country. There are 85,000 people who have security clearance


to work at Paris's airports. At the attacks here in November, 70 of them


had clearance revoked by police on the grounds of national security.


Today, a senior industry source told us that a significant number of


those worked in airside catering. Eric is a lawyer who represents ten


of those who had clearance revoked. All of them are accessing Muslims.


He said his clients are the innocent victims of paranoid times. But he


agrees that the airport has a problem.


The bomb on board the theory is still only one among many and even


if it was a bomb, it may not have come aboard here in Paris. It is


possible that the key to this mystery lies somewhere further back


in the story. Yesterday morning, the same aircraft had flown from Eritrea


to Egypt. Then onto Tunisia, and back to Cairo. And from there, to


Paris yesterday afternoon, before taking off on its final, fatal


journey. Earlier today, relatives of the passengers still missing from


flight MS804 made that same journey from Paris to Cairo. They will be


joined by French investigators and technical experts, all of them in


search of answers. Gabriel Gatehouse reporting.


And joining me now is Mark Urban our Diplomatic Editor.


It is the best part of 24 hours since the plane effectively


disappeared. As the list of possible causes narrowed at all? I think it


has somewhat, as facts have emerged. This could be a possible accident,


still. The plane was at 37,000 feet and there is an aerodynamic


phenomenon, the coffin corner, call it what you will, lift is limited at


that altitude. The have been previous cases of planes getting


into uncontrollable stalling. But no distress call, urges a first


important factor. If you start to look at foul play, the shoulder


launched anti-aircraft missiles, we know from the height and the


location that we can rule that out. Accidental engagement by a warship


or a fighter plane, once again that is pretty unlikely but such things


have happened. There is nothing in the right area so we can rule that


out. We end up with the possibility, did someone tried to storm the


cockpit? Germanwings model, or something that was alleged to have


happened on a 1999 EgyptAir flight. We know that there were three


security guards on the planes are once again, one is that they would


have put up a fight or something would have been radioed from the


cockpit. So we end up with this possibility of a bomb. Was it put on


somewhere like Cairo? Either way, whether it was there or it was put


on in Paris, it has very serious invocations. We have a


responsibility when a plane comes in that it leaves the airport safely.


So it does not put Paris in the clear, even of something was put on


somewhere else. Big applications if that turns out to be the case. And


where does the investigation go? The search for debris has many purposes


but once you start to bring in large amounts of debris, you can test them


for explosive residue. That is a key step. People will be looking for the


data recorders and they could be in 2000 metres of water, which will


make a difficult recovery operation. Intelligence services in Egypt and


France will be profiling the passengers, looking for possible


connections, people being open to blackmail or other pressure, through


family or other connections. All of these things will be done. Other


intelligence services will be looking for chapter, possibly on the


basis of that the Israelis and Russians and one or two others seem


to have been briefing this afternoon that they have concluded it was a


terrorist attack. But it is really early to say that with definitive


certainty. Many thanks. Two daughters off school,


parents supposed to be working, childcare a nightmare and a GP


refusing to prescribe the antibiotics which would see


off their throat infections antibiotic medicines -


and somehow fund the extremely 10 million humans a year could be


dying needlessly by 2050. This is the stark warning


at the heart of a Government-backed report into anti-microbial


resistance, led by the economist Lord Jim O'Neill


and published today. Anjana Ahuja has been examining


the implications of When it comes to drug resistant


infections, the future does not look just a grim, but apocalyptic.


Superbugs killing 10 million people each year by 2050, more than cancer.


Routine surgery like hip replacements grinding to a halt,


just when an ageing population needs them. The life-saving drug which has


revolutionised medical science. A crisis in antibiotics threatened to


end a golden year of medicine which started with Alexander Fleming's


discovery of penicillin in the 1920s and led to the belief that every


infection was durable. But with antimicrobial resistance on the rise


of over the antimicrobial resistance on the rise


beginning to look a lot antimicrobial resistance on the rise


past. We are talking about the issues in the future but we are


dealing with this problem now, all the time. We are having to use an


injection and a second antibiotic together because we do not want to


take the risk of treatment failing. Antimicrobial resistance, or AMR


refers to an treatable Antimicrobial resistance, or AMR


forecast to cost the global economy $100 trillion, 100,000 billion


dollars, in decades to come. $100 trillion, 100,000 billion


years ago, David Cameron asked the former Goldman Sachs


years ago, David Cameron asked the AMR could be tackled.


years ago, David Cameron asked the backed by the welcome


years ago, David Cameron asked the published today. It urges doctors


not to over prescribe, suggests a $2 billion global fund to pay for


vaccines and new antibiotics, plus a ban on some antibiotics used in


farming. We hear the global figures, we think


it is something happening in other countries. We need to understand


this is happening in our NHS. We have huge problems with infections,


ward closures, issues to halt the spread of organisms. I'm at one of


the top diseases labs at Imperial College London, which has made


tackling resistance one of its main research projects. One of the things


its researchers are doing is developing new classes of


antibiotics, something that the world desperately needs. That is


picked up in the report. But a careful reading of the report shows


a shift in emphasis, as well as the need to supply new antibiotics. The


world also needs to radically rethink how it uses its old ones.


Bugs such as MRSA and see difficile may dominate headlines, but drug


resistance is also causing huge problems in the field of sexually


transmitted infections. Because it can take days to get a definitive


lab result, doctors will sometimes prescribed powerful antibiotics just


in case. But there might be another way. Here, at St George 's Hospital


in London, in a project funded by the medical research Council, a new


test can detect infections in 30 minutes. That means patients can be


treated swiftly and only with the medicine that they really need. This


machine can reveal the presence of an STI in 30 minutes. We can press


this button and review the result. We can see that this patient has not


got chlamydia detected. The scenario of somebody coming in right now,


being diagnosed with gonorrhoea, right now they would be given a


really big injection, a second antibiotics to treat the gonorrhoea.


Just say that we were able to identify that the patient has a


strain of gonorrhoea which is very, very possible was susceptible to an


old antibiotic, with this diagnostic test, we would be able to identify


that straightaway and give that antibiotic. Firstly, we are not


guessing which antibiotic to use, we know which one to use. Secondly, we


don't have to use the injection, we don't have to use the front line


antibiotics that we might need to use later on. It is sparing new


antibiotics, reusing antibiotics and treating with confidence. That's


important in terms of what we call antibiotic stewardship, using them


responsibly. At some point, our luck will run out


and we will need new antibiotics. The trouble is, drug companies don't


think they are profitable to make, because they need to be prescribed


in the smallest amount is possible to the fewest people possible. There


are simply richer pickings to be had elsewhere. So there are 800 cancer


drugs in the pipeline, compared to just 30 or 40 antibiotics under


development today. Of those 30 to 40, only three are of a class that


is most desperately needed. Joining me now is Dr Virginia Ahuja,


an executive director at the Association of


the British Pharmaceutical Industry, which represents the


UK's pharma industry. Before you put your professional hat


on, how concerned are you, personally? The best thing we have


had today with the report is that we have brought this to the attention


of everyone that is watching this programme, reading the newspaper


today, has been listening to the news. That has been so important to


do. The conversations you were hearing on your piece, they are not


new. We have been talking about these issues. The time. The research


kick... Two years ago, it proceeded a lot of the work that we were


talking about today, it has gone on for years. We have had these


conversations for years. There is no hyperbole? There is a real risk of


the scenario that Jim paints in the report. I think the risk is there,


the risk is clear why we all need to be working together on it. You say


we need to be working together, it is only really your industry that


can address the most urgent part? Much of the report gets to the real


nub of it. There is no point in creating the latest and greatest


antibiotic if we are not making the most of our current antibiotics.


What can we do to prevent infection from going out of control in a


setting? We have all heard about hospital cleaning, but it goes


beyond that, understanding what you, as a father, as a parent, can think


about when you are approaching the use of an antibiotic. I appreciate


that, but it is fair to observe the discovery, the research and


development leads to the discovery of new medicines, and we are


becoming increasingly aware they are essential. I don't think it is


ignorant to suggest the pharmaceutical industry is the only


place where those can be an -- unearthed. This is something that


the industry has been pressing for a while. You mentioned the number of


drugs being developed. 30 or 40, against 800 for cancer? But it is


something that is worth comment 2014, $5 billion of investment in


R It is something we have done over the years, these antibiotics


have come from previous research. Let me draw attention to the fact


that we had a declaration by the industry in January of over 100


companies, 13 associations, committed to advancing the R and


addressing the resistance issue. Let's look at the proposals put


forward by Jim O'Neill, this pay or play scheme, $1 million in place for


a company that brings a new drug to market. It is quite attractive, and


it seems, even by the standards of the pharmaceutical industry, which I


think is the most profitable on the planet, a decent payday? R


incentives are important, something we have been talking about was time.


But let's think about how we get those delivered on the ground. If we


have a new antibiotics, ultimately, it is about making sure in every


country there is an opportunity to think about how to make sure the


antibiotic is going to be made available in practice. I just want


to focus on some conclusive answers that we might get to any course


to focus on some conclusive answers our brief time together. Does the


industry support the proposal? The industry supports


industry support the proposal? The incentives for getting medicines


through. Is this the incentives for getting medicines


incentive? We could have other incentives for getting medicines


options for investing in R In R,


options for investing in R In approach would be better.


options for investing in R In no? You not blindingly with


options for investing in R In answering the question. The question


is talking about two things. There is investment, how we put money into


R, and we have better ways of... You don't like the pay or play


proposal? There is a collaborative approach... Has Jim O'Neill made a


mistake approach... Has Jim O'Neill made a


It's good putting all of these ideas forward, I think the ideas need to


be discussed. We haven't had those conversations, we haven't gone


be discussed. We haven't had those through the costs of the different


approaches. What we have had a lot of experience with, in developing


world, in neglected diseases, of experience with, in developing


have a public partnership of experience with, in developing


R to fruition. Nasri Mac is research and development, and


R to fruition. Nasri Mac is other acronym is about


R to fruition. Nasri Mac is response ability, is there any any


R to fruition. Nasri Mac is work we have been doing in R has


been growing. work we have been doing in R has


investment in a number of areas. I don't think the industry is falling


down on understanding what the role is to supply the best possible


medicines for patient's health and benefits. It is what we need to


done with respect to this report that has come out. What


done with respect to this report is is how we collectively address a


challenge that faces every us. I understand the point


challenge that faces every us. I about collective responsibility, I'm


interested in corporate responsibility... Excuse me, one


moment, profit margins routinely breached the 40% mark. Pfizer made


$22 billion in 2014. It seems, despite a degree of obfuscation, it


seems unless there is major money to be made, the pharmaceutical industry


seems unless there is major money to will watch the planets ever? That


were true, you would not have 34 in the pipeline, you would not have 5


billion spent last year. In an industry worth 400


billion spent last year. In an investments are not


billion spent last year. In an is part of the R pipeline. Compare


it to the private... Let's act is part of the R pipeline. Compare


the government is doing... They are not here for me to ask, you are. I


will put that into perspective. The central proposal, the pay or play


scheme to reward... I would disagree that it is the central proposal...


Let's not get into semantics, a proposal? I think we could talk


about it, but I think other options would be much more effective,


getting the right medicines, in a voluntary collaboration. It means


you have a long-term to deliver on this enormous challenge that we


face. Thank you. Amid all the Referendum-related talk


of enhancing border control and restricting the free movement


of people, you could be forgiven for forgetting that in the event


of an exit vote on June the 23rd the United Kingdom would


still have a land border Quite what that border


between Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic would look


like is, at best, unclear. Newsnight's Secunder Kermani has


been considering what post-Leave life might look like


on either side of it. This small river splits the village


of PepsiCo. Since partition, it has divided the Republic of Ireland from


Northern Ireland. The border is basically invisible now. During the


troubles, checkpoints transformed life for residents on both sides.


There would be a few farmers that have grown on both sides of the


border. Stephen's family lives at the border, the British army blew up


the bridge at the edge. It only really a mile in this direction, you


are having to do a journey of ten or 12 miles, which took you out around


over the bow Island in front of us, and left you doing a journey of 35


or 40 minutes to get to a local shop that was a mile away. Do you worry


that something like that might come back if there is a Brexit, Britain


leaves the EU? I don't think we will ever see something as severe as


that, certainly there is a worry there will be customs and things


like that in place. What is going to happen, nobody can tell us. The


border is no longer look like this. But what will they look like in the


future? This side of the bridge is in the Republic of Ireland and


Britain is just a few steps away. Once you are here in Northern


Ireland, if you want to travel further into the mainland UK, there


are no passport controls. The Leave campaign wants to take control of


Britain's borders with the EU, so are we going to see a hard border


that splits community is once again? Some senior campaign managers have


said there should be, but the official line is that nothing will


change. The Common travel area between the Republic of Ireland and


the UK, it is in law, it is protected, there will be no passport


controls. But then you are not taking control of Britain's borders,


you can't stop anybody from big EU slipping through a porous border and


coming to Britain? You do, there is the power, there is the controls


that they can access in the Republic of Ireland. Anybody from the EU can


travel into the Republic of Ireland. But we do have spot checks on both


sides of the border. Will there be more checks, checking on people


coming from Northern Ireland to mainland UK? That would anger, I


imagine, people. We believe it is perfectly operational and will be


sustainable. Border towns thrive on the custom from both countries.


Shops here accept both pounds and euros. But despite what the Leave


campaign say, there is anxiety from many who pass through here on daily


commutes between Dublin and Belfast. Many of us feel Irish and Northern


Irish. I would hate that to be something that would be more


difficult, with the border. Even making the trip to Belfast, they


brought back Mars bars, Spangles, contraceptives. Do you think that if


Britain leaves the EU, we might go back to seeing customs checks? I


don't think they will be bringing contraception any more, that's gone!


I think you could get custom checks, yes. The last border checks were


brought down years ago. Anything vaguely resembling this would be


hugely controversial. We were told that British officials are concerned


that the border is already a back door to the UK. Security sources I


have spoken to say it has been targeted by terrorism suspects and


for illegal immigration. There had been talks predating the referendum


between Britain and Dublin on Visa harmonisation, on improving checks


on those arriving into the Republic of Ireland. I am told those talks


have a new sense of urgency because of the possibility of a Brexit. For


many living and working by the border, like here in Warrenpoint


harbour, the primary concern is the economic impact of leaving the EU.


Even some Leave campaigners say Northern Ireland is a net recipient


of EU funding by ?58 million, much of it agricultural subsidies, though


they still argue the UK would be better off out overall. 37% of


Northern Irish exports go to the Republic of Ireland. 22% go to the


rest of the EU. Ireland will also be affected. 17.5% of their exports go


to the UK. 40% of the trade of the sport, both import and export, comes


from all goes to the Republic of Ireland. But, to be quite honest, if


there were difficulties with border controls and paperweight, customs, I


am quite sure that trade would disappear from here and go to ports


in the Republic, where there would not be those controls. In County


Tyrone, another border region, many farmers receive payments from the EU


Qatar Common agricultural policy. Roger and Elaine run a more unusual


farm, breeding alpacas. You got very confused cows and alpacas, having


not seen cows, they didn't know what the animals were. Last year, they


make most sales south of the border. They are still yet to make up their


mind which way to vote. If we were out of the EU, it might give us the


opportunity, as part of the UK, to have a greater say in being able to


say, we are unique here, things need to be put in place that need to


facilitate as, being able to access things, just as much as those in


inland UK. According to the polls, Northern Irish voters are the most


strongly pro-remain in the country. But according to one poll, when you


break the vote down, nationalist voters are almost all EU, but a


majority of unionists are pro-leave. A lot of work has been done


reconciling communities in Northern Ireland, much of it in the border


regions has been funded by the EU, like this multi-million pounds


complex which brings different groups together. But there are fears


leaving the EU could destabilise the region's delicate balance. We are 30


years out of conflict, the country has come on leaps and bounds. There


is a generation that knows nothing about the troubles except what they


read about the troubles except what they


parents have told them. They don't understand it. Let's look


parents have told them. They don't generations of people. Why burden


them with a border again? We have been through all of this. We don't


want it, we've had enough borders, we don't want any more. This is the


UK's only land border with the rest of the EU. For many in Westminster,


whether to leave or remain is an abstract question, few will be as


deeply affected us those living here.


He was the sceptic's sceptic, prominent even among


the world's most passionate and persuasive atheists.


But a new book published in America posits the possibility


that the author and polemicist Christopher Hitchens not only


contemplated Christianity as his 2011 death from cancer


of the oesophagus approached but also flirted with faith itself.


However, friends and confidantes of Hitchens, including his widow,


are deeply unhappy at even the slightest aspersion being cast


In a moment, we'll speak to one of those friends but I'm joined now


The Faith of Christopher Hitchens: The Restless Soul of


Even the most cursory reading of Christopher Hitchens' work


establishes a man who did not believe he had a soul. How could it


possibly have been restless? The title makes it very clear that what


I am getting at with this is not that he had faith in God but rather


that, as the title makes clear, I think the man was an atheist but I


am asking the question, what was his faith in? The tumblers do not line


up with the atheist key, or the God key, but he was defined by a lot


more than his atheism. Of course it was, and I will ask the same


question again, how could a man who did not believe he had a soul have


had a restless soul? In a debate with Christopher, he spoke of a soul


and I made sure to point this out. What did he say? He said that


Christianity continued to inflict crimes against the body and the


soul. And I pointed out that from an atheist point of view, there is no


soul. But Christians would believe that there was. I do not think


trying to unpick the workings of Christopher Hitchens' brains is


within the remit of either of us. It is a deliberately provocative title,


you are attempting to take a man famous throughout the world for his


robust approach to atheism and his championing of it, and you are


possibly attempting to flog a few books off the back of it. That is


simply not true, James. And it is clear from your question that you


have not read the book. The book is a story about friendship, a story


about friendship between two man of very different world views. Here I


am, an evangelical Christian and Christopher Hitchens, a Molotov


cocktail tossing atheist. Onstage, the two of us could enjoy a warm


friendship that culminated in two Lengthy road trips, one from his


home in DC to mine, and the other through Yellowstone National Park,


where we studied the gospel together. You read a book together.


His friends say that you hardly knew him. Well, his friends clearly do


not know the truth of it. I don't know how many friends Christopher


took 13 hour car trips with, but he did two Lengthy road trips with me


and spoke very warmly publicly of our friendship. This is an film,


James. I am not inventing anything here. You bring his atheism into


question, you posit the notion of contemplating Christianity, and your


evidence is the number of hours you spend together in a car? No, that is


not the evidence. The evidence is a great deal more than that. In fact,


I think you are deliberately mischaracterising the book. What I


say in the book is that Christopher was contemplating making a number


of, if I could put it this way, edits to his life late in his life.


Exactly what he would convert to was not clear. He spoke of a Protestant


atheism, which was something he found attractive. Would he have


converted to DSM? He was deeply affected by Judaism, and the


discovery late in life that he was Jewish on his mother side. It is not


clear exactly what kind of change you would have made but after 2001,


he made a very serious defection from the left politically. And I am


simply suggesting that this was a man of a great deal more complexity


than you would suggest. Of course. How long before his death did you


last see? I saw him 40 months before his death and that is very


important. -- 14 months. Because the suggestion I am claiming a deathbed


conversion is absurd. First of all, the book is not about that and


secondly, I was not there. And nobody suggested it was. It was


merely the tone of your intimacy I was seeking to establish. We are


joined by Lawrence Krauss, an atheist and close friend of


Christopher Hitchens. He refused to discuss directly with Larry Thompson


the contents of this book. -- Larry Taunton. To begin with I want to ask


you why your feelings run so deeply on this and have you been mollified


by what you have heard? This is a man who is clearly trying to use


Christopher Hitchens to take a relatively unknown individual and


make money of Christopher's name. I will not participate with that, by


having a conversation with something I am not willing to other


conversation with. Is it possible that he was auditing some of his


belief in the last years of his life? Firstly, let's talk about


friendship because I had a conversation with Christopher


Hitchens' would all about this. She confirmed that Christopher was paid


to spend time with this man. I have to say that none of his friends paid


Christopher to spend time with him. That is the difference between a


real friend and a paid associate. Christopher was paid to debate with


this gentleman. The other thing is that Christopher was incredibly, in


spite of the fact that he was seen as a bulldog on stage, in private he


was incredibly civil with individuals and could have


wonderful, polite conversations with people he desperately disagreed


with. I know Justice Scully are used to be a visitor in his house. --


Justice Scolia. The fact that he is confusing friendship with civility


means he did not know this man at all. What did his widow make of the


book? She is disgusted by it and believes it was somebody taking the


opportunity to write his coat-tails. So many things are ridiculous about


the notion. First of all, atheism is not a belief system. It is a


recognition that you do not accept the existence of God without


evidence. As he would've said, extraordinary claims require


extraordinary evidence and the claim that after 13.8 billion years, God


would suddenly weighed in on this planet -- weight on this planet for


hominis to develop and then decided to reveal himself to illiterate iron


age peasants after millions of years, is so ridiculous that it


would require extraordinary evidence. Moreover, if you were


converting, what would you convert to? There were 1000 religions, and


certainly Christianity was not one of Christopher's favourites. He said


the new Testament was more evil than the old and in particular, as


Richard Dawkins and I have pointed out, no one talks more about how the


G7. -- hell then Jesus. He referred to God as a Saddam Hussein in the


sky. The notion that they would be sympathetic to that kind of


silliness is just ridiculous. Now, you may have been


following our My Decision mini-series in the run up to the EU


referendum - offering a little space to some well-known faces


who are not going to see out Tonight, the thoughts of someone


Gordon Brown described as a 'bigoted woman',


Gillian Duffy. Well, I think the European Union has


just got far too large for itself. The money what's being wasted,


over and over, every year, Well, it's not billions,


it's probably trillions now. We're giving all the time,


we always put our money in, but we never seem to get


anything back to help us. "I tried to read it and I thought


I can't be reading this." She said, I put a stamp on it


and just put, "David Cameron,


10 Downing Street." And I read in the paper that other


people had sent it back. Why was he allowed to spend


?9 million on a leaflet? I don't think it will


change our life at all. He said the rich will still be rich,


whether we come out or we stay in. So that means we're going to still


be the same anyhow, aren't we? But I'm frightened of losing


our identity as well. That's what I'm frightened


of, an' all. But we'll never get England


back to how it was. But I love being English,


and I don't want to be a European. And that is all we have time for.


Emily is in the chair tomorrow. Good night.


Good evening. Thursday brought some sunshine but many places had cloud


and outbreaks of rain.


In-depth investigation and analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines, with James O'Brien.

The search for the missing EgyptAir jet, the spectre of antibiotic resistance, plus what will happen to the Northern Irish border with Ireland if Britain leaves the EU?

Download Subtitles