:00:00. > :00:08.If Saudi Arabia is using British weapons to bomb Yemen,should we be
:00:09. > :00:12.Newsnight learns of turmoil at the heart of the establishment
:00:13. > :00:15.as senior MPs try to water down the draft report
:00:16. > :00:21.We bring you what appears to be the anatomy of a whitewash.
:00:22. > :00:25.I've got documents that show how some MPs want to remove references
:00:26. > :00:28.to violations of international law and calls for a suspenison of arms
:00:29. > :00:30.sales from an influential Parliamentary report.
:00:31. > :00:36.Hilary Benn and a former general will help us unpick it.
:00:37. > :00:48.Time for school for the boys of Bristol Grammar School.
:00:49. > :00:54.And will she ever convince anyone else?
:00:55. > :00:56.Nowadays, grammar schools are very much occupied by kids from affluent
:00:57. > :00:59.backgrounds and very few low-income, working-class kids that we all care
:01:00. > :01:03.about have the opportunity of getting into grammar schools.
:01:04. > :01:09.We're going to make some history together today.
:01:10. > :01:19.It's the best iPhone that we have ever created.
:01:20. > :01:32.Is innovation dead, or has it just moved to Asia?
:01:33. > :01:39.Do weapons sold to Saudi Arabia by Britain break
:01:40. > :01:41.international humanitarian law with their use in Yemen, and if so,
:01:42. > :01:49.Newsnight has learnt of extraordinary divisions betwen
:01:50. > :01:50.Newsnight has learnt of extraordinary divisions between
:01:51. > :01:52.the legislators trying to answer that exact question.
:01:53. > :01:54.Last night, this programme saw evidence that the Committees
:01:55. > :01:56.on Arms Export Controls was recommending Britain
:01:57. > :01:58.stop selling weapons to Saudi for use in Yemen,
:01:59. > :02:01.in a war where many civilians have been bombed.
:02:02. > :02:05.But tonight, further leaks show certain MPs trying to water
:02:06. > :02:07.down the draft report, with some rowing back altogether.
:02:08. > :02:10.The committee met again earlier this evening to try to hammer
:02:11. > :02:12.Gabriel Gatehouse has been following the story.
:02:13. > :02:25.How did it end? Late. We don't know whether it ended in agreement,
:02:26. > :02:31.because the members are sworn to secrecy and won't tell us. Given the
:02:32. > :02:35.divisions, I very much doubt it. The draft report we saw yesterday
:02:36. > :02:42.basically said it was inevitable that weapons supplied by Britain
:02:43. > :02:45.were being used by the Saudis in the coalition in Yemen, in contravention
:02:46. > :02:50.of international humanitarian law, that's basically war crimes. It is a
:02:51. > :02:55.draft, and tonight, we've seen proposed amendments. We've got 11
:02:56. > :02:58.pages here in total. This is the kind of things that happens with
:02:59. > :03:03.these reports, people write it up and then amendments coming, but what
:03:04. > :03:08.is unusual is to get the insight into the process, especially on this
:03:09. > :03:14.most controversial of issues. Most of the amendments come from two MPs
:03:15. > :03:19.- Crispin Blunt and John Spellar. What we see, really, is a concerted
:03:20. > :03:26.effort to water down, or in some cases completely eliminate, the
:03:27. > :03:29.legality of the issue of Britain's arms sales. Let's look at the
:03:30. > :03:34.summary. Here is the original draft. It says there has been very serious
:03:35. > :03:46.evidence of violations of humanitarian and human rights law by
:03:47. > :03:49.the Saudi led coalition in Yemen, including the targeting of civilian
:03:50. > :03:54.areas and medical facilities will top both John Spellar and Crispin
:03:55. > :04:00.Blunt want the term allegations to be used. Crispin Blunt once
:04:01. > :04:05.references to civilian areas removed altogether. The draft goes on, we
:04:06. > :04:10.believe there must be an independent, United Nations led
:04:11. > :04:16.investigation of these violations, and we call upon the UK Government
:04:17. > :04:19.to support and press for such an investigation. Crispin Blunt
:04:20. > :04:25.slightly softened the language on this to refer to alleged violations
:04:26. > :04:28.by all parties to the conflict. John Spellar wants the reference to an
:04:29. > :04:36.independent investigation removed altogether. Both Blunt and Spellar
:04:37. > :04:49.take exception to the following sentence:
:04:50. > :04:58.They both want that changed to a simple allegation. Then comes the
:04:59. > :05:02.recommendation. We therefore recommend, the draft says, that Her
:05:03. > :05:08.Majesty's Government suspend sales of arms that could be used in Yemen
:05:09. > :05:12.to Saudi Arabia until the independent UN led investigation has
:05:13. > :05:15.come to its conclusions. Crispin Blunt replaces that recommendation
:05:16. > :05:20.with a reference to a legal case that will come before the High Court
:05:21. > :05:26.next year. John Spellar removes it altogether. What might you mentioned
:05:27. > :05:31.Crispin Blunt and John Spellar, talk us through who they are. Crispin
:05:32. > :05:35.Blunt is Conservative MP for Reigate in Surrey, chair of the influential
:05:36. > :05:45.foreign affairs select committee. John Spellar is a former Armed
:05:46. > :05:52.Forces Minister. They are both verbally senior MPs and both have
:05:53. > :05:59.been members of the pro-Saudi or poly parter mail -- Parliamentary
:06:00. > :06:09.group. If you look at MPs' interest, you will see that Crispin Blunt has
:06:10. > :06:14.connections with a military company. He said the work was unrelated to
:06:15. > :06:18.Saudi Arabia. John Spellar has a record of defending arms sales to
:06:19. > :06:24.Saudi Arabia on the basis that it creates British jobs. None of this
:06:25. > :06:29.is unusual, or improper, but it gives us a sense of where people
:06:30. > :06:37.stand. What might you have an idea of the extent of British arms sales
:06:38. > :06:43.to Saudi Arabia. About a third of our arms exports go to Saudi Arabia.
:06:44. > :06:47.What is startling is the extent to which it has increased since the
:06:48. > :06:54.campaign in Yemen. According to the draft report, the UK sold more than
:06:55. > :06:58.?1.3 billion of arms to Saudi Arabia in the first 12 months of the war.
:06:59. > :07:05.To put it in context, that represents a 30 fold increase on the
:07:06. > :07:09.same period of the previous year. Any response tonight from the
:07:10. > :07:12.Government? The Foreign Office, who did not want to come on the
:07:13. > :07:18.programme, sent us a statement, saying what they usually say, that
:07:19. > :07:20.they operate one of the most robust arms export control regimes in the
:07:21. > :07:25.world and that they are satisfied that are in line with international
:07:26. > :07:27.obligations. The problem is that this report in its current form
:07:28. > :07:32.suggests that that is not credible. Well, last night, the Saudi Foreign
:07:33. > :07:34.Minister entered the debate, saying it was in Britain's interest
:07:35. > :07:37.to supply Saudi with arms for Yemen to help them fight
:07:38. > :07:39.Iran-backed rebel groups there, which would increase
:07:40. > :07:41.the risk of terrorism Certainly, British-Saudi
:07:42. > :07:46.relations are complicated - their tentacles go beyond economics
:07:47. > :07:48.to security and diplomacy and So, can we afford to upset
:07:49. > :07:52.Saudi Arabia on the question of arms sales, or does
:07:53. > :07:55.the question betray cowardice? Joining me now, Simon Mayall,
:07:56. > :07:57.former Lieutenant General and former senior British military advisor
:07:58. > :08:00.on the Middle East. And Hilary Benn, former
:08:01. > :08:11.Shadow Foreign Secretary. Very nice to have you both here.
:08:12. > :08:14.Hilary Benn, you wanted the Government to be investigated over
:08:15. > :08:18.this. From what is coming up tonight, what do you make of it?
:08:19. > :08:26.Where are we? It remains to be seen what report the committee on arms
:08:27. > :08:30.export controls finally decides. I've been calling for some months
:08:31. > :08:38.for arms sales to be suspended because there have been numerous
:08:39. > :08:41.reports of breaches of international humanitarian law by both sides. And
:08:42. > :08:47.I think it is important to emphasise that. The rebels and the Saudi
:08:48. > :08:53.coalition. We have legislation, and crazed TV and to -- and criterion to
:08:54. > :08:58.says we should not be exporting if there is a clear risk of serious
:08:59. > :09:02.violations. For me, the issue is, are we upholding the law that
:09:03. > :09:07.Parliament has passed? It seems extraordinary to ignore that, if all
:09:08. > :09:13.the signs are that we are breaking humanitarian law. I don't think that
:09:14. > :09:19.has been proven yet. What Gabriel was indicating was the usual, dare I
:09:20. > :09:23.say, conflicting interests within these committees. There are those,
:09:24. > :09:28.including those who gave evidence. I gave evidence to a committee. There
:09:29. > :09:33.are those who are viscerally against the whole of the defence industry
:09:34. > :09:37.and defence sales. There are people on it who are viscerally against the
:09:38. > :09:42.Saudi Government for a number of reasons. There are people who are
:09:43. > :09:48.deeply, I have to say, misinformed about the realities of the situation
:09:49. > :09:57.in Yemen. And there are those who really are not being really sensible
:09:58. > :10:01.about the threats. Is Hilary Benn one of those? He might have
:10:02. > :10:07.perfectly respectable concerns about issues to do with Saudi Arabia.
:10:08. > :10:13.There is a big regional issue here about who is really responsible when
:10:14. > :10:20.50,000 rebels are able to hold in hock 27 million people in Yemen. And
:10:21. > :10:25.we know where the finger points, I'm afraid, and it is to Iran, who are
:10:26. > :10:30.interfering across the region. Would you accept that Saudi Arabia becomes
:10:31. > :10:36.a lightning rod for this type of criticism? There is perhaps a good
:10:37. > :10:42.taste amongst a lot of the British public over our relations to Saudi.
:10:43. > :10:45.It is an important one. The security cooperation we have with them,
:10:46. > :10:50.because we face a common threat, is important. With people you have a
:10:51. > :10:57.long-standing relationship with, you have to be honest. Simon is right
:10:58. > :11:02.that the rebellion, there is a humanitarian catastrophe in Yemen,
:11:03. > :11:06.and the Saudi led coalition is supported by a UN resolution, but
:11:07. > :11:11.that is about how that campaign is conducted. Given that we have
:11:12. > :11:15.received repeated reports of civilians being hit and affected,
:11:16. > :11:19.and that's why international humanitarian law is so important.
:11:20. > :11:25.The way to resolve the argument, Emily, that has been going on is to
:11:26. > :11:28.have an independent, international investigation. Which we know is not
:11:29. > :11:36.going on because Saudi wants to conducted itself. You are happy for
:11:37. > :11:43.Saudi to conduct its own... 14 nations are in the joint assessment
:11:44. > :11:50.team. What you make of the UN report calling the Saudi operation against
:11:51. > :11:54.civilians widespread and systematic? What would it take to make you
:11:55. > :12:00.uncomfortable with this situation? I have to say, the nature of the
:12:01. > :12:04.operation is extremely complex. But you didn't think it should be
:12:05. > :12:09.investigated. I don't think we have enough weight of evidence, I'm
:12:10. > :12:13.afraid, that tells us we should be suspending one of the most important
:12:14. > :12:18.aspects of our relationship with a key ally in the Gulf, who is
:12:19. > :12:25.involved in a major aspect of countering so-called Islamic State.
:12:26. > :12:29.It is about sceptre -- separatism and security. And whatever they do
:12:30. > :12:34.in Yemen, perhaps we should look farther afield unthinkably risks to
:12:35. > :12:38.Britain. I don't think we should be doing that. The UK Government has
:12:39. > :12:43.showed itself incapable of doing its job. The first part of this year...
:12:44. > :12:48.It is not just the Government, it is people like John Spellar on your
:12:49. > :12:51.site. It has not applied its own legislation and for a long time has
:12:52. > :12:55.said, we've made an assessment and we don't think there are breaches of
:12:56. > :13:00.international humanitarian law. They said that to me as Gabriel was
:13:01. > :13:03.reporting on this programme. Then on the last day of the Parliamentary
:13:04. > :13:07.session, they said, that is not quite right, we have made an
:13:08. > :13:13.assessment. And then on Monday, the Foreign Secretary said, when it
:13:14. > :13:16.comes to this question, are there serious violations? He said, based
:13:17. > :13:20.on the information we have, we don't think that test has been met. We
:13:21. > :13:26.don't know what assessment has been done. In fairness to Saudi Arabia, I
:13:27. > :13:30.don't think it is fair to axe -- expect them to do it in a way that
:13:31. > :13:37.will command confidence. Should we pause are selling of arms and still
:13:38. > :13:43.expect them to help out on all the things Simon was talking about?
:13:44. > :13:49.Would they still do that? In the context of our failure to tackle
:13:50. > :13:53.Assad and our Sunni Muslim allies in the Gulf when we did a nuclear deal
:13:54. > :14:01.with Iran, in the context of not supporting Bahrain, this would be
:14:02. > :14:04.yet another blow to any sense of the Americans and ourselves being
:14:05. > :14:10.reliable allies. So we shut our eyes? We engage, and if you don't
:14:11. > :14:15.wish to be engaged, and they feel deeply insecure at the moment, they
:14:16. > :14:19.will go to people who could not care less about humanitarian law, and
:14:20. > :14:24.that is the Russians, the Chinese and the Iranians. Moral relativism
:14:25. > :14:27.is a dodgy place to be. If we don't sell them arms, the Russians will,
:14:28. > :14:32.and that will be worse. That is a weird place to come from. The report
:14:33. > :14:40.shows that there has not been clear-cut evidence of breaches. That
:14:41. > :14:42.is precisely the argument for having an independent international
:14:43. > :14:46.investigation. The sooner that can be done and we can answer the
:14:47. > :14:51.question about breaches of humanitarian law, we can then take
:14:52. > :14:54.the appropriate action. It is our legislation. The last Labour
:14:55. > :14:59.Government put it on the statute book. It is important to uphold it,
:15:00. > :15:03.including in conversation with our friends and partners. That
:15:04. > :15:06.relationship with Saudi Arabia is important, even though we have
:15:07. > :15:10.criticisms on their record on human rights and the death penalty, which
:15:11. > :15:12.I oppose. Thank you both for coming in.
:15:13. > :15:15.So grammar schools are back in the headlines this evening.
:15:16. > :15:16.After yesterday's accidental ministerial leak reinforced
:15:17. > :15:18.suspicions that they are back on the Government agenda,
:15:19. > :15:20.the Prime Minister was quizzed on the topic earlier
:15:21. > :15:23.today by backbenchers, many of whom would be happy
:15:24. > :15:29.Nick Watt's here and has the latest.
:15:30. > :15:35.Take us through the meeting. The new Prime Minister is more than a few
:15:36. > :15:39.words but she faced into the crumbling dry and the Conservative
:15:40. > :15:42.party by saying that she wants to move ahead with their plans to
:15:43. > :15:47.expand the grammar school system in England and she went to that meeting
:15:48. > :15:52.and said they would be an element of selection but then said, we already
:15:53. > :15:57.have selection in our system, selection by house price. And she
:15:58. > :16:01.would like to do with that, focusing reforms on disadvantaged children
:16:02. > :16:05.and one idea doing the rounds is you could say that grammar schools would
:16:06. > :16:09.have to give 50 presented the places to the poorest children, those are
:16:10. > :16:14.the ones on Free School meals. We thought this was an issue that has
:16:15. > :16:18.bedevilled English politics for the last 40 years so we thought we would
:16:19. > :16:20.take a look at the dilemmas facing Theresa May.
:16:21. > :16:25.It is a line no political leader has been able to cross in four decades.
:16:26. > :16:31.Now Theresa May wants to go where Margaret Thatcher dared not
:16:32. > :16:35.tread as Education Secretary and as Prime Minister.
:16:36. > :16:44.It goes right to the core of what I believe as a Conservative.
:16:45. > :16:48.That we should have the opportunity to progress in life,
:16:49. > :16:51.that where we end up in life should not be dictated by where we start.
:16:52. > :16:56.It does seem to me absurd that if parents and communities
:16:57. > :16:58.want something similar, they should be barred
:16:59. > :17:09.But grammar schools are a toxic issue and there are Tories
:17:10. > :17:12.who agree with Labour, who say they actually fail
:17:13. > :17:21.The evidence is that even if, historically, grammar schools did
:17:22. > :17:25.enable kids from very poor backgrounds to get
:17:26. > :17:31.on and have an opportunity, nowadays grammar schools are very
:17:32. > :17:34.much occupied by kids from affluent backgrounds and very few low income
:17:35. > :17:37.working class kids that we all care about have the opportunity
:17:38. > :17:40.of getting into grammar schools and that is the situation in Kent,
:17:41. > :17:42.it is the situation across the country and the outgoing
:17:43. > :17:46.Chief Inspector of Schools made that point very powerfully the other day.
:17:47. > :17:48.That is the evidence he sees as well.
:17:49. > :17:52.Theresa May believes the reforms lie at the heart of her vision
:17:53. > :17:54.of creating a country that works for everyone and not
:17:55. > :18:00.But the Prime Minister knows that she needs to move with care
:18:01. > :18:06.because there are doubts in her party right up
:18:07. > :18:08.to Education Secretary, Justine Greening, who is adopting,
:18:09. > :18:11.in the words of one minister, a sinuous approach on this.
:18:12. > :18:14.I have been told the reforms will be introduced incrementally,
:18:15. > :18:20.with no wholesale change, in line with the thinking
:18:21. > :18:23.of the brains behind the idea - her joint Chief of
:18:24. > :18:45.Amid signs of unease amongst some of the Tory modernisers sacked
:18:46. > :18:48.by the Prime Minister, Theresa May made clear to the 1922
:18:49. > :18:56.Committee this evening that she would move with caution.
:18:57. > :18:59.Graeme Brady, who resigned from the Tory front bench in 2007
:19:00. > :19:02.when David Cameron backed a speech by David Willetts rejecting a return
:19:03. > :19:08.I think the only concern that would arise is if there was any
:19:09. > :19:10.suggestion of a big top-down reorganisation being imposed
:19:11. > :19:14.on areas, whether they wanted it or not.
:19:15. > :19:16.I don't think anybody is talking about that.
:19:17. > :19:19.What we are looking at here, I hope, is a modest measure
:19:20. > :19:23.to provide more freedom, to provide more choice for parents
:19:24. > :19:27.and for communities and to free people up to have these kinds
:19:28. > :19:32.But Labour are confident they can block it.
:19:33. > :19:36.I think that this was not in the Conservative manifesto.
:19:37. > :19:39.Therefore, first of all, the House of Lords will not feel
:19:40. > :19:44.they are bound by the Parliament Act because it was not in the manifesto.
:19:45. > :19:48.There are many Conservative MPs who have doubts or are seriously
:19:49. > :19:54.opposed to this policy as well as many that support it.
:19:55. > :19:58.So I think that first of all, Theresa May will struggle to get
:19:59. > :20:01.this through the House of Commons and then she would struggle to get
:20:02. > :20:09.Theresa May believes she has found the elixir to reach out to
:20:10. > :20:18.Others think she has opened a can of worms.
:20:19. > :20:20.Theresa May was pressed again on her plans for Brexit today
:20:21. > :20:25.She managed to hold off the questions from MPs and insisted
:20:26. > :20:28.that she had no plans to "reveal our hand prematurely".
:20:29. > :20:30.But she's likely to come under more pressure tomorrow
:20:31. > :20:37.Nick is here with me now and has the details.
:20:38. > :20:46.What is happening? Tomorrow we will see the preparations for Britain's
:20:47. > :20:50.Brexit negotiations move from neutral into first gear, Theresa May
:20:51. > :20:55.will host the president of European Council for breakfast and it'll be
:20:56. > :20:59.their first meeting since becoming Prime Minister and has been a
:21:00. > :21:02.rotation in Brussels that Brussels has not triggered Article 50, the
:21:03. > :21:07.mechanism taking the side of the EU and friend Donald Tusk leaves he
:21:08. > :21:11.will have it clear in his mind that Britain will be triggering it and
:21:12. > :21:16.they will be triggering that in the New Year and from behind-the-scenes
:21:17. > :21:19.were getting an idea of the shape of how the UK sees those negotiations.
:21:20. > :21:23.One thing we are hearing is that senior ministers believe that
:21:24. > :21:28.Theresa May will concentrate on what are described as a few iconic
:21:29. > :21:33.issues, maybe only half a dozen, and what that is about is ensuring she
:21:34. > :21:38.manages to get the best deal for British goods and services and they
:21:39. > :21:42.say, 20 million other issues- pensions reform officials in the
:21:43. > :21:46.commission, we believe that to the officials. The other thing is the
:21:47. > :21:49.negotiations will be underweight in the New Year but they expect
:21:50. > :21:51.theatres for the French and German elections. Thank you very much for
:21:52. > :21:54.that. News now of fresh problems
:21:55. > :21:55.for the independent Newsnight has learned
:21:56. > :21:59.that the leaders of one of the main groups representing survivors
:22:00. > :22:01.of alleged abuse - a group who have been designated
:22:02. > :22:03.official participant status by the inquiry - have lost
:22:04. > :22:06.faith in it and will recommend to their members
:22:07. > :22:09.that the group abandon it. We'll speak to the group's
:22:10. > :22:23.leader in a moment. It was over one month ago that we
:22:24. > :22:31.got the unexpected news that Justice Lyle Gothard would quit from this
:22:32. > :22:35.enquiry, the third share in fractionally over 90 years since it
:22:36. > :22:40.was set up. In terms of why she quit, we had a brief obligation of
:22:41. > :22:44.correspondence had been hurt and the new Home Secretary and told us
:22:45. > :22:52.little and that prompted the chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee
:22:53. > :22:59.Keith Vaz to call just as Goddard. And we got that committee today.
:23:00. > :23:03.Minus Keith Vaz for reasons that have been well documented and also
:23:04. > :23:06.minus Justice Goddard, who chose to submit written evidence to the
:23:07. > :23:10.committee and in that evidence there was something that is causing
:23:11. > :23:16.problems. She complained that she was unable to select her own staff
:23:17. > :23:21.for the enquiry, her own secretary it and she accused the Home Office
:23:22. > :23:26.of fixing the way staff was elected so the secretary at was stuffed full
:23:27. > :23:32.of Home Office civil servants and she said they were bureaucratic in
:23:33. > :23:35.their approach but it is not that I position that is a problem for the
:23:36. > :23:41.survivors. Learn about to hear from one of the main survivors groups,
:23:42. > :23:45.who represents over 600 children who were in Lambeth's care homes in the
:23:46. > :23:49.latter part of the 20th century and many say they burn abused and the
:23:50. > :23:54.problem here is this is the Home Office, one of the institutions who
:23:55. > :24:00.stand accused of failing children in the past. Lambert is one of 13
:24:01. > :24:04.strands in this enquiry, it is one of the key once that has been
:24:05. > :24:08.started on, one of the ones that will report back first when this
:24:09. > :24:12.enquiry does finally report stop it was raised in the Select Committee
:24:13. > :24:17.today by Chukka Umunna, the Labour MP who represents the constituency
:24:18. > :24:19.in Lambeth and this issue of Home Office staff essentially having a
:24:20. > :24:23.big role in the enquiry when the Home Office is one of the
:24:24. > :24:28.institutions who stand accused. Amber Rudd said that Justice Goddard
:24:29. > :24:33.was mistaken and she had been free to pick her own staff. Why does this
:24:34. > :24:37.matter? There is an argument to be made that it does not matter, if
:24:38. > :24:41.survivor groups want to lose faith, and they don't want to be part of
:24:42. > :24:45.the enquiry, that is their business and the enquiry carries on but the
:24:46. > :24:49.reality is that firstly they might have important information to impart
:24:50. > :24:52.and it is also important for the enquiry to be seen to be credible,
:24:53. > :24:58.to have the support and the belief of those who were abused and it is
:24:59. > :25:04.also worth saying that this enquiry is under flak from all sides, many
:25:05. > :25:08.say the scope is far too big and it should be scaled back, something
:25:09. > :25:12.Amber Rudd said she did not think should happen. And you have that
:25:13. > :25:14.criticism and also the survivors. Thank you.
:25:15. > :25:15.Well, Raymond Stevenson, representive of the Shirley Oaks
:25:16. > :25:28.What is your sense, your concerns? We had concerned six months ago when
:25:29. > :25:32.we met with the enquiry team and a first question I asked was how many
:25:33. > :25:36.people weren't for the Home Office and we always knew during the
:25:37. > :25:39.investigation that they were implicated in what took place at
:25:40. > :25:43.Shirley Oaks and a failure to intervene so to read the document
:25:44. > :25:52.today from Justice Goddard and read her reasons for being concerned
:25:53. > :25:56.matching the reasons we expressed a while ago is very concerning. Do you
:25:57. > :26:02.really not believe that Home Office staff members today, all these years
:26:03. > :26:07.later, cannot be impartial? We're not going to take that risk. Some of
:26:08. > :26:13.our members have been through investigations before which had Home
:26:14. > :26:16.Office members and staff as part of that and we have been through that
:26:17. > :26:19.so this is about the third investigation Lambeth has been
:26:20. > :26:23.through so what we wanted from this was followed to be truly independent
:26:24. > :26:27.and we were sold the theory that it would be. If Justice Goddard is
:26:28. > :26:33.concerned, we are definitely concerned. There is another issue-
:26:34. > :26:36.the chair has spent 30 years in the social service department, that
:26:37. > :26:39.would have been another condition for us because we are accusing the
:26:40. > :26:45.social services of also being part of this so there has been a sea
:26:46. > :26:47.change in non-2 weeks, and you have Justice Goddard highlighting these
:26:48. > :26:55.concerns that we expressed. What would you recommend to your members?
:26:56. > :26:59.At this moment in time, we recommend that we pull out. We have given the
:27:00. > :27:02.enquiry an opportunity to meet us, we contacted them non-2 weeks ago
:27:03. > :27:09.and we're still waiting for that meeting. We don't know how they will
:27:10. > :27:13.jump through the hurdles of having two people compromised, the Home
:27:14. > :27:18.Office is compromised if they are as involved as it seems they are. If
:27:19. > :27:24.you pull out and others follow, this could be the beginning of the end of
:27:25. > :27:27.the whole thing? We are lucky, we set out to investigate this
:27:28. > :27:33.ourselves and we will produce our own report on the first 100 pages
:27:34. > :27:42.will be presented next week. It is a damning indictment of what took
:27:43. > :27:46.place in Lambeth and also it is a macro of what took place around the
:27:47. > :27:50.country. We wanted to join this enquiry to share our report with
:27:51. > :27:54.them and that they are unable to receive this in an independent we
:27:55. > :27:55.were definitely going to publish it ourselves. Thank you very much for
:27:56. > :27:58.coming in. When disgraced boss Mike Ashley
:27:59. > :28:01.turned up at an inspection of a Sports Direct factory this
:28:02. > :28:04.morning, they frisked him and found Nothing illegal
:28:05. > :28:06.about that, of course. Yet somehow we're conditioned
:28:07. > :28:09.to find raw, ready cash a sign of the underhand these days -
:28:10. > :28:11.or at least something slightly And now there are esteemed voices
:28:12. > :28:15.ready to make the argument A leading US economist suggests that
:28:16. > :28:23.central banks should phase out paper Lewis Goodall tries
:28:24. > :28:30.to figure it out. # Money, money, money,
:28:31. > :28:36.money, money #. How many of us would pay
:28:37. > :28:39.for something with 50s? And even if we did, how many
:28:40. > :28:44.shopkeepers would accept them? This is at the heart of Harvard
:28:45. > :28:48.economist Ken Rogoff's thesis. That high denomination banknotes -
:28:49. > :28:53.?50 notes or $50 bills in the US - are used for organised crime,
:28:54. > :28:56.tax evasion and even spur If you see a briefcase of $100
:28:57. > :29:02.bills, you know where it is from, as any fan of Breaking Bad
:29:03. > :29:04.will tell you. Rogoff believes that abolishing
:29:05. > :29:16.high-value cash notes would allow central banks to stimulate
:29:17. > :29:18.the economy by making negative At the moment, if negative rates
:29:19. > :29:24.are in place, ie banks are charging you to deposit money,
:29:25. > :29:27.you may as well hold them in cash. By abolishing high-value notes,
:29:28. > :29:31.you remove that option and make But from gold coins to the gold
:29:32. > :29:37.standard - money has existed in high-value form
:29:38. > :29:40.since the ancient world. How prepared would people be
:29:41. > :29:43.to give up that right? Ask the Weimar Republic
:29:44. > :29:45.or Harold Wilson - politicians have oft come unstuck
:29:46. > :29:48.messing with our money. In this uncertain financial world,
:29:49. > :29:51.it might take a brave one to ask us It doesn't mean, of course,
:29:52. > :29:56.that the pound here in Britain, in your pocket or purse
:29:57. > :30:04.or in your bag, has been devalued. Ken Rogoff joins us now
:30:05. > :30:07.from Boston and Fran Boait - the Executive director
:30:08. > :30:22.of Positive Money - is with me now. Thank you for joining us. Ken
:30:23. > :30:25.Rogoff, how do you see this working? To be clear, I am in favour of less
:30:26. > :30:36.cash, rather than being without cash. I think it would be eight
:30:37. > :30:43.mistake. It has convenience for small transactions. If you look
:30:44. > :30:46.around the world, countries are swimming in big bills that most
:30:47. > :30:54.people never see. There was a joke that the 500 euros note, everyone
:30:55. > :31:05.knew about it but no one had seen one. We have 36 $100 bills for every
:31:06. > :31:09.man woman and child in America, on what the same in the Eurozone and
:31:10. > :31:17.Japan. Central banks have been surveyed and they say, people love
:31:18. > :31:23.our currency. If we are swimming in cash we never use and most of us
:31:24. > :31:28.never see, what is the point? In the UK, cash is only 3% of all the money
:31:29. > :31:34.that we use. The remaining 97% is digital that we use with our debit
:31:35. > :31:38.cards. It is an interesting idea to move towards less cash in society,
:31:39. > :31:42.but a big part of the debate which isn't being discussed is, what is
:31:43. > :31:46.that cash replaced with? The electronic money we use through
:31:47. > :31:51.debit cards is not the electronic version of cash. They are different
:31:52. > :31:56.because of the institutions that create them. Is that not the point,
:31:57. > :32:00.that suddenly you have the privatisation of money? If I have
:32:01. > :32:05.wads of cash, I can keep it under the bed whatever I want, but as soon
:32:06. > :32:11.as it belongs in a digital structure like a bank or in society, they can
:32:12. > :32:16.do with that what they want. The UK is in a different position than the
:32:17. > :32:25.United States and Europe. You don't have... We have the $100 bill, euro
:32:26. > :32:31.has the 500 euros bill. Singapore has a 10,000 note. The UK is in a
:32:32. > :32:35.different position. That said, if you look at actual sales and retail
:32:36. > :32:46.shops, they are not using so much these large notes. But if you look
:32:47. > :32:52.at when they seized drug... Big busts and so on, they find them a
:32:53. > :32:56.lot. Cash is declining in the legal economy and rising in the
:32:57. > :33:00.underground economy. It is an ideal striking a balance. And there is
:33:01. > :33:04.this seediness that is associated with wads of cash. If you open a
:33:05. > :33:08.suitcase and it has cash, you don't think what a wonderful surprise. You
:33:09. > :33:15.think of what on earth has gone on here? There is that connotation. I
:33:16. > :33:19.am not denying that there are issues of tax evasion, and I'm not denying
:33:20. > :33:23.that abolishing big notes could help with that. But it throws a bigger
:33:24. > :33:27.questions, such as, what is money for? How do we design a system that
:33:28. > :33:32.works were people? I think if we're going to worry about tax issues, the
:33:33. > :33:40.seediness of big suitcases full of money, the biggest tax justice
:33:41. > :33:46.issues are around corporate tax avoidance. I don't think they are
:33:47. > :33:52.bigger quantitatively. What about the idea that money is a very public
:33:53. > :33:57.currency, for want of a better word? As soon as it is digital, you lose
:33:58. > :34:02.that. I'm not getting rid of smaller notes that most people use. It's
:34:03. > :34:06.perfectly possible, and I discuss it in my book, for the Government to
:34:07. > :34:15.provide its own electronic currency at a subsidised rate. In the UK,
:34:16. > :34:23.this has been long considered, but I thought about giving low income
:34:24. > :34:26.people debit cards. We need to think about central banks issuing digital
:34:27. > :34:29.cash. There is more and more research to say that they want to
:34:30. > :34:34.move in this the Wrexham. At the same time, we need to look at the
:34:35. > :34:41.actual system and how it works, and the structure that underpins it. It
:34:42. > :34:47.is not necessarily that simple to move to an economy that gets rid of
:34:48. > :34:51.cash and replaces it with a digital currency completely. But I think I
:34:52. > :34:55.would agree that we need to move in that direction, and we need to think
:34:56. > :34:58.about money being a public good and how we make it work for society. Do
:34:59. > :35:03.you think there is ever a danger, when you start to play around with
:35:04. > :35:09.money in this way, that you destroy the value of it? I don't think so,
:35:10. > :35:14.but I look at it very carefully in the book. There are all sorts of
:35:15. > :35:17.subtle issues about, if you get rid of too many notes, can the central
:35:18. > :35:24.bank still control the currency? If currency were all electronic, it
:35:25. > :35:28.looks different from Treasury bills and it is difficult to look at
:35:29. > :35:32.deposits. It has to be done slowly. You don't know what is going to
:35:33. > :35:36.happen. I am looking at ten, 20 years, and once you get going, I
:35:37. > :35:42.think it is important to include financial inclusion. Last word.
:35:43. > :35:47.Negative interest rates are bad idea. There are better ways to
:35:48. > :35:50.stimulate and boost demand. I couldn't disagree more! Thank you
:35:51. > :35:52.both very much. Alongside Watt, Faraday
:35:53. > :35:53.and Stevenson, the launch of an identical, expensive
:35:54. > :35:55.new rectangle that is missing a phone jack probably
:35:56. > :35:58.won't warrant its own set of commemorative stamps
:35:59. > :36:00.in years to come. Which heralds the question
:36:01. > :36:02.of the night. If the brand new iPhone 7
:36:03. > :36:05.is the best our leading inventors can do to excite us,
:36:06. > :36:07.have we reached the high Or does the absentee phone jack
:36:08. > :36:14.signify greatness to come? Ladies and gentlemen,
:36:15. > :36:20.our presentation will begin shortly. So, how does the CEO of the world's
:36:21. > :36:23.most valuable company begin his big
:36:24. > :36:35.product launch of the year? # I did it all #.
:36:36. > :36:38.. You get the sense there is a bit
:36:39. > :36:43.more sizzle than sausage
:36:44. > :36:45.with Apple at the moment. It's the best iPhone
:36:46. > :36:47.that we have ever created. Yes, there were some neat
:36:48. > :36:49.new features but nothing to rival the startling
:36:50. > :36:54.innovation of the Jobs era. At some point the new
:36:55. > :36:56.computers will end up collectors like Max Smith,
:36:57. > :37:02.a repair shop in East London. But some economists believe
:37:03. > :37:04.that we are now at the end of this period
:37:05. > :37:06.of extraordinary technological That all the big changes that have
:37:07. > :37:11.transformed our societies The challenge for the future
:37:12. > :37:16.is how do we satisfy the wants and needs
:37:17. > :37:17.of more and more people
:37:18. > :37:22.with minimal economic growth? Economist Robert Gordon created this
:37:23. > :37:26.graph showing economic growth in the leading
:37:27. > :37:29.industrial nation - that was first There has been a blip,
:37:30. > :37:36.he says, over the past 100 years from innovations like
:37:37. > :37:38.the steam locomotive, the telegraph But the trend, he says,
:37:39. > :37:42.is very much now downwards. The problem we face is that
:37:43. > :37:46.all these great inventions, we have
:37:47. > :37:57.to match them in the future. And my prediction that we're not
:37:58. > :38:03.going to match them brings us down from the original 2% growth down to
:38:04. > :38:10.0.2%, the fanciful curve that I drew you at the beginning. The theory is
:38:11. > :38:12.that most of the huge advantages of organisation, allegation, sanitation
:38:13. > :38:18.and computing have already been raped. What is left is marginal,
:38:19. > :38:21.incremental evolution, not revolution. According to other
:38:22. > :38:26.academics, this pessimism couldn't be more unwarranted. I think the
:38:27. > :38:31.really important age of innovation is still ahead of us. We have
:38:32. > :38:35.innovated a lot in terms of gaining control of the world outside, but we
:38:36. > :38:41.haven't really began in terms of changing the world inside us, just
:38:42. > :38:46.as in the Bible God has the ability to create animals and plants and
:38:47. > :38:51.humans are according to his wishes, Sylvie are now gaining with the help
:38:52. > :38:55.of biotechnology and artificial intelligence is the ability to start
:38:56. > :39:00.engineering and manufacturing living beings. I think that in the next
:39:01. > :39:05.century, in the 21st-century, the main products of the human economy
:39:06. > :39:11.will not be textiles and food and iPhones, they will be bodies, brains
:39:12. > :39:15.and minds. Some economists believe that what is missing today are
:39:16. > :39:20.engaged state institutions to set the direction for innovation. Beef
:39:21. > :39:26.fame Apollo man on the and programme from Nasa actually ended up over
:39:27. > :39:34.time, and that is another thing, allowing that time to take place,
:39:35. > :39:40.ended up producing most of the technology that is in the iPhone.
:39:41. > :39:46.What makes the smart -- iPhone smart not stupid are things like GPS,
:39:47. > :39:51.voice-activated systems, as well as the touch-screen display. All those
:39:52. > :39:56.were publicly financed. Without some idea of the big goals for
:39:57. > :40:00.innovation, perhaps we end up pursuing the short-term, marginal
:40:01. > :40:10.and trivial. And producing a pristine, Mira- like surface. There
:40:11. > :40:18.is a parallel with the hierarchy of needs. Our society progresses, we go
:40:19. > :40:23.for things like focusing on survival, to establishing the social
:40:24. > :40:26.order, to self actualisation. We become more obsessed with ourselves,
:40:27. > :40:33.and that is what innovators are responding to. It may be, then, that
:40:34. > :40:38.the future will contain innovation, but not innovation that leads to
:40:39. > :40:41.economic growth or makes the growing global population more prosperous,
:40:42. > :40:47.and that truly is a challenge for the innovators.
:40:48. > :40:52.And that was it from David Grossman. Almost time to go, but one story to
:40:53. > :40:57.bring you on the front of the Times. MPs will be leaving Parliament in a
:40:58. > :41:03.?4 billion restoration plan. It is the first time since 1941. Theresa
:41:04. > :41:12.May taking action to recommend that they decamp, and the MPs will go.
:41:13. > :41:17.The House of Lords will move to the Queen Elizabeth conference centre.
:41:18. > :41:19.That's it for tonight. Tomorrow will be a very special day
:41:20. > :41:23.in the hearts of true sci-fi fans - it's the 50th anniversary
:41:24. > :41:25.of the first ever screening And just in case you think
:41:26. > :41:30.it was just a TV show, ask the staff at Nasa
:41:31. > :41:32.or the Jet Propulsion Laboratory Ask any Western scientist
:41:33. > :41:35.or engineer involved The largest federation of
:41:36. > :41:42.scientists, engineers and explorers. So, from all of us here
:41:43. > :41:45.at Nasa headquarters...