:00:14. > :00:16.With 8000 451 votes, the leader of the UK Independence Party, Diane
:00:17. > :00:18.James! Diane James is the
:00:19. > :00:20.new leader of Ukip. But will serial resigner
:00:21. > :00:23.Nigel Farage be able to stay out Ukip has a new boss,
:00:24. > :00:27.and she's already told Theresa May to "get on with" getting
:00:28. > :00:29.the UK out of the EU. She seems to be already putting
:00:30. > :00:45.old noses out of joint. You appear to have been replaced by
:00:46. > :00:50.a coffee break. Yes. Well, I suppose... Well, I don't know. It is
:00:51. > :00:54.a change of regime. And I just don't understand what is happening.
:00:55. > :00:56.Sir Bradley Wiggins, Russian hackers and banned substances that
:00:57. > :00:59.The woman who helped write the doping rule-book
:01:00. > :01:04.And it's not just medical records hackers have released this week.
:01:05. > :01:08.Is privacy becoming a thing of the past?
:01:09. > :01:21.And if it is, is it in the public interest?
:01:22. > :01:24.The UK Independence Party has a new leader.
:01:25. > :01:27.But with Brexit secured and former leader Nigel Farage
:01:28. > :01:31.apparently intending to take a more conventional approach to resignation
:01:32. > :01:35.than he did last time - or the time before that -
:01:36. > :01:40.Diane James, the party's MEP for South East England,
:01:41. > :01:43.today emerged victorious after a leadership contest that was,
:01:44. > :01:46.for the most part, as devoid of the usual rancour
:01:47. > :01:51.So who is she and what's to become of a party that has
:01:52. > :01:56.David Grossman spent the day at the party conference
:01:57. > :02:03.It is an absolute pleasure to announce, with 8,451 votes,
:02:04. > :02:09.the leader of the UK Independence Party, Diane James!
:02:10. > :02:16.As Nigel Farage supposedly bowed out for the third time,
:02:17. > :02:20.his replacement this time had a message for the Prime Minister.
:02:21. > :02:23.From one grammar school girl to another...
:02:24. > :02:32.Stop the faff, stop the fudge, and the farce.
:02:33. > :02:42.That clearly went down well in the hall, but of course,
:02:43. > :02:46.a fact Diane James was reminded of repeatedly
:02:47. > :02:48.during her first press conference as leader.
:02:49. > :02:51.You are replacing one of the three, four or five best-known faces
:02:52. > :03:00.And for a lot of voters, this might be the first time
:03:01. > :03:02.they have become aware of Diane James.
:03:03. > :03:04.How would you introduce yourself to the British people?
:03:05. > :03:16.Exactly what you see in front of you, an MEP.
:03:17. > :03:23.Justice and Home Affairs spokesman for Ukip.
:03:24. > :03:26.Held Theresa May to account for two years.
:03:27. > :03:29.that she is also a pretty ruthless political operator.
:03:30. > :03:32.No sooner had Diane James been elected than she removed
:03:33. > :03:39.Neil Hamilton from the list of speakers on tomorrow's agenda.
:03:40. > :03:41.The former Conservative minister is blamed by many
:03:42. > :03:46.he has been replaced with a coffee break.
:03:47. > :03:57.It's a change of regime, and I just don't understand what's happening.
:03:58. > :04:04.What is your reaction to her election as leader of Ukip?
:04:05. > :04:07.Well, I was prepared to work with her and,
:04:08. > :04:12.as part of the team leadership that Ukip now needs,
:04:13. > :04:22.But we are a political party, not a fringe group
:04:23. > :04:27.One of those Mr Hamilton came into conflict with
:04:28. > :04:33.To add to the drama, today she defected to the Conservatives,
:04:34. > :04:38.It's going to be hard for them to differentiate themselves
:04:39. > :04:47.because she's doing wonderful policies that are likely to appeal
:04:48. > :04:50.How dysfunctional has the party been?
:04:51. > :04:57.you wouldn't want baby-sitting your dog, let alone running for office,
:04:58. > :05:07.And it's a shame, because what I've seen over the years
:05:08. > :05:10.is the talent and future promise of the party
:05:11. > :05:11.essentially being excised from the party.
:05:12. > :05:14.# Who do you think you are kidding, Mr Cameron?
:05:15. > :05:16.After all of those last-minute agenda changes,
:05:17. > :05:18.you'll be glad to know the Ukip choir, with their rendition
:05:19. > :05:21.of Who Do You Think You Are Kidding, Mr Cameron,
:05:22. > :05:24.will be appearing in tomorrow's event.
:05:25. > :05:27.The fact that it's still David Cameron in their song
:05:28. > :05:30.suggests a party that may be struggling to come to terms
:05:31. > :05:34.with the new post-Brexit referendum political reality.
:05:35. > :05:42.now that Britain has voted to leave the EU?
:05:43. > :05:47.One academic believes that Ukip can appeal beyond Brexit.
:05:48. > :05:49.There are broader issues around inequality, disadvantage,
:05:50. > :05:53.left behind groups, particularly white working class communities
:05:54. > :05:57.that feel as though they're not getting heard in modern Britain.
:05:58. > :06:02.you can see in many other European countries,
:06:03. > :06:04.successful populist movements, Five Star in Italy,
:06:05. > :06:09.So I think there is room for a party like Ukip.
:06:10. > :06:11.But it will have to resolve its internal problems -
:06:12. > :06:13.lack of unity, no money, dwindling membership.
:06:14. > :06:20.There is no gratitude and little loyalty in politics today.
:06:21. > :06:23.Having delivered on its signature policy, some in Ukip
:06:24. > :06:26.might have been expecting to be riding high right now.
:06:27. > :06:31.But no party has a right to exist, let alone thrive.
:06:32. > :06:37.So, where do Ukip voters want the party to go next?
:06:38. > :06:39.Secunder Kermani has been to West Bromwich,
:06:40. > :06:58.West Bromwich West was one of over 100 seats where Ukip came second in
:06:59. > :07:02.last year's general election, making inroads into traditional Labour
:07:03. > :07:09.heartland. But with Brexit now a reality, not a campaign slogan, what
:07:10. > :07:17.next for Ukip? We paid the local branch's social club visit, and it
:07:18. > :07:25.wasn't your average pub. We have the pub on this side, and on this site,
:07:26. > :07:32.we have the shop. And this is also the Ukip social club? Do they prefer
:07:33. > :07:37.the beads or the public? They prefer both. People from all walks of life
:07:38. > :07:42.come in. That is why you have the purple beads! Ray Crawford is a man
:07:43. > :07:47.of many beads and many hats. Amongst other things, he is a Ukip council
:07:48. > :07:52.candidate and he wants the party to position itself in the middle of
:07:53. > :07:56.British politics. The working class now are people earning ?15,000 to
:07:57. > :08:01.?80,000 a year, and are all struggling. Nobody is looking after
:08:02. > :08:05.them. Labour is looking after the people who don't earn the ?15,000,
:08:06. > :08:09.and on the other side, the Tory party is looking after the people
:08:10. > :08:14.who earn more. There is a massive gap in the middle. And do you think
:08:15. > :08:19.that without Nigel Farage, you can have the same popular appeal ever
:08:20. > :08:23.again? I am still dreaming of the fact that he will turn around
:08:24. > :08:28.tomorrow and say I am sorry I resigned, I am coming back! Voters
:08:29. > :08:33.here in the Black Country firmly backed Brexit, but many Ukip
:08:34. > :08:37.supporters doubt it will be delivered. I don't believe we will
:08:38. > :08:44.be out of Europe until I see it on paper. You voted Ukip last time, are
:08:45. > :08:51.you going to vote for them again? Yes. Why? They haven't done the job
:08:52. > :08:58.yet. But the government says it will take us out of Europe. But have they
:08:59. > :09:03.done it? You don't trust them? No. So is the party just a one trick
:09:04. > :09:08.pony? Now that the UK is leaving the EU, what is the point of Ukip? Ukip
:09:09. > :09:13.of 11, because they are going to keep the government to the candle,
:09:14. > :09:19.if you like, make sure we don't get Brexit light. I think Ukip has
:09:20. > :09:23.served a fantastic purpose so far, but that is not the end of them by a
:09:24. > :09:30.long way. It is fantastic today that we have got Diane James, who got 48%
:09:31. > :09:34.of the vote. She has a clear mandate. The disenchantment many
:09:35. > :09:38.Ukip voters have with mainstream politics remains, and that may leave
:09:39. > :09:41.many of them to stick with the party. But Ukip will have to define
:09:42. > :09:44.itself on more than just Brexit to broaden its appeal.
:09:45. > :09:47.Secunder Kermani reporting from West Bromwich.
:09:48. > :09:52.He defected from there to Ukip two years ago.
:09:53. > :09:55.He's the party's economics spokesman and sits in the Welsh Assembly -
:09:56. > :10:09.Let's start in Wales, because you have a new leader nationally. You
:10:10. > :10:12.have an old leader locally, Neil Hamilton. They already appear to be
:10:13. > :10:18.at loggerheads. Does someone like you now have to pick a side? Well, I
:10:19. > :10:24.pick Ukip's side and I try and work with people across the party. We
:10:25. > :10:29.have to build a team. We have to reach out and make use of all the
:10:30. > :10:39.talent within the party. It is fantastic that Bayern has won this
:10:40. > :10:41.contest. -- Diane. She has beefed your leader of the speaking roster
:10:42. > :10:45.and replaced him with a coffee break. You can call for unity but
:10:46. > :10:50.she doesn't appear to be minded to deliver it. There has been a bit of
:10:51. > :10:54.tension between Neil Hamilton and Nathan Gale, but Diane has come in
:10:55. > :11:00.as a new leader and the conference has been prepared and there have
:11:01. > :11:03.been proposals over what to showcase. Ultimately, Diane has just
:11:04. > :11:10.been elected as a leader, and if she wants to have a particular programme
:11:11. > :11:14.tomorrow, that is her right. But for people who don't follow these
:11:15. > :11:17.matters closely, Nathan Gill was the former leader of Ukip in the Welsh
:11:18. > :11:20.assembly who now sits as an independent after falling out with
:11:21. > :11:31.Neil Hamilton, but remains a Ukip MEP? Yes. We got seven members of
:11:32. > :11:35.the Welsh assembly elected. But he sits as an independent. Can you tell
:11:36. > :11:39.us more about Diane James? You saw my colleague trying to put a little
:11:40. > :11:42.flesh on the bones, but apart from the sort of detail we could have
:11:43. > :11:48.found on her business card, he was not successful. Do you know her
:11:49. > :11:52.well? I don't know her well. I know Diane. I have a professional
:11:53. > :11:55.relationship with her. The thing I would emphasise most about her is
:11:56. > :12:03.that like me, she has fought a by-election. And she came
:12:04. > :12:08.extraordinarily close to winning Eastleigh from a strong local Lib
:12:09. > :12:13.Dem campaign. She understands how to appeal to voters in the middle, had
:12:14. > :12:18.to expand our appeal. You are giving a CV, I am looking for something
:12:19. > :12:27.more weighty, something about her that we don't know. What she does
:12:28. > :12:33.is, she engages with voters. She goes out and understands what people
:12:34. > :12:42.want, speaks to people and reflects on what they say. She puts forward
:12:43. > :12:47.an attractive image of wanting to change things to benefit people in
:12:48. > :12:51.this country. In Eastleigh, she was nearly elected. But there is one
:12:52. > :12:55.candidate who has done even better and got elected, Douglas Carswell.
:12:56. > :13:02.She has not spoken to him for three months. Do you know why? I am not
:13:03. > :13:07.sure exactly... She has not spoken to Ukip's only MP. I think Douglas
:13:08. > :13:11.and Diane have a working relationship. I have been at
:13:12. > :13:14.meetings where they have worked together. She said one of her
:13:15. > :13:21.priorities will be to meet Douglas and discuss how best she works with
:13:22. > :13:28.our Ukip parliamentary party. The party's former PR, a few moments
:13:29. > :13:32.ago, described Ukip as being roughly half of them so dysfunctional that
:13:33. > :13:35.she wouldn't let them babysit her dog. Does that tally with what you
:13:36. > :13:40.recognise, bearing in mind that she has been with the party longer than
:13:41. > :13:44.you? That is a little unfair. Alex has done some work with me and
:13:45. > :13:49.occasionally put me forward to appear on programmes like this. I
:13:50. > :13:54.wish her well and far be it from me to criticise someone for choosing to
:13:55. > :13:58.move from one party to another. But this notion of dysfunction, some of
:13:59. > :14:01.the names and personalities of the party you joined, Suzanne Evans
:14:02. > :14:06.wrote the manifesto that you fought on in the last election. She has
:14:07. > :14:10.been essentially eased out of proceedings. Stephen Wolfe, for
:14:11. > :14:14.reasons that remain opaque, couldn't stand at all. Many felt he was Mr
:14:15. > :14:18.Farage's preferred candidate, and we are left with this question mark
:14:19. > :14:22.hangover Diane Jones, who you tell us wants to change things and
:14:23. > :14:26.reaches over to engage people. I don't imagine there is a politician
:14:27. > :14:31.in the country who would not seek to fit that description. What does she
:14:32. > :14:43.seek to change? What would be at the top of her to-do list? You mentioned
:14:44. > :14:46.Suzanne Evans and Stephen Wolff. I would like to see Diane make sure
:14:47. > :14:48.both of them play leading roles in the party. We had a superb manifesto
:14:49. > :14:51.that Suzanne wrote. I developed a lot of those ideas in a Welsh
:14:52. > :14:57.context for the election we won. Diane has to explain in her own
:14:58. > :15:02.words, and with her own passion, what our party is for. We have
:15:03. > :15:06.succeeded in getting out of the European Union. Very briefly, can
:15:07. > :15:12.you tell me what you think the party is for now that the eye bit of Ukip
:15:13. > :15:17.has been achieved? I think it is to get back our democracy. I was
:15:18. > :15:20.against the EU because I am a Democrat, not because I am a
:15:21. > :15:24.nationalist. We don't just want power back from Brussels to Britain,
:15:25. > :15:27.but then getting that power down to local communities and giving people
:15:28. > :15:32.back the sense that they are in charge of their destiny and have
:15:33. > :15:35.influence over their own lives. In your programme last night, people
:15:36. > :15:38.were paying two and a half times the price of electricity for 50 years
:15:39. > :15:42.because these corporate interests decide what is going to happen for
:15:43. > :15:45.them. We have to look to ordinary people in this country and try and
:15:46. > :15:49.make sure people have the opportunity of a better life, not
:15:50. > :15:53.having costs piled on them by a political elite and cartel that
:15:54. > :15:56.needs to be shaken up. And it is Ukip that speaks for the ordinary
:15:57. > :16:03.person, not for the corporate elites to make this a better country.
:16:04. > :16:06.But not necessarily speaking with one voice just yet. Mark Reckless,
:16:07. > :16:09.thank you. Few sportspeople have been more
:16:10. > :16:11.strident in their anti-doping In a sport beset by suspicion,
:16:12. > :16:14.accusation and actual offences, the Tour de France winning cyclist
:16:15. > :16:17.and five-time Olympic gold medal winner has always made much
:16:18. > :16:20.of his desire to cleanse his sport of the stains left by the disgraced
:16:21. > :16:23.doper Lance Armstrong. This week, though, a group
:16:24. > :16:25.of Russian hackers leaked the stolen medical records
:16:26. > :16:30.of the World Anti-Doping Agency, WADA, and Wiggins's name
:16:31. > :16:33.was among those found to have special medical exemptions
:16:34. > :16:38.to take banned substances. And while there is no
:16:39. > :16:41.suggestion of any wrongdoing, the nature and timing of those
:16:42. > :16:44.exemptions have posed His is a sport long tainted
:16:45. > :16:55.by illegal drug taking, so it has fallen on the likes
:16:56. > :16:58.of Sir Bradley Wiggins to try We are the ones picking up
:16:59. > :17:03.the pieces are much so and having to, I suppose, convince people
:17:04. > :17:07.that the sport has changed. It is difficult to convince some
:17:08. > :17:11.people, it really is, because of the precedent that has
:17:12. > :17:14.been set and so ingrained I haven't got the answer on how
:17:15. > :17:19.to do that other than to go out there and keep doing what
:17:20. > :17:23.I am doing, you know. Now, however, it is Sir Bradley
:17:24. > :17:26.who faces scrutiny, although there is no suggestion
:17:27. > :17:30.he has broken anti-doping rules. This week's revelations revealed
:17:31. > :17:32.that Wiggins had obtained an official exemption known as a TUE
:17:33. > :17:37.or therapeutic use exemption, to use Sir Bradley suffers from asthma
:17:38. > :17:45.and has a pollen allergy as well. This drug, which is banned
:17:46. > :17:49.during competition is used to treat serious allergies,
:17:50. > :17:52.but it is also known to be abused by athletes to help them
:17:53. > :17:56.recover and burn fat. Sir Bradley's former cycling team,
:17:57. > :17:59.Team Sky, applied for him to use a significant dose of this drug,
:18:00. > :18:04.just days before the start of Grand Tours in 2011 and 2012,
:18:05. > :18:09.when he won the Tour So why is Sir Bradley Wiggins facing
:18:10. > :18:15.questions when he has Well, by contrast, Lance Armstrong
:18:16. > :18:23.was a cyclist who for years abused corticosteroids and the system
:18:24. > :18:25.of medical exemptions that can He got a retrospective
:18:26. > :18:34.exemption that subsequently admitted he was using it
:18:35. > :18:38.for performance enhancing reasons. Team Sky have a well know zero
:18:39. > :18:41.tolerance policy towards drugs, but they have admitted
:18:42. > :18:44.it was a mistake to have given freelance work in 2011 and 2012
:18:45. > :18:48.to a doctor who was subsequently banned for life for doping
:18:49. > :18:54.violations in a previous role. Among various violations,
:18:55. > :18:58.Geert Leinders had admitted questionable quarter corticosteroids
:18:59. > :19:02.exemptions. In his autobiography,
:19:03. > :19:04.Sir Bradley says, I have When asked about this
:19:05. > :19:10.apparent contradiction injections revealed this week,
:19:11. > :19:16.a spokesman for Sir Bradley Wiggins everyone knows Brad
:19:17. > :19:20.suffers from asthma. His medical treatment is BC
:19:21. > :19:29.and UCI approved. Team Sky told us: Applications made
:19:30. > :19:32.by Team Sky for TUEs have all been managed and recorded in line
:19:33. > :19:35.with the processes put in place Joining me now is Michele Verroken,
:19:36. > :19:41.a former director of ethics and anti-doping at UK Sport,
:19:42. > :19:45.who designed and implemented current internationally accepted
:19:46. > :20:01.standards for doping control, Thank you for joining us. Forgive
:20:02. > :20:09.me, if this is a really silly question, but if I take this
:20:10. > :20:15.particular substance or any form of corticosteroid because I have asthma
:20:16. > :20:19.or allergies, does it retain its performance enhancing capabilities?
:20:20. > :20:23.The question is really whether some of the substance on the prohibited
:20:24. > :20:28.list do have performing enhancing benefits at the therapeutic dose. We
:20:29. > :20:32.may be talking about the overuse of medicines and the inappropriate use
:20:33. > :20:37.of medicines when people do not have that particular medical condition.
:20:38. > :20:42.It is re-difficult to answer your question about whether there is some
:20:43. > :20:46.correlation between you having this substance and suddenly becoming an
:20:47. > :20:51.elite athlete. I am not suggesting that that I have two cyclists here.
:20:52. > :20:57.I think this is what the average fan of the sport, and it is not just
:20:58. > :21:01.cycling, there are two cyclists, one of them has hay fever and the other
:21:02. > :21:04.one doesn't. That means the fellow with the allergies is allowed to
:21:05. > :21:08.take this drug which it is believed can help burn fat and help with
:21:09. > :21:14.recovery times. There are suggestions it could be useful in
:21:15. > :21:17.the mountain stages of a tour. The other cyclist doesn't have allergies
:21:18. > :21:23.so he can't take it. Is there any advantage accrued by the one who can
:21:24. > :21:27.take the substance? The athlete with the allergies has to deal with the
:21:28. > :21:31.allergies so quite honestly, no, is the answer, if they are dealing with
:21:32. > :21:36.allergic reactions, they are looking at a treatment in order to be able
:21:37. > :21:40.to continue to compete. But there is a perception, and that is the
:21:41. > :21:48.trouble, perception. Anyone who thinks that someone else is getting
:21:49. > :21:51.an advantage might themselves be tempted to cheat or to say, well, I
:21:52. > :21:57.think I've got a bit of an allergic reaction, can I have that? How is
:21:58. > :22:04.that police? That is one of the critical issues around this story
:22:05. > :22:07.that in actual fact, if someone is using a medication and they believe
:22:08. > :22:11.that it is going to help them, others look to see why they
:22:12. > :22:16.shouldn't be using those kind of treatment, even if they do not have
:22:17. > :22:20.that ailment. That is where the ova medicalised at an off the support
:22:21. > :22:25.that we do give to elite athletes has really let down the fairness of
:22:26. > :22:31.sport, because, if you have got the doctors who are prepared to
:22:32. > :22:35.prescribe... So we have to much information? We may have to much
:22:36. > :22:43.medical help going into elite sport that is actually wrong league
:22:44. > :22:47.supporting athletes. Doctors looking for loopholes? Exactly, and it's
:22:48. > :22:52.without medical conditions obtaining these substances and the
:22:53. > :22:58.verification. What do they have to do, just as a bit? No, there is a
:22:59. > :23:07.rigorous testing system. For something like asthma, I would not
:23:08. > :23:11.like to be... I was not making light of it. There is a bronchial
:23:12. > :23:15.provocation test and that is not nice for any asthmatic. As long as
:23:16. > :23:19.everyone around the world is being put through the same rigorous
:23:20. > :23:24.testing and that is what we cannot guarantee, that the standard
:23:25. > :23:28.operating for the approval of their repeated use exemptions is not
:23:29. > :23:32.without some degree of bias, some degree of lack of independence in
:23:33. > :23:36.the decision-making and it takes time for those who are in the layers
:23:37. > :23:43.of the system that are in place, to actually reject that application. It
:23:44. > :23:48.may be too late. This is going to involve quite a feat of imagination
:23:49. > :23:53.on your part, but imagine I was an elite athlete, can any doctor
:23:54. > :23:58.provide my diagnosis which I take to the governing body and say I am
:23:59. > :24:04.allowed this? Not quite any doctor. It would have to be someone who has
:24:05. > :24:08.though medical expertise. That there is no licensing by the body, it is a
:24:09. > :24:14.professional qualification they need? Not yet. It is at medical
:24:15. > :24:18.qualification but it is peer reviewed by other doctors who would
:24:19. > :24:21.look at your case independently and also anonymously and would come to
:24:22. > :24:25.the conclusion did that diagnostic evidence show that you needed that
:24:26. > :24:31.substance and there was no other permitted alternative. Would it be
:24:32. > :24:36.easier to get rid of the secrecy and have everything made public, it
:24:37. > :24:42.everybody was using every substance on the record. I am not a fan of
:24:43. > :24:48.this because I do think what we have seen just recently is a major
:24:49. > :24:54.privacy breach. We have seen athletes who trust the anti-doping
:24:55. > :24:58.system and share it with approved people, it has let them down. I
:24:59. > :25:02.don't think athletes should be afraid to have medical conditions
:25:03. > :25:07.and seek help for any illness they may have, but it is really not the
:25:08. > :25:14.case that we should be making every athlete now demonstrate their whole
:25:15. > :25:20.medical history. Michele Verroken, thank you. That leads me neatly to
:25:21. > :25:23.my next guest. It is almost as if we planned it.
:25:24. > :25:26.Athletes are not the only ones to have endured the leaking
:25:27. > :25:29.Private emails from former US Secretary of State Colin Powell,
:25:30. > :25:32.in which he was less than flattering about both Donald Trump
:25:33. > :25:34.and Hillary Clinton, are private no more.
:25:35. > :25:36.And donors to the Democratic Party, who expected their largesse
:25:37. > :25:43.to remain secret, have also been outed.
:25:44. > :25:51.Tonnes of information released by hackers. How much should be released
:25:52. > :25:53.and how much is in the public interest?
:25:54. > :25:55.Professor Jonathan Zittrain is faculty director
:25:56. > :25:58.at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University
:25:59. > :26:07.Professor. We seem to be moving quickly from a world in which
:26:08. > :26:12.whistle-blowers and hackers seem to act because they felt they should,
:26:13. > :26:17.into a world in which people are accessing and releasing this
:26:18. > :26:21.information simply because they can? Well, I think that is right. It is
:26:22. > :26:26.not simply because they can, because they may have their own agendas in
:26:27. > :26:32.mind, and that may mean the axis two e-mail and selectively release what
:26:33. > :26:37.they like, to create a mosaic. Each piece may be true but where the
:26:38. > :26:42.overall collection ends up suggesting something false. What
:26:43. > :26:47.strikes me is how much the public have got used to it. We take it as
:26:48. > :26:51.course that the private e-mails of a private citizen, essentially talking
:26:52. > :26:56.to his friends about his opinions of the candidates, we take it that we
:26:57. > :27:01.are entitled to see that when it is left on the doorstep of news
:27:02. > :27:05.organisations. You say there is no moral compass on the part of the
:27:06. > :27:09.people releasing the information. Obviously, we should all be a little
:27:10. > :27:15.bit careful about our private information but none of us can be
:27:16. > :27:19.completely safe? May be true but it is quite dangerous to think the end
:27:20. > :27:24.of the discussion is well, that will teach him to use e-mail. Electronic
:27:25. > :27:34.communication is now part of all our lives. I don't think we want to
:27:35. > :27:39.return to information being conducted in a park as if it was a
:27:40. > :27:42.drugs transaction. Or having to become official selves when you
:27:43. > :27:46.become US Secretary of state, I guess you are that forever and have
:27:47. > :27:50.to start acting as if you are on a news programme even when you are
:27:51. > :27:56.talking to your friends, that seems corrosive for a free society. The
:27:57. > :28:02.cessation of privacy once you become public. Is there anyway to stop it?
:28:03. > :28:09.Well, I think there may be some longer term remedies. The fact that
:28:10. > :28:14.we still have e-mail in the form it was in the 1990s, it is time to
:28:15. > :28:19.figure out ways to upgrade it. That could include having our trove of
:28:20. > :28:24.e-mail going back years, that might be accumulated in an online account
:28:25. > :28:30.because the storage is cheap, it should not be ready to leak like the
:28:31. > :28:37.exon valve these through a couple of keystrokes for hacker. There may be
:28:38. > :28:44.a way to have what they call glacial storage. Eyebrows get raised
:28:45. > :28:49.digitally speaking if someone is asking for everything. What would
:28:50. > :28:55.you consider personally to be a legitimate hack, so to speak? There
:28:56. > :28:59.are times when a system itself has enough issues, enough corruption.
:29:00. > :29:03.Anything that gets into the hands of the press, as the fourth estate, as
:29:04. > :29:07.a function of whistle-blowing, might be a candidate to say, while the
:29:08. > :29:16.means of getting it was a little unusual or even bad, it is sunlight
:29:17. > :29:22.being a disinfectant. But this is not corruption of public official,
:29:23. > :29:28.this is private correspondence by a private citizen. Then if we say it
:29:29. > :29:33.may be private correspondence that you are a public figure, that links
:29:34. > :29:38.to celebrities with leaks of their photo account and saying, they
:29:39. > :29:43.decided to be celebrities they had it coming. I think that is a
:29:44. > :29:48.dehumanising attitude and it will mean the only people who seek the
:29:49. > :29:52.spotlight will be people who are in new to having their private cells
:29:53. > :29:56.completely dissected and may not be representative of the range of
:29:57. > :30:00.people we want taking public office. A lot of the most prominent
:30:01. > :30:04.celebrities on the planet seem to be not just comfortable but committed
:30:05. > :30:09.to sharing every aspect of their existence with their fans. As you
:30:10. > :30:12.suggest, there is a form of Darwinian selection going on. Maybe
:30:13. > :30:18.those who would pursue the exposure are ones who for whatever reasons
:30:19. > :30:23.crave it, but even they may be carefully cultivating an image and
:30:24. > :30:27.have smaller and smaller spaces in which to explore, identify and
:30:28. > :30:32.express their true selves. When that is the case, I think the opportunity
:30:33. > :30:40.to bring one humanity into a job or a roll, or to be a role model that
:30:41. > :30:45.way, becomes quite limited. I think to allow our cynicism to start to
:30:46. > :30:50.equate genuine whistle-blowing with any form of hack of anybody, and
:30:51. > :30:54.just treat it as any other form of data, as if we were reading a
:30:55. > :31:00.history from 100 years ago, that strikes me as very corrosive to a
:31:01. > :31:09.free society. Professor guest-macro, thank you. That is almost it for
:31:10. > :31:14.this evening. The Rio Paralympic Games are almost over but we thought
:31:15. > :31:17.we would give you a recapture of the astonishing Team GB gold haul. Good
:31:18. > :31:34.night. # stars of track and field you are,
:31:35. > :31:37.# Stars of track and field you are, # Stars of track and field you are
:31:38. > :31:39.beautiful people...