17/10/2016 Newsnight


With Evan Davis. Mark Urban analyses the battle for Mosul. Plus the child abuse inquiry, the decision on Heathrow, air pollution, and is UKIP 'ungovernable'?

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 17/10/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Astride the River Tigris, a city of over two million,


But now a war zone, the fight to drive ISIS out and to get


This is perhaps the closest thing to a straight good-versus-evil


battle that will occur anywhere this year, at least, outside of fiction.


It's certainly worth understanding it, so we'll be


examining the military, humanitarian and political


Also tonight, this man was recently thought to be


Today he said the party is in a "death spiral" and has


This man still wants to be leader of the party -


And find out what our technology editor David Grossman is breathing


What I'm not separated from is the fumes. You can taste them. But what


am I breathing in? This bike has been set with an air quality


monitor. Will Brexit mean weaker


air quality laws? The battle has been long-awaited:


the so-called Islamic State has been in control of Mosul for over two


years and is now defending it against an alliance of Iraqi army,


Kurdish fighters, some controversial Shia militias and, of course,


some US forces, too. This is not the battle


to eradicate IS completely. It is a fight to drive the group


into a humiliating But there are myriad


challenges ahead. It sometimes motivates its fighters


by executing the ones Then there is the humantarian


challenge, 1.5 million There will, at some point


after the battle, be a need Think of how difficult it has been


between the republicans and unionists in Northern Ireland,


and then ask how hard it will be We'll be looking at all these,


but first, here's our diplomatic To the east of Mosul today


the first easy victories. But signs also of the IS group's


capacity to resist. A car speeds into a group of Kurdish


armoured vehicles before IS may be losing, but it's


still ready to defend Lots of the Isis leaders


and many of the fighters will turn towards Raqqa and Syria


as their last stronghold But I think it will be easier


to defeat Isis then, because we have to bear in mind Isis


is 95, if not more, percent, If they are pushed out of Iraq


into Syria I think it The city is now surrounded,


or almost so, a narrow corridor is being left open to the west


to allow IS fighters Kurdish brigades are now pushing


in from the east and north. Shia militias will advance


from the south-west. Given the risk of sectarian


conflict, these elements are meant Iraqi federal troops and loyal Sunni


militia will then enter the city Why leave a corridor open and drop


leaflets on the city for weeks before when that would seem


to violate any idea of surprise, Well, the answer lies in concerns


about the more than 1 million people And the feeling that if there is any


sort of prolonged fighting in that urban space it could have


dire humanitarian consequences. Mosul, you are talking


about 1.5 million of population. Can you imagine if Daesh


would take the risk? I'm sure they would do it,


to push the civilians to leave the city then you have


1 million refugees. It's going to be one


of the worst catastrophes. The aim is to keep the different


militias apart once the city's taken, because Mosul has long been


a cockpit of rivalry between Sunni Isis as a force has more or less


kept all the guns pointing In other words, pointing


towards Isis themselves. After they are defeated militarily


it's much more likely for us to see And we are not just talking


about sectarian Shia-Sunni conflict, but Sunni-Sunni conflict,


Shia-Shia conflict and And if losing Mosul would be


a heavy blow for IS, it still has its Syrian


stronghold of Raqqa. The prospect of an assault


there is still distant. In Syria I think it's


much more complicated. In Syria it took a dimension


like Kafkaesque, a crisis, it has I don't know, when we compare it's


much easier to see Iraq Ten years ago the Islamic State


was proclaimed in And it was overwhelmed


by a combination of force and splits The Islamic State in the form


that it is now being fought involved many of the same people,


tribes and places. And there's the warning


from history. If there isn't a convincing


political solution for those Sunni communities it's quite likely that


another form of the same jihadist ideology will break out


into the open again. The Mosul offensive can deal


with the immediate problem of a Jihadist group holding a major


Iraqi city, but what it do is soothe -- but what it cannot do is soothe


the ruling sectarianism of that country and the sense of grievance


felt by many Sunnis. Well, Mark has set out some


of the difficulties - and we are going to take these step


by step now. I'm joined by retired US


Army Colonel Peter Mansoor, who was an executive officer


to General David Petraeus in Iraq and is now a professor of military


history at Ohio State University. Rachel Harvey, who is an emergency


responder with British charity ShelterBox, who is joining us


from Irbil in Iraq. Toby Dodge, an international


relations expert from the LSE, is in the studio along


with Renad Mansour, a fellow of Chatham House


and Middle East expert. The evening. Let's start with the


military. -- good evening. Peter, you are in military expert. How


painful can IS make this military operation to get the city back? It


is going to the slow grind. As General Steve Townsend, the


commander of US forces in Iraq has said, the battle is going to take


weeks maybe months to culminate. The Prime Minister of Iraq wants to


finish it by the end of the year. The result is inevitable. The Iraqi


forces with US air support will end up crashing Isis. But it'll be a


hard fight for that to happen. The enemy has had more than two years to


dig in to urban landscape. Exciting palls of oil to darken the skies.


And make it harder for air strikes to target him. -- igniting pools of


oil. He has lit roadside bombs. The Kurdish forces will meet a stiff


resistance from an enemy that had a long time to prepare a battlefield


all the way. Many have said that the outcome is not really in doubt. That


assembly the numbers, is it, the numbers on the offensive to take the


city of the outnumbering those in city defending? -- that assessment


is the numbers. You may have upwards of 6000, 8000 Isis fighters in the


city. Opposing them are tens of thousands of Iraqi troops, Kurdish,


Shi'ite militias if they are needed. And they are backed up by US air


power and coalition air power that can make any defensive position a


shambles at the drop of a bomb. You will see a lot of firepower being


used and artillery guided rockets, as well. This will be a one-sided


fight. Does that raise the possibility that in rescuing the


people of Mosul that a lot of them will be killed in the process? I


think that inevitable, quite frankly. This is war. You cannot a


bloodless combat. They've left open an avenue for escape for civilians.


It is doubtful Isis will allow the civilians to flee. Isis wants a


humanitarian catastrophe to use it as propaganda. This is going to be


tough on the people of Mosul. But if you want to end the war against Isis


you have to take the city. Thanks. Just on the timing. Months, not


weeks, is this what we think of this military offensive? The analysis is


completely correct. We are not even in the city yet. It is important to


note. It'll take some time to move in, take the villages, especially


because it is coalition forces, many of them don't agree or coordinate


with each other. But they only have one enemy. They are looking to get


rid of that one enemy, which is the so-called Islamic State. And they


need to limit civilian casualties. Some generals we are speaking to


have said it is a matter of interest, inch by inch, and block


could take days to take over inside the city. They are conscious of the


fact that it isn't just military, they need to make sure the civilian


population is OK what happens. That brings us to the issue of the


humanitarian crisis. Rachel Harvey, I wonder if I can talk to you about


that. Set out, you are over in Irbil, just set out how ready you


are, and what expectations there are of a humanitarian out poor from the


people of Mosul. In a sense it has been a strange response falls. --


strange response. We don't normally get this kind of forewarning of the


humanitarian crisis. Normally we are reacting to an event after something


has happened. That is a positive. But other than that everything is


unknown. We don't know how many people are in the city at the


moment. It is all estimates. We don't know how many of those people


will be able to flee. We don't know when they will flee or in which


direction they will flee. It is a challenging situation to know how to


best respond. We've had months of planning. That has allowed


organisations to pre-position aid in places as close to the areas where


we think people will arrive. ShelterBox Is one of many


organisations working together. It'll come down to communication to


see our effective this response can be. We will have to be flexible. We


will have to adapt to events as they unfold on the ground. The


humanitarian response will be dictated by what happens militarily.


As the military response on faults we will have to react to the impact


of that. -- on faults -- unfolds. The people will probably escaped the


Kurdish areas, won't they? That is our working assumption at the


moment. But this is a region that has already taken in a number of


people, both Syrian refugees and Iraqis already displaced by conflict


over the past two years. This area would say it is already struggling


to look after those people already here. And now it is going to be


expected to take hundreds of thousands more people. There is a


scarcity of land on which to build camps. There is a shortage of


resources. And with the best well, with all of these uncertainties of


war you can plan a military operation as tight as you possibly


can but when it comes down to it military operations don't always go


100% smoothly. The humanitarian community is trying to make sure we


have aid in key places to cover an area wherever people are likely to


come. They are going to need shelter, food, they may need health,


they will certainly need some kind of protection. We are trying to get


all of those things together in key places so we can respond to all


their needs. These are likely to be highly traumatised people and


exhausted people. The arranges inhospitable. Most of these people


will have walked, having experienced the conflict which is getting


underway and before that having lived under IS the two years. -- the


terrain is inhospitable. They will be in a state before we get to them.


What happens when the inevitable military victory, however long it


takes, succeeds? That is the There's been a lot of planning and


training for the military campaign. My own best research suggests there


has been little or no thinking about the political aftermath. If we lock


at the aftermath of the invasion of 2003, aftermath of the surge in


2007, I think we see military capacity, military power being


deployed to deliver political solutions. Daesh, the Islamic State,


are violent, barbaric group is simply a cause of a series of


political failings and no-one has quite worked out how to reform the


Iraqi system to integrate those sections of the population that are


alienated and stop the Islamic State recruiting again. The Prime Minister


of Iraq, a man who was resident in the UK for quite a few years,


Manchester university, everybody seems to say he is something a


reconciler. Is he doing his best? Is he a baddie or a goody? He's doing


his best. Clearly, if you look at the opinion poll ratings, especially


after replacing al-Maliki, he was recognised or greeted with optimism.


However, he's incredibly weak in a fractured and internally divided


cabinet. He has little or no power. He doesn't control the Shia


militias. He doesn't control the Peshmerga. The Ministry of Defence


has been sacked over a vote of no confidence in the Parliament. Do you


agree with what we've heard about the state of the political set


newspaper Iraq? 100% agree. The biggest problem with Abadi is he is


facing many forces. The biggest are within his own camp, including the


former Prime Minister. He's still there. He's still looking for a


chance to bring Abadi down. Don't talk about sectarianism, there's an


internal Shia struggle that he is facing. This is what I heard in


Mark's piece. I was not aware - we all know Sunni-Shia. It's the


multiple dimensions. Post-2003 system is so ill legitimate, so


broken that it's not only Sunnis, it's Shias. There's a mass protest


movement from the summer of 2015 onwards de crying almost universal


corruption amongst the governing elite asking in a once oil-rich


country why they can't get electricity at the height of the


summer. We have a completely dysfunctional system. No-one has


come up with a plan to fix it. What would be your plan to fix it? What


is the political settlement that you're waiting for that would be


different to the period after the surge or original invasion, when it


did basically retreat into the most awful situation very quickly? I


think the period after the surge might offer a good example of


bringing the disenfranchised populations back to the bargaining


table. We need to sustain that. We have a military victory that we're


looking for. No-one is talking about the political victory. We have


plans, many different plans, but no plan. When you bring them back to


the table, what is this that you're going to get them to agree on? Is it


an autonomous region for the Sunnis so they're like the Kurds and it's a


more federal system? Again, it's very complicated. They have


different ideas of what they want. This is complicated. We need to give


them autonomy, to build systems of local governance in local provinces


so they can start to deal with their own affairs. This is what the former


Prime Minister did. They need to get them to discuss because


communication is the key to this. We've learned enough tonight,


probably enough for one evening. Thank you all very much indeed.


Stephen Woolfe, the man who was among the favourites to take


the leadership until that altercation in Strasbourg,


There are no hopes as far as I'm concerned.


I will be withdrawing my application to become leader of Ukip.


I'm actually withdrawing myself from Ukip.


I just don't think that Ukip, in this bible it has got,


where you have elected politicians fighting


each other, where there is just this visceral


hatred, in some cases toward Nigel or anyone


that is seen to be associated with him.


Some people call me his puppet for standing, and things like that.


Whilst that's happening, not only are they letting down the members,


but they are actually letting down themselves.


And I don't think at this stage Ukip is governable.


I'm joined now by Raheem Kassam, a Ukip leadership candidate


and the editor in chief of Breitbart London.


What's happened to Stephen and his ambition to be leader? I think he's


been through a really tough time. He went through a gruelling leadership


campaign the last time. The tactics got nasty. I don't think we should


see that inside our own party. We are a family. It shouldn't come to


those things. Stephen was particularly, more than anyone, on


the receiving end of the bullying, quite frankly. The fight, was he


going to be found guilty of partaking in a fight or starting it?


Because some said he was the one who said "Come outside." He said he


wasn't doing that meaning let's have a fight, but to take the argument


outside. Is that part of the thing here, that he was going to be


blocked from the leadership? Stephen wasn't innocent in that fracas. I


think he will admit, at least privately, that he bears some cull


pability for what happened there. I'm not going to prejudge. But from


what I've heard there's equal cull pability. He's saying he was hit.


We're not there, we await other investigations. The leadership


situation now. Would you support Nigel Farage saying look, I'm going


to stay on or I'm going to stand in this leadership election? He seems


to be the only one who can hold the party together. He's told me he's


not going to. You'd like it if he did, though? Other than it would


slightly thwart your ambitions. I'm young, I'm all right. It's up to


him. I think there's a lot of appetite in the party for Nigel


Farage. I've already said if I become the leader, he will be the


honorary president of the party. I think it needs to retain him in some


way. Ukip is Nigel. Nigel is Ukip. Some post that keeps him on the


side. The other candidate, because there was a determination about the


rules. Suzanne Evans, a frequent guest on this programme. She can


stand this time. She was blocked last time. Would you welcome her?


Absolutely. I've always said throughout the last, crazy ten days


that we should have an open contest. You could serve under her. If she


won you'd be delighted to serve under her? We know the party is


riven by splits and divisions and you're in a different division to


her. Could you unite under Suzanne Evans? It's a tough question. I'm


not sure she would take the party in the direction I would want it to go.


I would commit to this: Not attacking her if she won the


leadership. You might even leave the party if she became leader? No, I


wouldn't. People need to stick with this. People want Brexit. They don't


want a one party state. They want real opposition to the Tories.


Labour's not delivering it. Who are you supporting in the American


election? I would probably support Donald Trump. Patrick O'Flynn,


himself a candidate in the general election, he tweeted the choice


ahead for Ukip, in a way it encollapse late everything, is


whether to be the patriotic party of the common sense centre of of UK


politics or go Trump, ult-right. Doesn't that just encapsulate the


split in your party, between the Trump ones... I replied. I said it's


a silly, false dichotomy. You think Trump is a common sense patriot? No,


everybody in Ukip. Don't you think people think Trump is completely off


the scale who would say if you're a Trump person, I'm not for you. Trump


divides the world. Look, we're in Central London right now. It's


disgusting to support Donald Trump in Central London. I'm not taking a


view on it. I'm explaining this - If you say Trump is an inspiration to


you... Now you're putting words in my mouth. It's not so much that he's


an inspiration to me but I think Hillary Clinton would be bad for


America. That's all it comes down to - who is better. Do you think


there's a sort of fight gene in Ukip supporters, I don't just mean in the


boxing match, but all seem to just pick arguments. On Twitter tonight


arguing with Al Murray. What is it about you guys and fighting. A


already Murray -- Al Murray is funny, he gets the Jock lar element


of it. There's a lot of tongue-in-cheek behind some of this


stuff. It's not all animosity all the time. There's a lot of


playfulness here. Honestly. You're looking at me exceptically. I mean


that. But I also think it has come a point where it's too much because of


the crisis in Ukip, it doesn't know what it stands for. I want to make


the party great again. I will do it, 100,000 members if I'm leader. Thank


you very much for coming on. ( If there is one organisation that


has been competing with Ukip in the struggle to settle


on a leader, it's the independent It just cannot break free


of distracting headlines about itself and its personnel


problems, rather than The chair, Alexis Jay,


today tried to clarify the inquiry's But the legacy of the last chair,


Lowell Goddard, lives on in the form of argument and recrimination,


involving the Home Secretary, Amber Rudd, and her


permanent secretary. What did they know


about Lowell Goddard, Our political editor, Nick Watt,


has been following the row. it is one of the most ambitious


inquiries in British history, but it has been plagued by disputes at


almost every stage. Today the three people who have the future of


Britain's national child abuse inquiry in their hands moved to draw


a line under this most troubled of investigations. But first, remember


this... Order. Statement the Secretary of State for the home


department. Secretary Theresa May. I would like to make a statement about


the sexual abuse of children... Theresa May has enormous political


capital invested in this inquiry, after she overcame some scepticism


to set it up and then had to appoint three consecutive chairs after the


first two stumbled. With questions raging about the resignation about


her third chair, the Prime Minister is keen to focus on the main purpose


of the inquiry. Dame Lowell Goddard resigned shortly after the Home


Secretary and I talked about these issues. Let's remember, the point of


the inquiry is that there are many people who have suffered from child


abuse, who over the years, have felt that their voice was being ignored.


Nobody was listening to them. They deserve justice. Until today, this


was the Government's official explanation for the abrupt


resignation of Goddard on August 4. Ultimately she found it too lonely.


She was a long way from home. She decided to step down. That's all the


information I have about why she decided to go. Last week, the Times


reported that this man, Mark Sedwell, her most senior official


was alerted six days earlier to criticism of her management skills


and allegedly racist views. Today, the Home Secretary offered a fresh


explanation. Dame Lowell had not spoke ton me about her reasons, so I


relied on the letter she had sent to the committee. In her letter, she


said she was lonely and felt that she could not deliver and that was


why she stepped down. Dame Lowell strongly refutes the allegations


about her. The only way we could understand properly why she resigned


would be to hear from Dame Lowell. That original appearance before the


Select Committee may still cause trouble for the Home Office.


Newsnight understand that's there is unease amongst some MPs that Mark


Sedewell sat in silence when Rudd made her statement last month. One


observer said Sedwell, highly regarded by the Prime Minister,


faces a decisive day when he appears before the committee tomorrow.


As MPs debated the inquiry, along the river its new chair issued a


rare public statement. This was short on specifics, but Professor


Alexis Jay appeared to nod towards a scaling back of its work. If we were


to pursue the traditional public hearing model that people associate


with inquiries of this kind to the thousands and thousands of


institutions in England and Wales, we would fail. There is no


possibility that we can do that. However, we will apply it to some,


that will not be the main ways in which we will take this inquiry


forward. The Prime Minister, the Home


Secretary and a new enquiry chair will be hoping some answers into a


dark past may be provided by the end of the decade. But for now questions


will continue to hang over this enquiry.


As you heard, tomorrow the Home Secretary and her permanent


secretary will appear before the Commons Home Affairs


One of its members and a candidate for the chairmanship,


Good evening. Do you think Amber Rudd unreasonably misled the


committee when she met before and said, you know, Dame Lowell Goddard


art resigned because she was isolated and wanted to go home? When


the Home Secretary gave evidence to us on the committee she was


referring to the reasons that were given to her by Dame Lowell Goddard


art as to why she left. Whether at that point there was more, we don't


know. There might have been legal reasons to speculate why she had


gone. But Dame Goddard has gone now. There are a number of issues that go


beyond the head of enquiry. One is the extent to which the controlling


mind of the enquiry is impacted or influenced by the Home Office.


Before 1971 the Home Office had a role in inspecting and approving the


heads of children's homes were a lot of these awful things happened. If


you have an enquiry that is dominated by Home Office personnel


that's possible. I dated anybody has an issue with Herrerin abilities.


She was in the social work profession for over three decades.


-- with her abilities. We shouldn't sweep that under the carpet. That


needs to be dealt with. Are you suggesting maybe it needs another


chair? Alexis J isn't the right chair? I'm not saying that. --


Alexis Jay. Some survivors will not trust a social worker. The question.


I'm not raising that. The survivors are. -- that is a good question.


They have got to be the primary concern. If they say that is an


issue for then you have to deal with it, you cannot pretend it away. Some


hope we can just get on with this, we cannot keep changing the head.


Absolutely. I think people chair that view. The professor will be


appearing tomorrow in front of the committee. She wants this to be done


by 2020. One of the controversy is coming out the Department of Dame


Goddard is that you should forget about the past and focus on the


future. I would say that would be wholly unacceptable to my


constituents. What happened to them may have been in the past but they


live with it every day and will continue to do so in the future. One


of the things Dame Goddard suggested was that there was under sourcing of


the enquiry. But they refounded the Home Office. This is why it would be


good to have judge Goddard B there. -- Goddard be there. Were they


sitting on this? I don't know. That will be a line of enquiry. Thanks


very much. At one point, we were


expecting a decision It's probably next week now,


but hey, we've been waiting 48 years so another few days is neither


here nor there. But Nick Watt is back with me


with news on how the Government might push Heathrow,


if it is selected as the favoured What are they thinking? The Cabinet


will discuss tomorrow whether or where to build a new runway in the


south-east. We know that the Cabinet subcommittee will meet next week,


will make a decision, announced it next week. The government is


planning to hold a Commons vote within a week of that announcement.


They are obliged to hold a formal vote. It is a national strategy


policy statement. Within a few months. But they want to go much


earlier to stop opponents building up steam. If they were to go to


Heathrow, Zac Goldsmith could have his by-election but they would hope


they would have the numbers in parliament to have parliament


approve it by then. There is speculation they might overheat and


Gatwick. I am told they will go for one of the three options. -- there


is speculation they might have one at Heathrow and Gatwick. Tell us


which one. You must know. If you are going to one option, it looks like


you are following the airports commission. If you are following


Howard Davies you are going for a third runway at Heathrow. But


ministers are saying no decision has been made yet. The Prime Minister


wants to hear from the Cabinet. They will follow the information. Those


members on the subcommittee have a pile of papers, they need to do


their homework, then they will publish it.


Well, airports and aeroplanes are often seen as one of the main


culprits of toxic emissions by those who seek to improve


But those of us who bought diesel cars, thinking that would help,


have known for a while now that we are actually poisoning our fellow


citizens with toxic emissions that are far worse than we'd


down or use Brexit as a chance to dump the EU-mandated levels


Our technology editor, David Grossman, has been looking


at the UK's commitment - or lack thereof - to cleaner air.


The cycle path up the side of the A3 is not the prettiest


but it is pretty fast, and at least I am separated


What I'm not separated from, of course, are the fumes.


This bike has been fitted with an air quality monitor.


The main thing it's measuring is nitrogen dioxide.


What that does to the human body can be pretty nasty.


In simple terms that's going to increase your susceptibility


It's going to increase your risk of having, say,


It's going to make you more susceptible


If you've got asthma or sensitive lungs it might make you more prone


A strict EU limit came into force in 2010.


An annual mean of 40 micrograms per cubic metre of air.


However, the government won't enforce it until 2024


for the UK as a whole, and even later, 2025, for London.


Frankly it's enough to make you want to hold your breath


And here is the 40 micrograms annual mean limit.


My journey up the A3 was swimming in nitrogen dioxide.


But the biggest spike of the day was appropriately enough


Tomorrow the environmental lawyers Client Earth are continuing their


We need to go back to court now with the government because this


government in the 35 years that I've been doing environmental work


is the most reluctant to follow the law when it comes to important


We have 40,000 people a year dying early in the UK


And the government has done in its heels and said we're just not


going to comply anywhere near the time we are supposed to.


They were supposed to comply in 2010.


They are now saying in London it will be 2025.


But their own plan shows it won't be anywhere near 2025.


So why has the UK struggled to meet air quality laws that were supposed


Up until May Stephen Heidari-Robinson was David Cameron's


adviser on energy and the environment.


He says one reason is we do too much computer modelling and not


As you've done today, going around and actually measuring


things, it's probably the right way forward.


I think the second is you sort of look at these numbers


and you struggle to see why they are not going down.


And that's a large proportion of what happened with the VW scandal.


It turns out that actually emissions from diesel vehicles are six times


This problem is largely about diesel vehicles.


Really we need to address that issue if we want to solve


But given the scale of solving that problem, and meeting


those EU legal limits, there is some concern


that the government might try to use Brexit to abandon them or perhaps


Last month the Commons environment audit select committee couldn't get


Are you giving a commitment that standards will be higher,


or at least at the level of the European standards?


I'm saying to you what I've said to you previously,


that we want better air quality we have today.


-- that we want better air quality than we have today.


And that's what we'll be working, to that outcome.


Today we have enforceable legal standards.


I'm just wondering if you were going to keep them, that's all,


Will the government which is so reluctant to comply


with the law try to move away in the Brexit process?


And so will thousands of our citizens.


It would actually give us the best standards in the world.


In the meantime air pollution continues to damage thousands


As for me I think I'll take the long route through the park from now on.


in The Times on a story that David Cameron wasted ?1 billion on the


Troubled Families Programme. They suppressed the report. They wasted


money on that particular scheme. That's almost it for tonight,


but if you're not fortunate enough to have a baby boomer index linked


final salary pension, you probably didn't attend


the Desert Trip concert in California this weekend,


unkindly dubbed Oldstock The average age of the


headline acts was 72, The cheapest seat was $199,


the most expensive $3,000. Anyway, for everyone else,


here it is in 40 seconds. # People try to put us down


# Talking about my generation #. # Been around for many a long year


#. # I hope I die before I get old #.


# All we are saying... #. # We are just two young souls


swimming in a fishbowl # Year after year #.


If you have managed to avoid the showers over the past few days it


has felt good in the sunshine. A chillier feel thanks to a cold front


which will sweep down the country in the next few hours. Away from that,


sunshine, but some showers tomorrow in northern parts of the UK,


Northern Ireland, and Scotland. Temperature is


With Evan Davis. Mark Urban analyses the battle for Mosul. Plus the child abuse inquiry, the decision on Heathrow, air pollution, and is UKIP 'ungovernable'?

Download Subtitles