:00:00. > :00:09.Grenfell - the regulations not fit for the job.
:00:10. > :00:13.It wasn't just horrific flames but poisonous gases that killed.
:00:14. > :00:17.Could changing rules on cladding have contributed?
:00:18. > :00:22.So, this small amount of material, if it
:00:23. > :00:26.burned in a house or flat, would be enough to fill the whole house or
:00:27. > :00:29.Enough to stop you escaping and kill you.
:00:30. > :00:32.We'll be asking, just how long will it take before
:00:33. > :00:39.we can trust the rules will improve safety and not undermine it?
:00:40. > :00:46.As that Great EU Repeal Bill is finally published, we ask,
:00:47. > :00:53.I'm hoping the government are going to let us amend our lot of this bill
:00:54. > :00:56.and on that basis we might be able to support it.
:00:57. > :00:58.But we can't at the moment because it is so
:00:59. > :01:03.# I could kill, but I don't care about it.
:01:04. > :01:08.And we catch up with the man who wrote this song.
:01:09. > :01:11.What have you been doing in the years when we haven't
:01:12. > :01:17.Hmm, I suppose it was like spiritual research,
:01:18. > :01:35.Grenfell is one of those events that changes attitudes and opens our eyes
:01:36. > :01:39.to subjects that before the horrific events of a month ago
:01:40. > :01:41.were the preserve of experts, bureaucrats and the people -
:01:42. > :01:45.often ignored - who were living every day with risk.
:01:46. > :01:48.Tonight, Newsnight has new evidence that building regulations
:01:49. > :01:54.We reveal that the Government is preparing a major review
:01:55. > :01:57.of those regulations, and show that honourable efforts
:01:58. > :01:59.to make buildings more energy efficient could have inadvertently
:02:00. > :02:17.Tell us what this review is going to look at. The big thing is to
:02:18. > :02:23.understand is the government has been looking at local authority
:02:24. > :02:26.housing and social housing and the cladding and what came up is the
:02:27. > :02:30.astounded to discover that the rule book they thought they had written
:02:31. > :02:33.is simply not is what is being practised on the ground, there is a
:02:34. > :02:38.gap between where they expect standards to be and where they are.
:02:39. > :02:41.This review is working out whether the rule book is a problem or
:02:42. > :02:47.implementation of the enforcement? All of these things are on the
:02:48. > :02:57.table. The big issue is, how long will this take? People are living in
:02:58. > :02:59.these flats all around the country. Local authorities are dealing with
:03:00. > :03:01.short-term issues but longer term the government will have to do
:03:02. > :03:04.something about this and this review will clash with the judicial enquiry
:03:05. > :03:08.and the police investigations and they will be asking the same
:03:09. > :03:12.questions so it will take a long time and we have made a film today
:03:13. > :03:22.that explains just how troubled and difficult rebuilding regulations now
:03:23. > :03:26.really are. The Grenfell Tower fire had a lot of causes, direct and
:03:27. > :03:31.indirect but the problems here and those discovered in other tower
:03:32. > :03:35.blocks reflect that building rules have not kept pace with construction
:03:36. > :03:41.methods. The government have prioritised insulation over fire
:03:42. > :03:47.safety and it is quite a tempting proposition because insulation
:03:48. > :03:52.affects every building, fires only affect a very small number. Thermal
:03:53. > :03:56.efficiency is the part of the building codes that have changed
:03:57. > :04:02.most in the last 40 years. After the oil shock in the 1970s and more
:04:03. > :04:05.recently because of concerns about climate change and fuel poverty.
:04:06. > :04:12.Quite rightly, the rules have aimed for ever warmer homes. What do those
:04:13. > :04:18.changes over the last few decades mean in practice? Here is a thought
:04:19. > :04:22.experiment that might help you get your head around this. Suppose you
:04:23. > :04:26.have a bare brick wall adjective do something to get it past a building
:04:27. > :04:29.inspector concerned about thermal efficiency? In the 1960s all you
:04:30. > :04:36.needed to do was the equivalent of sticking a very thin sheet, just 15
:04:37. > :04:42.millimetres of old-fashioned mineral bull insulation, and you would be
:04:43. > :04:47.fine but standards have risen and by the 1990s you would need to stick
:04:48. > :04:53.around 90 millimetres to the wall to get it past the inspector. These
:04:54. > :04:58.days, you need to stick around 120 millimetres to the wall to get it
:04:59. > :05:03.through that inspection. The thing is, builders don't build to the
:05:04. > :05:06.minimum standards and at Grenfell Tower, the cladding introduced a
:05:07. > :05:11.level of insulation that was equivalent in our experiment did 200
:05:12. > :05:15.millimetres of insulation to the wall. The Grenfell planning
:05:16. > :05:34.application explained... There is another reason why
:05:35. > :05:40.developers have gone well beyond the basic requirements for energy
:05:41. > :05:45.efficiency. At Grenfell Tower, the renovation actually got funded in
:05:46. > :05:48.part by something called the energy company obligation, our public
:05:49. > :05:52.policy intervention by the government which forces energy
:05:53. > :05:56.companies to put money into making older buildings more energy
:05:57. > :05:59.efficient. In the Grenfell Tower case, that money went into a new
:06:00. > :06:05.district heating system, not insulation. But if you go down the
:06:06. > :06:11.road, that is the Ed Woodward 's estate and in that case the
:06:12. > :06:18.eco-money went straight into a new noncombustible insulation on the
:06:19. > :06:20.outside of the towers. These policies, regulations and
:06:21. > :06:28.initiatives are sharpened up incentives for builders to try new
:06:29. > :06:32.insulators, like so-called PIR plastic foams, the insulation at
:06:33. > :06:39.Grenfell Tower. It is a better insulator and therefore it is going
:06:40. > :06:44.to give better heat economy for the same thickness of material or the
:06:45. > :06:47.same weight of maternal. It is cheaper and it is lighter so it is
:06:48. > :06:53.going to require less material to hold it in place and it is going to
:06:54. > :06:58.require less cost in terms of lifting it up to whenever you are
:06:59. > :07:03.going to install it. But it obviously has this big drawback in
:07:04. > :07:08.terms of fire safety but the phone is organic based and is combustible.
:07:09. > :07:13.The rules advise that insulation in tall buildings should not be
:07:14. > :07:17.flammable but in the lead to is, I rule was introduced stating you can
:07:18. > :07:21.use such combustible materials on a tall building if it passes the test.
:07:22. > :07:29.You have to replicate the design you want to install and then set a fire
:07:30. > :07:35.under it. But here is a video produced by insulation manufacturer
:07:36. > :07:41.for its customers. As an alternative to a full test, it highlights a
:07:42. > :07:45.desktop study. If an engineer believes something similar to your
:07:46. > :07:51.design has already been tested, you don't need to test yours. Newsnight
:07:52. > :07:54.has already revealed how some engineers really stretch the
:07:55. > :08:00.definition of what is similar in these desktop studies to avoid
:08:01. > :08:04.further tests. For example, we have shown how tests using ceramic tiles
:08:05. > :08:11.have been used to justify avoiding testing with aluminium panels. Two
:08:12. > :08:13.different substances. We have revealed how some building
:08:14. > :08:18.inspection agencies have been routinely signing on using
:08:19. > :08:25.combustible insulation and exterior cladding without even so much as a
:08:26. > :08:29.desktop study. So there has been too little testing and the ones that
:08:30. > :08:33.have been done are confidential. The trouble is some manufacturers we
:08:34. > :08:38.know have an extensive library of the full-scale tests to prove their
:08:39. > :08:43.material. Others, it is difficult to discern whether they have or not so
:08:44. > :08:47.reliant on the way they market the product to us. If you see a claim
:08:48. > :08:55.saying this product is suitable above 18 metres and then you read
:08:56. > :09:01.governing authorities' literature endorsing that, we will believe that
:09:02. > :09:04.is suitable. One company that ensures industrial buildings got
:09:05. > :09:10.worried about the tests themselves. We have seen several fires involving
:09:11. > :09:13.combustible insulation and we were concerned that the laboratory tests
:09:14. > :09:20.on this type of plastic insulation did not reflect the risk in the real
:09:21. > :09:24.world. Normal lab test installation is installed to perfect standards
:09:25. > :09:29.but if you years ago the insurer commissioned tests on this widely
:09:30. > :09:33.made insulation type installed with real-world, normal workmanship. The
:09:34. > :09:40.traditional insulation held out for one hour. But the combustible PIR
:09:41. > :09:44.insulation did not. The fire monitoring equipment was destroyed
:09:45. > :09:49.in about 70 minutes by the heat. A much worse performance than previous
:09:50. > :09:54.lab tests suggested. There is also a problem with toxicity. The trouble
:09:55. > :09:59.but this material is that it has got a lot of nitrogen in it and when it
:10:00. > :10:03.burns, it produces both carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide and so
:10:04. > :10:08.the small amount of material, if it burned in a house or a flat, would
:10:09. > :10:14.fill the whole flat or house with toxic smoke, enough to stop the
:10:15. > :10:18.escaping and killed you. Hospital discharge papers from one Grenfell
:10:19. > :10:22.resident seen by Newsnight showed they had cyanide poisoning.
:10:23. > :10:31.The British Rigid Urethane Foam Manufacturers' Association said...
:10:32. > :10:41.They also stated that the design of the
:10:42. > :10:53.The government has been shocked to learn this month how far far
:10:54. > :10:58.standards are from where they had expected. That is why they believe a
:10:59. > :11:00.review is now necessary. Chris Cook, there.
:11:01. > :11:01.Jonathan O'Neill is Managing Director of the Fire
:11:02. > :11:19.He joins us from Worcester. Thank you for joining us. The testing
:11:20. > :11:21.regime is obviously flawed. You presumably welcomed this
:11:22. > :11:29.announcement that there will be this review and overhaul? Well, we have
:11:30. > :11:36.been calling for a review for some time so if a review is announced, it
:11:37. > :11:39.is very welcome news. And very refreshing that actually, your
:11:40. > :11:43.report has shown some of the problems are with the testing regime
:11:44. > :11:50.because as the film rightly pointed out, the tests are done on perfect
:11:51. > :11:53.insulation and we know that actually, the insulation is not
:11:54. > :11:57.perfectly encapsulated all the time and the test does not include
:11:58. > :12:02.windows or penetrations in the cladding and we would like to see a
:12:03. > :12:05.more realistic test, assuming we get a building regulations review as
:12:06. > :12:09.soon as we can. Isn't the problem that you have raised these issues
:12:10. > :12:16.time and time again and does not seem to have been much action? Why
:12:17. > :12:20.do you think that was? I think there has been a real difficulty. The Fire
:12:21. > :12:25.and Rescue Service have been so successful in reducing the number of
:12:26. > :12:29.fire deaths and injuries over the last decade that I think there was a
:12:30. > :12:34.genuine belief by ministers and others that the fire problem had
:12:35. > :12:39.gone away. In reality, we knew there were more combustible materials
:12:40. > :12:43.being introduced to the building process and that required... It was
:12:44. > :12:46.likely to require a different fire dynamic and that is what we were
:12:47. > :12:52.concerned about and that is why we are asking for building regulations
:12:53. > :12:57.reviews. You say that more combustible materials were being
:12:58. > :13:02.added to the cladding. Why? It is not just cladding, it is throughout
:13:03. > :13:04.the building process. There are different insulation requirements
:13:05. > :13:11.that have been introduced over recent years and the easy option is
:13:12. > :13:18.to be putting in the lighter, more combustible materials. The problem
:13:19. > :13:21.stems from a term called limited, stability, in reality we have
:13:22. > :13:26.combustible and noncombustible and it should be that simple, when you
:13:27. > :13:30.add terms like Limited, stability, it adds a grey area of
:13:31. > :13:36.interpretation and as a report said, that is where problems can occur and
:13:37. > :13:42.that has been a real concern. For high occupancies, noncombustible
:13:43. > :13:46.materials must be the absolute priority. The question I asked Chris
:13:47. > :13:52.before we saw that film was about the issue of speed. People are
:13:53. > :13:58.living in blocks with this type of material in them across the country.
:13:59. > :14:02.How quickly can a review of this type, with such congregated
:14:03. > :14:06.regulations, changing those regulations, how quickly and with
:14:07. > :14:11.what speed than any review take place and can changes be put in
:14:12. > :14:18.place so people are safer? Well, building regulations offer new build
:14:19. > :14:22.and refurbishment and we are where we are the building environment as
:14:23. > :14:25.it stands. There is a safety case and the government are doing all
:14:26. > :14:29.they can to understand how large this problem is with social housing.
:14:30. > :14:36.And the tests they have commissioned will go some way to solving that
:14:37. > :14:40.problem the issue we have got is, what are the problem insulation is
:14:41. > :14:47.and how to be fully encapsulated them so they do not cause any
:14:48. > :14:53.problem? As the tests have shown, fully encapsulated insulation can
:14:54. > :14:57.perform very well in a test. I am assuming that these things could
:14:58. > :15:03.take years to study and analyse. Is that the sort of time frame?
:15:04. > :15:09.Typically, and I sat on a number of different reviews over the last
:15:10. > :15:14.couple of decades, it normally takes 18 months to around two years for a
:15:15. > :15:21.review and we would be very keen to urge the government to start that
:15:22. > :15:25.review immediately and things can be short cut quickly, tests can be
:15:26. > :15:29.commissioned, it depends on the resources the government are
:15:30. > :15:32.prepared to throw at us. And also, to be honest, what evidence we can
:15:33. > :15:36.make available. It is sometimes difficult to get ahold of government
:15:37. > :15:38.statistics which can make a big difference to make the changes that
:15:39. > :15:45.are required. It's about trying to read gain trust
:15:46. > :15:50.and faith in the regulations which have been so damaged by the events
:15:51. > :15:55.one month ago. Without a doubt. We have been calling for the Government
:15:56. > :15:58.to review the basis of those regulations. At the moment they are
:15:59. > :16:05.life safety regulations, and quite likely serve. We don't have any
:16:06. > :16:08.building section within it. We had the local building act, which gave
:16:09. > :16:13.an element of building protection and resilience to the built
:16:14. > :16:16.environment. That was repealed under the last government. And so those
:16:17. > :16:20.types of protections, which are common throughout the world, just
:16:21. > :16:24.don't exist in UK Government building regulations any more.
:16:25. > :16:28.Jonathan O'Neil, thank you very much for joining us.
:16:29. > :16:31.We did ask the Government for an interview, but they told us that
:16:32. > :16:36.nobody was available. Today, it wasn't just Brexit
:16:37. > :16:38.and the publication of that excitingly titled European Union
:16:39. > :16:40.(Withdrawal) Bill that was the centre of attention -
:16:41. > :16:43.what we used to know The Brexit effect on the economy
:16:44. > :16:47.also hoved into view as the Office for Budget Responsibility -
:16:48. > :16:49.the OBR, the Government's official economic watchdog -
:16:50. > :16:51.published its first ever And it certainly said
:16:52. > :16:57.there were a few - high levels of debt,
:16:58. > :17:00.a continuing deficit, an economy now less able to deal
:17:01. > :17:03.with shocks than it was before Is this really the time
:17:04. > :17:10.to be ending austerity? The OBR called for public
:17:11. > :17:13.finance "prudence", and I asked John McDonnell,
:17:14. > :17:16.Labour's Shadow Chancellor, if borrowing more now would really
:17:17. > :17:20.make for a strong and stable economy, and whether being prepared
:17:21. > :17:23.to vote against the Brexit Bill was really an attempt to derail
:17:24. > :17:38.the whole process. If you look at the underlying
:17:39. > :17:42.references that are coming from the OBR, it's about seven years of
:17:43. > :17:47.austerity. It's about productivity stagnating from nearly a decade. Low
:17:48. > :17:50.wages, wages falling back as well. Business investment growth falling
:17:51. > :17:54.back. There's a sort of cocktail of desperate elements within the
:17:55. > :17:58.economy now. That puts the economy at risk. One thing within the OBR
:17:59. > :18:02.report which was interesting, they touch on the Grenfell fire. Do you
:18:03. > :18:05.think there is going to be a cost attached to putting in proper
:18:06. > :18:11.policies that can deal with things, the outcome of things like that?
:18:12. > :18:14.From what we so -- from what we have heard so far, it could be
:18:15. > :18:18.significant and we have to recognise that. The overall issue, how do we
:18:19. > :18:24.get our housing programme back in line? Robert Chote suggested, some
:18:25. > :18:28.would say, from his OBR report, but actually the prudent management of
:18:29. > :18:31.the public finances, austerity, if you'd like, is actually a good thing
:18:32. > :18:36.to do when you have very high levels of debt. Use till have a deficit all
:18:37. > :18:40.of these years after the financial crisis -- you still have a deficit.
:18:41. > :18:45.Actually it is time to fix the roof while the sun is shining. We are a
:18:46. > :18:48.whirlwind at the moment. Lack of investment, austerity measures,
:18:49. > :18:52.which have largely hit people who need the money, who would spend and
:18:53. > :18:57.help grow, and consumer debt increasing. It is just pure
:18:58. > :19:01.management. Can we move on to the issue of Brexit? We have had the
:19:02. > :19:05.publication of the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill, as it is now
:19:06. > :19:09.called. You have immediately come so too will not support it. Is there a
:19:10. > :19:12.danger for you that the public who voted to leave the European Union
:19:13. > :19:16.will look at Parliament on the, you're simply blocking the public
:19:17. > :19:20.will? The public is expecting us to take back control to Europe and then
:19:21. > :19:27.give it to the executive, to the government. By Henry VIII powers. Is
:19:28. > :19:30.that your big issues? If you hand to the executive, we have taken control
:19:31. > :19:33.from Europe and given it to the Government and there is no
:19:34. > :19:37.parliamentary discussion or control, that can't be right. We are saying
:19:38. > :19:42.that we need a different type of Bill. I hope the Government will
:19:43. > :19:45.hope us and a lot of this bill. We can't at the moment because it is so
:19:46. > :19:49.undemocratic. I think they should withdraw this and bring something
:19:50. > :19:59.forward. If not, we'll amend it as best we can. What is more important
:20:00. > :20:02.to you, Mr McDonnell, getting rid of the Prime Minister or getting out of
:20:03. > :20:05.the European Union? Look, the most important thing for me is about the
:20:06. > :20:07.future of the country. At the moment, the problem that we've got
:20:08. > :20:10.is that the future of our country is being held back because we have a
:20:11. > :20:13.weak or no Government in power at the moment. They are in office, but
:20:14. > :20:18.not in power. You can see my point that by frustrating the Brexit...
:20:19. > :20:21.Oh, no, we are not... Theresa May has to resign and you get the
:20:22. > :20:25.election that you want. Theresa May's Dever registration is more
:20:26. > :20:35.important. You are wrong, missing type to get. The most important
:20:36. > :20:38.thing for us is the good governance of this country so quite we have had
:20:39. > :20:40.an election, a referendum. And you lot down here in Westminster cannot
:20:41. > :20:43.get anything done. We have said time and time again that on the number of
:20:44. > :20:45.issues we can cooperate but we cannot support what they are doing
:20:46. > :20:48.at the moment because it is undermining our economy and ability
:20:49. > :20:50.to get this new relationship with Europe that we need. You're not
:20:51. > :20:53.going to get those kind of concessions, so Brexit will not
:20:54. > :20:56.happen with any speed whatsoever. I think this Government is falling
:20:57. > :20:59.apart rapidly on the Conservative Party is splitting about five
:21:00. > :21:03.different ways. On that basis, the only responsible thing for them to
:21:04. > :21:06.do in the interest of the country is to stand aside and let some deals
:21:07. > :21:11.form a government. You support being out of the Single Market when we
:21:12. > :21:15.leave the EU. We want tariff free access to the market itself and we
:21:16. > :21:19.want to negotiate that, we think we can. You agree with Kier Starmer
:21:20. > :21:23.when he says that leaving your item is not a good idea, the European
:21:24. > :21:27.Union's nuclear safety agency would not be a good idea for the UK. There
:21:28. > :21:31.is a whole series of bodies like that that we've got to maintain
:21:32. > :21:35.either a membership or a relationship of. What people may not
:21:36. > :21:38.understand is that the Article 50 process says, we would leave those
:21:39. > :21:43.agencies. You backed by Article 50 treble. So surely you are changing
:21:44. > :21:49.your mind between triggering Article 50 and think, actually, we want to
:21:50. > :21:53.stay in bits of it. There is a whole series of consequences that we need
:21:54. > :21:56.to examine. That includes these individual agencies, and there are
:21:57. > :22:00.dozens of them that we have to go through. It might well be those
:22:01. > :22:03.individual agencies that we maintain a relationship of some sort or
:22:04. > :22:07.maintain a membership of. That would be part of the negotiations. Why did
:22:08. > :22:15.you vote for Article 51 and made it clear that we should be leaving
:22:16. > :22:20.Euratom. It started the negotiations of... That was more important? It
:22:21. > :22:24.is, we need some form of stability with these relationships because it
:22:25. > :22:28.will give stability to our economy. As the OBR pointed out today, like
:22:29. > :22:32.stability will have a long-term impact on our economy. Doesn't it
:22:33. > :22:36.seem to the public that you are trying to unravel Brexit? Not at
:22:37. > :22:39.all. We have accepted the outcome of the referendum and we are leaving
:22:40. > :22:47.the European Union. Ms McDonnell, thank you. John McDonnell there.
:22:48. > :22:48.What do Labour's tactics, mean for its chances of progress?
:22:49. > :22:52.Our Political Editor, Nick Watt, is here.
:22:53. > :23:00.Mix, what exactly are Her Majesty is opposition up to, do you think? At
:23:01. > :23:03.what level they are playing a game that is intended to an seat Theresa
:23:04. > :23:07.May, but they would also say that they are not trying to block Brexit
:23:08. > :23:12.but they are trying to fashion a different sort of Brexit. But what
:23:13. > :23:15.is interesting about that Labour announcement is that they are
:23:16. > :23:20.prepared to vote against this Bill at its second reading in September
:23:21. > :23:23.and major changes are introduced, that has emboldened the so-called
:23:24. > :23:27.soft Brexit Conservatives. They now believe that they have the numbers
:23:28. > :23:30.in Parliament to make very serious amendments to the bill when it is
:23:31. > :23:34.considered at committee stage in the autumn. And on top of that, they
:23:35. > :23:39.believe that they can exploit rule number one of the Government Chief
:23:40. > :23:45.Whip Gavin Williams, and that is, never lose a vote in the House of
:23:46. > :23:47.Commons. And what they think is that the mere prospect of defeat in
:23:48. > :23:50.Parliament will persuade the Government behind the scenes to
:23:51. > :23:54.soften its stance in a number of areas. For example, they think the
:23:55. > :23:59.transitional phase after the UK immediately leaves EU, maybe we will
:24:00. > :24:03.get a softening there. And in the future relationship, the Single
:24:04. > :24:06.Market with the customs union and the European Court of Justice, maybe
:24:07. > :24:09.there will be a softening in those areas. Does this really mean, I
:24:10. > :24:15.mean, that is interesting from the Remain's point of view, does it mean
:24:16. > :24:20.the Government's position is even week -- we get to the point that
:24:21. > :24:25.they cannot get through exit legislation? They are potentially
:24:26. > :24:29.weak. It takes just seven Conservative MPs to vote against the
:24:30. > :24:33.Government. If all the opposition parties vote one way, then the
:24:34. > :24:36.Government will be defeated. Also, the Scottish and Welsh Government
:24:37. > :24:40.said today that they are prepared to block this legislation, although it
:24:41. > :24:43.is important to say that it is just by convention, they do not have a
:24:44. > :24:50.legal actual power of veto. But the Government believe it has cards to
:24:51. > :24:54.play. To the soft Brexit Tories, you may think that Jeremy Corbyn is a
:24:55. > :24:59.friend on this but he is a Ben Wright Eurosceptic who is involved
:25:00. > :25:02.in a simple power play to bring down Theresa May. Do you really want to
:25:03. > :25:07.be part of that? Add to the Labour Party, ministers are saying, with
:25:08. > :25:10.your tactics you may get a nice reception on those areas, remain
:25:11. > :25:15.areas that voted in Labour MPs, but don't forget those traditional
:25:16. > :25:18.Labour areas that voted Lees. Nick, thank you.
:25:19. > :25:20.Liu Xiaobo - Chinese dissident and Nobel Peace Prize winner -
:25:21. > :25:25.In his life, the authorities tried to muzzle him.
:25:26. > :25:29.He was serving an 11-year prison term - one of many
:25:30. > :25:34.since the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989.
:25:35. > :25:36.In his death, leaders, friends, writers around the world,
:25:37. > :25:42.One of them is a Chinese writer Diane Wei Liang,
:25:43. > :25:59.Welcome, thank you for joining us. Take us back, Diane, if you can, to
:26:00. > :26:08.the time of Tiananmen Square and the sort of figure that Liu was for you?
:26:09. > :26:17.Well, I knew Liu Xiaobo before Tiananmen through his writing. He is
:26:18. > :26:24.a poet, and he's written about reflections, on China and the
:26:25. > :26:30.Chinese system. And at Tiananmen, the students were there since May of
:26:31. > :26:34.that year. And Liu Xiaobo came later and joint in the protests. At that
:26:35. > :26:40.time, we did not understand his wisdom. On the June the 4th, when it
:26:41. > :26:46.was clear the government was going to crack down on the Tiananmen
:26:47. > :26:54.protesters. The talk was, as you can understand, being very young, was to
:26:55. > :27:02.be ready to die for the country. And it was to the credit of Liu Xiaobo
:27:03. > :27:06.and the others, older, wiser individuals, that he negotiated a
:27:07. > :27:13.safe passage for students to leave Tiananmen Square on June before. So,
:27:14. > :27:17.for many protesters -- June the 4th. We owe our lives to Liu Xiaobo.
:27:18. > :27:21.Goodness, how many people, lives do you think could have been saved by
:27:22. > :27:27.his wife council, I assume is how you felt it? Absolutely thousands --
:27:28. > :27:29.his wise counsel. There were thousands of protesters who still
:27:30. > :27:38.remained in Tiananmen Square. And Liu Xiaobo and others negotiated
:27:39. > :27:42.safe passage. And most importantly, convinced the students to withdraw
:27:43. > :27:49.from Tiananmen Square. How do you think he was treated in his time in
:27:50. > :27:53.China? Obviously famous around the world, but actually in China, maybe
:27:54. > :27:57.for very obvious reasons, not as well-known. How did the Chinese
:27:58. > :28:03.authorities deal with him, post-Tiananmen Square? After
:28:04. > :28:08.Tiananmen, for a period, he was allowed to write, and although his
:28:09. > :28:17.job was taken away, he lost his lectureship at Beijing University,
:28:18. > :28:21.he kept on writing. And he -- his books, unfortunately, were banned in
:28:22. > :28:29.China. And most Chinese do not know who he was. In a way, his impact in
:28:30. > :28:33.China was minimum. But his writing, in some ways, I think it should be
:28:34. > :28:38.one of his legacy is that they have been published. In the West, they
:28:39. > :28:44.are published. In the Chinese language in Taiwan. And they
:28:45. > :28:48.summarise his views of nonviolence, of reflection. Liu Xiaobo was a soft
:28:49. > :28:55.speaking intellectual. His work was very much on reflection. And his
:28:56. > :29:02.slogans, titles of books, include, We Have No Enemies And We Do Not
:29:03. > :29:07.Have Hatred Will Stop and he has very much call for a rethink of what
:29:08. > :29:12.Chinese society should be and what can be. Do you think that receiving
:29:13. > :29:16.the Nobel Peace Prize was something which then protected him against the
:29:17. > :29:17.authorities? I mean, how would something like that be viewed by the
:29:18. > :29:28.Chinese authorities? Many people who grew up in China
:29:29. > :29:36.during the Communist time, winning the Nobel Prize was the time that
:29:37. > :29:40.sealed his fate. Winning the prize petted him as an individual against
:29:41. > :29:45.the state and the state is always all-powerful. That is the struggle
:29:46. > :29:52.Liu Xiaobo had very little chance of winning. The Chinese state got more
:29:53. > :30:01.aggressive against dissidents at the moment, is there a record getting
:30:02. > :30:08.worse? For the past 30 years, the Chinese state is extremely powerful
:30:09. > :30:15.and for individuals like Liu Xiaobo, whose work in writing books and
:30:16. > :30:24.criticisms and signing a petition, called chapter 08, signed by a few
:30:25. > :30:28.thousand people and was never published and the crackdown is very
:30:29. > :30:33.heavy-handed and this is something that always seems to me to be
:30:34. > :30:43.incompetent civil that the state would want to treat an individual as
:30:44. > :30:47.such. But this is what marks China is a different system, they do not
:30:48. > :30:50.tolerate dissident voices. Thank you very much for coming on tonight.
:30:51. > :30:52.It's the world's biggest oil company, and it could be
:30:53. > :31:03.SaudiArmaco is Saudi Arabia's national oil company,
:31:04. > :31:06.and it could be coming to London in what would be the biggest
:31:07. > :31:09.But, controversially, we might need to change our
:31:10. > :31:11.regulations here to make such a lucrative deal possible.
:31:12. > :31:13.Our Business Editor, Helen Thomas, is here.
:31:14. > :31:17.Helen, this is a pretty heady mix of high finance and politics -
:31:18. > :31:33.It might not be immediately obvious to viewers why this is important.
:31:34. > :31:37.Tell us why this matters. This is the crown jewel of Saudi Arabia,
:31:38. > :31:42.generating 70% of government revenues and it is operated
:31:43. > :31:48.basically as an arm of the state, it has built schools, hospitals, sports
:31:49. > :31:52.arenas, very unusual, it is also enormous, if they get the valuation
:31:53. > :32:00.we are talking about, it would be around 2.5 times the size of Apple.
:32:01. > :32:05.London Stock Exchange is competing with New York to be the main
:32:06. > :32:11.locations for this listing and today the market regulators proposed rule
:32:12. > :32:15.changes that as it just so happens, would be very helpful if you were a
:32:16. > :32:20.large government-controlled company looking at London. Given Brexit and
:32:21. > :32:26.that we striking out for this new world, you feel that London might be
:32:27. > :32:30.looking at loosening regulations to make her seem more attractive? That
:32:31. > :32:36.we're going to become the Singapore of Europe? What the regulator said
:32:37. > :32:39.today is they want to create this new category of listing, a premium
:32:40. > :32:46.listing but without all of the rules that used to be required. For a
:32:47. > :32:49.company like Saudi Aramco, you can get this premium prestige badge but
:32:50. > :32:53.without all of the rules attached and remember, earlier this year
:32:54. > :32:57.Theresa May did go to Saudi Arabia as part of London's lobbying efforts
:32:58. > :33:01.but I will give you both sides of the argument. Some would say that
:33:02. > :33:08.London is a very global market, it is in our interests to attract big,
:33:09. > :33:12.interesting companies. This would be lucrative, lots of fees on offer and
:33:13. > :33:16.investors don't have to buy the shares, they can look and see what
:33:17. > :33:20.the company says and make their own decision. But there is this worry
:33:21. > :33:27.that we have seen this movie before, London had a string of scandals
:33:28. > :33:32.involving foreign owned companies and there is a feeling among some
:33:33. > :33:37.investors that it is just bad practice to tweak the rules so
:33:38. > :33:41.obviously to suit one particular company that it just sends the wrong
:33:42. > :33:44.message about how London operates. Fantastic, thank you very much. We
:33:45. > :33:47.will be watching how that develops. "He was often gone
:33:48. > :33:48.but never forgotten". You may not remember Peter Perrett -
:33:49. > :33:51.lead singer of 70s rock band The Only Ones and writer of what's
:33:52. > :33:54.been described as arguably the greatest rock single ever
:33:55. > :33:59.recorded, and there's much It was thought he'd chosen drugs
:34:00. > :34:07.over everything else - but now he's back with his first
:34:08. > :34:12.solo album, and to critical acclaim. So, how did he resurrect
:34:13. > :34:14.himself and his career? Our Culture Editor Stephen Smith
:34:15. > :34:17.went to meet him for his first TV Is this your stage gear,
:34:18. > :34:28.by the way, or do you... Umm, It's what I got
:34:29. > :34:30.up in, you know. I suppose some people
:34:31. > :34:36.will be amazed to see you. You know, I surprised myself
:34:37. > :34:39.by actually returning Accompanied by his sons,
:34:40. > :34:59.Peter Perrett is back, with perhaps the most unexpected
:35:00. > :35:08.solo album of the year. It has the political bite and dark
:35:09. > :35:11.sardonic humour that his patient # Just like everybody else I'm
:35:12. > :35:23.in love with Kim Kardashian. # She's taking over from JLo
:35:24. > :35:29.as my number one #. If it provokes thought,
:35:30. > :35:32.then that's an added bonus. But really I just wanted
:35:33. > :35:36.to make people laugh. Because laughter is extremely
:35:37. > :35:40.therapeutic, especially in times Many rock fans adore Perrett
:35:41. > :35:49.for Another Girl, Another Planet, which he wrote and performed
:35:50. > :35:52.in the 70s with his then It's been covered
:35:53. > :35:57.by many other acts. To some, it's the best
:35:58. > :35:59.rock song ever. # I could kill, but I
:36:00. > :36:06.don't care about it. # And stand up straight
:36:07. > :36:12.and tall and tell about it. # I think I'm on another
:36:13. > :36:15.world with you. You know, it's been described
:36:16. > :36:26.as an adrenaline rush And, yeah, it's probably the most
:36:27. > :36:32.difficult song for me to perform, which is unfortunate,
:36:33. > :36:33.because it's like my most # I think I'm on another
:36:34. > :36:39.world with you. You know, there's three
:36:40. > :36:44.minutes of classic rock music, and I'm thinking,
:36:45. > :36:47.you know, it's perfect. I don't think it's the best
:36:48. > :36:49.song I've ever written, but it's probably the best record
:36:50. > :36:54.I've ever made. In an admittedly crowded field,
:36:55. > :36:58.Perrett has been noticeable among rock musicians as a recluse
:36:59. > :37:01.and user of drugs. Apart from brief forays
:37:02. > :37:05.into recording and performing, he's gone missing for much
:37:06. > :37:08.of the last four decades. Where have you been,
:37:09. > :37:12.your fans will want to know. And what have you been doing
:37:13. > :37:14.in the years when we haven't I suppose it was like
:37:15. > :37:21.spiritual research, You know, there's certain
:37:22. > :37:34.security and comfort. One fairly lurid account described
:37:35. > :37:37.you as being sequestered in a crumbling Gothic mansion
:37:38. > :37:41.in Forest Hill. And there was a certain amount
:37:42. > :37:48.of drug dealing going on there? You know, you live
:37:49. > :37:58.in the black economy. But I guess it wasn't
:37:59. > :38:14.without cost, and you would know I believe you missed
:38:15. > :38:17.both your parents' funerals. Obviously it's not good to look
:38:18. > :38:28.back and regret things, but obviously you can't help
:38:29. > :38:33.thinking about things. But all you can do is learn
:38:34. > :38:36.from that and appreciate the people And try to give them
:38:37. > :38:42.as much love as you can. Let's talk about the vagaries
:38:43. > :38:55.of the rock life. One minute you're flying
:38:56. > :38:59.to Rio on Concorde. Sometime later you're saying
:39:00. > :39:01.that your publishing rights You weren't earning so much
:39:02. > :39:07.from publishing that I'm not allowed to talk
:39:08. > :39:11.about benefits, you know, with this government,
:39:12. > :39:14.it's dangerous territory. Because that's the worst thing,
:39:15. > :39:18.when they try and stop I was on benefits, and we did
:39:19. > :39:26.the Jools Holland show in 2008. And I tried to explain that just
:39:27. > :39:43.doing the Jools Holland Show, you know, because we were unsigned
:39:44. > :39:46.at the time, they actually paid But you don't actually
:39:47. > :39:49.make any money. Most people just go on there
:39:50. > :39:51.because they want to be on the Jools Holland Show,
:39:52. > :39:54.because it's the only show. They didn't believe me,
:39:55. > :39:58.so there's this whole investigation. And it's a stressful thing,
:39:59. > :40:00.you know, I really identify with poor people, because they know
:40:01. > :40:03.what it's like to be part # No one can love me
:40:04. > :40:19.the way that you can. Perrett's new record includes this
:40:20. > :40:22.love song to his wife, Xena, He's been clean and sober
:40:23. > :40:26.for eight years now. Taking things to the extreme,
:40:27. > :40:32.where there was an imminent possibility of the end
:40:33. > :40:37.of our existence. Especially my wife, who became
:40:38. > :40:43.a lot more damaged by it, you know, by the consumption,
:40:44. > :40:50.than I was. I realised that we owed it
:40:51. > :40:52.to the people that cared about us do, you know,
:40:53. > :40:56.have one last attempt. # If I lived my whole life
:40:57. > :41:01.again I'd choose you. You know, I feel like a total
:41:02. > :41:07.newcomer, so it's all new to me. And I'm enjoying it even more
:41:08. > :41:10.than I did in the 70s, because I'm taking it all in,
:41:11. > :41:17.there's no distractions. You know, fully focused on just
:41:18. > :41:19.enjoying that moment, Before we go, the Prime Minister
:41:20. > :41:30.revealed today in an interview with the BBC's Emma Barnett
:41:31. > :41:33.that she cried when she saw the exit Of course, the shedding of tears
:41:34. > :41:39.is not a new political phenomenon. Over the years, whether
:41:40. > :41:41.from personal grief, reversals of fortune or moments
:41:42. > :41:46.of national celebration, many # Too many teardrops
:41:47. > :42:16.for one heart to be crying. I just don't want to
:42:17. > :42:20.see us fall backwards. # You're way on top
:42:21. > :42:31.now since you left me. # You're always laughing
:42:32. > :42:38.way down at me. We've got some rain on the way
:42:39. > :42:42.tonight across northern areas