13/07/2017 Newsnight


Analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines, with Kamal Ahmed. Including government review of building regulations, John McDonnell, and Liu Xiaobo remembered.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 13/07/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Grenfell - the regulations not fit for the job.


It wasn't just horrific flames but poisonous gases that killed.


Could changing rules on cladding have contributed?


So, this small amount of material, if it


burned in a house or flat, would be enough to fill the whole house or


Enough to stop you escaping and kill you.


We'll be asking, just how long will it take before


we can trust the rules will improve safety and not undermine it?


As that Great EU Repeal Bill is finally published, we ask,


I'm hoping the government are going to let us amend our lot of this bill


and on that basis we might be able to support it.


But we can't at the moment because it is so


# I could kill, but I don't care about it.


And we catch up with the man who wrote this song.


What have you been doing in the years when we haven't


Hmm, I suppose it was like spiritual research,


Grenfell is one of those events that changes attitudes and opens our eyes


to subjects that before the horrific events of a month ago


were the preserve of experts, bureaucrats and the people -


often ignored - who were living every day with risk.


Tonight, Newsnight has new evidence that building regulations


We reveal that the Government is preparing a major review


of those regulations, and show that honourable efforts


to make buildings more energy efficient could have inadvertently


Tell us what this review is going to look at. The big thing is to


understand is the government has been looking at local authority


housing and social housing and the cladding and what came up is the


astounded to discover that the rule book they thought they had written


is simply not is what is being practised on the ground, there is a


gap between where they expect standards to be and where they are.


This review is working out whether the rule book is a problem or


implementation of the enforcement? All of these things are on the


table. The big issue is, how long will this take? People are living in


these flats all around the country. Local authorities are dealing with


short-term issues but longer term the government will have to do


something about this and this review will clash with the judicial enquiry


and the police investigations and they will be asking the same


questions so it will take a long time and we have made a film today


that explains just how troubled and difficult rebuilding regulations now


really are. The Grenfell Tower fire had a lot of causes, direct and


indirect but the problems here and those discovered in other tower


blocks reflect that building rules have not kept pace with construction


methods. The government have prioritised insulation over fire


safety and it is quite a tempting proposition because insulation


affects every building, fires only affect a very small number. Thermal


efficiency is the part of the building codes that have changed


most in the last 40 years. After the oil shock in the 1970s and more


recently because of concerns about climate change and fuel poverty.


Quite rightly, the rules have aimed for ever warmer homes. What do those


changes over the last few decades mean in practice? Here is a thought


experiment that might help you get your head around this. Suppose you


have a bare brick wall adjective do something to get it past a building


inspector concerned about thermal efficiency? In the 1960s all you


needed to do was the equivalent of sticking a very thin sheet, just 15


millimetres of old-fashioned mineral bull insulation, and you would be


fine but standards have risen and by the 1990s you would need to stick


around 90 millimetres to the wall to get it past the inspector. These


days, you need to stick around 120 millimetres to the wall to get it


through that inspection. The thing is, builders don't build to the


minimum standards and at Grenfell Tower, the cladding introduced a


level of insulation that was equivalent in our experiment did 200


millimetres of insulation to the wall. The Grenfell planning


application explained... There is another reason why


developers have gone well beyond the basic requirements for energy


efficiency. At Grenfell Tower, the renovation actually got funded in


part by something called the energy company obligation, our public


policy intervention by the government which forces energy


companies to put money into making older buildings more energy


efficient. In the Grenfell Tower case, that money went into a new


district heating system, not insulation. But if you go down the


road, that is the Ed Woodward 's estate and in that case the


eco-money went straight into a new noncombustible insulation on the


outside of the towers. These policies, regulations and


initiatives are sharpened up incentives for builders to try new


insulators, like so-called PIR plastic foams, the insulation at


Grenfell Tower. It is a better insulator and therefore it is going


to give better heat economy for the same thickness of material or the


same weight of maternal. It is cheaper and it is lighter so it is


going to require less material to hold it in place and it is going to


require less cost in terms of lifting it up to whenever you are


going to install it. But it obviously has this big drawback in


terms of fire safety but the phone is organic based and is combustible.


The rules advise that insulation in tall buildings should not be


flammable but in the lead to is, I rule was introduced stating you can


use such combustible materials on a tall building if it passes the test.


You have to replicate the design you want to install and then set a fire


under it. But here is a video produced by insulation manufacturer


for its customers. As an alternative to a full test, it highlights a


desktop study. If an engineer believes something similar to your


design has already been tested, you don't need to test yours. Newsnight


has already revealed how some engineers really stretch the


definition of what is similar in these desktop studies to avoid


further tests. For example, we have shown how tests using ceramic tiles


have been used to justify avoiding testing with aluminium panels. Two


different substances. We have revealed how some building


inspection agencies have been routinely signing on using


combustible insulation and exterior cladding without even so much as a


desktop study. So there has been too little testing and the ones that


have been done are confidential. The trouble is some manufacturers we


know have an extensive library of the full-scale tests to prove their


material. Others, it is difficult to discern whether they have or not so


reliant on the way they market the product to us. If you see a claim


saying this product is suitable above 18 metres and then you read


governing authorities' literature endorsing that, we will believe that


is suitable. One company that ensures industrial buildings got


worried about the tests themselves. We have seen several fires involving


combustible insulation and we were concerned that the laboratory tests


on this type of plastic insulation did not reflect the risk in the real


world. Normal lab test installation is installed to perfect standards


but if you years ago the insurer commissioned tests on this widely


made insulation type installed with real-world, normal workmanship. The


traditional insulation held out for one hour. But the combustible PIR


insulation did not. The fire monitoring equipment was destroyed


in about 70 minutes by the heat. A much worse performance than previous


lab tests suggested. There is also a problem with toxicity. The trouble


but this material is that it has got a lot of nitrogen in it and when it


burns, it produces both carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide and so


the small amount of material, if it burned in a house or a flat, would


fill the whole flat or house with toxic smoke, enough to stop the


escaping and killed you. Hospital discharge papers from one Grenfell


resident seen by Newsnight showed they had cyanide poisoning.


The British Rigid Urethane Foam Manufacturers' Association said...


They also stated that the design of the


The government has been shocked to learn this month how far far


standards are from where they had expected. That is why they believe a


review is now necessary. Chris Cook, there.


Jonathan O'Neill is Managing Director of the Fire


He joins us from Worcester. Thank you for joining us. The testing


regime is obviously flawed. You presumably welcomed this


announcement that there will be this review and overhaul? Well, we have


been calling for a review for some time so if a review is announced, it


is very welcome news. And very refreshing that actually, your


report has shown some of the problems are with the testing regime


because as the film rightly pointed out, the tests are done on perfect


insulation and we know that actually, the insulation is not


perfectly encapsulated all the time and the test does not include


windows or penetrations in the cladding and we would like to see a


more realistic test, assuming we get a building regulations review as


soon as we can. Isn't the problem that you have raised these issues


time and time again and does not seem to have been much action? Why


do you think that was? I think there has been a real difficulty. The Fire


and Rescue Service have been so successful in reducing the number of


fire deaths and injuries over the last decade that I think there was a


genuine belief by ministers and others that the fire problem had


gone away. In reality, we knew there were more combustible materials


being introduced to the building process and that required... It was


likely to require a different fire dynamic and that is what we were


concerned about and that is why we are asking for building regulations


reviews. You say that more combustible materials were being


added to the cladding. Why? It is not just cladding, it is throughout


the building process. There are different insulation requirements


that have been introduced over recent years and the easy option is


to be putting in the lighter, more combustible materials. The problem


stems from a term called limited, stability, in reality we have


combustible and noncombustible and it should be that simple, when you


add terms like Limited, stability, it adds a grey area of


interpretation and as a report said, that is where problems can occur and


that has been a real concern. For high occupancies, noncombustible


materials must be the absolute priority. The question I asked Chris


before we saw that film was about the issue of speed. People are


living in blocks with this type of material in them across the country.


How quickly can a review of this type, with such congregated


regulations, changing those regulations, how quickly and with


what speed than any review take place and can changes be put in


place so people are safer? Well, building regulations offer new build


and refurbishment and we are where we are the building environment as


it stands. There is a safety case and the government are doing all


they can to understand how large this problem is with social housing.


And the tests they have commissioned will go some way to solving that


problem the issue we have got is, what are the problem insulation is


and how to be fully encapsulated them so they do not cause any


problem? As the tests have shown, fully encapsulated insulation can


perform very well in a test. I am assuming that these things could


take years to study and analyse. Is that the sort of time frame?


Typically, and I sat on a number of different reviews over the last


couple of decades, it normally takes 18 months to around two years for a


review and we would be very keen to urge the government to start that


review immediately and things can be short cut quickly, tests can be


commissioned, it depends on the resources the government are


prepared to throw at us. And also, to be honest, what evidence we can


make available. It is sometimes difficult to get ahold of government


statistics which can make a big difference to make the changes that


are required. It's about trying to read gain trust


and faith in the regulations which have been so damaged by the events


one month ago. Without a doubt. We have been calling for the Government


to review the basis of those regulations. At the moment they are


life safety regulations, and quite likely serve. We don't have any


building section within it. We had the local building act, which gave


an element of building protection and resilience to the built


environment. That was repealed under the last government. And so those


types of protections, which are common throughout the world, just


don't exist in UK Government building regulations any more.


Jonathan O'Neil, thank you very much for joining us.


We did ask the Government for an interview, but they told us that


nobody was available. Today, it wasn't just Brexit


and the publication of that excitingly titled European Union


(Withdrawal) Bill that was the centre of attention -


what we used to know The Brexit effect on the economy


also hoved into view as the Office for Budget Responsibility -


the OBR, the Government's official economic watchdog -


published its first ever And it certainly said


there were a few - high levels of debt,


a continuing deficit, an economy now less able to deal


with shocks than it was before Is this really the time


to be ending austerity? The OBR called for public


finance "prudence", and I asked John McDonnell,


Labour's Shadow Chancellor, if borrowing more now would really


make for a strong and stable economy, and whether being prepared


to vote against the Brexit Bill was really an attempt to derail


the whole process. If you look at the underlying


references that are coming from the OBR, it's about seven years of


austerity. It's about productivity stagnating from nearly a decade. Low


wages, wages falling back as well. Business investment growth falling


back. There's a sort of cocktail of desperate elements within the


economy now. That puts the economy at risk. One thing within the OBR


report which was interesting, they touch on the Grenfell fire. Do you


think there is going to be a cost attached to putting in proper


policies that can deal with things, the outcome of things like that?


From what we so -- from what we have heard so far, it could be


significant and we have to recognise that. The overall issue, how do we


get our housing programme back in line? Robert Chote suggested, some


would say, from his OBR report, but actually the prudent management of


the public finances, austerity, if you'd like, is actually a good thing


to do when you have very high levels of debt. Use till have a deficit all


of these years after the financial crisis -- you still have a deficit.


Actually it is time to fix the roof while the sun is shining. We are a


whirlwind at the moment. Lack of investment, austerity measures,


which have largely hit people who need the money, who would spend and


help grow, and consumer debt increasing. It is just pure


management. Can we move on to the issue of Brexit? We have had the


publication of the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill, as it is now


called. You have immediately come so too will not support it. Is there a


danger for you that the public who voted to leave the European Union


will look at Parliament on the, you're simply blocking the public


will? The public is expecting us to take back control to Europe and then


give it to the executive, to the government. By Henry VIII powers. Is


that your big issues? If you hand to the executive, we have taken control


from Europe and given it to the Government and there is no


parliamentary discussion or control, that can't be right. We are saying


that we need a different type of Bill. I hope the Government will


hope us and a lot of this bill. We can't at the moment because it is so


undemocratic. I think they should withdraw this and bring something


forward. If not, we'll amend it as best we can. What is more important


to you, Mr McDonnell, getting rid of the Prime Minister or getting out of


the European Union? Look, the most important thing for me is about the


future of the country. At the moment, the problem that we've got


is that the future of our country is being held back because we have a


weak or no Government in power at the moment. They are in office, but


not in power. You can see my point that by frustrating the Brexit...


Oh, no, we are not... Theresa May has to resign and you get the


election that you want. Theresa May's Dever registration is more


important. You are wrong, missing type to get. The most important


thing for us is the good governance of this country so quite we have had


an election, a referendum. And you lot down here in Westminster cannot


get anything done. We have said time and time again that on the number of


issues we can cooperate but we cannot support what they are doing


at the moment because it is undermining our economy and ability


to get this new relationship with Europe that we need. You're not


going to get those kind of concessions, so Brexit will not


happen with any speed whatsoever. I think this Government is falling


apart rapidly on the Conservative Party is splitting about five


different ways. On that basis, the only responsible thing for them to


do in the interest of the country is to stand aside and let some deals


form a government. You support being out of the Single Market when we


leave the EU. We want tariff free access to the market itself and we


want to negotiate that, we think we can. You agree with Kier Starmer


when he says that leaving your item is not a good idea, the European


Union's nuclear safety agency would not be a good idea for the UK. There


is a whole series of bodies like that that we've got to maintain


either a membership or a relationship of. What people may not


understand is that the Article 50 process says, we would leave those


agencies. You backed by Article 50 treble. So surely you are changing


your mind between triggering Article 50 and think, actually, we want to


stay in bits of it. There is a whole series of consequences that we need


to examine. That includes these individual agencies, and there are


dozens of them that we have to go through. It might well be those


individual agencies that we maintain a relationship of some sort or


maintain a membership of. That would be part of the negotiations. Why did


you vote for Article 51 and made it clear that we should be leaving


Euratom. It started the negotiations of... That was more important? It


is, we need some form of stability with these relationships because it


will give stability to our economy. As the OBR pointed out today, like


stability will have a long-term impact on our economy. Doesn't it


seem to the public that you are trying to unravel Brexit? Not at


all. We have accepted the outcome of the referendum and we are leaving


the European Union. Ms McDonnell, thank you. John McDonnell there.


What do Labour's tactics, mean for its chances of progress?


Our Political Editor, Nick Watt, is here.


Mix, what exactly are Her Majesty is opposition up to, do you think? At


what level they are playing a game that is intended to an seat Theresa


May, but they would also say that they are not trying to block Brexit


but they are trying to fashion a different sort of Brexit. But what


is interesting about that Labour announcement is that they are


prepared to vote against this Bill at its second reading in September


and major changes are introduced, that has emboldened the so-called


soft Brexit Conservatives. They now believe that they have the numbers


in Parliament to make very serious amendments to the bill when it is


considered at committee stage in the autumn. And on top of that, they


believe that they can exploit rule number one of the Government Chief


Whip Gavin Williams, and that is, never lose a vote in the House of


Commons. And what they think is that the mere prospect of defeat in


Parliament will persuade the Government behind the scenes to


soften its stance in a number of areas. For example, they think the


transitional phase after the UK immediately leaves EU, maybe we will


get a softening there. And in the future relationship, the Single


Market with the customs union and the European Court of Justice, maybe


there will be a softening in those areas. Does this really mean, I


mean, that is interesting from the Remain's point of view, does it mean


the Government's position is even week -- we get to the point that


they cannot get through exit legislation? They are potentially


weak. It takes just seven Conservative MPs to vote against the


Government. If all the opposition parties vote one way, then the


Government will be defeated. Also, the Scottish and Welsh Government


said today that they are prepared to block this legislation, although it


is important to say that it is just by convention, they do not have a


legal actual power of veto. But the Government believe it has cards to


play. To the soft Brexit Tories, you may think that Jeremy Corbyn is a


friend on this but he is a Ben Wright Eurosceptic who is involved


in a simple power play to bring down Theresa May. Do you really want to


be part of that? Add to the Labour Party, ministers are saying, with


your tactics you may get a nice reception on those areas, remain


areas that voted in Labour MPs, but don't forget those traditional


Labour areas that voted Lees. Nick, thank you.


Liu Xiaobo - Chinese dissident and Nobel Peace Prize winner -


In his life, the authorities tried to muzzle him.


He was serving an 11-year prison term - one of many


since the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989.


In his death, leaders, friends, writers around the world,


One of them is a Chinese writer Diane Wei Liang,


Welcome, thank you for joining us. Take us back, Diane, if you can, to


the time of Tiananmen Square and the sort of figure that Liu was for you?


Well, I knew Liu Xiaobo before Tiananmen through his writing. He is


a poet, and he's written about reflections, on China and the


Chinese system. And at Tiananmen, the students were there since May of


that year. And Liu Xiaobo came later and joint in the protests. At that


time, we did not understand his wisdom. On the June the 4th, when it


was clear the government was going to crack down on the Tiananmen


protesters. The talk was, as you can understand, being very young, was to


be ready to die for the country. And it was to the credit of Liu Xiaobo


and the others, older, wiser individuals, that he negotiated a


safe passage for students to leave Tiananmen Square on June before. So,


for many protesters -- June the 4th. We owe our lives to Liu Xiaobo.


Goodness, how many people, lives do you think could have been saved by


his wife council, I assume is how you felt it? Absolutely thousands --


his wise counsel. There were thousands of protesters who still


remained in Tiananmen Square. And Liu Xiaobo and others negotiated


safe passage. And most importantly, convinced the students to withdraw


from Tiananmen Square. How do you think he was treated in his time in


China? Obviously famous around the world, but actually in China, maybe


for very obvious reasons, not as well-known. How did the Chinese


authorities deal with him, post-Tiananmen Square? After


Tiananmen, for a period, he was allowed to write, and although his


job was taken away, he lost his lectureship at Beijing University,


he kept on writing. And he -- his books, unfortunately, were banned in


China. And most Chinese do not know who he was. In a way, his impact in


China was minimum. But his writing, in some ways, I think it should be


one of his legacy is that they have been published. In the West, they


are published. In the Chinese language in Taiwan. And they


summarise his views of nonviolence, of reflection. Liu Xiaobo was a soft


speaking intellectual. His work was very much on reflection. And his


slogans, titles of books, include, We Have No Enemies And We Do Not


Have Hatred Will Stop and he has very much call for a rethink of what


Chinese society should be and what can be. Do you think that receiving


the Nobel Peace Prize was something which then protected him against the


authorities? I mean, how would something like that be viewed by the


Chinese authorities? Many people who grew up in China


during the Communist time, winning the Nobel Prize was the time that


sealed his fate. Winning the prize petted him as an individual against


the state and the state is always all-powerful. That is the struggle


Liu Xiaobo had very little chance of winning. The Chinese state got more


aggressive against dissidents at the moment, is there a record getting


worse? For the past 30 years, the Chinese state is extremely powerful


and for individuals like Liu Xiaobo, whose work in writing books and


criticisms and signing a petition, called chapter 08, signed by a few


thousand people and was never published and the crackdown is very


heavy-handed and this is something that always seems to me to be


incompetent civil that the state would want to treat an individual as


such. But this is what marks China is a different system, they do not


tolerate dissident voices. Thank you very much for coming on tonight.


It's the world's biggest oil company, and it could be


SaudiArmaco is Saudi Arabia's national oil company,


and it could be coming to London in what would be the biggest


But, controversially, we might need to change our


regulations here to make such a lucrative deal possible.


Our Business Editor, Helen Thomas, is here.


Helen, this is a pretty heady mix of high finance and politics -


It might not be immediately obvious to viewers why this is important.


Tell us why this matters. This is the crown jewel of Saudi Arabia,


generating 70% of government revenues and it is operated


basically as an arm of the state, it has built schools, hospitals, sports


arenas, very unusual, it is also enormous, if they get the valuation


we are talking about, it would be around 2.5 times the size of Apple.


London Stock Exchange is competing with New York to be the main


locations for this listing and today the market regulators proposed rule


changes that as it just so happens, would be very helpful if you were a


large government-controlled company looking at London. Given Brexit and


that we striking out for this new world, you feel that London might be


looking at loosening regulations to make her seem more attractive? That


we're going to become the Singapore of Europe? What the regulator said


today is they want to create this new category of listing, a premium


listing but without all of the rules that used to be required. For a


company like Saudi Aramco, you can get this premium prestige badge but


without all of the rules attached and remember, earlier this year


Theresa May did go to Saudi Arabia as part of London's lobbying efforts


but I will give you both sides of the argument. Some would say that


London is a very global market, it is in our interests to attract big,


interesting companies. This would be lucrative, lots of fees on offer and


investors don't have to buy the shares, they can look and see what


the company says and make their own decision. But there is this worry


that we have seen this movie before, London had a string of scandals


involving foreign owned companies and there is a feeling among some


investors that it is just bad practice to tweak the rules so


obviously to suit one particular company that it just sends the wrong


message about how London operates. Fantastic, thank you very much. We


will be watching how that develops. "He was often gone


but never forgotten". You may not remember Peter Perrett -


lead singer of 70s rock band The Only Ones and writer of what's


been described as arguably the greatest rock single ever


recorded, and there's much It was thought he'd chosen drugs


over everything else - but now he's back with his first


solo album, and to critical acclaim. So, how did he resurrect


himself and his career? Our Culture Editor Stephen Smith


went to meet him for his first TV Is this your stage gear,


by the way, or do you... Umm, It's what I got


up in, you know. I suppose some people


will be amazed to see you. You know, I surprised myself


by actually returning Accompanied by his sons,


Peter Perrett is back, with perhaps the most unexpected


solo album of the year. It has the political bite and dark


sardonic humour that his patient # Just like everybody else I'm


in love with Kim Kardashian. # She's taking over from JLo


as my number one #. If it provokes thought,


then that's an added bonus. But really I just wanted


to make people laugh. Because laughter is extremely


therapeutic, especially in times Many rock fans adore Perrett


for Another Girl, Another Planet, which he wrote and performed


in the 70s with his then It's been covered


by many other acts. To some, it's the best


rock song ever. # I could kill, but I


don't care about it. # And stand up straight


and tall and tell about it. # I think I'm on another


world with you. You know, it's been described


as an adrenaline rush And, yeah, it's probably the most


difficult song for me to perform, which is unfortunate,


because it's like my most # I think I'm on another


world with you. You know, there's three


minutes of classic rock music, and I'm thinking,


you know, it's perfect. I don't think it's the best


song I've ever written, but it's probably the best record


I've ever made. In an admittedly crowded field,


Perrett has been noticeable among rock musicians as a recluse


and user of drugs. Apart from brief forays


into recording and performing, he's gone missing for much


of the last four decades. Where have you been,


your fans will want to know. And what have you been doing


in the years when we haven't I suppose it was like


spiritual research, You know, there's certain


security and comfort. One fairly lurid account described


you as being sequestered in a crumbling Gothic mansion


in Forest Hill. And there was a certain amount


of drug dealing going on there? You know, you live


in the black economy. But I guess it wasn't


without cost, and you would know I believe you missed


both your parents' funerals. Obviously it's not good to look


back and regret things, but obviously you can't help


thinking about things. But all you can do is learn


from that and appreciate the people And try to give them


as much love as you can. Let's talk about the vagaries


of the rock life. One minute you're flying


to Rio on Concorde. Sometime later you're saying


that your publishing rights You weren't earning so much


from publishing that I'm not allowed to talk


about benefits, you know, with this government,


it's dangerous territory. Because that's the worst thing,


when they try and stop I was on benefits, and we did


the Jools Holland show in 2008. And I tried to explain that just


doing the Jools Holland Show, you know, because we were unsigned


at the time, they actually paid But you don't actually


make any money. Most people just go on there


because they want to be on the Jools Holland Show,


because it's the only show. They didn't believe me,


so there's this whole investigation. And it's a stressful thing,


you know, I really identify with poor people, because they know


what it's like to be part # No one can love me


the way that you can. Perrett's new record includes this


love song to his wife, Xena, He's been clean and sober


for eight years now. Taking things to the extreme,


where there was an imminent possibility of the end


of our existence. Especially my wife, who became


a lot more damaged by it, you know, by the consumption,


than I was. I realised that we owed it


to the people that cared about us do, you know,


have one last attempt. # If I lived my whole life


again I'd choose you. You know, I feel like a total


newcomer, so it's all new to me. And I'm enjoying it even more


than I did in the 70s, because I'm taking it all in,


there's no distractions. You know, fully focused on just


enjoying that moment, Before we go, the Prime Minister


revealed today in an interview with the BBC's Emma Barnett


that she cried when she saw the exit Of course, the shedding of tears


is not a new political phenomenon. Over the years, whether


from personal grief, reversals of fortune or moments


of national celebration, many # Too many teardrops


for one heart to be crying. I just don't want to


see us fall backwards. # You're way on top


now since you left me. # You're always laughing


way down at me. We've got some rain on the way


tonight across northern areas


In-depth investigation and analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines, with Kamal Ahmed.

Including government review of building regulations, John McDonnell, Liu Xiaobo remembered, and will the world's largest oil firm list in UK? Plus The Only Ones' Peter Perrett.

Download Subtitles