With Emily Maitlis. Grenfell and housing, animals and the Tories, the latest on Brexit, and reviews of Star Wars: The Last Jedi.
Browse content similar to 12/12/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
No justice - no peace!
Tonight - the council has allocated
more than £200 million
for Grenfell residents.
So why is it taking so long
to find people new homes?
We have to be patient.
We have to be patient.
And also considering moving
into a place is one thing,
moving into a place
which will have to become your
home is another thing.
So, for me, it's, like, OK,
if I move into a place it has to be
something I can turn
into a home and I'll be
there for the rest of my life.
We'll discuss housing
and the public enquiry
with a solicitor representing 17
families and an expert in how
to run housing like this.
Also tonight, Brexit
will be great for animals -
declared the Environment Secretary
Of course we must do
more, and we will.
We will make sure that in law
there is appropriate protection
for animals which recognises
that they are sentient,
that they can feel pain, and that
it's our responsibility to make
sure their welfare is protected.
Why are the Tories so keen
to prove their love of our
four legged friends.
And what does it say about
the party's political positioning?
The Last Jedi will dominate
the papers tomorrow.
What did they really think
of the latest Star Wars incarnation?
We have the first reviews.
Six months ago, after
the fire at Grenfell Tower,
I interviewed the Prime Minister.
She promised the residents
they would be rehoused
within three weeks.
Two weeks before Christmas,
more than a hundred households
are still in hotel rooms.
So where have things gone wrong?
The council has allotted huge sums
of money for rehousing -
Kensington and CHelsea have set
aside £235 million to secure
accommodation for the people made
homeless by the fire.
So why is it is stalling?
David Grossman reports.
Justice for Grenfell!
Justice for Grenfell!
This protest outside the Council
offices last week was only
a fraction of the size of the ones
in the summer.
They are living a second trauma
because they're not considered
worthy enough to be given housing...
The focus of this is
to demand permanent
new homes for the survivors.
There are still people stuck
in hotels with their children.
Their children are
in a room next door.
It is not an adjoining
room so the children
will sleep with the parents.
So then you may have a family
of five in one room.
Because actually they don't want
their children in the next room,
they want to keep an eye on them.
It is a really horrible way to live.
Christmas is coming,
they're going to spend
Christmas in hotels.
Not much has changed
on the tower itself,
but what has the council done
for the residents who
survived this disaster?
One fact that has hugely complicated
matters for the Council
is that the number of
houses or flats they are
looking for has gone up
by more than 50% since the tragedy.
As groups of people who were housed
in one unit inside the tower have
elected to be rehoused in two
or sometimes more units outside.
That means what was originally
a search for 138 new houses or flats
has become a search for 210.
Of that total just 45 households
are now in new, permanent homes.
54 are in temporary accommodation.
And 111 are still in
That is typically hotel rooms.
That figure includes
He was one of the last people to be
rescued from Grenfell.
He was trapped on the tenth floor
of the burning tower for five hours.
He shared his flat
with his adult son.
They will now be
In terms of finding permanent
accommodation, it's not easy.
And obviously we have
had our assessment with the council,
with my housing officer.
And there are some requirements
that we have requested
and I understand that it takes time
and it takes a little bit of...
We have to be patient.
And also considering that moving
into a place is one thing,
moving into a place which will have
to become your home
is another thing.
So it's like, OK, if I move
into a place, it has to be something
that I can turn into a home.
And I will be there for
the rest of my life.
So therefore I might have to turn
down one, two or three.
I don't know how many.
Are the council putting any pressure
on you to accept anything?
No, you know, they're lately,
for the last two or three months,
they have been very active
in showing, in trying.
And I must say I appreciate that.
But in the sense of pressure, no.
It is understandable that Antonio
and other Grenfell survivors
don't want to be rushed.
According to one housing charity,
this is straining a system not used
to providing choice.
We have a real crisis in affordable
housing in this country.
And we have a social housing system
that doesn't give people any choice.
Once you actually start asking
people what they want,
you then have to deal with the fact
that actually it can't be delivered.
So I think what we are seeing
is a system that is not used
to any element of choice
and is very disempowering.
Suddenly when you're trying
to empower people within that system
and give them some choice,
the system simply can't cope.
To provide choice, the council has
put aside £235 million to buy
new houses and flats
for the survivors of Grenfell Tower.
That works out at £1.7 million
per original household.
This doesn't include the cost
of hotels, new furniture,
resettlement grants and writing off
rent and service charges
in the new homes until June 2019.
These are being paid
for from another budget.
This is the living
space and the kitchen.
And then through here
you've got two bedrooms...
The council showed us this
place that they bought
for a Grenfell survivor.
It's in a low-rise block
of privately owned flats
not far from the tower.
The director of housing wouldn't
tell me what they paid for it,
but similar flats seemed to go
for around £850,000.
We still do have people
in hotels, that's true.
We've got 28 families
with children under 18 in hotels.
Now, 16 of those have accepted
something, so they will be moving
on and we are trying to support them
at the moment to do that
as soon as possible.
But we have got 12 families
who haven't accepted an offer.
So we're working as hard as we can
with them to try and get something
that meets their needs
and their preferences.
Because of what people have been
through, most people want to live
at lower floor levels.
Most people would like
a bit of outside space.
A lot of people want to be
in the North Kensington
area, not everybody.
And we have got to meet all of those
desires with the properties
that we are acquiring.
But that doesn't include residents
of the surrounding blocks
who were evacuated during the fire.
The blocks themselves were undamaged
although the heating and hot water
systems were destroyed.
They have now been replaced and two
thirds of the residents have
returned to their homes.
But 109 households
don't want to go back.
Some of them don't
feel ready to return.
For example until the tower
is wrapped or some of
those kind of decisions.
So what we're saying to those people
is we will rent you a property
in the private rented sector locally
in Kensington and Chelsea
for you to move into whilst you take
stock of what you want to do next.
And then we will work with them
quite intensively over the next few
months to see what they want to do.
Do they want to return home.
Or obviously we have got
a consultation out at the moment
around awarding people points
for priority on the
So actually if they feel
that they can't be on the estate,
that they've got the opportunity
But that is not enough of
an assurance for Thomasina Hessel.
She shared a hotel room with her son
Jesse for six months.
She doesn't want to go back to her
flat near the base of the tower,
but doesn't feel there is enough
certainty of what will happen
in the long-term to move out of this
hotel room into a temporary flat.
They have not made me any
offers, first of all.
And they have made some
of my neighbours offers and insisted
that they make decisions based
on this draft housing policy
that they have going.
And I think that is unfair
because it is a draft policy.
Anything can change so anyone making
a decision now is making it
on something that may not exist
in a month's time.
So that is unfair.
Their reason for doing that
in my view is because A,
it saves them money to get people
out by Christmas.
And B, it makes them look good.
Is part of the problem though,
that in the initial rush to help,
residents were led to believe that
rehousing would take place
at an ultra fast pace?
Here's the Prime Minister
on this programme in June,
two days after the fire.
Other things we will do as well
to provide support for people,
to ensure they are rehoused
within three weeks...
Today a group of survivors
and the bereaved from Grenfell
arrived at Downing Street to remind
the Prime Minister
of this commitment.
We were given promises
by Theresa May that they would be
housed in three weeks.
It is coming up to Christmas,
it is six months.
Thursday will be a telling day.
You know, if she is coming
to the memorial service,
we hope that she comes
with a message of positivity
and you know, things that have
been accomplished rather
than empty promises.
Nothing can change what happened
here six months ago.
Rehousing those who lost homes
and loved ones is only the start
of trying to repair the damage.
But it is clear there
is still a long way to go,
even on that limited objective.
David Grossman there.
Let's get some reaction
to what we've just seen and look
ahead to the inquiry which has been
meeting for the first time
to discuss the parameters
and how best to effect it.
Emma Norris works at the Institute
for Government and has been working
on how public inquiries can be
carried out most effectively,
Cyrilia Davies Knight
is a solicitor for 13
of the Grenfell Tower families.
It's nice to be here.
What do you
understand from your families is the
hold-up with the housing right now
Good question. Actually
I'm unclear as to what the delay is
with the housing. A lot of my
clients whom I represent remaining
hotels, in temporary accommodation,
and it's unclear what the issue is
with rehousing them.
The money is
there. This huge sum of £235 million
which has been put aside by the
council. Are the people you are
representing very keen to get into
their new houses? Where is the
delay, do you think?
clients are keen to get into their
new houses. I represent vulnerable,
some bereaved, and some survivors,
and indeed they would like to be
rehoused as quickly as possible.
However, they are not prepared to
accept accommodation that is
inadequate or substandard to what
Do you think they are
being offered... It was very hard to
see... The apartments we were seen
inside of, something around
£850,000, they looked incredible,
but you think what is being offered
There needs to be a
thorough means tested assessment. So
that the clients I represent are
given appropriate accommodation for
their needs. Many of my clients, as
I said, are vulnerable and
traumatised. And the delay in being
rehoused isn't helping them. I'm not
sure what the delay is but I do know
it is unhelpful.
explaining the numbers. What started
off as 138 families needing to be
rehoused has now become a search for
210 households because they have
splintered off. Antonio said his son
wanted his own house. Some people
want to move out from parents or
other relatives. Was that always
going to be part of the process? How
does that work in terms of these
I can only speak
for those I represent. What I would
say is that it is absolutely
paramount that those affected by
this disaster are rehoused as
quickly as possible, as promised by
our Prime Minister.
Emma, look ahead
for us to the enquiry, there is a
lot of momentum at the beginning of
these things. I guess the key is
that some of that actually drives
through to results, right?
that's right. You've picked up on
one of the key issue straightaway. A
successful enquiry isn't about what
happened at the beginning of an
enquiry or during, but afterwards.
Often that is where some of our
institutions are at their weakest.
We need to see the up with a
powerful set of recommendations for
change. But we also need to see the
Government act upon them, and that
is often where enquiries fall down.
As an enquiry got a dual role? I
wonder how much of an enquiry is
catharsis and how much you need to
Good question. The
enquiries are there to answer three
questions. What happened, who is
responsible to some extent, and what
can we learn from what happened.
Those first two questions speak to
that emotional catharsis you
mentioned. At the moment the
community is understandably
mistrustful of the enquiry process.
It got off to a rocky start. There
are some signs things are getting
better. The chair has appointed a
community engagement specialist to
the panel. But we know from past
enquiries the dangers of failing to
listen to victims and families.
Hillsborough, for example, examples
of when there were failures to put
the victims at the heart of the
You've seen enough of these
enquiries to know that they often
don't deliver, right? How many times
do we get to the end of an enquiry,
the victims seem unhappy, the public
doesn't trust them, there is no
sense anything is going to change.
Do enquiries really work?
Public enquiries are one of the only
tools we have to look independently
as some of the worst tragedies that
we experience as a society. We need
to seek government be far better in
setting out how to implement
recommendations and parliament
following up on that. Looking back
at the 68 enquiries that have taken
place since 1990, only six have
received full follow-up by
We need to do better
than that. Looking at what is coming
in and your families, is there a
sense of expectation?
I think my
clients are distrusting and
expectations are quite low. I have
to say. I think that housing is one
of the key points that needs to be
addressed first and foremost in
order to help rebuild the trust and
confidence in the process that they
are subjected to. I think other
things can be done to help rebuild
that trust. There needs to be a
commitment to psychological one of
our fire and well-being.
Psychological welfare. This needs to
start sooner rather than later, the
enquiry. There needs to be equality
when the enquiry comes to start.
wonder if you also think that the
enquiry is up against a particular
difficulty when social media can
spread a sense of not trusting the
right person or questioning the
judges or the figures. It can be
very useful tool but also exacerbate
worries and concerns or perhaps they
do not know.
That is why it's
important to make sure you're
involved in the community and with
the victims properly. Looking at the
Hillsborough inquest, they gave the
Brive the opportunity to talk about
the people they had lost as part of
the inquest process and I think
adopting a similar process in this
enquiry would make sure that the
victims are at the heart of it.
there is a sense of them and us, are
you going into this thinking you're
doing battle almost?
I would not say
we're doing battle. I think it is
clear and it has been made clear
that my clients feel they have been,
their voices have gone unheard, they
have not been listened to or
properly engaged thus far. There are
distrusting. They want the truth,
they want justice and
accountability, they want the
answers. There are many ways that
can be achieved. That could be
achieved through disclosure,
disclosure needs to take place
quickly of documents from the TMO,
from the council, so they can feed
into the process. They have lived
this, this is their lives, their
Thank you both very much.
And more on Grenfell Tower six
months on over the next couple of
Environment Secretary Michael Gove
has promised to make Brexit work
not just for citizens
but for the animals we love too.
The Conservatives have been talking
about animals a lot recently.
The beavers that will be
released into the wild.
The puppies that will no
longer be smuggled.
The rare sea birds to be saved
by an extension of the blue belt.
Today Mr Gove promised higher
sentences for animal cruelty,
and to reflect animal sentience -
their response to pain - in law.
So why this concentration
on animal rights, right now?
Is it about more than
just, well animals?
Some people call us the nasty party.
When Theresa May spoke
of the danger all those years ago
of being perceived as the nasty
party, she struck a chord
not just with voters,
but with those in her own party
who realised that perception
of niceness was paramount.
It was no coincidence that
David Cameron as he rose to power
spent time with husky dogs
in the polar regions.
The Conservatives, you see,
were modern and compassionate
They even knew about veganism.
They were, the theory ran,
more palatable to younger,
more liberal metropolitan voters
as well as their rural base.
But the austerity years
took care of all that.
The Huskies were put out
into the cold again,
in came badger culling,
a free vote on fox hunting,
the Green went True Blue.
The viral story of the last election
was a failure by the Conservatives
to effect a manifesto promise
of a ban on ivory imports.
And last month a misunderstanding
got reported and shared by millions,
suggesting the Conservatives did not
believe animals could feel pain.
Had even voted against it.
Even though the story
was quickly disproved,
the damage had been done.
The Tories were back
to being in some voters' minds
the nasty party again.
The damage control was instant.
And in the last weeks and months
we've seen DEFRA roll out policy
after policy that shows
the Conservatives' love of animals.
None so enthusiastically perhaps
as Michael Gove who since June has
announced he will be saving
trafficked puppies, freeing beavers,
looking after animals
The list goes on.
So does the party seem more caring?
Are those younger, metropolitan
liberal voters even listening?
Or is the old image of the Tory out
hunting to attempting to move on?
I'm joined by Deborah Mattinson
the founding partner of the research
and polling organisation
Britain Thinks and Jack Elsom who is
the Chair of the London Universities
Lovely to have you both. What is
going on, does being nice to animals
actually win votes?
I'm a Young
Conservative voter but it would be
pretty foolish of me to come on here
and say the Conservatives do not
have a problem attracting young
people. Deborah Bull tell you that
I'm sure in a minute. But in my
conversations not just in
conservative circles that
universities but with Labour and Lib
Dem friends, it is not the hot topic
of debate at universities. It is
mainly towards Brexodus tuition
So do you mean that people
think about it but not at the top,
or do not talk about it at all?
Really not at all but I do think
having said that what Michael Gove
said today is will -- will be able
to unite students whether it is
recognising that animals can feel
pain or good news for animals about
how sentences for maximum abuse...
Well this is interesting, in
university talking about these
things and yet we are told that the
stories that went viral during the
election, that is the story about
not fulfilling the Pledge on the
ivory ban and this one on the
sentience of animals, how are we
getting this wrong.
To say is not
the hot topic is the understatement
of the century, it has never made
more than 1% of the issues... As any
people tell you you have a small
number of people who care a lot
about animal rights. In a way what
is not to like but actually it is
not what drives younger voters or
older voters for that matter. But
the point about the election, fox
hunting for example, the reason why
that was noticed was because it
struck a chord and it spoke to the
Tory brand and is said to people
this is what I believe the Tory
brand to be about. Back to nasty.
Unfortunately which I guess they're
now trying to unpick again at the
moment. Bad blood at the time people
noticed that and people notice
things when they sure up something
they already believe.
So is Michael
Gove, as the Young Conservative is
he right to go on about the animals
now to try to chase people like you
if you're already on board or if you
do not really care. Is he wasting
his time or will he bring people in?
I do not think is wasting his time.
It may not be the hot topic of
debate at universities but I think
it is important and students may not
care as much about it as something
like Brexit or tuition fees but I
think there would be a big concern
since among students about
recognising the sentience of
animals. And great news in terms of
that sentencing for up to five years
for the worst abusers.
Do they trust
the Tories to maintain the message,
if you think back to David Cameron
and the symbolism of the Tory party
was the green oak tree and now with
Brexit there is no green.
ran focus groups in the election and
we asked people to think of the main
party leaders and who would you
trust most to look after your house
on holiday. They said Theresa May
but they would not trust her to look
after their pet!
Just bring up the
page of the i newspaper tomorrow,
Tories go green to win back the
voters. Is that a strategy that you
would say would be worth adopting
again because David Cameron tried
that and arguably it worked.
partially worked and I think the
rebrand worked partially for a
number of reasons and that was one
of them, a striking photo
opportunity. Well young voters in
particular care about housing, they
care about the economy, about jobs.
The environment generally and animal
rights in particular are very low on
So if you do care about
animal rights and clearly there is a
passionate constituency of people
who do. Are they never going to vote
Tory anyway, we'll always be green
voters or Labour voters?
never going to go first to you. Not
at all, it is not at the top of the
agenda in terms of what young people
really care about but I would not
say no when is going to like these
policies or dislike them. I think
students will get behind the fact
that Michael Gove is putting animals
of the top of his agenda. That might
not be top of the student agenda
which is more Brexit or tuition
fees, but I think they could get on
board with this.
Is it done with
conviction? I think there are other
fish to fry, you are unusual as you
know, just 15% of 18 to 24-year-olds
say the Conservative Party is the
party for me. And I think there are
much bigger challenges than this is
able to meet.
Thank you both very
After an ill judged comment
on a radio show, the Brexit
secretary David Davis has spent
today trying to reassure top EU
negotiators that Britain is not
trying to wriggle out of a deal
they agreed last week.
Mr Davis has invited the EU
to work with him to convert
the conversation into a legal text
as soon as possible.
Tomorrow, things move
on to the question of whether MPs
will get the final say
on the overall Brexit bill.
The former attorney
General Dominic Grieve is hoping
to attract enough support to defeat
the government in a vote on his
rebel amendment in the commons.
Nick Watt our political
editor is here, explain
what Mr Grieve is hoping to do?
Do you think you will defeat the
government? Well we have a
government that is very nervous it
could be about to suffer its first
defeat on the EU Withdrawal Bill
because the rebels led by Dominic
Grieve the former Attorney General
are digging in on their call for
that meaningful vote on the deal
figures out of the EU. Double is --
so tomorrow we will get some warm
words from the government and of
course I will say we will not dream
of using the powers in this
legislation to sneak through that
deal without consulting Parliament.
The rebels saying not good enough.
You have got to amend this bill and
if you do not like the wording of
Dominic Grieve you can fiddle around
with them at the later report stage.
I'm hearing the rebels saying the
government is behaving in a
cack-handed and bizarre ways so
tonight we have this band. The cheap
-- the Chief Whip Jordan Smith
follows the example of never losing
a vote so it is losing difficult, do
a deal. But does Dominic Grieve have
the numbers, he has nine Tory MPs
signing his amendment plus others on
his side. The rabble view is if they
have ten they're getting there, if
they have 15 they are in business.
Also quite stern words from Michel
Barnier to David Davis, is there a
sense that he is really upset, that
he has upset his European partners.
I think there is some irritation
with Michel Barnier and in Germany
about this statement from David
Davis that this was more kind of a
statement of intent and Michel
Barnier saying no backtracking.
Michel Barnier also said the best
that can be hoped for in these
Brexit negotiations over the next
two years is that you get a
withdrawal agreement, you get an
agreement on a transition and get
the beginnings of a future trade
deal and a kind of political
statement of what that would mean.
Which is not quite what David Davis
is saying, he's saying I appreciate
they cannot do a future trade deal
in that Article 50 but they could do
it at one minute past midnight.
Michel Barnier saying no way and
that raises questions about the
British approach, nothing is agreed
until everything is agreed. David
Davis tonight saying I know what
Michel Barnier is like, he uses time
as a pressure point.
Thank you very
Time for Viewsnight now -
the programme's place for opinion.
Tonight it's Christopher Snowdon -
the Head of Lifestyle Economics
at the Institute of Economic Affairs
and author of 'Killjoys'.
He asks if we really need so many
public health bodies telling us
how to live our lives.
Tomorrow's Times will hail
the new Star Wars movie
as the best one yet,
calling it a film of wit
and wonder and frequently
devastating emotional power.
The franchise has come a long way
since the much criticised prequels -
not least in terms the revival
of its much loved
original characters -
at The Last Jedi's very centre -
the actress Carrie Fisher who died
a year ago and its creation
of new powerful female roles.
Something inside me
has always been there.
And now it's awake.
And I need help.
I've seen this raw
strength only once before.
It didn't scare me enough then.
It does now.
Joining us now is the film critic
Anna Smith and, from Los Angeles,
is Annalise Ophelian,
who is behind the documentary
Looking for Leia.
One has seen the film, one hasn't,
so we must be very careful. What are
you hoping for? I know you are going
to a screening once you have
finished here. What will you look
I'm excited to see where
the story goes. That desire to see
the next chapter is the sign of good
storytelling. Star Wars has really
Do you think she
will get that?
She is in luck,
definitely. I was pleased with the
latest instalment in the series.
It's thrilling, exciting, good
mainstream blockbuster. Lots of
characters jostling for space but
they are well developed, especially
the female characters, as you
alluded to. I was pleased to see
lots more female characters and lots
When you were coming
out, were the critics you were with,
or the audience, pretty unanimous?
Was there divergences?
applause at the end, which never
happens, which is a good sign. Some
were strong on it than others but it
has been a good, critical response.
What is it about Star Wars that set
you off on your documentary that
takes people's childhood memories
and really can play with fire in
what it does with them?
Looking for Leia is the phenomenon
of the fandom, especially among
girls. I am the class of 1977. I saw
the original film in the theatre
when I was four. Star Wars has
always been a part of my life. It's
one of the central come across
cultural mythologies, I think we can
all read ourselves into this story,
escapism, and adventure of outsiders
fighting their way in. There is
something for everyone. Every
generation has a Star Wars story.
Because we have 40 years worth of
films. It is intersected with so
many different generations,
childhoods, now into adulthood is.
It's amazing when you think of it as
40 years. -- adulthoods. There have
been disasters in the middle of
that. Is this a love letter to the
Absolutely. It stays true to
the original. The director has done
a good job of putting his stamp on
it but has also remained faithful.
There is something for fans and
people knew to the series, as well.
-- people who are new.
You can see
that the merchandise is already out.
For you it has a strong female
message. Does it ever feel like all
of the branding of it get in the
Star Wars is so interesting,
especially now, it is the
intersection of cinema and pop
culture. We are not just audience,
we are also consumers. I think Star
Wars fans are acutely aware of that.
In the United States, at least, on
the 13th of December we are having
what the Internet is calling the
take your merchandise to work today.
But then Star Wars created the
phenomenon of movie merchandising.
It only makes sense they would be
the best doing it.
I won't be asking
you if you will be taking your stuff
to work tomorrow. What we haven't
touched on yet is Carrie Fisher,
who, sort of, appears from beyond
the grave in this film. Does it do
It does. It is poignant
to see her. It brings an extra layer
to the film, knowing what
subsequently happened, but it is a
wonderful tribute and it is
attributed to her in the end. She
has an important part to play in
this film, as well.
You have seen
the strength of the female
characters right the way through.
From the class of 77 onwards. As you
say. For a lot of women this will be
a change. In the early days it felt
like something of a man's world,
Star Wars, do you think it is gender
free now? Do you think it still
plays to weigh more man's
imagination than a woman's? -- plays
more to a man's imagination.
seeing the cultural permission to
expand on the shift. I'm talking to
all of these women who consistently
tell me their stories about their
lifelong fandom but it is only
recently something which is socially
sanctioned and acceptable to show it
off. There is something exciting
about having more and more
characters to identify with, as
Great to have you both here.
Thank you both very much indeed.
That's almost it for tonight.
But before we go, a letter written
by Charles Dickens in 1865
was auctioned for over
£5,000 at Sotheby's today.
It details personal trauma
after being involved in a rail
accident while travelling
with his mistress - and her mother!
Dickens escaped and tended
to the wounded and the dying.
He administered water
in his top hat and passed
around his own bottle of brandy.
But after remembering he had left
that month's episode
of 'Our Mutual Friend' on board,
he climbed back up the side
of the viaduct to rescue his copy.
Dickens was never the
same after the crash.
The letter is evidence, some say,
that Dickens struggled
with what is now known as post
disorder in later years.
To play us out, here is the actor
and Dickens biographer Simon Callow
reading an excerpt from that letter.
My dear Madame Viardot,
I take the opportunity of Chorley's
coming near you to thank
you for your kind and affectionate
letter received after my escape
from that terrible accident.
The scene was so affecting
when I helped in getting out
the wounded and dead that
for a little while afterwards I felt
shaken by the remembrance of it.
But I had no personal
My watch, which is curious, was more
sensitive physically, than I.
For it was some few minutes slow
for some few weeks afterwards.
Except that I cannot yet travel
on the railway at great speed
without having a disagreeable
impression, against all reason,
that the carriage is
turning on one side.
I have not the least
Will you tell Chorley how I can best
send you a book next October?
It will be Our Mutual Friend, which
I'm now finishing with great pains.
And which I hope will interest
you half as much as it interests me.
Believe me, always affectionately
yours, Charles Dickens.
In-depth investigation and analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines with Emily Maitlis.
Grenfell and housing, animals and the Tories, the latest on Brexit, and reviews of Star Wars: The Last Jedi.