16/02/2018 Newsnight


16/02/2018

In-depth investigation and analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines with Kirsty Wark.


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 16/02/2018. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

Tonight, the government has

announced that Oxfam will not bid

0:00:060:00:09

for any new funding from DifD

until it is satisfied

0:00:090:00:12

that the charity meets

high ethical standards.

0:00:120:00:20

So has the relationship

between the government and aid

0:00:210:00:24

charities been too

close and too casual?

0:00:240:00:24

And can Oxfam ever recover?

0:00:240:00:27

It was the long shadow

over the US election.

0:00:270:00:29

Now a grand jury indicts

13 Russian nationals

0:00:290:00:32

for interfering in the campaign,

and it's clear the allegation

0:00:320:00:34

is they gunned for Hillary Clinton

before the vote, and since then

0:00:340:00:37

they've been sowing discord

about the Trump presdiency.

0:00:370:00:40

The defendants allegedly

conducted what they called

0:00:400:00:43

information warfare

against the United States,

0:00:430:00:48

with the stated goal of spreading

distrust towards the candidates

0:00:480:00:49

and the political

system in general.

0:00:490:00:57

What if the government gave everyone

£10,000 a year instead of state

0:00:570:00:59

benefits and tax reliefs?

0:00:590:01:01

Thomas Paine's age old idea

of a citizen's dividend is back.

0:01:010:01:04

The former Labour leader Ed Miliband

is flirting with the idea

0:01:040:01:06

of a basic universal income.

0:01:060:01:14

"The Russians made a sinister

and systematic attack

0:01:240:01:26

on our political system," said

the Republican speaker

0:01:260:01:28

of the House of Representatives,

following the charges

0:01:280:01:31

against 13 Russian nationals

and three Russian companies.

0:01:310:01:34

One of those charged,

Yevgeny Prigozhin, is said to be

0:01:340:01:36

nicknamed Putin's chef,

a reference to his closeness

0:01:360:01:39

to the Russian president.

0:01:390:01:47

However, a Russian Foreign Ministry

spokeswoman called the allegations

0:01:480:01:50

of interference in the US

elections, "absurd".

0:01:500:01:52

What is clear from the indictment

is that the alleged interference,

0:01:520:01:55

which involved hundreds of people

in a spider's web of online

0:01:550:01:57

activity going back for years,

was not only designed to damage

0:01:570:02:00

Hilary Clinton's

presidential campaign,

0:02:000:02:02

but it didn't stop after Donald

Trump reached the White House -

0:02:020:02:05

his presidency became the target.

0:02:050:02:06

A little earlier this evening,

this is what the US deputy

0:02:060:02:09

Attorney General had to say.

0:02:090:02:12

On September 13, 2017,

soon after the news media reported

0:02:120:02:15

that the special counsel's office

was investigating evidence that

0:02:150:02:19

Russian operatives had used social

media to interfere with

0:02:190:02:22

the 2016 election, one defendant

allegedly wrote, "We had a

0:02:220:02:25

slight crisis here at work.

The FBI have posted our activity.

0:02:250:02:31

The FBI have busted our activity.

0:02:310:02:33

So I got preoccupied

with covering tracks,

0:02:330:02:35

together with my colleagues."

0:02:350:02:38

And Trump tweeted tonight

that Russia started

0:02:380:02:40

the anti-US campaign long before

he announced he would

0:02:400:02:42

run for president.

0:02:420:02:45

He said:

0:02:450:02:47

"Russia started

their anti-US campaign in 2014,

0:02:470:02:49

long before I announced that

I would run for President.

0:02:490:02:51

The results of the election

were not impacted.

0:02:510:02:53

The Trump campaign did nothing

wrong - no collusion!"

0:02:530:02:56

I'm now joined down the line

from Washington by Niall Stanage,

0:02:560:02:58

White House columnist at The Hill.

0:02:580:03:00

And Anne Applebaum, Washington Post

columnist and Professor at the LSE

0:03:000:03:02

Institute of Global Affairs.

0:03:020:03:04

Good evening. The level of detail in

the indictment is quite

0:03:040:03:10

extraordinary.

It is, absolutely,

Kirsty, that is the big takeaway

0:03:100:03:16

from this. Some of the allegations

are not that surprising given what

0:03:160:03:21

is in the ether. But it is as if the

prosecutors have been building a

0:03:210:03:26

jigsaw puzzle and have suddenly

whipped away a cover to show just

0:03:260:03:30

how much they know. In that sense it

is very dramatic and a very big

0:03:300:03:34

story.

On page 23 of the indictment

it talks about November the 12th in

0:03:340:03:43

2016, at the same time defendants

and their co-conspirators organise a

0:03:430:03:46

rally in New York called Trump is

not my president. They held a rally

0:03:460:03:54

in Charlotte, North Carolina against

Trump. So they were putting together

0:03:540:03:59

rally ideas and posters and the

unwitting American public was

0:03:590:04:03

following along.

Yes, as they were

doing that by fictional social media

0:04:030:04:10

accounts. The overall effort here is

clearly to increase discord, to sow

0:04:100:04:15

dissent among the American people,

and to use hot button social issues

0:04:150:04:21

to do so.

What about the involvement

of a particular character, allegedly

0:04:210:04:28

called Putin's chef?

I am not an

expert on the Russian side of this,

0:04:280:04:33

but clearly somebody who is that

much intimately connected with the

0:04:330:04:37

Russian president is a problem

because it typifies that this is a

0:04:370:04:43

Russian lead and directed operation.

It seems clear this is not some

0:04:430:04:47

freelancing effort, given the number

of people involved and the amount of

0:04:470:04:51

money involved, $1.5 million a month

at one stage.

I want your reaction

0:04:510:04:59

to these indictments tonight.

I

think the indictments are an

0:04:590:05:05

extraordinary insight into how the

Russians think, how they think about

0:05:050:05:12

disinformation, US elections, and it

should offer us some really useful

0:05:120:05:16

background for how they think in

other countries and how they act in

0:05:160:05:19

other elections because we know they

do that as well. One of the

0:05:190:05:23

extraordinary thing is watching the

US election campaign was the way in

0:05:230:05:29

which Russian messaging and

0:05:290:05:35

which Russian messaging and tramp

messages were acting hand. Hashed

0:05:360:05:39

out and narratives that started in

sputnik and on TV would appear out

0:05:390:05:45

of the President's mouth a few days

later. We never knew what the

0:05:450:05:49

connection was. We do not know what

tied them together, but we see the

0:05:490:05:54

Russians were studying the US very

closely and were looking for

0:05:540:05:57

explosive, divisive issues and they

were acting in concert with the

0:05:570:06:02

Trump campaign.

And the unwitting

collusion of the American people in

0:06:020:06:07

this as well, the way they organised

it, that is their modus operandi

0:06:070:06:12

anyway, but I wonder how it fits

into the overall picture about

0:06:120:06:16

possible Russian interference. Given

that it is still going on, does that

0:06:160:06:21

in itself as per Donald Trump's

tweaked let him off the hook?

No, I

0:06:210:06:27

do not think he is let off the hook

at all. It is true the report says

0:06:270:06:32

there is no evidence any of the

Americans named in this indictment

0:06:320:06:36

knew they were collaborating with

Russians. But this does not address

0:06:360:06:40

the overall question of what the

Trump campaign knew. Did they know

0:06:400:06:44

this extraordinary campaign was

going on? How could they not know?

0:06:440:06:49

There were all kinds of connections

between different kinds of Russians

0:06:490:06:53

and members of the campaign is all

through 2016 and that was happening

0:06:530:06:57

at the same time millions of

Russians were putting millions of

0:06:570:07:01

dollars into affecting the campaign

and increase democratic

0:07:010:07:06

disillusionment in the United

States. How is it possible they were

0:07:060:07:09

not aware of one another? We do not

have the answer to that told.

And we

0:07:090:07:16

now have a Trump presidency and

Hillary Clinton would be perfectly

0:07:160:07:20

right to say this possibly did

actually affect the outcome of the

0:07:200:07:26

election that she has some evidence

on her hands with these indictments

0:07:260:07:32

now.

We certainly have evidence of

what the Russians were doing. As the

0:07:320:07:38

previous speaker was saying, it is

in detail. This is what is

0:07:380:07:44

unexpected about the indictment. The

PayPal accounts, the bank accounts,

0:07:440:07:50

the particular incidents described.

We now know exactly what the Russian

0:07:500:07:55

operation looked like in the United

States and how it worked.

The detail

0:07:550:07:58

is extraordinary and a slip-up of

one of the defendants who allegedly

0:07:580:08:03

said online to a friend what they

were doing and how they were trying

0:08:030:08:08

to cover their tracks. It is like

some strange thriller.

Absolutely.

0:08:080:08:17

some strange thriller.

Absolutely. I

am not even sure... It is amazing

0:08:180:08:22

the FBI got those details where you

have an alleged Russian conspirator

0:08:220:08:27

e-mail in a family member literally

saying the FBI are on to us and we

0:08:270:08:31

are now trying to cover our tracks.

Just in terms of the sheer

0:08:310:08:35

compelling nature of the story that

is a remarkable thing and it builds

0:08:350:08:40

this broader picture of nefarious

activity and that is what further

0:08:400:08:46

adds to the narrative about alleged

collusion.

Thank you both very much

0:08:460:08:49

indeed.

0:08:490:08:51

Tonight the pressure

on Oxfam has intensified,

0:08:510:08:53

with the government announcement

that the charity will not bid

0:08:530:08:56

for any new government funding

until they prove they can meet

0:08:560:08:58

the high standards expected

of the Department for International

0:08:580:09:00

Development's partners.

0:09:000:09:01

The International Development

Secretary, Penny Mordaunt,

0:09:010:09:03

said that it was clear that Oxfam

has a long way to go to regain

0:09:030:09:07

the trust of the British public,

their staff and the people

0:09:070:09:10

they aim to help.

0:09:100:09:11

It comes on the day when the charity

said it will set up an independent

0:09:110:09:15

commission to investigate past

and present allegations

0:09:150:09:17

of exploitation by staff.

0:09:170:09:19

In a moment, we'll be

discussing the implication

0:09:190:09:22

of the ban on bidding,

not least for the delivery

0:09:220:09:25

of future aid to those

in need around the globe.

0:09:250:09:27

But first here's David Grossman.

0:09:270:09:32

Charities cannot afford to be slow

in showing us the work they do.

0:09:320:09:38

Their fundraising depends on

showcasing the lives they change.

We

0:09:380:09:43

cannot reach them without you. It

all starts with you.

In the past we

0:09:430:09:49

may have rather trusted their own

accounts too much. After all, we can

0:09:490:09:54

hardly go and see for ourselves. But

that trust appears to be drying up.

0:09:540:09:59

I would like more outrage. This has

all been going on for a long time.

0:09:590:10:05

The intelligence agency warned in

1999 that paedophiles were finding

0:10:050:10:09

safe, happy homes in our foreign aid

sector. And yet nothing has been

0:10:090:10:15

done about this until the Times

investigation last week.

How ripe is

0:10:150:10:23

the misconduct within the charity

and the sector at large?

Oxfam needs

0:10:230:10:29

to fully clarified delegations with

maximum transparency.

Tonight it

0:10:290:10:34

deepened. The young aid worker

employed by Oxfam for the first time

0:10:340:10:38

in the Haiti disaster in 2010 has

told the BBC she was assaulted by a

0:10:380:10:43

more senior, male colleague.

He

pinned me up against the wall, he

0:10:430:10:48

was groping me and grabbing me. He

was kissing me and I was trying to

0:10:480:10:53

shove him off.

A torrid week of

scandals for Oxfam has ended with a

0:10:530:10:58

blunt statement from the

International Development Secretary.

0:10:580:11:02

Oxfam will no longer bid for

government aid contracts.

Clearly

0:11:020:11:05

Oxfam have a long way to go before

they can regain the trust of the

0:11:050:11:10

British public, their staff and the

people they aim to help. The actions

0:11:100:11:15

and attitude of the organisation

over the coming weeks will be

0:11:150:11:17

critical.

The Oxfam scandal has cast

a spotlight on the whole sector,

0:11:170:11:24

where the government with big aid

budgets rely too heavily on how the

0:11:240:11:29

NGOs spend those budgets and whether

this close relationship has

0:11:290:11:33

deflected necessary scrutiny.

This

is not about the charity, it is

0:11:330:11:38

about the people they are trying to

help. By withdrawing from bidding

0:11:380:11:45

for future contracts, that might

mean Oxfam can help fewer people in

0:11:450:11:50

the future. Throughout this process

whatever Oxfam has done wrong, I

0:11:500:11:56

very much hope this is a temporary

period whilst they sort themselves

0:11:560:12:00

out.

But this has happened before.

The charity kids company collapsed

0:12:000:12:07

in 2015 amid allegations of

financial impropriety and questions

0:12:070:12:10

about how many people they help.

It

was not that the government saved

0:12:100:12:15

the company, it was that the company

did the government's work.

The

0:12:150:12:21

charity received tens of millions of

pounds of public money. The

0:12:210:12:24

journalist who wrote the first

critical article says it was a very

0:12:240:12:28

tough story to break.

Nobody wanted

to hear the story, people had

0:12:280:12:34

invested too much into kids company

and their reputation rose and fell

0:12:340:12:38

with kids company, so the did not

want it pulled down. This was

0:12:380:12:42

whether they were politicians or pop

stars or whether it was business

0:12:420:12:46

people. They wanted kids company to

keep going because it made them look

0:12:460:12:53

good.

This perhaps explains why it

took so long for the allegations

0:12:530:12:57

against Oxfam to come to light. For

75 years the charity has been

0:12:570:13:02

harnessing the British public

enthusiasm to help those in need.

0:13:020:13:06

Whether that enthusiasm survives

this scandal will decide how well

0:13:060:13:12

the charity survives.

0:13:120:13:12

the charity survives.

0:13:120:13:14

I'm now joined by Imogen Wall,

an independent aid worker

0:13:140:13:16

and former UN spokesperson.

0:13:160:13:17

She runs an online support

forum for aid workers.

0:13:170:13:20

Also with me is Martin Bell,

a Unicef UK ambassador since 2001.

0:13:200:13:22

He's also a former war

correspondent and former MP.

0:13:220:13:25

On the line from South Africa

we've got Ian Birrell,

0:13:250:13:28

a contributing editor to the Mail

on Sunday and former advisor

0:13:280:13:30

and speechwriter for David Cameron.

0:13:300:13:34

Good evening. If I can come to you

first. How bad is it for Oxfam that

0:13:340:13:42

the government has said going

forward there will be no future

0:13:420:13:46

contracts until they are sure of

that ethical stance?

It is pretty

0:13:460:13:51

damning for Oxfam, although I have

to question why it is the government

0:13:510:13:54

feels Oxfam is not good enough for

new contracts, but it is worthy of

0:13:540:14:00

continuing to hold the contracts it

has held and they are worth millions

0:14:000:14:04

of pounds.

0:14:040:14:09

of pounds.

Let me put that to Martin

Bell. Oxfam is engaged in so many

0:14:100:14:14

different contracts around the

world, is Ian Wright that if we take

0:14:140:14:18

the chance of them getting future

contracts away now, we should really

0:14:180:14:23

be probing the contracts that they

have now?

0:14:230:14:28

Oxfam is in so much trouble it has

two and suffer itself. I have been a

0:14:280:14:33

Unicef ambassador for 17 years. I

have seen wonderful people, national

0:14:330:14:40

and international staff, doing

life-saving work on some of the most

0:14:400:14:44

difficult corners of the world. I

can only hope that this appalling

0:14:440:14:48

scandal does not affect those people

helped by aid agencies doing such

0:14:480:14:53

great work.

With your professional

hat on, looking at that indictment

0:14:530:14:59

of Oxfam from penny Mordaunt, she is

saying there needs to be radical

0:14:590:15:04

change, the time it takes for that

to come out, what will happen to

0:15:040:15:07

Oxfam?

We will see in the coming

days. We are very far from the end

0:15:070:15:12

of this. What is clear and very

unfortunate, and I think David have

0:15:120:15:17

no choice, they manage public money

and the right to demand an element

0:15:170:15:22

of accountability, but that Oxfam

are not alone in this. Every agency

0:15:220:15:26

in the aid sector has a problem that

we work in a sector that attracts

0:15:260:15:32

the vulnerable, sorry, that supports

vulnerable people.

It attracts

0:15:320:15:39

predators.

So you have to have a

safeguard. Every agency has faced

0:15:390:15:43

this. Oxfam have been found out but

they have been hung out to dry.

That

0:15:430:15:49

is possibly quite terrifying for a

lot of people to hear that we, with

0:15:490:15:52

our best endeavours, support a

variety of charities, and you're

0:15:520:15:55

telling that this literally is the

tip of the iceberg, what is going to

0:15:550:16:00

happen?

Hopefully wholesale reform

will happen.

Without scandal? People

0:16:000:16:07

are just quietly changing things?

No, they are not. That is the

0:16:070:16:12

problem. For many years activists

have been warned.

An activist on

0:16:120:16:18

Newsnight said that last year she

talked about sexual violence to aid

0:16:180:16:22

workers and Oxfam was by no means

the worst.

They are really not. They

0:16:220:16:28

have had opportunities to reform

themselves. It needs to come. We

0:16:280:16:33

need an interagency process. You can

solve the problem of Oxfam but the

0:16:330:16:36

predators will get jobs elsewhere.

We have seen that is what happened.

0:16:360:16:41

How damaging you think this is to

the global aid effort?

I think it is

0:16:410:16:47

pretty damaging because it is

highlighting problems that these are

0:16:470:16:51

organisations that paint themselves

as saviours of the poor, paint

0:16:510:16:55

themselves as do-gooders and see

themselves as being so morally above

0:16:550:17:01

criticism, and suddenly people are

seeing them for what they are, which

0:17:010:17:04

is people interested in earning my

and people proclaiming...

Can I just

0:17:040:17:13

put to you what Martin Bell was

saying? He has been an ambassador

0:17:130:17:17

for Unicef are many years and has

seen the good work done. You

0:17:170:17:20

wouldn't doubt, presumably, that

individual aid programmes, people

0:17:200:17:24

going with their best endeavours to

help those in need, you're not

0:17:240:17:28

entirely cynical about this, are

you?

I'm pretty cynical. I've seen

0:17:280:17:32

too much of it. Let's look at Hay

tee. What did the UN there? They

0:17:320:17:38

took cholera there and killed

several thousand people and put

0:17:380:17:42

hundreds of thousands more into a

state of disease. Then they denied

0:17:420:17:46

it. They covered up. That is typical

of what goes on. A.D. Was a complete

0:17:460:17:50

mess from start to finish. -- high

tea.

I want to bring in Martin.

0:17:500:17:58

Particularly when you are talking

about the government giving money to

0:17:580:18:01

particular aid charities, do you

think there has been too cosy and

0:18:010:18:06

casually relationship between the

government and the charities who it

0:18:060:18:11

funds aid programmes through?

I

think the government and charities

0:18:110:18:17

are close and they have to be. If

Ian had been where I had been, if

0:18:170:18:23

you are holding the hands of a

nine-year-old child in Yemen who has

0:18:230:18:27

been bombed out of her home and is

being given care by Unicef, you have

0:18:270:18:33

a different view of it. I think the

idea that because there is a

0:18:330:18:37

scandal, all aid agencies are

tarnished. Just connect with my

0:18:370:18:44

experience. Wonderful people doing

wonderful things out there.

What

0:18:440:18:47

about the question of governance?

Are aid agencies and the governance

0:18:470:18:53

to close?

They work closely

together. What we are seeing right

0:18:530:18:56

now is the capacity the government

has told them to account when

0:18:560:19:00

needed. That is a powerful thing.

There is no question it is a club

0:19:000:19:05

and there have been long discussions

about how to bring more particularly

0:19:050:19:10

local organisations into that

community, and to this collection of

0:19:100:19:15

agencies.

That interesting. What you

are saying is, and we know the

0:19:150:19:21

government only funds through big

agencies and it is funnelled out...

0:19:210:19:26

What you're saying is that it is too

for a divot. They have to be more

0:19:260:19:32

particular and pick smaller

charities which it ollie spatter?

0:19:320:19:36

Yeah. And help develop into agency

policing systems. I was in the field

0:19:360:19:43

for ten years. 95% of aid workers

and local staff. They are not

0:19:430:19:48

internationals. That is the

stereotype.

What about the big

0:19:480:19:53

salaries Ian talks about?

They are

not that big, trust me! Certainly

0:19:530:19:57

not for Oxfam.

Ian, if you don't

think that aid in itself delivered

0:19:570:20:03

by charities is a good thing, how

would you sort a lot of the global

0:20:030:20:10

issues that we feel everywhere in

the world, those of us who have

0:20:100:20:13

more, have a duty to help those who

have less?

I'm very committed to

0:20:130:20:21

help the world's poor but the way to

do it is not with patronising

0:20:210:20:24

Westerners going in there and

telling them how to solve their

0:20:240:20:28

problems their services. Not by

propping up dictators. And not get

0:20:280:20:32

caught doing harm. Is what we have

seen often. There is an unholy

0:20:320:20:38

Trinity going on whereby there is a

shared deal going on with the

0:20:380:20:42

government and much of the media,

and with the aid groups. They all

0:20:420:20:45

portray this image that they are the

saviours of the world. The facts do

0:20:450:20:51

not fit this. That is why there is

such resentment against it in many

0:20:510:20:54

parts of the world.

Martin,

everybody is hearing this, people

0:20:540:20:59

who perhaps give to different

charities, should the public, for

0:20:590:21:04

example with Oxfam, withhold the

money until Oxfam gets a clean bill

0:21:040:21:08

of health?

I think that is

reasonable. Oxfam now has to answer

0:21:080:21:15

for itself. But that all NGOs and

aid agencies should be tarnished, if

0:21:150:21:20

Ian and anybody could come with me

to the eastern Congo, there are no

0:21:200:21:25

dictators, there was no government,

there was nobody there helping the

0:21:250:21:27

people accept Unicef and other

agencies. Should they be left

0:21:270:21:31

without help? I don't believe so.

Thank you all very much. With

0:21:310:21:36

regards to recent allegations made

against Adam Smith International,

0:21:360:21:39

the ordination -- organisation have

denied any wrongdoing.

0:21:390:21:45

What would you do with £10,000

a year guaranteed income?

0:21:450:21:47

A new report says we have to rethink

radically the value of work,

0:21:470:21:50

and how we contribute to society,

before the machines take over

0:21:500:21:53

swathes of our lives,

and just as we face a vastly

0:21:530:21:55

increasing ageing population

and the prospect of much

0:21:550:21:57

less stable employment.

0:21:570:21:59

Would it be better to give everyone

a basic income and do away with many

0:21:590:22:03

state benefits and tax reliefs?

0:22:030:22:05

Today, the Royal Society

for the Encouragement of the Arts,

0:22:050:22:07

Manufacture and Commerce rebooted

the idea of a Universal Basic

0:22:070:22:09

Income, described by Thomas Paine

more than 250 years ago

0:22:090:22:13

as a "citizen's dividend".

0:22:130:22:21

From its Enlightenment origins,

Universal Basic Income has been an

0:22:210:22:23

idea that crosses the political

divide, mentioned in the writings

0:22:230:22:26

of Thomas Paine

and John Stewart Mill.

0:22:260:22:31

The first thing that we

must do you tonight...

0:22:310:22:34

By the 1960s, both Martin

Luther King and Richard

0:22:340:22:36

Nixon were on board.

0:22:360:22:40

One of the big attractions

for modern politicians is that it

0:22:400:22:43

proposes getting rid of one

of the most hated aspects

0:22:430:22:46

of the welfare state.

0:22:460:22:47

You still don't get

this, do you, Mr Blake?

0:22:470:22:50

This is an agreement

between you and the state.

0:22:500:22:55

The Ken Loach polemic,

I, Daniel Blake,

0:22:550:22:56

struck a chord in its portrayal

of the dehumanisation process of

0:22:560:22:59

bureaucratic assessment.

0:22:590:23:03

Universal Basic Income

would simply do away

0:23:030:23:06

with that altogether.

0:23:060:23:07

Everyone gets paid

the same sum of money each

0:23:070:23:10

year, no strings attached.

0:23:100:23:12

Some on the libertarian right

like it, because the government

0:23:120:23:16

would be less involved in our lives

and it could lead them to shut

0:23:160:23:20

existing programmes.

0:23:200:23:21

Some on the left like it

because it seen as a way of

0:23:210:23:24

universalising benefit

and empowering workers, even as

0:23:240:23:27

automation undermines

their position.

0:23:270:23:32

Have a few more days off a week

to study, take up yoga or

0:23:320:23:35

help elderly relatives -

who could argue with that?

0:23:350:23:37

Of course, some may choose

not to work at all.

0:23:370:23:40

That is one criticism.

0:23:400:23:41

The main problem though is expense.

0:23:410:23:43

In the most extreme

version, where the

0:23:430:23:46

allowance is enough to live

off, that is hundreds

0:23:460:23:48

of billions of pounds a year.

0:23:480:23:51

So most UBI proposals

are for a halfway house.

0:23:510:23:53

Smaller amounts, or even one

large, one-off payment.

0:23:530:23:57

Today's report envisages

10,000 a year.

0:23:570:24:01

But the thing that unites

all the proposals is that they

0:24:010:24:04

envisage giving billions of pounds

to millions of people who currently

0:24:040:24:06

manage without state help.

Will voters buy that?

0:24:060:24:14

With me now a man who is flirting

with the idea of Universal Basic

0:24:180:24:22

Income, former Labour leader Ed

Miliband. You have sort of half

0:24:220:24:28

tongue in cheek described the idea

of a universal income as a trust

0:24:280:24:33

fund for all. The problem is that

people actually do have trust funds

0:24:330:24:38

and get it as well. It is

indiscriminate.

This yeah, but they

0:24:380:24:44

pay it back through taxation. I'm

attracted that this because it

0:24:440:24:47

speaks to the can of society we want

to be. Do we trust in people? Do we

0:24:470:24:52

believe that if we get rid of a

complex, intrusive, demeaning means

0:24:520:24:57

tested system, and replace it with a

flat rate payment, people will do

0:24:570:25:03

extraordinary things? I personally

think they probably would. Some of

0:25:030:25:06

it would be caring, for elderly

relatives, kids. Some would be

0:25:060:25:11

voluntary. The interesting thing is

the evidence is, on the point about

0:25:110:25:15

work, the evidence is so far in the

work that has been done on this, the

0:25:150:25:20

pilots, it hasn't led to the

diminishing of work, people doing

0:25:200:25:22

nothing.

There will be less work?

Because of technology. Exactly. That

0:25:220:25:29

is another reason why this is

interesting. We are entering an era

0:25:290:25:33

were be can't be certain of this

scale. We know technology will be

0:25:330:25:38

incredibly disruptive. A welfare

system built on a job for life, the

0:25:380:25:43

welfare system we sort of have,

doesn't really feel fit for purpose.

0:25:430:25:48

And therefore, this could be, this

is kind of right, has got

0:25:480:25:54

attractions in any case. But in

particular for the very people

0:25:540:25:57

chopping and changing their jobs,

that world, it could be appropriate.

0:25:570:26:03

Do you think that by and large

people want to work?

Yes I do.

Nick

0:26:030:26:09

Boles, the former Minister of

skills, says mankind is hard-wired

0:26:090:26:13

for work, we gain satisfaction from

it. The point is there won't be work

0:26:130:26:17

for all, we're kidding ourselves.

That may be true to an extent. We

0:26:170:26:27

don't know. People have predicted

the end of work before. The

0:26:270:26:30

interesting thing on this point

about what evidence we have, it's

0:26:300:26:36

not overwhelming, but Alaska, they

have got a fund, a smaller

0:26:360:26:40

version...

They are doing well in

Finland.

Yes, but Alaska has been

0:26:400:26:46

going for a decade. Work has gone

up. In a way this is a bet on human

0:26:460:26:52

nature.

There is a bigger

fundamental question about whether

0:26:520:26:56

it would necessarily be a bad thing

if people worked less, if they do

0:26:560:27:00

different things, because there will

be an ageing population. Perhaps

0:27:000:27:05

there are different ways we should

be running our lives?

I totally

0:27:050:27:09

agree with you.

The ageing

population is another aspect of

0:27:090:27:12

this. Anyway your language has

changed. When you are special

0:27:120:27:17

adviser to Gordon Brown you talked

about tax credits.

I was in short

0:27:170:27:24

trousers!

That must have looked very

weird in Parliament. You talk about

0:27:240:27:27

tax credits. They are means tested.

You have changed your mind?

May be a

0:27:270:27:34

bit. I'm still a defender of tax

credits.

But they are means tested.

0:27:340:27:42

Yeah. The liberating thing for me is

I'm not thinking what should we do

0:27:420:27:45

tomorrow. I'm thinking five, ten, 15

years ahead, what system should we

0:27:450:27:51

be designing? What is the system

that will be fit for purpose?

You

0:27:510:27:57

talk about labour being the party

that supports crafters. It is more

0:27:570:28:01

like the grifters.

That is where we

part company. The notion that people

0:28:010:28:08

will take this money and lay around,

I don't buy that.

Who will pay for

0:28:080:28:11

it? What the RSA are saying is it

will cost 14 billion a year.

In the

0:28:110:28:20

big scheme of things that is small

change. In the big scheme of things,

0:28:200:28:23

if you are thinking about a 20 year,

15 year enterprise, and I think we

0:28:230:28:29

should pilot this...

It has been

piloted in Scotland.

Exactly. We

0:28:290:28:33

should be doing it here. The

government has Cook corporate tax

0:28:330:28:40

over the past few years. You would

save some money on some of the means

0:28:400:28:43

tested benefits. It would have an

outlay. But if it worked, if it had

0:28:430:28:48

the liberating power that many

advocates think it could have, I

0:28:480:28:53

think it would be worth it.

You

think there would be retraining?

0:28:530:28:58

Starting businesses. They are saying

in the report today that Mrs

0:28:580:29:03

Thatcher said up the enterprise

allowance, which gave people a

0:29:030:29:06

certain amount of money. People may

set up businesses. Middle-class

0:29:060:29:12

people taken for granted that they

have money to fall on.

You have been

0:29:120:29:16

very critical of people like Mike

Ashley at Sports Direct. The idea

0:29:160:29:21

that people are very wealthy and get

this 10,000, I suppose they give

0:29:210:29:25

more back in tax. In a moral sense,

should everybody get this money?

0:29:250:29:35

Yeah, because they are citizens.

This is the point. We have more or

0:29:350:29:39

less got universal child benefit.

This is what Thomas Paine advocated.

0:29:390:29:45

Recognition of citizenship.

Particularly as technology takes off

0:29:450:29:47

and the danger is greater

inequality. The idea that every

0:29:470:29:51

citizen should have a stake in the

growing wealth of the country I

0:29:510:29:54

think is attractive.

Thank you very

much indeed.

0:29:540:30:01

Two papers in front of us. That

story, no more money for Oxfam, say

0:30:010:30:07

ministers. Charity warned it must

regain public trust. On the

0:30:070:30:10

right-hand side, 13 Russians charged

over the Trump plot. The Financial

0:30:100:30:14

Times, Russians charged with

interfering in US election. They

0:30:140:30:20

have also got a piece on life in

Riyadh jail. City access after

0:30:200:30:31

Brexit.

0:30:310:30:33

That's almost it for tonight.

0:30:330:30:34

But before we go,

the closest most of us will get

0:30:340:30:37

to walking amongst the stars

is a holiday in Los Angeles.

0:30:370:30:39

Not so for Norishige Kanai

and Mark Vande Hei.

0:30:390:30:42

The two astronauts spent most

of today on a so-called Space Walk,

0:30:420:30:45

conducting maintenance

on the outside of the

0:30:450:30:48

International Space station.

0:30:480:30:49

Talk about an office with a view.

Goodnight.

0:30:490:30:57

Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS