28/02/2018 Newsnight

Thought you'd settle

in for a nice warm, cosy watch

with Newsnight this evening?

Well, we're reporting on:

Democracy in Russia...

Brexit!

And this...

Tonight, Gabriel Gatehouse follows

the Russian presidential race

with Opposition candidate Ksenia

Sobchak.

It's a fake election.

It's a fake election?

Yes, I'm always telling that.

But is everything quite as it seems?

Could it be that Ksenia Sobchak

is doing the Kremlin's bidding?

Also tonight, John Major today

called for a free vote in Parliament

on Brexit, with the possibility

of a second referendum.

It's fair to say Brexiteers

are not impressed.

I think generally a good idea for

previous Prime Ministers, whatever

their views on either side of this

argument or any argument...

Normally, if you haven't got

anything positive to say,

probably best to keep quiet.

And did we used to be better

at dealing with this?

Good evening.

From Syria, to cyber warfare,

to the American Presidency,

to energy supply - if you think

the Russian Presidential election

doesn't have an impact

on our lives, think again.

Tonight, an extraordinary film ahead

of next month's vote.

Tomorrow, Vladimir Putin

delivers his annual address

to the Russian parliament and other

members of the Russian

political elite.

The speech is likely to contain

a slew of spending promises,

but even if he feels the need to go

a-wooing, there's little

doubt that he'll be

the man delivering them

after the election.

The first round is in

less than three weeks,

and without some seismic

upset, Putin will win

his second consecutive

term, and fourth term overall.

In a race where at least one

contender, Opposition

leader Alexei Navalny has been

barred from participating,

why would anyone risk

all to challenge Vladimir Putin?

Ksenia Sobchak is a former

Russian socialite turned

Opposition journalist.

She's now running for

the Russian presidency.

But many opposition supporters say

she's a fake candidate,

running a no-hope race to boost

the Kremlin's

democratic credentials.

She herself admits she has

no chance of winning.

But take a deeper look,

and her candidacy in fact reveals

much about contemporary Russia.

Gabriel Gatehouse joined

Ksenia Sobchak on the campaign trail

and found a twisted tale

of intrigue, power struggles

and family loyalties,

in a country where nothing

is as simple as it first appears.

APPLAUSE

In a Moscow nightclub,

the Opposition candidate

makes her pitch to the capital's

cultural elite.

Russian democracy is a strange

and sometimes dangerous beast.

It's a fake election.

It's a fake election?

Yes, I'm always telling that.

Explain what you mean.

I mean that like in a casino,

where the winner's always the house,

in Russian elections,

the winner's always on Putin's side.

So I'm taking part in the elections

not to win, I have no

illusions about that.

I'm taking part to be heard.

Once upon a time, in the capital

of the Tsars, a girl was born

with a silver spoon in her mouth.

When the Communist empire collapsed,

the chaotic transition to capitalism

produced a sort of alchemy that

turned silver into gold - for some.

Ksenia Sobchak's family

was one of those few.

Her father, one of the founders

of Russia's new democracy,

became the mayor of St Petersburg.

He would later die in

uncertain circumstances,

while his former deputy,

a once unknown KGB officer,

would become the most

powerful man in Russia.

He was a person who gave

Putin his first job,

I was a little girl then.

But, by a strange twist of fate,

nearly two decades later,

the girl with the silver spoon

would challenge the new Tsar

for the highest office in the land.

350 miles south of Moscow,

the city of Kursk.

Ksenia Sobchak is on

the campaign trail.

Her task here is to show

that she can speak to

ordinary Russians too.

The biggest problem in Russia

is not freedom of speech,

unfortunately, for many people.

It's the poverty.

Out in the suburbs, residents

have been complaining

they can't get their children

into a local nursery.

Now she's haranguing

some local officials.

This is pretty much the kind

of thing that Putin does

when he goes around the regions.

How do you feel like people react

to you, coming - as you do -

from quite a privileged background?

You know, I don't try to be

like "I am like one of you",

because, well, it's not true.

If I wear red lipstick

in my everyday time,

why should I go without make

up to them?

It's not kind of true,

I'm not a populist.

So, yes, I come in a good car

and in good clothes,

but I earned this money,

I didn't steal that.

Corruption is a big issue in this

election for all candidates.

After a slightly optimistic welcome

at local campaign headquarters,

Ksenia takes things

one step further.

In Russian politics,

there are certain red lines;

among them, Putin

and his inner circle.

Are you saying Putin is corrupt?

I say that Putin created a system

that allows those people to get

funds from the state.

Direct criticism of

Putin feels dangerous,

and out on the streets, many people

simply don't want to know.

Crazy.

As soon as you approach

people, they run away.

But Sobchak's journey to dissidents

has been an unusual one.

When money gets into my hands,

I spend everything.

Clothes is where my budget stays.

It's a lot, it's about

$3000-4000 a month.

I really like this sweater...

In the first decade of this century,

as millions of Russians struggled,

Ksenia Sobchak transformed

herself from society rich

kid to TV celebrity.

Feeding the masses a diet of reality

television and branding

herself simply Ksenia.

But then, the girl with the silver

spoon had another transformation.

In 2011, she joined opposition

protests and was promptly carted

off to a police cell.

Alexei Navalny -

the movement's leader -

has long been a thorn

in the Kremlin's side.

I was close with him all those

years, we shared many values,

and we are still sharing

those values, I hope.

But when Navalny was banned

from standing in this year's

elections, and Ksenia announced

she was running instead,

his supporters called her a traitor.

Ksenia, they said,

is a Kremlin agent -

her campaign just more reality TV.

Could that be true?

Could it be that Ksenia Sobchak

is doing the Kremlin's bidding?

I paid a visit to her campaign

headquarters, to meet one

of her top advisers,

a woman well versed in the dark arts

of Russian politics.

She should be, she used

to work for Putin himself.

Just to be clear, this is Sobchak's

own campaign adviser saying, "Yes,

we're playing the Kremlin's game",

but in Russia, there's always more

than one game going on.

And that's exactly what Sobchak

says she's trying to do.

If there's one thing

Ksenia understands, it's

the power of television.

She's using her candidacy to talk

about issues that are taboo.

To say this on state TV is heresy,

genuinely subversive.

Shocked presenters have resorted

to surreal measures,

to try to drown her out.

But here is the conundrum,

the Kremlin controls everything.

Who gets to stand in elections,

and who gets to go on TV.

So, what is going on?

Ksenia treads a delicate path.

Before she set out on her journey,

the girl with the silver spoon

needed to get the approval

of the Tsar in the Kremlin.

She needed wise counsel.

Alexei Venediktov is one

of Russia's most famous

and well-connected journalists.

As it happens, Ksenia

is in the process of making

a film about her father,

the former mayor of St Petersburg.

Putin, who'd been his deputy,

had agreed to an interview.

So, in September, she went

to see him in the Kremlin.

And then in the end, I said this,

that I took this decision and I just

want you to know that I'm

going to challenge you,

and he was like silent

for a second and said,

"Well, it's your decision,

but it's also your responsibility".

What do you think you meant by that?

Well, I don't want even

to think about that,

I don't think anything nice.

And so, the Tsar decided

to accept his challenger,

but not everyone was happy.

Behind the facade of monolithic

power, different factions

struggled for control.

How indeed?

How did the girl who spoke out

against the Tsar get

permission to run against him?

The answer to this riddle

lies buried in the past,

when Putin worked for Ksenia's

father in St Petersburg.

Or perhaps it should more accurately

be titled the 'Museum of How Russian

Democracy Was Poisoned at Source'.

The name Anatoly Sobchak

stands alongside the likes

of Gorbachev and Yeltsin.

The story of how the anti-Soviet

reformer chosen an obscure KGB

officer as his deputy is also

the story of how factions

from the old Soviet security

establishment have come to be

running Russia today.

Anatoly Sobchak was voted

out of office in 1996,

amid allegations of corruption.

When investigators called him

in for questioning, Putin helped

spirit him out of the country.

But in Moscow, factions

were manoeuvring.

Putin was being groomed

as Yeltsin's successor.

The battle was over who would have

sway over the new leader.

Then, in February 2000,

Anatoly Sobchak died

suddenly at the age of 62.

At the funeral, Russia's

new president was distraught.

That was the first and last time

everyone saw him crying in Russia.

This day I still remember it,

and one of the shocks

I had was his reaction,

he was totally killed by this.

But what killed Sobchak?

To this day, that remains a mystery.

The original autopsy

was inconclusive, and many

were suspicious, including Sobchak's

widow, Ksenia's mother.

Narusova had her own autopsy

performed, but instead

of making the results public,

she keeps locked in a safe

of making the results public,

she keeps them locked in a safe

in a secret location.

The Kremlin today is still

a place of rival factions,

to threaten their power is to take

a terrible risk.

The girl with the silver spoon

is not a girl any more.

Her family history may protect her,

but only up to a point.

Meanwhile, back on the Sobchak

campaign trail...

From public transport

to pensions, to childcare -

Ksenia listens to people's everyday

problems as if she were a real

candidate in a real election.

The passengers on the Kursk trolley

bus know all about Ksenia's

family ties, and yet...

What then is the purpose

of all this elaborate theatre?

If Ksenia is a threat to the regime,

why let her run at all?

I've spoken to a senior

government official,

on condition that I couldn't

quote them by name.

I said, "What's the point of having

an election when everyone

acknowledges that only

one person can win?"

They said, look, this is a western

invention that you have.

We don't have a classical

democracy in Russia.

We have what they called

a 'developing democracy'.

The truth is, Russian democracy

has stopped developing.

It is frozen, paralysed by two

certain facts:

Just as surely as Putin

will win the next election,

he will also not be around forever.

Behind the walls of the Kremlin,

powerful people are playing games.

Ksenia Sobchak is a pawn.

Some factions are pushing

her forward,

others want to hold her back.

The girl with the silver

spoon knows all this,

but she thinks the pawn might just

become a queen.

That's my chess game.

I played this option

of going to elections,

because I was thinking that

I have a chance to go through,

because of my name,

because they underestimate me,

because I have a past

which they can always punch at me,

because they're not afraid of me

as much as Navalny,

so these are my chances.

Who's a better chess

player, you or Putin?

I don't know, we will

see in the end.

But the end is not near,

because I'm only starting.

And you can see a longer version

of Gabriel Gatehouse's film

on Our World on the BBC

News Channel and on

iPlayer this weekend.

We asked the Russian embassy

whether they'd like to comment

on the Russian elections,

and they told us that they weren't

in a position to do so.

But they did say that they invited

all Russian citizens in the UK

to vote in the March 18th

presidential elections at polling

booths in London and Edinburgh.

There's no sign of a ceasefire

in the Tory party over Brexit.

Today, Sir John Major made that very

clear with his depth charge

of a speech calling for a free vote

in Parliament on the final Brexit

deal with the option

of a second referendum,

and hence the possibility

of remaining within the EU.

Always a passionate Remainer,

the former Prime minister has denied

he's trying to undermine Theresa

May.

But one of the "ultra Brexiteers"

he was taking aim at,

Jacob Rees-Mogg, said that Major

was "all cheap comments

and propaganda."

Timing is all, and of course today's

EU draft legal agreement has

particular resonance for Sir John,

whose dogged work on the Northern

Ireland peace process led finally

to the Good Friday Agreement.

The idea of a "common regulatory

area" for Ireland was rejected

immediately by the Prime Minister.

So, is the man who as Prime Minister

in 1993 faced his own hell

at the hands of the Maastricht

rebels, now in full

rebellion himself?

One of those Maastrict rebels

is here, but first, Nick Watt.

Europe, a storm that has consumed

successive Conservative prime

ministers. When this one was bundled

out of office, she promised to keep

an eye on this one. When he exited

the stage, he promised to be more

friendly and was supportive of this

one. But today, he cast his own

shadow.

Thank you very much and good

afternoon, everyone.

The

mild-mannered former Prime Minister,

usually punctilious and polite to a

fault, if this are Theresa May on

Brexit.

For the moment, our

self-imposed redlines have Ochs to

be government into a corner. -- have

boxed. They are so tilted to

ultra-Brexit opinion, that even the

Cabinet cannot agree them. And a

majority in both houses of

parliament oppose them. If

maintained in full, it will be

impossible to reach a favourable

trade agreement.

The intervention by

the former Prime Minister echoed the

private fears of many remain members

of the Cabinet who have been

fighting their lips. An old foe who

clashed with the former Prime

Minister on Europe was surprised to

hear him call for a free vote in

parliament on Brexit.

During

Maastricht there was such a strict

whip imposed that there were a whole

bunch of Conservative MPs who lost

the whip for voting against the

whip. That means being kicked out of

the party and parliament. They were

stateless, as it were. And people

were shipped in by ambulance and all

sorts of things, to comply with the

vote, such was the benign and kind

nature of the then regime, which I

do believe at that stage was led by

John Major.

Pro-Europeans welcomed

John Major's intervention.

You go

into a negotiation knowing he will

have to make some concessions in

return for gaining some. The quite

rightly pointed out that every time

we create a red line, Europe in turn

removes options from the table for

the UK.

Sir John chose a significant

moment to issue his warning. A few

hours earlier, the EU's chief

negotiator upped the ante. By

tabling a series of demands that

trampled all over the UK's Brexit

redlines. A new European Commission

draft of the UK and EU withdrawal

treaty calls for "A common

regulatory area between Northern

Ireland and the Irish Republic if

the UK and EU failed to negotiate a

comprehensive free trade deal"

the UK and EU failed to negotiate a

comprehensive free trade deal". A

definitive role for the European

Court of Justice in policing the

withdrawal agreement. Theresa May

rejected the EU's proposals, which

could place a border within the UK

between Northern Ireland and Great

Britain.

The draft legal text the

commission have published would, if

implement it, undermine the UK,

market and threaten constitutional

integrity of the UK by creating a

customs and regulatory border down

the Irish Sea. And no UK Prime

Minister could ever agree to it. I

will be making it crystal clear to

President Juncker and others that we

will never do so.

In Downing Street

officials acknowledge Brexit

negotiations are entering a crunch

phase ahead of a showdown summit in

three weeks' time. Ministers leading

to the Brexit side believes the EU

is turning the screws to improve its

negotiating position. -- ministers

leaning. Other ministers fear that

the long drawn-out process to reach

a Cabinet consensus on the future

trading relationship has provided an

opening that the EU is exploiting.

Even a Prime Minister cocooned in

their security bubble cannot escape

the UK's Chile visitor from the

east. When the elements turn, it can

feel like the world is closing in.

Nick is here now.

Simulate a reaction tonight? I was

just talking to Lord Howard about

that John Major speech. He says it

is very sad the former Prime

Minister cannot come to terms with

the results of the British people.

You will remember Michael Howard had

run-ins with John Major when he was

a member of his Cabinet in 1990s

ovate Europe. He was labelled by

John major as a bustard. I asked

about feud was going and this is

what he said.

He wasn't keen on free

votes at that time, no questions

about that. Indeed, this speech was

full of rich ironies. I seem to

remember that when he was Prime

Minister, he was quite upset about

the interventions of one of his

predecessors. I think he was called

back-seat driving in those days.

The

Cabinet will meet tomorrow to

approve the decision by the Cabinet

subcommittee, Brexit subcommittee,

to have the end state negotiations

pursuing an ambitious managed

divergences. That really is going to

set the countdown, a three-week

countdown to the opening council at

the end of March, where hopefully

guidelines will be agreed on the

future, the nature of the future

trading relationship. I asked

Michael Howard what he thinks of

that Cabinet decision we are likely

to get tomorrow and this is what he

had to say.

I do think it's realistic. It's

realistic because the European

Union, at the end of the day, wants

a deal, it wants a deal on goods and

services because it sells more goods

to us than we do to them. It uses

London not because they love us but

because it's the most efficient

capital market in the world and they

want the deal because they want our

money, and without a deal, they

won't get it.

Michael Howard, thank

you.

I'm now joined by one of those

Maastricht rebels who made

John Major's life

in office a misery,

Sir Bill Cash.

He rebelled the party whip 48 times

during the period and is now Chair

of the European Scrutiny Committee.

Good evening. . I want to start with

a tweet by George Osborne. Why this

synthetic Brexiteer anger over the

EU tax and Irish border. Number ten

made key concessions in December,

they made a deal in which you all

cheered, in the absence of agreed

solutions UK will maintain full

alignment with the EU and Customs

union.

Look, basically what they

said in this draft legal text, and

my European scrutiny committee are

looking at it right now, the bottom

line is what they are trying to do

is to create a constitutional crisis

in the UK. This is basically the EU

which is seeking to achieve this

hardboard, where actually they have

said they don't want it. We have

also said we don't want it and the

Irish government has said they don't

want it. Nothing synthetic about

this. Have actually created, trying

to create a constitutional crisis.

The truth is, the question of the

Irish border is a key issue in

Brexit. It's not some kind of fake

argument. You have a situation here

now where you have either got a

customs union or you get a border.

If you take for example that we've

got the Euro row at one end of

Ireland and the pound at the other,

you have different fiscal

arrangements, you've got different

corporation tax, there are

differences already within Ireland

north and south.

Do you believe it

can be something like Boris a --

Johnson said, congestion charge?

Bertie Ahern...

Nobody is prepared

to say what would be in place from

the British side just now, we are

still waiting.

I don't agree with

that, we put forward proposals on

those proposals are based on the

fact there are technical ways of

dealing with it. Bertie Ahern

actually said you can turn a blind

eye to a lot of the local trade and

that most of this stuff...

A blind

eye?

There is a Swedish expert and

Customs who says it is perfectly

feasible to do it. Real experts were

saying that. The EU are trying to

dig in and over this, in order to

create maximum trouble for the

government.

It's very, very obvious.

Also the concern with the

government, with the goodwill of the

DUP, do you think what you are

fighting for is worth threatening

the Good Friday Agreement?

It is not

threatening the Good Friday

Agreement. The Prime Minister today

said we are going to stand by the

Good Friday Agreement, everybody

will stand by it. The bottom line is

this is the synthetic argument, as

you said from George Osborne, author

of Project Fear, this is the

synthetic part of the argument which

is coming from the EU. There is no

need for them to do this but they

are doing it in order to create

maximum trouble for our

negotiations.

By John Major's speech

today it is very clear there is no

harmony in the Conservative Party,

never mind conservative membership,

all about the kind of Brexit there

should be. He famously called you

one

one knows the bastards in the

Maastricht Treaty.

I thought I was

watching another edition of spitting

image when I saw the speech he gave

today. I actually think the real

problem here is that he can't come

to terms with the fact he has lost

the debate. Actually, it much worse

than that because when you examine

what he says, he talks about

conscience voting for study talks

about a second referendum. I do

remember a thing called the

Maastricht referendum campaign,

which I organised with some friends.

Give a free vote now.

The position

was neither an Maastricht or in

relation to the Lisbon Treaty have

ever been any free votes on this

question.

Bill Cash, thanks very

much indeed.

On the eve of meteorological

spring...

It was the bleak midwinter today

for millions of people in the UK.

We've all had our fun with the Beast

from the East but tonight it is set

to evolve into the much more

menacing Storm Emma.

The mercury could sink

to minus 15 where there's snow

on the ground, and the blizzards,

gales and sleet just keep coming.

Worst affected is Scotland,

with a red warning.

Earlier, I spoke to Lorna Gordon,

who's in Glasgow.

I asked her whether there were any

signs of supplies running low.

I did a quick run through

a couple of shops in some

of the areas I have been today.

So far, so good.

I think Scots are pretty stoic.

We are used to the bad weather.

It takes quite a bit

to rattle people up here.

So the shops, I think,

are doing OK so far.

But this is an extended

period of bad weather.

We're talking about that

red warning in place

until tomorrow morning thus far.

But the bad weather will

continue beyond that.

But, yes, a big impact on public

transport here in Glasgow

and in fact over this large red

warning area that affects

3.5 million people.

No trains running.

Here in Glasgow, no buses running.

And you can see from the road here,

very few cars out on the streets

as well, at least in

the urban city centre areas.

One of the most obvious effects

of the snow is the closure

of hundreds of schools.

Hundreds of thousands of children in

Scotland lobby off tomorrow. -- will

be off tomorrow.

With me in the studio

is Geoff Barton, General Secretary

of the Association of School

and College Leaders.

Good evening. Is it an easier

decision to close a school than keep

it open?

It is always a difficult

decision. I think today maybe a

slightly easier decision, given the

scale of what is happening. I have

had people contacting me today, some

of whom are new headteachers, really

anxious about whether they have made

the right call and some veterans

also. Ultimately the decision we're

making is about looking after

children and making sure we can

protect them and get the staff in to

supervise them.

You could get the staff in, the

appearance of one teacher would mean

that the families of 30 kids could

be out of work supporting the

economy.

What is distinctive about a

school is in my case, 1500 students.

What you had to do is make sure if

you had 1500 students going to

school, did you have sufficient

staff to supervise a man for the

quality of teaching? All I knew is

with 85 teaching staff, there was

about 30 of those who lived more

than 20 miles away from the school.

So the decision was, can I safely

supervise those students and bring

staffing to do it? Every member of

the leadership teams in all schools

will be making that decision before

seven o'clock, in order to inform

parents of the decision.

There is

now, here, the safety of the

children but also in attendance,

record of attendance. If you leave

school open and children can't get

there, then the attendance record

gets completely shot.

There is a

scale of different considerations.

The number one, which parents would

want to hear as saying, which is the

most important, is good week

supervise their child safely, that

is most important. And I'll be able

to give some kind of educational

quality to what we're doing. I know

there was a day when I decided to

close the school, in my 15 years of

being head, there were three times.

One diagnostic, by 11 o'clock it

cleared I felt humiliated. It will

always be a difficult call.

It's a

difficult thing to leave the school

open to see who comes on the kids

who don't come then get marks on

their attendance record which the

school order to avoid that, you

close the school?

That is such a

small issue. What you would do if

their school is close, you would

authorise the attendance of the

children who are not there because

you are in extreme circumstances. If

parents were unhappy about the

decision, the governing body hold

you accountable. It is the chair's

decision that you report to the

governing body and you are

accountable for that. Leadership is

about making a decision. That

followed the people today have done

in the of mourning.

Is the primary

consideration health and safety?

Health and safety but not that

caricature of health and safety, are

we worried lots of children will

slip on the Pegram? They could slip

on the street. That is not to say

you wouldn't want to be concerned

about that but the number one is,

can I supervise the number of

students in school by bringing staff

who can do it?

Why is this so

different, briefly, from 1963 when

schools did stay open on this didn't

happen?

Just like lots of things are

different from 1963. Parental choice

means more children will be

travelling further, more children

travelling on parental cars they

were before. I don't think we can do

like for like comparison of 1963.

Thank you very much indeed.

That's almost all for this evening.

A quick well done to the Newsnight

team which picked up

two RTS awards tonight

for the programme's coverage

of Grenfell and our film

on the Rohingya massacre.

Tomorrow, I'll be talking to

Brett Anderson, frontman of Suede -

and he doesn't hold

back on Britpop...

I think it kind of became...

It mutated from a Mike Leigh film

into a Carry On film.

More from that tomorrow.

But, before we go, Civilisations,

a new nine part series

on the history of art,

starts tomorrow on BBC Two.

It follows from the legendary

original, Civilisation,

presented by Kenneth Clark in 1969.

We thought we'd leave you where that

original series left off,

with Clark musing

on a poem by WB Yeats.

"Things fall apart;

the centre cannot hold;

Mere anarchy is loosed

upon the world,

The blood-dimmed tide

is loosed, and everywhere

The ceremony of

innocence is drowned;

The best lack all conviction,

while the worst

Are full of passionate intensity."

Well, that was certainly true

between the wars, and it

damn nearly destroyed us.

Is it true today?

Not quite, because good people have

convictions -

rather too many of them.

The trouble is that there

is still no centre.

The moral and intellectual

failure of Marxism

has left us with no alternative

to heroic materialism.

And that isn't enough.

One may be optimistic,

but one can't exactly be joyful

at the prospect before us.