12/03/2018 Newsnight

Tonight, the PM lays down

the gauntlet to the Kremlin.

We will consider in detail the

response from the Russian state.

Should there be no credible

response, we will conclude this

action amounts to an unlawful use of

force by the Russian state against

the United Kingdom.

the United Kingdom.

has 24 hours to come

up with an explanation

for the Salisbury attack or Britain

will consider it an unlawful use

of force against the UK.

The nerve gas crisis is escalating

into a full-blown crisis.

Authoritarianism is on the rise

in Poland and it's spooking the EU.

Europe threatens to remove

Warsaw's voting rights,

while the Poles resent

Brussels' high handedness.

I will be recommending a short,

independent lead inquiry looking

into allegations of bullying by

staff.

into allegations

of bullying by staff.

Newsnight's bullying

of parliamentary staff provokes

action from the Leader of the House.

But does her promise satisfy the MP

who brought the issue

to the commons today?

And Steve Smith recalls

the moment Ken Dodd revealed

his love of Newsnight.

Why did you decide to talk to us?

I

thought it was about time you had a

bit of encouragement.

bit of encouragement.

Good evening, so what happens now?

Good evening, so what happens now?

Moscow has been given 24 hours

by the UK government

to explain what happened

in the Salisbury chemical attack.

The Foreign office has summoned

the Russian ambassador to explain

whether the poisoning

of Sergei Skripal and his daughter

was a direct action by the Russian

state or the result of that

government losing control

of its stock of nerve agents.

This afternoon in the Commons,

the Prime Minister stated

that the chemical used was a weapons

grade state-produced substance

from Russia's Novichok programme

and said if no credible response

was forthcoming from Russia

by the end of tomorrow Britain

would conclude the action amounted

to a use of force

on British territory.

So, after firm words from the PM

the ball is now in Russia's court.

What happens next?

Let's ask Mark Urban our diplomatic

editor, who's been on this

from the beginning.

Talk us through what we know of the

nerve agent or the programme,

Novichok, mentioned for the first

time today.

At the risk of sounding

like a pedant it is pronounced

Novichok. It defines things in quite

a few ways, but it is still quite a

broad category. There are something

like 100 different agents that are

contained within that programme.

Firstly, let's talk about what it

now makes clear. For a few days they

did not know what they were dealing

with. The Novichok agents were

designed not to be detectable by

standard Nato chemical agent

detectors. That would explain a lot

of things including why those

warnings to people at Salisbury did

not come for a few days, because

they had not detected it for the

first few days and that also

conditioned the treatment that was

given to Sergei Skripal and his

daughter. They were treated for

nerve agent poisoning relatively

quickly, but they did not know what

they were dealing with. The normal

ones like sarin are detectable.

Secondly, it may add some insight

into why this may have happened

earlier than many people think. The

table was found to be contaminated

in a restaurant and it could easily

have been a few hours before the

pair were finally seriously ill.

Various theories, could it have been

a liquid put on their food? That has

already been touted. Other people

are looking at one of the other

Novichok agents which is a powder.

It could have been in the

ventilation system or in the car, so

when it started it blew into the car

and it was contained within that

Shell. They parked and then they

went to the restaurant and they were

shedding contamination there and in

the pub before they fell ill. All of

these things have been defined and

now increasingly it will define the

politics, including the drama today

in the Commons.

We know we are in a

diplomatic stand-off. The Russians

have been given 24 hours to provide

an explanation of how one of the

nerve agents ended up on British

streets. An ultimatum after an act

of apparently shocking recklessness.

It is not a new strategy for Russia

for the breadcrumbs so to speak to

lead back to the Kremlin. Part of

this is revenge, but the bigger part

is really about delivering a message

to Russians inside Russia, to

Putin's own electorate in advance of

the elections. And his security

services who are enabling him to

remain in power.

As investigators

took samples late last week, the

diagnosis of Britain's chemical

warfare community became clearer.

Nerve agent, part a family nicknamed

Novichok in the old Soviet Union,

highly potent and very hard to

detect. The Prime Minister today

called out Russia.

On Wednesday we

will consider in detail the response

from the Russian state. Should there

be no credible response, we will

conclude this action amounts to an

unlawful use of force by the Russian

state against the United Kingdom.

And I will come back to this house

and set out the full range of

measures that we will take in

response. Mr Speaker, this attempted

murder using weapons grade nerve

agent in a British town was not just

crime against Sergei Skripal and his

daughter. It was an indiscriminate

and reckless act against the UK,

putting the lives of innocent

civilians at risk.

What of Russia's

response?

response? Steve Rosenberg caught up

with Vladimir Putin electioneering.

Is Russia behind the poisoning of

Sergei Skripal. Get to the bottom of

things there and then we will

discuss it came the reply. Novichok

is a family of about 100 nerve

agents developed as the Soviet Union

was on its last legs. The chemical

principles are well understood, but

the processes in constituent

chemicals create a highly signature.

It is possible to determine the

exact structure of the molecule.

Because of that it is possible to

determine which pre-cursors were

used in the manufacture of that

agent. It is possible because of the

knowledge about the precursor is to

reconstruct the method of synthesis

and these are tell-tale signs like

fingerprints.

As the clock ticks

away on Theresa May's ultimatum to

the Russians, the wires will be

burning between the Foreign Office

and allied ministries across Europe

and of course the State Department

in the United States. What the UK

will be trying to find out is how

much support there is, whether

solidarity in backing Britain in its

calls for sanctions against Russia

extends beyond the rhetorical. The

Prime Minister did leave one

possible route out for the Kremlin,

alluding to the possibility that

Novichok, a banned weapon in any

case, might have been used without

government authorisation.

It could

be that it was stolen or sold at an

earlier date to another entity. In

which case the question is what is

happening? Why did that happen? What

is the security here? How could this

have been allowed to happen? That is

a very different set of questions.

But if Russia continues to deny

everything, Britain will likely by

Wednesday afternoon be asking its

allies to endure the pain of

applying new sanctions.

This is a

threat that suddenly came to

fruition in the UK. It does not mean

it would not happen in other Western

countries and together we need to

take action, whether it comes in the

form of declaring Russian officials

persona non grata in the UK, or

sanctions against specific Russians.

There is a cost we will pay, but if

we do not face the cost now, we may

pay more in the future.

This is

developing into a fully fledged

diplomatic crisis and Britain soon

could be putting forward a whole new

raft of measures against Russia.

And what response from

the Russians tonight?

Putin brushed off the question

saying the British need to get

to the bottom of it first.

The Foreign Ministry

called it a circus show.

Joining me now, Amy Knight,

a world expert on the KGB,

and Sir Tony Brenton,

British Ambassador

to Moscow until 2008.

Nice to have you here. I will start

with you, Amy. Theresa May laid out

those two options. The Russian state

or a rogue perpetrated that has

borrowed the agent. What do you

sense that this is?

I think the

Kremlin will undoubtedly not admit

it is the Russian state that

committed this act. But I think the

likelihood that rogue elements got a

hold of this nerve gas and were able

to transport it or bring all the

pre-cursors and make this, I think

it is highly unlikely. The FSB is

the agency that is in charge of

these sophisticated laboratories

that do this and it is really

unlikely that this would have

happened.

Mark was espousing some of

the theories of what might have

happened on that day. Do you think

this went according to plan or did

something go wrong?

You know, I was

surprised by the fact that this

substance was actually allowed to

damage other people and put people

in hospital. Even Sergei Skripal's..

But if you look back at the

Alexander Litvinenko poisoning, that

was also handled very carelessly. We

know that the two gentleman work

hired by the FSB to poison Alexander

Litvinenko. I was surprised at the

lack of professionalism if you will,

but presumably this can happen.

But

you still think that Putin's

fingerprints are ultimately on this

or you think it might have been

people acting, believing it was what

he would have required?

That is not

the way things operate. I have heard

this theory before in regard to

other crimes and so forth. This kind

of action would not have been taken

without the explicit approval of

Vladimir Putin. Of course there will

never be a smoking gun because that

is not the way things work. He will

just continue to deny and denied. I

am sure they will say that they will

investigate it and tried to get to

the bottom of things, but as you

know, Vladimir Putin and his very

close colleagues control all of the

investigative organs. So there is no

possibility of Russia having any

kind of an independent investigation

of the circumstances of this

poisoning.

Let me pick up on that

point. What does Russia do now? If

you were in that Foreign Office

meeting tomorrow, would you expect

the Russian ambassador to turn up?

What would you expect him to say?

I'm sure he will turn up and what he

will say is we did not do it and we

do not believe anybody from our side

did it either. It is clear we will

get a negative response the

Russians. And again the question has

been put to them in that way.

Has

Theresa May taken a gamble or has

she played a blinder? Does Russia

care?

I they spooked by this at all?

I do not think she has taken a

gamble, she is responding entirely

properly to an outrageous attack on

the UK. Do the Russians care? That

depends on how we now respond. We

have got a range of sanctions at our

disposal. We can make life

uncomfortable for Russian

intelligence agencies working in the

UK. We can hit Russian money in the

city. But the crucial question is

how much support we can get from our

allies. Our action by itself will do

some damage. But if the West at

United 's lead, that will have much

what impact.

We are pretty much

alone at the moment. From the looks

of it we have not got trapped coming

to our aid. We have not got the EU

necessarily rallying round at this

point, how are we, have we?

Around

the Alexander Litvinenko affair, the

lack of support was disappointing.

The Europeans in particular were

knocked over and beyond rhetoric.

The position has changed a lot. All

of the West is much more at

loggerheads with the Russians than

we were in 2006, so there is more

scope for persuading our western

partners. This has happened on our

streets today, it will be on your

streets tomorrow. But a lot comes

down to the skill and

professionalism and persuasiveness

of the British diplomats and

ministers over the next few days.

Do

you think Donald Trump will have to

start taking this seriously? Will he

have to come out against the

Russians if this is where it leads?

You know I think it is interesting

that timing of this incident. Not

only did it occurred two weeks

before the Russian presidential

election, but also it occurred at a

time when the tram administration is

totally caught up in scandals. So I

think first of all the tram

administration is very distracted,

so they are not likely to be able to

react as well as they might if

things were going smoothly in the

White House. Secondly, we know

Donald Trump has bent over backwards

to apologise for everything that

Vladimir Putin has done. He has gone

on record as saying that he does not

believe Vladimir Putin ever commits

any kind of political killings. I

think it is unlikely that we are

going to get any initiative from

Donald Trump. That said, there are

people in the White House and in the

Congress who have been very

proactive when it comes to this kind

of thing. So we might see something

from them. But I hesitate to say

that it is going to be as strong as

it might be if we had an

administration that was much more

realistic about Russia.

Thank you

very much.

The Leader of the House of Commons

has ordered an independent inquiry

into allegations of bullying

of staff by MPs after

an investigation by this programme.

In one of the more uncomfortable

sessions for the House,

the Speaker John Bercow,

one of those MPs named

in our investigation,

presided over today's proceedings.

Andrea Leadsom said the reports

of bullying were of "huge concern"

and that a short inquiry

would assess whether current

procedures to protect people

who work for the Commons

were fit for purpose.

Ms Leadsom chose not to address

a question on Mr Bercow's own future

but insisted bullying must be

stamped out wherever it is seen.

Chris Cook and his producer Lucinda

Day broke the story for Newsnight.

Here's Chris on the latest.

Last week Newsnight revealed a

problem inquest Mr, an issue with

the so-called plumptiousness, the

apolitical class who make the place

tick, who say they serve bullying

from MPs and they say they don't

trust management processes to

protect them. In large part because

of serious cases where MPs can be

involved in judging one another.

Management have told us to report

stuff but if I said something I

would be moved. I haven't seen one

case go against them.

The response

from the Commons authorities is

pretty dismissive, for example we

told you how a serving Clark told us

how she lived in a culture of fear.

The authority said that was a

grotesque exaggeration. Today we

reported on a new development. We

got hold of a letter from the clerk

of the House of Commons, completely

changing his position. The letter

was sent to the House of Commons

clerks.

The senior management of the house

are acknowledging that they got the

tone of their response to

Newsnight's reporting wrong, they

acknowledge there is a problem with

bullying and harassment in the

Commons and that the policy in place

to deal with it is inadequate and

must be looked at again.

The letter

was seen as a step forward but we

gathered testimony revealing

continued concerns among serving

clerks. He makes no apology or

commitment...

The people who have that power are

the MPs. They met today to discuss

our report. We revealed that John

Bercow is accused of bullying. He

denies it and chaired the session.

The commission will meet on Monday

the 19th of March, next Monday and I

have given notice to my fellow

members that I will be recommending

a short, independently lead in

Querrey by the house commission

looking into allegations of systemic

bullying of parliamentary staff --

independently lead enquiry. I

propose the enquiry should hear from

current and past staff members about

their experiences and help to

provide them with closure where

possible.

It's unclear whether this

enquiry will name MPs or just

discuss the culture. That's for the

House of Commons commission to

discuss next week. A panel chaired

by John Bercow. Some MPs today were

concerned about overreaction. Here

is Paul Farrelly who denied

allegations of bullying last week.

Before members jump to judgment on

what was a very selective BBC

broadcast, approaching the cases

that have been raised in a more

balanced way.

A consensus has

emerged that something must be done

and the enquiry should help to

decide what. The clerks won't be

left out of efforts to reform

Westminster but any system where MPs

and still make decisions on

sanctioning MPs will not have the

support of staff. That was Chris

Cook.

I am joined now by the MP

Caroline Lucas, the co-leader

of the Green Party.

And the MP who tabled the urgent

question leading to Andrea Leadsom's

statement. Did it go the way you

hoped?

There was a change of tone,

which was welcome. There was a

change or deciding the complaints as

exaggerated. That was positive. We

had acknowledgement that the new

procedures will be expanded to

include all staff, which is good,

but where it fell short is the lack

of real grappling with the fact that

the whole process from start to

finish has to be independent. This

new enquiry that Andrea Leadsom

announced is supposed to be

undertaken by the House of Commons

commission, in other words another

set of MPs. If this saga has told us

anything it is that you cannot have

MPs judging other MPs. It doesn't

work, it won't breed confidence. So

in the new procedure and the old one

we have to look at, we have to get

rid of any sense that this is MPs

marking their own homework.

Did you

feel today that there was the

appetite to recognise that and

change it?

Not to the degree that

I'd have liked. Some MPs get it

across the house. But the fact that

the leader of the house can be

proposing another process that is

not independent, the commission

looking at cases indicates a lack of

understanding. We cannot have MPs

making those key decisions on fellow

MPs.

That is mirrored by the

situation today, John Bercow

presiding over and calling on you to

make the urgent question. Is that

the sticking point, that actually

while you've got the judge and jury

in the same place, you can't get to

the bottom of it?

The position of

John Bercow today was different in

the sense that we weren't talking

about live complaints that are

current under existing guidelines

being discussed this was about a

structure, the systemic issue and to

be fair to him he's been very good

at calling urgent questions.

Does he

need to say something publicly about

the allegations about himself?

I

think it would clear the air if he

did, but there has to be an

investigation and at the moment

we've only had allegations from one

side which have been refuted. We

need an investigation. But it cannot

and must not be an investigation

undertaken by MPs. That can have no

credibility with the staff.

Do you

think there is a need, and appetite

to get to the bottom of this or

whether there is a bit of

politicking going on, especially

concerning the speaker's job, as he

has made a lot of enemies in the

job.

Some people are using this for

political ends. James Diedrich got

up to criticise John Bercow for

deciding over the proceedings today,

that MP has no love for John Bercow,

for many years. Yes, people are

using this to settle scores and

that's disappointing because what's

at stake is the well-being of staff

who work very long hours, everyday

for MPs, so we have to tackle the

underlying culture of privilege

allowing MPs to think they can act

in ways that would not be accessible

in any other workplace. Parliament

should be the beacon of best

practice rather than constantly

running to keep up.

Thank you for

joining us.

When it comes to picking fights

with the EU Britain is not alone.

Poland is now in the dock.

It's popularist right-wing

government stands accused

of threatening the independence

of the judiciary by

greatly increasing it's

control of the courts.

This has led the European Commission

to trigger an unprecedented Article

7 proceeding against Warsaw.

If Poland fails to back down by next

Tuesday, March 20th,

it could ultimately lose it's

EU voting rights.

There are also widespread concerns

that the authoritarian policies

of the ruling Law and Justice Party

are threatening liberal democracy

by attacking the media,

curbing civil rights and encouraging

cultural and religious intolerance.

Mike Thomson's been to Warsaw

to find out more about Poland's

creeping authoritarianism.

We should get back to our tradition.

We do not need to

learn from the West.

This is against the mainstream,

against the elite.

It's the right direction.

We are very much afraid.

We are closing our society,

just to our nation,

and that's not good.

The world is multinational.

Ever since Russian forces left,

25 years ago, Poland has

faced an identity crisis.

What does it mean to be Polish?

At first, the Euro

way was the only way.

But now, a new nationalism

is sweeping the nation.

In power since 2015,

the right-wing Law and Justice party

has tapped into dissatisfaction

with liberal, western values.

Emphasising a traditional idea

of Polishness, which promises

to give people back their pride,

culture and self-belief.

But many here fear that what they

regard as the authoritarian

political party behind all this

is hijacking the government,

by subverting the judiciary,

muzzling the media and curbing civil

rights.

I'm here to investigate whether such

claims are justified

and if we are really seeing

the beginning of the end of liberal

democracy in Poland.

This is Ostrow Mazowiecka,

a Law and Justice stronghold.

Like many parts of rural

East Poland, people have long felt

neglected by liberal politicians

and the urban elite.

Here at this windswept paving stone

factory on the edge of town,

there is resentment about the way

foreign EU leaders are criticising

the party they support.

This man has worked at the plant

for more than 25 years.

The town's mayor insists

people here have long been

ignored and talked down to.

He says his party are giving

them back their dignity.

Pride, both personal and national,

isn't the only thing

being given to people here.

Welfare payments for anyone

with children is yet another

very popular policy.

27-year-old Monika,

struggling to raise three

children in her tiny flat,

has long felt let

down by politicians.

Not any more.

Which party do you think

you will give your vote

to in the next election?

This gathering in the capital,

of older urbanites, looks a world

away from those in Ostrow

Mazowiecka.

But appearances can be deceiving.

Here at this right-wing

club in central Warsaw,

liberalism is under attack.

For the last hour or so we've been

hearing all about concerns over

the Pope's policies towards gay

marriage and divorce,

but it goes much deeper than that.

People here have big issues

with the whole subject

of Western democracy itself.

We were robbed, we have debts.

Most of the rules were

very poor, very bad.

We were servants, servants

to the Western capitalists coming

to Poland from 1989.

In Jan's view, the majority of Poles

have seen few real benefits

since the fall of Communism.

Who gained freedom, I'm asking?

Who?

Was Communists, their friends

and families and their

supporters, that's it.

One third is for the

rest of the people.

Very simple.

We should really pursue our own way

and our own tradition.

Of course it's very difficult

but there is a good

saying, can you count?

If you can, count on yourself.

But if Poland carries on down this

path, the biggest beneficiary of EU

grants can't count on the support

of the EU.

Brussels has condemned its move

to take over the appointment

and disciplining of judges

and to make them retire earlier.

But the party's vice president

in the European Parliament sees this

as an unwarranted interference.

Mainly when I'm talking

with my colleagues in

the European Parliament I always

say, OK, you are criticising Poland.

Look at your country.

I cannot accept situation

when the people from the other

countries which are not informed

about the situation,

do not speak Polish,

do not visit Poland,

they compare the situation of Poland

to Russia, Turkey, two different

undemocratic countries.

Some believe the government

is playing an Poland's many

reminders of invasion,

to blame foreigners for their woes.

This government needs enemies,

you know, they are in desperate

search for enemies.

Each and every month

they invent a new enemy.

The European Union is one.

Germany is number one.

It is a very successful mechanism

for attracting people

and the name of the game again,

with this electorate, as I described

it, is a kind of simplicity.

Proud of being Polish,

there is this megalomaniac history

that is being proposed,

offered anew, which is not

necessarily is a real history.

Civil rights groups

have come to fear that

they're on this list too.

Through these doors is the offices

of a women's rights charity.

Just a few months ago,

police went through here,

up the stairs and raided the office,

taking with them dozens

of confidential files, none

of which have yet been returned.

Of course it was very shocking

for us and very scared,

especially when it was a day

when we had clients in our offices.

When the police came they took not

only all the financial documents

but also the documents

concerning very sensitive

data of our clients.

Sometimes we think how big an impact

it had not only on us,

on our situation, the trust

of our clients, how safe they feel.

She suspects that her organisation's

biggest crime is championing women's

rights rather than the kind

of traditional family

values espoused by the

Polish Prime Minister.

So, how is this all

being allowed to happen?

Neither will campaigns backed

by this judge to keep Poland's

judiciary independent.

But why is the government

is so intent on eroding this?

Law and Justice have insisted that

all they're doing is redressing

the long-standing liberal bias

in the country.

But is it not really

a naked power grab?

This was in your questions about

fundamental rights, civil rights.

I can assure you, they are not

in danger, in this country.

The professor believes things cannot

go on the way they are indefinitely.

One of the things that we have

to emphasise about the Poland

of today is that we have

a constituational crisis.

We have a separation of powers

that is nonexistent here,

the rule of law has been violated

on many occasions by the president

and by this party.

This is a violation of the existing

binding constitution

and we are asking ourselves,

when will it be that these people

will face the state tribunal?

Because this is the obvious thing.

I think it will happen

sooner or later.

Poland's radical policies

are flying high for now,

kept aloft by populist answers

to the nation's identity

crisis and the woes

of its marginalised rural poor.

But gathering storm clouds may yet

force Warsaw to change course,

as the battle with Brussels nears.

Mike Thomson reporting.

We did ask the Polish

government for an interview

but no one was available.

Ken Dodd used to say

that he loved to watch Newsnight

last thing at night.

"It's saved me a fortune

on milky drinks."

He might have stayed up

for this one though,

a tribute to a comedian

who was called many things,

perhaps the nicest of which was

simply "life affirming".

Ken Dodd was was

the son of a coalman.

He never left the home

in Knotty Ash, Liverpool,

where he grew up and indeed died

there aged 90 this weekend.

Stephen Smith looks back on the work

of one of Britain's greats.

The one and only Ken Dodd!

Tonight, ladies and gentlemen,

I feel absolutely tattyfilarious

and full of plumptiousness.

What he had in spades was that

very peculiarly British

quality of total daftness.

It makes me absolutely

disconficurated to see that

so many of you have turned up

for the free soup.

He hung out with the Beatles

and they shared jokes about hair.

Lovely hair.

Lovely hair.

We call it "herr" in Liverpool.

We say Judy with the "ferr herr".

Only the Fab four themselves had

bigger hits in the 60s.

Ken Dodd even held the record

for the longest run

at the London Palladium.

42 weeks.

To go to one of his gigs wasn't only

a kind of beautiful experience

of Stockholm syndrome,

as he kept you inside that theatre

until you submitted to his humour,

but it was also to hear jokes that

might have been in

circulation are centuries.

might have been in

circulation for centuries.

Newsnight spoke to Ken Dodd

in his hometown a few years back.

If you want to enjoy

life, its optimism.

I always go on the stage and say,

by Jove, what a beautiful day.

What a beautiful day

for doing this and that,

what a day for ramming

a cucumber through the vicar's

letterbox and saying, look out,

the Martians are coming.

What a beautiful day for bouncing

up and down in a big

barrel of blancmange.

What a beautiful day

for rushing onto the Roland

Using the jokes, which

works to emphasise.

Willie works in the docks

in Liverpool and he's

what they call a diesel fitter,

he goes round looking in the cases

saying "these'll fit her",

"these'll fit her".

I worked for my father in a coal

business with my brother and then

I was on the knocker,

as you say, going around selling

pots and pans and tickling sticks.

Selling things like this,

saying ooh, missus and all

of that is a kind of patter,

a kind of pitch that's directed

at a working-class audience.

Here's a suggestion

from Mrs Nellie Dean who writes,

I think it's high time that

Ken Dodd got knighted.

Well, Mrs Dean, I'd like to thank

you very much for your kind letter.

Just a minute, that says

naughty, not knighted.

Class may have held Ken Dodd back,

he wasn't knighted until 2016.

He also faced trial over an alleged

tax fraud before being acquitted.

# Tears have been my

only consolation #.

Many admired his

singing voice which brought him

several hit records and directors

cast Ken Dodd in straight acting

roles or straight-ish.

But you've won the grand prize.

Well, what is it?

I've never won anything before.

Your prize...

Hang about.

Ladies and gentlemen,

please welcome Mr Ken Dodd.

Even his greatest admirers admit

it was the theatre, not telly

where Ken Dodd really shone.

Ken was addicted to a live

audience, to real people

sitting in rows of seats.

In a sense, the camera got

in the way and he never mastered

the camera like Frankie Howard did

or Bruce did or Eric and Ernie.

A live theatre, it's

a one to one experience,

there's not all this scrap iron

in the way!

Is there ever a moment...

Don't you dare say that word!

No, no, no.

People retire, men retire

when they stop doing what they don't

want to do and start doing

what they do want to do.

Now I happen to know that you'd

rather have an allotment and raise

chickens than be a journalist.

Geronimo!

# Happiness to me is an ocean tide,

a sunset fading on a mountainside.

I watched your programme,

it is a barrel of laughs.

You have some very,

very funny people.

# Happiness, happiness #

That's all we have time for.

Evan's here tomorrow.

Till then, goodnight.