0:00:04 > 0:00:07Facebook faces the wrath of regulators and customers
0:00:07 > 0:00:09in multiple countries.
0:00:09 > 0:00:12Its reputation has sunk, along with its share price,
0:00:12 > 0:00:16and a business plan based on liberal sharing of data may be under threat.
0:00:16 > 0:00:21Is the Cambridge Analytica scandal a watershed moment
0:00:21 > 0:00:25in our relation with Facebook, and other Silicon Valley giants?
0:00:25 > 0:00:27I don't know whether Cambridge Analytica had a significant effect
0:00:27 > 0:00:28on the Trump election.
0:00:28 > 0:00:31I don't know whether they had a significant effect on Brexit.
0:00:31 > 0:00:37I do know that the systems that have been developed by Facebook give this
0:00:37 > 0:00:39capability and make this something that is possible
0:00:39 > 0:00:41to happen in the future.
0:00:41 > 0:00:44We'll hear from Senator John Kennedy, no relation,
0:00:44 > 0:00:49who thinks data is the new oil.
0:00:49 > 0:00:54Also tonight, John Sweeney dusts down an old KGB handbook to find out
0:00:54 > 0:00:58why the Russians might have used a London based professor
0:00:58 > 0:01:02as an alleged conduit between Trump and the Kremlin.
0:01:02 > 0:01:06International conferences and seminars are great for recruiting.
0:01:06 > 0:01:09Stuffed with clever academic scientists and business people,
0:01:09 > 0:01:13they're the perfect place to, quote, "Get information"
0:01:13 > 0:01:16and influence foreigners.
0:01:16 > 0:01:18And shared parental leave...
0:01:18 > 0:01:21Men are apparently, generously still leaving
0:01:21 > 0:01:22the bigger share to women.
0:01:22 > 0:01:28But are fathers secretly just dying to give up the office for the nappy?
0:01:28 > 0:01:32For me, it's really a family time, quality time, you know.
0:01:32 > 0:01:36So, it's very good.
0:01:36 > 0:01:37I love it, actually.
0:01:37 > 0:01:38Yeah.
0:01:38 > 0:01:41We'll ask if men really think it's so great,
0:01:41 > 0:01:47why aren't more doing it?
0:01:52 > 0:01:59Hello.
0:01:59 > 0:02:01The controversial political data intelligence firm Cambridge
0:02:01 > 0:02:04Analytica has suspended its chief executive.
0:02:04 > 0:02:05More on that soon.
0:02:05 > 0:02:07But Facebook is not having a great week either.
0:02:07 > 0:02:09It's the biggest corporate crisis since Volkswagen's diesel deceit.
0:02:09 > 0:02:14That inaugurated a significant decline in diesel sales,
0:02:14 > 0:02:17does this mark the same for Facebook or even other tech giants?
0:02:17 > 0:02:19In the US, the Federal Trade Commission is reported
0:02:19 > 0:02:23to be investigating.
0:02:23 > 0:02:32Here, the Information Commissioner's Office said it's applying
0:02:33 > 0:02:35for a warrant get access to Cambridge Analytica; and told
0:02:35 > 0:02:38Facebook to drop its own audit of the controversial political
0:02:38 > 0:02:39data intelligence firm.
0:02:39 > 0:02:42It was a sign that the authorities here - as elsewhere -
0:02:42 > 0:02:45are not going to let Facebook act as though this is a little local
0:02:45 > 0:02:48difficulty, that can be dealt with via an in-house memo telling
0:02:48 > 0:02:49people to wash the coffee cups.
0:02:49 > 0:02:52Authorities across the West have are shocked at the way Facebook let
0:02:52 > 0:02:54app developers harvest data, and then break all the rules
0:02:54 > 0:02:56by passing it onto others.
0:02:56 > 0:02:57And not tell anyone when they discovered
0:02:57 > 0:03:03rules had been broken.
0:03:03 > 0:03:08How should we describe Facebook's attitude to the date of its users at
0:03:08 > 0:03:12the time Cambridge Analytica had taken possession of so much of it?
0:03:12 > 0:03:17Permissive, certainly. But in fact is the goal. App developers could
0:03:17 > 0:03:22make better apps could use on Facebook if they could get the data.
0:03:22 > 0:03:27Kellas? Well, yes. At that time apps didn't just hoover up the user 's
0:03:27 > 0:03:30data but could access the user 's friends. That did stop in 2015. Is
0:03:30 > 0:03:38the fact we might have given consent defence for Facebook?I think
0:03:38 > 0:03:41legally it is possible we might have given Facebook permission to do
0:03:41 > 0:03:45whatever they want with that data but Facebook actually removed some
0:03:45 > 0:03:51of these access points around 2014 and Mark Zuckerberg went on stage
0:03:51 > 0:03:57and said people were surprised this happened. I'm friends with you and
0:03:57 > 0:04:00now you're upset because an app surprises you. It is kind of clear
0:04:00 > 0:04:06that the
0:04:06 > 0:04:10that the legal...What's clear is that the Cambridge Analytica affair
0:04:10 > 0:04:14has hit a nerve, igniting an international indignation at the
0:04:14 > 0:04:20power of the company. One German court found Facebook's default
0:04:20 > 0:04:26consent settings breached European law. The company faces potential
0:04:26 > 0:04:30punishment and, crucially, a threat to pieces of its business model.So
0:04:30 > 0:04:35what's been happening up until now is the lax control from Facebook has
0:04:35 > 0:04:41allowed the advertisers to really focus their advertising, to really
0:04:41 > 0:04:45make it specific to users by accessing the data that perhaps
0:04:45 > 0:04:49under a controlled environment they wouldn't necessarily have access to.
0:04:49 > 0:04:54I think with the increased regulation, we're going to see an
0:04:54 > 0:04:59ending or certainly a much stricter control of that, which will impact
0:04:59 > 0:05:02the amount that advertisers are going to be able to access
0:05:02 > 0:05:08information, and therefore the amount they are going to be able to
0:05:08 > 0:05:10centre their advertising. That is certainly going to make Facebook a
0:05:10 > 0:05:15little less attractive for advertisers.Let's be fair, there is
0:05:15 > 0:05:20no direct evidence as yet that Cambridge Analytica's use of
0:05:20 > 0:05:24Facebook data actually had any very big effect. Of course, Cambridge
0:05:24 > 0:05:28Analytica would love you to believe it has magical powers of persuasion,
0:05:28 > 0:05:35as indeed most of its vocal critics do, but does Chris Rogers yesterday
0:05:35 > 0:05:40we learned the Conservative Party has spent four times more on
0:05:40 > 0:05:43Facebook than the Labour Party in the run-up to last year's
0:05:43 > 0:05:48collection. The Conservatives spend millions on the best political
0:05:48 > 0:05:51marketing research consultants but I think it is fair to say, to put it
0:05:51 > 0:05:55charitably, its campaign was not regarded as among the best in
0:05:55 > 0:05:58British election history. It was a lesson in how the biggest brains
0:05:58 > 0:06:04don't always get what they want. Certainly, if they are indeed these
0:06:04 > 0:06:09Svengali like super geniuses who can make people believe things just by
0:06:09 > 0:06:16targeted Facebook advertising, then it kind of raises this question, why
0:06:16 > 0:06:18haven't we seen that technique being used by other people? Particularly
0:06:18 > 0:06:22by people who sell stuff online audio brand rather than trying to
0:06:22 > 0:06:30market an election every four years. How is the Amazon is not trying to
0:06:30 > 0:06:34do custom advertising to you in order to sell you a dishwasher?But
0:06:34 > 0:06:38the damage is done, a corner has been turned, data is being taken
0:06:38 > 0:06:42more seriously, the company is being taken is less trustworthy.
0:06:42 > 0:06:46I don't know whether Cambridge Analytica had a significant affect
0:06:46 > 0:06:50on the Trump election if they had a significant effect on Brexit. I do
0:06:50 > 0:06:54note that the systems that have been developed by Facebook give this
0:06:54 > 0:06:58capability make this something that is possible to happen in the future,
0:06:58 > 0:07:03and that is I think what is more important. Not the specific event
0:07:03 > 0:07:06but just happened but what the implications are for our democracy
0:07:06 > 0:07:09in the future, because the abilities of these things will only get
0:07:09 > 0:07:15better. Big data analysis is getting more refined. The amount of
0:07:15 > 0:07:17information there is getting greater, so it means the likelihood
0:07:17 > 0:07:21of being able to affect things is increasing.
0:07:21 > 0:07:25Mark Zuckerberg has been strangely quiet on the whole affair. It's as
0:07:25 > 0:07:30though data was some obscure data area of law even in 2015 and data
0:07:30 > 0:07:34was Facebook's business after all. But it feels like the company is
0:07:34 > 0:07:37leaving its teen years now and being expected to take responsibility like
0:07:37 > 0:07:40an adult.
0:07:40 > 0:07:42That is the Facebook side of it.
0:07:42 > 0:07:45Tonight, more revelations - this time regarding the role
0:07:45 > 0:07:47Cambridge Analytica claims to have played in Donald Trump's
0:07:47 > 0:07:48election as US President.
0:07:48 > 0:07:50Chris Cook is with me.
0:07:50 > 0:07:54Bring us up to date on developments. We have to be clear, because of
0:07:54 > 0:08:00Channel 4 News's excellent reporting, we know they had an
0:08:00 > 0:08:02undercover reporter talked to various Cambridge Analytica
0:08:02 > 0:08:08executives who claimed to have had a critical effect on the election of
0:08:08 > 0:08:17Donald Trump, to have the power to spread anonymously. They also talked
0:08:17 > 0:08:22about, talked in a way that made some people draw the collusion that
0:08:22 > 0:08:26-- conclusion that had been collusion between the Trump campaign
0:08:26 > 0:08:28and a supposedly independent election group, which is not allowed
0:08:28 > 0:08:33under US law. Cambridge Analytica denies all these things that their
0:08:33 > 0:08:36own executive have said and that is why they suspended their chief
0:08:36 > 0:08:41executive this evening.Let's talk about the British investigation,
0:08:41 > 0:08:44maybe not the one Facebook is most terrified of, because the American
0:08:44 > 0:08:50side is probably a big deal for them. The information Commissioner
0:08:50 > 0:08:54is on the case, how effective will that be?The thing to know about the
0:08:54 > 0:08:58information Commissioner is it is not the world's most frightening
0:08:58 > 0:09:02regulator at all. Fundamentally as two functions. It does data
0:09:02 > 0:09:05protection, which is why we are talking about it tonight and Freedom
0:09:05 > 0:09:10of information. These are two things that are both real hassles the
0:09:10 > 0:09:13government. So there is quite a strong incentive for central
0:09:13 > 0:09:17government not to give it too much money because if they do they know
0:09:17 > 0:09:20it will come straight for them. Think of all the data that NHS and
0:09:20 > 0:09:24schools and local authorities hold, as well as the hassle and hatred in
0:09:24 > 0:09:26Whitehall for Freedom of information. There really is no game
0:09:26 > 0:09:30for them in giving it a lot of money. So even where it has
0:09:30 > 0:09:34sufficient powers, and it has quite good powers and data protection, it
0:09:34 > 0:09:37doesn't have the bandwidth or capacity to really take on big cases
0:09:37 > 0:09:42and monthly it is a real scaredy-cat when it comes to taking on big
0:09:42 > 0:09:45things. We will seek what it does. Thank you.
0:09:45 > 0:09:48Earlier I spoke to Senator John Kennedy.
0:09:48 > 0:09:52He is the Republican Senator for Louisiana and serves
0:09:52 > 0:09:54on the Senate Judiciary committee - a committee that Facebook officials
0:09:54 > 0:09:57will give evidence to tomorrow.
0:09:57 > 0:10:01I started by asking whether it was Cambridge Analytica that delivered
0:10:01 > 0:10:05President Trump the election.
0:10:05 > 0:10:10Well, you can't quantify it.
0:10:10 > 0:10:12I mean, you can't really say the President of
0:10:12 > 0:10:15the United States became President of the United States or a senator
0:10:15 > 0:10:17became a senator because of one particular factor.
0:10:17 > 0:10:18Campaigns are not like that.
0:10:18 > 0:10:20There's a lot going on.
0:10:20 > 0:10:24People have a multitude of reasons for voting as they do.
0:10:24 > 0:10:28And I just don't think that you can...
0:10:28 > 0:10:31I mean, I have had consultants pitch me all
0:10:31 > 0:10:34the time in campaigns saying you know, we have won this
0:10:34 > 0:10:35election for this candidate.
0:10:35 > 0:10:37We have won it for that candidate.
0:10:37 > 0:10:40And, you know, you smile politely, but it doesn't work
0:10:40 > 0:10:41that way.
0:10:41 > 0:10:47There's no way to quantify or evaluate what they are saying.
0:10:47 > 0:10:49Your question is can they have an impact?
0:10:49 > 0:10:57Sure, they can have an impact.
0:10:59 > 0:11:00How measurable it is is another issue.
0:11:00 > 0:11:03Hillary Clinton would say it was such a fine election, so
0:11:03 > 0:11:06narrow, and impact means that they changed the course of history.
0:11:06 > 0:11:07They got Donald Trump elected.
0:11:07 > 0:11:08And that is a big thing.
0:11:08 > 0:11:09I don't agree with that.
0:11:09 > 0:11:11I'm not prepared to say that.
0:11:11 > 0:11:13I don't think anybody can say that.
0:11:13 > 0:11:15Do I personally believe that Cambridge Analytica elected Donald
0:11:15 > 0:11:16Trump through their activities?
0:11:16 > 0:11:17No.
0:11:17 > 0:11:23I don't.
0:11:23 > 0:11:26Do I believe that Russia influenced the outcome of the election?
0:11:26 > 0:11:27Influenced, perhaps.
0:11:27 > 0:11:28Determined?
0:11:28 > 0:11:30That's a whole different story.
0:11:30 > 0:11:33OK, let's talk about Facebook, which is obviously a much
0:11:33 > 0:11:35bigger company and a more important global player than
0:11:35 > 0:11:40Cambridge Analytica.
0:11:40 > 0:11:42A lot of people are just saying, look uninstall
0:11:42 > 0:11:45Facebook if you don't want your data passed around like that, just get
0:11:45 > 0:11:48rid of it.
0:11:48 > 0:11:50The company has lost trust and people should uninstall it.
0:11:50 > 0:11:53Do you think that is a piece of consumer advice you would give?
0:11:53 > 0:11:57Well, certainly transparency is something we need to talk about.
0:11:57 > 0:12:00But before we look for remedies, we have to understand the problem.
0:12:00 > 0:12:04And here's the problem.
0:12:04 > 0:12:10Facebook is an extraordinary company.
0:12:10 > 0:12:11But it is no longer a company.
0:12:11 > 0:12:12It is a country.
0:12:12 > 0:12:15It is huge.
0:12:15 > 0:12:18It is breathtakingly powerful.
0:12:18 > 0:12:25Data is the new oil.
0:12:25 > 0:12:29And Facebook's behaviour leaves something to be desired.
0:12:29 > 0:12:31I mean, some of their recent behaviour is
0:12:31 > 0:12:34getting into the foothills of creepy.
0:12:34 > 0:12:39I don't want to see the United States Congress just start
0:12:39 > 0:12:43regulating, I would prefer to have first a frank and candid discussion
0:12:43 > 0:12:46with the social media CEOs at the table with us,
0:12:46 > 0:12:53in front of God and country and the American public.
0:12:53 > 0:12:55And anybody else wants to watch, and let us talk frankly
0:12:55 > 0:12:56about these issues.
0:12:56 > 0:12:58We tried it once before.
0:12:58 > 0:12:59In the Judiciary Committee.
0:12:59 > 0:13:02Facebook and the other social media companies sent their lawyers.
0:13:02 > 0:13:05I don't know what they paid their lawyers.
0:13:05 > 0:13:11But they did their job because they didn't say a damn thing.
0:13:11 > 0:13:13They dodged, they weaved, they stalled, they re-stalled,
0:13:13 > 0:13:17but they would not confront the issue.
0:13:17 > 0:13:22Sorry to interrupt you, but tomorrow Facebook
0:13:22 > 0:13:26officials say they're going to brief the Senate and house judiciary
0:13:26 > 0:13:27committees with the latest.
0:13:27 > 0:13:30Again, I don't expect it is going to be
0:13:30 > 0:13:34Mark Zuckerberg who's going to come talking to you.
0:13:34 > 0:13:37How are you going to make something different next time so it isn't just
0:13:37 > 0:13:39again you listening to a bunch of lawyers saying we can't
0:13:39 > 0:13:41answer that question?
0:13:41 > 0:13:44Well I don't have the authority to make anybody come to the judiciary.
0:13:44 > 0:13:45But our chairman does.
0:13:45 > 0:13:47We have subpoena power.
0:13:47 > 0:13:51I would refer not to see us get to that point.
0:13:51 > 0:13:54I don't even know if the chairman is willing to have a hearing.
0:13:54 > 0:13:55I certainly hope he does.
0:13:55 > 0:14:00We have had one hearing, we need to have another.
0:14:00 > 0:14:05And I would very respectfully and politely but
0:14:05 > 0:14:08firmly, suggest to Mr Zuckerberg that he needs to come to talk to us.
0:14:08 > 0:14:16And subpoena him if he doesn't accept the invitation?
0:14:21 > 0:14:22We're not there yet.
0:14:22 > 0:14:24We're not even to the subpoena stage.
0:14:24 > 0:14:27Let's give him the benefit of the doubt and ask
0:14:27 > 0:14:29him to come politely.
0:14:29 > 0:14:31I mean, he is a smart guy, obviously.
0:14:31 > 0:14:32He invented Facebook.
0:14:32 > 0:14:34My aim in all this is not to trash Facebook.
0:14:34 > 0:14:36I think Facebook has done wonderful things.
0:14:36 > 0:14:38It has brought a lot of people together and
0:14:38 > 0:14:46helped spread democracy.
0:14:46 > 0:14:49It was critical in the Arab Spring in terms of people being able to
0:14:49 > 0:14:50communicate with each other.
0:14:50 > 0:14:52In many ways it brings us closer together.
0:14:52 > 0:14:54But also in other ways it brings us further apart.
0:14:54 > 0:14:56Can I just ask one last one.
0:14:56 > 0:14:58You are talking about this as a Facebook problem.
0:14:58 > 0:15:01Is that your view or do you think this is a
0:15:01 > 0:15:02bigger, tech giant problem?
0:15:02 > 0:15:04I think it is bigger.
0:15:04 > 0:15:05I'm talking about Facebook because the Cambridge
0:15:05 > 0:15:12Analytica issue had to do with Facebook.
0:15:12 > 0:15:16But you can make the same argument for Twitter, Google, the
0:15:16 > 0:15:16other social media companies.
0:15:16 > 0:15:18I mean, let me say it again.
0:15:18 > 0:15:20I'm proud of them, they are American companies.
0:15:20 > 0:15:24But they're not American companies, they're not even
0:15:24 > 0:15:25companies any more.
0:15:25 > 0:15:28They are countries.
0:15:28 > 0:15:29They are breathtakingly powerful.
0:15:29 > 0:15:31They know more about me than me.
0:15:31 > 0:15:35They know more about you than you.
0:15:35 > 0:15:37And we need to talk about the socio-, economic and cultural
0:15:37 > 0:15:42problems that their size presents.
0:15:42 > 0:15:50And the American people, I don't know about
0:15:53 > 0:15:55the folks in the UK, but the American people
0:15:55 > 0:15:57expect us to address these issues and by God,
0:15:57 > 0:15:58I plan on doing that.
0:15:58 > 0:16:01We can do it the hard way or the easy way.
0:16:01 > 0:16:02Senator John Kennedy, thanks very much.
0:16:02 > 0:16:04Thanks for talking to us.
0:16:04 > 0:16:06Facebook has not succeeded in knocking Russia off the news.
0:16:06 > 0:16:09It is only 16 days since the nerve gas attack on the Skripals,
0:16:09 > 0:16:14but today saw the 23 Russian embassy staff leave the country.
0:16:14 > 0:16:18Spies, diplomats - call them whatever you want.
0:16:18 > 0:16:21Today, in front of the long lenses of the gathered press,
0:16:21 > 0:16:24the Russians and their families climbed onto a bus, taken off
0:16:24 > 0:16:25to Stansted Airport, and were basically booted out
0:16:25 > 0:16:28of the country and taken back to Moscow.
0:16:28 > 0:16:32If they were hoping to creep out the back door of the country
0:16:32 > 0:16:35without being noticed, they failed.
0:16:35 > 0:16:37As the Russian state owned Ilyushin aircraft headed home,
0:16:37 > 0:16:40the British government said they had no plans for further
0:16:40 > 0:16:42sanctions - for now.
0:16:42 > 0:16:48Mark Urban is with me.
0:16:48 > 0:17:00The other development is the OPCW have started the deliberations.They
0:17:00 > 0:17:07are the international watchdog. They are now in the UK, more of them
0:17:07 > 0:17:11coming and their director-general said at least three weeks. They are
0:17:11 > 0:17:17going to verify the Porton Down scientists diagnosis that this was a
0:17:17 > 0:17:23new generation Russian nerve agent. Whether they are going to have the
0:17:23 > 0:17:28exact forensic fix on it as having come from a Russian factory is a
0:17:28 > 0:17:34different matter. It may not resolve the argument one way or the other.
0:17:34 > 0:17:42These Russian diplomat left today. Any more?Well the National Security
0:17:42 > 0:17:46Council meeting today, we thought there might be a task force on going
0:17:46 > 0:17:51after Russian money and that kind of thing but apparently not even that.
0:17:51 > 0:17:57Maybe you get the sense that perhaps we feel the diplomatic advantage is
0:17:57 > 0:18:03with us. Today Donald Trump congratulated President Putin on his
0:18:03 > 0:18:09election victory. And you look at these 23 and you see the British do
0:18:09 > 0:18:16not want to get into any further tit-for-tat. I understand the 23 is
0:18:16 > 0:18:24not all of them. It was said in the British statement that it was
0:18:24 > 0:18:30undeclared. So we're not sure of the numbers but some appear to have
0:18:30 > 0:18:36stayed. You look at the expulsion of the Brits from Moscow, I can tell
0:18:36 > 0:18:39you 23 is more than that of intelligence people the Brits had in
0:18:39 > 0:18:44Russia. So they do not want to get into any further tit-for-tat and
0:18:44 > 0:18:49that also is a measure of how the diplomatic advantage might not still
0:18:49 > 0:18:54be with the UK in this.
0:18:54 > 0:18:56Now, I hesitated to call the Russians that were sent home
0:18:56 > 0:19:01today "spies", despite the fact others have, not just
0:19:01 > 0:19:04because it is there is perhaps no clear line that defines
0:19:04 > 0:19:05a spy at all.
0:19:05 > 0:19:07Intelligence gathering is done by many who are not living
0:19:07 > 0:19:10under diplomatic cover.
0:19:10 > 0:19:13And crucially, the Russian state has long been known to make use
0:19:13 > 0:19:15of people who aren't even Russians.
0:19:15 > 0:19:18In the twilight zone of spying and networking,
0:19:18 > 0:19:20John Sweeney has been looking at how this works,
0:19:20 > 0:19:22focusing on one mysterious professor, said to be
0:19:22 > 0:19:24a London-based conduit between President Trump
0:19:24 > 0:19:32and the Russians.
0:19:36 > 0:19:42Highgate Cemetery has always been a place of intrigue for Russians.
0:19:42 > 0:19:45The Tomb of Karl Marx stands sentinel over those of other
0:19:45 > 0:19:50socialists dignitaries.
0:19:50 > 0:19:54And this is also the resting place of former KGB officer
0:19:54 > 0:19:56Alexander Litvinenko, believed to have been
0:19:56 > 0:20:00poisoned by Russian spies.
0:20:00 > 0:20:03A reminder, as if one were needed this week,
0:20:03 > 0:20:11that Cold War espionage is alive and well.
0:20:12 > 0:20:14There's an old KGB handbook which details the tricks Russian
0:20:14 > 0:20:18intelligence got up to in the bad old days of the Cold War.
0:20:18 > 0:20:23The gossip is these techniques are still very much in use.
0:20:23 > 0:20:25Lessson one; when targeting the enemy, don't use a Russian
0:20:25 > 0:20:29if you can find someone from a third country who will do your
0:20:29 > 0:20:34dirty work for you.
0:20:34 > 0:20:37This is a strange tale of the connections between three
0:20:37 > 0:20:39men; the first Maltese, the second Russian,
0:20:39 > 0:20:42the third German.
0:20:42 > 0:20:46We begin with the links between the Russian state
0:20:46 > 0:20:48and the election campaign of a certain American
0:20:48 > 0:20:53reality TV star.
0:20:53 > 0:20:57During the American election, Trump advisors were offered e-mails
0:20:57 > 0:21:00from inside Hillary Clinton's campaign - e-mails
0:21:00 > 0:21:04hacked by Russian spies.
0:21:04 > 0:21:10The FBI has launched a major investigation.
0:21:10 > 0:21:12This is Trump advisor George Papadopoulos.
0:21:12 > 0:21:17He pleaded guilty to making false statements about contacts he'd had
0:21:17 > 0:21:21with the Russian government.
0:21:21 > 0:21:23And Papadopoulos admitted to the FBI that a mystery Maltese Professor
0:21:23 > 0:21:27was the go-between between him and the Russians.
0:21:27 > 0:21:31The Russians will use third country nationals as really
0:21:31 > 0:21:35mostly access agents, to use the proper term,
0:21:35 > 0:21:37meaning they're out there spotting and assessing for targets
0:21:37 > 0:21:38for Russian intelligence.
0:21:38 > 0:21:41Particularly people who might not want to talk to a Russian,
0:21:41 > 0:21:44would be put off by talking to a Russian for security
0:21:44 > 0:21:45or personal reasons.
0:21:45 > 0:21:47Someone who's a third country national can be a lot better
0:21:47 > 0:21:49person to be the face of Russian intelligence.
0:21:49 > 0:21:54Papadopoulos admitted to the FBI the professor told him
0:21:54 > 0:21:57that the Russians possessed dirt on Hillary Clinton in the form
0:21:57 > 0:21:59of thousands of e-mails.
0:21:59 > 0:22:03That he wanted to introduce Papadopoulos to a contact
0:22:03 > 0:22:05and that his contacts were in the Russian Ministry
0:22:05 > 0:22:11of Foreign Affairs.
0:22:11 > 0:22:14The Maltese Professor was this man, Joseph Mifsud.
0:22:14 > 0:22:18He was known as a diplomat but Professor Mifsud's career had
0:22:18 > 0:22:20began as an academic here in Valletta, at
0:22:20 > 0:22:23the University of Malta.
0:22:23 > 0:22:28He resigned in 2007 under something of a cloud.
0:22:28 > 0:22:31He then moved through a series of academic institutions,
0:22:31 > 0:22:36touting his expertise in diplomacy, presenting as an ambassador,
0:22:36 > 0:22:39but this is not true.
0:22:39 > 0:22:44Maltese journalist Jurgen Balzan has checked out the facts.
0:22:44 > 0:22:47There's no evidence of him, of Mifsud being an ambassador
0:22:47 > 0:22:55or deployed in some Maltese foreign ministry office abroad.
0:22:57 > 0:23:00The man who never was an ambassador moved to the London Academy
0:23:00 > 0:23:03of Diplomacy in 2013; an obscure outfit whose degrees were awarded
0:23:03 > 0:23:11by the University of East Anglia and the University of Stirling.
0:23:11 > 0:23:17Here he is with a Russian Ambassador, a real one, that is.
0:23:17 > 0:23:19So why would a minor academic working in British universities be
0:23:19 > 0:23:24of interest to the Russians?
0:23:24 > 0:23:27He is a very typical kind of character in this world,
0:23:27 > 0:23:31on the fringes of academia, think-tankery and governments.
0:23:31 > 0:23:34He looks nonthreatening, he's a hanger on, he's
0:23:34 > 0:23:36at all the parties.
0:23:36 > 0:23:38He's a wannabe, not a real player.
0:23:38 > 0:23:41In a strange way, that can actually help the Russians because again,
0:23:41 > 0:23:49the threat perception of the Maltese,
0:23:52 > 0:23:57-- drops considerably.
0:23:57 > 0:24:00He is Maltese which is not associated a lot with threats
0:24:00 > 0:24:01of any kind, frankly,
0:24:01 > 0:24:03he can get along in a lot of places.
0:24:03 > 0:24:06Mifsud had a fiance based in Ukraine according to BuzzFeed.
0:24:06 > 0:24:08The woman says she hasn't seen or heard of the professor
0:24:08 > 0:24:10for months, but she's left holding the baby.
0:24:10 > 0:24:12Weeks ago she gave birth to their daughter.
0:24:12 > 0:24:14He got about a bit for business too.
0:24:14 > 0:24:18We've tracked some of the movements of our humble professor.
0:24:18 > 0:24:25In London, he met Boris Johnson and junior minister Tobias Ellwood.
0:24:25 > 0:24:27At the University in Rome, he worked with two former
0:24:27 > 0:24:29Italian foreign ministers.
0:24:29 > 0:24:32In Riyadh, he was at the think tank run by former head
0:24:32 > 0:24:37of Saudi intelligence, Prince Turki Al-Faisal.
0:24:37 > 0:24:43A source said he'd regularly visited Moscow.
0:24:43 > 0:24:51None of this, of course, is evidence of him being a Russian asset.
0:24:51 > 0:24:54But there's no denying the benefits of networking.
0:24:54 > 0:24:58Here's another nugget from that old KGB handbook.
0:24:58 > 0:25:02International conferences and seminars are great for recruiting.
0:25:02 > 0:25:06Stuffed with clever academics, scientists and business people,
0:25:06 > 0:25:10they are the perfect place to, quote, get information.
0:25:10 > 0:25:14And influence foreigners.
0:25:14 > 0:25:17In 2016, the professor was in Moscow for a Kremlin-backed
0:25:17 > 0:25:20Valdai conference.
0:25:20 > 0:25:23To his left is Ivan Timofeev, who works at a think tank linked
0:25:23 > 0:25:26to the Russian ministry of foreign affairs.
0:25:26 > 0:25:30Democracy is such a political regime.
0:25:30 > 0:25:37Which is most vulnerable in comparison with every other kind...
0:25:37 > 0:25:41The Washington Post says it is aware of e-mails suggesting
0:25:41 > 0:25:45Mifsud put the Trump team in contact with Timofeev.
0:25:45 > 0:25:48Also at the Valdai conference we meet German-born Swiss-based
0:25:48 > 0:25:53multimillionaire Dr Stephan Roh.
0:25:53 > 0:25:57Stephan Roh, on the left, is the third man.
0:25:57 > 0:26:00He's a lawyer with close links to Professor Mifsud.
0:26:00 > 0:26:02Stephan and his Russian born wife Olga have homes
0:26:02 > 0:26:10in Switzerland, Monaco, London, and Hong Kong.
0:26:11 > 0:26:14And then there's this castle in Scotland, and buying it made
0:26:14 > 0:26:22Stephan and Olga the Baron and Baroness of Inchdrewer.
0:26:22 > 0:26:24In 2014 Stephan Roh became a visiting lecturer
0:26:24 > 0:26:27at the London Academy of Diplomacy.
0:26:27 > 0:26:29He buys the private university in Rome where Mifsud
0:26:29 > 0:26:31is part of the management.
0:26:31 > 0:26:38And Mifsud becomes a consultant at Roh's legal firm.
0:26:38 > 0:26:44In a way we always were in my family very achievements oriented.
0:26:44 > 0:26:47Here is Olga Roh, on the left, in Fox's reality TV show,
0:26:47 > 0:26:54Meet the Russians.
0:26:54 > 0:26:55She's extraordinarily well connected, running an upmarket dress
0:26:55 > 0:26:59company in London's Mayfair.
0:26:59 > 0:27:05Among her customers, Britain's Prime Minister.
0:27:05 > 0:27:09Here's Theresa May meeting the Queen, in an Olga Roh coat.
0:27:09 > 0:27:12Most intriguing are Stephan's business interests,
0:27:12 > 0:27:14which appear extensive.
0:27:14 > 0:27:20Newsnight can reveal the story of one.
0:27:20 > 0:27:25In the autumn 2005 I received this phone call from a Dr Stephan Roh
0:27:25 > 0:27:27showing interest in the company and explained very briefly
0:27:27 > 0:27:30that he was involved or intended to be involved with some technology
0:27:30 > 0:27:35transfer from Russia to Europe.
0:27:35 > 0:27:43And he would like to do this through my company.
0:27:43 > 0:27:47Dr John Harbottle is a British nuclear scientist who ran
0:27:47 > 0:27:50a nuclear consultancy, Severnvale Nuclear Services Ltd.
0:27:50 > 0:27:54He specialised in the effects of radiation on fuel materials
0:27:54 > 0:27:58in reactors in Britain, France and the United States.
0:27:58 > 0:28:01So what did Dr Roh want from him?
0:28:01 > 0:28:07He explained that he would like to acquire my company
0:28:07 > 0:28:10but he wanted to retain my services on the technical side
0:28:10 > 0:28:13because he was a lawyer and had no technical background at all.
0:28:13 > 0:28:16Dr Roh bought the nuclear consultancy, then invited
0:28:16 > 0:28:22Dr Harbottle on an all expenses paid trip to a conference, in Moscow.
0:28:22 > 0:28:25But the nuclear scientist was alert to the danger that visitors
0:28:25 > 0:28:28to Moscow can be targeted, or even honey-trapped, into
0:28:28 > 0:28:34compromising situations.
0:28:34 > 0:28:35I smelt a rat, you know.
0:28:35 > 0:28:40It didn't sound as if it rang true.
0:28:40 > 0:28:43And I decided that I wasn't going to go to this meeting.
0:28:43 > 0:28:44So Dr Harbottle declined to go.
0:28:44 > 0:28:47Shortly afterwards, he was fired.
0:28:47 > 0:28:53Under Dr Harbottle, the company's turnover had been £42,000 a year.
0:28:53 > 0:28:55Within three years, Severnvale Nuclear was turning over
0:28:55 > 0:28:57more than $43 million a year under Stephan Roh, with
0:28:57 > 0:29:03just two employees.
0:29:03 > 0:29:06On the face of it, it could be a legitimate business,
0:29:06 > 0:29:10highly successful in a short space of time.
0:29:10 > 0:29:13However, my concerns are that it's only got two employees,
0:29:13 > 0:29:15neither of which are experts in the field of a consultancy.
0:29:15 > 0:29:17So it could be money-laundering.
0:29:17 > 0:29:20Up from that, it could be a way of obtaining nuclear capability
0:29:20 > 0:29:23for the Russian energy sector within Russia, it needs improvement.
0:29:23 > 0:29:29Dr Roh didn't respond to repeated attempts to contact him.
0:29:29 > 0:29:32The case of Stephan Roh and Severnvale Nuclear
0:29:32 > 0:29:35and of Joseph Mifsud and Team Hillary's e-mails raises
0:29:35 > 0:29:37big questions about these types of international characters
0:29:37 > 0:29:44and their links to the Russian state.
0:29:44 > 0:29:46The essential tradecraft used by Russian intelligence today
0:29:46 > 0:29:49is very similar to that used in the Cold War, indeed it's
0:29:49 > 0:29:53overwhelmingly similar.
0:29:53 > 0:29:58So you can draw lines from the late KGB to the present day with a lot
0:29:58 > 0:29:59of ease and accuracy.
0:29:59 > 0:30:05Professor Mifsud too did not respond to Newsnight's
0:30:05 > 0:30:07attempts to contact him.
0:30:07 > 0:30:14But has always denied that he is a spy.
0:30:14 > 0:30:16When approached by Italian newspaper la Republica,
0:30:16 > 0:30:17he said, "Secret agent?
0:30:17 > 0:30:19I never got a penny from the Russians.
0:30:19 > 0:30:20My conscience is clean.
0:30:20 > 0:30:22All I've done is to foster relationships between official
0:30:22 > 0:30:29and nonofficial sources."
0:30:31 > 0:30:33Three years ago, the Government introduced shared parental leave,
0:30:33 > 0:30:35which gave couples the option of splitting 50 weeks
0:30:35 > 0:30:40of leave entitlement between mother and father.
0:30:40 > 0:30:43A charter for new dads to take more responsibility for rearing baby.
0:30:43 > 0:30:45But some old habits have persisted.
0:30:45 > 0:30:47Take up of the shared leave scheme is very low -
0:30:47 > 0:30:50about 3% of eligible couples.
0:30:50 > 0:30:58The vast majority of couples are sticking
0:30:59 > 0:31:02to the traditional leave system - maternity, with a side of paternity.
0:31:02 > 0:31:04The subject has been analysed by the House of Commons Women
0:31:04 > 0:31:06and Equalities Committee - we'll discuss it shortly,
0:31:06 > 0:31:09but we went to Luton to speak to parents about how they feel
0:31:09 > 0:31:11about their roles in parenting...
0:31:11 > 0:31:13We are equal parents.
0:31:13 > 0:31:15It shouldn't be the mother being at home looking
0:31:15 > 0:31:18after the homestead all the time.
0:31:18 > 0:31:20Getting time off from work, spending time with the kids
0:31:20 > 0:31:23at Easter holidays etc, etc, so any more time
0:31:23 > 0:31:25with the kids is a better thing.
0:31:25 > 0:31:28Two weeks - it's not enough.
0:31:28 > 0:31:30A man has every right to spend time with their child
0:31:30 > 0:31:33as much as a woman does.
0:31:33 > 0:31:34Two weeks, it's not enough.
0:31:34 > 0:31:40You can't bond with a baby in two weeks.
0:31:40 > 0:31:44It means that we get a little bit of a break, as well,
0:31:44 > 0:31:47and for a dad to actually be able to spend time with their child,
0:31:47 > 0:31:49it's one of the most amazing things there is.
0:31:49 > 0:31:52It's a very precious thing, actually.
0:31:52 > 0:31:55So, as you can see, I've brought my two children
0:31:55 > 0:31:58and my foster child as well, so we are having really
0:31:58 > 0:32:04quality time over here.
0:32:04 > 0:32:06I do know of families where the father's had
0:32:06 > 0:32:10to go back so quickly.
0:32:10 > 0:32:12But even a week, two weeks after the birth,
0:32:12 > 0:32:16it's such a process for the woman to go through, that they need time,
0:32:16 > 0:32:18that time to physically recover and have that support.
0:32:18 > 0:32:21So for the dad to be able to take some of that load
0:32:21 > 0:32:24would mean a lot for them, and improve rates of things
0:32:24 > 0:32:28like postnatal depression.
0:32:28 > 0:32:31I've got three kids myself, so I got two weeks off, you know,
0:32:31 > 0:32:35it wasn't much time at all.
0:32:35 > 0:32:37Clearly times have definitely changed, you know, women are no
0:32:37 > 0:32:39longer at home any more, they're working full-time jobs,
0:32:39 > 0:32:40looking after kids.
0:32:40 > 0:32:46Dads do the same thing, so times have definitely changed.
0:32:46 > 0:32:50With me here is director of the think tank Demos Polly Mackenzie,
0:32:50 > 0:32:53stay at home dad and blogger John Adams, and Kate Andrews from
0:32:53 > 0:32:58the Institute of Economic Affairs.
0:32:58 > 0:33:03Very good evening to you all. John, you are a stay at home dad. You
0:33:03 > 0:33:07weren't there for paternity as such, is that right?Not for shared
0:33:07 > 0:33:10parental leave. When my first daughter was born I took a month off
0:33:10 > 0:33:15work to stay home with my wife and I was needed at home. She had a very
0:33:15 > 0:33:18hard birth, I had to be there to keep the family running. When my
0:33:18 > 0:33:23wife gave birth the second time, the birth was straightforward but she
0:33:23 > 0:33:25was re-hospitalised afterwards, very high blood pressure and again I had
0:33:25 > 0:33:29to take a month off so I could be at home and keep the family running.
0:33:29 > 0:33:38How old are your children now?Nine and five.What is your day? CHUCKLES
0:33:38 > 0:33:41My day these days involves getting up, getting the children ready,
0:33:41 > 0:33:46doing the school run and then when they are actually at school I do a
0:33:46 > 0:33:52little bit of freelance, and a bit of money, then back to school,
0:33:52 > 0:33:55picked this keeps up, sort out after-school clubs. Today I had to
0:33:55 > 0:34:00host a play date after school.Are there any other stay at home dads?
0:34:00 > 0:34:03When you go to the school gates are they all mothers are some other
0:34:03 > 0:34:09guys?No other men in my position, no. You do see a lot of men on the
0:34:09 > 0:34:12school run these days but you do not see them in the playground like me,
0:34:12 > 0:34:17twice a day.I wonder whether, Polly, we put too much emphasis on
0:34:17 > 0:34:21the very first year. The mother has an important role denim
0:34:21 > 0:34:26breast-feeding and maybe we should put more weight and the later years
0:34:26 > 0:34:31and dads would be more useful to be around?One of the things you can do
0:34:31 > 0:34:36with shared parental leave is that six months of mum attempt then mum
0:34:36 > 0:34:39can go back to work and dad can take the second six months. I think it
0:34:39 > 0:34:42would be great if more people did that. But there is a huge amount of
0:34:42 > 0:34:47work by John is talking about that comes with parenting later on, which
0:34:47 > 0:34:51is the child is sick and you have to pick them up for the nursery has
0:34:51 > 0:34:55closed and is the inset day or a snow day. By default, it tends to be
0:34:55 > 0:35:00the mum that picks that up, just as it is the daughter who picks up care
0:35:00 > 0:35:03for elderly parents, so all of that kind of eats into the number of
0:35:03 > 0:35:08hours that a woman tends to work and that eats into the whole earnings
0:35:08 > 0:35:12profile women having comparison with men, which is how we have ended up
0:35:12 > 0:35:16with the situation where women are 51% of the population but take the
0:35:16 > 0:35:20third of wages.You are getting straight back to the gender pay gap
0:35:20 > 0:35:23and all those issues. Is it a problem, Kate? That men and women
0:35:23 > 0:35:27are not splitting paternity in the wake policymakers are nudging them
0:35:27 > 0:35:34to?It is only a problem if they are not able to do so, if the policies
0:35:34 > 0:35:37and flexible enough and individuals, choices and partners can't have that
0:35:37 > 0:35:42conversation between themselves. It is important to increase paternity
0:35:42 > 0:35:45pay. It might be a cost to the taxpayer but it might be something
0:35:45 > 0:35:48we want to prioritise. It shouldn't affect small businesses because they
0:35:48 > 0:35:52can reclaim that money from the state. I much more concerned with
0:35:52 > 0:35:56the government tries to bringing in some intrusive policy to hit its own
0:35:56 > 0:36:01targets, despite what people might be telling us. In that respect, the
0:36:01 > 0:36:04policies proposed today by forced dad leave, forcing them to take time
0:36:04 > 0:36:08off, threaten their benefits and the time they can take off if men don't
0:36:08 > 0:36:11take a certain proportion is deeply concerning to me. I don't think it's
0:36:11 > 0:36:15a liberal, I don't think it is flexible or represents what couples
0:36:15 > 0:36:19want.You basically think it is about choice and as long as they are
0:36:19 > 0:36:23freely choosing it doesn't matter if there is some inequality or some
0:36:23 > 0:36:28difference in the way people choose? We want to make sure there is
0:36:28 > 0:36:31equality in terms of being able to take it, but of outcome is
0:36:31 > 0:36:37absolutely fine.Of course, as a point of principle that is really
0:36:37 > 0:36:41compelling but then you have the reality, which is when a mum says to
0:36:41 > 0:36:44her own employer, I want to take time off work it's now brilliantly
0:36:44 > 0:36:49really normal and OK and lots of employers have on ramps and off
0:36:49 > 0:36:53ramps to help people back. But if the dad says I want to take six
0:36:53 > 0:36:57months or even three months or even six weeks, it's kind of, people know
0:36:57 > 0:37:01they have legal obligations and feel a bit awkward but it is not normal
0:37:01 > 0:37:04lives. And actually a really compelling thing about a daddy month
0:37:04 > 0:37:10is it helps to have that conversation. I think lots of men, I
0:37:10 > 0:37:13would love to know what John Biggs, don't feel empowered to have that
0:37:13 > 0:37:17conversation with their employer. They would love to do it but they
0:37:17 > 0:37:25feel it's not what dads do.Is that correct?I think it is right. I
0:37:25 > 0:37:28would disagree with Kate, I don't think it's a case of taking benefits
0:37:28 > 0:37:31away from people, they take it or don't. This issue of stand-alone
0:37:31 > 0:37:36leave, it would basically put us all on a level playing field, I think.
0:37:36 > 0:37:42The crucial point here is it would enable men to get involved with
0:37:42 > 0:37:46their children from day one and if you bond with your child from day
0:37:46 > 0:37:50one there is reams of evidence and involved father from the start they
0:37:50 > 0:37:55can evolve with their start and have better educational outcomes, better
0:37:55 > 0:38:01mental health and, I lost my train of thought...Kate, there is a sort
0:38:01 > 0:38:05of success breeds success if you get dads to take time off because it is
0:38:05 > 0:38:08probably easier for John, easy for John if he wasn't the only man at
0:38:08 > 0:38:15the play date?Absolutely. As far as I am concerned John is leading the
0:38:15 > 0:38:19way on this. I said to him on and off-screen how impressed I am by
0:38:19 > 0:38:23that. I agree there is a cultural problem but you don't change culture
0:38:23 > 0:38:26organically and in a meaningful way if you do it through false. I think
0:38:26 > 0:38:31forcing couples, each individual to take a certain amount of time off is
0:38:31 > 0:38:35not the right way to go about it. Nobody is proposing to force them,
0:38:35 > 0:38:41it is use it or lose it.Use it or lose it, I think you're putting new
0:38:41 > 0:38:43parents in a very difficult situation where you are threatening
0:38:43 > 0:38:47to take benefits away and time and leave away when that could be
0:38:47 > 0:38:51redistributed to the mother or the father or to anybody who wants it.
0:38:51 > 0:38:57Which is why shared parental leave is a great thing. Why are we backing
0:38:57 > 0:39:01away from there?Becoming so Draconian? The original plans we
0:39:01 > 0:39:06wanted to put through were six weeks for the mum, six weeks for the dad
0:39:06 > 0:39:09that he couldn't give away and then a big amount of shared parental
0:39:09 > 0:39:14leave.Why do you or anyone else in no better for an individual couple?
0:39:14 > 0:39:19It used to be 26 weeks for the mum that she couldn't give away. We did
0:39:19 > 0:39:25from 26 weeks the woman mum couldn't give away, instead of taking it down
0:39:25 > 0:39:31to two we give them am six weeks and the dad to six weeks.Who is getting
0:39:31 > 0:39:35the raw deal? Bloom the self-employed. You have framed it
0:39:35 > 0:39:38very much as men are getting the better deal because you looked at
0:39:38 > 0:39:43this in the labour market rate. Is there a privilege to looking after
0:39:43 > 0:39:47the kids? Is it basically you are getting a good deal now because you
0:39:47 > 0:39:51have the kid time?I think ultimately, if you look at how much
0:39:51 > 0:39:56time the majority of men spent with their kids, I feel blessed, I really
0:39:56 > 0:40:01do. There was a guy doing some building work to how some years ago
0:40:01 > 0:40:04in his 60s, stereotypical builder. I was always around the house when he
0:40:04 > 0:40:08was there an idle one day I would have to explain to him why I was
0:40:08 > 0:40:14there with my kids. I told him it's me that looks after the kids, my
0:40:14 > 0:40:17wife goes out to work and I did not expect a positive reaction. He
0:40:17 > 0:40:21stopped what he was doing and looked away that said, I wish I could have
0:40:21 > 0:40:25done what you don't because I never saw my kids up.The measure of
0:40:25 > 0:40:30happiness, levels of women are hired men, maybe this is a rather nice
0:40:30 > 0:40:35thing to do? We talk about as if it is a burden, after children?This is
0:40:35 > 0:40:39such an important point. When we talk about the gender pay gap it's
0:40:39 > 0:40:43how we can make women pursued the same career trajectories of men and
0:40:43 > 0:40:47there is never a conversation about women having a healthy balance and
0:40:47 > 0:40:51Mike are making choices that make them happier. I think as long as
0:40:51 > 0:40:54women can pursued the same career trajectories we are in a good place.
0:40:54 > 0:40:59We're not quite there yet. I think, as has been pointed out my, it is
0:40:59 > 0:41:02assumed women will take up the household chores on childcare and I
0:41:02 > 0:41:05think that is a bit of an unfair assumption and there is more we
0:41:05 > 0:41:10could do. Why is it that only going to work and working 60, 70, 80 hours
0:41:10 > 0:41:14a week is the right thing to do? Kate is completely right and that.
0:41:14 > 0:41:19The best thing from my perspective is if we were to share both the joys
0:41:19 > 0:41:24and burdens of family life. Changing nappies is not massively fun but
0:41:24 > 0:41:28playing with the baby is extraordinary. Picking kids up and
0:41:28 > 0:41:31going... There are wonderful things but also sometimes I do feel like I
0:41:31 > 0:41:34just want to stick to go to work because I can sit down and have a
0:41:34 > 0:41:40cup of coffee.Sharing it more you would enjoy it more.It means we can
0:41:40 > 0:41:43get away from the situation where women don't have the money, they
0:41:43 > 0:41:46don't have the pension savings because they can share.We are going
0:41:46 > 0:41:50to leave it there. Thank you all very much.
0:41:50 > 0:41:53That is all we have time for this evening. Emily will be here, but
0:41:53 > 0:42:02until then, a very good night.