Stories behind the headlines with Emily Maitlis. With an in-depth look at the Westminster Bridge attack one year on, Facebook's data problem and Alexander Stubb on the EU summit.
Browse content similar to 21/03/2018. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
It's been one year since terror hit
the streets of Westminster
and five people lost their lives.
The attack confounded
Who was the perpetrator?
Had he worked alone?
Tonight, an extended Newsnight
you significant new information
about who he radicalized,
and why he acted when he did.
-- on how he was radicalised.
What's going to be our next
move against Russia?
The Prime Minister will address
the our relationship with Russia
at the EU summit tomorrow,
and she won't be holding back.
EU leaders will be warned by the
Prime Minister that they are all
under threat from Russia, but will
Also tonight, a status update
from Mark Zuckerberg
on Facebook's data breach.
We'll ask if the social media
giant is doing enough
to salvage its reputation.
One year ago a 52-year-old
Khalid Masood, brought terror
to the heart of Westminster.
More than 50 people
were injured, five were killed.
Tomorrow the lives of PC
Keith Palmer, Kurt Cochran,
Aysha Frade, Leslie Rhodes
and Andreea Cristea
will be remembered
at a memorial service.
The man behind the attack
was out to hit the seat
of British democracy,
driving a vehicle into
pedestrians along the Bridge
before attempting to
enter Parliament itself.
But he didn't fit
the typical profile.
We were told he acted alone.
That police were baffled
by his motivation.
Tonight, in an extended film
on who he was
and how he was radicalised.
Richard Watson and producer
Maria Polhofska have worked
on this report which contains images
of the attack some may
London, 22nd of March last year.
Khalid Masood floors
the accelerator of his 4x4,
mounting the pavement on Westminster
Watch the highlighted circle,
the car was his murder weapon.
This wasn't a random attack.
This was an individual who'd been
an extremist for many, many years,
whose pattern of behaviour over
many, many years
was characteristic of many Islamist
extremists that we see.
Masood had sent a document to his
Whatsapp messaging group,
justifying his terrorist attack.
It was called "Retaliation".
Three people were killed
outright on the bridge,
one died later in hospital.
Newsnight has learned it
could have been even worse.
Security sources have told Newsnight
that these barriers saved 25-30
lives of the day of the attack,
and that's because Khalid Masood's
car was forced off the pavement
and onto the road at the start
of the barriers,
he drove along here and then cut
back into the pavement
at the end of the barriers,
crashing the car over
there on the left.
Seconds later, he jumped out
of his car armed with two knives,
ran down here through a barrier
leading to the Palace of Westminster
and stabbed PC Palmer.
A plainclothes protection
officer shot Masood dead,
but PC Palmer was mortally wounded.
There was an awful
lot of blood loss.
We had a pulse at that point,
which I was pleased about,
because I thought absolutely we can
keep him alive.
Tobias Ellwood MP, seen
here kneeling next to PC Palmer,
used his army medical training,
chest compressions, mouth-to-mouth
in a desperate effort
to keep him alive.
Eventually doctors said,
OK, I think we're just
going to have to call it,
and I remember looking
at him and saying,
"You're going to have
to tell me to stop, Sir,
because otherwise I'm
going to keep doing this."
And he just said, "Sir,
you've done your best,
we've all done our best here,
I call the time of death."
I do recall the silence.
The doctors and all the medics
and the entire team then moved away
with all their equipment
and I was left there with a couple
of the original policeman,
who by this time were very,
very upset because it
was their colleague.
It was very eerie to be able to hear
the leaves in the trees and sounds
you're not normally familiar
with at all but not a single
movement of traffic, not a horn,
not anybody speaking,
no shouts, nothing whatsoever.
To be in front of his body,
when everybody else then disbursed,
and then it was up to us to,
in a dignified way,
cover the body up
and then wait for the
forensics to turn up,
because of course this
was now a murder scene.
Masood had murdered five people
in an attack lasting 90 seconds.
The first of a series
of terrorist attacks
that killed 36 people last spring.
A year later, approaching
the anniversary of the attacks,
Newsnight has been investigating
Khalid Masood and his connections
to UK extremists,
searching for clues that might help
explain his murderous rampage.
We have significant new information.
There is a widely-held belief
that this was the work
of one crazed individual,
a so-called lone actor.
While it's true that Masood was not
part of a terrorist cell,
he's had contact with extremist
terrorists over the past 13 years.
We started by looking at his links
to drugs and violent crime.
A source in Eastbourne,
where he once lived,
told us he was using crack cocaine
in the '90s.
He was dealing drugs
and could be extremely violent.
He'd already been convicted
of stabbing a man in the face
in 2000 in East Sussex,
and later, in another attack,
when he got out of prison,
he stabbed his friend.
Full on punched me, stabbed me
straight in the face.
Put me straight on the floor.
I've turned round to try to get
and he's trying
to stab me in the back.
Most Islamic extremists
that we've come across in the last
five or ten years
have had a history
most of them are criminals,
and many of them have got a history
of violence as well,
and violent criminality.
Masood, then Adrian Ajao,
is thought to have converted
to Islam while in prison.
Freed in 2003, he chose to live
in a succession of places which have
been extremism hotspots in the UK.
They were all strongholds
of the Islamist group
I've investigated for nearly 20
This is a proscribed
organisation in this country,
a proscribed terror organisation
but it takes root in certain parts
of certain communities,
and Khalid Masood moved from one
area to another
where there was activity
It was in Crawley in 2004
that he came up on the security
services' radar for the first time.
The town was at the centre
of a plot using fertiliser,
stored here, to make home-made bombs
to blow up nightclubs
and bars in the south-east.
Masood's telephone number
was on the contacts list of someone
MI5 was investigating.
But he was on the periphery
and wasn't investigated.
Does a detail in the public records
provide a clue to his militant
Islamist mindset back then?
In 2004, Khalid Masood
married his second wife,
Farzana Malik, at this registry
office in Medway, in Kent.
I've got the certificate here,
and the date on it is very
The marriage took place
on the anniversary of the 9/11
attacks on New York,
the 11th of September, 2004.
We asked a former Jihadist
who infiltrated Al-Qaeda
and spied on the group for Britain's
secret intelligence service MI6
what he made of the choice of date.
Well, I mean, that is rather
shocking, and most likely speaks
volumes of how he viewed
that particular anniversary.
So most likely he thought
it was a joyous day.
He is not the only one,
unfortunately there are legions
of people who believe basically
it was a joyous day.
From 2005 to 2009, Masood spent time
in Saudi Arabia, teaching English.
First in Yanbu
and then at the government's
aviation school in Jeddah.
This man knows some of his fellow
students from those days.
Based on what the students
who attended his classes,
now they are professionals
in the aviation industry
in Saudi Arabia,
they describe someone
who was more on the path
of radicalism, in a sense.
He was serious, he wasn't someone
who would describe the Saudi society
as a true Islamic society.
He would say
that there are many
things about the Saudi
society that was wrong.
Especially the path they are taking
in terms of modernity.
When he was living in Jeddah,
British intelligence suspected
Masood was helping extremists join
Al-Qaeda in the Federally
Areas of Pakistan.
In London, MI5 later
assessed Masood had been
got the wrong man.
Meanwhile, in Saudi,
his students saw a man
who was ultraconservative.
They were worried, basically,
that he was really more
than Saudi conservatives themselves!
There was no doubt that he was a
Salafist. But he went even beyond
On his return to the UK, new
moved to Luton. He taught English at
the private language school, here at
the Britannia Centre. -- he moved to
Luton. At the time it was owned and
run by trustees of the is lamb
Part-time teacher, would
come there, would disappear,
pleasant person to talk to.
Islamic State wallows fundamentalist
Salafist teachings and so did Khalid
But the Imam has had street
confrontations with al-Muhajiroun in
the town, and has said that if the
lead Masuda had shown any signs of
supporting the group he would have
into means that he would have
If he had the slightest
indication that he was adopting
radical beliefs, we would deal with
it on the spot, we would not give it
the opportunity to fester grow.
Luton or the mosque or the
organisation have anything to do
with his radicalisation?
not, absolutely not, if you look at
where we come from, and you study
Luton Islamic State, we are the
forefront of refuting extremism.
security sources have told Newsnight
that the lead Masuda was associating
with extremists in Luton, once
again, picked up on MI5's radar
because he was in contact with these
men, convicted of plotting a terror
attack on a Territorial Army base in
the town. Khalid Masood lived a few
streets away from the plotters, at
this point, MI5 still classified him
as a subject of interest, but his
file was closed in October, 2012,
occurs there was no evidence that he
posed a direct threat the UK.
coming in and out, if you like, the
surveillance that was going on at
the time, it would not mean that he
was caught, and that he was plotting
as such, but he may well have had
awareness of those who were
plotting. -- it would not mean that
he was core. He would be cognisant
of what was being planned and talked
about. He was well-known, but prior
to Westminster, he had never been a
central figure in the conspiracy to
carry out a terrorist attack.
Between 2012 and 2016, Masood was in
contact with al-Muhajiroun
supporters who were being actively
investigated by MI5. He expressed
support for 9/11. MI5 has said that
neither of those facts warranted
reopening the investigation into
him. In 2016, he was living in
Birmingham, with his third wife.
Masood is believed to have been
running a private tutoring business
here. He joined an established
Salafist community but was already
planning his next move, this time,
overseas, to Saudi Arabia. In May,
2016, we understand that he was
stopped from travelling to Jeddah,
to start a new job, could this have
been the trigger for the attack? Is
this why he called his farewell
document Retaliation? New research
suggests denial of travel can be a
key risk factor for terror attacks.
He was in touch with a
transportation company, in Jeddah,
in Saudi Arabia, which specialises
in transporting pilgrims who are
visiting Mecca, Medina, the holy
cities. Why did the Saudi
authorities refused his work Visa?
We understand... The understanding,
based on the confidential source
from Saudi Arabia, the understanding
is that his name was on a list
provided, without saying who
provided the list, but it was
provided to them.
intelligence, I would imagine?
likely, most likely it was provided
by the authorities here.
question, then, for the police and
MI5, was Saudi Arabia his end
destination or did Masood have an
ambition to go to a jihadist Theatre
of war? Counterterrorism sources say
they found no evidence that he was
trying to fight in Syria but he had
been linked to people trying to get
to the Afghan border, in the past.
If he was going to be more less in
the service of pilgrims, coming into
Mecca and Medina, that is not
extremists me to if he was using
that as a pretext to go into Syria,
then yes, that was extreme. -- that
is not extremist; if he was using
that as a pretext, that was extreme.
His Visa was refused, could that be
I think it could be
significant, like many of his kind,
like many Islamist extremists, at
some stage, they often have an
aspiration to travel to one of the
theatres of, where jihadis is going
on, whether that be in Afghanistan,
in the early 2000s, or laterally,
Islamic State, Syria and Iraq, it
looks on the face of it that that
could have been the trigger. If
something is put in the way the
aspiration go overseas. -- latterly.
Then they decide to carry out an
Research carried out by
Canada's Secret Service, after two
attacks there, lends to this theory.
100,000 intelligence reports were
analysed, looking for factors that
turn ideological extremists into
attackers, it is called mobilisation
I'm proud to say our work has been
ground-breaking. The analysts have
been inspired by the fact we had two
attacks in Canada. We never had
attacks like that before and they
want to make sure that we were being
as effective as possible, it was
their contribution to it.
2014, a man deliberately mowed down
soldiers in Quebec. One was killed.
He'd had his passport seized three
months before the attack. He was
There can be a
variety of factors that lead them to
switch parts but it is a fluid
process we see a switching back and
forth. It's not a surprise we would
see them go from a denial of travel,
where travel was the objective, to
subsequently plotting an attack.
This is so-called Islamic State's
cheap propagandist. He released a
video in 2014 telling his supporters
explicitly that if you can't get to
the caliphate, then attack at home
with knives and cars. That is what
Masood did. From his family home in
this well-kept suburban estate in
Birmingham he started downloading
extremist material in 2016,
searching so-called Islamic State
and planning to travel. It is now
believed he started to plan the
Westminster bridge attack from here.
In the months before the attack, he
told his family he was planning to
move abroad for a second time.
Newsnight understands that the
police investigation after the
attack found he was on the verge of
travelling overseas with another
man. We don't know to wear. I also
understand the police investigation
suspected Masood was radicalising a
third man, by giving him religious
instruction. It seems he was making
final preparations for the attack
and in December 2016, moved into
this small bedsit in Hackney Road,
Central Birmingham. We spoke to a
He was a different person, I can see
that, because of his clothing, his
beard, his style was different. He
was wearing, always, a cloth that is
just one piece from his shoulders to
his feet. I wasn't scared of him.
You weren't scared?
No, because as I
say, he was very calm. He was
minding his own business, and my
expression was... Sorry, my
impression of him was he was more
like a spiritual guide.
On the 22nd of March, he thought
Callard missed dude was in his room
when the police raided hours after
I saw a couple of police
cars. I went to the stairs and I saw
fully armoured police offers.
Just on the stairs
there were four or five of them.
Fully equipped, with all
the body armour, with machine guns,
with the green lasers pointing at
me. It was like I was in a movie.
must've been massive shock?
yes, I was in shock when I found out
the guy living next to me murdered
The police and MI5 were racing to
find out if Masood was part of a
wider cell or if he'd entered alone.
12 people were arrested. They were
all later released without charge.
Ultimately, the police and MI5
concluded that Masood acted alone,
but this was not a random attack by
any means. Newsnight has charted his
long-standing connections to
extremism. What triggered him to
strike at Westminster bridge
question why did he blamed the
British state for disrupting his
travel plans? It is hard to get
inside the head of such a violent
and volatile man, and
counterterrorism experts argue his
precise motivations died with him.
Richard Watts and reporting there.
"We have a responsibility
to protect your data",
Mark Zuckerberg shared in an update
"And if we can't, then we don't
deserve to serve you.
I've been working to understand
exactly what happened
and how to make sure this
doesn't happen again.
The good news is that the most
important actions to prevent this
from happening again today we have
already taken years ago.
But we also made mistakes,
there's more to do, and we need
to step up and do it".
His Chief Operating Officer
at Facebook added her own statement.
"I deeply regret
we didn't do enough".
Said Sheryl Sandberg.
So tonight, we ask
how much is enough -
and what Facebook knew
about what it had got wrong.
Dipayan Ghosh worked
for Facebook in the Privacy
and Public Policy Team.
He's now a fellow at
the Harvard Kennedy
School of Government.
Eileen Burbidge is a partner
at Passion Capital, early stage
tech, who previously worked
Lovely to have you both. Your scale
of, your assessment of the scale of
the problems now at Facebook and
weather tonight's apology mitigates
It is a tremendous scale,
this issue. This is a matter that is
beyond just user privacy. Obviously,
50 million people's data, over that,
was breached, in a sense, and this
is a massive user privacy issue. It
is also a major issue for the
National security, and for the
integrity of democratic institutions
around the world.
scale. When you worked at Facebook
in the private policy, how important
did it feel that was to them?
hugely important for the company.
Privacy is the bread-and-butter for
the company, and if it gets privacy
wrong, its stock price drops. There
is a direct correlation there, as we
had seen. It is the company's
responsibility to protect user
privacy. In this case, there were
certain breaches and I think the
company needs to assess what has
happened and try to take positive
action going forward.
understand how they let it happen?
If it's as important as you say, how
did they allow an academic to
download those apps without any
checks and balances to see how
widely they were being shared?
I think this is a very difficult
situation, because academics are
always clamouring to get access to
the data that tech companies hold.
Facebook's data is, of course,
extremely valuable for academic
study and to the extent the company
can be transparent about it. It is a
net positive for society. In this
case, the academic clearly breached
his policy with the company and that
is a tremendously egregious action.
That is what has been reported, at
So who do you think made the
biggest breach of trust in all of
this? Who has let down who the most?
Well, I think that what we have do
remember here is that Facebook
operates no differently from any
other major Internat company,
Google, Twitter, Snapchat. The
entire industry operates on the
premise that we collect a lot of
data, were going to try and monetise
that in the digital advertising
ecosystem. So I don't see the
practices of this particular company
is any different to any other. I
think what we really need to try and
understand is the checks and
balances that companies like
Facebook Place an academics and
other third parties they share data
with, as well as the way that these
companies enforce the agreement they
said with third parties who receive
data. Which, of course in this case,
we have seen harm the public.
don't think in future they will
collect less data, do you?
think that remains to be seen. I
think a lot of this is going to
depend on the way that Washington,
DC and the rest of the regulatory
community around the world starts
thinking about this burgeoning
industry. There may be checks placed
on the way that these kinds of
companies, like Facebook, can
collect data, which may or may not
have positive effects for consumers
at the end of the day.
there for a second if you can.
Alexander Nix told me on Monday, he
was the boss of Cambridge Analytica,
of course, that he felt the media
had been out to get it. One of the
questions we just do not know is how
helpful Facebook word to the Donald
Trump campaign and whether there
would have been the same interest if
Hillary Clinton had won.
that is really difficult to say but
I suspect other parties would be
complaining if it had been the other
way, but I do think there are a
number of issues that are being
conflated, which makes this a
situation which is not going away. I
think there is one issue about
Facebook and about third parties
that use its data and then violate
its terms of services. There is
another issue about Facebook's lack
of disclosure and lack of
transparency about when those
violations happened and how it
behaves in response to that. Then
there is another issue yet about
what is being done with that data.
So I don't think there would be
quite so much backlash, for example,
if it turned out to be a clothing
retailer who had used data servicing
adverts for clothing.
This is the
question, if we know our data is
being used and shared, do we mind?
Is it about the transparency more
than anything is?
For me, I think
it's all about the transparency,
disclosure. Even things that have
come out that maybe Facebook tried
to suppress the news about this,
tried to deny... I think they played
this badly and their acted very
poorly. They probably felt they had
a defensive position because they
had changed their terms of services
in 2014, since all this happened
that Mayport, we have got of this,
we know how to manage this. I think
that response is what was poor.
want to bring up the front of
tomorrow's Times which has a story
saying advertisers are threatening
to pull out of Facebook. Even talk
of putting it on and on ethical
investment list, which clearly would
be a major blow to a company that
thought it was all about sharing the
good. Do you think they will or is
this just a threat?
I think it's
being considered and is a viable
threat. My prediction is it wouldn't
come to that. I think Facebook will
continue to insist it is a platform,
as was said earlier, it does need to
monitor and make sure that it is
adhering to its terms of service,
terms and conditions. I think
advertisers and even investors just
want to see Facebook leadership
leading from the front and being
more transparent and more genuine
and sincere about that.
a domain, the Giants, but this is an
industrywide problem, as far as we
Yes, and that is what he
was saying earlier, this is not just
Facebook. Every technology company
uses big data and that is one of the
promises of technology, that you can
have bespoke custom tailored
I know you are not and
might as any kind of Facebook
spokesman. You left the company and
I'm wondering why, was a sense of
discomfort with what they did?
Well, my career is varied, before
Facebook I was in the bomber White
House, working on privacy and
Internet policy issues. -- Obama
White House. Long story short, I
wanted to have an impact in public
policy-making, and so I'm doing what
I'm doing out to try to think about
how this industry can reshape
itself, and mould into a space that
can limit the negative externalities
that we are seeing from political
misinformation to foreign
interference in elections, to hate
Yeah. Limit the negative is
a very delicate phrase...! Is that
where we are, can it come back now?
No, no, I think it is going to come
back, all of this is unprecedented,
all of this is unintentional, there
is consequence that come about of
having great market force and impact
but Mark Zuckerberg, with all of his
naivete, and reaction over the last
few days, he is well intended, he
wants to see the platform used for
good, wants to remain somewhat
neutral, and wants to have a
framework which can support the
monitoring and the policing of that.
But in an altruistic, a beneficial
way, I think that is the intention.
I don't think he started the company
thinking, this can be used as a
weapon or a tool, for nefarious
Thank you very much, both
The war of words between Russia
and the UK is at boiling point
as the Foreign
Secretary compared the likened
Russia's use of the forthcoming
World Cup to Hitler's use
of the 1936 Olympics.
Tomorrow's European summit was meant
to be dominated by Brexit
but the Prime Minister
has other ideas.
Our political editor
Has the Foreign Secretary helped or
hindered? As the biographer of
Winston Churchill, Boris Johnson
will understand the acute
sensitivities of drawing parallels
between Nazi Germany and Russia, to
be fair, needed not draw and sacked
parallel, but in answer to a
question from the former Labour
minister, Ian Austin, the Foreign
Secretary said that it was certainly
right. -- he did not draw an exact
parallel. He said it is right to say
that they will promote Russian
interests at the World Cup,
anti-competitive way that Adolf
Hitler did that in the 1936 Perlin
Olympics. -- and he compares that in
the way. -- the Berlin Olympic. The
danger is that this was tenth in the
hand of EU countries who believe
that Britain has overreacted to the
attack in Salisbury, and there will
be in intervention at the summit
tomorrow, and she is essentially
going to reflect the UK view that
Russia is now a strategic enemy, and
not a strategic partner of the
European Union. She is going to say
that the Salisbury attack was an
attended murder, using an illegal
chemical weapon, indiscriminate and
it was reckless. And she will say
that this was a challenge from
Russia that is going to India for
years, and as one number ten
official has said, the Russian
threat now does not respect borders
and as such we are all at risk. --
endure for years.
Is she actually
making a call to arms, is there an
action she wants to see?
Minister will tell EU leaders that
by expelling 23 undeclared Russian
intelligence officers, the UK has
dismantled the Russian espionage
network, in the UK, and she will
essentially say it could be you
next, she will say, to the 27
leaders, this was the first use of
chemical weapons on European soil
since the Second World War. And
there is a feeling in Whitehall that
the Prime Minister will use this to
move up to the next step, move up to
a multilateral level, and
essentially indicates to EU leaders,
maybe you want to follow our
example, in basically expelling
spies from your country. Important
to say, in Whitehall, they are
saying, this is not a big
confrontation with Russia, we are
not looking at regime change.
you very much.
Being an ex-Prime Minister,
Finland's Alexander Stubb told me,
is the best job in the world.
He gives few interviews at home,
because every intervention he says,
seems like criticism
of the current administration.
He calls himself an Anglophile,
indeed his wife is British,
and always forged a strong
between Finland and
Britain within the EU.
Ahead of the European Summit
I sat down with him this
afternoon to talk about Brexit,
loyalty, and whether it was right
for the EU commission president
to congratulate President Putin.
I began by asking whether he agreed
with Jacob Rees-Mogg who told me
on Monday that as far
as the Withdrawal treaty went,
the government had rolled over,
without even getting
its tummy tickled.
I actually think the negotiations
are going quite well for both sides.
Usually in the EU, you have
three faces: crisis,
chaos and sub-optimal solution.
We've had the crisis,
when Brexit basically happened,
the vote took place,
but I think that negotiations have
been very smooth and I think
there are two reasons for it -
one is called Michel Barnier
and the other is called David Davis.
So I'm quite optimistic.
You don't see a problem
with the Irish border?
Well, I see a problem with Brexit
and Irish border is a symptom of it,
but if you look at the whole
they have a financial settlement,
which was the 7th of
so everyone knows what the bill
is going to be like.
They have a transition deal,
everyone knows for how long the UK
will be in after it's out.
I'm going to bring you
back to the border...
On the Irish border,
that is basically the symbol
of the problem,
because if you're not
part of a customs union,
if you're not part of the single
someone has to try
and square the circle,
and the way in which they've done it
in the negotiations so far
is to say there are three options:
One, put as part of a big deal.
Two, do some technological stuff
and three, have a backstop,
and they still have to negotiate
and work on that.
Can it be solved?
Oof, I don't know.
I've been in EU negotiations
for the better part of 20 years.
You always find a solution
at the end of the day.
Whether it's going to be
a solution that the EU
likes or the UK likes,
I don't know,
but I think it's very,
very important to protect
the integrity of the single market
and make sure that
there's no hard border.
Is there any solution
that is obvious to you?
Well, the obvious solution
is to start thinking
along these lines of,
you know, customs union or some
form of a customs union.
The obvious thinking is to start
using modern technology,
and that will be the final deal.
They've said that can
take a decade, right?
It can take a long time
but I don't know how long.
To a certain extent,
you could also say
that the negotiations
on Ireland are the pretext
also for the future
relationship of the UK.
I personally think,
as an Anglophile,
married to a Brit and children
that it's very important that the UK
has a special place in or out
from the European Union
in the future.
Would you see financial services
being included in a trade deal?
Philip Hammond has spoken
of the dangers of fragmenting
the market in the City of London.
He said it doesn't go to Europe,
if you try and punish Britain,
it just goes to Hong
Kong or Singapore.
So isn't it important that financial
services is part of that?
I think Philip Hammond
has been one of the voices of reason
in this whole debate.
I look at financial services
as obviously part of one
of the four freedoms,
if you will.
The free movement of money,
to a certain extent,
and I agree that financial services
in Europe should not be fragmented,
but having said that,
and as a banker nowadays,
I also fully understand
that if you don't have passporting
there is going to be movement
of financial services elsewhere.
Financial services are not
going to escape London,
but they will be more centralised
on the continent proper.
You've called yourself
an Anglophile personally.
There's probably been no closer
friend to Britain, within the EU,
than Finland to the UK.
Do you feel now that those
royalties are torn?
Is it more important to you to see
the UK flourish
or to see the EU
flourish without us?
Obviously, first and foremost,
I'm a Finn,
secondly I'm an European,
and thirdly I'm married to a Brit
and an Anglophile.
So the wife comes third!
No, wife comes number
one because she's also
a Finnish national nowadays!
No, but the bottom line
is that obviously for me
Brexit is sad and I still,
and I say this with a sunken heart,
that it's a lose-lose proposition,
but at the same time I'm a pragmatic
so we had to make the best of it.
So I belong to the camp
who is trying to help the UK
to alleviate the pain,
at the same time, get a good deal
for the European Union.
And then whatever happens
in domestic politics in the UK,
that's something that is completely
out of our or my reach.
I want to turn to the words
of Jean-Claude Juncker today.
He congratulated Putin on his win.
Broke with the protocol
of a lot of Western leaders.
Was it a mistake?
It's not my job as former
Vice President of the
European Investment Bank,
to give advice to
Every institution and,
actually, every state,
takes that decision,
and I do understand
the sensitivities on a lot
of players in this game.
Would you have said that
if you had been in his role?
Well, it's a hypothetical
question, isn't it...
..Because I'm not.
I try to be diplomatic and discreet.
He congratulated President Putin.
He said, "Congratulations on your
re-election, President Putin".
I think there are a lot of European
leaders and others as well
who have congratulated,
and it is part of protocol.
There is no denying that.
Obviously, was it my choice?
And remember, Finland has 1300
kilometres of border with Russia.
I would like to see a more open,
more transparent Russia
than what we have today.
When you add those together,
we have seen incursions;
we've seen cyber incursions,
we've seen electoral meddling.
Do you worry about the country
on your doorstep?
Of course I worry, and I think
that nowadays, actually,
the line between war
and peace is blurred.
We see cyber attacks,
we see usage of chemical
weapons or nerve gases,
we see media manipulation...
You're talking about Salisbury?
We're seeing different types
of things happen all over the place,
and I think we have to sort of put
a foot down
and start discussing these things
and try to make them
unavoidable in the future.
Alexander Stubb, thank you.
The front pages of the newspapers
before we go, the Daily Telegraph
there are, blue "Brexit" passports
to be made in Europe, Tory fury as
the contract goes to a Franco Dutch
company, poised to win the contract
to make the iconic blue British
passport, after Brexit. --
Franco-Dutch. In the Guardian,
police take days to respond to 999
incidents as budget cuts bite. The
school should be dealt with within
one hour, but significant stress
from smashed budgets and increased
demand. And pay rise hope for
millions after the £4 billion NHS
deal was agreed, public sector
workers and the government today.
That's about it, but before we go,
today, fittingly on World Poetry
the auction house Bonhams had
a sale of the personal effects
of Sylvia Plath and Ted Hughes.
Seeing the objects on offer,
it's hard not to summon up mental
images of their marriage,
in all its painful, poetic tragedy.
Here's a selection.
# And maybe she'd take me to France
# Or maybe to Spain
and she'd ask me to dance
# In a mansion on the top of a hill
# She'd ash on the carpets
# And slip me a pill
# Then she'd get me
pretty loaded on gin
# And maybe she'd give me a bath
# How I wish I had a Sylvia Plath #.
Including an in-depth look at the Westminster Bridge attack one year on, Facebook's data problem, Theresa May to give Russia warning and Alexander Stubb on the EU summit.