01/03/2012 This Week

Tonight, in honour of the great Davy Jones, This Week is going to

have some fun. Some monkey business going on over the Falklands, but

where will it lead? Former MP gorgeous George Galloway thinks

it's time to let go. We don't want to end up crying over Argentina, we

can't have another war. The Queen doesn't have enough soldiers. We

will have to come up with something else. I know just the man for the

job. Too much monkeying around at News

International as James Murdoch steps down. The Sun's Jane Moore

takes a ride on the buses. It's been a bumpy week for the tabloids,

but I am still a believer. And as Rupert Murdoch launches The

Sun on Sunday s there a future for the tabloids? One creation of the

red-top press, Abi Titmuss give us an exclusive. The tabloid press

certainly built me up but in the end they almost destroyed me.

We are the political monkeys and people say we monkey around but

we're too busy singing to put anybody down.

Anybody still watching? Evening all, welcome to This Week.

Now for those whose Thursdays aren't complete without a little

light playing of the infamous This Week drinking game, we might as

well kick things off early with an immediate shout-out of: Blue Nun!

Off you go, down it. Because I fear you're going to need a swift one,

folks, when you hear today's shock news that people who pay top-rate

income tax don't particularly like paying top-rate income tax.

Consider my flabber well and truly gasted. In an open begging letter

to today's Daily Telegraph, over 500 of the nation's squeezed pips

have put the case for trickle-down economics and a cut in their

personal taxation Apparently the 50p top-rate of tax is unfair,

politically motivated, puts populist politics before sound

economics, reduces Government income, damages the economy, hurts

public services, undermines charitable giving, and have you

seen the price of a Bentley these days?! Actually, they failed to

mention the price of a Bentley in the letter but reading between the

tear-stained lines, I think we all felt their unspoken pain. Boy

George, dare you come to their aid come the Budget? Dare you, dare you,

dare you? You know you want to. Speaking of desperate charity cases

in need of our sympathy, I'm joined on the This Week sofa tonight by

two of Westminster's biggest sob- stories, the little orphan Annie

and littlest hobo of late night political chat. I speak, of course,

of Michael 'Trainspotter' Portillo and, as always, trending as

#manontheleft, Alan 'AJ' Johnson. Welcome to you both. Hello, Andrew.

Moment of the week, Michael? couple of nights ago there was a

Dimbleby lecture given, I thought it was one of the most outstanding

lectures I ever heard, Sir Paul was arguing for the role of science in

fighting disease, fighting climate change, improving the economy. I

thought it was just an outstanding piece of reasoning. By the way, Sir

Paul and I were at school together, he is a little bit older than I and

I thought it was wonderful, a man who has won a Nobel prize and now

President of the society to pay him paying tribute to a teacher at

school who inspired him, even though Sir Paul found it difficult

to get into university. wonderful. Great story. Alan, your

moment? It's a sad one, it's the obituary of a woman called Dame

Streathy who was a prominent civil servant I had the privilege to work

with in Government. She left an academy aged 16, became an

administerive assistant, about the lowest grade of the civil service

and rose to become the chief executive of Jobcentre Plus and

chief executive and permanent Secretary of Her Majesty's Customs

and Revenue. It's a tragedy that she died. Another non-university.

tragedy she died, I hope the ability to go from the first rung

of the civil service to the top rung hasn't died with her. You both

raise stories as to whether that social mobility is still with us

today and we talked about that, very interesting indeed. Now, you

know when you've been tango'd and it looks like in the diplomatic

dance of the South Atlantic, things are warming up nicely, thank you

very much, With Argentina ramping up the rhetoric over the Falkland

Islands, amid threats of trade embargos and turned-away cruise

ships and a pre-emptive British pincer movement involving Prince

William and a Royal Navy Destroyer, it looks like a bit of Argy Bargy

could be back on the cards and with the 30th anniversary of the

Falklands conflict only a month away. So we asked former MP George

Galloway for his Take of the week. I am quite well known as an anti-

war campaigner, after all, many a time over the last decade or so I

have addressed huge audiences from this plinth in Trafalgar Square

behind me in opposition to British wars. But as a matter of fact, I

did not oppose the war in the Falklands in 1982. Any British

Government would have been forced to come to the aid of people

attacked in such a way. But that did not mean then, and certainly

does not mean now, that I support the idea that Britain can continue

to assert its sovereignty over a piece of land 8,000 miles away on

the basis of a population of British people smaller than the

population of the village of Netherwlop. Argentina holds all the

cards, it's no longer ruled by a fascist military junta. It's part

of a collection of left leaning democracies in Latin America

admired throughout the world. As was shown by the panic in the

British Foreign Office at the off the cuff remark of an Argentine

Minister that big companies in Argentina should be boycotting

British goods and services, if all of Latin America begins to boycott

British goods and services, trust me, the cost to our trade, our

business, and our influence in that part of the world and wider would

be very expensive indeed. That's not to say that there's no

peaceful solution to this. There is. First of all, Argentina has no wish

to take away the Britishness of the 3,000 people who are living on the

Falkland islands, they have enough people in their country. They don't

want the people. They want sovereignty, at least shared

sovereignty over the land. And of course the waters around it and

what lies beneath them. So, either the people can be resettled in

Britain, or alternatively, they could remain in the Falkland

islands with their prized British passports, as long as the land and

the waters and what lies beneath them is shared with Argentina and

trust me, it would be better to reach a deal now that shared that

sovereignty, and shared those resources, rather than later when

the balance has shifted still further and we end up with no share

at all. Now, I know that the British Foreign Office just down

the road there in Whitehall ain't what it used to be. But you know

what, I reckon that if you sent me over to Buenos Aires, that between

me and the popular and attractive President of Argentina, I could

probably sort it out in an afternoon.

George Galloway, a beautiful spring day in Trafalgar Square, to our

square here in Millbank. Welcome. Let me tourpb Alan Johnson first,

is George right, time for a rethink? No, because I think what

George is suggesting is these things are decided on logic. A lot

of logic in what George said and actually if the war hadn't happened

you could imagine those conversations, indeed those

conversations were probably taking place before 1983, but now that

British blood has been spilled on the Falklands I just can't see it

happening. Is the present relationship between Britain and

the Falklands sustainable? Yes, I think it's sustainable for a very

long time. The people who live in the Falklands are essentially

British. George admitted that in the film. They're not like

Australians or South Africans, they're certainly not like

Gibraltarens. A lot of Italians. These people on the Falklands

really could have dropped out of Sussex the day before yesterday.

There's no history of Argentine population. It isn't a mixed

population. It's not as though Argentina once had a lot of people

there who got kicked out or anything. These are British people

and George airily said they could be resettled or the Government

could be changed on top of them. I was surprised too to hear George

said the Argentinian Government is respected, I don't think that is sa

broad view. I think on the whole the Argentina Government is not

respected and Argentina has been an extremely unstable sort of place

between military dictatorships, the pop louse Government now and

governments that made the country bankruptcy in between. George?

President is very popular throughout Latin America, all Latin

America countries now support the Argentine claim. We used to have a

fifth column in Chile but actually there is a pan Latin American

support for Argentina's claim and indeed broadly in the United

Nations. I take the point Alan makes about the spilling of British

blood and of course you and I at least, if not are old enough to

remember, that both the Callaghan Government and Thatcher Government

were discussing this very thing with the Argentines and if the

fascist -- junta hadn't attacked the Falklands we probably would

have already done that deal. The problem is we talk about spilled

blood, we don't have more blood to spill. We can't fight Argentina

again. In fact, we would be fighting all of Latin America if we

did. We are not what we were. We are a country struggling. The Queen

doesn't have enough enough soldiers to fight another war against all of

Latin America and what after the war? Are you going to garrison it

and defend it for ever more? What about Michael's point that the

people of the Falklands, they can't be resettled, they've nowhere else

to go. They belong in the Falklands. Argentina has never occupied or

populated the Falklands themselves. It's not like Argentinas were

kicked out to make way. Argentina didn't effectively exist when as a

state when... When the Spanish had it for a while. When we planted

people there and these are the descendents. They're forever

telling us how British they are, they might welcome �1 million each

to live here and we would still be quids in because we spent more on

the war and the sus tenance since. But if they wanted to stay

Argentina would be more than happy to agree to that. Quo share the

sovereignty now or when the balance tilts still further we might end up

with nothing at all. There's a sort of cynicism here that I don't

generally associate with George. used to be called diplomacy and a

proper... On this basis we would invade Iraq because there is a lot

of oil there, the same logic says we should give these people up

because we have broader interests in Latin America and we can send

these people somewhere else, give them �1 million and tell them to go

away and be grateful. It is the population of - British national

interests cannot be kick stated by the population of Netherwalop,

that's absurd and if that policy is going to become more expensive in

diplomatic terms, in business terms, it's incumbent upon us. Once upon a

time British statesmanship would have automatically been calculating

that and coming up with a solution and I am saying that Andrew and I,

the delightful Mrs Kercher, a paso I know that all the Latin American

countries have sort of signed up with Argentina on this, signing up

is one thing, giving a dam is another. That's the point. I don't

think that Argentina are rattling sabres in a meaningful way. I don't

think there's any question of them repeating the mistake of the junta

in the 80s but George is right, I think Brazil were supporting the UK

back in the 80s and they don't now and Brazil is a major player but

there's no catalyst for tho this here there.'s no reason for the

British Government to be thinking through these options. Did you

really think Brazil cares? Very much so. The leftist Government in

Brazil is close to the President, they would be a key ally. Brazil in

the next ten years is going to be one of the most important economies

in the world. It already is. Indeed. Why would you want to have bad

relations with Brazil? It doesn't make sense. You have to go a stage

further and prove that Brazil is going to have bad relations with

Britain over the Falklands and I don't think you have proved that.

Well, I think we are headed in that direction. The direction of travel

is for a sharper polarisation between Britain and Argentina.

Argentina will call in its friends' support. The threat of a boycott in

Argentina of British goods and services will become a Latin

American black spot on us and that's far more expensive, even

than the cost of sustaining and garrisoning these islands and

certainly... For the moment it is only Argentina and the Argentine

economy is a good deal smaller than the economy of the city of Sao

Paulo. Indeed. My point Argentina is located in an emerging Latin

America, you know this very well, which is more and more important.

It's swept away dictatorship. It has popular governments. There --

they are admired around the world as a whole, Latin America. This can

only get worse. This is my point. Our position can only get worse

You raised the possibility of joint sovereignty. Any examples where

that has work? We had a relationship with China over Hong

Kong for a substantial time and the transition has worked very well to

total Chinese sovereignty. I am saying if we do not sign up for

joint sovereignty with Argentina, we will eventually have to give it

all to them. And we now know this is not just about a collection of

rocks, penguins, sheep and the population of Nether Wallop. This

is about oil and gas under the water. Doesn't that give an

incentive to hold on, in that we had to fight for these islands, we

did, blood was spilled, these people are loyal to the British

Crown, now we have discovered oil and no good deed goes unrewarded?

There is no way that George can prosecute this argument by ignoring

what happened in 83. And it changes all of the basis for the discussion

on this. I think the President of Argentina, who said this will be

referred to the UN for Dispute Resolution, that will assure that

it will not be sold for the next 70 years. Maybe there might be a

different climate then. But I see no catalyst for a British

Government to do an enormously unpopular thing, to get into talks

with Argentina on the spurious grounds that it might improve

relationships with Brazil. Give your crystal balls out. 30 years

time, the status of the Falklands? They will be British. I do not

think it would change in 30 years. While we are still sitting on

television sofas we will have joint sovereignty. We will have you back.

Even if we have you in a wheelchair to get in.

Now, wake up and get yourself dressed. Those shelves aren't going

to stack themselves you know. But before you leave us for HMP Tesco's

night shift, stick around a little longer because waiting in the wings

former model, actress, and phone- hacking victim Abi Titmuss, who's

here to reveal all about the highs and lows of tabloid culture. And

for those looking to express their undying gratitude to us just fire

up your Raspberry Pi and get in touch via Twitter, the Facebook, or

even just the plain old interweb. Now, with just a 148 days until the

Snooze-lympics, indifference in the This Week studio is palpable. Even

Michael's having second thoughts about the Greco-Roman wrestling. So

things must be bad. So imagine our delight that, despite Boris' shiny

new Routemaster, London bus drivers are being encouraged to use the

Games as an opportunity to flex some industrial muscle and show the

world that we still know how to come first when it comes to

throwing a spanner in the works. But don't worry, we've got it

covered. We've asked the Sun's Jane Moore to man the buses and give us

Next stop, Leveson. It was all aboard once again as the Leveson

inquiry resumed this week. This time in the hot seat, the police

and the Sun, as findings of alleged corruption were uncovered. There

appears to have been a culture of the Sun of illegal payments, and

systems had been created to facilitate those payments whilst

hiding the identity of the officials receiving the money.

tabloid journalists are not far behind cowboy builders and estate

agents in the popularity stakes, these claims are perhaps more

damaging for the police who, after all, are the supposedly of holders

of the law. That is a view that seems to be shared by the Prime

Minister. It is hard to think of any circumstances in which it is

right for police officers to take money. Where to? Wapping, please.

Some would have it that the Leveson inquiry claims another high profile

scout this week, when James Murdoch, the executive chair of News

International, announced he is stepping down. But those within the

company might tell you that move had been in the pipeline for about

three months. Thank you. Either way, it seems that his exit stage left

was positively understated compared to a much bigger show in town, his

dad, Rupert, launching the Sunday The wheels on the bus go round and

round, and so do the arguments over the Government's NHS reforms. No

signs of reversing or you turns, but certainly a little bit of

spinning of the political wheels. Nick Clegg, with his spring

conference around the corner, knows he has a certain of oiling of the

grassroots to do. So he teams up with Lib Dem pin-up girl Shirley

Williams to write a public letter demanding changes to the NHS bill.

What a tough guy he is. I have always regarded competition as a

means to a better NHS, not as an end in itself. That is why our

amendments will make it clear once and for all that competition is the

servant of the NHS, Neve its master. -- never its master. Hang on a

minute! Nick Clegg is part of the Government and Deputy Prime

Minister, so what is he doing publicly demanding changes when he

could just speak to Dave? This smacks of political choreography,

or, as the Lib Dems so catchily put it, differentiation policy. Still,

it seemed to work. We, and I mean all of us on these benches, we are

using the debates in the Lords further to reassure all those who

care about the NHS. I am grateful for this chance to reassure my

honourable friends in the House of the positive and beneficial effects

of debate in another place and of the work we are all doing to secure

positive future for the NHS. Feet of the seats! When Nick Clegg now

stands on NHS reform is not clear. Something Ed Miliband had quite a

bit of fun with. By the way, Deputy Prime Minister is smirking. I do

not know whether he supports the bill, or opposes it. Oh, he

supports it! He supports it, Mr Speaker! Well, there is firm

leadership for you. It is not only Lib Dems looking for love from the

top. It seems to be forgotten that they lost five seats at the last

election. So there is a bit of rumbling at the back of the bus

from Tory parliamentary footsoldiers, anxious that the

perception is that Nick Clegg and Co are in the driving seat.

Somebody should tell the Deputy Prime Minister who is running this

The Government's work experience scheme had a very bumpy ride last

week. In fact, it nearly broke down. Cue the sound of reverse gears

crunching all over Westminster. Sorry! As the minister in charge

backtracked over removing benefits from those who disembarked the

scheme after a week. The employers said, we would like to modify it.

At the moment, people can leave voluntarily after the first week.

We would like them to sit down later with us in a work placement

if it is not working out and to say, we want to opt out. We thought that

was reasonable. We want to keep the positive scheme for young people

going, so we said we would accept that. I am with Sir Stuart Rose on

this. The Government and the big companies should have stuck to

Union boss Len McCluskey has called for public sector workers,

including bus drivers to strike during the Olympics. It is a move

that has been universally condemned. Still, if they are mad enough to do

it, at least I will be ready to man the buses.

Two for the price of one. We can throw-in Miranda Green from the Lib

Dems, too. Welcome back. Thank you. How difficult is this health issue

for the Lib Dems? It is very tricky, with the spring conference coming

up and the threat of rebellion from the grass roots, who are putting

forward motions to debate at the conference that the whole bill

should be dropped. It is still very tricky but Nick Clegg has done this

manoeuvre to hug Shirley Williams extremely close. She can barely

breathe! I think they are quite pleased. She is getting on, so he

needs to be careful. He had to sign this letter, didn't he? They had to

do something to try and demonstrate that the key concerns had been met.

What they feel is that the peers, who have been leading the rebellion

on this, if the peers, who know every line of the bill off by heart,

now say that they are satisfied, that ought to satisfy the grass

roots. I think it is very unpredictable. Liberal Democrat

conferences can be unpredictable. This whole Lib Dem rebellion

started at the spring conference last year. We are one year into it.

We have had endless amendments, not all of them from the Lib Dems, but

some of the substantive ones have been. And yet we are still not

through the process. Politically, it is a mess, isn't it? It is a

mess for everyone and a disaster for everyone involved. But because

David Cameron is absolutely stalwart in his determination to

keep the bill, it has to be proved publicly that the Bill has been

changed dramatically by a Lib Dem intervention. Hence all of his

choreography. Will the forces of law and order at the Lib Dem

conference, Mr Clegg and the party establishment, will they see off

the peasants with pitchforks? really think a lot depends on

Shirley. If she turns up and says it is OK... If she is front and

centre and makes a significant intervention at the right moment in

the conference hall, she will sway everyone because she always does.

Their hearts go out to her and they do what she says. It all depends on

Shirley. I think largely it does and this joint manoeuvre has been

magnificent but it may not work. What happens if conference says, we

vote to throw the bill out? Liberal Democrats are Democratic

Party, so unfortunately for the leadership what conference says

does matter significantly. What happens to Mr Clegg's position? Is

it in danger? I don't think so on this. It is not a mess of his

making, remember that. This is Andrew Lansley's bill. He signed

the white paper. And we saw him saying he supports the bill. With

its changes. He supported it before the changes as well, until he

decided they had to be changes. we coming to the end of the

parliamentary road with this? Is it all over bar the shouting? This

hope of a bill will one day grab -- drag itself across the Royal Assent

winning line. But this is a disaster. It is a disaster because

it is a top down re organisation. The reforms that are very necessary

could have been done, practically all of them, without any

legislation, let alone a bill that is three times the size of the one

that created the NHS. It is a total mess. There is a danger for Labour.

You are saying it has since asked - - disaster and Andy Burnham told me

it is privatisation. Mr Miliband has gone at it four weeks in a row

at PMQs and in at least three out of four he has done pretty well.

But if in a few years' time, not much has changed and the health

service is still doing what the health service does, you are in a

weaker position. Yes, but that is not going to happen. The challenge

for the NHS is to make efficiency savings that are ploughed back into

frontline care. That was our policy. They are being asked to do that at

the same time as this spaghetti junction of commission groups is

set up. What the Lib Dems did last year made it worse. The stopping

and listening exercise meant that at the time of the next election

there will be all of these different commissioning bodies.

That makes the whole thing more complex. When the GP who has led on

practice based commissioning, the most innovative, when he turned

against it that was a seminal moment for the bill. And anything

that goes wrong in the NHS from now one can be blamed on the bill and

on the Government. James Murdoch, did he go, or was he pushed? He was

pushed. But you're the insider. You used to be the editor of the Sunday

Times. Seriously, is he finished? Not finished, but among the walking

wounded, I would say. Unlike his father, he does not care about

newspapers and particularly does not like tabloid newspapers. It was

James that talked Rupert into closing down the News of the World,

something Rupert regrets now and wishes he had not closed it down.

Although James was not there when the hacking happen, he thinks that

James did a bad job in handling the crisis. He has moved right out of

favour. He is no longer be obvious heir apparent. He has moved him

into television. Rupert is back and getting ink on his fingers. But

there is still a major problem for James Murdoch, which is that I am

told the select committee report will be devastating on him. And it

could even raise issues - although he has been moved into television,

he is chairman of BSkyB, not owned by Murdoch but a major public

company - and if it is devastating, people will say, you are not a fit

and proper person to be chairman of a public company. I know that a

number of changes have been made on the BSkyB board, and you would call

its succession planning. They have somebody in mind to take over if

Leveson, this relations - you are a former Home Secretary, the police

and Northern Ireland, as Sue Akers, what do you make of it? Sue Akers

interestingly was putting forward what she thinks happened but there

was no defence from News International to this, much of

information is coming from News International itself. I feel pretty

strongly about this. I was in post when The Guardian story broke about

Gordon Taylor in 2009. I was the Home Secretary and looked John

Yates in the eye and said what's going on here? And was assured as

my predecessors had and others have in the past was assured. I asked

about John Prescott in particular, I asked about John in particular.

They said there's no evidence that John Prescott's phone had been

hacked. It had. The evidence was there, we now know. When we look

back now something sinister was happening in this country, although

we vaguely could see it at the time, it's only now that it really

strikes you. There was this incestous relationship between News

International and the Labour Government. They were in and out of

each other's offices day after day. Coupled with an incestous

relationship with the police, which made News International think we

have got the Government squared, we have got the police squared, we can

walk on water. We are above the law. It was for a democracy really

unhealthy. It's the kind of thing you would get in Chicago. With

respect, I wouldn't sort of rush to the defence of governments, but

look, you know governments getting close to major newspaper

proprietors, it's always happened. Governments have always wanted to

have a good press. I did hear Charlie Faulkner making the point

Andrew made. I agree, we were too close. But this is a completely

different - I wouldn't equate that with bribing public servants,

having a network, this web of corrupt officials that the

newspapers had built up and... Apparently a system which generated

cash that could be paid to these people in large dollars. If you

were a policeman and you see that News International - these people

that the police were seeing from News International would say to the

police oh well, when I spoke to the Prime Minister last night or when I

spoke to the Chancellor or when I spoke to the Home Secretary or

Alastair Campbell, that intimidates police as well, they think this

newspaper group has it all. That didn't help, you are right. Alan is

saying he didn't get a horse. didn't, unfortunately. I didn't get

a push bike. Work experience, is that causing the Lib Dems problems?

It's a funny one this, because my own feel something that work

experience is a very good idea and a lot of voices have piped up to

point this out. But you know, they have backed down on it, if the

scheme survives and it's seen to help. Youth unemployment I think is

a big, big issue and a lot of people, not just on the left, not

just traditional Lib Dem leftish voters leaving the party, do care

about this passionately, so if they can show they're doing a lot about

this and keep on this agenda on education, I know that Alan takes

great interest in as well t will help. One final question for you

since we have a Lib Dem here tonight. If the Tories can't

deliver Lords reform for Mr Clegg, do you turn around and say you

ain't getting the boundary changes then? Well, the question of the

boundary change deal that was done... We all thought that was for

the AV referendum and you got that. Yes, but it didn't turn out to to

well as you know! That wasn't the deal. I think you have to forgive

the Lib Dems finally being in Government, after all these years

for trying their dammest to reform the House of Lords, which is a long

cherished aim of the party and its predecessor parties and they'll do

everything they can. You haven't told me whether it's conditional on

boundary changes, though. But we have run out of time. Open to

definition. You played for time very well well there. Thank you.

Now they shoot horses, don't they? Well, no actually, turns out they

don't, not if they're Metropolitan Police horses. They just lend them

out to editors with whom they are unhealthily cosy,. Such as call-me-

Dave's best mate, Rebekah Brookes, the flame-haired media medusa and

break-out star of the hacking scandal, who apparently stabled a

'dibble dobbin' for over a year, before returning it to the police,

in a reportedly poor condition. She probably made him read the Sun

every morning. Sounds like a job for Inspector

Knacker of the Yard if you ask me. But you can't expect them to

investigate the press. That's not what they're there for! In the

meantime, we've begun our own investigation and put tabloid

Rupert Murdoch's new Sunday tabloid could not have been launched ahead

of a more difficult week for the media mogul as the Met gave their

eagerly awaited toefd the Leveson inquiry, even more damming re-

hraoeugss -- revelations have come out showing how some of the

headlines emerged. The current assessment it reveals a

network of corrupted officials. News International keeps having to

reach for its chequebook as celebrities continue to win huge

damages for illegal phone hacking. What I have discovered is the

litigation has gone on has sickened and disgusted me. Nothing was

deemed off limits by those who pursued me and my family to make

money for a multinational news corporation. Has the pressure got

too much for James Murdoch? His resignation makes you wonder who is

going to be left standing in the world of the red tops?

We are back with Abi Titmuss, welcome back to the programme.

nice to be back, I have missed you all terribly. We have missed you

too. You had an extraordinary relationship with the tabloids that

you don't have now. Looking back what do you make of it? Yes, I have

had a lot of fun with the tabloid press over the last decade. I have

to start by saying, I wouldn't be here sitting here if it wasn't for

the press. They created me, but as I said earlier in the show, that

they almost destroyed me emotionally as well actually and my

family. So, it started off, I was thrust into the spotlight through

no choice of my own and they fed off me. Did you Did you encourage

it at one stage? Not at the very start, but as it developed yes it

sort of became a relationship where we were feeding off each other

which for me blossomed into a toxic co-dependency if I am honest. But

it was me trying to take some semblance of control over what was

happening in my life and the way it was spiralling out of control and

things that they were doing. I knew for a long time that they were

hacking my phone. No one believed me. Did you try to do anything

about it when you knew that? didn't know what to do. I changed

my number lots of times. That still didn't stop it? No, no. If it was

as simple as that - oh, Andrew! You probably know that being a former

editor. Just checking. I did, of course and changed my security

number and those things. It's not an uncommon tale for the tabloids

to build up somebody into a celebrity and then turn on them.

They're creating characters that they can then create stories about.

It's a story-Stelling. One of the first things ever written about me

and they called me angel nurse. I remember thinking that's nice and

also thinking but I am not an angel and I wasn't a full-time nurse at

that point, I was a drama student. And also in that headline itself I

could see... Other than that it was accurate! It worried me, I thought

I can't stay angel nurse in a tabloid for long. They're going to

turn. Was there a time, particular time you thought I have got in too

deep and sold my soul? Yes, many times actually. But as I said, I

think it becomes such a toxic co- depenency and because of the things

they had been writing about me and I have had journalists that I have

met since saying we used to make up things all the time. There's always

a grain of truth in every story, but because it had become - my

self-esteem had become low and I had become unhappy because of of

what was happening and there's a lovely notion you can hop on a

train back to a village called obscurity but when you are really

in the spotlight on on the front pages every day it's not that easy.

There's no such village. I couldn't go back to my old job as a nurse, I

had left that. That was becoming difficult. I remember the last few

days and weeks as a nurse Wye stop wearing my name badge because it

was impossible. But you did get out, you got away from this relationship

before the hacking scandal broke. But the breaking of the hacking

scandal brought you back into the story again. Yes, it's odd, but

watching the news with great interest at the moment and of

course I have sued News International. And settled? It's

got to be said I am happy for Charlotte Church she's done well

and been brave in the way she's spoken out but it's got to be

remembered we have all sued them, not for what they've written about

us or treatment of us but simply for the hacking our phones. It's a

business relationship when you are in the public eye. If I step on to

a red carpet it's a known deal that I am giving a picture, they're

taking a picture. It's a give and take thing, but that doesn't mean

you can follow me and my family, hack into my phone. They think they

own you? In a democracy you know it's the corruption and level of

power and control that they did have. They thought they were

untouchable. They did. Has the hacking scandal and this

investigation now into the police, has it changed tabloid culture

fundamentally? I don't know, we will have to wait and see about

that. The Sun on Sunday was a subdued Sunday paper. It's a wonder

they had any journalists to turn it out actually. It's changed it for

now, the question is for how long will it have changed it. My My

guess it will bounce back at some point. You don't think this is a

watershed, they're behaving until we lose our attention on the matter

and you think they'll go back to old ways? I think the reason there

was a public outcry really was if it had just been celebrities I

don't think - people would have just shrugged, it's because of

ordinary people that were involved. The trouble with tabloid culture is

it requires a constant supply of victims likerant MPs, not looking

at anybody, and misbehaving footballers, fallen rock stars, but

it's when ordinary folk become involved, bereaved parents who

never sought fame that then things are different. On the front pages

of all the papers and the news. Absolutely. I understand. I wonder

whether there isn't going to be a change. I think the Leveson report

is sa wakeup call. There's clearly going to be a tougher Press

Complaints Commission. I think the law's got tougher now. There will

be times when they can't help themselves. See what comes from

Leveson, I agree with Michael there's no sign yet, that quote by

Charlotte Church, they're only sorry they got caught. I think the

culture is still there. They don't believe in resepl beings --

reseplings. Do you think it's changed, not just for the short-

term or just for the short-term? think that the best story I ever

saw was a massive picture of me on the front page I think of The Sun

and a tiny picture of the fact Ronald Reagan had died, if that's

news, I don't know what is. Hopefully things will change.

We will have you back and see if it has changed. Thank you.

That's your lot for tonight folks, but with Michael's quiff and air of

exotic mystery and Alan's super- cool threads, and mod-tastic

guitar-playing the frankly unnerving resemblance to the iconic

Morrissey and Marr has not gone unnoticed in the This Week office.

Though most things do pass them by. So we leave you with today's news

that call-me-Dave's favourite band, The Smith's, might actually get

back together - but on one condition. According to Johnny Marr,

Cameron and Clegg must call time on the coalition love affair first.

Nighty night, don't let Morrissey bite!

# And there's a double decker bus crashes into us