outbreaks up which will bring some outbreaks of rain. looking at the afternoon, where we are likely to see this showers, they will be hit and miss but some can be quite heavy in the south—west of england and the south—east, the odd thunderstorm and also for wales, northern ireland, very frequent and heavy showers. fewer showers in northern england and southern scotland but some showers bubbling up around the highlands. temperatures in the high teens for most of us. tomorrow evening, the rain starts to become more persistent in the east which is a sign of things to come in the middle of the week because this low pressure drives in from then a confident and that will bring some pretty slow moving heavy rain. we will see that on wednesday for parts of northern england, southern scotland as well, rainfall totals really mounting up in the next few daysin really mounting up in the next few days in the north. sunshine and showers in the south, perhaps a slight improvement towards the bike at —— bank holiday weekend. thanks, sarah. and that's bbc news at ten. newsnight is just getting under way on bbc two with kirsty wark.

on bbc one, it's time tojoin our colleagues for the news where you are. goodnight. time and again, people in positions of power and trust at the time to stop the transmission of those

infections. time and again, they failed to do so. the prime minister said... the prime minister said the infected blood scandal had knocked hundreds of thousands of lives off course — will those lives and all the hurt and devastation ever be repaired? we'll be joined by one of the leading campaigners forjustice on the infected blood scandal, dame diana johnson, chair of the health select committee steve brine, and jennifer and matthew, a mother and son affected by the scandal. also tonight... how will the dynamic in the middle east be impacted by the call by the icc senior prosecutor for the arrest of benjamin netanyahu and the hamas leader in gaza, and by the death of iran's president? we'll be speaking to experts to find out what, if anything,

could change in the region. and, in mark's final film for newsnight, our diplomatic editor reflects on three decades of war reporting. we have come to northern kuwait, near the border with iraq, to the area where saddam hussein kept his armoured divisions in reserve. good evening. successive governments going back to the 1970s made deliberate attempts to lie and conceal the infected blood scandal. that is the damning, shocking verdict of sir brian langstaff, the chair of the long—running inquiry that reported today. the prime minister called it a day of great shame for the british state — politicans, civil servants and health professionals. did what happened make a mockery of the hippocratic oath, "do no harm"? instead, as rishi sunak said, "to our eternal shame, they allowed victims to become objects for research." as for compensation, he said, whatever it costs, we will pay it. first, here's kate.

harm which cannot adequately be put into words, how the chair of the infected blood inquiry today described events which led to around 3000 deaths and 30,000 life changing hiv and hepatitis infections. questions of conversation were first raised a0 years ago but health minister ken clarke rejected the idea saying they had never been a scheme to compensate the unavoidable effects of medical procedures. today the inquiry reported the treatment disaster could and should largely been avoided. ryan langstaff said patients were knowingly exposed to unacceptable risks of infection. to understand the question of avoid ability, we can look at two hospitals, alder hey in liverpool, like many others, treated children with haemophilia almost exclusively with haemophilia almost exclusively with blood clotting proteins created by pulling plasma from tens of thousands of donors and often imported from the us, where page

donations came from high—risk donors to stop all ia patients a year and in 87 they reported 16 were infected with hiv. those in charge at sheffield children's hospital worried about the risk to patients and instead specifically chose to use a little construed as possible, preferring alternative treatments or when required and it has produced products. they treated slightly more patient and saw just products. they treated slightly more patient and sawjust one infection in the words of the report, they all had the infection lane information did not use it and in consequence children suffered did not need to do so. �* . ,., , children suffered did not need to do so. �* . , ., children suffered did not need to do so. . , so. all the evidence points to a sinule, so. all the evidence points to a single, inescapable _ so. all the evidence points to aj single, inescapable conclusion, so. all the evidence points to a - single, inescapable conclusion, that children and adults were not treated in a way which prioritised their safety above other considerations. the report finds it was known blood could transmit hepatitis in 19a8 by the late 70s, it was clear case of

what would later be named at the time to see risks serious long—term consequences but, despite a decade of discussion, the uk didn't introduce screening until 1991, when i direct test was available after 23 countries got there first. while the inquiry finds everyone involved in treating patients either knew or should have known of the risk of hiv transmission by the end of 82, heat treatment to eliminate the virus wasn't introduced until the end of 85. the inquiry doesn't blame or decision organisation for this instead it documented a catalogue of failures, including doctors who didn't adequately inform patients of the risks, slow and protracted government decision—making, the organisation of the blood services and incorrect decisions by the licensing authorities do not suspect the importation of commercial products. the inquiry finds the harm done were compounded by what

happened after. successive governments closed ranks and denied wrongdoing. the answer to the question, was to recover up, brian langstaff concluded there had been this at a movie, there were not a handful of people plotting, but the inquiry described the truth being freshly hidden over many years and it finds politicians repeated inaccurate and offensive lines. three lines were repeatedly deployed by successive governments, that people had the best available treatment, that the infections were inadvertent and that screening for hepatitis c could not have been introduced earlier than september 1991. all of those claims were untrue. ~ , ., 1991. all of those claims were untrue. ~ ,., , untrue. while some documents were lost with time _ untrue. while some documents were lost with time the _ untrue. while some documents were lost with time the inquiry _ untrue. while some documents were lost with time the inquiry finds - untrue. while some documents were lost with time the inquiry finds on i lost with time the inquiry finds on the balance of probability of this rating to the delays in screening for hep c word liberty destroyed in an attempt to make the truth or difficultly to reveal.— difficultly to reveal. more than 3000 peeple _ difficultly to reveal. more than 3000 people died. _

difficultly to reveal. more than 3000 people died. they - difficultly to reveal. more than 3000 people died. they died i difficultly to reveal. more than - 3000 people died. they died without an apology. i want to make a wholehearted and unequivocal apology for this terrible injustice. the for this terrible in'ustice. the current for this terrible injustice. the current government is criticised for causing widespread distress as it is yet to set out a compensation package despite accepting their moral case, something rishi sunak says will happen tomorrow. the infected and affected will have to wait for a full response to the inquiry. i'm joined now by mother and son matthew and jennifer merry. matthew was infected with hiv while receiving treatment for haemophilia in childhood. his mother also acquired hepatitis from infected blood. dame diana johnson, the labour chair of the home affairs select committee, who spearheaded legislation through parliament to get victims quicker access to compensation. and steve brine, the conservative chair of the health and social care select committee. good evening. you have lived with this for four decades. and waited

for this forfour decades this for four decades. and waited for this for four decades but today, didn't make a big difference to you? it did, yes. the apology was something we had been waiting for for a long time. it seemed sincere, and i hope those words are put into action as well. can and i hope those words are put into action as well.— action as well. can you tell me how ou found action as well. can you tell me how you found out _ action as well. can you tell me how you found out that _ action as well. can you tell me how you found out that matthew- action as well. can you tell me how you found out that matthew and - action as well. can you tell me howj you found out that matthew and his brother were infected with hiv? fin a brother were infected with hiv? on a railway station. _ brother were infected with hiv? on a railway station. my _ brother were infected with hiv? q�*i —. railway station. my husband, philip, and i were waiting, we think, for a train, because even now we don't know why we were there because it was such a shock, and this lady came up, she had got a young boy at the same hospital, and she asked us if we had a letter and, of course, what she didn't realise was, if we said no, she had got to tell us, and we said no and then she said, well, in

that case, your sons have hiv. find that case, your sons have hiv. and the were that case, your sons have hiv. and they were what. — that case, your sons have hiv. and they were what, six _ that case, your sons have hiv. and they were what, six and nine? matthew was 11 and simon was eight. matthew, can you remember being told what was going to happen to you and what was going to happen to you and what was going to happen to you and what was happening to you? i remember being told by my mum and dad that— remember being told by my mum and dad that i_ remember being told by my mum and dad that i was hiv positive and i was12— dad that i was hiv positive and i was 12 at— dad that i was hiv positive and i was 12 at the time. that was devastating, because it was that time _ devastating, because it was that time in — devastating, because it was that time in the mid—80s when the aids devotes _ time in the mid—80s when the aids devotes from the telly and it was a huge _ devotes from the telly and it was a huge stigma around it and it was a death— huge stigma around it and it was a death sentence at the time stop there _ death sentence at the time stop there was— death sentence at the time stop there was no two ways about it. and ou had a there was no two ways about it. fific you had a brother in there was no two ways about it. fific you had a brother in the same situation. you had a brother in the same situation-— you had a brother in the same situation. yet. what did you think miaht situation. yet. what did you think might happen? you presumably had lots of questions but didn't know who to ask?— lots of questions but didn't know who to ask? ., ., ., ., who to ask? there was no one to ask. we were essentially _ who to ask? there was no one to ask. we were essentially told _ who to ask? there was no one to ask. we were essentially told to _ who to ask? there was no one to ask.

we were essentially told to go - who to ask? there was no one to ask. we were essentially told to go away i we were essentially told to go away and die _ we were essentially told to go away and die no help was ever offered or given— and die no help was ever offered or given and. — and die no help was ever offered or given and, actually, i ended up going _ given and, actually, i ended up going to — given and, actually, i ended up going to see a psychologist at great ormond _ going to see a psychologist at great 0rmond street hospital in 1990. i was 16— 0rmond street hospital in 1990. i was 16 and it was two weeks after my birthday _ was 16 and it was two weeks after my birthday i_ was 16 and it was two weeks after my birthday. i got the report here, and part of— birthday. i got the report here, and part of it _ birthday. i got the report here, and part of it says, it's very likely indeed — part of it says, it's very likely indeed that, over the next few years. — indeed that, over the next few years. if— indeed that, over the next few years, if he doesn't dispel at aids, he will_ years, if he doesn't dispel at aids, he will suffer major emotional difficulties. he will have to adjust to the _ difficulties. he will have to adjust to the possibility of a shorter than normal— to the possibility of a shorter than normal life — to the possibility of a shorter than normal life and a period of chronic iii-health — normal life and a period of chronic ill—health. and that was the facts back ill—health. and that was the facts hack in_ ill—health. and that was the facts hack in the — ill—health. and that was the facts back in the early 90s. meanwhile, ou were back in the early 90s. meanwhile, you were having — back in the early 90s. meanwhile, you were having to _ back in the early 90s. meanwhile, you were having to administer - back in the early 90s. meanwhile, i you were having to administer factor eight. you were having to administer factor eiaht. , , �* , you were having to administer factor eiaht., , v m you were having to administer factor eiaht., hm ,, eight. yes, it's awful because, first of all. _ eight. yes, it's awful because, first of all. i— eight. yes, it's awful because, first of all, i gave _ eight. yes, it's awful because, first of all, i gave this, - eight. yes, it's awful because, first of all, i gave this, i'm a l first of all, i gave this, i'm a carrier, so you feel that guilt, and

then you have the next guilt, because you probably infected them with it with the injections, and it's just awful, dreadful. with it with the injections, and it'sjust awful, dreadful. you with it with the injections, and it's just awful, dreadful. you are pouring poison into your children's arms. a, , ., pouring poison into your children's arms. , ., ., pouring poison into your children's arms. ., ., ., pouring poison into your children's arms. . ., . . arms. matthew, you had no idea what ou are arms. matthew, you had no idea what you are being — arms. matthew, you had no idea what you are being given. _ arms. matthew, you had no idea what you are being given. it— arms. matthew, you had no idea what you are being given. it wasn't - arms. matthew, you had no idea what you are being given. it wasn't your - you are being given. it wasn't your mother was doing the best she could do in the circumstances. it mother was doing the best she could do in the circumstances.— do in the circumstances. it was 'ust treatment the fi do in the circumstances. it was 'ust treatment the hospital i do in the circumstances. it was 'ust treatment the hospital gave h do in the circumstances. it was 'ust treatment the hospital gave us h do in the circumstances. it wasjust treatment the hospital gave us to l treatment the hospital gave us to deal with— treatment the hospital gave us to deal with haemophilia. do treatment the hospital gave us to deal with haemophilia.— treatment the hospital gave us to deal with haemophilia. dealwith haemophilia. do you have our dealwith haemophilia. do you have your records? _ dealwith haemophilia. do you have your records? when _ dealwith haemophilia. do you have your records? when news - dealwith haemophilia. do you have your records? when news of- dealwith haemophilia. do you have your records? when news of an - your records? when news of an intui your records? when news of an inquiry started. _ your records? when news of an inquiry started, i— your records? when news of an inquiry started, i wrote - your records? when news of an inquiry started, i wrote to - your records? when news of an inquiry started, i wrote to all. inquiry started, i wrote to all hospitals _ inquiry started, i wrote to all hospitals i'd been at for my records and most _ hospitals i'd been at for my records and most of— hospitals i'd been at for my records and most of them had been destroyed. in and most of them had been destroyed. in fact, all— and most of them had been destroyed. in fact, all of— and most of them had been destroyed. in fact, all of the records, because my mum _ in fact, all of the records, because my mum and dad kept separate records, — my mum and dad kept separate records, because it was about 1982 and there _ records, because it was about 1982 and there were stories coming out of blood—borne viruses, and when i got all my— blood—borne viruses, and when i got all my records, or what was left of

them, _ all my records, or what was left of them, back— all my records, or what was left of them, back from the hospitals, all traces _ them, back from the hospitals, all traces of— them, back from the hospitals, all traces of american factor eight had been _ traces of american factor eight had been removed from those records and we had _ been removed from those records and we had known we were given the american — we had known we were given the american factor eight because, after my mum _ american factor eight because, after my mum and dad got the news me and my mum and dad got the news me and my brother were hiv, they tried to -ive my brother were hiv, they tried to give us more american factor eight and my mum refused it. yes. when i went in there — and my mum refused it. yes. when i went in there to _ and my mum refused it. yes. when i went in there to get _ and my mum refused it. yes. when i went in there to get it, _ and my mum refused it. yes. when i went in there to get it, he _ and my mum refused it. yes. when i went in there to get it, he put - and my mum refused it. yes. when i went in there to get it, he put this i went in there to get it, he put this box in front of me and i saw it was american, and this was only a few weeks after i'd been told they were hiv positive, and he turned and said, but they are already infected with the he might as well have said, they are going to die, anyway. necklaces, they already infected? yes. do necklaces, they already infected? es. ~ , ., , yes. do you think there should be prosecutions? _ yes. do you think there should be prosecutions? if _ yes. do you think there should be prosecutions? if this _ yes. do you think there should be prosecutions? if this had - yes. do you think there should be prosecutions? if this had been - yes. do you think there should be l prosecutions? if this had been done earlier, prosecutions? if this had been done earlier. yes- — prosecutions? if this had been done earlier. yes- i— prosecutions? if this had been done earlier, yes. i don't— prosecutions? if this had been done earlier, yes. i don't think... -

prosecutions? if this had been done earlier, yes. i don't think... the - earlier, yes. i don't think... the people alive now. if there are some, yes. i people alive now. if there are some, es. ~' , people alive now. if there are some, es. ~ , , ., , yes. i think the files should be tassed yes. i think the files should be passed to _ yes. i think the files should be passed to the _ yes. i think the files should be passed to the cps. _ yes. i think the files should be passed to the cps. there - yes. i think the files should be | passed to the cps. there must yes. i think the files should be . passed to the cps. there must be people _ passed to the cps. there must be people still alive who had a hand in this and _ people still alive who had a hand in this and i_ people still alive who had a hand in this and i think they need to be prosecuted. this was not an accident _ prosecuted. this was not an accident. the wording where it says it's a _ accident. the wording where it says it's a tragedy or anything like that, — it's a tragedy or anything like that, it — it's a tragedy or anything like that, it makes it sound like an accident _ that, it makes it sound like an accident. this was done on purpose, with full— accident. this was done on purpose, with full knowledge of the risks. and for— with full knowledge of the risks. and for the purposes of research, detrimental to people with those issues. ., , detrimental to people with those issues. . , ., detrimental to people with those issues. ., . ., . detrimental to people with those issues. ., . ., issues. there was never a choice or discussion — issues. there was never a choice or discussion over _ issues. there was never a choice or discussion over risk. _ issues. there was never a choice or discussion over risk. what - issues. there was never a choice or discussion over risk. what about i issues. there was never a choice or| discussion over risk. what about the idea of passing _ discussion over risk. what about the idea of passing all— discussion over risk. what about the idea of passing all the _ discussion over risk. what about the idea of passing all the research - discussion over risk. what about the idea of passing all the research to i idea of passing all the research to the cps? , . ._ idea of passing all the research to the cps? , . , idea of passing all the research to thecps? ,. , _ the cps? 'ustice delayed is 'ustice denied the cps? justice delayed is 'ustice denied and no i the cps? justice delayed is 'ustice denied and no stop * the cps? justice delayed is 'ustice denied and no stop on h the cps? justice delayed isjustice denied and no stop on justice. - the cps? justice delayed isjustice denied and no stop on justice. if l denied and no stop onjustice. if there are people alive, and there is

an evidence base, which it looks like there is to me, i think the cps have a duty to be interested in this. what i would say is, just listening to you both, my heart is slippy —— my heart is beating, and i've met many people in your position, and we knew today was going to be like a tsunami and we've been talking with my cloaks and select committee for several weeks about how we were going to respond to this and how we as a committee will scrutinise his work going forward. you know when it hits its going to really hit but, when it makes land, it's got a hell of a punch, and today has had an incredible punch to it. given the delays to this report and the maxwell ian procedure they talk about, where everybody criticised it had to go back to, i think that was ominous, and, boy...— had to go back to, i think that was ominous, and, boy... what did you like to you. —

ominous, and, boy... what did you like to you, diana? _ ominous, and, boy... what did you like to you, diana? it _ ominous, and, boy... what did you like to you, diana? it was - ominous, and, boy... what did you like to you, diana? it was an - like to you, diana? it was an emotional— like to you, diana? it was an emotional day _ like to you, diana? it was an emotional day for— like to you, diana? it was an | emotional day for everybody. finally, — emotional day for everybody. finally, the truth was told about what _ finally, the truth was told about what had — finally, the truth was told about what had happened and the cover—up. ithink— what had happened and the cover—up. i think that _ what had happened and the cover—up. i think that was too important, that that acknowledgement was given. the tragedy— that acknowledgement was given. the tragedy and the cover—up. do that acknowledgement was given. the tragedy and the cover-up.— tragedy and the cover-up. do you both acknowledge _ tragedy and the cover-up. do you both acknowledge that _ tragedy and the cover-up. do you both acknowledge that there - tragedy and the cover-up. do you both acknowledge that there are l both acknowledge that there are problems and blame on both sides of the political divide, that this is successive governments? this is completely _ successive governments? this is completely off — successive governments? this is completely off the _ successive governments? this is completely off the state. - successive governments? this is completely off the state. thankl successive governments? this is i completely off the state. thank the idea of national scheme. can, i think that's one of the first time is a prime minister in recent times said, this is a it was a short statement in the chamber and it was incredible sombre. i wrote down three things, the prime minister said it's a day of shame for the british state and every level of the institutions failed and whatever it costs. fora institutions failed and whatever it costs. for a british prime minister to say that at the box is a big deal

and i thought he was incredibly sincere today. and i know him and i knowjeremy hunt, the chancellor, well and i know, in their hearts, they will make this work. thea;r well and i know, in their hearts, they will make this work. they will make it right. _ they will make this work. they will make it right, but _ they will make this work. they will make it right, but brian _ they will make this work. they will make it right, but brian langstaffl make it right, but brian langstaff hasn't made recommendations that are binding, is he? ida. hasn't made recommendations that are binding. is he?— binding, is he? no, but most april he set out — binding, is he? no, but most april he set out clearly _ binding, is he? no, but most april he set out clearly the _ he set out clearly the recommendations of competition so, as much— recommendations of competition so, as much as _ recommendations of competition so, as much as i — recommendations of competition so, as much as i think the prime minister— as much as i think the prime minister today was sincere in his apology. — minister today was sincere in his apology. a — minister today was sincere in his apology, a year ago, he was told by sir brian. _ apology, a year ago, he was told by sir brian, people are dying, you need _ sir brian, people are dying, you need to— sir brian, people are dying, you need to get compensation paid, and the delay— need to get compensation paid, and the delay of the government for the last 12 _ the delay of the government for the last 12 months has further compounded things to stop i last 12 months has further compounded things to stop i think as well it's been — compounded things to stop i think as well it's been a _ compounded things to stop i think as well it's been a continuation - compounded things to stop i think as well it's been a continuation of- compounded things to stop i think as well it's been a continuation of a - well it's been a continuation of a lie and lying for a0 odd years because, even last year, when they had so brian langstaff�*s second interim report, we were being told, we are working at pace. they were

doing nothing. they were lying to us. 0verand doing nothing. they were lying to us. over and over again. doing nothing. they were lying to us. 0verand overagain. it doing nothing. they were lying to us. over and over again. it takes a report like this to get rishi sunak to stand up and admit what has happened. and they were dragging their feet over who was in the compensation as it were arena. over who was in the compensation as it were arena-— it were arena. yes, and diana has this tradition _ it were arena. yes, and diana has this tradition at _ it were arena. yes, and diana has this tradition at the _ it were arena. yes, and diana has this tradition at the end _ it were arena. yes, and diana has this tradition at the end of - it were arena. yes, and diana has this tradition at the end of term i this tradition at the end of term every term there is a new q in the name of dame diana johnson on the subject and i have spoken many times and you're right. a year ago was a moment when a gesture could have been made and it wasn't. for moment when a gesture could have been made and it wasn't.— moment when a gesture could have been made and it wasn't. for all you sa it is been made and it wasn't. for all you say it is extraordinary _ been made and it wasn't. for all you say it is extraordinary to _ been made and it wasn't. for all you say it is extraordinary to hear - been made and it wasn't. for all you say it is extraordinary to hear the i say it is extraordinary to hear the prime minister, should he have said, i take responsibility for the delay and inaction in the last year? he should have done because ultimately, he is the _ should have done because ultimately, he is the prime minister and should have done because ultimately, he is the prime ministerand if should have done because ultimately, he is the prime minister and if the prime _ he is the prime minister and if the prime minister want something to happen— prime minister want something to happen in— prime minister want something to happen in government, he can make it happen _ happen in government, he can make it happen. they— happen in government, he can make it happen. they did this with the horizon — happen. they did this with the horizon scandal, they decided of the outpouring _ horizon scandal, they decided of the outpouring of disbelief of what happened when that tv drama was

aired. _ happened when that tv drama was aired. they— happened when that tv drama was aired, they took action. they could have _ aired, they took action. they could have done — aired, they took action. they could have done this a year ago if they had wanted. have done this a year ago if they had wanted-— have done this a year ago if they had wanted. �* ., ,., . ., ., had wanted. and labour could have done it when _ had wanted. and labour could have done it when they _ had wanted. and labour could have done it when they were _ had wanted. and labour could have done it when they were in - had wanted. and labour could have done it when they were in power. i had wanted. and labour could have | done it when they were in power. to be clear. ijust want the government of the _ be clear. ijust want the government of the day— be clear. ijust want the government of the day now to do the right thing — of the day now to do the right thing i— of the day now to do the right thint. ., , ., of the day now to do the right thint. ., i. ., thing. i wonder if you have confidence _ thing. i wonder if you have confidence that _ thing. i wonder if you have confidence that it - thing. i wonder if you have confidence that it couldn'tl thing. i wonder if you have - confidence that it couldn't happen again with blood products? i don't think so. because _ again with blood products? i don't think so. because i— again with blood products? i don't think so. because i heard - again with blood products? i don't think so. because i heard that - again with blood products? i don't think so. because i heard that the j think so. because i heard that the blood products laboratory has been sold off to a private investor. so thatjust puts profit back in to the blood products and that is what got us here in the first place. american companies trying to get profit out of people giving blood and selling blood. {to of people giving blood and selling blood. ,., . �* of people giving blood and selling blood. ,., ., �* ., ., ., blood. go after big pharma and the american companies _ blood. go after big pharma and the american companies supplying - blood. go after big pharma and the i american companies supplying factor viii. and somehow explain to you and many others way the american factory presence was removed from records, thatis presence was removed from records, that is extraordinary.— that is extraordinary. that's why the word record _

that is extraordinary. that's why the word record -- _ that is extraordinary. that's why the word record -- word - that is extraordinary. that's why i the word record -- word cover-up that is extraordinary. that's why - the word record -- word cover-up is the word record —— word cover—up is used. we under select committee are doing this leadership on the nhs select inquiry and it started on a piece of work looking at previous public inquiries where they have made patient safety recommendations and the gunmen have accepted those recommendations. we found it actually, time and again, recommendations were made, repeated and not carried through. what i want to know now is that systemically, they will follow each recommendation three. but they will follow each recommendation three. �* ., they will follow each recommendation three. �* . , , ., three. but learning the lesson doesnt three. but learning the lesson doesn't mean _ three. but learning the lesson doesn't mean anything. - three. but learning the lesson doesn't mean anything. it - three. but learning the lesson doesn't mean anything. it was foreseeable and preventable, so was grenfell. to a certain extent, so was covid. what's the problem at the heart of the state? i was covid. what's the problem at the heart of the state?— heart of the state? i have reflected on this a lot _ heart of the state? i have reflected on this a lot in _ heart of the state? i have reflected on this a lot in recent _ heart of the state? i have reflected on this a lot in recent weeks - heart of the state? i have reflected on this a lot in recent weeks as - heart of the state? i have reflected on this a lot in recent weeks as you can imagine and i think, is this it is a new country and we are not good at statecraft? clearly not. do we not have good people who can dig into the sorts of failures? clearly not. so it has to be that it is cover—up and it is what the

chancellor spoke very openly about in yesterday's newspapers about the ranks being closed around public services. theresa may said that in the house today. i services. theresa may said that in the house today.— the house today. i also think it is a complete _ the house today. i also think it is a complete lack _ the house today. i also think it is a complete lack of _ the house today. i also think it is a complete lack of personal- a complete lack of personal accountability. _ a complete lack of personal accountability. there - a complete lack of personal accountability. there was i a complete lack of personal- accountability. there was no—one that will— accountability. there was no—one that will take _ accountability. there was no—one that will take personal— that will take personal responsibility- that will take personal responsibility for thisl that will take personal. responsibility for this and that will take personal- responsibility for this and it is all hidden _ responsibility for this and it is all hidden in _ responsibility for this and it is all hidden in groupthink. - responsibility for this and it isj all hidden in groupthink. the? responsibility for this and it is all hidden in groupthink. they think that atain, all hidden in groupthink. they think that again, there _ all hidden in groupthink. they think that again, there could _ all hidden in groupthink. they think that again, there could be - all hidden in groupthink. they think that again, there could be a - that again, there could be a prosecution.— that again, there could be a prosecution. that again, there could be a trosecution. �* ., ., ~ , prosecution. and the thought to keep somebod 's prosecution. and the thought to keep somebody's reputation, _ prosecution. and the thought to keep somebody's reputation, hundreds - prosecution. and the thought to keep somebody's reputation, hundreds ofl somebody's reputation, hundreds of people _ somebody's reputation, hundreds of people died. thousands. yes, thousands. just for somebody's reputation. thousands. just for somebody's reputation-— thousands. just for somebody's re-utation. �* ~ ., , , reputation. and i think money comes into this as well. _ reputation. and i think money comes into this as well. because _ reputation. and i think money comes into this as well. because there - reputation. and i think money comes into this as well. because there was l into this as well. because there was a view this would be very expensive if you actually admitted something wrong could happened. and i think the reputational damage and the money with the two reasons why the state closed ranks and said, nothing to see here, we did the best we could. i to see here, we did the best we could. ., ., ., . ~ ., could. i want to go back to matthew in a minute- — could. i want to go back to matthew in a minute. from _ could. i want to go back to matthew in a minute. from the _ could. i want to go back to matthew in a minute. from the political- in a minute. from the political perspective, what happens next? procedurally, a statement tomorrow

from the cabinet office minister. remember, when i was a minister of the department, this was taken away from the department. theresa may was frustrated and she has since spoken publicly about why this happened. we have to fight to get it out of the department of health because when the public inquiry was called, the sponsoring department would have been the _ sponsoring department would have been the department of health and that was— been the department of health and that was totally unacceptable because they are at the heart of this _ because they are at the heart of this. , , ., ., ., , this. they should not have been markint this. they should not have been marking their _ this. they should not have been marking their own _ this. they should not have been marking their own homework. i marking their own homework. absolutely, but there had to be a fi-ht absolutely, but there had to be a fight to _ absolutely, but there had to be a fight to get it into the cabinet. there — fight to get it into the cabinet. there is— fight to get it into the cabinet. there is a _ fight to get it into the cabinet. there is a statement tomorrow from john glen, i presume, the cabinet office minister. but my concern is 0ffice minister. but my concern is not about getting immediate compensation to the infected, it is the complications and the complexity of getting it to be affected. and i worry that is going to take forever. another thing that could have been done over— another thing that could have been done over a — another thing that could have been done over a year— another thing that could have been done over a year ago— another thing that could have been done over a year ago is— another thing that could have been done over a year ago is registeringl done over a year ago is registering all the _ done over a year ago is registering all the affected _ done over a year ago is registering all the affected people. _ done over a year ago is registering all the affected people. that - done over a year ago is registering all the affected people. that has i all the affected people. that has not been — all the affected people. that has not been done. _ all the affected people. that has not been done. that _ all the affected people. that has not been done. that has - all the affected people. that has not been done. that has not - all the affected people. that hasl not been done. that has not even

started _ not been done. that has not even started so — not been done. that has not even started. ., ., ., ~ not been done. that has not even started. ., ., . ~ ., not been done. that has not even started. ., ., .,~ ., , started. so what would make a big difference to _ started. so what would make a big difference to your _ started. so what would make a big difference to your life _ started. so what would make a big difference to your life just - started. so what would make a big difference to your life just now- started. so what would make a big difference to your life just now is i difference to your life just now is to mark you are telling me earlier your are not on drugs at the moment for hiv and you are essentially well —— just now? you are telling me. what would make a difference to your life going forward. this what would make a difference to your life going forward.— life going forward. this is the start of the — life going forward. this is the start of the end _ life going forward. this is the start of the end of _ life going forward. this is the start of the end of this - life going forward. this is the i start of the end of this because life going forward. this is the - start of the end of this because we have been— start of the end of this because we have been living _ start of the end of this because we have been living this _ start of the end of this because we have been living this for— start of the end of this because we have been living this for 40 - start of the end of this because we have been living this for 40 years. | have been living this for 40 years. i have been living this for 40 years. i have _ have been living this for 40 years. i have grown-up. _ have been living this for 40 years. i have grown—up, my— have been living this for 40 years. i have grown—up, my childhood, i| have been living this for 40 years. - i have grown—up, my childhood, i had to hiv _ i have grown—up, my childhood, i had to w i_ i have grown—up, my childhood, i had to hiv iwas— i have grown—up, my childhood, i had to hiv. l was told _ i have grown—up, my childhood, i had to hiv. i was told in— i have grown—up, my childhood, i had to hiv. i was told in my— i have grown—up, my childhood, i had to hiv. i was told in my 20s i- i have grown—up, my childhood, i had to hiv. i was told in my 20s i had - to hiv. i was told in my 20s i had hepatitis — to hiv. i was told in my 20s i had hepatitis c — to hiv. i was told in my 20s i had hepatitis c. and _ to hiv. i was told in my 20s i had hepatitis c. and i— to hiv. i was told in my 20s i had hepatitis c. and i was _ to hiv. i was told in my 20s i had hepatitis c. and i was told - to hiv. i was told in my 20s i had hepatitis c. and i was told in - to hiv. i was told in my 20s i had hepatitis c. and i was told in myl hepatitis c. and i was told in my late 20s — hepatitis c. and i was told in my late 20s i — hepatitis c. and i was told in my late 20s i was _ hepatitis c. and i was told in my late 20s i was also _ hepatitis c. and i was told in my late 20s i was also exposed - hepatitis c. and i was told in my late 20s i was also exposed to i late 20s i was also exposed to variant — late 20s i was also exposed to variant cjd _ late 20s i was also exposed to variant cjd through _ late 20s i was also exposed to variant cjd through blood - late 20s i was also exposed to - variant cjd through blood products. so it is— variant cjd through blood products. so it is not— variant cjd through blood products. so it is not a — variant cjd through blood products. so it is not a clear— variant cjd through blood products. so it is not a clear run _ variant cjd through blood products. so it is not a clear run for— variant cjd through blood products. so it is not a clear run for the - so it is not a clear run for the rest — so it is not a clear run for the rest of— so it is not a clear run for the rest of my— so it is not a clear run for the rest of my life. _ so it is not a clear run for the rest of my life. there - so it is not a clear run for the rest of my life. there are - so it is not a clear run for thej rest of my life. there are still clouds — rest of my life. there are still clouds hanging _ rest of my life. there are still clouds hanging over- rest of my life. there are still clouds hanging over my- rest of my life. there are still| clouds hanging over my head. rest of my life. there are still- clouds hanging over my head. and i want _ clouds hanging over my head. and i want to— clouds hanging over my head. and i want to be — clouds hanging over my head. and i want to be in— clouds hanging over my head. and i want to be in a— clouds hanging over my head. and i want to be in a position _ clouds hanging over my head. and i want to be in a position where - clouds hanging over my head. and i want to be in a position where i- clouds hanging over my head. and i want to be in a position where i can| want to be in a position where i can make _ want to be in a position where i can make my— want to be in a position where i can make my family— want to be in a position where i can make my family secure. _ want to be in a position where i can make my family secure. i _ want to be in a position where i can make my family secure. i cannot i want to be in a position where i canl make my family secure. i cannot get life insurance — make my family secure. i cannot get life insurance. if— make my family secure. i cannot get life insurance. if i— make my family secure. i cannot get life insurance. if i die _ make my family secure. i cannot get life insurance. if i die tomorrow, - life insurance. if i die tomorrow, how— life insurance. if i die tomorrow, how would — life insurance. if i die tomorrow, how would my— life insurance. if i die tomorrow, how would my family _ life insurance. if i die tomorrow, how would my family cope? - life insurance. if i die tomorrow, how would my family cope? so i | life insurance. if i die tomorrow, - how would my family cope? sol need to be

how would my family cope? so i need to be in— how would my family cope? sol need to be in a _ how would my family cope? sol need to be in a position _ how would my family cope? sol need to be in a position where _ how would my family cope? so i need to be in a position where my- to be in a position where my family's— to be in a position where my family's future _ to be in a position where my family's future is _ to be in a position where my family's future is secure. - to be in a position where myl family's future is secure. find to be in a position where my family's future is secure. and you are ttoin family's future is secure. and you are going to _ family's future is secure. and you are going to make _ family's future is secure. and you are going to make sure _ family's future is secure. and you are going to make sure that - family's future is secure. and you - are going to make sure that happens? 0h, are going to make sure that happens? oh, boy, a select committee corridor is going into overdrive because i want to make sure accepted recommendations from the past followed through. if i hear learn the lessons tomorrow which i suspect i will, there will be deep saying the house. and if i hear that we are now setting up the register, even deeper sighing, and i expect we will hear both of them. but we will follow this up and sir brian's work will not be left on the shelf. tbtnd will not be left on the shelf. and this is cross-party _ will not be left on the shelf. and this is cross-party is _ will not be left on the shelf. and this is cross—party is welcome at this is cross—party is welcome at this is— this is cross—party is welcome at this is not— this is cross—party is welcome at this is not one side, the house wants— this is not one side, the house wants to — this is not one side, the house wants to see justice.— this is not one side, the house wants to see justice. wants to see 'ustice. thank you very much wants to see justice. thank you very much indeed- _ wants to see justice. thank you very much indeed. -- _ wants to see justice. thank you very much indeed. -- cross-party- wants to see justice. thank you very much indeed. -- cross-party as - wants to see justice. thank you very. much indeed. -- cross-party as well, much indeed. —— cross—party as well, and this is not one side. into the maelstrom of the middle east have been added two significant developments. today, the chief prosecutor in the international criminal court announced he was seeking arrest warrants for benjamin netanyahu and his defence minister, along with the hamas leader in gaza, ismail haniyeh, and two other senior hamas figures, for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

this follows the confirmation that iran's president, ebrahim raisi, had died in yesterday's helicopter crash, along with the country's foreign minister, prompting mourning in public and some celebration on social media. that raises the question of whether the deaths make any difference to iran's role in the gaza conflict, providing hamas with indirect military backing. i'm joined by mark. mark, first, what has the icc�*s chief prosecutor set in motion? what chief prosecutor set in motion? what he has asked — chief prosecutor set in motion? what he has asked for— chief prosecutor set in motion? what he has asked for is _ chief prosecutor set in motion? “fingsgt he has asked for is arrest chief prosecutor set in motion? “fig"isgt he has asked for is arrest warrants. he cannot issue them. the request goes to a panel of three judges who have to make this decision. now, they might say they have done this decision or they might keep them as so—called sealed arrest warrants in order that the people concerned wouldn't become aware of them. the three leaders of hamas as you have mentioned are concerned, ismail haniyeh, mohammed deifand

mentioned are concerned, ismail haniyeh, mohammed deif and yahya sinwar. according to the prosecutor, they have a case to answer and they could be charged with murder, rape and kidnap. so very serious. also of course, as you mentioned, two key israeli leaders as was explained this afternoon by the chief prosecutor karim khan. israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu and minister of defence yoav gallant bear criminal responsibility for the following international crimes, committed on the territory of the state of palestine, from at least the 8th of october 2023. the crimes include starvation of civilians as a method of warfare, wilfully causing great suffering, serious injury to body or health, or cruel treatment. so where does it go from here? well, we have seen — so where does it go from here? well, we have seen a _ so where does it go from here? well, we have seen a lot _ so where does it go from here? well, we have seen a lot of _ so where does it go from here? well, we have seen a lot of reactions - we have seen a lot of reactions today to what has been done. a plague on both your houses approach

from the icc, starting off with the prime minister of the czech republic. he weighed in, this is something he put on twitter. we can see that on the screen, maybe not. but he weighed in pretty much straightaway saying that he found the moral equivalence of this unacceptable. he tweeted this... now, there was some supportive statements from some governments. belgium for example, they said that no—one must be above the law. but the white house and the foreign and commonwealth and development office in the uk have also been critical in the sense of what they have been calling the moral equivalence of having both hamas and israeli leaders. the wider question of course is where does it go from here in the more literal sense? i talked before about the need to get this through the panel of three judges for warrants to be issued. can through the panel of three 'udges for warrants to be issued. can they be executed? _

for warrants to be issued. can they be executed? exactly, _ for warrants to be issued. can they be executed? exactly, how - for warrants to be issued. can they be executed? exactly, how do - for warrants to be issued. can they be executed? exactly, how do you| for warrants to be issued. can they i be executed? exactly, how do you go about executing this kind of warrant? 50 about executing this kind of warrant? . , about executing this kind of warrant? ., , ., «g , warrant? so many of the key countries _ warrant? so many of the key countries involved, - warrant? so many of the key countries involved, israel, i countries involved, israel, critically, are not signatories to the statute that established the icc. cattle, where ismail haniyeh, the political leader of hamas, also subject to these charges, also is not a signatory —— subject to these charges, also is not a signatory -- qatar. turkey. neither is iran. so it is quite possible these individuals, even if open warrants are issued, will still continue to operate politically and move around the region. but restrictions _ move around the region. but restrictions on _ move around the region. but restrictions on movement presumably depending on the airspace, depending on where you land and refuel. ii on where you land and refuel. if benjamin netanyahu wanted to get on a plane to go to the us, ok, the us wouldn't arrest him. they are not parties either to the rome statute. but what if the plane developed a technical fault and touched down but what if the plane developed a technicalfault and touched down in ireland? those are the kind of issue somebody now if it goes ahead with

arrest warrants could potentially face. “ , arrest warrants could potentially face. 3 , , arrest warrants could potentially face. , .,~ arrest warrants could potentially face. 2, ,~ «m,, arrest warrants could potentially face. 2, ,~ ., face. let's briefly talk about iran. a chan t e face. let's briefly talk about iran. a change in _ face. let's briefly talk about iran. a change in leadership _ face. let's briefly talk about iran. a change in leadership ahead. i face. let's briefly talk about iran. i a change in leadership ahead. what is ahead for iran apart from elections, obviously? well, that is the clear thing. _ elections, obviously? well, that is the clear thing. the _ elections, obviously? well, that is the clear thing. the 50 _ elections, obviously? well, that is the clear thing. the 50 day - the clear thing. the 50 day timetable for the first deputy to the dead president to arrange these elections. i think the key questions i'm sure we will hear about in a moment from ali, to what extent does this provide is now a window for frenetic politicking for the people around the supreme leader ayatollah khamenei to try to fix this in the best way they can politically? clearly, it is an unexpected political event. now, for more on this, i am joined by nomi bar—yaacov — associate fellow in the international security programme at chatham house, and by ali ansari — professor in modern history, with reference to the middle east, at the university of st andrews, and the founding director of the institute for iranian studies. let“s let's go back to basics, what were they doing putting president raisi

in such an ancient helicopter? that is a question _ in such an ancient helicopter? that is a question l _ in such an ancient helicopter? that is a question i think _ in such an ancient helicopter? “i"isgit is a question i think many iranians will be asking, not only such an ancient helicopter but flying in such bad weather in a mountainous area. i think those questions will be asked even among loyalists. latte be asked even among loyalists. we have an unexpected election but will it make any real difference to policy, not least hardline policy, particularly towards women? mast policy, not least hardline policy, particularly towards women? most of the toli particularly towards women? most of the policy is — particularly towards women? most of the policy is derived _ particularly towards women? most of the policy is derived by _ particularly towards women? most of the policy is derived by the _ particularly towards women? most of the policy is derived by the supreme| the policy is derived by the supreme leader, who sets strategy the outline. raisi was particular in his loyalty and reliability to the supreme leader but he isn't an originator of the ideas, so i think the supreme leader would be looking earnestly for someone as similar as he could find to take over. what he could find to take over. what raisi was very — he could find to take over. what raisi was very much _ he could find to take over. what raisi was very much behind i he could find to take over. what raisi was very much behind was the idea of acting as proxies in the gaza war.

idea of acting as proxies in the gaza war-— idea of acting as proxies in the gazawar. ~ ., , gaza war. was also supporting the houthis in yemen, _ gaza war. was also supporting the houthis in yemen, supporting i houthis in yemen, supporting hezbollah in unprecedented faction and various militias in syria and iraq _ and various militias in syria and iraq. they— and various militias in syria and iraq. they were all acting against israel _ iraq. they were all acting against israel he — iraq. they were all acting against israel. he was also a great executioner. he issued thousands of execution _ executioner. he issued thousands of execution orders towards anyone that showed _ execution orders towards anyone that showed any— execution orders towards anyone that showed any kind of dissent. he was known _ showed any kind of dissent. he was known as a — showed any kind of dissent. he was known as a tremendous hardliner but ithink— known as a tremendous hardliner but i think the _ known as a tremendous hardliner but i think the policy is not going to change — i think the policy is not going to change i— i think the policy is not going to change. i think they will keep everything tightly under wraps, they've — everything tightly under wraps, they've set a date for the elections, during the 28th, and it's unlikely— elections, during the 28th, and it's unlikely to — elections, during the 28th, and it's unlikely to be a democratic process whereby— unlikely to be a democratic process whereby you are going to see a lot of campaigning. i assume everything will be _ of campaigning. i assume everything will be decided ahead of time by the supreme _ will be decided ahead of time by the supreme leader, and i think it's going _ supreme leader, and i think it's going to — supreme leader, and i think it's going to be much of the same. let�*s going to be much of the same. let's

turn to the — going to be much of the same. let's turn to the international— going to be much of the same. let�*s turn to the international criminal court. has there been the expected reaction in israel? horror at the idea, nobody would ever think this was a good idea?— was a good idea? israel isn't a signatory _ was a good idea? israel isn't a signatory and _ was a good idea? israel isn't a signatory and they _ was a good idea? israel isn't a signatory and they feel - was a good idea? israel isn't a signatory and they feel they i was a good idea? israel isn't a i signatory and they feel they had exhausted local remedies and i think the issue _ exhausted local remedies and i think the issue of— exhausted local remedies and i think the issue of exhaustion of local remedies — the issue of exhaustion of local remedies is fundamental. do you think this will — remedies is fundamental. do you think this will have _ remedies is fundamental. do you think this will have the _ remedies is fundamental. do you think this will have the impact i remedies is fundamental. do you think this will have the impact of| think this will have the impact of shoring up benjamin netanyahu? i think that's the risk, is they already— think that's the risk, is they already feel hounded, that's part of how his _ already feel hounded, that's part of how his whole modus operandi is. he feels that, _ how his whole modus operandi is. he feels that, the more he is hounded, the more extreme he gets, the more dangerous it — the more extreme he gets, the more dangerous it gets, and sol the more extreme he gets, the more dangerous it gets, and so i think there _ dangerous it gets, and so i think there is— dangerous it gets, and so i think there is a — dangerous it gets, and so i think there is a risk and then of course there _ there is a risk and then of course there is— there is a risk and then of course there is a — there is a risk and then of course there is a risk and then of course there is a risk that the voters will shift _ there is a risk that the voters will shift further to the right feeling nobody— shift further to the right feeling nobody understands the narrative one

is hearing _ nobody understands the narrative one is hearing there. what nobody understands the narrative one is hearing there.— is hearing there. what about both lease, is hearing there. what about both please. the _ is hearing there. what about both please. the play _ is hearing there. what about both please, the play with _ is hearing there. what about both please, the play with hamas i is hearing there. what about both please, the play with hamas and | is hearing there. what about both i please, the play with hamas and the israelis, in a kind of moral equivalence? i israelis, in a kind of moral equivalence?— israelis, in a kind of moral etuivalence? ., �* ~ ., ., equivalence? i don't think moral equivalence _ equivalence? i don't think moral equivalence is _ equivalence? i don't think moral equivalence is a _ equivalence? i don't think moral equivalence is a helpful- equivalence? i don't think moral equivalence is a helpful way i equivalence? i don't think moral equivalence is a helpful way of. equivalence is a helpful way of looking at it. i feel, at the end of day, even for the israelis as democracy, they do have to maintain certain moral standards and i think that any military action, at the end of the day, is to be within a moral and politicalframework of the day, is to be within a moral and political framework and so, of the day, is to be within a moral and politicalframework and so, in that sense, there is a moral standard to follow.- that sense, there is a moral standard to follow. mark, on the tuestion standard to follow. mark, on the question of _ standard to follow. mark, on the question of this _ standard to follow. mark, on the question of this icc _ standard to follow. mark, on the question of this icc move, i standard to follow. mark, on the question of this icc move, whatl question of this icc move, what impact would potentially have on negotiations? it’s impact would potentially have on negotiations?— impact would potentially have on negotiations? it's always difficult. so, ttoin negotiations? it's always difficult. so. going back — negotiations? it's always difficult. so, going back with _ negotiations? it's always difficult. so, going back with the _ negotiations? it's always difficult. so, going back with the issuing i negotiations? it's always difficult. so, going back with the issuing ofj so, going back with the issuing of arrest warrants. then the loss of which during the yugoslav war and on my mark duffy in 2011 in libya, in

those cases, it gave them no other way out than to fight on. —— on colonel gaddafi in 2011 in libya. gaddafi died in the conflict but the loss of which was handed over by change government in serbia for trial in the hague and this is what opponents of benjamin netanyahu hope, when the government changes, there could be some kind of deal. but right now, the possibility is that it polarises things the other way and that it doesn't have that effect. so it's quite hard to predict how this will play out. lloathed predict how this will play out. what do ou predict how this will play out. what do you make _ predict how this will play out. what do you make of _ predict how this will play out. what do you make of the _ predict how this will play out. what do you make of the accusations, the accusations of arrest for hamas for kidnap and rape, and essentially the indictment, if you want to put it that way, of benjamin netanyahu for using starvation as a weapon of war? i think the issue here is what is

the political framework of what he is doing, what is the endgame? at the moment, even a criticism within israel if he hasn't really provided a sort of political endgame for what is going to happen in gaza afterwards, so i think at the moment the problem is you're seeing the devastation of gaza with no possible solution at hand. if the israelis could develop and provide that and say, as jake sullivan and others have been asking for, i think that would ameliorate it.— have been asking for, i think that would ameliorate it. does this move b the icc would ameliorate it. does this move by the lcc in — would ameliorate it. does this move by the lcc in a _ would ameliorate it. does this move by the icc in a sense _ would ameliorate it. does this move by the icc in a sense we _ would ameliorate it. does this move by the icc in a sense we commit, i by the icc in a sense we commit, because if it's something that cannot be executed in any way and is being rejected by america for the idea of moral equivalence, it shows the icc essentially, toothless? there is also the impact of what happened — there is also the impact of what happened with the icj case, which is running _ happened with the icj case, which is running in _ happened with the icj case, which is running in parallel. in this particular request, there was no mention—

particular request, there was no mention for genocide, and a panel of experts, _ mention for genocide, and a panel of experts, with the top leading experts — experts, with the top leading experts in this country, you had two lord justices, the authors of this report, _ lord justices, the authors of this report, which i am holding here, which _ report, which i am holding here, which is — report, which i am holding here, which is the _ report, which i am holding here, which is the panel of experts of international law, and it's on that basis _ international law, and it's on that basis that— international law, and it's on that basis that the declaration today and request— basis that the declaration today and request for the arrest warrants was made _ request for the arrest warrants was made so— request for the arrest warrants was made. so all the evidence that was reviewed _ made. so all the evidence that was reviewed has been reviewed since january— reviewed has been reviewed since january by— reviewed has been reviewed since january by five top lawyers in this country. — january by five top lawyers in this country. so — january by five top lawyers in this country, so i think there has been a rigorous _ country, so i think there has been a rigorous process, in terms of hiring the top _ rigorous process, in terms of hiring the top international lawyers possibly in the world, to examine the evidence and, before any decision— the evidence and, before any decision was made, as marc roca saidi _ decision was made, as marc roca said. and — decision was made, as marc roca said. and to — decision was made, as marc roca said, and to a pre—chamber of three judges _ said, and to a pre—chamber of three judges who— said, and to a pre—chamber of three judges who will have to decide whether— judges who will have to decide whether to issue arrest warrants or not, whether to issue arrest warrants or not. and _ whether to issue arrest warrants or not, and that hasn't been decided yet. not, and that hasn't been decided yet so—

not, and that hasn't been decided yet so it's — not, and that hasn't been decided yet. so it's not decided on it with to issue — yet. so it's not decided on it with to issue arrest warrants. if they decide — to issue arrest warrants. if they decide to — to issue arrest warrants. if they decide to issue arrest warrants, there _ decide to issue arrest warrants, there will— decide to issue arrest warrants, there will also be a lot of toing and froing and questions of everybody, i and and froing and questions of everybody, land israel will be questioning the jurisdiction of the court. _ questioning the jurisdiction of the court. and — questioning the jurisdiction of the court, and the icc has mentioned that dogma at the same time, they mentioned — that dogma at the same time, they mentioned that hamas is a non—state atom~ _ mentioned that hamas is a non—state atom~ so _ mentioned that hamas is a non—state atom~ so the — mentioned that hamas is a non—state atom. so the question is there will be a lot— atom. so the question is there will be a lot of— atom. so the question is there will be a lot of questions asked. and we will be discussing _ be a lot of questions asked. and we will be discussing lots _ be a lot of questions asked. and we will be discussing lots of _ be a lot of questions asked. and we will be discussing lots of them. i as you may know, newsnight“s format changes next week and, as a result, there“ll be a parting of the ways with some valued members of the team. mark is one of those leaving the bbc after more than three decades on this programme, covering conflicts and diplomacy worldwide. we asked him, aided by his long—time producer maria polachowska, who is also leaving, to reflect on how today's world differs from the one he began reporting on all those years ago.

we“ve come to northern kuwait, close to the border with iraq, to the area where saddam hussein kept his armoured divisions in reserve. kuwait, 1991. the united states crushed iraq“s armed forces and, as they tried to flee, the americans kept bombing. i thought someone would put up some kind of defence. i mean, if they love their country as much as we do, i thought they'd try to fight for it, but theyjust didn't know what they were up against. it was ripped open... the us sent more than half a million people and 1,000 aircraft to fight. some said the unequal slaughter had made america a hyperpower and ushered in a monopolar world. but the logic for maintaining the huge military forces that did this would soon collapse. when a coup attempt by hard—liners against mikhail gorbachev collapsed in moscow,

it spelt the end of the soviet union and many of its symbols. ..has gained access to the central committee complex. the soviet communist party was outlawed. we managed to get into the central committee building that night and found it already deserted. in the shredding room, evidence of the apparatchiks“ attempts to save themselves. the machines have been stuffed to overflowing. on top, an account of party privilege, listing departments and individuals in receipt of special foods and other perks. as the ideological divide that had dominated the world for eight decades crumbled, economic turmoil and shock therapy overtook russia. capitalism had apparently triumphed. just a few years later, as britain prepared to hand its last colony, hong kong, to china, some had such faith in capitalism that they thought hong kong might

consume the people's republic by touching off a democracy movement. hongkongers like ourselves are looking forward to a very bright and prosperous future, very much thanks to the british. but as we've seen, although it took two decades to happen, china eventually suppressed the student democracy movement, and its enormous economic strength meant that hong kong was subsumed, not the other way round. china prioritised its economic growth, while america had to deal with this. screaming. oh, my god! we've got to go! the us found itself responding to al-qaeda“s 911 terrorist attacks, ushering a decade of highly destructive conflict. we“re pushing into dora, which is a district

in the south of baghdad.