w6 rm warm and clear night and a very warm and muqqy clear night and a very warm and muggy night with temperatures no lower than 18 or 19 in parts of the south. plenty of sunshine tomorrow morning, if few showers in western areas, but the showers will get going in scotland and northern ireland, this will bring cooler weather in the highlands and islands but england and wales have a very hot and humid day. we are likely did see some well scattered but intense thunderstorms developing. there could be some localised flooding. tomorrow might be the hottest day of the heatwave, up to 33 in the south—east, but high 20s generally in england and wales. temperatures will be coming down for the great north run in north—east england for the weekend but there will still be so much showers and thunderstorms around, but also sunny spells. this is the picture on sunday. clusters of rain in eastern areas. —— western

areas. the thunderstorms could be widespread, pushing their way northwards, and they could be torrential if you catch one, with the chance of lightning. temperatures are still 30, 31 in the south—east but coming down in scotland and northern ireland and thatis scotland and northern ireland and that is the trend as we move into next week, cool air moving down from the north—west ringing fresher days and nights and ten which is closer to what we expect for this time of year but there will be scattered showers around —— temperatures closer to what we expect. that is the bbc news tonight. more analysis of the stories on newsnight. and the news continues on bbc one because now it is time to join our colleagues for the news where you are. it is good night.

the americans have outsourced their space programme. is this the price? how did tech bros become major players in global conflict? people like elon musk think it is better to switch off some of the services. this is something that happened to ukraine.

we'll be talking to george bush's former speechwriter, and a man who was the first chief software officer of the us air force. as police release video of the food van they think wandsworth escape daniel kalife was hiding under, are we left with the impression our counter terrorism operations are out of date and underfunded? we'll be speaking to julia ebner a counter terroism expert. and the author sebastian faulkes goes scifi for his new novel about what happens if ivf creates a human hybrid. it isa it is a great liberation not to have to check which way round the traffic went in 1910, but to just make stuff up, you cannot research the future because there is nothing to research. good evening. twenty years ago a story about a tech billionaire refusing to allow a warring country to access his satellite system, in order to avoid complicity in what the mogul called "a major act of war" would have been the stuff of a bond movie. but elon musk is that tech billionaire, the warring

country is ukraine, and following allegations in a new biography of musk by the historian walter issacson, musk has said that that there was an emergency request from government authorities to activate starlink all the way to sevastopol, the obvious intent being to sink most of the russian fleet at anchor." his response was to deny the request because it would result in "conflict escalation." that thwarted strike attempt was last year and today an aide to president zelensky, mykailo podolak said the decision effectively allowed the russian warships to fire missiles at ukrainian cities. here's david. not so long ago, someone who controlled the heavens made decisions on life and death would have been called a god. now he is called elon musk and some aren't happy.

called elon musk and some aren't happy- by called elon musk and some aren't happy. by not allowing ukrainian drones to destroy part of the russian military fleet via starling interference elon musk allowed this fleet to fire calibre missiles at ukrainian cities. as a result civilians, children are being killed. this is the price of a cocktail of ignorance and big ego. this is the furious social media post from the senior adviser to the ukrainian president. starling is a network of thousands of small relatively cheap satellites launched into low earth orbit and controlled by space x. —— starlink is a network. it allows connection without cables.— network. it allows connection without cables. ,, . ~' , . without cables. starlink has been a name without cables. starlink has been a game changer _ without cables. starlink has been a game changer for _ without cables. starlink has been a game changer for ukraine - without cables. starlink has been a game changer for ukraine because | without cables. starlink has been a | game changer for ukraine because it game changerfor ukraine because it gives them connectivity of all areas of the battlefield. this

constellation, only 550 kilometres above the earth, which is very low, gives them coverage all over the battlefield where starlink applies, which means they can get material direct from the satellite down to the mobile phones all the laptops of soldiers in the field. fix, the mobile phones all the laptops of soldiers in the field.— soldiers in the field. a new biography _ soldiers in the field. a new biography of _ soldiers in the field. a new biography of elon - soldiers in the field. a new biography of elon musk- soldiers in the field. a new- biography of elon musk claimed that the tech billionaire ordered starlink to be switched off to prevent a devastating ukrainian attack on russian warships in crimea, a part of ukraine that was invaded by russia in 2014. elon musk denies starlink was switched off. he said:

we are using this to defend our common land. we weren't aiming at russian territory. crimea is an internationally recognised part of ukraine. they are daily hitting ukraine. they are daily hitting ukraine with missiles. it would secure notjust ukraine but the whole european region. in secure notjust ukraine but the whole european region. injune the pentauon whole european region. injune the pentagon announced _ whole european region. injune the pentagon announced it _ whole european region. injune the pentagon announced it had - whole european region. injune the pentagon announced it had agreed| whole european region. in june the l pentagon announced it had agreed to purchase starlink services for ukraine from space x but some in the company have already voiced their concerns that what was supposed to be a peaceful communications product has been weaponised. but it isn't just ukraine that is dependent on elon musk, but also the most powerful military nation in the world. �* u, , powerful military nation in the world. �* , ., world. the americans don't have the ca aci to world. the americans don't have the capacity to send _ world. the americans don't have the capacity to send rockets _ world. the americans don't have the capacity to send rockets regularly . capacity to send rockets regularly and release 35 satellite at a time,

which is what starlink have been dipping for some time. if they could replace starlink they would but they physically can't do it in the time they have available. so they will learn from this, that dependent on a private individual and private systems is likely to decrease their ability to make proper choices. it all throws into sharp focus a world where a few rich individuals control the world's critical infrastructure. dangerous in peace, perhaps, and deadly in war. and now i am joined by an author of a book on american politics, former speechwriter for president george w bush and staff writer at the atlantic, david frum, and former chief software officer for the us air force and space force, nicolas chaillan. good evening both of you. david, first of all, what you make of elon musk�*s actions? first of all, what you make of elon musk's actions?— first of all, what you make of elon musk's actions? they astound me. what any other _ musk's actions? they astound me. what any other ceo _ musk's actions? they astound me. what any other ceo would - musk's actions? they astound me. what any other ceo would have i musk's actions? they astound me. . what any other ceo would have done, someone who owned his company in a

situation like this, assuming the improbable it had never been thought about before, what if, he would have called the president's national security adviser, briefed them, and asked what the us would have liked him to do. at that point you do that. you don't make the decision for yourself. d0 that. you don't make the decision for yourself-— for yourself. do you think this is unprecedented, _ for yourself. do you think this is unprecedented, then? - for yourself. do you think this is unprecedented, then? there . for yourself. do you think this is l unprecedented, then? there may for yourself. do you think this is - unprecedented, then? there may be thins in unprecedented, then? there may be things in the — unprecedented, then? there may be things in the annals _ unprecedented, then? there may be things in the annals of _ unprecedented, then? there may be things in the annals of secrecy - unprecedented, then? there may be things in the annals of secrecy that l things in the annals of secrecy that have some parallel to this but it does seem so astonishing. what elon musk did was unpatriotic. he took it upon himself a nationalforeign policy decision. it was reckless for his company because he has exposed it to all kinds of liability. it was a betrayal of his investors. he doesn't own all of starlink. he has partners in the bank of america, private investment firms. the question now will be raised, should starlink be nationalised because his

co—investors are at risk? he put himself at risk as well as his co—investors. he has become an unpatriotic citizen of the us. it was a reckless and arrogant act to do, aside from its horrific possible consequences for ukraine. nicolas, has elon musk _ consequences for ukraine. nicolas, has elon musk undermined - consequences for ukraine. nicolas, has elon musk undermined the - consequences for ukraine. nicolas, - has elon musk undermined the western policy of support for ukraine by his actions? ., ., �* ~' ., policy of support for ukraine by his actions? ., ., �* ~ ., ., actions? you don't know what it takes to build _ actions? you don't know what it takes to build a _ actions? you don't know what it takes to build a weapons - actions? you don't know what it i takes to build a weapons system. using _ takes to build a weapons system. using starlink, which is different from _ using starlink, which is different from what elon musk enabled the ukrainian — from what elon musk enabled the ukrainian government to do, keep in mind— ukrainian government to do, keep in mind it_ ukrainian government to do, keep in mind it has _ ukrainian government to do, keep in mind it has saved countless lives. within_ mind it has saved countless lives. within days they lost all communications because of the attack by russia _ communications because of the attack by russia. all communication of ukraine — by russia. all communication of ukraine went down. without starlink millions_ ukraine went down. without starlink millions of— ukraine went down. without starlink millions of lives would be at stake. elon millions of lives would be at stake. eion musk— millions of lives would be at stake. elon musk was able to deploy the capability within days, which is really— capability within days, which is really unheard—of. you can't always blame _

really unheard—of. you can't always blame the — really unheard—of. you can't always blame the commercial company that a foreign _ blame the commercial company that a foreign government is depending on a single _ foreign government is depending on a single source product... do foreign government is depending on a single source product. . ._ single source product... do you disauree single source product... do you disagree with _ single source product... do you disagree with david. _ single source product... do you disagree with david. david - single source product... do you disagree with david. david said| single source product... do you i disagree with david. david said he should have gone straight to the pentagon and possibly the oval office and asked what to do. do you agree with that? that office and asked what to do. do you agree with that?— agree with that? that is not how this works- _ agree with that? that is not how this works. from _ agree with that? that is not how this works. from being - agree with that? that is not how this works. from being in - agree with that? that is not how this works. from being in the i this works. from being in the government, this is not how things would _ government, this is not how things would happen. you don't put a capability— would happen. you don't put a capability of this of weapons without _ capability of this of weapons without a tremendous amount of assessment tonga by the way, when it comes— assessment tonga by the way, when it comes to _ assessment tonga by the way, when it comes to liability it is too easy to say that— comes to liability it is too easy to say that authorising this would be a

less impactful thing to the company. it might have been the opposite. it might have but the company's product -- put— might have but the company's product —— put the company's product forward making _ —— put the company's product forward making it a _ —— put the company's product forward making it a massive liability. the lawsuit _ making it a massive liability. the lawsuit could have been enormous. particularly if something went wrong all the technology was misused. when the technology was provided for ukraine it was to be for defensive use, _ ukraine it was to be for defensive use, so deciding overnight to use it for an— use, so deciding overnight to use it for an offensive merger, use, so deciding overnight to use it foran offensive merger, going use, so deciding overnight to use it for an offensive merger, going for the corporate channels is a massive mistake _ the corporate channels is a massive mistake both on the ukrainian side and also the coordination with the us. . ., , . . us. the deal was the licence agreed between the pentagon _ us. the deal was the licence agreed between the pentagon and starlinkl between the pentagon and starlink was that it would be defensive, not offensive. is that a reasonable defence of elon musk's decision, david? ., ., ., , ., david? know and that is how it works. i have _ david? know and that is how it

works. i have jake _ david? know and that is how it works. i have jake solomon . david? know and that is how it i works. i have jake solomon plus works. i have jake solomon plus microphone number and i assume elon musk does as well. he should have called and asked what the president wanted him to do. what is weird is it isn't as if it hadn't occurred to anybody before october 2022 that there might be military operations in crimea. my question is, have the united states government not communicated their wish to elon musk? was he complying with a secret wish? in any case, not his decision to make. of course this company is now exposed to tremendous risk. spacex is not a publicly traded company. if it is nationalised its value will be decided not by the public market but in a court of law. the investors, the private equity firms, they might not like the evaluation they get if starlink is nationalised.— nationalised. this is a new frontier- — nationalised. this is a new frontier. military - nationalised. this is a new frontier. military defence l frontier. military defence contractors, all in line with the governments they are supplying, but

now tech plays a central role in conflict. does that change the relationship of the providers? one can't always assume that tech providers... because elon musk does lots of business in china and places like that... lots of business in china and places like that- - -_ like that... spacex's ma'or customer is the us. elon musk _ like that... spacex's major customer is the us. elon musk is a _ is the us. elon musk is a us citizen. his investors are subject to the us. the us will take his company away from him if he uses it in a way which goes against national security interests.— security interests. nicolas, in a global conflict, _ security interests. nicolas, in a global conflict, just say - global conflict, just say between the us and china because we are talking about that in david's film, could we automatically assume elon musk would be on the side of the west when he does so much big business in china? is this a paradigms shift now? business in china? is this a aradiums shift now? . �*, , ,., paradigms shift now? that's why you shouldn't be — paradigms shift now? that's why you shouldn't be depending _ paradigms shift now? that's why you shouldn't be depending on _ paradigms shift now? that's why you shouldn't be depending on a - paradigms shift now? that's why you shouldn't be depending on a single l shouldn't be depending on a single company— shouldn't be depending on a single company to provide national security _ company to provide national security. we are looking at the

wrong — security. we are looking at the wrong problem here. you should have multiple companies able to provide the capability. this also happens in a situation where you have one bidder~ — a situation where you have one bidder. it puts national security at risk _ bidder. it puts national security at risk. you cannot blame a company for doing whatever it wants to do with its business. what you can complain is the lack— its business. what you can complain is the lack of us urgency to have different— is the lack of us urgency to have different options. the problem is that elon musk essentially - different options. the problem is that elon musk essentially has a | that elon musk essentially has a monopoly so what you need is a lot of disruptors, different relationships with the us government so that actually there are different options? so that actually there are different otions? . , , ., so that actually there are different 0 tions? . ,, ., ., ~ , so that actually there are different otions? . ,, ., ., ,, , , , options? perhaps if that makes sense but the fact is — options? perhaps if that makes sense but the fact is most _ options? perhaps if that makes sense but the fact is most business - options? perhaps if that makes sense but the fact is most business people i but the fact is most business people in the us, in fact i dare say virtually all, in a national security crisis would want to do what was best for the country. and they would consult with the elected authorities to check what they thought. they would not have taken this decision upon themselves. they also would have had the prudence to say that if they take the decision themselves they expose their company to all kinds of risks that spacex is open to now. in the early days of this conflict, spacex was indispensable, elon musk might have

been remembered as a hero for his early actions in the war. thanks very much indeed. _ who escaped on wednesday morning from wandsworth jail, has now been on the run and evading detection by more than 100 counter—terrorism met police officers for 63 hours and counting. the police have confirmed a sighting in wandsworth on wednesday morning, and have offered £20,000 for information leading to khalife's arrest. today the chief of the met mark rowley said the escape of the former private in the royal signals regiment was clearly pre planned, but we are no clearer whether the fugitive had inside or outside help. joe's here. what is the police strategy? speaking to sources within the met, the fact that this evening they have released more information and images and unveiled this £20,000 reward, that suggests the priority is publicity. because even though they have more than 150 officers and staff in the counterterror command

working on this, plus members of the security service, the biggest potential force of detectives is a public and it was a member of the public and it was a member of the public who spotted daniel khalife on wednesday, close to wandsworth, this confirmed sighting. there might be many more, with door bell cameras and dash—cams but the challenges time and we have more information about what happened on wednesday and it is now friday evening. let’s it is now friday evening. let's look about the issue. _ it is now friday evening. let's look about the issue. we're not - about the issue. we're notjust talking about terrorism but espionage?— espionage? and this categorisation ruestion espionage? and this categorisation question has not _ espionage? and this categorisation question has not been answered, i question has not been answered, there was a review ordered by the justice secretary and we should say that some terror suspects are not held in category a prisons and some actually are baled if they do not pose a serious threat and the police say that daniel khalife does not pose a direct threat to members of the public but do not approach him, we must differentiate between the

two charges he faces, one under the terrorism act, and the third charge was under the official secrets act, the espionage charge, two injanuary and one of them added injuly and that was the pointjonathan hall, the head of review of terror legislation, said there should have been a change and he should not have been a change and he should not have been held in category b and certainly not the kitchen although he has pled not guilty to all of those charges. we he has pled not guilty to all of those charges.— those charges. we did ask the government — those charges. we did ask the government to _ those charges. we did ask the government to come - those charges. we did ask the government to come on - those charges. we did ask the government to come on to - those charges. we did ask the - government to come on to discuss the counterterrorism strategy but they declined. i am joined counterterrorism strategy but they declined. iamjoined by counterterrorism strategy but they declined. iam joined byjulia ebner, senior research fellow at the institute for strategic dialogue whose research focuses on combating terrorism and extremism. given what we know about daniel khalife, is the fact he is being held in a category b prison consistent with the counterterrorism strategy or not? the counterterrorism strategy was just updated this year in 2023 and it spoke a lot, it highlighted the

threat that at the nexus of hostile state actors and terrorism, which is really what this case highlights, and i think that shows that he should have been held in a category a prison, that is something that can be argued and also considering he is a former soldier, he might have had expertise in terms of escape routes and knowing a little bit of how the system works. so i think that really points to severe issues in the chain of decision—making that was faulty. from what you know, given the charges, which he denies, but given someone of that status, how detailed with those discussions and all the paperwork and so forth have been before a decision was made about where he should be placed? it is something _ where he should be placed? it 3 something where i do not have specific insights into the decision—making that took place but

it does show there is probably a wider problem within the uk's security system, especially when it relates to different decisions being made and the communication between intelligence and the security community and the prison system is a big issue in terms of capacity but also the skills of the prison officers who are often not aware of terrorist offenders and how to deal with them. there is the programme which is targeting that issue of terrorism, the issue of terrorist offenders in prisons, and it is something there is not enough training for prison officers to know what to do. that training for prison officers to know what to do-— what to do. at the decision level, should there _ what to do. at the decision level, should there have _ what to do. at the decision level, should there have been _ what to do. at the decision level, should there have been red - what to do. at the decision level, | should there have been red flags? what to do. at the decision level, . should there have been red flags? in terms of what he was charged with, should there have been red flags? i'm sure there should have been early on and there was clearly an issue relating to that process, yes. there should definitely be a review and an investigation into both the

decision—making at the beginning but also what has gone wrong now and how he could escape. his also what has gone wrong now and how he could escape-— he could escape. as the counterterrorism - he could escape. as the i counterterrorism strategy he could escape. as the - counterterrorism strategy fit for purpose at the moment? right now there is a time _ purpose at the moment? right now there is a time lag _ purpose at the moment? right now there is a time lag in _ purpose at the moment? right now there is a time lag in terms - purpose at the moment? right now there is a time lag in terms of - there is a time lag in terms of facing these newly evolving and quickly changing threats. we are seeing a completely different landscape than five years ago, rossi counterterrorism strategy has not been significantly changed or updated and recently there was this newly published version of it, but until we see these changes being permitted, that will take some time. there is a new strategy but there is no implementation? that there is a new strategy but there is no implementation?— there is a new strategy but there is no implementation? that was always the case and — no implementation? that was always the case and we _ no implementation? that was always the case and we are _ no implementation? that was always the case and we are seeing _ no implementation? that was always the case and we are seeing these - the case and we are seeing these threats, especially that nexus between hostile state actors and terrorism, that is evolving and well we do probably have to face a situation in the coming years where we are not necessarily prepared for this new threat. pare we are not necessarily prepared for this new threat.— this new threat. are we making a ve bi this new threat. are we making a very big assumption _ this new threat. are we making a very big assumption that - this new threat. are we making a very big assumption that the - this new threat. are we making a very big assumption that the old | very big assumption that the old threats, isis and so forth, have

gone? is that an assumption we should be making? i do gone? is that an assumption we should be making?— gone? is that an assumption we should be making? i do not think the are should be making? i do not think they are gone. — should be making? i do not think they are gone, they _ should be making? i do not think they are gone, they are - should be making? i do not think they are gone, they are less - should be making? i do not think. they are gone, they are less visible because we have had high—profile attacks, a series of attacks in 2017, and in the 2010s and that is something we have seen that the investment in the present system but the de—radicalisation and rehabilitation space have not been prioritised, recently because of this lack of visibility of the threat. ., . ~' this lack of visibility of the threat. ., ., ,, ., ., ., threat. you talk about the readout equalisation _ threat. you talk about the readout equalisation issue _ threat. you talk about the readout equalisation issue and _ threat. you talk about the readout equalisation issue and that - threat. you talk about the readout equalisation issue and that brings| equalisation issue and that brings us back to prison. —— the re—addict —— the de—radicalisation issue. and in prison there are people on remand for people who have been convicted, so what worries you about that issue? , , ., , so what worries you about that issue? , ,., , ., ., issue? the prisons are in a dire state in this — issue? the prisons are in a dire state in this country _ issue? the prisons are in a dire state in this country and - issue? the prisons are in a dire state in this country and have i issue? the prisons are in a dire - state in this country and have been for some time and there are so many studies that show prisons or a hotbed for radicalisation and we have seen a very high real fence rate in the uk and we need bigger

investment notjust in the capacity and the upskilling of prison staff, but also investments in rehabilitation programmes, there are good examples of evidence—based approaches, for example the twin programme being spearheaded by oxford researchers. the programme being spearheaded by oxford researchers.— oxford researchers. the twinning programme _ oxford researchers. the twinning programme is — oxford researchers. the twinning programme is being _ oxford researchers. the twinning programme is being rolled - oxford researchers. the twinning programme is being rolled out i oxford researchers. the twinning - programme is being rolled out across prisons across the uk, based in a psychological based approaches. the counter argument would be that actually the government has been relatively successful at keeping a safe right now? we do not hear about the threat necessarily?— the threat necessarily? there have been many — the threat necessarily? there have been many failed _ the threat necessarily? there have been many failed pre-emptive - the threat necessarily? there have . been many failed pre-emptive attacks been many failed pre—emptive attacks but at the same time it is always necessary to keep up to speed with the most recent developments, in terms of technology and the more complex threat landscape and missing that boat can be very costly and can really cost lives, so we should be

looking at what is lacking at the moment, especially this combination of the new threat landscape on the one hand and the very severely understaffed and overcrowded prisons, that is a potentially disastrous combination. thank you ve much disastrous combination. thank you very much indeed. _ 30 years ago birdsong, the second of sebastian faulks trilogy about the first world war, was published, setting him on a course as a writer of both historical and contemporary fiction, encompassing war, politics, and psychiatry, and more, but for his 16th novel he has moved into the near future — 2030, and the birth, by a surrogate, of a baby boy called seth, whose origins are, at first, a secret. the orchestrator is a tech billionaire, who has set up an ivf institute, and wants to be a disruptor — a bit like elon musk. seth has certain characterisitics which set him apart from ordinary homo sapiens, and the novel �*the seventh son' is a new take on the age old question about what it is to be human. earlier i sat down with sebastian faulks. the basic premise of the novel

is that something weird happens in a fertility clinic, insofar as the father's contribution is switched out for another father. and the father who replaces him is not like you and me, he's not fully human in the same way. "do you have any questions before i begin? i don't think so. we've been through it all so many times. no, of course. so if you put your legs up here. that's right. now shift your tailbone. no, no, not that way. forward a bit. that's it. are you comfortable? yes, as much as she could be. doctor olsen crossed the room to the hatch. when she returned, she was wearing a surgical mask, gloves and what looked like goggles. she sat on a stool. a tiny bit of cream just here. just relax. talissa thought how felix would hate to be witnessing this. she felt the thin probe and thought of how she herself had been conceived in a bed in the bronx, probably late one night." ithought, ok, liking round numbers, we'll start it in 2030. so the kid is born in 2030,

when the world is pretty much as it is now. but by the time the story ends, he's 25 and we're then in 2055. and then i felt obliged to imagine the future world a little bit more carefully. but you ascribe characteristics which are entirely fictional. you know, he can see what's about to happen. he's obsessed by meat and he doesn't dream. i mean, that's obviously all in a writer's imagination. i mean, there's nothing that you could ever point to to suggest that would ever be the case. it's fiction. it's fiction, but i spend quite a lot of time talking to people who know a lot about former human species, neanderthals in particular. and one of the things you drill down to when you're asking these questions is how were they different? i wonder if you feel now that the future offers you a freedom that as a writer... you've written several of your books in the past, and do you feel now constrained by the past? is it more exciting for you as you get older to look to the future? it is a great liberation not to have to check which way

round the ringstrasse the traffic went in 1910, but to just make stuff up, you can't research the future. there is nothing to research. having said which, i don't know if all my books will now be set in the future, but i did find it liberating and i find itjust very good fun, and lots of comedy crept into the seventh son, which again, rather like the future creeping up on me, i hadn't expected humour to creep up on me, but it was in there. so i thought, well, it'd better stay. though, of course, this year is the 30th anniversary of the publication of birdsong. it sold more than three million copies. did that change your life? it certainly did change my life in the sort of absolutely routine day—to—day thing of going to work and having a job. and i expected... i'd left myjob injournalism — this was in the early �*90s — and i'd expected i'd go back after a year or so out, but i haven't had to go back yet, so for sure it changed that. whistle sounds.

you've said that people don't seem to bother to read anymore. have i? yeah, you were talking about undergraduates at cambridge, and you came across somebody and they read two books, and they were doing english. yeah, i mean, my evidence for this is quite anecdotal, but i mean, i have talked to quite a lot of people who teach at universities and schools, and you're not really required to read a great number of books anymore if you study literature or, you know, you get these snippets. and i remember talking to someone who taught at university college london, a very good university. we were talking about vanity fair. and i said, how does becky sharp go down these days with your students? because she's a very modern woman, a real go—getter. and she just fell about laughing. and i said, why are you laughing? and she said, none of my students has read vanity fair for 30 years. and i said, why?

is it sort of politically wrong? no, it's too long. did you use a library? yes, idid. ilived... we were brought up in a village near newbury in the south of england. and i used to go to the town library with my mum and there was a travelling library in a van that used to come to our village. i had a rather insatiable appetite for adventure stories. this was not high literature when you're nine or ten, but ijust wanted more and more excitement, and i got it a lot from libraries. part of the reason i'm asking this is a survey by the national literacy trust says one in seven state primary schools across the uk does not have a designated library space, and over three quarters of a million children in the uk do not have access to books that enable better educational outcomes and greater wellbeing. i mean, what do you make of that? what do you think the impact of that must be on kids? catastrophic, i would have thought. obviously at primary school level, you're not going to be reading literature.

you're not going to be understanding deep wisdom about inner lives. but you need to have stories and you need to have your world opened up to you. and i think it's a sort of massive step towards... i mean, literacy in stories and reading about other people's lives, even at a primary level, is a way of opening up a tolerance towards the rest of the world as well. will they ever get back an experience, ever get a chance to have an experience of being alone with a book? people have long lives, and you can start reading and start developing later. so i don't want to be too despairing about it, but certainly on the face of it, i can't imagine how any child could be educated without a book in hand daily. and, of course, that allows them to make critical decisions. so imagine a child in the future is shown a book on a curriculum that's supposed to be by sebastian faulks, but actually it's ai. will they know? i don't think ai has got there yet. some friends of mine tried to get an ai programme to imitate me and it was really terrible. i don't think the bot had been fed enough of my stuff to come

up with the version, with the parody yet.