09/03/2018 Daily Politics


09/03/2018

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 09/03/2018. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

Hello and welcome to

the Daily Politics.

0:00:330:00:37

A few months ago they were trading

insults but Kim Jong-Un

0:00:370:00:40

and Donald Trump could be

sitting across a table

0:00:400:00:43

from each other within weeks.

0:00:430:00:45

Has a nuclear showdown on the Korean

Peninsula been averted?

0:00:450:00:50

Donald Trump slaps tariffs

on imported steel and aluminium.

0:00:500:00:53

Has he kicked off an

international trade war?

0:00:530:00:57

MPs are at the centre

of allegations of bullying

0:00:570:01:00

in the Palace of Westminster.

0:01:000:01:01

Does there need to be

an independent process in place

0:01:010:01:04

to protect Commons staff?

0:01:040:01:11

When the British people voted last

June, they did not vote to become

0:01:130:01:16

poorer.

Nobody voted to be poorer.

Nobody voted to be poorer.

0:01:160:01:22

It's an often repeated

mantra from remainers,

0:01:220:01:24

but were some Leave voters prepared

to take a financial

0:01:240:01:26

hit to deliver Brexit?

0:01:260:01:31

All that coming up in the next 60

minutes and joining me

0:01:310:01:33

for the duration are Iain Martin

of the Times and the political

0:01:330:01:37

commentator, Rachel Shabi.

0:01:370:01:39

Welcome to both of you.

0:01:390:01:41

First today, it's been announced

in the last hour that 100 military

0:01:410:01:45

personnel are to be deployed

in Salisbury to assist

0:01:450:01:47

in the police investigation

into the poisoning of ex-Russian spy

0:01:470:01:51

Sergei Skripal and his

daughter Yulia.

0:01:510:01:54

The Home Secretary, Amber Rudd,

has visited the scene this morning.

0:01:540:01:57

Here's what she had to say.

0:01:570:01:59

At the moment, our priority

is going to be the incident,

0:01:590:02:02

which is why I'm here

in Salisbury today.

0:02:020:02:04

Making sure that everybody's

protected around here,

0:02:040:02:06

around the incident.

0:02:060:02:09

Making sure the emergency services

have had the support that they need

0:02:090:02:12

and will continue to get it -

ongoing - and it's been great

0:02:120:02:15

to hear that is the case.

0:02:150:02:17

In terms of further options,

that will have to wait

0:02:170:02:19

until we're absolutely clear

what the consequences could be

0:02:190:02:21

and what the actual source of this

nerve agent has been.

0:02:210:02:29

Let's talk to our Home Affairs

correspondent, Daniel Sandford.

0:02:300:02:38

-- lets talk to Jonathan Beale. Why

have the military been called in?

0:02:380:02:43

180 military personnel from all

three services who have specialist

0:02:430:02:48

expertise in chemical warfare and

training, and who know how to

0:02:480:02:51

decontaminate. One of the things

they will be doing along with the 12

0:02:510:02:55

vehicles involved will be to remove

ambulances that were used to ferry

0:02:550:03:00

those injured into hospital.

Possibly to take them a where to be

0:03:000:03:07

decontaminated but they will remove

other object as well. These are

0:03:070:03:12

people who have regular training in

chemical and biological warfare,

0:03:120:03:17

including 40 commando, who recently

completed a three-week exercise

0:03:170:03:21

called toxic dagger, where they were

practising these kind of scenarios.

0:03:210:03:26

Also 27 Squadron from the RAF

Regiment. You would say that perhaps

0:03:260:03:31

this expertise still exists in the

military, it is not as dense and

0:03:310:03:35

full as it was during the height of

the Cold War but they still have

0:03:350:03:39

this expertise and clearly there can

help the police in this

0:03:390:03:43

investigation and secure sites. The

message from the Ministry of Defence

0:03:430:03:49

and ministers is the public should

not be alarmed, the threat level has

0:03:490:03:52

not changed but you will see people

in military uniform, potentially

0:03:520:03:57

wearing gas masks and chemical

warfare equipment at the seams

0:03:570:03:59

around Salisbury.

You say the

message is don't be alarmed, but

0:03:590:04:03

they will not be surprised that if

the public are somewhat put at an

0:04:030:04:08

ease by the visibility -- puts at

our knees by the military personnel,

0:04:080:04:14

how long do you think they will be

in Salisbury?

I don't think we know,

0:04:140:04:19

people should be expecting to seemed

people in military uniform arriving

0:04:190:04:23

at Salisbury today. The public

should not be alarmed because the

0:04:230:04:27

threat level, there is no more

danger to the public than there was

0:04:270:04:30

yesterday. But they will have to get

used to seeing this military

0:04:300:04:38

personnel who have this expertise,

it might be reassuring to people to

0:04:380:04:41

know that people still have this

expertise in the military and they

0:04:410:04:47

are trained to deal with it.

0:04:470:04:49

That's the response in terms of the

investigation, the political

0:04:490:04:53

response as it looks as if the

finger of suspicion remains firmly

0:04:530:04:58

towards Russia and the Russian state

despite their denials, in reality,

0:04:580:05:02

what can be done, what is this whole

spectrum response that we have heard

0:05:020:05:06

in the last 24-hour is?

First of

all, it's absolutely right to have

0:05:060:05:12

the investigation ahead of the

political response because we are

0:05:120:05:15

still not 100% sure. It would be

good to have clarity. In terms of

0:05:150:05:19

what the response could be, it is

difficult to tell because of course

0:05:190:05:25

this is not the only thing that

Russia is doing. On the

0:05:250:05:32

international scale there would be

problems with his support for Assad

0:05:320:05:39

in Syria, the potential that he

meddled in elections in the UK and

0:05:390:05:45

the US. Without international

cooperation and caught naked

0:05:450:05:48

response, I'm not sure there's an

awful lot that the UK can do -- and

0:05:480:05:52

a quarter naked response, I'm

0:05:520:05:53

awful lot that the UK can do.

0:05:530:05:58

I think there is quite a bit that

can be done and government ministers

0:06:030:06:09

have been quite vocal in cracking

down on certain Russian interests in

0:06:090:06:14

London and the UK. The troubling

thing is that we might never really

0:06:140:06:20

properly know the answer, because

there is a grey area. There is the

0:06:200:06:25

Russian state, which totally denies

any involvement, but then there is

0:06:250:06:30

Russian organised crime, which has

links to the FSB and formerly KGB.

0:06:300:06:35

What an order given, and someone

acted -- was an order given and

0:06:350:06:41

someone acted on the basis that they

would rid them of this troublesome

0:06:410:06:43

person or was there school setting?

It suggests if there was no agent

0:06:430:06:50

used, there was agents involved.

You

cannot really make it easily in your

0:06:500:06:56

garden shed. In terms of this show

of strength, some ministers and

0:06:560:07:01

former ministers have said that

Russia only understands a show of

0:07:010:07:06

strength so Britain have to respond

by cutting off diplomatic ties,

0:07:060:07:11

freezing assets of Russians here or

in Moscow. But will that actually

0:07:110:07:15

harm or put enough pressure on

Vladimir Putin to change his policy

0:07:150:07:22

towards the West?

No, I'm not saying

those things shouldn't happen.

0:07:220:07:26

Recalling ambassadors and freezing

assets are things that you would

0:07:260:07:30

expect to see happen in this sort of

situation but I think there's a

0:07:300:07:33

wider question of how you do deal

with someone who is an authoritarian

0:07:330:07:37

like Putin, and the malign

international actor. I come back to

0:07:370:07:43

this point of, without having a firm

international response, a

0:07:430:07:48

coordinated response, I'm not sure

what a single country can do.

That's

0:07:480:07:53

very difficult because the European

Union always runs a mile from this

0:07:530:07:58

stuff for all these reasons, because

of tensions with Germany and Germany

0:07:580:08:02

has a particular approach in terms

of handling Russia. The US is in a

0:08:020:08:06

strange situation because of the

current president. And also Britain

0:08:060:08:10

is kind of isolated here with its

strong Russian connections,

0:08:100:08:18

particularly in wealthy London. It

seems to be the case that Russian

0:08:180:08:21

actors are prepared to kill on

British soil, not prepared to kill

0:08:210:08:27

on American soil, prepared to

potentially interfere in American...

0:08:270:08:30

It does look as though Britain is a

particular target.

Yes, because over

0:08:300:08:37

the last 20 years, UK has been a

magnet for Russian wealth and there

0:08:370:08:42

has been two-way traffic between the

countries.

Let's leave it there.

0:08:420:08:46

Now it's time for our daily quiz,

and remember our quiz

0:08:460:08:49

is just a bit of fun,

there are no prizes.

0:08:490:08:51

Theresa May was asked

in an interview yesterday,

0:08:510:08:53

to mark International Women's Day,

what her ideal night with her

0:08:530:08:56

girlfriends would look like.

0:08:560:08:57

Was it...

0:08:570:08:59

Dinner at wine at home, karaoke and

cocktails, a boxed set binge or none

0:09:020:09:09

of the above?

0:09:090:09:10

At the end of the show

Rachel and Iain will,

0:09:100:09:12

we hope, give us the correct answer.

0:09:120:09:14

Now, female staff in the House

of Commons have been the subject

0:09:140:09:17

of bullying at the hands

of some MPs.

0:09:170:09:19

A BBC Newsnight investigation has

seen files and spoken

0:09:190:09:21

to witnesses who say staff

known as Commons clerks

0:09:210:09:24

have been mistreated.

0:09:240:09:25

Newsnight has spoken

to witnesses who believe

0:09:250:09:26

that a single member,

Paul Farrelly, the Labour MP

0:09:260:09:29

for Newcastle-under-Lyme,

made her continued employment

0:09:290:09:30

at the House of Commons impossible -

a consequence, they say, of years

0:09:300:09:34

of continued, personal criticism.

0:09:340:09:35

Newsnight's Chris Cook

asked the witness to

0:09:350:09:36

describe the treatment.

0:09:360:09:38

Aggressive, dismissive, rude.

0:09:380:09:43

And, ultimately, bullying.

0:09:430:09:49

And how much of an effect

did it have on her?

0:09:490:09:54

It ground her down.

0:09:540:09:55

It basically reached crisis point

and she could no longer do her job.

0:09:550:09:58

He had undermined her

and bullied her so much,

0:09:580:10:00

so regularly, so badly,

that she was just left entirely

0:10:000:10:02

exhausted and incredibly distressed.

0:10:020:10:03

And Newsnight's Chris

Cook joins me now.

0:10:030:10:11

What has been a response from Paul

Farrelly? We haven't actually heard

0:10:190:10:22

from him today. But his case is

something of a totem for women

0:10:220:10:31

working at the house today because

of what happened after that Clark,

0:10:310:10:34

who had to lose her job, complaint.

The two were the odd things that

0:10:340:10:41

have stuck in the mind, she raises a

complaint, it triggers an internal

0:10:410:10:47

inquiry run by another member of the

House staff, and an HR process which

0:10:470:10:52

was only eight months old at that

point. When she raised her complaint

0:10:520:10:58

other women came forward, and we had

eight years of test dummy about Mr

0:10:580:11:01

Farrelly's behaviour. Because the HR

policy was only eight months old,

0:11:010:11:08

they could only look at the eight

months, they thought. They feel that

0:11:080:11:13

the game has not been played fairly.

The second thing that has happened,

0:11:130:11:18

they go into this inquiry, of the

House staff goes to the allegations

0:11:180:11:22

that she makes, not the other women,

only her. He upholds complaint on

0:11:220:11:30

some of her allegations and decided

it was bullying and the

0:11:300:11:37

it was bullying and the contact was

offensive and there was no doubt

0:11:370:11:40

about her competence. That document

is taken to the House of Commons

0:11:400:11:43

commission which is a committee of

MPs, and they decide really not to

0:11:430:11:47

do anything. In fact, they suspend

the policy, they don't take action

0:11:470:11:51

against Mr Farrelly, they say that

the legal basis of the policy was

0:11:510:11:57

not down so they could not take

action. They also say that what

0:11:570:12:00

happened, any system that relies on

clerks investigating MPs is not fair

0:12:000:12:05

and robust.

You spoke to Paul

Farrelly before the piece went out,

0:12:050:12:10

what did he say?

He denies any

bullying, he says in 2012

0:12:100:12:14

allegations were made about me

having bullied a clerk during the

0:12:140:12:21

phone hacking inquiry, they were not

upheld but I apologised. The policy

0:12:210:12:28

was considered to be so unfair to

those about whom were complaint that

0:12:280:12:34

it was immediately withdrawn and

replaced by another policy. The case

0:12:340:12:38

is not really about Paul Farrelly,

this is all about the House of

0:12:380:12:42

Commons receiving a campaign and

clerks are taking the lesson -- a

0:12:420:12:47

complaint and clerks are taking a

lesson that the process cannot be

0:12:470:12:54

forwarded.

They think that the HR

process protect MPs. What about the

0:12:540:13:00

speaker, John Bercow?

In May 2010,

he got a new private secretary who

0:13:000:13:09

only lasted for nine months when she

was signed off sick. She had to be

0:13:090:13:12

found in new job somewhere else in

the House, they had to modify that

0:13:120:13:18

subsequent job so she would not come

into contact with the speaker. Her

0:13:180:13:22

managers were told that she had

posts a post right -- post-traumatic

0:13:220:13:31

stress disorder. She got that job

because she was regarded as a

0:13:310:13:35

phenomenal talent, the kind of

person you wanted in this enormously

0:13:350:13:39

important role. And there is an

enormous amount of sympathy for her

0:13:390:13:42

and everyone knows what happened to

her because they had to create these

0:13:420:13:45

new systems around her in a

subsequent job.

He has contested the

0:13:450:13:51

allegations as well?

His spokesman

says that he refutes the allegation

0:13:510:13:55

that he behaved in such a manner

eight years ago or any other time.

0:13:550:13:57

Downing Street has also been

speaking about this, the

0:13:570:14:02

spokesperson described claims of

staff bullying as concerning, and

0:14:020:14:10

they say there is no place for

bullying and harassment of any kind.

0:14:100:14:13

They also say that John Bercow has

said the allegations are being

0:14:130:14:17

contested but the Prime Minister has

full confidence in the speaker

0:14:170:14:21

according to her spokesman. Are you

surprised about these allegations?

0:14:210:14:24

I'm not, really. The House of

Commons or Parliament in general is

0:14:240:14:29

a very strange place. It doesn't

operate in a way that a conventional

0:14:290:14:35

workplace operates, it's not a

conventional organisation with a

0:14:350:14:39

hierarchy. MPs, and I should add

that I think most people would

0:14:390:14:44

accept that most MPs do not behave

in this fashion, but a small

0:14:440:14:48

minority do, and MPs really kind of

run the place. And in a group of 650

0:14:480:14:56

people, you end up with this small

minority who really wants to be

0:14:560:15:03

treated almost as little gods. And I

think the way in which the system is

0:15:030:15:09

constructed in means that staff then

don't necessarily have adequate

0:15:090:15:16

protection, there is confusion about

who investigates what. It's a legacy

0:15:160:15:19

of a place which has thousands of

people working in it, but it's not

0:15:190:15:24

constructed with the chief

executive. It cannot be because its

0:15:240:15:28

democratic institution. There's

going to have to be after this

0:15:280:15:32

investigation, have to be some form

of change.

0:15:320:15:38

Chris Cook's report reveals it is

difficult to know where to go to

0:15:390:15:42

complain and people within the

building are investigating each

0:15:420:15:45

other to a certain extent. Do you

think there needs to be an

0:15:450:15:48

independent process now, a different

body coming in to investigate

0:15:480:15:52

complaints?

I do, I do. What I think

was terrific about the Newsnight

0:15:520:15:56

report is it took the time to

explain the situation about how this

0:15:560:16:00

occurs. When we talk about a

systemic culture of bullying and

0:16:000:16:05

harassment, when we talk about a

male workplace culture that promotes

0:16:050:16:10

or facilitate bullying and

harassment, the Newsnight report

0:16:100:16:13

took the time to show this is what

it looks like, this is how it

0:16:130:16:18

manifests, this is what it means. I

think unless we take the time to

0:16:180:16:21

look at it, we're not going to be

able to find out ways of tackling

0:16:210:16:25

it.

I think the danger is and we saw

this during the expenses crisis,

0:16:250:16:30

that the real risks in bringing in

and outside, independent body,

0:16:300:16:37

because of the strange

constitutional position of

0:16:370:16:41

Parliament, and Parliament is

sovereign, so if you place an

0:16:410:16:44

independent body above Parliament,

you do interesting, strange things

0:16:440:16:48

to the Constitution. What I would

like to see happen is the vast

0:16:480:16:52

majority of MPs who don't behave in

this fashion really take this as a

0:16:520:16:57

wake-up call, take charge of the

process and institute changes.

0:16:570:17:01

Wright, thank you Chris Cook for

coming in.

0:17:010:17:03

Now, last week President Trump

unveiled plans to raise

0:17:030:17:05

tariffs on foreign imports

of steel and aluminium.

0:17:050:17:08

"If you don't have steel,

you don't have a country!,"

0:17:080:17:10

you might recall him tweeting.

0:17:100:17:12

Yesterday, surrounded

by steel workers, he made

0:17:120:17:13

good on that promise,

and signed the measures into law,

0:17:130:17:20

claiming that the industry had been

"ravaged" by aggressive foreign

0:17:200:17:23

trade practices that were, he said,

"an assault" on the United States.

0:17:230:17:25

They are expected to take

effect in 15 days' time.

0:17:250:17:28

Let's hear what he had to say.

0:17:280:17:30

Today, I'm defending America's

national security by placing

0:17:300:17:37

tariffs on foreign imports

of steel and aluminium.

0:17:370:17:41

We will have a 25% tariff

on foreign steel, 10% tariff

0:17:410:17:47

on foreign aluminium,

when the product comes

0:17:470:17:50

across our borders.

0:17:500:17:54

It's a process called dumping.

0:17:540:17:59

And they dumped more than at any

time, on any nation,

0:17:590:18:01

anywhere in the world.

0:18:010:18:05

And it drove our plants out

of business, it drove our

0:18:050:18:08

factories out of business.

0:18:080:18:11

And we want a lot of steel

coming into our country,

0:18:110:18:15

but we want it to be fair

and we want our workers to be

0:18:150:18:19

protected and we want, frankly,

our companies to be protected.

0:18:190:18:23

By contrast, we will

not place any new tax

0:18:230:18:26

on a product made in the USA.

0:18:260:18:33

So there's no tax if a product

is made in the USA.

0:18:330:18:36

You don't want to pay tax?

0:18:360:18:37

Bring your plant to

the USA, there's no tax.

0:18:370:18:39

President Trump.

0:18:390:18:40

The UK's International Trade

Secretary Liam Fox appeared

0:18:400:18:42

on Question Time last night.

0:18:420:18:43

He said he would be travelling

to the United States next week

0:18:430:18:46

to meet his US counterpart.

0:18:460:18:50

The way that the United States

is going about this is wrong,

0:18:500:18:53

because they're doing it under

what's called a 232 investigation

0:18:530:18:55

based on national security.

0:18:550:18:57

And for the UK it's doubly absurd,

because we are only responsible

0:18:570:19:00

for 1% of America's steel imports.

0:19:000:19:05

It's 5% of our tonnage,

by steel, that we produce

0:19:050:19:07

here, it's 15% by value.

0:19:070:19:10

The reason there's a difference

is that we tend to produce

0:19:100:19:13

very high value steel,

some of which can't be sourced

0:19:130:19:15

in the United States and will simply

push up the price of steel there.

0:19:150:19:19

We also make steel for the American

military programme.

0:19:190:19:23

So it's doubly absurd that we should

be then caught on an investigation

0:19:230:19:26

on national security.

0:19:260:19:30

That was Liam Fox.

0:19:300:19:32

Joining me now is author

and consultant, Ted Malloch,

0:19:320:19:34

who is also a supporter of Donald

Trump.

0:19:340:19:36

Welcome to the programme. Do you

think the president is making the

0:19:360:19:39

right move?

Yes, and it's been

sometime in the. I call it a PPE

0:19:390:19:47

move. It has to do with politics on

one hand, we are in the mid-term

0:19:470:19:51

elections. If you noticed who was

behind the president when he makes

0:19:510:19:56

this announcement, working-class

steelworkers and aluminium workers

0:19:560:19:59

from those rust belt states who need

to vote in favour of the Republicans

0:19:590:20:04

for them to stay in power during the

next congressional election. The

0:20:040:20:10

second thing is philosophical,

promised to do that in his

0:20:100:20:13

campaigns, is following through on a

campaign pledge. And it is economic,

0:20:130:20:18

there is an economic reason for

doing this.

What is that?

China is

0:20:180:20:23

dumping steel on international

markets. About 2 billion tonnes of

0:20:230:20:28

steel made, 800 million coming from

China. They are dumping them and it

0:20:280:20:32

is affecting global markets. So we

are going to knock that down.

Do you

0:20:320:20:37

accept that, it's a good trade

policy for the United States to

0:20:370:20:41

pursue?

I can understand the

politics of it, I don't think the

0:20:410:20:44

economic 's really make any sense.

What troubles me about it, as

0:20:440:20:48

someone who is pro-market, is

pro-market people tend to look to

0:20:480:20:52

the United States for a lead.

Beginning a trade war in this

0:20:520:20:57

fashion could have all sorts of

unintended consequences, if others

0:20:570:21:01

respond. Should just qualify one

thing, which is we are talking as

0:21:010:21:06

though we in Europe don't use

tariffs, but of course the European

0:21:060:21:11

Union has a 72%...?

74.7.

And

Chinese steel. So the European Union

0:21:110:21:18

has been playing this game as well.

Having said that, I thought Trump

0:21:180:21:22

with the tax cuts, I thought he was

starting to get somewhere economic

0:21:220:21:28

year and I think this could set back

a lot of that progress.

It is the

0:21:280:21:32

beginning of a trade war,

potentially. European Union vice

0:21:320:21:35

president has had in the wake of

Trump's decision the commission will

0:21:350:21:41

continue with the rebalancing

measures. Will that help the United

0:21:410:21:45

States, a trade war?

I don't think

it will be a trade war, blown up to

0:21:450:21:50

that proportion.

It will they

retaliate.

There will be some

0:21:500:21:54

tit-for-tat like on things like Jack

Daniels, peanut butter and

0:21:540:22:00

Harley-Davidson motorcycles. The

real thing that is coming down the

0:22:000:22:03

pipe and this is significant in

Europe and the UK, and the president

0:22:030:22:07

intimated this yesterday and has

said it also in other speeches, is

0:22:070:22:12

the potential for significant

tariffs. In other words, narrowing

0:22:120:22:16

tariffs on automobiles.

What impact

would that have? That is a much

0:22:160:22:22

bigger deal in terms of the UK.

A

much bigger deal. The EU tariffs on

0:22:220:22:27

US automobiles is 2%. The US, I mean

is 10%, the US is 2%. If we were to

0:22:270:22:35

just change that to the mirror

image, it would dramatically affect

0:22:350:22:38

the German automobile industry and

also Jaguar Land Rover.

Rachel, that

0:22:380:22:43

would have a real impact here and on

German car-makers. What can be done

0:22:430:22:51

by the British government who are

said to have a special relationship

0:22:510:22:54

with the US?

It is one more reason

not to be so reliant on the US in

0:22:540:23:00

our post-Brexit reality. One of the

things I find objectionable about

0:23:000:23:06

right wing authoritarian site Donald

Trump is this misdiagnosis of what

0:23:060:23:10

is ailing the economy. It is not

globalisation per se that is a

0:23:100:23:14

problem. We lived in a joined up

world, that is the reality. It's a

0:23:140:23:19

neoliberal economic policy that has

ravaged peoples lives, destroyed

0:23:190:23:22

communities, that has gutted out and

hollowed out economies. It has

0:23:220:23:26

nothing to do with tariffs, it's a

political choice to run an economy

0:23:260:23:31

in a particular way. We can

reprogram it to run on a different

0:23:310:23:36

way, it's just that this particular

neoliberal system of running

0:23:360:23:39

economic has chosen not to.

What do

you say to that?

We have had

0:23:390:23:45

elections in the United States and

elected this president, is hardly an

0:23:450:23:50

authoritarian he's just started a

peace process and denuclearisation.

0:23:500:23:53

We will talk about that in a moment.

He's hardly an authoritarian. This

0:23:530:23:57

was part of his campaign, to bring

back manufacturing to American

0:23:570:24:02

industries. This is a national

security issue. Steel is rather

0:24:020:24:07

important, aluminium also rather

important. There this is nothing to

0:24:070:24:11

do with authoritarianism.

Isn't he

failing political promises question

0:24:110:24:16

what you could argue Jeremy Corbyn

also wants to have an economic

0:24:160:24:18

policy that is going to support

local industries, would also like to

0:24:180:24:24

actually support and subsidised

steel industry here, if he became

0:24:240:24:27

Prime Minister. In a way, these are

just different ways of dealing with

0:24:270:24:32

the same problem.

No, because one is

telling lies and making false

0:24:320:24:36

promises. Let's look at how

localisation, what it could look

0:24:360:24:39

like in the UK. One example of that

is the Preston model, the local

0:24:390:24:45

council in Preston, Lancashire,

which has seen a local government

0:24:450:24:49

spending when it has spent locally,

create more wealth in the local

0:24:490:24:53

economy than if it were outsourced.

That is one-way. It has nothing to

0:24:530:24:58

do with tariffs. That is one way of

reviving the local economy. It means

0:24:580:25:02

local businesses can thrive, they

employ people, everyone pays tax,

0:25:020:25:07

the business pays tax on the economy

locally is revived. It is nothing to

0:25:070:25:10

do with tariffs, it's a political

decision to reprogram an economy, to

0:25:100:25:14

work in a way that benefits people

are not corporations.

It has

0:25:140:25:19

benefits for people. The process of

trade liberalisation after the

0:25:190:25:22

Second World War, which was

advocated by moderate left centre

0:25:220:25:28

politicians and free-market

politicians, turned into

0:25:280:25:30

globalisation, which of course I am

concerned about some of the extreme

0:25:300:25:33

effects of that but it has globally

had the most extraordinary impact.

0:25:330:25:36

It has lifted at least a billion

people out of property.

Created the

0:25:360:25:41

biggest wealth inequalities as well.

I don't think trickle-down economics

0:25:410:25:45

has been proven not to work. I think

the problem is wired into the

0:25:450:25:50

system.

Let's compare the Chinese

economy in 1950 now...

Your point is

0:25:500:25:56

perfect on is the miracle is that

the Chinese economy. We moved 350

0:25:560:25:59

million people out of extreme

poverty in China.

That is a good

0:25:590:26:03

thing.

The cost of that has been the

cost of jobs in the rust belt in the

0:26:030:26:08

United States and hollowed out parts

of England and in Western Europe.

0:26:080:26:14

It's a trade-off.

Let's talk about

the relationship with the UK, is a

0:26:140:26:19

good friend of the United States?

Absolutely.

Will there be an

0:26:190:26:23

exemption for the UK?

Will you be

part of the European Union?

At the

0:26:230:26:28

moment.

When you leave we will see.

Is that the trade-off, the UK might

0:26:280:26:35

get an exemption once it leaves the

EU or would it be better to stay

0:26:350:26:39

part of the EU, a big trading bloc

and use and support those

0:26:390:26:42

retaliatory measures?

I voted to

leave but I didn't vote to leave

0:26:420:26:47

thinking that this utopia of loads

of trade deals being out there and

0:26:470:26:51

somehow some massive trade deal with

the US is going to solve Britain's

0:26:510:26:54

economic problems. Most of its

problems are domestic. Exports are

0:26:540:26:58

20% of the economy and about half of

that is the EU and half of that is

0:26:580:27:04

the rest of the world, led by the

US. I don't think in the short-term,

0:27:040:27:07

certainly in this context the US

president doing what he's doing, I

0:27:070:27:10

don't think that that will be that

many trade deals in the next four or

0:27:100:27:14

five years.

You said once Britain

leads the EU, but if this friendship

0:27:140:27:19

and relationship exists now, why

can't there be an exemption, as

0:27:190:27:21

you're giving to other countries, to

the UK?

Because he would have to do

0:27:210:27:26

it to the whole of the EU and when

not about to do that. We gave an

0:27:260:27:30

exception to Mexico and Canada but

the president said yesterday, that

0:27:300:27:33

is only an exception if we can come

to terms on their Nafta. If we don't

0:27:330:27:40

we have leverage on the same tariffs

will apply to those two country.

It

0:27:400:27:44

said countries that meet or fail

their defence commitments to Nato.

0:27:440:27:52

We do stop white

only five do.

Would

you be confident the UK could get an

0:27:520:27:58

exemption or is there any point of

this special relationship if there

0:27:580:28:01

will be no special treatment for the

UK in the future?

We will see what

0:28:010:28:07

Mr Liam Fox accomplishes when he

goes to Washington this week or next

0:28:070:28:09

week. My guess is there won't be an

exemption for the UK.

What you say

0:28:090:28:14

about Liam Fox's view and trade, and

the high-grade steel that you get

0:28:140:28:19

from the UK, which would be able to

get it in the US?

Once those

0:28:190:28:23

industries come back in the US they

will be available. There are places

0:28:230:28:26

in the US where those things have

been decimated. With this new

0:28:260:28:29

measure, you have heard already

companies bringing back hundreds,

0:28:290:28:32

soon to be thousands of employees,

to make exactly those kinds of

0:28:320:28:36

products.

Ted Malloch, thank you.

0:28:360:28:38

She said she would, and apparently

Theresa May has raised concerns

0:28:380:28:41

about human rights in Saudi Arabia

during talks with the

0:28:410:28:46

country's Crown Prince,

Mohammed bin Salman has been

0:28:460:28:48

on a three-day UK visit

to talk about trade,

0:28:480:28:50

and presumably some of the more

awkward issues like Yemen.

0:28:500:28:53

The visit comes the same week

as International Women's Day,

0:28:530:28:57

another area, Saudi Arabia isn't

exactly celebrated for.

0:28:570:28:59

Here's Ellie.

0:28:590:29:01

At nearly every stop

on the Saudi Arabian visit this

0:29:010:29:04

week, the protesters

haven't been far.

0:29:040:29:05

Well, today I got the opportunity

to talk to one of 29 women who sit

0:29:050:29:09

on the Shoura Council.

0:29:090:29:10

It's not exactly a parliament,

but it's a council that advises

0:29:100:29:13

the Saudi Arabian King,

and there's plenty to put to her.

0:29:130:29:18

A good place to start -

women's rights.

0:29:180:29:21

A country that in June is finally

allowing women to drive cars,

0:29:210:29:24

and that is being seen as progress.

0:29:240:29:26

It's a woeful record, isn't it?

0:29:260:29:28

The country is young, not just

in its population but in its age.

0:29:280:29:35

Effectively it's an 80 year

old country, but I actually always

0:29:350:29:40

say it's a 50 year old country,

because when the first revenue

0:29:400:29:44

of oil came to the country,

to the government, that's

0:29:440:29:46

when it was used for

the infrastructure.

0:29:460:29:48

When you look at a country

that is basically 50 years old,

0:29:480:29:53

we're only going one way,

which is forwards.

0:29:530:29:56

But it cannot happen

from one day to the next.

0:29:560:30:00

But it is true that women don't

have the same rights as men,

0:30:000:30:03

don't have the same rights

that they would here in the UK?

0:30:030:30:06

When did you get your rights?

0:30:060:30:08

More than 100 years ago,

women have been voting, for example.

0:30:080:30:11

Yes, that's fine, but how long did

it take for you to have?

0:30:110:30:14

I'm talking about a country

that is 50 years old.

0:30:140:30:16

You were not 50 years

old when you got your rights.

0:30:160:30:19

I'm not justifying the fact that

in your eyes we are slow.

0:30:190:30:23

Yes, it is challenging.

0:30:230:30:25

There are obstacles,

we get frustrated and I'm not

0:30:250:30:30

denying any of that,

this is the reality, it's there.

0:30:300:30:32

What about you personally?

0:30:320:30:34

You're a woman living

in Saudi Arabia.

0:30:340:30:38

When I need to find myself at X, Y,

Z place at a certain time,

0:30:380:30:42

and I can't be there

because of transportation reasons,

0:30:420:30:44

yes, of course, I get frustrated.

0:30:440:30:47

Today things are easier,

with Uber, with Careem

0:30:470:30:51

and with private drivers,

obviously things do gets easier.

0:30:510:30:53

But when I look at it on a global

level, a 50 year old country,

0:30:530:30:58

to have reached what a lot

of countries took

0:30:580:31:02

hundreds of years to do.

0:31:020:31:04

And, like I said, I think the only

way we have had to go is forwards.

0:31:040:31:08

Much has been made this

visit of Vision 2030 -

0:31:080:31:12

a blueprint by King Salman

and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman

0:31:120:31:15

of economic and social reforms

to modernise Saudi Arabia.

0:31:150:31:21

You yourself have a daughter.

0:31:210:31:23

Do you think Saudi Arabia

of the future will be an easier

0:31:230:31:26

place to thrive for a woman?

0:31:260:31:27

I believe it will be,

but if it's not done in 2030

0:31:270:31:30

and it's done in 2032,

that's fine too.

0:31:300:31:32

Like I said, it's part

of the evolutionary

0:31:320:31:34

development of the country.

0:31:340:31:36

It's not stagnating.

0:31:360:31:38

And because we are moving forwards,

it can only get better.

0:31:380:31:40

It'll get better from next year,

it will get better the year after,

0:31:400:31:43

because we are seeing these changes,

because there is a genuine desire

0:31:430:31:46

to change and reform.

0:31:460:31:51

And it's not just because Prince

Mohammed or King Salman

0:31:510:31:56

want that to happen,

it's because the young people

0:31:560:31:59

of the country want it to happen.

0:31:590:32:00

And these young people are coming

back from their education abroad

0:32:000:32:07

not just with a degree,

but with open horizons,

0:32:070:32:10

mental horizons that

will change the way they live,

0:32:100:32:12

will change their aspirations.

0:32:120:32:16

There have been protests

during your visit here

0:32:160:32:20

about human rights abuses,

about the situation in Yemen.

0:32:200:32:22

Do you find some of those

difficult to defend?

0:32:220:32:25

Politically speaking,

when a country's surrounded

0:32:250:32:28

by enemies more than by friends,

there are certain actions

0:32:280:32:31

that need to be taken.

0:32:310:32:34

Especially if politically

and diplomatically chances

0:32:340:32:36

were given, not just once,

not just twice, more than that.

0:32:360:32:41

We have had the example

of Hezbollah in the North.

0:32:410:32:46

We don't want a resurgence

or a reappearance of something

0:32:460:32:49

like that in the South.

0:32:490:32:51

I'm not justifying the deaths

or the human rights issues

0:32:510:32:56

that come with any war,

I'm just stating the facts.

0:32:560:33:00

I think that it is very easy

to criticise and to talk

0:33:000:33:04

about issues when they're not

relatively clear to

0:33:040:33:08

the general public.

0:33:080:33:11

So the idea that the situation

in Yemen is a proxy war

0:33:110:33:14

against Iran is, what?

0:33:140:33:17

Definitely there's part of that,

I'm not denying that at all.

0:33:170:33:19

Iran has a big role, has had a big

role in this issue, yes.

0:33:190:33:27

Ali Price reporting. Do you share

her optimism in terms of the pace of

0:33:300:33:38

reform that Saudi Arabia is very

keen to promote, we saw that

0:33:380:33:42

underlined in that interview? In

terms of women's rights especially?

0:33:420:33:44

No, there have been cosmetic reforms

and obviously we need to credit and

0:33:440:33:52

celebrate the Saudi women who have

campaigned for those reforms, two

0:33:520:33:57

decades in the case of getting the

right to drive. But they are

0:33:570:34:01

cosmetic reforms. As long as the

underpinning system of male

0:34:010:34:05

guardianship exists in Saudi Arabia,

whereby women has to get permission

0:34:050:34:11

from a male guardian for all kinds

of things which essentially mean

0:34:110:34:14

they do not have equal rights as

citizens. As long as there is system

0:34:140:34:19

like that underpinning everything,

these reforms will be cosmetic.

In

0:34:190:34:23

terms of the relationship that

Britain has the Saudi Arabia, how

0:34:230:34:26

under pressure is that with

accusations of military advisers in

0:34:260:34:29

Britain being involved in the war in

Yemen?

I don't think it's

0:34:290:34:35

necessarily under pressure. The UK

Government has invested a lot of

0:34:350:34:40

faith and time in recent months

building up to this week to really

0:34:400:34:42

make a fuss of Mohammed bin Salman,

and there is a calculation and play

0:34:420:34:48

made by the Foreign Office is that

what he is doing is potentially

0:34:480:34:53

transformative. And while I share

some of the scepticism, but there

0:34:530:34:58

are reasons to be cautious about it,

he is potentially transformative.

0:34:580:35:04

The French have been far ahead of

the UK in terms of trade and being

0:35:040:35:08

in there with the new leadership.

Britain had some catching up to do,

0:35:080:35:14

that's what this week was about.

Those trade deals are extremely

0:35:140:35:18

important, worse potentially

billions of pounds. The trouble with

0:35:180:35:22

this -- worth potentially billions

of pounds.

The trouble with this

0:35:220:35:26

very cosy relationship is not just

the human rights abuses in Saudi

0:35:260:35:30

Arabia itself, and the treatment of

women comes up in that category, it

0:35:300:35:33

is that it is a destabilising force

in the Middle East. It backed a

0:35:330:35:39

military coup against the

democratically elected president in

0:35:390:35:42

Egypt's, it has at least covertly

funded some pretty violent

0:35:420:35:46

extremists in Syria and Iraq, it

effectively kidnapped Lebanese Prime

0:35:460:35:50

Minister just a few months ago and

that's before we get onto the

0:35:500:35:54

horrific human rights violations

going on in.

Of course.

Aided and

0:35:540:35:59

abetted by the UK whose arms sales

to Yemen have increased by an

0:35:590:36:06

extraordinary amount despite these

very clear human rights violations.

0:36:060:36:09

What that does to Britain is that it

undermines our reputation and

0:36:090:36:14

credibility in the Middle East and

internationally.

Is it defensible?

0:36:140:36:21

Yemen is a catastrophe, of course,

but you cannot look at Yemen without

0:36:210:36:24

looking at the role of Iran. You

can't have a situation from the

0:36:240:36:27

Saudi's position...

But we are

post... -- closely allied.

Yes, we

0:36:270:36:35

have been 50 years but it cannot

have a situation from a typical

0:36:350:36:40

point of view where Iranian

interests without in Yemen against

0:36:400:36:46

the Saudis. In terms of funding

against terrorism, we will see if he

0:36:460:36:53

is as good as his word, but he seems

to have said to the National

0:36:530:36:57

Security Council and MI6 and MI5

that he will curtail the funding of

0:36:570:37:06

certain groups. He has only been in

charge for a small amount of time

0:37:060:37:11

and it seems to be heading in the

right direction.

0:37:110:37:14

Now, if you've paid any

attention to British politics

0:37:140:37:17

since the Brexit referendum,

you've probably seen and heard one

0:37:170:37:20

sentiment expressed more

than any other by some of the most

0:37:200:37:23

ardent pro-EU voices in Westminster.

0:37:230:37:24

And even by some in the government.

0:37:240:37:25

Let's take a look.

0:37:250:37:27

Nobody voted on the 23rd of June

to make this country poorer.

0:37:270:37:31

Nobody voted to be poorer.

0:37:310:37:32

Nobody in this process

voted to be poorer.

0:37:320:37:35

Nobody, nobody voted to be poorer.

0:37:350:37:38

The country didn't vote

to make itself poorer.

0:37:380:37:41

When the British people voted

last June, they did not

0:37:410:37:44

vote to become poorer.

0:37:440:37:48

Philip Hammond at the end there,

echoing a sentiment

0:37:480:37:50

expressed by many across

the political spectrum.

0:37:500:37:52

But even if the jury's yet to return

a verdict on how the EU

0:37:520:37:55

will affect people's finances -

were some people who voted Brexit

0:37:550:37:59

prepared to take an economic hit

if that was the price

0:37:590:38:02

of leaving the EU?

0:38:020:38:04

Well, to discuss this we're

joined by David Goodhart

0:38:040:38:06

from the Policy Exchange think-tank,

he's also the author

0:38:060:38:09

of The Road to Somewhere, which,

amongst other things, explores

0:38:090:38:12

why people voted for Brexit.

0:38:120:38:18

Welcome to the show. Do you think

people were prepared to take an

0:38:180:38:23

economic hit in order to take back

control, to use another phrase?

I

0:38:230:38:27

think they would rather not but I

think a lot of people did vote

0:38:270:38:29

knowing that their pockets might be

hit. But regarding it as a

0:38:290:38:36

reasonable trade-off. We might be a

few hundred pounds richer in ten

0:38:360:38:40

years' time, but our democratic

accountability would be weaker, our

0:38:400:38:46

national identity would be weaker,

if we remained in the European

0:38:460:38:48

Union, a lot of people thought. I

actually voted to remain but I

0:38:480:38:53

thought that they were right about

that.

Do you agree and accept that

0:38:530:38:56

there were plenty of people who did

feel it was worth economic

0:38:560:39:00

uncertainty, let's put it like that,

and potentially being slightly worse

0:39:000:39:03

off in order to regain some sorts of

national identity?

I think national

0:39:030:39:09

identity is a phrase that's doing a

lot of work in that sentence. It's

0:39:090:39:14

very hard to discern what it was

that people actually did vote for,

0:39:140:39:18

and that's precisely why were having

such difficulty is that the

0:39:180:39:22

negotiations because we're trying to

find out what is it that people

0:39:220:39:25

wanted from Brexit. Nobody actually

said that. That wasn't on the

0:39:250:39:28

ballot. But I don't think these kind

of cultural concerns, that seems to

0:39:280:39:34

me a proxy for what can only be

described as Zeno races and I don't

0:39:340:39:39

think we should be making any -- is

then a racism and I don't wish to

0:39:390:39:44

make any political decisions on

that.

I find myself much more

0:39:440:39:53

favourable for Brexit because of the

arguments we had from the militant

0:39:530:40:01

Remainers, sheer panic on the

financial side or that we are all

0:40:010:40:10

racist, the 50% who voted leave.

Neither of those things are true.

0:40:100:40:16

There will be an adjustment cost but

I suspect we will be just as rich as

0:40:160:40:20

we will have been. This is that

first big push back of the shrinkage

0:40:200:40:28

of democratic space that has

happened in all big democracies, you

0:40:280:40:31

think of the way that the WTO,

European and aggression, even

0:40:310:40:36

domestic policies like the

independence of the Bank of England

0:40:360:40:40

have shrunk the attic space. What is

exciting about Brexit is it is a the

0:40:400:40:47

first push back against the

shrinking of that democratic space.

0:40:470:40:50

Although people might have been

prepared to take an economic hit, we

0:40:500:40:53

don't know how they thought it would

manifest itself. Do you think there

0:40:530:40:57

were a broad sense of the reasons

that people were voting and that has

0:40:570:41:02

made it difficult for negotiations,

because people said, we will be the

0:41:020:41:06

single market and the customs union

and if that makes us poorer, then so

0:41:060:41:11

be it.

We have to be sceptical about

polling after the event of the last

0:41:110:41:14

few years but there are quite

detailed series of polls done on

0:41:140:41:18

testing attitude afterwards, on what

people thought they were doing.

0:41:180:41:21

Immigration comes second, first

tends to come the question of

0:41:210:41:26

self-government and the country

making its own laws. What's

0:41:260:41:31

astonishing about the British

political class is that it was so

0:41:310:41:33

shocked by the result. It's been

apparent since about the time of

0:41:330:41:38

Maastricht at something close to the

majority of British voters were

0:41:380:41:43

sceptical about excessive political

integration and were never asked the

0:41:430:41:45

question. The first time the

question was put to them, they

0:41:450:41:49

delivered a pretty clear answer. In

terms of the good people voting to

0:41:490:41:55

be poorer, that is obviously a piece

of sophistry. I certainly voted but

0:41:550:42:00

that was a possibility -- knowing

that was a possible 80 and I know

0:42:000:42:09

many Leave voters who voted thinking

it was.

0:42:090:42:14

it was. People heard the warnings,

they calculated that there might be

0:42:140:42:18

some hit, there might not, depending

on things that had not happened yet.

0:42:180:42:21

But if there was a moderate hit, and

an adjustment cost, it is something

0:42:210:42:26

worth living for force of

government.

People said it was worth

0:42:260:42:29

it because Britain could then -- it

was worth living for four

0:42:290:42:34

self-government, people said it was

worth it because Britain could then

0:42:340:42:37

make decisions over things like

borders, and money, and that is more

0:42:370:42:41

important?

People were sold this

idea of taking back control. That

0:42:410:42:46

doesn't mean anything, it's an

anti-slogan.

It's not an empty

0:42:460:42:49

slogan.

When we talk about the

accountability of the WTO, or of

0:42:490:42:59

banks and multinationals, that is a

very separate thing from the issue

0:42:590:43:03

of the EU. And that's exactly the

success of the Leave campaign, it

0:43:030:43:07

managed to divert a lot of very

reasonable concerns, economic

0:43:070:43:11

concerns into something that was

essentially... It was huge areas of

0:43:110:43:15

life. But because of European --

because of European rules, we could

0:43:150:43:29

not control, the way in which

different can -- countries balance

0:43:290:43:33

risk and other things, it's hugely

different from country to country

0:43:330:43:37

and we are squeezed into often

German related anxieties about their

0:43:370:43:41

detection, for example.

We have to

pay huge tariffs on shoes because of

0:43:410:43:48

the Italians. This is all sorts of

areas that we can reclaim

0:43:480:43:53

sovereignty. Liberal fantasists

think it is a

0:43:530:44:03

think it is a pooling of

empowerment, but I think a lot of

0:44:030:44:05

people think it is this empowering.

If people are feeling poorer at the

0:44:050:44:10

moment because of high inflation and

wage stagnation because in the

0:44:100:44:14

aftermath of that EU vote,

0:44:140:44:24

GDP will fall by less than it fell

in the financial crisis. I do think

0:45:020:45:06

people would change their mind, come

to regret what they thought was

0:45:060:45:09

worth taking an economic hit for?

It's possible, there is no sign of

0:45:090:45:13

it yet. I think where the Labour

Party has a real advantage and

0:45:130:45:19

Jeremy Corbyn are headed the game,

because the Tories are focused on

0:45:190:45:23

the shambolic negotiations already

Labour in that keynote speech Jeremy

0:45:230:45:28

Corbyn gave last week, already he is

talking about Britain after Brexit.

0:45:280:45:35

I think the Labour understanding is

correct. Once Brexit is a done deal

0:45:350:45:40

and happens in one form or another,

there will then be up battle for

0:45:400:45:44

votes in areas for those who voted

for Brexit who want to see some

0:45:440:45:48

concrete improvement.

David

Goodhart, thank you.

0:45:480:45:51

And for more reporting

and analysis of Brexit,

0:45:510:45:53

check out the BBC News website -

that's bbc.co.uk/brexit.

0:45:530:46:01

Donald Trump has accepted

an invitation from the North Korean

0:46:010:46:03

leader, Kim Jong-un,

to hold an unprecedented meeting

0:46:030:46:05

to discuss the future

of the regime's nuclear

0:46:050:46:07

and missile programme.

0:46:070:46:08

Following months of mutual

hostility, senior South Korean

0:46:080:46:11

officials appeared outside

the White House to announce the news

0:46:110:46:14

having verbally conveyed Kim's

invitation to Trump.

0:46:140:46:19

The White House confirmed Trump

was ready to meet Kim "by May."

0:46:190:46:23

President Trump himself

confirmed the meeting

0:46:230:46:28

in his own inimitable way

- yes, tweeting.

0:46:280:46:31

To get the latest on this we can

talk to our correspondent

0:46:430:46:46

Robin Brant in Seoul.

0:46:460:46:50

What has been the reaction in South

Korea?

0:46:500:46:56

Korea?

The South Koreans believe

that they are the ones who have

0:46:560:47:00

engineered this meeting, and meeting

the like of which has never, ever

0:47:000:47:03

happened before. A sitting president

sitting down with chairman Kim, in

0:47:030:47:09

this instance, the leader of the

Democratic People's Republic of

0:47:090:47:13

Korea. South Korea's leader was a

man who came to office a couple of

0:47:130:47:16

years ago on a promise to extend the

olive branch to the north. Clearly

0:47:160:47:20

he is delivering on that. At the

same time he has pursued a policy

0:47:200:47:24

trying to further cement that very

close relationship with the United

0:47:240:47:27

States.

0:47:270:47:32

States. But Moon Jae-in has high

hopes for the meeting, even though

0:47:350:47:38

we don't know when it will take

place. South Korea's president

0:47:380:47:41

already saying he feels this meeting

will be remembered as a historical

0:47:410:47:45

milestone that realised piece on the

Korean Valencia. Even before it has

0:47:450:47:49

taken place. But the South Koreans

clearly believe that there can be

0:47:490:47:53

tangible gains, real achievements,

in terms of not just an

0:47:530:48:00

de-escalation of tensions between

North Korea and America but also on

0:48:000:48:03

this issue, very vexed issue of

denuclearisation.

Thank you. Joining

0:48:030:48:12

me now is Professor Robert Kelley,

an expert in Korean affairs. Welcome

0:48:120:48:17

to the Daily Politics. An enormous

diplomatic breakthrough?

It may be,

0:48:170:48:24

if the president can bring home a

genuinely big deal. That meeting

0:48:240:48:30

means the stakes are really high, we

assume there is some sort of big

0:48:300:48:34

bargain to come from this. But there

is only ten weeks to actually

0:48:340:48:38

prepare for this and really there

has not been much discussion in the

0:48:380:48:43

analyst community. They didn't seem

the Secretary of State knew was

0:48:430:48:46

coming White House staff. The

president has to bring home

0:48:460:48:49

something big, a lot of work to do

in a short time.

How have things

0:48:490:48:53

changed so rapidly? We thought

relations were at an extremely low

0:48:530:48:56

point. Trump was promising to bring

down fire and you're like the world

0:48:560:49:00

had never seen an Korea and now?

I

think a lot of this shows the

0:49:000:49:07

President's temperament. We know he

is very erratic and volatile and

0:49:070:49:12

changes his mind very rapidly. Just

three months ago we were talking

0:49:120:49:15

about air strikes on North Korea. My

sense is that is the president.

0:49:150:49:22

North Korea properly have fully

functional nuclear weapons they

0:49:220:49:26

figure, why not talk now? The

sanctions are biting also. I think

0:49:260:49:30

the big swing is due to the

president himself.

You think it is

0:49:300:49:33

down to him. Could this be the mixer

China moment for President Trump,

0:49:330:49:40

that he has manoeuvred the US into a

strong position?

It could be of the

0:49:400:49:44

president brings home something

real. The concern from the analyst

0:49:440:49:48

community, if you're watching TV or

looking at Twitter today, a lot of

0:49:480:49:51

people have been very unsure about

what this means. Because it came out

0:49:510:49:55

of the blue. Fixing this issue as

difficult as North Korea- US

0:49:550:50:00

relations, it's highly unlikely can

be fixed in just ten weeks. This is

0:50:000:50:04

the kind of thing that takes years

and years. If you look at the 90s,

0:50:040:50:08

years were spent on this kind of

stuff and suddenly Donald Trump

0:50:080:50:12

order in ten weeks. It is so

unlikely. Maybe, but unlikely.

Just

0:50:120:50:16

before I go to my guests, what you

keep saying, it's a very short space

0:50:160:50:21

of time to get all this sorted out

before the meeting. What are the

0:50:210:50:27

risks to these talks, and saying

they will be done by May? If they

0:50:270:50:31

collapse or they don't go the way

either side wants, could actually

0:50:310:50:37

escalate the situation?

Yes, I think

there are two possibilities. The

0:50:370:50:40

first is they meet and don't like

each other. And they both start... I

0:50:400:50:45

mean Kim Jong-un have called him

names and Donald Trump likewise.

0:50:450:50:49

They could fall back to that and

load each other and then there is a

0:50:490:50:54

real impasse. The other possible it

is they meet and it doesn't go

0:50:540:50:57

anywhere, it fails. Particularly the

Trump sides is look, we went for the

0:50:570:51:05

big show, the summer and it went

nowhere and it doesn't leave us with

0:51:050:51:07

anywhere else to go. Normally these

things work their way through a

0:51:070:51:12

lower-level policy process before

the summit happens, Trump is taking

0:51:120:51:16

a chance to have the summit before

the years of groundwork that

0:51:160:51:19

normally precede it stop like that

is an important point, the stakes

0:51:190:51:22

are very high. On one side you could

say it will be the meeting of two

0:51:220:51:26

absurd figures

who have high levels

of vanity. On the other hand, an

0:51:260:51:30

historic meeting?

It is. But it is

another example, Trump has to be

0:51:300:51:36

seen in terms of celebrity

wrestling. He is that kind of

0:51:360:51:40

president. He is seeing this other

guy, Kim, is the other celebrity

0:51:400:51:50

wrestler, and they've been facing

off, promising to kill each other.

0:51:500:51:55

Now, something interesting, the

great Trump show is going to produce

0:51:550:52:00

something, a great plot twist. It is

possible. I am a Trump sceptic but

0:52:000:52:07

there is certainly something in his

approach and we saw it last month on

0:52:070:52:11

gun control, where he flipped and

adopted a different position from

0:52:110:52:17

the position the NRA would have

wanted to take. There is something

0:52:170:52:21

in his unpredictability and his

showmanship which, in this case,

0:52:210:52:26

might just work. It is worth a go.

In celebrity wrestling, in this

0:52:260:52:31

instance, who comes out on top?

Oh

my goodness! That is the question,

0:52:310:52:36

isn't it? It might be that

showmanship works. I think it is

0:52:360:52:42

interesting what the analysts and

experts are saying, which is look,

0:52:420:52:47

normally negotiations on this sort

of situation, it's years, its years

0:52:470:52:52

of backroom staff. There is a lot

going on before it comes to leaders

0:52:520:52:58

meeting fostered in this case none

of this has happened, they've just

0:52:580:53:01

gone straight to this meeting.

Therefore, the likelihood of it

0:53:010:53:05

producing something, without that

huge background, backroom effort, it

0:53:050:53:09

doesn't seem high, does it?

In terms

of using President Trump has to come

0:53:090:53:15

home with something big. This

denuclearisation, is that the only

0:53:150:53:20

goal, the only possible prize,

anything less than that will be seen

0:53:200:53:22

as a failure?

The Americans keep

talking it up that way, yes. I think

0:53:220:53:28

the president needs to start

managing expectations. The North

0:53:280:53:31

Korean spent 40 years developing

nuclear weapons, it is unlikely they

0:53:310:53:37

will give up in ten weeks. It would

be astonishing. What's more likely

0:53:370:53:41

as you'll get some movement on human

rights, is important, cameras or

0:53:410:53:46

inspectors back in North Korea, may

be nuclear safety. There is concern

0:53:460:53:51

about that. All this stuff, these

are small steps. It would be helpful

0:53:510:53:56

to work our way through those before

we went in for the big enchilada. It

0:53:560:54:02

is highly unlikely in a state that

has been 40 years building nuclear

0:54:020:54:06

weapons that they will give them up.

It brings a possible this might not

0:54:060:54:09

turn out to be anything. It might be

a big, a show that goes nowhere, the

0:54:090:54:14

Trump show. That is what the

president has to work on. He has a

0:54:140:54:19

lot to do in ten weeks.

Will it

matter if it doesn't go anywhere?

0:54:190:54:23

Symbolically it will be important.

Imagine the two of them when they

0:54:230:54:26

meet, what will that be like?

We

have come a long way since Stalin,

0:54:260:54:32

Roosevelt and Churchill. It is going

to be a Technicolor, most

0:54:320:54:40

extraordinary reality TV style

event. Imagine the media experience,

0:54:400:54:44

as they shake hands, and the

carnival.

But they are serious

0:54:440:54:48

issues.

A very serious issue. I

think if it fails, I don't think

0:54:480:54:54

domestically it really make that

much difference. He is derided in

0:54:540:54:59

the US by liberal analysts and he

seems to have, he has a meeting

0:54:590:55:07

which, of a kind which none of his

predecessors have managed and he is

0:55:070:55:11

giving it a go. I say that as a

Trump sceptic, it is probably worth

0:55:110:55:15

a go.

Di welcomer?

What is

interesting is behind this, the

0:55:150:55:22

relationship, the thawing of North

Korea and South Korea. They had

0:55:220:55:25

meetings at the Olympics, had a lot

of drinks together, which says a lot

0:55:250:55:29

for alcohol fuelled diplomacy!

Whatever works. Robert, thank you

0:55:290:55:34

for joining us today.

0:55:340:55:37

There's just time before we go

to find out the answer to our quiz.

0:55:370:55:40

The question was, what does

Theresa May's ideal night

0:55:400:55:42

with her girlfriends look like?

0:55:420:55:44

Dinner and wine at home,

karaoke and cocktails,

0:55:440:55:46

a box set binge

or none of the above?

0:55:460:55:53

You are stumped.

I can't really see

her doing karaoke, I'm going to go

0:55:540:56:01

with dinner with the girls.

None of

the above. I don't know what it is

0:56:010:56:06

about these questions to the Prime

Minister.

Iain is right. I'm not

0:56:060:56:14

surprised you were foxed by it.

Let's have a look and see.

0:56:140:56:17

If you could have your perfect

get-together with your girlfriends

0:56:170:56:19

on International Women's Day,

away from all of the pressures

0:56:190:56:22

of your job, what would be your

perfect night with them and how

0:56:220:56:25

would you let your hair down?

0:56:250:56:26

Goodness me, what a question!

0:56:260:56:27

And I haven't thought

about it, because, actually,

0:56:270:56:29

my International Women's Day

is heavily focused on what we're

0:56:290:56:32

doing on domestic abuse.

0:56:320:56:33

So it's not going to have the time

to have the girls round

0:56:330:56:36

and have an evening together,

I'm afraid.

0:56:360:56:40

I know that, I know

that Prime Minister.

0:56:400:56:42

I'm just saying on your dream

moment, how would you let your hair

0:56:420:56:45

down with your girlfriends?

0:56:450:56:47

Well, I don't think that

when you let your hair down,

0:56:470:56:51

I don't think there's only one way

of doing it, I think it depends

0:56:510:56:55

on the group that you've got,

it depends on the time.

0:56:550:57:00

How many ways are there to let down

your hair? Rage, why do you think

0:57:000:57:05

the Prime Minister finds it so

difficult to answer questions at

0:57:050:57:07

this question that you remember the

naughtiest thing you have ever done?

0:57:070:57:11

Because she's not very natural and

sincere and it keeps coming over,

0:57:110:57:16

doesn't it? She doesn't seem very

ordinary.

Does it matter? That she

0:57:160:57:23

doesn't answer the questions?

It

does matter, it mattered during the

0:57:230:57:27

election a lot.

Why do you think it

is difficult for her?

I think it is

0:57:270:57:32

shyness, not a lack of sincerity.

You're just watching that, you want

0:57:320:57:35

her to just, you feel for her, you

want her to take dinner at home and

0:57:350:57:39

a glass of wine at.

Anything!

Anything, not just I'm focusing on

0:57:390:57:45

domestic abuse.

In the end, what

does it say to people?

I think it's

0:57:450:57:51

misinterpreted as, and perceived as

a sort of stiffness and a remoteness

0:57:510:57:57

and I think it is actually just that

she finds it very difficult,

0:57:570:58:01

off-camera as well, to do that small

talk. If you asked how the weather

0:58:010:58:05

today she would say, it's too early

to say.

And you don't want to make a

0:58:050:58:09

mistake and say the wrong thing.

I

get the thing about small talk, I'm

0:58:090:58:13

not great at small talk either but

there is something about that that

0:58:130:58:17

says, it's not sincere and it is not

real. There is something quite fake

0:58:170:58:21

about not being able to relax and

give any answer to a very sort of

0:58:210:58:26

normal, everyday question.

How did

you let your hair down on

0:58:260:58:31

International Women's Day?

I did go

for a drink with the girls.

You

0:58:310:58:37

couldn't answer, not as easy as you

think!

I was going to dad cooked

0:58:370:58:41

dinner for my wife but that's a lie,

she cooked dinner for me.

Is that

0:58:410:58:44

how it always is?!

0:58:440:58:46

That's all for today.

0:58:460:58:47

Thanks to my guests.

0:58:470:58:50

No more difficult questions, that's

it, have a nice weekend, goodbye.

0:58:500:58:54

Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS