:00:24. > :00:26.Hello, and welcome to Dateline London.
:00:27. > :00:30.How close a relationship can, and should, Britain have with China?
:00:31. > :00:33.Israel's prime minister says the Holocaust was not Hitler's idea,
:00:34. > :00:40.And should we put a tax on sugar as a danger to health?
:00:41. > :00:46.My guests today are Thomas Kielinger of Die Welt, Stephanie Baker of
:00:47. > :00:49.Bloomberg Markets, Diane Wei Liang, who is a Chinese writer, and Yasmin
:00:50. > :00:55.Britain's relationship with China is going through a golden period,
:00:56. > :00:58.and the welcome in Britain for the Chinese president put
:00:59. > :01:02.But is this simply a new pragmatism, based on money and business
:01:03. > :01:09.interests, or potentially something much more significant?
:01:10. > :01:21.What do you think China got out of this visit? A lot. There
:01:22. > :01:23.visit to the United States three weeks ago which did not go as well
:01:24. > :01:29.as planned. He had to delay one day to stay in Seattle rather than going
:01:30. > :01:34.to Washington because Pope Francis was there. Following the state
:01:35. > :01:39.banquet and the UN meeting, President Putin who did a big
:01:40. > :01:49.announcement in Syria, it was not as well received from his point of
:01:50. > :02:04.view. He was coming for the state banquet, it was a great triumph for
:02:05. > :02:10.him. He is the most important leader for a long time. He is someone who
:02:11. > :02:14.wants to build chain into this China dream. To become actual
:02:15. > :02:21.international player. Not only economic sense, but in a political
:02:22. > :02:39.sense. That is very interesting. What you think Britain
:02:40. > :02:56.is very much as short-term gain. But in the
:02:57. > :03:01.years and how much gain would that be? That is, if I may say so, a very
:03:02. > :03:05.Chinese way of thinking of things. The next 20 years, the next
:03:06. > :03:10.generation. Richard politicians tend to think of the next three or four
:03:11. > :03:16.years. Absolutely. The Chinese politicians want to engage with UK,
:03:17. > :03:20.with financial services it is just the beginning. There is a lot that
:03:21. > :03:25.owner can gain from engaging with the city, for example. The Uber
:03:26. > :03:30.you'll love this? I can see the economic arguments, but not the
:03:31. > :03:34.political arguments at all. I do not fall in line with the xenophobia or
:03:35. > :03:42.jingoism of this country or any other. But politically, I thought it
:03:43. > :03:46.was quite scandalous, actually, that the political leaders of this
:03:47. > :03:58.country code code who, I agree, is an astonishing
:03:59. > :04:20.leader but his political record in which ever way you want to judge it
:04:21. > :04:28.for mutual respect, is not an equation I buy into. The economy
:04:29. > :04:32.cannot bypass or override everything else. I do not think anyone assumes
:04:33. > :04:36.that the economy will bypass the other issues, people understand that
:04:37. > :04:56.the league, these are too different kettles of fish. When a country is
:04:57. > :05:05.at its political best, that is not necessarily kowtowing. Our police
:05:06. > :05:12.went and took the computer of someone who survived... You do not
:05:13. > :05:14.have false demonstrations of loyalty on our streets. There was something
:05:15. > :05:21.quite artificial going on all stop apart from the incident, which was
:05:22. > :05:25.disreputable... The economy are completely go with. Ever since
:05:26. > :05:30.Kissinger, when they started to open up, trade was at the bottom of the
:05:31. > :05:37.future relationship which might, over time, Ely area to the behaviour
:05:38. > :05:44.of the opposing number. In the old days in the Soviet Union that led to
:05:45. > :05:51.change. I have seen that personally in the past 35 or 40 years, how the
:05:52. > :05:55.China of my childhood, which was completely controlled by the state,
:05:56. > :06:01.has turned into China today, which for the Chinese is full of freedom.
:06:02. > :06:11.Freedom of speech. Incremental. I should say, you were also one of
:06:12. > :06:26.those leaders of the Chairman Square demonstration. -- Tianamen Square
:06:27. > :06:32.demonstration. I wonder whether talking then this
:06:33. > :06:38.relationship is, in economic terms particularly, a mistake? I think
:06:39. > :06:45.George Osborne will accept this in the terms of, if we do not do that,
:06:46. > :06:51.someone else will. Britain has a larger trade deficit with China than
:06:52. > :06:56.France, for example. He went to China last month, during which time
:06:57. > :07:01.he was quoted as saying, Britain should run towards China. He is
:07:02. > :07:06.known to be fascinated by China, he backpacked around there after
:07:07. > :07:14.Oxford, he has surrounded himself by advisers who are up-to-date on
:07:15. > :07:22.China. Including the former Goldman Sachs economist who talks about the
:07:23. > :07:26.emerging markets. He says that we risk our commercial interests if we
:07:27. > :07:32.focus too much on human rights. He clearly decided to put that on the
:07:33. > :07:34.back owner. I was as horrified as anyone by the treatment of this
:07:35. > :07:39.protest figure and showed a bad example to China when they were
:07:40. > :07:43.visiting. That they clearly decided engagement with China gives them
:07:44. > :07:47.more influence over human rights. Whether you agree with it or not. I
:07:48. > :07:54.am not so sure boycotting China gives them any more influence. The
:07:55. > :08:00.question is, now that Cameron has had a bear with the president, and
:08:01. > :08:06.he has taken a red and a golden carriage with the Queen, and been to
:08:07. > :08:15.Manchester City with Sergio Aguero... One important thing to
:08:16. > :08:19.say, the whole human rights and international law obligations of
:08:20. > :08:26.this country have been rewritten by this current government. The
:08:27. > :08:30.directions they now give the ministers, this is very frightening
:08:31. > :08:33.and dangerous. Because if we are saying because we want to do
:08:34. > :08:38.business with China, India, any nation, the values which we have
:08:39. > :08:41.espoused since the end of the Second World War also going to be torn up,
:08:42. > :08:48.we should be incredibly careful of that. I do not think it has been
:08:49. > :08:59.torn up. Think David Cameron has made great progress with President
:09:00. > :09:02.Xi on the subject. He said there is room for improvement, he said we
:09:03. > :09:05.want to work with countries such as the UK to improve our record on
:09:06. > :09:12.human rights. That is something that has not been said before. That is a
:09:13. > :09:15.big thing for Cameron. If you become friends then you can discuss these
:09:16. > :09:21.matters. That is something I have not heard. But I wonder if that is
:09:22. > :09:26.like President Putin, he knows that he needs to say it but the actions
:09:27. > :09:29.do not match the words. But so far no Chinese leaders have said that
:09:30. > :09:31.before. Let us move on.
:09:32. > :09:33.The prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, said something
:09:34. > :09:36.quite extraordinary this week - that Adolf Hitler did not want to
:09:37. > :09:38.exterminate the Jewish people until meeting a Palestinian religious
:09:39. > :09:40.leader, the Grand Mufti, who apparently sowed the idea
:09:41. > :09:52.What do you think people in Germany are making this? This is an
:09:53. > :09:55.aberration of judgment. It flies in the face of history and historical
:09:56. > :10:02.record. Who knows what was said and exchanged and visit prior to Hitler
:10:03. > :10:08.coming to power. He was bent, from the start, on exterminating the Jews
:10:09. > :10:12.which ever way he could. I have a problem with the statement,
:10:13. > :10:16.particularly because I think it is so much geared to the current
:10:17. > :10:22.struggle between the Israeli 's and the Palestinians. He is trying to
:10:23. > :10:27.get one over the Palestinians and paint them as black as can be and
:10:28. > :10:30.exonerate Hitler, which has unintended consequences. There is no
:10:31. > :10:37.need to have gone this far. If you think that there is guilt on the
:10:38. > :10:40.Palestinian side presently and in history it is enough to come up with
:10:41. > :10:46.that statement, but you do not need to leave the impression that Hitler
:10:47. > :10:50.is not responsible. He has suspended his judgment, completely. How do
:10:51. > :10:55.think this has gone down, particularly with the Jewish
:10:56. > :10:58.communities in the unit states? It is a very diverse community, but do
:10:59. > :11:07.you believe people are puzzled about this? It is about 2015 and not about
:11:08. > :11:10.1941, 1942? Respected Holocaust scholars have criticised him and
:11:11. > :11:18.said it is completely historically inaccurate. Even the Israeli press
:11:19. > :11:22.has come out and criticised him. One Israeli historian of the Holocaust
:11:23. > :11:28.said it was a political mistake for the Palestinian rural Mack that --
:11:29. > :11:35.Palestinians, that they met with Hitler, but that this is
:11:36. > :11:39.historically incorrect. Social media ridiculed him for this, he was
:11:40. > :11:44.probably not expecting that. He is not a naive man, and he has said
:11:45. > :11:49.this before in a speech, I believe. He knew the effects of his words.
:11:50. > :11:54.You have to wonder why did he decide to trot that one out at a time when
:11:55. > :12:02.he had several weeks of violent crashes between Israelis and
:12:03. > :12:06.Palestinians and the prospect of revising the priest process is at an
:12:07. > :12:12.all-time low after talks broke down last year. -- his process. It smacks
:12:13. > :12:17.of desperation on his part that there is no way out. He is fanning
:12:18. > :12:29.the flames in the same way that he has accused Hamas of fanning flames.
:12:30. > :12:34.They have reached this low that you think that you can score points by
:12:35. > :12:38.pointing at a historical meeting and painting it in this fashion. What
:12:39. > :12:46.more can you do to completely disrupt any sort of hope for
:12:47. > :12:53.resolution? Does it disrupt relationships between Benjamin
:12:54. > :13:00.Netanyahu and President Obama? There is no love lost there. But this will
:13:01. > :13:03.not repeal it? No, and John Kerry travelled to you rip to have a
:13:04. > :13:11.four-hour meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu to try to calm down
:13:12. > :13:21.tensions. It looks like a lost cause. President Obama has little
:13:22. > :13:29.over a year left and is more or less resigned to passing the nuclear deal
:13:30. > :13:37.with Iran which Benjamin NASA -- Benjamin Netanyahu has fought.
:13:38. > :13:42.How do you see this, it is a very odd statement to make, isn't it?
:13:43. > :13:47.Yes, I believe he made the same statement in 2012. His aide had
:13:48. > :13:54.claimed that this was a belief that he has always held. I believe it is
:13:55. > :13:57.written in his book of 1993. It is a statement I think he made possibly
:13:58. > :14:04.with a purpose of looking at today's conflict between the
:14:05. > :14:09.Palestinians and Israelis. And it is to fan further more of the conflict
:14:10. > :14:15.the sentiment that is involved in this current violence and
:14:16. > :14:20.deterioration. What is really sad is to look at the situation we have
:14:21. > :14:27.today. The Oslo accord was 22 years ago. Nothing has happened. Of course
:14:28. > :14:32.we have John Kerry travelling to the region, we have a lot of politicians
:14:33. > :14:39.engaging with the process. We are at an all-time low. This peace process
:14:40. > :14:51.is anybody thinking that this will be revived? There is no peace
:14:52. > :14:55.process, really. Increasingly, public opinion has shifted hugely in
:14:56. > :15:00.the last ten years when it comes to this conflict between Israel and
:15:01. > :15:06.Palestine, partly because David and Goliath, whose David and Goliath now
:15:07. > :15:11.in terms of sheer power and arms. I am not blaming Israel for all that
:15:12. > :15:16.has happened, but Israel is the stronger player and public opinion
:15:17. > :15:21.in this country, in my lifetime as a columnist, I can see how public
:15:22. > :15:27.opinion has shifted. So you raise this Holocaust, you stay in the name
:15:28. > :15:31.of the Palestinians. A lot of Palestinians, a lot of Arabs, are
:15:32. > :15:40.indeed anti-Semitic. I know because they even tell me. But this is used
:15:41. > :15:46.very instrumentally. Because once you raise this thing that even the
:15:47. > :15:52.Holocaust has the stain upon the Palestinian leader, you have really
:15:53. > :15:57.reached the depths of bad, bad moral politics. That is why it has come up
:15:58. > :16:03.the second time instead of two years ago, it is essential. You never
:16:04. > :16:11.entered the same river twice, as the Greeks used to say. It adds fire.
:16:12. > :16:19.There were Nazi sympathisers in this country, a man who would have been
:16:20. > :16:20.king. An exoneration of all of that in history. Absolutely.
:16:21. > :16:22.Let us move on. The former mayor of
:16:23. > :16:25.New York Michael Bloomberg tried to improve the health of New Yorkers
:16:26. > :16:29.by banning enormous servings of Now the British government is being
:16:30. > :16:35.urged to tackle obesity, tooth decay, diabetes,
:16:36. > :16:37.heart disease and other conditions The prime minister David Cameron
:16:38. > :16:50.is said to be against it. I thought that this was a
:16:51. > :17:02.fascinating thing by Bloomberg to try to do. But it failed because the
:17:03. > :17:11.court said that he did not have the power to do this. Yes, he said it
:17:12. > :17:14.should be city councils. In New York, he tried to ban super-size
:17:15. > :17:22.sugary drinks. It was not a tax per se. In his philanthropic work he has
:17:23. > :17:29.funded work in Mexico and California to get a tax imposed. In Mexico that
:17:30. > :17:39.worked. Mexico imposed a 10% tax on sugary drinks and 20 15 -- 2015. It
:17:40. > :17:45.appears to be working. The sales have declined by 20%. It is a good
:17:46. > :17:51.example of how you can shift public health through policy measures such
:17:52. > :17:54.as this. But the city is a huge issue in Mexican politics, because
:17:55. > :18:05.50 years ago it was not a problem and it is a really big problem now.
:18:06. > :18:08.And they have used the funding for that to fund anti-obesity problems.
:18:09. > :18:11.Norrie and Denmark have similar taxes. I am frankly baffled by the
:18:12. > :18:18.reaction of the government to this issue. Jeremy Hunt tried to suppress
:18:19. > :18:25.this report, David Cameron has no interest in imposing a tax. But the
:18:26. > :18:36.public health research indicates that it would have an effect. ?5
:18:37. > :18:43.billion per year is spent on the NHS on obesity related issues. As well
:18:44. > :18:50.as the fundraising. For countries that have a National Health Service
:18:51. > :18:53.that is a drain on national budgets, it seems incomprehensible to me that
:18:54. > :18:57.he would not be imposing measures that might reduce the demand on the
:18:58. > :19:01.NHS as well as provide funding. The counterargument is that the
:19:02. > :19:10.government should not be telling us what we should be eating. This up to
:19:11. > :19:15.you and me to decide. In that case we should not have a government, we
:19:16. > :19:17.should be free and be anarchists and do what we want. This government in
:19:18. > :19:18.particular, and some previous governments, the only thing
:19:19. > :19:22.matters is money. The nation's matters is money. The nation's
:19:23. > :19:29.health comes second. The same thing happened with the drink industry.
:19:30. > :19:33.All this evidence, doctors, all of the professionals in the health
:19:34. > :19:38.service, or calling for action from the government on the problem with
:19:39. > :19:44.alcohol intake. The pricing particularly. Nothing was done. It
:19:45. > :19:52.used in most everything sector and used in most everything sector and
:19:53. > :19:56.they are not going to discipline us. Discipline the big businesses that
:19:57. > :20:01.are part of... It is labelled, if you buy pasta sauce, it will tell
:20:02. > :20:08.you how much sugar is in it. I harassed mother in a supermarket
:20:09. > :20:13.trying to get food is not going to stand in a supermarket trying to get
:20:14. > :20:19.food is not going to stand and look at available. Price change equals
:20:20. > :20:27.perspective. You can only change so much. I am not convinced that the
:20:28. > :20:35.tax on sugary substance is the best way. Taxing certain product or
:20:36. > :20:41.ingredients is a very blunt instrument. It may have an effect,
:20:42. > :20:50.it may not. If you look at the UK, the sort of dieting habits, I
:20:51. > :20:55.suspect that attacks on sugar will actually affect the poor even more
:20:56. > :21:00.so. It might not deter them from purchasing these goods. In fact, I
:21:01. > :21:06.believe in this country there is already VAT on soft drinks, sweets,
:21:07. > :21:11.chocolates. So that already has additional tax. I do not think it
:21:12. > :21:16.has had an effect. I would say that to look at this issue, you need to
:21:17. > :21:23.look more carefully, rather than to believe that the sweeping tax on
:21:24. > :21:28.ingredients... One of the reasons why the government is hesitant is
:21:29. > :21:32.twofold, they do not want to be more nannying, they do not want to
:21:33. > :21:36.increase the perception of being the nanny state, and there are also
:21:37. > :21:40.using the argument that it might hurt the poor risk the worst. There
:21:41. > :21:44.are also out of instruments available, before you get the tax
:21:45. > :21:50.issue. You can fit a curb on advertisements and come down heavily
:21:51. > :21:56.on banning advertisements. Before you come to the tax issue, although
:21:57. > :22:01.I must say from the Mexican instant experience, it did not seem to have
:22:02. > :22:05.hurt the poor predictive. On the contrary, it helped reduce... It
:22:06. > :22:12.hurts the poor in terms of their health. If they do not do it? Yes,
:22:13. > :22:17.if they continue to consume lots of sugar. I am trying to understand why
:22:18. > :22:22.the government is so resistant to following Public Health England's
:22:23. > :22:25.George Osborne is trying to push George Osborne is trying to push
:22:26. > :22:30.through this working tax credits cut, so they do not want another
:22:31. > :22:36.issue compounding working families... The nanny state issue,
:22:37. > :22:39.was people in this country who never had nannies would quite have liked
:22:40. > :22:47.the nanny! That is a different matter. Will it happen? It will not
:22:48. > :22:50.happen. It will not happen, because the business rules. I think the
:22:51. > :22:55.public health argument is so overwhelming that in ten years... It
:22:56. > :23:02.may take a while. I think in ten years... Argument has been made for
:23:03. > :23:06.a tenuous. The Scandinavian countries have done it, we have
:23:07. > :23:15.never done it. I am sorry, I really am very cynical. In Mexico, where we
:23:16. > :23:22.talk about the poor, the poor feeding Coca-Cola to their babies in
:23:23. > :23:27.feeding bottles. If the poor are not doing that then it is only good for
:23:28. > :23:31.them in the end. I do think that we have to look at influence. At the
:23:32. > :23:36.Conservative Party Conference it did feel like the biggest business in
:23:37. > :23:41.the world. Honestly. It has taken 50 years to get where we are with
:23:42. > :23:46.cigarettes. Absolutely. They are acceptable but you have to smoke
:23:47. > :23:51.them outside, it sector. These public health campaigns take a very
:23:52. > :23:59.long time. Yes, and what really worked in the smoking campaign is
:24:00. > :24:13.not putting on more tax, it is banning smoking in public places...
:24:14. > :24:17.Advocates also say that Andy all -- anti-alcohol campaigns, changing the
:24:18. > :24:23.price, it does affect behaviour, so they say. We have tax on petrol,
:24:24. > :24:31.cigarettes... How many more taxes can you introduce and do you want to
:24:32. > :24:36.combat this epidemic with other programmes as well? Obesity has a
:24:37. > :24:43.lot to do with exercise. It is not just sugar intake. I do not think
:24:44. > :24:47.Public Health England's recommendations are exclusively tax.
:24:48. > :24:51.They have a proposals, including advertising aimed at children.
:24:52. > :25:02.Counselling the Great British the cough! -- Bake Off! They are so
:25:03. > :25:08.scared of this report coming out because the argument is so strong.
:25:09. > :25:16.It will remain on the public agenda as long as baby city crisis keeps up
:25:17. > :25:22.-- obesity crisis. We are back next week at the same
:25:23. > :25:23.time. Thanks for watching.