02/01/2016 Dateline London

keeps coming across the north-east of England at eastern Scotland.

Happy New Year, and welcome to Dateline London's

lookahead to 2016 - the year of the US presidential

elections, almost certainly of a European Union referendum

in Britain, extremes of weather, the threat and reality of terrorism,

plus difficult arguments over immigration and what to do

about the problems of the Middle East.

Our top team of predictors and prognosticators are: Marc Roche

Mina al Oraibi, who is a writer and commentator.

And Stephanie Baker of Bloombergy Markets.

Let us begin with the US presidential elections. Is this

Hillary Clinton's collection to lose? It ends on who her opponent

is, that is the difficult debate. Everyone has expected Donald Trump

to blow up and he has not, his latest outrageous statement will

cause voters to turn on him. I do not think that will happen, he

cannot see anything more outrageous than he already has. We have to look

at how the prerace play out. In Iowa, the first

ahead. He is financially speaking, the best placed of the other

contenders. The feeling is that he could perhaps win a string of

southern states, super Tuesday, March the 1st, that could give him

momentum and Donald Trump could slowly die and feed as people focus

on, do we really want him as our candidate? Can he really beat

Hillary Clinton? Because the polls are showing that he would lose

against Hillary Clinton. The candidate, if they really want to

win, is Marco Rubio. The man with the aspirational story. If that were

Marco Rubio, he could really damage Hillary Clinton by saying, this is

my story, very American story, when the immigrant, let you know full,

and say, isn't there a sense of entitlement about you? He would

certainly be the one to play against Hillary Clinton's legacy, the

insider stuff, the sleaze and things that Donald Trump and others have

tried to stick on Hillary Clinton. It has been seen that Trump has been

able to get traction with voters. Marco Rubio needs to be put in that

sort of template, he is much more of a centrist in a very skewed

political system in the US at the moment. As outsiders, we can see

Marco Rubio and Hillary Clinton. We almost think that Hillary Clinton

and Jed Bish and more centrist. -- Jeb Bush. Donald Trump has said that

he would not be a third-party candidate. But he could say, I will

run anyway. I do not think so. If he does badly in the first round of

primaries, he will pull out. He is a complete fraud. He does not even

have a campaign headquarters, it is apparently empty. It is apparently

like a tax dodge company. He has a Twitter feed! He has this

sensational media coverage because he is a reality TV star. He does not

understand the policies of the party that he has chosen as a vehicle for

his ambitions. Some of his policies are to the left of Obama, on health

care, for example. If the Republicans have their head screwed

on, it will be Marco Rubio. He looks like tomorrow, not yesterday. The

thing about Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton running against each other

is that it looks like two dynasties from yesterday, which would be

depressing for the electorate. Marco Rubio could be the President Obama

of the Republican party. He had this wonderful speech about, my father

was a bartender and my mother was made and now I am running for

president. It brings tears to your eyes. He looks like the face of a

new generation, and he is Hispanic, which is good for the Republicans

who tend to badly. Calling him centrist would probably do damage to

him in Republican eyes. It is not so much a question of centrist as

looking like today rather than yesterday. That will be tremendously

important. Hillary Clinton could be made to look like an antique by

Marco Rubio. I agree with what you said. But he is against abortion,

gay marriage. He is Catholic and that could play against him in

California and New York. It could play very well with the Republican

electorate. With the grassroots. The Hispanic population as the boat, the

Cubans and Mexicans are very different. The Mexicans do not like

the Cubans because the Cubans feel a bit superior, and they could very

well stay Democrat. Who's going to win? People are not talking about

the fact that Donald Trump has struck a cord with an electorate. He

has struck a chord, his pulling numbers are incredibly high

nationally. He has struck a chord because of the state of the US

economy, the shrinking middle class, the blue-collar workers who feel

left paint as the result of these growing inequalities between rich

and poor. But how does he connect with the lower-middle-class, the

blue-collar worker? It is interesting that in passing, until

very recently, was also doing very well. The unifying threat is that

they are dictators to the Washington system. Unpolished. He throws this

stuff out there. How much is about his policies? You can say brash,

ugly things and people say, yes, I want people to see that, it is

normalising it. It is antiestablishment. You have the same

politicians in Europe. The same problem, the same blue-collar

worker. But the idea of an American politician to rescue us from

politics as usual has been going back decades, they tend not to win.

That is right. He particularly is so ugly and unpleasant. He bears a

striking physical resemblance to Mistley me and some food grass! Do

something about that which will be repellent enough -- Mussolini. The

European referendum, will it take place this year and do you think it

is a sham? Yes, to both questions. It is intended to be a sham. Whether

or not it will actually come off as a sham depends to some extent on the

media criticism and the media analysis of what Cameron is trying

to do. The diplomatic game that is being played where, on the one hand,

we are Angela Merkel and Francois Hollande seem to be offering

concessions and making that call diplomatic overtures to him is

immediately blown out of the water by them saying precisely the

opposite when you ask a specific question, for example that it is not

acceptable for us to discriminate against EU incoming workers and the

resident population. The next day they say, a four-year delay in the

right to collect automatic benefits would not be acceptable but the

three your delay would be. What? Either it is an acceptable to

discriminate or it is not. It is becoming nonsense. How we're going

to make head or tail of what has been asked in this referendum is the

real question. Who was at that said, if you'd like my principles I can

get some new ones? The voice of Britain beside me, come weakly

ungrateful. European partners willing to help Britain, they feel

strongly about the freedom. Personally I think, it should be the

rule, it is that you belong to the EU. Back yes. And think that the

referendum will take place. I think that Britain will stay in the EU not

by emotion but by reason, because of jobs, economy, because the

anti-Europeans are divided between nasty Ukip and also some part of the

more conventional right-wing conservatives. Also Europe want

Britain to stay in. We are stronger with Britain. This being said, if

Richard Lees the EU -- if Britain leaves the EU, you can continue to

prosper but it will become a dwarf among nations. No, a dwarf among

nations. That is going to be the argument. Welcome to Dateline London

for the next few years! He resist the thought, which is that supposing

Mr Cameron wins the referendum but when is it 55-45, and never-ending?

Will it on and on? It is looking a bit like the Scottish referendum,

which you thought would pick the issue to bed but it continues to

fester and sports continue. What the Shan is -- sham is is that this

issue of benefits would make a difference, but it will not. The

minimum wage will be hiked here, that will be as much of a draw.

Ultimately, the number of people who will be voting in the EU referendum

based on what deal Cameron comes back with is relatively small and

people will vote with gut instincts. May be about immigration, or my job?

They will be mobilised. It will depend on how the campaign is played

out, but most people will be voting on gut. I read British and European

or JVC ex-dash-mac or do we see ourselves as a Welsh and British

English and British and that is it. I do not think there are that many

voters looking at three or four years and what it means for

benefits, it is more of an image of what it means to be European. Janet,

you would not agree with where he is coming down on this, but they

believe that William Hague had only good nerve, which says that the

future of the United Kingdom is at stake here because Scotland would

leave if there is a no fault? Ally William is a friend of mine but I do

not think that that is a sound argument. For one thing, it should

not be the deciding factor. The break-up of the United Kingdom does

not depend on way or another on the break-up of the EU. Scotland thinks

that it could pick in separate application for membership, which

would take years to go through and that that would cause a break-up,

that is far-fetched. It would speed up... We will work on them, open the

doors... But do you think Scotland will be economically viable? Will

they bend the rules like they bent them for Italy? We will help them to

be viable! The British give them help anyway. Exactly. The other

issue is polling. The polls seem to say that most people will vote to

stay in the EU, but again it is also fascinating how this polling is

being done. It goes back to the argument about younger people.

Younger people will want to stay, people taking part in these debates

online seem to be overwhelmingly pro-Europe, unlike those on

landline... The older voters, you have to give them a disproportionate

voice in the polling if you are to get an accurate result. Jeremy

Corbyn in 2016, a big test for him. Some of the papers are saying he has

got to get 35% for Labour in the May elections otherwise he will be in

trouble. Do you buy any of that audience think he will be the leader

of the Labour Party until he decides he does not want to be, or 2020? I

think he is here to stay. He has such a control over the party

machine that I do not think... Unless they can figure out a way to

exclude him from a new nomination contest... He would not get enough

support from Parliamentary Labour MPs at this point, but they cannot

exclude him. There is this legal no man's land. I think that he is here

to stay. The more interesting question is what happens to the

Conservative Party leadership as the result of the EU referendum. But as

Boris Johnson come down on this because he is still straddling the

fence. Theresa May and some of the other big hitters. What does that do

the George Osborne's prospect of taking over the Conservative Party?

That is the interesting space to watch. I agree that he will stay

because he has been elected. Labour in general is much nicer and kinder

to the leaders. A lot of this is going to be affected by his

vindictive cabinet reshuffle, which apparently is due in the next few

weeks. If he really does what he is rumoured to be doing, and sax Hilary

Benn, his father was the tenet figure for the Labour left, if he

pushes out and he notes and insults three or four of the major figures

who on the serial vote, that is bad news for him. Let us move on to the

Middle East. This weekend, for instance, we have had a concrete

example of the rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran over the execution

of a highly regarded cleric in Iran. The rivalry is bear. It predates

2016 for sure. Some people talk about the Cold War. In some cases,

the Middle East is a hot war now. People see it as Saudi Arabia and

Iran, but the ramp so many more nuances and local fights. Some

people are on the ground trying to get quick wins and manipulate the

divisions between Saudi Arabia and Iran, but also between Turkey and

Iran, the sectarian lines. But there are local warlords who are making a

lot of money and are invested in the battles going on in Iraq, Syria,

Lebanon, and so on. We will see more of these battle ground is being

exacerbated by the politics, is also not being controlled so directly as

people see in -- as people assume. The local dynamics taking place are

significant and should not be overlooked. This year, Isis, it is

on everyone's mind. They are seen as an enemy for all of these players.

However, who is actually helping behind-the-scenes to push out Isis,

thinking that they can use them. That card has gone out of control.

In Iraq, we see the battle for power politically. The Iraqi army are

being put at the front, not a militia force supported from Iran.

That was significant. The Iraqi prime minister has said that they

will end Isis's presence in Iraq by 2016. That is a very big commitment.

They have made commitments in the past that they cannot keep up with.

Syria, political talks are starting in January. These will be

significant. We have a political process when it comes to Yemen. Will

any of these processes bring results that are political rather than

military? The bloodshed could go on for the next ten years. If everybody

connected with Isis were to disappear, to be jailed or bombed or

whatever. If Islamic State was never mentioned ever again, they would

still be people, al-Qaeda and Boko Haram and other organisations who

have the same basic ideas. Can they be isolated? Is it geographical

entity? They are keen to establish a separate caliphate. At the hidden

dynamic for the West particularly as the fact that the Saudis are being

very helpful to the West by pumping out oil and keeping the oil price

low, but from a global and political point of view, Russia's economy will

collapse if the oil price keeps falling. It is going through the

floor. That has very serious consequences. That means Russia can

be put back in its box, and that is something Europe and America will

see is a great advantage. However misjudged the Saudis's actions may

be, it is very important to the West. Undermining the price of oil

also damages I saw. I think the main issue will come back in 2016,

Israel-Palestinian conflict, which has been put on the back burner with

Syria and Iraq. I share your view about this one. It is there and it

is completely block. There is no solution is here in this sort of

desperation on the one side and colonies Asian on the other side, it

is creating a powder keg. You'll map it is largely irrelevant to this

sunny-Shia -- Sunni-Shia conflict. There is one year left of the Obama

presidency. Some believe that that will be as it has in the past. Back

to the oil price, in order to get some sort of stability, peace, end

to the conflict in Syria, you need a stable Saudi Arabia. Oil at $35 per

barrel is not helping stability in Saudi Arabia. But all of these

powers on to realign the power struggle based on the price of oil.

It is not set up for oil at 35. There are a series of payments to

keep peace domestically. Why are they doing this? Why are they not

rationing oil? They want to kill off she'll oil production in the US. --

shale oil in the US. They are very aware of the impact to the sapping

the Miss -- having domestically. They believe that they can manage it

for the next 12 months, I do not think we will see it at $35 for the

long-term. Some predictions. In 2050 we did not smile a lot. 2016, the

euro, -- euros, Belgium is the favourite, which is nice. Terrorism

will become part of life, because the thing about Paris, they were off

the radar, these people. The loan will from now is the main threat --

lone wolf. It is important that the stupid French

plan is to continue to enjoy... This has been a year of insanity. Jeremy

Corbyn has become the leader of the Labour Party, Donald Trump is a

Republican contender. All bets are off. I have a warning. It is in line

with what has just been said. There is an idea that we will be taken

over by an illiberal paranoia. That is a terrifying prospect for the

West. For 2015, if you had said that three of the greatest cities in the

United Kingdom, Manchester, Leeds and Europe, would all be flooded,

people would think you are mad. That is one of the big stories, what we

do about flooding and environmental issues. Yes, we started looking

about what would happen in Paris and there was this agreement on the 2

degrees. Climate change is here. We are longer talking about the future,

it is about mitigating and what the future steps can be. We have seen

the crazy snowstorms in the middle East, where you have refugees,

another issue that is going to continue. The ski resorts in the

Alps have been rather dry. Whereas in Lebanon, they are snowed under.

The refugee camps cannot sustain that any more in both Jordan and

Lebanon and beyond. In Turkey there has been a snowstorm. There has been

a mass movement of people because of very difficult conditions. The

Middle East, Africa, Africa is under Licht. -- overlooked. The real

challenge is making sure that liberal values can stand strong in

the face of terrorists, because that is when the win. When they really

were in is when those values actually -- when they really win is

when those values actually and remained. We could see the Euro

crisis rewritten ugly head again. Greece is being asked to do the near

impossible. We will see what: stability in Spain, that could hold

Spain off track of economic reforms. Economic league, you could see an

emerging market debt crisis caused by the sort of pincer action of

slowing growth in China, increased interest rates in the US affecting

them. I am going to put my money on Hillary Clinton. I think she has

raised $100 million, I will put my money on her. Unless Marco Rubio

wins the Republican nomination. You think it is Marco Rubio? If the

eurozone imports, the referendum question will become an irrelevance.

It will not! It will do well, the usual, because it is going up.

Pakistan and India relations restored, that is another story. We

will come back later in the year-end check is right. -- and check who is

right. That's it for Dateline London's

first edition of 2016. You can comment on the programme

on Twitter - @gavinesler. And we hope to see you at

the same time next week