27/05/2014 Newsnight


EU leaders consider the aftermath of the European elections, the latest on the kidnapped Nigerian girls and protecting the Awa community in Brazil. With Jeremy Paxman.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 27/05/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



The leaders of the European Union are meeting tonight in the aftermath


of an election which saw many of their citizens blow the institution


a resounding raspberry. But are they listening? Well, you would like to


think so, but there are signs tonight that plenty want to carry on


regardless. Popular capitalism is a crusade, a crusade to franchise the


many in the economic life of Britain. Oh yes? Does capitalism


have to be like this? Is there another way, way to find of creating


an inclusive capitalism? The boss of John Lewis believes so.


Got a million to invest? Why not buy Tracey Emin's bed? We will talk to


her about the nuttiness of the art market and whether she has got any


better at making the bed. And Justin Rowlatt joins the


Brazilian forces taking measures to try protecting indigenous peoples


from the predations of the modern world. The officers decide there is


only one thing for it. She is going to burn it down.


Oh dear, what do we do now? It would have been a delight to see the 28


elected leaders of the European Union and their associated


functionaries gathered beneath a banner like that tonight, when they


met for their free dinner in Brussel, to discuss what the


weekend's elections mean. David Cameron said they meant that people


felt the EU was "too big, too bossy, too interfering", which seems pretty


accurate. But these are the very people who made it big, bossy and


interfering, and what are they going to do about it now? Mark Urban is in


Brussels. Do you think the implications of the


vote have sunk in? Well, the thing is, different implications are


sinking in indifferent international members. For the UK and France it is


very clear what happened, there was an earthquake of right-wing US


scepticism. In Spain and Greece, it was clear what happened, it was a


left-wing rejection of authority that rocked the system, of


austerity, I beg your pardon. In countries like Italy and the


Netherlands, there was a far lesser turnout for Eurosceptic parties than


some of the incumbents had feared even a couple of months ago. Instead


of having an awkward squad in the European Parliament of up to 200


Eurosceptics, as someone suggesting that polls might, if they came true,


deliver, by this point would be considerably less. What's more, you


have this different national awkward squads, some on the far left, summer


fascist, who will find it hard to agree about anything. Instead of a


coherent Eurosceptic block, I think we are looking at a much harder


Parliament to manage, but one which some people think because of that


can still be managed. Is there really a sensible business as usual


there? I think because of that feeling, that perhaps even this can


be got through, there are extraordinary things going on here.


These are the things which normally happen after European election. You


get an election of a new chairman of commission, the civil service, the


real Eurocrats that people on the right in the UK like to excoriate.


That happens with a lot of close right in the UK like to excoriate.


door meetings. The person who ends up taking over


door meetings. The person who ends current favourite is a Luxembourg


politician, is not some who was elected on Sunday, it is someone who


is chosen in these backroom meetings and we are told that these can


expect to go on for several weeks, while the


expect to go on for several weeks, parliamentary caucuses haggle over


who should parliamentary caucuses haggle over


attempt to get some serious change between the relationship between


this country and Europe? He is trying to exert influence including


over the choice of who runs the European Commission next. He had his


loose alliance of parties including the Dutch, the Swedes and the Danes,


who were working with him to try and open up some of these areas and say


that member countries should be able to take more of their so-called


competencies or powers, if you like. We see for example, the Dutch, not


under the same pressure from Euro sceptics as they thought they might


be, in these elections, will they still be so keen on that? One thing


is the shore, Mr Cameron still still be so keen on that? One thing


the backing of the Swedish Prime Minister.


I think the situation in the United Kingdom is one of the most important


to attend two for the coming five-year period. For Sweden it is


of the utmost importance that Britain stays inside the European


Union and we also take into account the situation we


mandate for the incoming commission. Britain where we now formulate a


Now, in pushing that case, Mr Cameron, the


have to convince a disparate and disunited Europe


have to convince a disparate and when they will find it so


have to convince a disparate and gain consensus. That is the mountain


that David Cameron has declined. Thanks, Mark.


One thing the Eurosceptic voters do have in common is they do not seem


to like the EU as it is. What are the chances of reform? Chris Cook


reports. Where should the EU go next? The


weekend's European Parliament election results may be focusing


some minds. Eurosceptics did very well. Ministers now have


some minds. Eurosceptics did very big post-election decision. Who


should lead the Commission, the executive of the


EU? But what chance is there David Cameron getting his way, pushing


through his plans for reform and renegotiation? We need an approach


that recognises that Europe should concentrate on what matters, and


growth and jobs and not try to do so much. We need an approach that


recognises that much. We need an approach that


big, too much. We need an approach that


David Cameron is keen to block the favourite to be European Commission


President, this man, Jean-Claude Junker. But is because Britain --


David Cameron wants to be negotiate Britain's terms. On one hand David


Cameron wants to see a European union which does less, a slimmed


down European Union. On the other hand, you have shone Claude Junker,


the frontrunner for European Commission president who wants to


see more centralisation and more Brussels. Reform of any kind will be


tough. There is not a consensus of what Europe should be. An EU poll


from last year found that while more than 70% of people in Luxembourg,


Malta and Germany consider themselves to be EU citizens, the


equivalent number was only 40% in Greece and the UK. There is also


great variation in what people worry about. I think there are 28 kinds of


unhappiness and that is what these elections tell us. There are groups


of the unhappy. There is British and Danish unhappiness, North European


liberals outside the euro zone. There are the Germans who are


unhappy because they feel they have to pay for these profligate


southerners. And most of all, there are the debtor countries in the euro


zone who feel unhappy because of these austerity policies imposed on


them. That number is borne out by the polls. The number of citizens


who are pro EU has fallen. This has strengthened the case for reform in


the EU. They do not strengthen the case for Cameron's renegotiation.


Everyone now sees we have to inform the EU to make it deliver better,


deliver jobs, deliver more economic growth, meet these discontents,


across the whole European continent. Renegotiate not --


renegotiation on your hand, means delivering specific shopping list


for Britain for Cameron's backbenchers and UKIP voters. The


sooner we leave, the better. But more Eurosceptics in the European


Parliament might actually strengthen Cameron's hand. These elections


which have seen a record number of anti-EU parties will I think serve


as a wake-up call. If we do not go for reform, eventually, voters might


throw the baby out with the bath water and go for the anti-EU


parties. If it is not Cameron, it is the pen and that is a strong


argument. Keep an eye out on who the new European Commission president


is. It is a first hint about whether the EU is going to he'd David


Cameron's call for reform. Joining me now is Sir Malcolm


Rifkind, the former Foreign Secretary and from Brussels Ska


Keller, the leader of the Greens in the European Parliament and


candidate for European Commission president.


Let me start with you, Sir Malcolm. Do you think these elections


strengthen or weaken David Cameron's negotiations issue? In the


short term it is quite a blow to have Nigel Farage do so well. But


the more I think about it, in a curious way, it may make his job


easier. The single most important thing I have heard in the last 24


hours has been for President Hollande of France. His reaction was


the European Union will have to withdraw from certain things it


needn't be doing in the first place. Today, he repeated that. If he is


serious, if France now believes that has to be less involvement in the


European Union in matters which are not crucial, that are done uniformly


throughout Europe, that a huge ally for the United Kingdom. We know that


Angela Merkel is very anxious that the United Kingdom should be


accommodated in some way. I do not want to overdo it but that has to be


a serious possibility that for different reasons, the three major


countries recognise the need for some change. It is a problem because


we do not know what David Cameron is after. It would be quite foolish for


him to spell that out at the moment. The negotiation cannot begin and be


completed by our general election. You cannot start a negotiation when


the people you are negotiating with no it is not certain you will even


be in government a year from now. There is nothing to stop you doing


that. This is an international negotiation. It is not an internal


British matter. If you were to succeed, neither Britain nor any


other country will reveal its bottom line prematurely. That is not the


way you conduct an international mugger station. I am not asking you


to tell us, but do you know what he is likely to try? I can guess. The


crucial point is what my Conservative colleagues have to


recognise, or indeed anyone who supports a renegotiation, is any


negotiation at the end of the day involves compromise. The most


successful negotiation does not mean one side gets 100% and everyone else


gets nothing. The key will be to identify things that make a real


difference to the United Kingdom, like getting rid of the working time


directive, protecting London as a European financial centre, and a


range of issues of that kind which will benefit the United Kingdom


without other countries that have to agree to that having to explain to


their electors why some real harm has been done to their interests. It


can be done but it requires deft diplomatic skills.


Cigar Keller, these election results are pretty wholesale repudiation of


your idea of your -- we have had a great success. When


you look at the Tories, they have not had a great success. Cameron is


not at all clear of what he means with reform. You cannot say reform


this, reform that. You have to be clear what should be reformed in


which way because these elections, like all elections, you have to pick


your cards on the top of the table. Top of the pile in the UK's UKIP and


in France it is Front National. We've seen Euro-sceptic countries


also in the Netherlands. Euro-sceptic parties are not the


only ones who've been winning in some countries, even though


unfortunately not everybody seems to have noticed that there is a broad


array and rage of parties. We've seen very different election


results. The Greens have been doing very well. That's for a reason. We


are obviously advocating for reform but we say what sort of reform we


want, what sort of Europe we want, what jobs we are aiming for, where


to put more investments in green energy, things that have benefitted


the UK and would benefit the UK even more if it were to be done. We are


not just coming empty slogans. But isn't it the case that in these


circumstances it would be a brave man or woman who would say the


chances of a renegotiation of the relationship between member states


are higher now? Isn't it much more likely that the European Union will


say what we have we hold and we'll stay where we are for now, thank you


very much? We have a European Parliament with different political


parties. They have had all their chances in the campaign to say which


Europe they want and to campaign for their ideas. I do think we still


have plurality in this Parliament, that's good, but if you want to say


you want to renegotiate a contract you have to say which direction it


should go and make that clear. We can only negotiate if it is clear


what each side wants. Sir Malcolm Rifkind, you are going to need to


give people in this country, in order to head off what's clearly a


big upswell of opinion, a pretty clear idea of the direction of


travel at least. Absolutely right. The fundamental objective, and it is


not just the United Kingdom but Sweden, Denmark, the Dutch have


themselves said the days of ever closer union are behind us. It looks


as though it may be France as well. We are talking of a sizeable bloc,


including two of the three largest countries in the European Union


talking the language of reform. That means a crucial necessity of showing


that the European Union is only about doing the things jointly which


have to be done jointly. Each member state is a democratic country. There


is no need for the kind of interference in a whole range of


social policy, employment policy, economic policy that can better be


done by national Governments directly answerable to their own


electorate. Sir Malcolm Rifkind and Ska Keller, thank you both.


Has there ever been a time when capitalism hasn't been said by


someone or other to be in crisis? But now it's not just Marxists


predicting its inevitable collapse, but ardent capitalists themselves


worrying about whether there might be some other way of running the


thing. Today, a constellation of big-heads - Bill Clinton, Christine


Largarde of the IMF, even Prince Charles - wrung their hands and gave


us the benefit of their ideas on something called inclusive


capitalism, which they hope may be a way of arresting what seems to be a


constantly widening gap between rich and poor. The Governor of the Bank


of England was there too, warning tonight of the dangers of what he


called "unchecked market fundamentalism". Here's Katie


Razzall. Has capitalism ever been less


popular, as discontent spreads, financial crisis and a rise in


inequality have been grist financial crisis and a rise in


mill for those who argue that the free market as we know it has had


its day. This kind of social unrest in part


explains the inclusive capitalism conference in London today. Bill


Clinton, Prince Charles, the Bank of England Governor and the head of the


IMF all talking about why capitalism needs to be renewed. Their audience


- investors who hold a third of the world's assets, $30 trillion worth.


The numbers are striking. If you take the 85 wealthiest people in the


world, they can all fit in a double-decker bus, right? They have


more amongst themselves than half the population of the world. The


poorest half of course. But that's 3. 5 billion people. Not that those


85 people would ever likely travel by double-decker bus, but in the


City of London today capitalism was under scrutiny by the capitalists.


People have fought for years to define it for their political ends.


On paper, this definition of an economic system which uses wealth to


produce goods sounds fairly anodyne, but when trust is lost, it is a


wake-up call, as the conference heard today. Bank bail-outs,


unemployment and recession have all contributed to a sense of them and


us. British politicians have tried to tap in to the popular belief that


capitalism needs rewiring. I call for a new popular capitalism. Are


you on the side of the wealth creators or the estate strippers?


The producers or the predators? Not everyone accepts premise of today's


conference - that capitalism needs some work. You create the sense that


where the wealth have gone wrong recently it is something to do with


the economic system. I don't believe capitalism has broken down. I think


these things are driven by some of the events of the financial crisis


and what's happened since. By and large those can be characterised of


failures of regulation not market processes. But making capitalism


more inclusive was the agenda, taking in as opposed to excluding or


leaving out. I was only too pleased to go over and arrange for him to


open his first account. The world's moved on since the days of the


trusty bank manager who knew your name. But the excesses of the


banking industry were under fire today. Reforms have been too slow,


said Christine Lagarde, in part because the sector has fought them.


Within the last few hours Mark Carney gave his critique of


capitalism. After he said his number one priority is addressing the issue


of banks that are too big to fail. Six years after Lehman Brothers we


are still talking about it. It is not that it is low on the priority


list. It is that at the top of the priority list and authorities are


truly working to ensure, as much as possible, that that has happened. So


why are the bank Governor and some of the world's biggests so


interested in inclusive capitalism? Perhaps because they know that


inequality can lead to instability, anathema to capitalism. And the last


thing they want is another banking crash.


Joining me now are Sir Charlie Mayfield, chairman of the John Lewis


Partnership, and Zanny Minton Beddoes, economics editor of The


Economist. Is this way of conducting capital inch, do you think,


sustainable? Which way of capitalism? The non-inclusive? I


think by definition not. I don't think it's in crisis. There wasn't a


sense of immediate crisis at this gathering today, a huge gathering of


some $30 trillion... There were loads of wealthy people there. There


were. I think a powerful one is that it is no long they are the rising


tide is raising all boats. The rise in inequality means that people at


the top are doing incredibly well and lots of people further down are


not. To the the traditional idea that when an economy grew and there


was growth, that no longer is so much the case. But capitalism,


hasn't it Sir Charlie Mayfield, always depended on inequality? So


there was a recognition today that capital capitalism doesn't mean


equality. That some inequality is inevitable. And indeed necessary.


But there can also be a point you reach when it is excessive and the


point that was made repeatedly today is a lot of people are feeling that


it has got no a stage where income and equality has reached levels that


are concerning. I do think that's a worry. Another feature is that


technology is changing the way the job market is working. On the one


hand there are some people doing very well as a result of technology.


They are able to do a lot more than before and be paid more for it. But


there are middle order jobs that used to be good paying jobs which


have been replaced by technology. The risk is we are seeing a


workplace that's changing shape. People talk about the hollowing out


of the workplace. Those two things together I think create a situation


which is worrying. And needs to be addressed. And they are related. One


of the reasons that the inequality is widening is because of the change


in technology, which is rewarding people with the skills to useta


technology. The mid-skilled level jobs are being automated away. I


think the challenge is, how do you equip people with the skills that


they need to rots per in this fast-changing environment? That's


where Sir Charlie is doing lots of interesting stuff. Do you think


about education, do you think about training? Can waffle about


inclusiveness but there are concrete issues to be addressed. There is a


lot of waffle. What would inclusive capitalism look like in a way that


we can recognise as different. My definition is that the rising tide,


that prosperity raises all boats. It doesn't mean absolutely equality,


you need some inequality, but workers gaining as well as


shareholders, and everyone is improving somewhat. What is the John


Lewis mod Snell That's different to a lot of other businesses in a sense


that we are owner by people in the business. So you don't have


shareholders? We have shareholders but they work in the business.


90,000 people in the business own the company. The interesting thing


about the partnership is it was founded less than 100 years ago, but


as a response to perceived inequality of capitalism.


Essentially it was saying let's have labour employing capital rather than


the other way around. But that isn't a model you can apply everywhere is


it? No, I do think there is an opportunity for employee ownership,


and perhaps more than that for different forms of ownership to play


a bigger part in our economy. We've become very focused on the PLC,


which will always be I'm sure the predominant form, but not the only


one. The way it has worked in most market economies like ours in the


past has been that business does what it does, and Government does


what it can to aten wait some of the consequences of these disparities.


And there was a long term view that business is business and government


is government. To a degree that's right. A lot of what's going on now


is thinking about what should government be doing differently? It


is not government be doing differently? It


government is better, far from it. And what should business be doing


differently? This advir tore, if you wanted a concrete definition of


inclusive capitalism, he called it CEO, the conduct of business,


education and training and ownership. I think education and


training is central. We've got this unbelievably faction-changing world.


It is changing as dramatically as it was in the first Industrial


Revolution. And yet we have no radical change do our education


system. We haven't radically rethought training. We have a


generation of skills that they need to succeed. What would you like


Government to do? First of all, we should acknowledge from today is


that was business people coming together. There were no serving


politician there is at all. That's a recognition by business people that


business needs to play a bigger part. What I would like to see from


Government is on the one hand in principle the Government can play a


bigger role of acting as convenor. There are ways it can engage with


business people and others to solve these big challenges. An example of


that would be education. You've seen over the last ten or 15 years most


successful businesses have completely re-engineered the way


they operate. You are seeing now that working lifetimes are going to


be at least 20% longer and the innovation cycle is turn turning


longer than than before. And yet we still take the view that education


takes place between 5 and 21. I want a greater Porosity between the world


of business and education. There are lots of opportunities for that to


happen at lots of different levels. Thank you both very much indeed.


The hundreds of girls kidnapped in Nigeria are no closer to rescue


tonight. The Nigerian Army claimed this morning it knew where they are,


and just wasn't recovering them because of the risk a liberation


mission would pose to them. But tonight the BBC has discovered this


may be a long way from the truth. Boko Haram, the organisation which


wants to impose a medieval Islamic caliphate in Nigeria and which


seized them, meanwhile continues its murderous campaign, with more


attacks today. A body count by the Reuters news agency reckons that


almost 500 people have been killed since the girls were abducted. The


BBC's security correspondent, Frank Gardner, is here. Do they have any


idea where these girls are? Only very roughly, Jeremy. Everybody I've


spoken to says they don't have the precise location. Let's look at the


map. There's Nigeria, there's Abuja the capital, the girls were taken


from Chibok in the north-east corner. They've been taken it is


believed to the north of there to a forest. That's an area twice the


size of Rwanda, 16 times size of London. So saying they know where


the girls are is a bit of a moveable fierce. They've been sending drones


over, satellite planes and spy planes. The girls have been split up


into groups. Some are being held under ground in caves. A hostage


rescue would be suicidal and result in a blood bath, which is why the


Nigerian military is saying, rightly, that's not on the cards for


now. Have there been any attempts that negotiations? You have the


president, Goodluck Jonathan saying we are not going to accede to their


demands, but we have heard they came very close to deal which got


scuppered at the last minute that they were going to release 50 of the


girls which is a start, in exchange for 100 Boko Haram amp is in is.


That got scuppered. We learnt tonight there was a DVD that proves


the girls are live. If that is true and there is no way of corroborating


it, that is extremely important. The fundamental principles of kidnap and


ransom negotiations are, you establish proof of life, are the


girls alive and well, and proof of ownership. Are the people you are


talking to the people holding them? If you have got that, you have the


basis of negotiation. That is the only way the girls will get out of


there alive. Thank you. And so to bed.


Few artworks have divided opinion as drastically as Tracey Emin's My


Bed, made or rather un-made 16 years ago in her Waterloo council flat. Of


course, it is just a bed and a grubby one at that. But it also


expresses a state of mind and expresses the life of Warman who has


made her personal history the stuff of her art. It is a period piece,


one of the most celebrated examples of a time when the and font terrible


of the Young British artists could scandalised by ideas. Charles


Saatchi, who made so much of the art scene, is willing to part with it if


you should happen to have a few hundred thousand pounds burning a


hole in your pocket. Tracey Emin is here now. It was a good few years


ago you made that bed or produced that piece. 16 years ago, a long


time. What does it mean to you now? This morning I was installing it.


What is shocking is everything from the bed is kept in little tiny


plastic bags and it is all out on a chess table and it is like a frenzy


lab. As I am opening everything it is half like a crime scene and half


like a diary. Nearly everything I am touching is 1 million miles away


from me now. It is like a time capsule of my life really. I found


it a really sad thing to see that bed. It was a bed occupied by


someone, and I think you were unhappy at the time, when two? I was


very unhappy but also, that period of my life, was highs and lows. So


when you see the bed, how odd that it is preserved, such a mess is


preserved so precisely. It is funny. As an artist, when you're young and


unknown, there is no way you ever thinking your heart that it will


stay around forever or for a long time. And especially something like


the bed which is so serial, it is throwaway things, things which


should still not be existing. When I first the bed in Japan, this is


something most people don't know, the Japanese customs people would


not allow it in to Tokyo or the airport. We had to prove that I was


an artist, that I was alive, that was the other thing. They wanted to


know if I was still alive. I think it was Nixon wrote at the Tate and


the British Council had to send letters saying I was a living artist


in Britain -- Nick Sirota. Why did they not wanted in? I did not have


time for transport and I had all of the stuff around the bed inside the


suitcases. All the old condom 's and fag ends? Yes, all in bags but


inside the suitcases so they were going to destroy the suitcases. Of


course it was a great call celebre, and various people got very hot


under the collar screaming this is not art. What did you think when you


heard that? I just screamed louder and said, yes it is, it is my art.


With being an artist, if you have true conviction about what you're


doing and you are doing it for the right reasons, no one can take that


away from you. I proved that with the bed, just the testimony of time,


the fact that it is still here, it has become more iconic, it is more


seminal, it has more presents now than it did then. Then people


thought I was a silly young thing doing a shocking piece of art. When


you actually see it now, like this morning, I'm not saying you saw my


bed this morning or anything like that, or anyone else for that


matter! But the bed, it looks very sweet and almost harmless in a way.


Now it is definitely middle-aged. It is middle-aged and it needs to be


somewhere where it is preserved. Does it remind you of a part of your


life which is very distant. Guess, you can say that again. When I was


going through that different thing, there are condoms, contraceptive


pills, cigarettes, vodka, tiny underwear, all of those things which


are to do with being a girl and coming through some kind of


transition, going through something, some cathartic state. I


do not live like that any more. Now you wear enormous knickers expat


this bed is now worth a fortune. Isn't that odd? Some people think it


is probably a joke that it is worth that much and some people probably


think it is worth more. It depends what our perception of art is, what


is important, what our values are. The bed I think is iconic, it is


seminal and it did make a splash in art history. I do not know how long


for but at the moment it is still there. How much did Charles Saatchi


by four? 150,000. Now it is being talked about as going for a million.


You will not see any of that increase presumably? No. What you


feel? I am quite philosophical about my work being sold on. Charles has


looked after it. I know he adored it. If he does sell it, all of that


money will be used to buy more art and create an educational programme


and I think that is a useful thing. I think that is really positive. I


have always had the attitude that if someone buys my art, they might


literally only to resell it, but I will always own the idea and the


essence of it and it truly is mine. No one can ever take that away from


me. That is why I am on the programme tonight talking to you and


talking about my bed. Tracey Emin, thank you very much. Thank you.


talking about my bed. Tracey Emin, The World Cup begins in just over a


fortnight, much to The World Cup begins in just over a


various parts of the population of Brazil, who think grotesque amounts


have been spent on the preparations. The government sees the competition


as a way to celebrate its great economic growth. The flip side of


all of that, is all the stories of destruction in the Amazon rainforest


and the obliteration of the ways of life of indigenous people living


there. As Justin Rowlatt has discovered, this is a problem the


government knows it needs to be seen to be tackling.


government knows it needs to be seen We are flying over the edge of the


Amazon. We are flying over the edge of the


spotted an illegal sawmill. The team is led by Officer


Gonsalves. This raid is part of huge operation including the Brazilian


army, air force and military police. It is a first in the history of


Brazil. It is called operation Awa and stopping illegal logging is part


of it. The key objective is to save an entire tribe, the Awa. The agents


find some incriminating evidence, the account books. Look at this.


They have got the total value, 4700 Riaus and there is a fee here, 202


pay the police. This year, Brazil is hosting the World Cup. In 2016, it


will stage the Olympics. These events have helped drive a building


boom creating a massive demand for timber. They have made the forest


reserves of the indigenous people like the Awa, even more attractive


to loggers. The offices decided there is only one thing for it.


An officer from Brazil's indigenous peoples Department is taking me into


the Awa's reserve. The Awa live in the last islands of


forest left in this region. They may be near to the edge of the jungle


but they are one of the most isolated communities on earth. Many


Awa grew up without any outside contact -- contact with the outside


world. Many small groups still live completely separately. He says they


are in an area now where they know there are uncontacted people. There


may be 40 or 50 people here. There is a spider web of tracks in the


forest. They know the loggers are here as well. The loggers are


rapidly destroying the remaining forest, putting the 350 or so Awa in


such peril that they have been described as the most endangered


tribe on the planet. I first met the tribe four years ago. Last time I


was here, they took me on a hunt. I am not going to dress like that!


They are one of the few hunter gatherer tribes left in the Amazon.


With so much of the forest gone, the hunt leader wanted to show me how


hard it is to find food. I am back to find out how the Awa


are getting on. It is amazing to come back. I never thought I would,


actually. Hello, I remember you. Do you remember me? We came here


before. For years and, if anything, the Awa's plight has only deepened.


They tell me these days you can sometimes hear loggers chainsaws


from the village. Many of the adults here grew up in uncontacted


communities. They say they have been fleeing the loggers ever since they


were children and with good reason. This man says loggers have been


known to kill indigenous people when they encounter them in the forest.


Not only do loggers destroy habitats, they open up the forest


with tracks bringing in settlers who clear the land. That is why this


operation has to be on such a large scale.


They have to evict the 400 farming families who illegally occupy the


Awa's land. All of these people will be moved out of the town and they


have come here to ask how their preparations are going, whether they


need help with transport, and the idea is these guys will be given


another plot of land somewhere else in Brazil where they can farm. Some


families have been here for 18 years. Naturally, they are sad to




EU leaders consider the aftermath of the European elections, the latest on the kidnapped Nigerian girls, Tracey Emin's bed goes up for auction, protecting the Awa community in Brazil and is capitalism in crisis? With Jeremy Paxman.

Download Subtitles