:00:00. > :00:09.The European Referendum campaign - what kind of fight will it be?
:00:10. > :00:17.I'll have you checkmated in your next move.
:00:18. > :00:30.One side has to win it when the vote comes.
:00:31. > :00:32.We'll look at what kind of argument will clinch it,
:00:33. > :00:35.and whether the negotiation will make any difference.
:00:36. > :00:45.Rhodes holds his place in Oxford, but the argument goes on.
:00:46. > :00:49.Cecil Rhodes, more than any individual in
:00:50. > :00:52.Cecil Rhodes, more than any symbolises British imperial power
:00:53. > :00:54.and the racial apartheid and racial violence that came with it in South
:00:55. > :00:54.Africa. We'll ask if it makes sense
:00:55. > :00:57.to fight over symbols. Celebrated novelist,
:00:58. > :01:04.but also - you might not know this, And I've got the
:01:05. > :01:15.bruises to prove it. Coming soon to a screen
:01:16. > :01:18.near you, an epic battle - But before we get to the main show,
:01:19. > :01:25.there's that other drama Now, scriptwriters all know that
:01:26. > :01:30.to make a gripping plot, And this morning, we were treated
:01:31. > :01:36.to a suggestion of the latest European offer on the vexed issue
:01:37. > :01:38.of migration and benefits. It didn't sound like much
:01:39. > :01:41.of an offer - an emergency benefits brake that other countries have
:01:42. > :01:43.to vote on. But who knows whether that's
:01:44. > :01:46.the real state of play, or just a ploy to give us all some
:01:47. > :01:49.jeopardy and make the final deal What we do know is that
:01:50. > :01:55.the Foreign Secretary, Philip Hammond, said last night,
:01:56. > :01:57.that if there's no significant deal on migration, Britain
:01:58. > :02:00.will vote to leave. So with everything hotting up,
:02:01. > :02:03.let's get out of the weeds of the current negotiations,
:02:04. > :02:05.and into the big questions about what kind of fight each camp
:02:06. > :02:09.is going to conduct. We'll start with Chris Cook,
:02:10. > :02:27.on referendum tactics and strategy. The EU referendum currently looks
:02:28. > :02:31.like it could be a very tight race. And so having consulted the BBC big
:02:32. > :02:36.book of heavy-handed metaphor, I have come to a racetrack. I am
:02:37. > :02:44.resigned to having to work quite hard for your attention on this
:02:45. > :02:47.topic. Now both campaigns actually reveal one thing. The average voter
:02:48. > :02:52.is not very interested by this question. They have not got prior
:02:53. > :02:56.conceptions in the way they do in normal elections, nor is it as
:02:57. > :03:01.energising as the Scottish referendum. There are loads to play
:03:02. > :03:11.for. Many voters have strong views on Europe, but most are just not
:03:12. > :03:13.watching the minutiae of the Prime Ministers campaigning. Headline
:03:14. > :03:20.polls are really less useful than usual. Campaigns are conducting
:03:21. > :03:24.exercises like one that better together did in the Scottish
:03:25. > :03:29.referendum. They have identified six groups. First, two sort of
:03:30. > :03:34.Unionists. Two sort of pro-independence voters they could
:03:35. > :03:37.write off. That left two sort of swing voters from their good fight.
:03:38. > :03:43.That helped them tailor their messages. Estimates vary between
:03:44. > :03:49.their being one fifth than one third of voters in play. What messages
:03:50. > :03:53.might expect to hear? The number one reason we're having this referendum
:03:54. > :03:56.is probably immigration. That means the strategic challenge for both
:03:57. > :04:02.campaigns revolves around immigration. If they remain they
:04:03. > :04:06.have to show they can understand the concerns of voters who have
:04:07. > :04:09.legitimate worries around immigration. But fur leave, they
:04:10. > :04:14.need to understand they pretty much have all of the votes of voters who
:04:15. > :04:25.are Eurosceptic and worried about immigration. That is why senior
:04:26. > :04:29.people who vote leave worry that... It is very striking by the way that
:04:30. > :04:36.the in campaign is focusing heavily on security. Today they campaigned
:04:37. > :04:41.on Europe-wide law enforcement. The campaign is just hotting up. View
:04:42. > :04:44.our being able to see some of these tried and tested techniques at the
:04:45. > :04:49.ready, whether it is the cost of staying, the cost of leaving,
:04:50. > :04:56.complexity, trying to paint the other side as to come to cater to
:04:57. > :05:01.get to grips with, and also fear. We are seeing some tried and tested
:05:02. > :05:06.techniques already emerging. Vote Leave see staying in as a 1970s
:05:07. > :05:13.choice. They say exit would allow Britain to seize opportunity. But
:05:14. > :05:16.sceptics on both sides have clocked that globalisation is the thing
:05:17. > :05:21.people do not like, and strength in numbers is an idea that resonates.
:05:22. > :05:27.Both sides expect the leave campaign will work hard to offer reassurance.
:05:28. > :05:31.Both sides also expect stay to concentrate on explaining what we
:05:32. > :05:34.get for our EU membership. Most people do not know. That fight will
:05:35. > :05:37.decide who ends in first place and who trails behind.
:05:38. > :05:41.Here with me - the MEP Dan Hannan, who is on the board of Vote Leave,
:05:42. > :05:43.one of the leave campaigns, and Lucy Thomas, Deputy Director
:05:44. > :06:00.Let's just start on the negotiation. Lucy, do you think it is going to
:06:01. > :06:06.make any difference? We're reporting on it every day and does not sound
:06:07. > :06:10.like anybody is engaging. Is that correct? Most people think the EU is
:06:11. > :06:16.not perfect, so absolutely right for the Prime Minister to push for
:06:17. > :06:20.reform and make it better. Like successive Prime Ministers have
:06:21. > :06:25.done. But fundamentally our case is about the benefits outweighing the
:06:26. > :06:27.costs right now. Whether that is on security, like the European Arrest
:06:28. > :06:33.Warrant, free trade, lower prices, those things. But fur people out
:06:34. > :06:40.there, they want to know what the benefits are and costs are to
:06:41. > :06:43.address the question. You're not going to make a very big deal of it,
:06:44. > :06:50.because you think we should be in, regardless? The benefits outweigh
:06:51. > :06:54.the costs. But I do think it is important to prove that as a member
:06:55. > :06:58.you can make it better. On the eurozone, that is about the
:06:59. > :07:01.long-term sustainability of being a member with the best of both worlds
:07:02. > :07:06.in with the benefits of free trade but not in the single currency. Dan,
:07:07. > :07:12.I know you do not think very much of the renegotiation. Do you think the
:07:13. > :07:16.voters will make much of it? No. I cannot imagine there are people
:07:17. > :07:21.watching thinking, I am really on the fence about this, but a partial
:07:22. > :07:26.moratorium on benefits claims for four years for migrants, that will
:07:27. > :07:30.swing it. These are fairly small-scale negotiations. Lucy knows
:07:31. > :07:36.it. There is one way in which I think it will impact the campaign.
:07:37. > :07:39.It is the smell of the thing. People will see a British Prime Minister,
:07:40. > :07:43.the leader of the fifth biggest economy in the world, second biggest
:07:44. > :07:48.in the EU, touring Europe, begging for the right to tweak is on asylum
:07:49. > :07:53.rooms -- rules and still getting the brush off. That would tell people
:07:54. > :07:58.something about the extent of our subordination. To emphasise how
:07:59. > :08:05.powerless we are? Yes to have raised and dashed expectations will leave
:08:06. > :08:08.the yes side in a worse position. What is really interesting is, how
:08:09. > :08:14.do you think that we have more influence and more control by
:08:15. > :08:18.leaving? Because we take back control of our borders, money,
:08:19. > :08:23.taxes, our democracy. We have been outvoted more than any other member
:08:24. > :08:28.country of the EU. Let me come in here. I want to focus, one of the
:08:29. > :08:32.things I wanted to focus on was the question of how immigration is going
:08:33. > :08:36.to play. I would imagine you both think migration will be a big issue
:08:37. > :08:40.through the campaign? Think is one of the issues. But I will go back to
:08:41. > :08:46.what Dan was saying. This idea that we do not have control now. How is
:08:47. > :08:51.it that France and Germany are going to give us a better deal when we
:08:52. > :08:55.just walked out and left? I simply do not understand how we get more
:08:56. > :09:01.control. We will be an independent country, Lucy, like New Zealand and
:09:02. > :09:07.Japan. There are 198 territories in the UN of which 170 are not in the
:09:08. > :09:11.European Union. To me the most interesting question of the whole
:09:12. > :09:17.thing, and I don't know the answer, is, if we leave, do we get our
:09:18. > :09:21.border back? Carl Bildt said on this problem the other day if you want
:09:22. > :09:26.access to the single market you will have two have free movement, like
:09:27. > :09:31.Norway and Switzerland. This is about control more than migration. I
:09:32. > :09:34.am quite a fan of controlled legal immigration. I think people in the
:09:35. > :09:38.country will also want to have a component of refugees coming into
:09:39. > :09:41.the country. But if you are going to make that argument, people in return
:09:42. > :09:49.want to know that they are ultimately in charge of who we admit
:09:50. > :09:56.and about numbers. You have totally avoided the question. Do you expect
:09:57. > :10:03.Britain will have access to the single market, but will not have
:10:04. > :10:10.free movement under current rules? Nobody is suggesting we are going to
:10:11. > :10:14.join Schengen. Every time you mention Switzerland they say,
:10:15. > :10:19.Schengen. Nobody is suggesting that. I think it would be sensible for us
:10:20. > :10:25.to have an element of free movement of labour, but I don't think that
:10:26. > :10:29.should be a pre-judgement of benefits. People coming in as
:10:30. > :10:34.seasonal workers, that will carry on. It will carry on with people
:10:35. > :10:40.from outside the EU. There is an issue of fairness. There will be a
:10:41. > :10:43.lot of Brits of Commonwealth origin who know what a hassle is to bring
:10:44. > :10:51.somebody over for a wedding because we have had to crack down on visas
:10:52. > :10:55.to make space for EU nationals. Your weakness probably is immigration.
:10:56. > :10:59.Daniel Hannan has given a long answer to the question but that has
:11:00. > :11:04.got to be basically the weak point of your campaign? I am not sure it
:11:05. > :11:08.is. We have just heard there will be an element of free movement. Leave
:11:09. > :11:12.does not mean closing the border. If people are try to argue that that is
:11:13. > :11:17.all leaving means, there is evidence it is not that if we still want
:11:18. > :11:23.those benefits. Nobody is suggesting that. The personality factor, at the
:11:24. > :11:29.moment you would like Boris to join your campaign. I would like
:11:30. > :11:33.everyone. Do you need a big name? The public are probably going to get
:11:34. > :11:38.lost in the detailed conversation. Do you need a big-name? In the AV
:11:39. > :11:44.referendum there was not a big-name. In the north-east there was not a
:11:45. > :11:47.big-name. It is a strength to have people making different argument is
:11:48. > :11:52.to different constituencies. I do not think you need a single figure.
:11:53. > :11:58.Because, although we all come together wanting a democracy back,
:11:59. > :12:01.we disagree about what we would do as Labour, Conservative, green or
:12:02. > :12:06.whatever. It should be for the British people to decide. Wildie
:12:07. > :12:11.Prime Minister ultimately lead the in campaign? Let's see what happens
:12:12. > :12:15.with his reforms and what he decides to do. They will be lots of
:12:16. > :12:18.different people on our side of the argument, as there already are. We
:12:19. > :12:22.have huge diversity from the president of the NUS to the former
:12:23. > :12:28.head of the army, to respected business leaders, a cross-party of
:12:29. > :12:33.people. Dan's party are fighting each other over who is gone to lead
:12:34. > :12:39.the campaign. Let's pic on your campaign. Agley both campaigns have
:12:40. > :12:43.a degree of disarray. Stewart rose seems to beat Wheeldon, not properly
:12:44. > :12:47.briefed. He was given statistics he does not have to defend because they
:12:48. > :12:50.are largely thought of as indefensible. And unable to remember
:12:51. > :12:56.the name of your campaign on sky television interview. I think that
:12:57. > :13:01.can happen to the best of us. Forget to remember the name of the campaign
:13:02. > :13:06.they lead? That clip was before he properly started recording the
:13:07. > :13:12.interview. You got in a tangle over somebody's name earlier in the week.
:13:13. > :13:21.I can at least remember the name of the programme I am presenting, what
:13:22. > :13:25.is it to Newsnight. Stewart has led one of this country's best loved and
:13:26. > :13:29.best named brand. We have diversity on our board who are all hugely
:13:30. > :13:33.respected and incredible in their own field of who are making the same
:13:34. > :13:38.argument, unlike Dan's side were fighting each other. Do you agree
:13:39. > :13:44.that nothing will change the first ten years after we leave? It is on
:13:45. > :13:48.the record. Talking about disarray, there seems to be on your side of
:13:49. > :13:54.the argument a tendency for your site to fight each other. You have
:13:55. > :14:00.got a vote leave. You are on the board. Arguments about whether
:14:01. > :14:04.Dominic Cummings is running it. What is going on? We have so much
:14:05. > :14:08.exuberance. We have so many people wanting to do it. In every campaign
:14:09. > :14:12.there are strong feelings. You have covered in general elections to know
:14:13. > :14:15.that people, because they want to win, have different ideas. The idea
:14:16. > :14:18.that we are not pulling together around the general vision of
:14:19. > :14:24.fighting an upbeat, optimistic, positive campaign about a global
:14:25. > :14:28.Britain, we are going to come together. Will Dominic Cummings be
:14:29. > :14:31.an office on Monday? Yes. 20 both.
:14:32. > :14:33.Cecil Rhodes has triumphed for the time being -
:14:34. > :14:36.Oriel College says his statue will stay, against the wishes
:14:37. > :14:38.of the campaign to have him taken down, given his brutal
:14:39. > :14:41.The argument though has been remarkable.
:14:42. > :14:44.In a way, it's a bit like the other Cecil -
:14:45. > :14:47.Cecil the Lion - one of those individual cases that somehow
:14:48. > :14:50.ignites a consciousness of a far bigger issue.
:14:51. > :14:53.In this case, it's been the British variant
:14:54. > :14:57.John Sweeney went to Oxford today to see how contentious
:14:58. > :15:28.The Latin says roughly thanks to the great generosity of Cecil Rhodes but
:15:29. > :15:40.others disagree. Cecil Rhodes said... He was a 19th-century
:15:41. > :15:45.imperialist who made a mint in South Africa. Some students want this
:15:46. > :15:50.symbol of racial supremacy to be cast down. I do not think that a
:15:51. > :15:56.statue that symbolises racial violence and apartheid should be
:15:57. > :15:58.adorning any acronym done Mike academic institution of any
:15:59. > :16:03.institution that considers itself to be progressive. What it has done
:16:04. > :16:08.with it I do not really care but I do not think it should be part of an
:16:09. > :16:15.academic institution. Oxford has decided that Cecil Rhodes is
:16:16. > :16:22.staying. If you start with smashing the statue, where do you stop? What
:16:23. > :16:28.about the kings and bishops hanging out with Cecil Rhodes? The
:16:29. > :16:35.21st-century is not big on statues but it does do legacy. This business
:16:36. > :16:41.School is evidence some say of the amazing generosity of a billionaire
:16:42. > :16:49.benefactor, proof according to others that the facilitator is
:16:50. > :16:55.worried about his immortal soul. It is not just rich men who have have
:16:56. > :17:02.been buying up chunks of our universities. An imperial power is
:17:03. > :17:08.at it as well, but that is not Britain. China is being to get its
:17:09. > :17:14.Confucius Institutes into our academia. LSE has received ?860,000
:17:15. > :17:20.from the detainees state and that is not all. It turns out they find 29
:17:21. > :17:27.Confucius centres across the country in universities like Cardiff, eight
:17:28. > :17:37.Edinburgh and Manchester. Totalling up to roughly ?4 million a year.
:17:38. > :17:43.Smashing up statues of people you do not bike has always been good fun.
:17:44. > :17:47.It is how the present gets its revenge on the past. The danger is
:17:48. > :17:51.if you clean up history too much you may end up forgetting it.
:17:52. > :17:59.With me now, the historians David Olusoga and Tom Holland.
:18:00. > :18:08.I would like to generalise this beyond Cecil Rhodes. Is it a concern
:18:09. > :18:12.you have that there is a tendency in Britain and maybe other parts of the
:18:13. > :18:16.west to whitewash some of the full things that we did in the past and
:18:17. > :18:20.that is what this debate is about? The debate has got to the heart of
:18:21. > :18:25.the fact that the statues are not very good at telling of history.
:18:26. > :18:31.Telling of the very simple one-sided celebratory history. The image of
:18:32. > :18:36.Cecil Rhodes that is presented as of his great works. He undoubtedly gave
:18:37. > :18:40.a lot of money that has done a lot of good but there is another side of
:18:41. > :18:47.a legend died statues do not give us that. They are not very good tools
:18:48. > :18:51.for history. It is just a statue. Do you think there is a problem with
:18:52. > :18:58.whitewashing of colonial past or not? I think we have struggled in
:18:59. > :19:02.this country to look all the sickly at the colonial past. Some people
:19:03. > :19:11.want to claim that everything Britain did abroad was terrible.
:19:12. > :19:18.Then there are people who convince themselves that the empire was some
:19:19. > :19:21.enormous act, some great global charity that Britain abandoned the
:19:22. > :19:28.poor of Britain and spent its wealth and treasure going around the world
:19:29. > :19:36.and was -- worrying about whether India would have a railway. It was
:19:37. > :19:45.done for profit. Where are we on Empire? A lot of this debate is
:19:46. > :19:50.really about attitudes to the imperial past. Yes. The debate
:19:51. > :19:53.demonstrates that attitudes to Empire are divided and essentially
:19:54. > :19:59.there is a huge conflict-of-interest. I do not think
:20:00. > :20:05.that the people who are supporting the retention of the statue Kirk
:20:06. > :20:11.very much about Rhodes himself. I think it reflects a sense that
:20:12. > :20:15.people have of how we in this country have traditionally done
:20:16. > :20:22.history. We are not like the French or the Russians. We do not go around
:20:23. > :20:26.toppling statues because we have the slightly strange attitude to our
:20:27. > :20:37.history that we have evolved gradually over time. I did not hear
:20:38. > :20:41.a whimper of discontent at Jimmy Savile in Glasgow. Maybe that is the
:20:42. > :20:48.exception that proves the rule. In Oxford there was a memorial to fill
:20:49. > :20:52.Marshal Haig that was put up and got discreetly removed so it does happen
:20:53. > :20:56.but what you have in Oxford in the examination rooms is a picture of
:20:57. > :21:00.the Kaiser. With these memorials it is as though you are looking at
:21:01. > :21:04.fossils in a great wall of sedimentary rock and you can use
:21:05. > :21:08.them to trace the evolution of our history and that is part of the
:21:09. > :21:14.fascination. We have Rhodes in Oxford but we have the young Mandela
:21:15. > :21:20.and the elder statesman Mandela in Parliament Square. That is one
:21:21. > :21:26.tradition. Britain has two traditions. The domestic and the
:21:27. > :21:31.colonial and Britain has gone around the world than destroyed thousands
:21:32. > :21:35.of statues. Missionaries destroyed temples in Africa of the indigenous
:21:36. > :21:43.people and we went to China and we destroyed one of the great jaws of
:21:44. > :21:50.China. We went and destroyed another palace and all of the bronzes of the
:21:51. > :21:53.kingdom. We have another great sideline which is in pinching
:21:54. > :22:00.statues. The British Museum is full of statues... This idea that statues
:22:01. > :22:05.are somehow uniquely sacrosanct and unviable for the British might be
:22:06. > :22:14.true in the domestic sense... Within Britain. His career was not in
:22:15. > :22:18.Britain, it was in Africa. In a way this gets to the heart of the debate
:22:19. > :22:24.about other things like the way the language is sexist or other symbols.
:22:25. > :22:30.Should we focus as much as we do for modern causes on symbols? On
:22:31. > :22:40.changing symbols? Like statues or words. I think they can be extremely
:22:41. > :22:45.important. There is a risk happening in some university campuses this
:22:46. > :22:49.idea that no disagreement or idea that you do not like should be
:22:50. > :22:55.presented to you. You should love in a safe space. You are not in favour
:22:56. > :23:03.of that? I am opposed to that but I do not think that is what this
:23:04. > :23:08.debate is about. Do we go too far? That is quite common to pull down a
:23:09. > :23:13.statue. These are complex and difficult issues. We live in an age
:23:14. > :23:20.where an effective hash tag can generate an it I campaign. The
:23:21. > :23:23.ability of people to harness campaigns is having an impact on the
:23:24. > :23:29.way in which certain symbols and acting as lightning rods. No one in
:23:30. > :23:35.this campaign is talking about toppling or destroying statues. This
:23:36. > :23:43.is not destroying the statue. India has had a great solution. All the
:23:44. > :23:48.old statues are used to be littered around colonial belly are jumbled
:23:49. > :23:48.old statues are used to be littered together in a park. None
:23:49. > :23:51.old statues are used to be littered have been destroyed. Last time I was
:23:52. > :23:57.that there was a queen or storks have been destroyed. Last time I was
:23:58. > :24:02.nesting on Queen Victoria. There is a way of diffusing statues.
:24:03. > :24:04.nesting on Queen Victoria. There is is to accept they
:24:05. > :24:09.nesting on Queen Victoria. There is history and should stay there. At
:24:10. > :24:12.Whitehall you have a statue of Charles
:24:13. > :24:12.Whitehall you have a statue of Cromwell. That seems a wonderful way
:24:13. > :24:22.of sorting out the problems. Cromwell. That seems a wonderful way
:24:23. > :24:27.have space for both. Maybe a bigger plaque explaining the context. I
:24:28. > :24:33.wanted to be contextualised. I want the other side of Rhodes' career.
:24:34. > :24:37.That is what they seem to be saying they will do. I do not think we will
:24:38. > :24:40.be arguing about this in a year. But if you want a writer
:24:41. > :24:45.who really walks the walk, look no further than
:24:46. > :24:46.best-selling author Before he made it big with novels,
:24:47. > :24:50.including The World According to Garp, The Cider House Rules
:24:51. > :24:53.and A Prayer for Owen Meany, Irving kept his young family
:24:54. > :24:56.by training fighters. He sold well over 12 million books
:24:57. > :25:01.in 35 languages since. Now 73, Irving's new book,
:25:02. > :25:03.Avenue of Mysteries, presciently anticipates our current
:25:04. > :25:05.preoccupations with migration He went 12 rounds with our
:25:06. > :25:08.punch-drunk palooka, If this is going to work,
:25:09. > :25:19.we have to keep it quite Not any more because I am
:25:20. > :25:30.standing on your foot. Hemingway played the macho card
:25:31. > :25:51.but you have kind of lived it, I competed as a wrestler for 20
:25:52. > :25:58.years and I coached the sport until I was 47 but I
:25:59. > :25:59.was disappointed. I was a good wrestler
:26:00. > :26:05.among better wrestlers. Just as well he was more
:26:06. > :26:14.of a contender on the page. Irving's new novel follows
:26:15. > :26:19.the Mexican slum kid Juan Diego who becomes
:26:20. > :26:25.a successful writer. The book deals with the consolations
:26:26. > :26:30.and failings of religion. The word got around that he had
:26:31. > :26:35.taught himself to read. That was how the Jesuits,
:26:36. > :26:41.who put such a high priority While Juan Diego has always been
:26:42. > :26:54.suspicious of the man-made institution of the Catholic Church,
:26:55. > :26:57.of the man-made rules, dictates, policies, politics
:26:58. > :27:02.of the Catholic Church, he has always been
:27:03. > :27:11.seeking to believe. For an alpha male of
:27:12. > :27:13.a writer Irving is much praised by some critics
:27:14. > :27:15.for his liberal approach to issues 40 years ago I was writing
:27:16. > :27:20.The World According to Garp where the most sympathetic
:27:21. > :27:30.and arguably the least sexually volatile or intemperate
:27:31. > :27:34.person in the novel is the transgender
:27:35. > :27:37.character in that novel. The treatment, the acceptance,
:27:38. > :27:42.the tolerance, of sexual minorities, gays, lesbians and transgender
:27:43. > :27:55.people, is certainly better. The fact you say it
:27:56. > :27:58.as an issue and a debate still today keeps
:27:59. > :28:01.the issue alive in my work. Jermaine Greer, who I am sure
:28:02. > :28:05.you know, said that a transgender I do not take and have never taken
:28:06. > :28:13.Jermaine Greer seriously. She does not know what
:28:14. > :28:26.she is talking about. Irving has written more than a dozen
:28:27. > :28:35.novels and won an Oscar after adapting one
:28:36. > :28:36.of them, The Cider Irving's new novel concerns
:28:37. > :29:01.the plight of people in poor countries like Mexico
:29:02. > :29:03.and the appeal of more I feel very badly for
:29:04. > :29:10.Mrs Merkel who I believe has tried to do the right thing,
:29:11. > :29:14.the progressive thing, the responsible thing,
:29:15. > :29:19.the humane thing, by It is tragic that
:29:20. > :29:28.among the people who perpetrated that violence
:29:29. > :29:33.against those women in Cologne has caused this backlash
:29:34. > :29:39.against Mrs Merkel and against the genuine heartfelt
:29:40. > :29:45.instinct that you have to help these people who have nowhere to go,
:29:46. > :29:52.who are in peril, who need to come. Donald Trump, I do not know
:29:53. > :29:57.if he has resiled from this but he talked about
:29:58. > :29:59.building a wall to keep I do not take what Mr
:30:00. > :30:08.Trump says seriously. But I am seriously worried
:30:09. > :30:13.about the number of people who are angry, as angry,
:30:14. > :30:20.as ignorant, as misinformed or uninformed or shallowly
:30:21. > :30:32.informed as he is. The old grappler even pulls off
:30:33. > :30:39.a somersault leg drop on the American
:30:40. > :30:42.writer's biggest foe. I never wanted to write
:30:43. > :30:56.the great American novel. It always struck me as another act
:30:57. > :30:59.of patriotic extermism that anyone would care to write
:31:00. > :31:18.a great American novel. We still have some hazards to come
:31:19. > :31:20.through the night and into