26/05/2016 Newsnight


With Kirsty Wark. Fresh doubts over whether the Hinkley nuclear plant will go ahead; immigration rises again; Nicola Sturgeon on what Brexit could mean for Scottish independence.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 26/05/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Tonight: It's a deal worth more than ?18 billion and described


by this Government as essential for the UK's energy plans.


But Newsnight reveals that there are new doubts


about whether Hinkley C nuclear plant will ever be built.


And official consultation of the committee which represents the staff


and unions within EDF is currently going ahead, Newsnight has


exclusively spoken to the secretary of that committee and we have


learned that the consultation is not going well. For the company.


Also tonight: Net migration rises again to its second


As immigration hits centre stage in the EU debate,


we'll ask this Government minister and Brexiteer


And Scotland's First Minister raises the prospect of a second referendum


If Scotland is in the situation where we are faced with being taken


out of the year even though we voted to stay in, of course there would be


many people in Scotland, not everybody, but many who would say,


we need to protect our EU membership. And, today in the United


States. It could be that we will run against crazy Bernie, could become a


crazy Bernie, here's a crazy man, but that is OK, we like crazy


people! On the day Donald Trump


all but clinches the Republican nomination, why is the man he calls


"Crazy" Bernie about to face him We'll debate whether divisions


in the Democrat party are making We begin tonight with fresh


revelations about the future of the planned ?18 billion power


plant at Hinkley Point in Somerset. It had originally been


due to open next year, but has been hit by delay


after delay after delay, and now won't open until 2026


at the earliest. The latest setback came a month ago


when the company said it was delaying giving the project


the go-ahead until it had


consulted its trade unions, Now Newsnight has exclusively been


told that that consultation has so far done nothing to reassure


the unions, and that there is little chance


of them giving their blessing VOICEOVER: A symbol of so much,


Hinkley C, a huge infrastructure plan, and ?18 million the life which


could supply 7% of our electricity. -- ?18 billion a liar. It will be


built by EDF, the electricity company majority-owned by the French


state, and it is a victory in the attempts to court Beijing, a third


of the capital will come from China. -- goliath. At the outset, critics


had concerns about whether we may be overpaying for Hinkley C, but today,


the real danger to this project comes from France, we are still


awaiting final sign off. In France, the finance director left EDF over


concerns about whether the financial risk of Hinkley C was too great, to


understand why, it is worth looking across the Channel, two other places


where it is building the same model of reactor as it plans for Hinkley


C, the so-called EPR. It is an immensely save enormous structure,


which, however, looks as though it is almost uncontrollable. There are


two projects around the world where this exactly the same design very


much the same design being constructive. Both of them are in


enormous difficulty. The one in Finland is about ten years late, in


Normandy, being created by EDF, that will be in the order of 12 years


late at least. The French energy minister has already stated publicly


that she has concerns about the cost and the risks associated with


Hinkley C, the unions, who have particularly powerful officials


within the state-owned company, also have concerns, they want the project


forward. This week, the French finance minister, wrote to British


MPs to explain to them that the project was still on track, but


right now, there is a moratorium on Hinkley C, and that is because an


official consultation of the committee which represents the staff


and unions within EDF is going ahead. Newsnight has exclusively


spoken with the secretary of the committee, and we have learned that


the consultation is not going well, for the company. We were told:


unions do not have a veto, could EDF press ahead against their will?


Going for it would be for the government crossing a red line in


their relationship with the trade unions, which would make it really


difficult for the government, especially thinking about the next


general election, where they will need to get back some support of the


trade unions. Remember where we started, this is a political project


as well as an economic project. The political commitments is completely


confirmed, we back Hinckley point, it is very important for France, it


is very important for the nuclear sector and EDF. -- Hinkley Point.


Others are less convinced. I do not believe that it is going to start


one day, I think that the chance is that it does not come online


increase. The reason being... Making the decision for the project is not


possible right now. The political cost, the cost for EDF's financial


situation is too high. That could leave our government in an odd


position, accused of paying too much for a nuclear power plant at home


and in driving a hard bargain that was not deliverable abroad.


STUDIO: The day the latest migration figures were released by the Office


of National Statistics was always going to be a big moment


The increase in net migration in 2015 was 20,000, bringing


the figure to 330,000, and Boris Johnson called it


a "scandalous Government failure", his Government's failure.


He was referring to the Government's aspiration


to cut the number to under 100,000.


"The system has spun out of control," he exclaimed.


So what exactly would the Brexiteers do about it?


In a moment I'll be speaking to the Northern Ireland Secretary,


Theresa Villiers, one of the six Cabinet members backing an EU exit.


But first here's our political editor Nicholas Watt.


VOICEOVER: From the shores of Sicily to the borders of Ukraine,


uncontrolled flow of migrants entitled to enter Britain, that is


the message spelt out in Churchill style language that the main Brexit


campaign has delivered spell out the core reason for wanting to leave the


EU, today was a big moment for the vote Leave campaign, the reason the


final set of migration statistics before the referendum, net migration


rose rainier record peak of 330,000 last year, illustrating a key theme,


until the UK takes full control of its borders, it will fail to meet


the government 's target of reducing net migration below 100,000.


The blue line shows the greatest portion of EU migration is from all


the member states, part of the club before the Big Bang expansion in


2004, the yellow line shows the eight Eastern European countries


that joined in 2004, the red line shows Romania, and Bulgaria, which


joined in 2007. One senior Brexit figure believes that wherever they


are coming from, the numbers must fall. The right number will be in


the tens of thousands, between the low tens, and up to about 100,000. I


find it hard to imagine a circumstance where it would be


beneficial to Britain to have more than 100,000 every year. But, you


must let the economy drive that. The vote to leave campaign is focusing


heavily on immigration in the final phase of the campaign to get the


vote out, a full 58% of the electorate believe that immigration


would fall if the UK left the EU. Clear red line for the government is


that the British people are voting to leave the European Union on the


23rd, on the 24th, the government must recognise that one key


component of what they voted forward border control. Whatever else we


discuss and negotiate with the European Union about whatever kind


of arrangements over trade, border control is our red line, that is


exactly what they voted. White Vote -- Vote Leave has ambitions beyond


June 24, they believe that by gaining full control of the UK


borders, the government of the day will be able to achieve something


unprecedented in the modern era, consent for immigration. Vote Leave


source said that he dreams of a day when he will be able to stand up in


Parliament and make the case for higher immigration on the basis that


the UK alone would be setting a limit is. -- one Vote Leave source.


It is not beyond our wits to come up with a system which would be a


combination, whether it is an Australian points system,


recognition of historic links and responsible it is, skills needed,


all of those things, but the key element is that it is decided at


Westminster and has the consent of the people who have elected us. An


absence of consent does not allow you to take that kind of leadership.


Required to say that within controlled immigration can and is a


good thing. Tonight, the first official debate of the campaign was


held in Glasgow. Immigration was to the fore. Are you saying that if


Britain votes to leave, there would be visas or there would not?


Victoria, we just do not know. We just do not know. BOOING


Because we have a Prime Minister who has said that there is no Plan B, he


has not presented a single bit of detail as to what happens, if we


vote to leave, and he has left it all completely open. These exchanges


highlighted the need to tread carefully on such a sensitive


subject, think of immigration as a lily pad, I was told, allowing the


vote leave frog to jump into less contentious areas, like pressures on


the NHS, in a way that appeals across the political spectrum, they


believe they have a path to victory. STUDIO: I am joined by the Northern


Ireland Secretary, Theresa Villiers, who wants to see the UK


leave the EU. Good evening, let's go through a few


of the migration issues. If we vote to leave the EU, we close borders,


is that correct? We would still have immigration if we vote to leave the


EU, the different would be that the people we vote to elect at


Westminster would decide. Would there be fewer people, do you agree


with the point by David Davis, maximum 100,000 every year? It gives


us the chance to bring down the current numbers. That is the idea.


Without taking control of immigration policy again, we have no


chance of getting a grip on the current numbers. You think the


numbers are too high. I think they are too high. We have a manifesto


commitment to get them down under 100,000. Let's say that the economy


is doing extremely well and you need workers, and you need workers from


all over the world, if you needed 330,000 workers, you would be happy


to have 330,000? If you had 350,000 that you need it, would that be


happy? We have a commitment to bring down the numbers below 100,000, call


me old-fashioned, we should try to achieve that. That is a principle,


100,000, no matter if the economy was booming and you needed those


workers, the door would be closed? The reality is that we would


introduce a more intelligent system, focused on the skills gap, which


judges people more fairly, from wherever they come in the world,


judged on merit rather than if they happen to come from an EU country.


No matter how things are going, you say you cannot see a situation where


we would need more than 100,000 every year? Beyond the next general


election it is up to the party to put forward their numbers, but we


have a manifesto commitment, obviously we are determined to


deliver on that. Below 100,000? Obviously in the future, after a


general election, those commitments can change, at the moment, our


commitment is to bring numbers down below 100000 and there is a lot of


support for that. Let's talk about how this will work.


Let's just talk about how this would work. Let's say you have Britons


working in France, would they have to come back home and apply for


visas? It is very clear that if immigration rules change, they can't


apply retrospectively, so no one who is already working in France would


be forced to come back. That is what you say, but the French might not


say it. We are all banned by international conventions, so it is


clear that whether you are an EU worker in the UK or a work in the


rest of Europe, rules on freedom of movement do not apply


retrospectively. So let's say that there is a Polish nurse here now,


but she wants to bring her mother over after we would hypothetically


leave the EU. Would you have to get a Visa? That will be down to the


Government that we elect. The principle here is not leave campaign


mandating a new immigration system. We want to give power back to the


Government to take decisions on immigration. So is it possible a


family member could just come in? If you listen to that debate tonight,


Diane James from Ukip were saying we just don't know about visas for


people. And people are concerned, if you are a young Polish worker here,


your mother is sick in Poland and you want to bring her over, would


you need a tech backstreet? What this debate is about is who takes


the decisions on migration. There is a great amount of support in this


country for taking our own decisions on migration. The beauty of that is


we have democratic accountability, at the moment these decisions are


made by a council of Ministers, the European court of justice, not by


people who are elected. So a young Polish person who can vote in this


EU Referendum Bill but a young person from Britain can. So say you


are a young architect, you want to go to Berlin or Prague. You would


need a tech backstreet ago, presumably? We are not mandating the


rules would will be applying in the rest of the EU in the event of a UK


exit, but there are thousands of citizens from around the world who


work in Europe, many of whom do not come from EU member states, there


were thousands of the Jewish people who worked in the EU -- thousands of


British people working in EU before we joined. But this is putting


pressure on our public services and housing. But people thinking about


how they are going to vote want answers. Every young person wants to


go to Europe to be an architect, or if a young German person wants to


come here and learn to be an architect, they will have to have a


visa, is that right? There may be changes in the terms on which people


can travel, but these would be decided in Britain as a result of


democratically accountable decisions, and we ought to take into


account another problem for young people and that mass migration from


Europe is depressing wages in this country, that is a fact. Let's talk


about security. We already know the French have said that there will be


no border in Calais, the border will have to go back over here. The


French government have said various different things about this. The


Justice Minister has been supportive of those arrangements. The reality


is the French camp all the plug... The Financial Times, March the 3rd,


Emanuel macron, the French Minister said, the day this unravels,


migrants will no longer be in Calais, they will be on the dish


coast, won't they? The French home affairs Minister has been very


supportive of this. It is a bilateral arrangement, the French


could all the plug right now they wanted to, but the reasons the


arrangement is in place is because it is in the interests of both


France and the UK, so there is no reason for them to pull the plug.


But the point is, the migrants who want to come here, why would the


French bother stopping them, locking them up, having them in the


so-called Jungle at Calais? It will be up to Britain to deal with them


when they wish. But this arrangement is in France's interest as well as


the UK's, otherwise it wouldn't be in operation now. Let's look


somewhere else, and this is your territory, where we have a land


border between Northern Ireland and Southern Ireland, and there is no


question of the Republic of Ireland leaving the EU. Will that border the


entirely open? I would say it will be entirely open. We had a common


travel area allowing free movement of people between the Republic of


Ireland and the United Kingdom ever since the creation of the Irish


state 100 years ago. But there wasn't free movement of peoples and


the rest of the EU. So in your view, should there be an open border


between Northern Ireland and Southern Ireland? Definitely. The


Common travel area survived a civil war, World War I30 years of the


Troubles. It will survive the exit. So theoretically, any member from


European state could come to Southern Ireland and go straight


into Northern Ireland and into the United Kingdom? There is nothing to


stop them doing that. , travel area gives rights to Irish citizens which


would be absolutely maintained in the event of a Brexit. I don't mean


are citizens. I mean other people who wish to enter the UK, can


somebody do it through the Northern Ireland Southern Ireland open


border? There would be certain risks to be managed in retaining an open


border in the event of a Brexit vote, but very similar risks already


occur and are appropriately managed through Corporation between the


authorities... What are those risks? Individuals coming into Ireland who


may not have an entitlement to come into the UK, so those risks occur


today. The idea that suddenly we will have hundreds of thousands of


citizens from other EU countries heading across-the-board between


Ireland and the UK, it is fanciful, to be honest. If we change the rules


on free movement, there would be constraints on the rights of those


EU citizens to enter the UK. But if you tighten borders elsewhere, while


even this border open? Because of the close relationship that we have


between the UK and Ireland. Because that open border has served us well


for 100 years, there is no need to scrap it, and it is important for


border areas of Northern Ireland that we keep it. Let's move on to


the last hurrah before purdah, the last piece of Treasury analysis. The


analysis is that people will be worse off in terms of their pensions


between 220 ?330 per year if we leave the EU. You are the former


Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury. Is that a reasonable


assumption? I don't believe that it is, and I don't believe people are


taken in by what I'm not neutral reports. We can trade these


forecasts from here until referendum day, but the last time the Treasury


predicted a shock in the way they are doing at the moment was when we


were members of the ERM, they said they would be an inflation Russia


and the economy would crash, the truth, inflation came down, interest


rates came down, we had a decade of growth, they were wrong then and


they are wrong now. Theresa Villiers, thank you grow much for


joining us. Now, if you're sick of referendums


already - surely not! Polls tell us that Scotland is more


in favour of remaining in the EU But there's been some suggestion


that if the UK votes to leave, Scotland might, in turn, hold


another independence referendum. Who better to tell us


than Scotland's first Put in the words "our country"


instead of "Scotland", and that is a pretty powerful


argument for leaving One of the reasons, one of the many


reasons I want Scotland to be an independent country is so that


as an independent country in an interdependent world,


we decide for ourselves the extent to which we share sovereignty


and the organisations that we choose I am somebody who believes


in Scottish independence, I want Scotland to be


outward-looking and play a full part in the world,


and the European Union is an organisation I want Scotland,


whether it is independent or part But you could argue,


and have some sympathy for the argument, presumably,


that the EU is a distant force that doesn't actually understand


different countries' cultures For me, that is an argument


for countries to be in there trying to change and reform the union


and make it more responsible I do just think this


argument that being a member of the EU is inconsistent


with being an independent All 28 member state of the EU


are independent countries, and if you go to Germany


or France or Sweden... But Scotland is not an


independent country. And actually no


prospect of being so. We may agree to differ on that,


but let's not go there just now. What I'm saying is, whether Scotland


is an independent country or part of the UK, I think it is better


for our interests overall to be playing a part in the world,


cooperating with other independent countries to deal with the issues,


climate change, energy security, refugee crises, that


countries themselves can't The scenario would be that


Scotland votes to remain, but overall, the United


Kingdom votes to leave. You have been repeatedly asked


about whether or not there would be I am not going to get dragged,


no matter how hard you try, I am not going to get dragged


too far into the realms of the speculative,


because I actually don't want It is only four weeks out,


you have to be public, surely. With the greatest of respect,


I think I'm entitled in those four weeks as somebody who believes


that there should be a Remain vote to argue the case for


a Remain vote not only I have argued that


for my whole adult life. But I don't want to see the UK vote


to come out of the union. On that basis, would you do


anything it took? Would you share a platform


with David Cameron? I will take part over the next few


weeks in some debates around the European Union and membership,


but I will make the case that Would you share a platform


with David Cameron? There are no plans as far


as I am aware... Look, I'm not planning to share


a platform with David Cameron, but this is much bigger than just


individual politicians. I am having to try hard


to keep up with all these Scotland votes to remain,


England votes narrowly to go, and Scotland's vote pulls


England over the line. What would the atmosphere be


like then with the Again, I'm not going to get dragged


into the speculation around I hope, and what I'm going to focus


on for the next four weeks is playing my part,


albeit my small part, in trying to make sure


that there is a big overwhelming vote in Scotland, and I hope


there is also an overwhelming vote But if there is a vote in Scotland


to remain and a vote throughout the rest of the UK to go,


can you see a situation in which there wouldn't be


the possibility of a referendum? I think, and I have said this


before, if Scotland is in the situation where we are faced


with being taken out of the EU even though we voted to stay


in, particularly given the fact that we were told


that it was independence that imperilled our EU membership,


then of course I think that there would be many people


in Scotland, not everybody, but many people in Scotland,


who'd say, we have to protect our EU membership and look again


at independence as the way If you were free to do so,


and I say this because, as you know, migration is one of the big issues


around this EU referendum, if you were free to do so,


would you take more non-EU I think countries should


have the ability, and Scotland should have the ability,


to set its immigration policy based People come into this country


from other EU countries and make a net positive


contribution to our economy. The figures that are published


today, the increase in net migration on my reading is as much to do with


a fall in emigration as it is to do There are as many people coming


from outside of the EU as that are from inside the EU,


so let's have a fact-based Let's not lose sight of that central


point, that EU migrants actually make a net positive


contribution to our economy, and that is before we talk


about the cultural and social advantages of having people able


to come here and people from here able to go


to other European countries. Looking at who you think


your main opposition The principal party


of opposition is the Tories. And that says, I think,


actually more about the state of the Labour Party in Scotland


than it does about the state But I'm more interested


in what my job is as the Government of Scotland to lead Scotland,


to tackle the challenges we have is a country and to seize


the massive opportunities If, the day after the referendum,


Scotland is out of the I hope that is not the case,


and if that is the scenario we find ourselves in on the 24th of June,


I will guarantee I will sit down with you and we will have


this conversation. But I'm going to spend as much


energy as I can in the almost four weeks now between now and the 23rd


of June making the case for that I hope people vote, and I hope


people vote in large numbers to stay Nicola Sturgeon says that she will


be on Newsnight on the 24th of June. Republican and Democratic


presidential candidates traditionally do not debate each


other until both parties have selected their nominees,


but then there's not much that's So perhaps it shouldn't be


a surprise that today we learned that Donald Trump wants


to debate the underdog Democratic Party challenger,


Bernie Sanders. The move will further


frustrate his rival, frontrunner Hillary Clinton,


who wasn't invited to this particular showdown, and who has


plenty of her own troubles. Today the State Department's


Inspector General found that Clinton ignored clear guidance


that her e-mail set-up broke agency rules and could have left government


secrets vulnerable to hackers. Joining us to discuss these


developments are Nomiki Konst, O journalist and broadcaster who


used to in turn for Hillary Clinton. I'm not sure why you introduced me


as an intern, I did that when I was in college, 15 years ago. It was


rather than simply being a supporter, you were somebody who


knows Hillary Clinton. No, I don't, I interned on her campaign as a


college student. I was booked to discuss my column on Bernie Sanders.


If you are looking for someone to speak for the campaign, I should


probably encourage you to book summary of. I'm very happy to talk


about the entire idea of Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton, we are


live on television, and that is what we would like to talk about. Is


there anything wrong with Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump going


head-to-head just now? It is kind of adding to the reality


show nature of this campaign, I have got to be honest, I was under the


impression I was here to discuss a column I wrote for the daily beast


about race and Bernie Sanders, I did not know that I was here to talk


about the reality show nature of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump


ready to have a verbal wrestling match. -- Daily Beast. Really we are


just here for your knowledge on the campaign, looking across from the


Atlantic. You think that Hillary Clinton should bite the bullet,


should she get Memento and going, even if she has to take on Donald


Trump now, do that, get some momentum? Yes, I think that she has


been critiquing Donald Trump in her speeches, which indicates she's


looking ahead to the general, not really focused on the primary


anymore, it is unrealistic that Bernie Sanders can catch her in the


delegate count, that is what matters in terms of who will be the


Democratic nominee. We are in a situation now where Bernie Sanders


himself could actually make some traction with this kind of debate,


you are keen to talk about Bernie Sanders and race, what is it in


particular that you think that he is achieving? The column that I wrote,


that I was under the impression I was here to discuss, was the level


of harassment that African-American journalists like myself have faced


when they have dared to criticise Bernie Sanders, one of the reasons


I'm disappointed in how your produces chose to introduce me is


one of the misconceptions that Bernie Sanders supporters have been


spreading is that anyone who is critical of him must be a supporter


of Hillary Clinton or paid by the Clinton campaign. Part of the


misinformation of that is that people like myself, who in turn for


the Clinton campaign 15 years ago, when I was in college, was described


as someone who was a secret supporter of Hillary Clinton. People


like Diane Sawyer worked for president Nixon when she was young,


she went on to become a very accomplished journalist, her


integrity was not questioned. And so I was talking about my piece about


how the level of insult attacks and derogatory claims made by Sanders


supporters against female journalists and African-American


journalists really spoke to a level of indecency and a lack of civility.


In the campaign cycle, which we have not seen before. Who is instigating


it? Well, look, one of the things I learned in my column is that it was


not one person or two people, it was a coordinated effort, I have someone


who works in me who reads my mail, the read a lot of my e-mail and


social media, and really goes through it, I was attacked so badly


for about a week after I wrote several months ago that I did not


consider Bernie Sanders particularly electable because polling shows that


socialists in America have a very tough time being accepted. By


voters. What I found is that the level of attacks were so bad that


there were Sanders people that said my Facebook page, please stop


attacking her, and after that, one of the Sanders supporters responded


in kind, she is a journalist, anything short of violence should be


acceptable...? Taking this to the last question which I want to ask,


is there something that Hillary Clinton can do to unite this very


fractious, if we are to be believed, very fractious Democratic race,


obviously you have faced that yourself.


The onus is on people like Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump to


discourage violence at rallies, the onus is on Bernie Sanders to


vigorously denounced the threats that female Democratic official in


Nevada has received from many of the supporters, death threats that she


received, which he did not vigorously denounced, the onus is on


him to say that we can disagree, you can hate her writing, you can think


Kelly Gough is a terrible writer, I'm sure when the people do, but


there is a level of decency, and civility that we need to maintain in


our society full. -- Kelli Goff. Thank you very much a joining us.


-- that we need to maintain in our society.


On Friday President Obama will travel to Hiroshima,


becoming the first American president to visit the city


where the US dropped the first atomic bomb during World War II.


It's a trip his ten predecessors since Truman have avoided.


The White House says there will be no apology.


But some survivors of the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki


We spoke to some survivors about their memories


Viewers may find some of their stories distressing.


The first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base, that was


because we wished in this first attack to avoid insofar as possible


the killing of civilians. We have used it in order to sharpen the


agony of war. That is all we have time for, good


Sky being lit up in the south by a series of thunderstorms, could well


be heavy showers around. Across Wales and Southern counties.


Steadily fading, then the afternoon


With Kirsty Wark. Fresh doubts over whether the Hinkley nuclear plant will go ahead; immigration rises again; Nicola Sturgeon on what Brexit could mean for Scottish independence; could Bernie Sanders stop Hillary Clinton?

Download Subtitles