30/08/2016 Newsnight


With Evan Davis. A key leader of so-called Islamic State is reported killed, and is the era of the unrestrained multinational company coming to a close?

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 30/08/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Mighty beasts bestriding the earth...


Hungry, sometimes brutal, without regard for nation or border...


But is the era of the unrestrained multinational company


Apple is told to pay billions of euros in back tax.


A huge bill for one company, but potentially a sign


of a backlash against the rules of the world economy.


Apple is just one example of companies that flourish because


But politicians appear to be tiring of the tax avoidance and trade


We'll ask this Nobel Prize winning economist


if the old rules should change, and what they should change to?


One of IS's most senior commanders is reportedly killed.


A man who had been instrumental in plotting attacks in Europe.


We'll ask how serious that is for so-called Islamic State.


What should the new Prime Minister prioritise as she gets stuck


Our panel of political pros will offer their advice.


Believe it when you see it actually happen -


but yes, Ireland really has been told to collect


Money like that makes it worth hiring some lawyers,


But the mere fact the EU Commission saw fit to make


the determination it did today, is a pretty extraordinary statement.


Altogether, it's been a bad few days for those who want more


globalisation and more of that benign political environment


It's not clear who's to blame for the Apple tax problem -


Apple, which paid little tax on the profits from its European


sales, or Ireland, which allowed Apple to avoid that tax.


It agreed the company could book most of those sales to a barely


existent head office that was registered nowhere,


But the EU Commission was clear - it's not fair on the rest of us.


This decision sends a clear message: Member states cannot give unfair tax


No matter if they are European or foreign, large or small,


It does send a message, a message that is scary for the big


for the big corporates - be wary about taking big gifts,


because if you're given too much, it will be taken away.


There is a sense that too much has been given away to big


The EU Commission says it's simply enforcing a state aid rule that's


been around since 1958, but it does look like politics.


Politics responding to recent public disquiet, and there's another timely


Three years in discussion, a European trade and investment


deal with the US called TTIP is in trouble.


If not ominously close to the rubbish tip, it


appears trapped in the land of never-ending negotiation.


TRANSLATION: There will not be an agreement by the end of the year.


We should accept it, rather than prolonging


discussions that on this basis cannot be concluded.


In my opinion the talks with the United States


have de facto failed, even though nobody


That is because they held 14 negotiation rounds,


based on 27 chapters - not one agreement was made


If the French and Germans don't want it, it isn't going to happen


and their reluctance is down to that sense.


Now, back in the 1980s, there was a widespread perception


in Britain that the trade unions were too powerful and too selfish.


The unions want a guaranteed weekly wage.


Over the course of a decade, that power was cut back.


So are we on the cusp of a long era in which corporate


A quick note on the weirdness of what looks like an anti-global,


anti-multinational tilt in sentiment.


It is itself a global, multinational phenomenon -


one that covers the United States and most of Europe.


And there's another thing: The Apple decision by the EU kind


of demonstrates that if you want to take


on a multination, the typical nation state is too small


It was by taking control away from Ireland, that the EU


So we're in a kind of muddle over who's fighting


One other issue - consumers are not going to want


to give up the benefits of the multinational era.


Smart products, at affordable prices.


We may push back but were not about to let go of the whole thing.


Joining me now is the nobel prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz,


who you might say foresaw the backlash against globalisation


way back, even before the financial crisis when his book,


Globalisation And Its Discontents, was published back in 2002.


He has another one now on the Euro called the euro and its threat to


the future of Europe forced up thank you for coming in. Do you think we


are on a kind of come a long cycle against the multinationals? They


have had a good couple of decades, maybe it is time? I wouldn't say


against them, it's trying to rebalance. The fact is they have


been bad actors. They talk about social responsibility. Their first


social responsibility is paying the taxes that you make on the profits


that are garnered from the activities you carry out in a


country. What Apple has done, and it's only one of many examples, it


has avoided the taxes. They might say, oh we just obey the law, but


they did sweetheart deals and they used their influence to shape the


law, so they do have to pay taxes. While the rest of us have to pay


taxes. We know when you have a backlash against someone pendulum


swings one way and then the other. Do you see any danger that we will


throw babies out with bath water here? If -- not in this particular


case. It's like, did we swing too far in banking regulation? I don't


think so. The general sense in the United States, at least, is we had


compromise after the crisis in 2008. It was 350 million Americans who


wanted more regulation. Banks said no and we got a compromise halfway


between the power of ten versus 350 million. It was roughly balanced. It


is very easy, isn't it, to look at the losers from globalisation and


thence dismiss the whole thing? And actually not talk, and you're a


progressive, liberal guy, talk about the hundreds of millions of huge


gain that are not appearing on our talk shows and news programmes,


China, and middle income country now, with running water which they


didn't have 30 years ago, DVD players, and see their lives


transformed through this thing we call globalisation. Apple building


these products and selling them to us? They're big benefits. But you


noticed they said escaping in one country, one company, 13 billion


euros. If you take 13 billion dollars and spent on retraining


workers in the north of England or in the United States, you would have


had less discontented people. You would have had a more productive


economy. Your clip talked about TTIP and we're having a big debate about


TPT. The other one. They have done analysis on what is the impact on


economic growth. The most optimistic, this comes out of the


government itself, is after about 15 or 20 years, 0.1.5% GDP. Other more


reliable estimates are negative. This is not about growth, this is


about shaping the economy and it's a power grab from the Power


corporations, to make sure they're not regulated, that they are not


taxed, that they can destroy the environment... Your clip put it very


well. Clearly excess power, there has to be a check at some point. You


would be against the Pacific partnership, TPT, TTIP, you would


stop them all for now? I am not against trade but it's trying to get


the right balance. It is very interesting, big Democratic platform


that all the presidential candidates in the United States have come out


against TPT. It has set principles that are inconsistent with the


administration's position on TTIP. So that's why these negotiations...


We have to talk about politics, you are American and visiting here. This


is a very interesting time. Is there a connection between Donald Trump


and what we're talking about today? Very much so. It's a more


complicated issue, obviously but it is the connection you saw in the


Brexit vote. Discontented people, people who were told there is a new


world out there, globalisation is going to bring new benefit. It


didn't do that. They the people left behind. The basic idea is, if


globalisation had brought the benefits we were promised and if


some of that extra growth had been shared, there wouldn't be this kind


of discontent. That was one of the main point. You're not a Donald


Trump supporter I'm guessing? No. What has gone wrong that we have had


a problem in the world economy, a balance that has gone too far one


way, the political support hasn't been for your kind of candidates but


for those who are completely the opposite of weight you are? It is


interesting. In the primary is in the United States it was enormous


support for somebody like Bernie Sanders. It was a statement that the


traditional centrist party candidates have not delivered on


what they promised. It is a message, and I think it's a message Hillary


Clinton has got, that you need a different agenda, and that means we


have to do a better job of protecting the people who have not


been the winners. When you look back at Gordon Brown and Tony Blair, Tony


Blair's name on the left is marred. When you look back at him is up


Prime Minister, do you think it was a disaster or do you think he was a


Prime Minister who did his best kind obtained this beast? I think you


need to look at it in historical context. I think it was a mistake in


the United States the deregulation of the financial sector... But you


have to look at it in historical context. That was the spirit of the


time. These are not economists. I was very strongly opposed to the


financial deregulation but I was coming at it from economics. These


are people who were politicians, they were listening to the voices in


the air and the campaign contributors. Does it bother you


that the left... Post financial crash, the left's story has been,


the centre-left, not the further left, the centre-left has had


trouble getting its ducks in a row, hasn't had much of the story? In


each country it is a different story. In the United States


President Obama was not brave enough, if you want to think of it


like that. He was afraid, I think, to take on the financial markets. We


had just been through from and he said, let's try to walk on


carefully. I think it was a very big mistake. He brought on as his


economic advisers the same people who had brought on the deregulation


that cause the problem and it was not a surprise that it didn't work,


and it's not surprised there is such an dead now. I think those mistakes,


in not dealing adequately with the global financial crisis, are part of


the anger we are seeing today. Talk a little about Europe. Sceptical of


the euro, you think is a disaster, that is one of the messages of your


new book. You do say you think Britain might, might get better


outside the European Union. You are in a big minority in the economic


profession in that. Give us the scenario. The idea here is you are


still part of the global community. There is the WTO. It goes back to


what I said about TTP and TTIP. Already lots of trade going on. The


last bit doesn't get you what you thought and you're paying the price


for that. And so... The issue here is what are going to be the terms of


the negotiation, the settlement? And if you get a reasonable deal,


consistent with what is in your interests, remember Europe also says


global integration is a good thing, if you get one consistent with their


interests, I think there is no reason why this should be traumatic.


The market view right now is there is an act from. Markets have not


collapsed as if it was doomsday. More on the Brexit deal later in the


programme. Thank you very much. Now, before we move on, let's just


get a little more on Apple, the Irish and that 13 billion euro


late tax bill. Our business editor


Helen Thomas is with me. Where next for Apple? First the


lawyers swing into action, both Apple and Ireland have said they


planned to challenge the decision in the European courts. Realistically


we could be three or five years away from getting an eventual settled


outcome. They have got to put the cash aside in the meantime. But the


fallout could be interesting, I have spoken to tax advisers and expect to


be busy from multinationals with questions wanting to review their


tax arrangements. The government has said, this was not of course


necessary a question of but these tax rulings allowing Apple to


allocate profit in a certain way. The commission has said they will


look at Amazon and McDonald's and Luxembourg, their tax arrangements,


and it is a similar issue. But those dates back to an original


investigation from 2013. Since then the commission has expanded its


work, reviewing over 1000 tax rulings. The expectation is that we


could see more cases along these lines. The United States professes


not to be happy with this particular decision today. No one seems


terribly happy. The US Treasury has raised various concerns relating to


the EU trampling over national sovereignty, potentially undermining


efforts to harmonise tax rules globally. But even in the US there


are people that concede that the EU is acting where governments either


cannot or will not because they worry about jobs and investment or


in the US there has been gridlock on efforts to reform its tax system for


years. And the US tax system creates some of these incentives for


companies to organise themselves in these weird and wonderful ways.


You may well not have heard of him, but he has been one of the most


important figures in the so-called Islamic State.


And we've been hearing tonight that he has reportedly


You might call him the Goebbels of the group -


he was sometimes called the spokesman for IS.


Propaganda was his field, he was one who was reportedly


involved in selecting videos to push.


He was also a commander who played a big role in the


overseas operations - in Europe in particular.


Well, I'm joined by our correspondent, Gabriel Gatehouse


and also Shiraz Maher, deputy director of the International


Centre for the Study of Radicalisation at King's College


Gabriel, tell us a little about who this man is. Abu Mohammad al-Adnani,


he is a Syrian, thought to be in his late 30s. 39 by some accounts. He


joined Al-Qaeda in Iraq shortly after the US invasion and became a


founder member of Isis, he is one of the people who articulated the


founding of their so-called caliphate and became their chief


spokesman. In September 2014 he made this by now infamous fatwa calling


on believers to attack people in the West wherever they might find them.


Worth quoting perhaps a little of that, he said if you can kill a


disbelieving American or European, especially the spiteful and filthy


French, he said, kill them in any manner you can. That call became


Paris and Brussels attacks, it has been cited in several British terror


plot cases as an inspiration. So in that sense he was the spokesman. As


you said he was a propagandist, there are reports that he held


monthly meetings where they would go through the grisly videos that I S


filmed and then he chose which to disseminate. He was also strategist.


And we're hearing fascinating accounts from former Isis members,


or European and who have come back, about this department that he


headed. In charge of plotting and coordinating attacks in the West.


The Bataclan, Brussels. In one sentence, do we know what has


happened to him, do we know he is dead? No although it has been


announced on the IIS Twitter account. The United States said it


carried out an air strike against a senior Isis official north-west of


Aleppo, where they say he died. They have not confirmed that it was


al-Adnani. They say they're still looking into it. But all kinds of


people are active in area. How big a blow is that to Islamic State? I


think quite significant. It is going after the number two of the


organisation in terms of someone who is very important, he was directing


these plots that were hitting Europe. Number two, is that what you


think he was? In many respects he even eclipsed by daddy in terms of


profile and prominence. But Eddie of course being de facto head of the


so-called caliphate. To what extent is Isis and system that carries on


operating even when you take out key individuals? Or is it reliant on


some charismatic figures who run the show? IIS is dependent on these


important leaders who carry charisma and standing, of the most important


things about al-Adnani Izzy had pedigree and have been fighting


since 2003 with Al-Qaeda in Iraq. He had a long period to become a very


skilled fighter and so on. That also gave him credibility amongst


comrades. In that sense it is important and we've seen in the past


with Al-Qaeda, with the removal of Osama bin Ladin, in a way Al-Qaeda


never recovered. I do not expect this to be quite so significant with


IES with the loss of al-Adnani but it does have an effect. In Europe


one interest will be that this is a man who inspired lots of people to


carry out the atrocities in this confidence. To think it will make a


difference to that, is that, have Isis been benefiting from people


with mental health difficulties in Europe who latched onto them?


Someone like al-Adnani clearly did inspire people but in a sense he got


the ball rolling, he has inspired people who have never been to Syria


and Iraq to carry out attacks in the name of the group. In that sense he


has done what he had to do. It will be interesting to see who replaces


him and the nature of his successor. But the types of people in essence


likely to have been inspired by him will look at these events today and


take inspiration from that in and of itself. Thank you.


Jeremy Corbyn released his manifesto for digital democracy today..


He's proposing a digital bill of rights, and high speed broadband


and mobile connectivity for every household.


He was mocked for suggesting that there might be some kind


of free-to-use on-line hub of learning resources -


given that Wikipedia has been doing that rather well for 15 years.


But aside from the policies, one critique of Mr Corbyn is not


that he is stuck in the analogue age, but that he has been


so seduced by digital hype, he thinks you can win elections


He talked today of "harnessing the advances of new technology


to organise political campaigning like we've never seen before".


A 67-year-old MP might seem an unlikely social media star,


but Jeremy Corbyn is the centre of a surprisingly fertile


online mass movement, and today he set out his vision


As part of Labour's plans for a universally accessible


national education service, we will create a free to use


online hub we are calling an open knowledge library,


a digital repository of lessons, lectures and curricula...


He's not the most charismatic of speakers but his supporters


who gathered online don't really seem to mind.


Britain's most important social medium.


A poll last year found 55% of women had lately used Facebook,


The equivalent figures for Twitter are 16% of all women and 2%


Around 800,000 people have shown enough interest in Jeremy Corbyn


to get regular Facebook updates from his team.


As well as an alternative broadcast tool, it's also been an organising


So we've seen lots of people engaging and participating


through social media, and it's actually something that's


facilitated off-line activity as well, so that's how we've been


able to get huge numbers at meetings and rallies.


We've mobilised lots of volunteers to join


The official campaign is just a small part of the Corbyn


Jeremy Corbyn has a massive presence on Facebook with hundreds


of thousands of followers, which is run by his campaign,


but separately, run just by activists or by individuals,


who make images and then share them, all these smaller groups,


and essentially an image might take hold on Facebook and within 24 hours


be seen by far more people than the official Facebook page,


without the official campaign ever organising it.


And even if the campaign went away tomorrow, those sorts of images


Here's an example, and like lots, it's a bit


It compares expenses of an MP who can cycle to Westminster from


Team Corbyn has already found itself having


to answer for the views and


The fact that a lot of the content created in the name of the Corbyn


campaign is not actually controlled by them can


For example, at the moment the campaign


has tried to distance itself from the work of the Canary, a


publication that is online and pushes often


This expert thinks it might have its roots in Labour's unfocused


You see Labour were very effective at whipping up conversations among


the politically engaged, a lot of anti-government


While that's not effective when you have an electorate of


essentially 45 million people, it's incredibly


effective when you have a


much smaller electorate, if you like the membership


of the Labour Party, and affiliated organisations who are


going to decide this particular election.


You can see that that kind of method of operating, while it


doesn't particularly work in electoral politics, with the wider


public being incredibly effective in smaller and politically engaged


So can Labour turn this big group of keyed up activists into


From my experience of the Obama campaigns, an organisation that won


a primary and two general elections, you need to both


have the grassroots energy, but also the organisation and data


and context to make it meaningful in an electoral contest.


And so, to be able to create the space for


energy is one thing, but to be able to marshal


where you can produce an electoral outcome is something else, and it


remains to be seen if the scale and capacity of the Corbyn side is going


The Corbynasphere utterly dominates Labour's internal elections.


So far, though, it had no visible success peeling off swing


Theresa May is back at work now, having taken a nice Swiss holiday.


Tomorrow is an important one - the cabinet will sit


Nick Watt is also back from his holiday.


Great to have you back. It feels a bit like things are settling in.


What did we learn today? Theresa May is saying no to a second referendum,


no Tonelli General election after the Brexit boat but yes to beginning


the process early next year of taking the UK out of the EU by


triggering Article 50 of the Ms Bond Treaty. But without a vote in


parliament and assuming that she wins a legal challenge against that.


Had we been paying attention when Theresa May launched a leadership


contest in the early summer, we would not have been surprised. She


said it would be wrong to add to the uncertainty by holding an election


and she said that Brexit means Brexit. As one and I said, she needs


to trigger it early next year so she can take in the UK out of the EU by


2019 and go into a general election in 2020 and say, you voted to leave


and I delivered it, can I have the reward? We learned some things today


but if we had paid attention we would have known that. What about


tomorrow? The Cabinet awayday at Chequers, beginning with the formal


cabinet. And then the officials will gently be shown the door and the


real business in the political Cabinet begins. And the three


Brexiteers, David Davis, Liam Fox and Boris Johnson will do


presentations on how things are going. There has been some signs of


tension between those three and Theresa May was not amused by that.


And she needs them to get their ducks in a row so there is an agreed


UK position by the time that she triggers Article 50 early in the New


Year. Ayew any clearer about what that position could be cursed at the


grand bargain is that the UK needs to take back control of immigration


and if you're doing that then you're going to limit your access to the


single market. I spoke to one senior Whitehall source today who said that


the key thing is the UK has got to be a rule maker and not a rule


taker. And this person said I think that means we will have limited


access to the single market and interestingly, perhaps no passports.


This is the process allowing us to sell our financial services around


the EU and this person is saying the process that we might move towards


is equivalent, we as the UK said the rules and regulations and then we


say, they are the equivalent of the EU. But who would arbitrate? But


Theresa May has been visiting five European capitals and she has been


struck about how UK -- EU leaders are worried, and are sounding


flexible on free movement of workers and not people. That could be


encouraging for her. Well, as the new political


term is almost upon us, we've invited along a panel


of friendly experts to offer some We've asked each of you to tell us


what her priority should be. Here with us: Anne McElvoy


from the Economist, Polly Toynbee from the Guardian,


and Fraser Nelson - If she has to pick one priority,


what should it be at this point? I think a big priority for Theresa May


is people outside London, outside the urban centres who may be voted


for Brexit but not die-hard Eurosceptics. Just people who have


become a bit divorced from what goes on at Westminster, who feel the


system doesn't work very well for them. She sees quite small


irrational people, a lot of Brexit is blamed on people being


dispossessed. She knows a lot of people voted for this and it is a


symbol, if you like, if this dislocation. She wants to put this


back together and rebuild small sweet conservativism. Particularly


outside London but the previous government had a big idea, Northern


powerhouse. We've been a bit all over the place? She doesn't like


that, it sounds to top down, too many banker friends of George


Osborne doing the right things for Manchester. Very nice for Manchester


and Leeds, but it left a lot of holes in between thinking, what


about us? I think we will see less of that big headlining, the grand


ideas, and more as a now reached a lots of places who can feel they


have a stake. How she will deliver that will be difficult and


interesting. That is one. What do you think a priority should be? She


has to explain who she is and what her agenda is. People have known as


the Home Secretary for ages but she's not one who would tell you


about her vision of politics and how it differs from David Cameron's and


what direction she would take the country in. It wasn't long ago we


were watching television debates of three leaders, which seems


ridiculous we have people who are entirely different. She hasn't had a


leadership contest to explain this. Right now she should be going up and


down the country, trying to explain what she intends to do. She has been


very quiet, partly because she has been on holiday, but she hasn't been


putting herself about? Even her own Cabinet don't know what her agenda


is and some don't know why they were appointed. She needs to get her


agenda across to them first and then to the rest of the country. There is


no such thing as Mayism right now. She needs to find out, tell her


colleagues and then the rest of us. Polly? The big discussion starts


tomorrow, the honeymoon is over and she is confronted with a Cabinet


that is riven over the big issue of Brexit. Even the three Brexiteers


don't really agree. She said Brexit means Brexit, that is meaningless,


nobody knows what it means. A delightfully helpful get out clause.


She has to say what she means by it. In my view that should be supporting


Philip Hammond and saying we have to stay in the single market. She has


to set the parameters and not allow them to all run away with a great


squabble amongst themselves. She has to establish her authority and


sakes, this is what I mean by Brexit. Interested to hear your


views, we will have as many as we can accommodate, but she has to say


what Brexit is. It is a nightmare. I don't think any Prime Minister in


living memory has stepped into such an appalling situation. Rishi has


more had Brexit is in her party. -- she has more. It is not easy. She


does, but she has a huge majority in the House of Commons who are


Remainers and it will come back to the House of Commons. The


communities act has to be repealed, every element of this will end up


being discussed in parliament. It may drive the rest of the country to


desperation with its complexities, but it's important. What do you say?


She is also a Remainer, but a quiet one. Fraser was interesting saying


there's no such thing as Mayism, but apart from that she has a blank


sheet on which to write. She has been very good in not boxing herself


in, in her position as Home Secretary. And even fair on the Bill


of Rights and things, she created some space for herself. My worry is,


does she know, does she have the team, does she have the planning


order quickly to put into that space? I think she has been very


clever at getting where she got to. She has come through as apes


Remainer in charge of a Brexit cabinet. Polly says it is


unmanageable but she is chairing these committees. She knows how to


run the organisational chart of government. Fraser, if she was so


minded, can she basically say we are going to stay in the single market


and have a minimal change on free movement best or does she have to


say, free movement is ended? I think she has to. The way the referendum


campaign was fought, there was an unwritten understanding that freedom


of movement was a problem. The idea you can control the ever rising EU


migration turned out to be one of the central issues of the referendum


campaign. Technically she could do a Norway. When she says Brexit means


Brexit she means we're not going to do a Norway, it does actually mean


coming out of it. We are drifting towards probably no passport in


front biggest export industry? Absolutely. I think it was fairly


widely discussed in the campaign. Something Phil Hammond is concerned


about. Absolutely. She has other huge problems on her plate, the NHS


is on its knees. People voted Brexit and they were promised, ?350 million


that the NHS, social care is in a state of absolute collapse. Where is


the money going to come from? We don't know what her economic


policies are. Is she willing to borrow or let the deficit slip?


Would you call an election if you were her not right now. But if she's


going to be so much different from David Cameron, and it looks as if


she is so far, then I think she has to. If her agenda is significantly


different to the one the country voted for last year, then she ought


to. Spring next year? Spring or summer next year. Hopefully Labour


will reckon resemble an opposition by then. Is it the best thing to say


you're not going to do it until you actually do it? I don't think why


she needs to. I think she is in such a commanding position, the Labour is


in a state of shambolic collapse. I don't see why she doesn't simply


plan her course, do what she wants to do. She's pretty much mistress of


all she surveys. She will only do when she has a deal, a reliable


deal... Do you think we need to be clear about Brexit before the


election? Yes, otherwise it becomes referendum two, the horror story


continues. What is in it for her? She is not under massive pressure


from the Labour Party for the foreseeable future. I think she can


largely control the terms. It may be 2020 is a long way away, but she


does know she has got control, because nobody else, as it turned


out, in her party, could do it better. We will leave it there.


Thank you all very much. That's about it tonight,


but before we go a little tribute to one of America's most loved comic


actors Gene Wilder Millions of children grew up


with his classic "Willy Wonka He also provided the magic


for the box office juggernauts Bonnie and Clyde, Stir Crazy


and The Producers, which won him In his later years he found most


comfort in his writing but we'll leave you with this


family favourite. # Anything you want to,


do it Good evening, a stunning day across


most of the UK today. Tomorrow, a change coming our way. This weather


front will be crossing the country bringing a spell of cloud and some


rain. Not a lot of rain but at times you might need an umbrella. This is


what it looks like in the afternoon across Northern Ireland. Most of the


day will be quite bright with a few showers, the showers will also get


into Scotland, through the lowlands


Download Subtitles