:00:07. > :00:08.Dialogue and discretion: statecraft and savoir faire -
:00:09. > :00:21.the art of diplomacy used to look like this:
:00:22. > :00:27.What does that mean for the world in 2017?
:00:28. > :00:30.We ask whether the traditional tools of the mandarin are being eclipsed
:00:31. > :00:33.Boris piled into the Saudis and tonight the former
:00:34. > :00:41.Are we ready for a more truthful conversation
:00:42. > :00:48.# Never thought I'd ever feel this way again
:00:49. > :00:52.# But here it is, so why try to explain
:00:53. > :00:55.# When I hear your name all I want to do is break free
:00:56. > :00:59.The evergreen songthrush, Petula Clark, tells us what happens
:01:00. > :01:02.when she and another singer found themselves alone with Elvis Presley
:01:03. > :01:06.And it was quite obvious that he was impressed at seeing us.
:01:07. > :01:18.And we were with him because, I mean, he was gorgeous.
:01:19. > :01:22.There is no shortage of committees trying to sort out
:01:23. > :01:26.Nato this week in Brussels will be followed by
:01:27. > :01:28.the General Affairs Council, EU leaders, then the Organization
:01:29. > :01:38.Each time Syria and Ukraine are top of the agenda and each
:01:39. > :01:39.will yield resolutions and statements, tough
:01:40. > :01:43.But anyone who really wants to know what's happening in geopolitics
:01:44. > :01:46.right now is probably better off reading Twitter, the preferred
:01:47. > :01:51.form of communication of Mr Donald J Trump,
:01:52. > :01:54.or listening to the off script remarks of Boris Johnson.
:01:55. > :01:56.Tonight, we look at what power Nato and these other
:01:57. > :01:58.global bodies still yield and whether the traditional tools
:01:59. > :02:03.of diplomacy are being eclipsed by a new kind of state power.
:02:04. > :02:06.Mark Urban starts us off with this report.
:02:07. > :02:10.ARCHIVE: This business of building for peace is a very grim business
:02:11. > :02:15.and it has to be worked for day in and day out.
:02:16. > :02:19.The very foundation and purpose of the Atlantic Pact is to bring
:02:20. > :02:22.this freedom-loving peoples together in such a way that they can
:02:23. > :02:33.For nearly 70 years, Nato has ticked along nicely.
:02:34. > :02:36.Everybody's understood the shape of the deal.
:02:37. > :02:43.During his campaign, Donald Trump suggested the US
:02:44. > :02:45.wouldn't come to the aid of its European allies
:02:46. > :02:54.unless they paid more towards the cost of defence.
:02:55. > :02:58.Behind the scenes, in the Alliance, that's caused a sense of crisis.
:02:59. > :03:00.I want to keep Nato, but I want them to pay.
:03:01. > :03:02.I don't want to be taken advantage of.
:03:03. > :03:05.We don't want to be the stupid people any more, OK.
:03:06. > :03:07.We don't want to be the stupid people any more.
:03:08. > :03:14.Many in Nato feel Mr Trump has to make things crystal clear now.
:03:15. > :03:18.It will only be put to bed by the strongest possible signal
:03:19. > :03:23.from the new President, after the 20th January, that
:03:24. > :03:26.America will, no ifs, no buts, no prevarication,
:03:27. > :03:29.come to the aid of a Nato member if attacked.
:03:30. > :03:31.If that doesn't happen, there will continue to be doubts
:03:32. > :03:34.about America's willingness to do that under President Trump,
:03:35. > :03:38.and that will strike right at the heart of Nato's founding
:03:39. > :03:42.So, potentially, is this the end of Nato?
:03:43. > :03:48.The foundation of the Alliance is Article 5.
:03:49. > :03:51.If there is any doubt about that, then it could spell the beginning
:03:52. > :03:57.Seeing trouble ahead, the British have been trying
:03:58. > :04:01.to bridge the gap between Trump and their European allies.
:04:02. > :04:04.Earlier this week, at the Nato meeting, Boris Johnson started
:04:05. > :04:06.the business of cajoling those who spend too little
:04:07. > :04:13.It is absolutely vital that everybody steps up to the plate
:04:14. > :04:18.and puts their money where their mouth is.
:04:19. > :04:21.From the European point of view, there's been a reluctance historical
:04:22. > :04:26.to support certain presidents - Reagan, Bush or now Trump.
:04:27. > :04:30.But look at it from the American perspective.
:04:31. > :04:33.The Europeans have consistently under spent on defence
:04:34. > :04:42.Taking it from a point where the US used to provide about half
:04:43. > :04:48.of the Alliance's defence spending, to one where it's now 75% American.
:04:49. > :04:50.This was a change election in the United States.
:04:51. > :04:53.We have an administration with a very different
:04:54. > :04:57.So there will be change, and I think the allies have to be
:04:58. > :05:00.prepared to adapt but, hopefully, at the same time,
:05:01. > :05:02.persuading the new US administration that Nato is a valuable asset
:05:03. > :05:10.There are 28 countries in Nato and all are committed to a target
:05:11. > :05:17.of spending 2% of their GDP on defence by 2024.
:05:18. > :05:21.Five of them already do - USA, Greece, the UK,
:05:22. > :05:28.Some are moving in the right direction.
:05:29. > :05:32.But when you look at the bottom five, including some
:05:33. > :05:34.of the Alliance's richest economies, they're spending under 1%
:05:35. > :05:44.Less than half the target, with little chance of meeting it.
:05:45. > :05:47.Add to the disagreements over resources, arguments about Russia
:05:48. > :05:58.and you have a growing crisis in the Alliance.
:05:59. > :06:00.President Trump wants a reset of relations with the Kremlin,
:06:01. > :06:02.and if that means de facto recognition of Putin's
:06:03. > :06:04.seizure of Crimea or indeed allowing him free rein
:06:05. > :06:07.in the former Soviet Union, the divisions will get
:06:08. > :06:12.Basically, ratifying the results of Russian aggression
:06:13. > :06:18.in Ukraine I think would perhaps buy you some short-term tranquillity
:06:19. > :06:21.but, in the end, it would create a much more unstable situation
:06:22. > :06:27.in Europe, encourage the Russians to continue to press forward
:06:28. > :06:32.for some kind of Yalta II with a new division of Europe
:06:33. > :06:35.into spheres of influence which I think would bring back some
:06:36. > :06:39.of the instability that we saw in previous decades.
:06:40. > :06:42.Nato is now preparing forces to defend the Baltic Republics,
:06:43. > :06:47.part of the Alliance, but once part of the USSR.
:06:48. > :06:50.If Nato doesn't make a credible pledge to defend them,
:06:51. > :06:57.There must be absolutely no doubt about the imperative of defending,
:06:58. > :07:04.There can be no discussion or deals about 'zones of influence'
:07:05. > :07:07.'new Yalta's', and that sort of thing, because that strikes
:07:08. > :07:11.right at the heart of what Nato's about.
:07:12. > :07:14.You always have to be prepared to walk.
:07:15. > :07:17.It would be easy to blame Donald Trump for undermining Nato,
:07:18. > :07:19.but European defence cuts have been going on for 25 years,
:07:20. > :07:23.If there are tricky times ahead for the Alliance,
:07:24. > :07:35.that's because many members now see things quite differently.
:07:36. > :07:39.We need to know what Trump will do, what Putin will do,
:07:40. > :07:41.what Brexit will look like - the cusp of change.
:07:42. > :07:44.We can speak to our correspondents in Syria, Washington and London
:07:45. > :07:46.about where the events of 2016 have left us.
:07:47. > :08:02.I guess, so much uncertainty. Aleppo is the front-line and the human cost
:08:03. > :08:07.of all this? Aleppo is at the top of the in-tray for leaders in many
:08:08. > :08:12.capitals. It is the war of our time. It is in Syria a civil war, a
:08:13. > :08:16.sectarian war, but it stopped being just about Syria a very long time
:08:17. > :08:22.ago. It is also a proxy war with all of the regional big hitters,
:08:23. > :08:27.including Saudi Arabia and Iran entangled in it. A new cold war with
:08:28. > :08:32.Moscow and Washington as well. It's the humanitarian test of our time,
:08:33. > :08:38.to use the United Nations phrase, and the world is failing Syria. On
:08:39. > :08:43.its watch, almost every day here accusations of possible war crimes
:08:44. > :08:46.by one side or the other. It is a terrible indictment of the
:08:47. > :08:51.international community. Will it take a different turn come January
:08:52. > :08:55.with a new United Nations Secretary General and a new President in the
:08:56. > :09:00.White House? Everyone is watching certainly here. To Jon Sopel in
:09:01. > :09:06.Washington. Listening to Lyse, you have to ask the question, Jon, how
:09:07. > :09:10.much does the in-coming administration commend how much is
:09:11. > :09:14.being suspended as we wait for Trump to begin? We wait for Trump to
:09:15. > :09:23.appoint who will be his Secretary of State. We have had all the words
:09:24. > :09:26.that Mark Urban played out. I was with with Rudy Giuliani hoping to be
:09:27. > :09:29.Secretary of State, he said you have to look at Donald Trump's tweets in
:09:30. > :09:33.the context of the start of a negotiation. This isn't what he
:09:34. > :09:41.thinks. This is his starting point for a negotiation where you might
:09:42. > :09:45.reach some centre ground. The other thing that Rudy Giuliani said is he
:09:46. > :09:49.doesn't know much about foreign affairs and who gets appointed is
:09:50. > :09:53.absolutely critical. I think the Secretary of State role will assume
:09:54. > :09:56.much more importance than it did under Barack Obama because Donald
:09:57. > :10:01.Trump is going to need to lean on whoever that Secretary of State is.
:10:02. > :10:06.So the world is waiting for the US response. America is waiting to see
:10:07. > :10:11.who the Secretary of State will be. Donald Trump, we know what his
:10:12. > :10:16.instincts are. These are complex issues. We have no idea which way
:10:17. > :10:24.he's going to jump on certain key policies. To Mark Urban now. If 2016
:10:25. > :10:30.was the year of shocks, what do you think 2017 is shaping up to be? I
:10:31. > :10:33.think another very bad year for the West and the Western idea of what is
:10:34. > :10:37.right. Let's look at some of the things that have been happening
:10:38. > :10:41.recently. China, in the summer, refusing to accept arbitration over
:10:42. > :10:45.a dispute with the Philippines in the South China Sea. South Africa
:10:46. > :10:50.and Russia pulling out of the International Criminal Court. Donald
:10:51. > :10:53.Trump saying he won't ratified the trans Pacific trade deal. The ideas
:10:54. > :10:57.have been around for some time about what is right in terms of human
:10:58. > :11:03.rights, trade, dispute resolution now being actively ignored in Aleppo
:11:04. > :11:07.or in that case in the south can South China Sea challenged. The core
:11:08. > :11:11.institutions of the West next year, the EU and Nato I think will also
:11:12. > :11:16.face serious challenge. Mark, thank you. Thank you all very much indeed.
:11:17. > :11:18.Well, the day began with comments from Boris Johnson
:11:19. > :11:21.hitting the airwaves - he had candidly admitted
:11:22. > :11:23.the Middle East had no strong leadership willing to reach out
:11:24. > :11:28.That's why, he said, "you have Saudis, Iran
:11:29. > :11:30.moving in, puppeteering and playing proxy wars."
:11:31. > :11:33.It was written up as a gaff and Number Ten were quick
:11:34. > :11:34.to distance themselves from the Foreign
:11:35. > :11:39.But they echo feelings that come right from within the region itself.
:11:40. > :11:42.The former President of Yemen, Ali Saleef, gave an exclusive
:11:43. > :11:48.interview to the BBC Arabic's Nawal al-Maghafi today for an Our World
:11:49. > :11:51.documentary, in which he agreed the strikes by Saudi on his country
:11:52. > :13:49.Yemen's former president speaking there.
:13:50. > :13:52.So how should we interpret those comments from Boris Johnson?
:13:53. > :14:01.Or has he broken the cardinal rule of British diplomacy?
:14:02. > :14:05.Our political editor, Nick Watt, is here.
:14:06. > :14:11.What did Downing Street make of the remarks? There was a certain feeling
:14:12. > :14:14.in Whitehall today that Theresa May hit the roof when she learned about
:14:15. > :14:18.the reports that were reported in this morning's Guardian. She had
:14:19. > :14:22.just returned from a visit to the Gulf where she met the King of Saudi
:14:23. > :14:24.Arabia and there was incredulity that Boris Johnson made these
:14:25. > :14:28.remarks last week knowing the Prime Minister would meet the king a few
:14:29. > :14:32.days later. There was a sense that perhaps he was behaving as a
:14:33. > :14:36.newspaper columnist thinking of headlines rather than as Britain's
:14:37. > :14:39.chief diplomat. This morning, you got the slap down from Downing
:14:40. > :14:43.Street in public where they said that these were his views and not
:14:44. > :14:47.the government's views and that was really knocking him down a peg or
:14:48. > :14:53.two. Because if the Foreign Secretary speaks for himself and not
:14:54. > :14:57.for Britain, he's really going to struggle to establish credibility on
:14:58. > :15:02.the world stage. So any response from Boris Johnson today to that? I
:15:03. > :15:06.think there's a feeling in Boris Johnson's circle that the use of the
:15:07. > :15:10.word property was unwise but there's irritation that Downing Street gave
:15:11. > :15:15.the story a new lease of life why publicly rebuking him in that way.
:15:16. > :15:19.-- the word property. He is going to travel to the region in the next few
:15:20. > :15:22.days and go to Saudi Arabia and my senses he's not going to be in
:15:23. > :15:27.apology mode because essentially, what he's going to say that the
:15:28. > :15:32.Saudis know what he thinks because this is he tells them in private,
:15:33. > :15:35.significantly, an official advice. But what is really interesting is I
:15:36. > :15:40.get the impression that Boris Johnson think that after the
:15:41. > :15:44.election of Donald Trump, the downfall of Matteo Renzi after the
:15:45. > :15:49.Italian referendum, we are in a new world and in that new world, it can
:15:50. > :15:53.be refreshing if you can hear in public what is being said behind
:15:54. > :15:58.closed doors and in this case, has been said behind closed doors for 15
:15:59. > :16:02.years. Briefly, do you think there is a hint we might have more of
:16:03. > :16:08.this? I think that Boris Johnson really does feel quite strongly that
:16:09. > :16:12.there is a new world out there. He understands it, if, in a sense, he
:16:13. > :16:16.was part of that new world because of course he was one of the leading
:16:17. > :16:19.lights, and there is an argument we may not be talking about leaving the
:16:20. > :16:23.European Union were it not for Boris Johnson's decision to endorse and
:16:24. > :16:26.campaign to leave. Interesting. Thank you for joining us.
:16:27. > :16:29.Joining us now, Sean O'Grady from the Independent and Jill Rutter
:16:30. > :16:38.Lovely to have you here. Do you think it is right that we have now
:16:39. > :16:42.entered a different era, a different age? We have to rewrite the rules a
:16:43. > :16:48.bit of how diplomacy is done? I think there's a lot in that and I
:16:49. > :16:51.think it is perfectly true that people, fairly obviously, over the
:16:52. > :16:55.last year or more, have got very tired of politicians missing their
:16:56. > :17:01.words, not saying what they think. There was a lack of authenticity in
:17:02. > :17:04.political life and I think what has happened with the Brexit vote and
:17:05. > :17:08.drum and what is happening on the continent of Europe in some cases,
:17:09. > :17:12.for various reasons and sometimes it is the radical right and sometimes a
:17:13. > :17:15.bit more the radical left to benefit from it, people are looking for
:17:16. > :17:20.politicians who say what they mean and mean what they say. And I think
:17:21. > :17:24.they have been lacking that and I think that if the politicians then
:17:25. > :17:28.choose to make a populist appeal, so much the better for them and they
:17:29. > :17:32.are benefiting from it. There's a huge sort of global peasants revolt
:17:33. > :17:36.which is happening at the moment. There will be plenty of support for
:17:37. > :17:42.that, would there? A politician who says it as it is and is admired for
:17:43. > :17:45.doing so. I think you really need to differentiate a bit between
:17:46. > :17:49.politicians and government. I think one of the things that is quite
:17:50. > :17:54.interesting is I think you are right, people want politicians who
:17:55. > :17:57.are prepared not just to spout lines to take and things like that but
:17:58. > :18:00.it's a bit different when you are talking about government and
:18:01. > :18:04.government positions which is quite interesting -- why it's quite
:18:05. > :18:07.interesting number ten have had to clarify, have been spending the last
:18:08. > :18:10.three or four months clarifying a lot of their ministers. Quite often,
:18:11. > :18:15.a minister goes out and freelance is a bit and comes back and number ten
:18:16. > :18:18.said it was their position, not the government position. It may be a
:18:19. > :18:25.considered view that it is actually better to foment a bit of debate and
:18:26. > :18:27.there's only one person who authentically speaks for the
:18:28. > :18:30.government, which is Theresa May, and everyone else is doing their own
:18:31. > :18:33.thing but it gets a bit awkward. We've had one area and Heathrow
:18:34. > :18:37.where they have formally suspended collective responsibility --
:18:38. > :18:40.collective responsibility. What does Boris Johnson do now? When he goes
:18:41. > :18:45.to the Middle East, does he stick with his line or the government's?
:18:46. > :18:49.If I was him, I would stick to the Boris Johnson line. So he set
:18:50. > :18:51.himself at odds with the UK Government permanently? Orange
:18:52. > :18:56.Mackreth I think they can live with it and I think we can as well. What
:18:57. > :19:00.he has done is bring ethics into foreign policy, just like that.
:19:01. > :19:03.Nobody has noticed but we now have a liberal Foreign Secretary, in
:19:04. > :19:10.effect, operating in ethical foreign policy. There was this idea that we
:19:11. > :19:12.can deal with a government that sends out different messages? Think
:19:13. > :19:15.about being the receiving government, you have someone coming
:19:16. > :19:19.and are they speaking for the country from which they come or not?
:19:20. > :19:23.That is when it gets really complicated. In a sense, you almost
:19:24. > :19:26.devalue the Foreign Secretary's visit because it's not the
:19:27. > :19:30.government. Theresa May says those things in private to the Saudi
:19:31. > :19:34.government anyway, we understand so he's just taking it out of the
:19:35. > :19:39.shadows and putting it into the public sphere. What he's doing, the
:19:40. > :19:44.point is for 50, 60, 70 years, diplomats, the Foreign Office, what
:19:45. > :19:48.people are unkindly call the Camel Corps, those people have been doing
:19:49. > :19:52.quiet diplomacy, behind-the-scenes diplomacy, talking and lobbying in
:19:53. > :19:56.secret and then they go to the banquet and so forth and they are
:19:57. > :20:00.very polite and at best you have a coded message. It is not doing any
:20:01. > :20:04.good in Yemen. Boris Johnson is completely right. Everyone knows it,
:20:05. > :20:07.there's a proxy war going on in Yemen between Iran and Saudi Arabia.
:20:08. > :20:13.And other parts of the Middle East as well. If we don't call them out,
:20:14. > :20:16.as Boris Johnson has done, then you go along with the spin and you just
:20:17. > :20:23.get nowhere. People suffer as a result. Like the no collective
:20:24. > :20:26.responsibility, maybe it's a small point in the great scale of things
:20:27. > :20:30.but there is no point of which you hold the government to it count for
:20:31. > :20:34.anything they have said? But there wasn't anything Boris Johnson said
:20:35. > :20:37.that was actually rude. He was just telling them what they know already.
:20:38. > :20:43.It is like telling the king he's got a beard. May but I think the
:20:44. > :20:47.interesting thing is if there is an explicit strategy that you want to
:20:48. > :20:50.maybe pincer attack, the Foreign Secretary saying one thing and the
:20:51. > :20:54.Prime Minister saying another thing and that is agreed in advance and
:20:55. > :20:57.they know and the Foreign Secretary knows the Prime Minister might
:20:58. > :21:01.distance herself slightly from him, then I think that's fine. If
:21:02. > :21:04.actually, what you are getting is two people shooting off in slightly
:21:05. > :21:08.different directions, whatever they are saying privately behind closed
:21:09. > :21:12.doors, I think that makes for policy incoherence and I don't think it is
:21:13. > :21:19.terribly helpful and it does not help advance British interests. Do
:21:20. > :21:22.you think he did it deliberately? That he was happy for it to be
:21:23. > :21:25.picked up? That is the hint we are getting. I'm not a Boris reader, he
:21:26. > :21:27.might live next door to the Institute by telepathy does not go
:21:28. > :21:33.through the walls. It's interesting, he's relatively new to a senior
:21:34. > :21:37.cabinet position and as mayor of London, it was OK to say things on
:21:38. > :21:41.your own account, the same way that Donald Trump can still say things on
:21:42. > :21:44.his own account. Once you are a senior government minister, you are
:21:45. > :21:47.expected to be able to talk for the government. That's an interesting
:21:48. > :21:52.point because on one level, it is not very collegiate, he's used to
:21:53. > :21:58.being the Boris Johnson figure. Is there a bit of megalomania coming
:21:59. > :22:03.into this? I wouldn't call it that. He's a top-ranked politician. They
:22:04. > :22:09.are all megalomaniacs. So you would? It's not so unusual in that line of
:22:10. > :22:12.work. But he is one of, like quite a few of them, those who is not
:22:13. > :22:15.necessarily a very good team player which is not helped by the fact he's
:22:16. > :22:19.a journalist because journalists like to tell the truth every so
:22:20. > :22:24.often, as you know. He's not one of those people who is inclined to
:22:25. > :22:28.follow his lead are always and everywhere. If we move this slightly
:22:29. > :22:31.away from Boris, the bigger question is perhaps when you look at the
:22:32. > :22:35.institutions, and I listed them at the beginning of the programme, you
:22:36. > :22:39.look at what Nato is trying to do, not very successfully and what EU
:22:40. > :22:42.leaders are trying to do, not very successfully, they can make the
:22:43. > :22:45.minutes and these emissions and the summit and all the rest of it but
:22:46. > :22:55.Barnsley, the world has failed in the Middle East, it's failed to so
:22:56. > :22:58.-- solve the war and diplomacy does not work as we know. Does something
:22:59. > :23:00.you need to happen even if it comes from a strong statement? I think
:23:01. > :23:02.it's really interesting, I think there's a good case for saying that
:23:03. > :23:05.actually, we need political leaders generally who are prepared much more
:23:06. > :23:09.to level and expose the real choices that they face and have a much more
:23:10. > :23:13.honest conversation, whether it is an foreign policy or domestic
:23:14. > :23:16.policy, with the population. Whether actually, the events of this year
:23:17. > :23:20.have shown there is a real public appetite for that or not, I'm not so
:23:21. > :23:25.sure I would read it that way but I think there are lots of areas where
:23:26. > :23:28.there is almost a sort of conspiracy of not asking difficult questions
:23:29. > :23:33.between the political class which means that actually, there's a
:23:34. > :23:37.divorced from reality. I think actually, a general move towards
:23:38. > :23:40.having more debates in public and actually being prepared to admit you
:23:41. > :23:43.don't know things, that some things are difficult, that sometimes you
:23:44. > :23:47.will make the wrong choice, will actually improve the quality of
:23:48. > :23:50.public debate enormously. I think that's different from shooting off
:23:51. > :23:53.in different directions, though, because it seems like a good thing
:23:54. > :23:56.to say at the time. I don't know if that is what he was doing a lot but
:23:57. > :23:58.I don't think you can run government on that basis. Thank you for joining
:23:59. > :24:00.us. Anyone who's devoted hours
:24:01. > :24:02.of the last week watching the intricate and detailed legal
:24:03. > :24:04.argument of the Supreme Court will perhaps have noticed one
:24:05. > :24:06.extraordinary thing - The make up of the UK's highest
:24:07. > :24:10.court, in other words, has been overwhelmingly old,
:24:11. > :24:12.male and white. Chris Cooke's going to
:24:13. > :24:18.have a go at explaining. One striking feature
:24:19. > :24:20.of the Supreme Court is, for a public body, how pale,
:24:21. > :24:25.male and old it is. All white, when 13% of the country
:24:26. > :24:30.is from an ethnic minority. Only one woman of 11
:24:31. > :24:35.Justices, all aged over 60. Supreme Court Justices need
:24:36. > :24:43.decades of experience. Half the population are women,
:24:44. > :24:54.but only one Justice is, Lady Hale. According to a study
:24:55. > :24:56.of 34 Supreme Courts from around the world,
:24:57. > :24:59.that low representation puts us Now, only 16% of judges in England
:25:00. > :25:08.and Wales over 60 are women. So it's partly a reflection of legal
:25:09. > :25:10.recruitment of 40 years 34% of 50-something judges are women
:25:11. > :25:22.and 47% of 40 to 49-year-old judges. Yet there remains a lack
:25:23. > :25:24.of women across the top In the Court of Appeal, only seven
:25:25. > :25:29.of the 38 Justices are women. So there's a problem in the pipeline
:25:30. > :25:35.for women to the senior judiciary. There's not just an absence
:25:36. > :25:41.of ethnic minority judges in the Supreme Court,
:25:42. > :25:44.there are no Court of Appeal minority judges either,
:25:45. > :25:46.and only 5% of High Court judges There's also a basic
:25:47. > :25:51.recruitment problem here, Only 9% of Justices in England
:25:52. > :25:58.and Wales, under 40, The minority population share
:25:59. > :26:03.of adults, aged 25 to 40 in Britain, Building a judiciary which better
:26:04. > :26:20.reflects the country Karon Monaghan QC wrote a review
:26:21. > :26:25.into judicial diversity in 2014 and Matthew Ryder QC is London's deputy
:26:26. > :26:28.mayor for social integration, social mobility and community. Nice to have
:26:29. > :26:34.you both here. I wonder if you think it actually matters? Does it matter
:26:35. > :26:39.if they don't look like their country they represent necessarily?
:26:40. > :26:43.Yes, I think it does. I think it matters for reasons of democratic
:26:44. > :26:46.legitimacy. We saw this week the Supreme Court dealing with some of
:26:47. > :26:51.the most important constitutional issues that are likely to be
:26:52. > :26:54.confronted in law and looking at a court that bears no resemblance to
:26:55. > :27:00.those who are likely to be affected by the decisions they will in due
:27:01. > :27:04.course make really calls into question whether or not we can
:27:05. > :27:08.really buy into that. Secondly, I think it's important because it
:27:09. > :27:13.makes a difference. It makes a difference, certainly in some cases,
:27:14. > :27:20.to the outcome. You actually think it changes the way... In a small
:27:21. > :27:23.number of cases, I think, yes. And I say that based on experience of
:27:24. > :27:31.being in the Supreme Court but also, I say it because senior judges say
:27:32. > :27:34.it, senior women judges said. I find that fascinating, do you think your
:27:35. > :27:41.own perspective has changed? Would you agree with that as well? -- has
:27:42. > :27:44.changed an outcome? We bring different experiences and in a
:27:45. > :27:47.collegiate cord, women and other minorities will bring other
:27:48. > :27:52.experiences which will inform the ultimate decision. So it's not just
:27:53. > :27:57.about the way law is read? Matthew, you feel, you had a very different
:27:58. > :28:02.experience coming in to a predominantly all-white, mail...
:28:03. > :28:05.Yeah, and I think I'm an adviser on the David Lammy review which is
:28:06. > :28:09.looking at this termination the criminal justice system and the
:28:10. > :28:13.interim findings have said 51% of British-born non-white people don't
:28:14. > :28:18.have confidence in the criminal justice system. Now whether that is
:28:19. > :28:22.well founded on the evidence or not is almost not the issue because the
:28:23. > :28:25.concern is the confidence within the judiciary and the level to which it
:28:26. > :28:30.has legitimacy to the public it is serving. So I agree, it is a really
:28:31. > :28:34.important reason why the judiciary, we really need a judiciary that does
:28:35. > :28:39.an important public service that looks like the community it serves.
:28:40. > :28:42.The second point is that you say you find interesting I think is an
:28:43. > :28:46.interesting phenomenon because when you get a diversity of experience at
:28:47. > :28:52.a judge level, at the lower level of courts as well, particularly, you
:28:53. > :28:55.know, when judges are dealing with facts and understanding communities
:28:56. > :28:58.and understanding where people come from, a wealth of experience can be
:28:59. > :29:02.really important. That doesn't mean you can't put yourself in someone
:29:03. > :29:05.else's shoes but it means that the broader breadth of experience you
:29:06. > :29:08.have do draw on from the judiciary, the more likely you are to get
:29:09. > :29:15.people that understand the points in front of them. There are levers for
:29:16. > :29:18.change, are there? On one hand, you could say these are the finest legal
:29:19. > :29:21.minds and they have endless experience and they are at the end
:29:22. > :29:27.of their career so they are naturally going to be older. So
:29:28. > :29:30.there are levers. One, we have traditionally appointed from the
:29:31. > :29:34.Court of Appeal, as you referred to, or the High Court for the Supreme
:29:35. > :29:37.Court judges. And they are predominantly white and male. So if
:29:38. > :29:45.we use that as the pool, inevitably we will have a cord which is
:29:46. > :29:49.constituted by those who are represented in the scene Yu courts
:29:50. > :29:53.below. Lord Sumption jumped straight up. He was the first person to do so
:29:54. > :29:58.in about half a century and he was of course, a white man educated at
:29:59. > :30:01.Eton and Oxford, unfortunately. So we can widen the pool, there's no
:30:02. > :30:06.reason we have to recruit from that pool. We widen the pool by, for
:30:07. > :30:11.example, advertising for academics, for those who are employed lawyers
:30:12. > :30:14.and so on, a more diverse cohort and there is also a mechanism within the
:30:15. > :30:21.law that exists now which allows for women to be preferred in cases where
:30:22. > :30:30.they are of equal merit as compared to a man. And that can be a useful
:30:31. > :30:35.tool if properly used. To ensure that there is greater diversity but
:30:36. > :30:38.so far, there's been considerable reluctance both in extending the
:30:39. > :30:42.pool and using that tool. Looking at the pipeline, as it were, the gender
:30:43. > :30:47.problem seems to correct itself because there are many more women
:30:48. > :30:49.coming through. When you look at the ethnic minorities, one thing that is
:30:50. > :30:53.extraordinary is that throughout school, it tends to be ethnic
:30:54. > :30:58.minority kids that outperform white kids. Why doesn't that follow
:30:59. > :31:01.through then into such a strong part of the astonishment? You're talking
:31:02. > :31:05.about a couple of things, firstly, a legacy. As you pointed out, judges
:31:06. > :31:08.are of a certain age and a certain point in their careers. We change
:31:09. > :31:12.the system of how we appointed judges about ten years ago and as a
:31:13. > :31:17.result, we are looking at... Radically changed, a much more
:31:18. > :31:19.transparent system, a way, a judicial appointments commission
:31:20. > :31:23.which is not about a tap on the shoulder from people you know but is
:31:24. > :31:26.a much more objective system. Ten years later, we are looking at what
:31:27. > :31:29.has happened but it takes time for it to flush through. At the same
:31:30. > :31:32.time, it is really important to emphasise, you asked about
:31:33. > :31:36.experience, my experience of first sitting as a judge is that the
:31:37. > :31:40.judges I sat with were enormously welcoming and very positive and that
:31:41. > :31:44.was great but it's almost not the point. The point is, you need to
:31:45. > :31:47.make sure there are more able people from ethnic minorities feeling they
:31:48. > :31:51.can apply and there needs to be more rigour, trying to find them. The
:31:52. > :31:55.important point to note, if I can make two quick points, firstly,
:31:56. > :31:59.everybody in the debate pretty much agree is that you have to maintain
:32:00. > :32:03.the very high standard of the Ingush judiciary. Everyone in the debate
:32:04. > :32:08.also agreed that we can't continue with the same lack of diversity in
:32:09. > :32:11.the judiciary we have now. -- English judiciary. It's a given
:32:12. > :32:12.everyone understands that and we are just tried to find the best way to
:32:13. > :32:22.get there quickly. Barristers are employed on a
:32:23. > :32:29.case-by-case basis. You can't have a system that is corrected from within
:32:30. > :32:36.the inside, as it were You looked to a broader cohort. You look outside
:32:37. > :32:39.the self-employed Bar and look to academia. At the Supreme Court level
:32:40. > :32:45.you don't need to have those who excel at the Bar. The judiciary as a
:32:46. > :32:50.whole you will not look outside? At the senior levels, there is no
:32:51. > :32:55.reason why not. We should be more progressive about the way we recruit
:32:56. > :33:02.at first instance senior level by, for example, adopting the equal
:33:03. > :33:06.merit provision identified. I'm less optimistic about Matthew who, I
:33:07. > :33:13.think if I understood him correctly, is suggesting that things will
:33:14. > :33:21.change. Can I just say. Of course. We have had 14 white men appointed
:33:22. > :33:24.since Lady Hale was appointed. Cannot be each and every one of
:33:25. > :33:28.those men is better than the best of the women who could have been
:33:29. > :33:31.appointed. I think we need to do something more compelling there. I
:33:32. > :33:36.do think it's important... In the context of the job I do for the
:33:37. > :33:43.Mayor of London. He doesn't have anything to do with the judiciary,
:33:44. > :33:47.when you talk about broader service. You cannot, when have you a problem
:33:48. > :33:50.with diversity in the public service, you cannot be complacent.
:33:51. > :33:56.You cannot be complacent. The opposite. What I'm saying is, the
:33:57. > :33:59.worst thing you can do is take the view - it will be all right, time
:34:00. > :34:05.will sort it out. It won't. Absolutely. Have you to be rigorous.
:34:06. > :34:08.As long as you are engaged in that conversation with the profession,
:34:09. > :34:12.with other people making sure you have the right kind of levers that
:34:13. > :34:21.you are pulling, that is #2350i7b. Fine. You can't expect it will sort
:34:22. > :34:25.it self out, because it won't. Thank you very much.
:34:26. > :34:27.If you've made it this far into the programme,
:34:28. > :34:31.it can only mean that you're as keen as I am to hear from our
:34:32. > :34:32.crepuscular culture correspondent, Stephen Smith.
:34:33. > :34:34.And tonight's effort should be pretty good for once,
:34:35. > :34:37.as he's joined by one of our most garlanded and best-loved
:34:38. > :34:40.At the height of Beatlemania in the '60s, Miss Clark
:34:41. > :34:43.was the female face of the "British invasion" of America,
:34:44. > :34:44.where she enjoyed 15 consecutive hit singles.
:34:45. > :34:47.Now aged 84, she came into Newsnight's storied rehearsal
:34:48. > :34:50.rooms to sing from her new album, From Now On, and to talk
:34:51. > :34:52.about evading an amorous Elvis, taking career advice
:34:53. > :34:54.from John Lennon and the transcendent therapy of...ironing.
:34:55. > :34:56.Stephen's report includes a little colourful language and the usual
:34:57. > :35:00.# Downtown, where all the lights are bright
:35:01. > :35:10.# Downtown, waiting for us tonight...#.
:35:11. > :35:12.When The Beatles weren't topping the American charts
:35:13. > :35:20.But when she found herself having a hard time with
:35:21. > :35:23.audiences in bilingual Canada, of all places, she turned
:35:24. > :35:26.There they were, John and Yoko, sitting up in bed, you
:35:27. > :35:30.John said, "Hey, what's the matter with you?"
:35:31. > :35:37.And he was so sweet and wise and funny and he gave
:35:38. > :35:40.me a piece of advice which I can't repeat.
:35:41. > :35:42.Even in front of a grown-up like you.
:35:43. > :35:52."Well, thank you for that advice, John."
:35:53. > :35:54.He said, "Go and have a drink in the living room".
:35:55. > :35:57.They had a suite, so I went into the living room
:35:58. > :35:59.and there were people humming along to this simple little
:36:00. > :36:08.song that was coming over the loudspeaker.
:36:09. > :36:11.They gave us a lyric and we all started singing it.
:36:12. > :36:24.And little did I know that we were all being recorded.
:36:25. > :36:32.Capping a long and distinguished career, Miss Clark joined us to
:36:33. > :36:34.record a prestigious Newsnight session with a song from her new
:36:35. > :36:41.# Never thought I'd ever feel this way again
:36:42. > :36:44.# But here it is so why try to explain
:36:45. > :37:00.I insist on having an iron and an ironing board in my dressing
:37:01. > :37:03.room, because that's my, that's my therapy, before I go on.
:37:04. > :37:12.Do you take like the week's wash in and do them or just...
:37:13. > :37:15...or just the blouse you are performing in?
:37:16. > :37:18.No, my musicians did suggest perhaps I did their shirts
:37:19. > :37:25.# I've heard it all a million times before #.
:37:26. > :37:28.Like other female stars, Lulu, Cilla Black, Petula Clark had her
:37:29. > :37:31.own TV series in the supposedly less-enlightened '60s.
:37:32. > :37:33.# Don't sleep in the subway, darling
:37:34. > :37:42.What does she make of today's younger singers?
:37:43. > :37:45.A lot of them seem to be trying to sound like someone
:37:46. > :37:47.I suppose that's understandable when you're starting
:37:48. > :37:58.But, you know, the trick is to find your sound
:37:59. > :38:08.Find a sound that other people will want to imitate.
:38:09. > :38:11.# Well, I've lost my soul, what's wrong with me #.
:38:12. > :38:14.At the height of her fame, Miss Clark found herself in Elvis
:38:15. > :38:16.Presley's dressing room in Vegas, alone apart from the singer Karen
:38:17. > :38:20.It was quite obvious that he was impressed at seeing us.
:38:21. > :38:26.I mean, he was gorgeous, and let's face it,
:38:27. > :38:30.Karen and I were the top two women singers in the world, you know.
:38:31. > :38:40.And I said, "Elvis, that was so great.
:38:41. > :38:45.Thank you for the drink, blah blah blah", and we scuttled out of
:38:46. > :38:50.And as I left, I turned round and Elvis was standing at the door,
:38:51. > :38:59.# But I love you the way you are
:39:00. > :39:26.The papers. The Mail, a decision that MPs and military chiefs are
:39:27. > :39:31.calling "disgraceful." It's by The Police Service of Northern Ireland
:39:32. > :39:41.to re-examine every British Army killing during The Troubles.
:39:42. > :39:50.In the Times. A story with a headline, aid blown on foreign
:39:51. > :40:01.luxury. Hundreds of millions pounds of aid have been poured into hotels
:40:02. > :40:04.and rest rants. This is a revelation about the Times about the
:40:05. > :40:09.government's private equity decision. Claims it make as lasting
:40:10. > :40:14.difference to people's lives. In the Guardian, photo that will shock you.
:40:15. > :40:20.To talk you through that. In case you can't see the small pribt print.
:40:21. > :40:30.This is by Alison Jackson, the artist famous for the satirical
:40:31. > :40:40.photos posed by lookalikes. She was saying she was outraged by lawyers
:40:41. > :40:44.warningings that a President might sue to restrict artistic freedom.
:40:45. > :40:48.But just before we go, there was news this evening that
:40:49. > :40:50.John Glenn, the first American to orbit the Earth, has died.
:40:51. > :40:53.We thought there would be no more fitting tribute than the footage
:40:54. > :41:27.Coming down on a ten, circles are open.
:41:28. > :41:53.Recondition at 10,800 feet and beautiful choux chute.
:41:54. > :41:54.It it looks as though we will start off on a