26/01/2017 Newsnight


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 26/01/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



To join hands, as we pick up that mantle of leadership once more. To


renew our special relationship, and to recommit ourselves to the


responsibility of leadership in the modern world.


"Haven't you noticed? Sometimes opposites attract."


So said Theresa May en-route to her meeting with Donald Trump.


She's been turning on the charm for senior Republicans this evening -


so how will she handle the president?


We'll hear from former Labour leader Ed Miliband.


On the eve of summit to discuss gay sex and the clergy,


we discuss the Church of England policy to pretend


Tomorrow, the long awaited sequel to Trainspotting opens


But what was it about that film that entranced a whole generation?


It is primarily a youth book, and a youth movie.


Because I would rather be, kind of, on drugs in a bedsit in my 20s


than I would be sailing around the Bay of Biscay in a yacht


Charming senior Republicans with a speech in Philadelphia


and stressing the historic ties between the UK and the US.


Her messages on leadership, free trade and shared values went


Tomorrow - the diplomacy might get trickier.


In the Commons before she left for Philadelphia,


politicians of all stripes were queuing up to offer her advice,


If she'd listened to the majority of them she would have a list


of grievances in her briefcase, everything from human rights


In fact, the new president has offered the hope that we might


have a closer relationship than over the last eight years -


after all, he wants a new trade deal and he's a big fan of Brexit.


Our diplomatic editor Mark Urban is here.


What was the tone of her speech? It was reaching out for lot of downing


-- a lot of people in Downing Street Sea as a big political opportunity


in the UK, but problematic as his reputation may be, his remarks are


favourable of the UK, and at the expense of Germany, President Obama


praised those countries so high in his last weeks in office, they


constituted an opportunity. Let's hear what she had to say. President


Trump's victory, achieved in defiance of all the pundits and the


polls, rooted not in the corridors of Washington but in the hopes and


aspirations of working men and women across this land. You are part of


this victory, in the Congress and the Senate, where you swept all


before you, secured with great effort and achieved with an


important message of national renewal. And because of this,


because of what you have done together, the cause of that great


victory that you have won, America can be stronger, greater and more


confident in the years ahead. Fascinatingly there, not too many


mentions of President Trump, but addressing the congressmen and women


and senators directly a few times, and mentions of Nato too. It is a


congressional do, this conclave, but one can see her acknowledging the


complexity of the way that power is dispensed in Washington, and


reaching out directly to those people and making her pitch to them


as well. Of course, President Trump tomorrow. She is meeting Donald


Trump tomorrow but one leader will not be next in line? It was supposed


to be happening next week, President Pena Nieto of Mexico was meant to


come, this would be the beginning of tough talk about trade and the wall.


All of those things but people have been asking, what will happen when


Trump sends one of these tweets? That is exactly what happened today.


He said they may as well not come if they are not prepared to pay for the


wall. A couple of hours later, in Mexico City, it was announced that


the meeting was. That wrong-footed the president for a while, he


appeared on live television saying that he would slap a 20% Harris on


Mexican imports -- tariff. Then people around him in the White House


moved back a bit, you had to put legal and other arrangements in


place. We are beginning to see the first signs of someone who has the


impulse to act like President Putin, dealing with the constitutions of


the democracy. But, Theresa May is in there tomorrow. There is an


aspect where people understand that President Obama was not that great


for Britain in some ways, and this is a new opportunity to define, as


she said, redefine, a special relationship.


Until last week, there was a president widely esteemed


in Britain who didn't exactly return the love.


He removed Winston Churchill's bust from the Oval Office, couldn't


forget the treatment his grandfather received in Kenya and plainly


considered Germany a more important ally than Britain.


As I reflect back over the last eight years,


I could not ask for a steadier or more reliable partner


Now, of course, there's a president who alarms or appals


a great many Britons, but who, in marked contrast


to Obama, is seeing Theresa May ahead of all other foreign leaders,


and, it seems, couldn't be more supportive of Brexit.


He doesn't seem to like the European Union.


He seems to be encouraging other people to follow our example


Now, a lot of people in the United Kingdom consider these


things to be terrible negatives, but it does give Theresa May some


It was Palmerston, and who better for this age in which we seem to be


turning to 19th-century style jostling nationalisms.


He said, Britain has no eternal allies and no eternal enemies.


So, if it's in Britain's vital interest to cosy up


The question is of course whether it's also in the interests


This is a protectionist president, so any idea that he's


We stand to lose our environmental protections, our food standards,


our food assurances, and this will be a Trojan


Britain can of course offer Trump something back in some areas.


If the Donald accuses many Nato allies of being freeloaders,


that's not so different to long-held a Downing Street views.


Instead of planning expensive new headquarters or dreaming


of a European army, what Europe needs to do now is to spend


That is the best possible approach to the Trump presidency.


But on so many questions, from policy towards Israel


to torture, Putin or withdrawal of funding from the UN, Britain


How to break the news to Trump gently?


This is not going to be easy for her.


She's got to steer between not behaving like a British poodle


to the American president, but at the same time,


creating a atmosphere in which, as she said herself,


you can invest new meaning in the special relationship.


These days, and we saw this during the last visit


here by the Chinese president, diplomacy as demanded by many


on Twitter or even from the floor of the House of Commons


would involve lecturing a foreign leader on why their values


Unsurprisingly, foreign leaders are no keener on that than any


Tonight, Theresa May arrived in America, telling reporters


frankly that any resumption of CIA "enhanced interrogation"


With suggestions the two leaders may give a joint news


conference tomorrow, the Prime Minister's balancing act


At least, though, she can start on the basis that,


since his election, Donald Trump has saved some of his kindest words


for Britain, and has moved that famous bust of Churchill back


In a moment, we'll speak to the former Labour Leader Ed Miliband.


But first - the Daily Telegraph columnist Tim Stanley is with us.


Good evening. Hello. What should Theresa May do tomorrow, should she


go in all guns blazing? I think what she will do is what she is going to


be doing anyway, saying one thing publicly and another privately.


Publicly, she has started on a strong foot saying I'm with you, not


just strategically but there is a philosophical connection between us.


She rolled out lavish praise. Privately, I would not be surprised


if she says to him firstly, drop the language about torture. Aside from


Britain believing it immoral, illegal and wrong, it is a


propaganda coup for the enemy. I expect that she will push hard on


America continuing to be the leading force within Nato. I suspect what we


have seen here, publicly, is not necessarily the tone behind closed


doors. In that speech tonight she mentioned Nato eight times, she


has strong signals, but we know that Donald Trump does not like that and


is capable of turning around and saying something less than


diplomatic? We do not know that yet. We are testing Trump is a president,


working out of what he says publicly is what he gets on with and does.


Torture is an example. In the press, we need to learn to distinguish what


he is saying when he is in reality television mode, when he speaks


casually, and what he does. When it comes to torture, the new head of


the CIA says that he is against it, the head of defence is against it,


heads of Republicans in Congress are against it. It is unlikely to


happen, let's hope what he says is not what happens. And Theresa May


has a huge list of grievances, is it your personal view that trumping all


else... Not unintentional pun! There is this idea that Britain will get a


good trade deal, does that kick everything else out the water? No,


that is what she leads on and once but she has two big about what he


wants. He needs us as much as we need him? Yes. He is selling himself


as a great businessman but nobody ready wants to speak to him right


now except the British, they are the most enthusiasts it, except perhaps


the Israelis. Also, the Association with Britain carries credibility


when it comes to global strategy, he can reassert that he is going to


beat Nato and this is his chance to reassure the world. That is what


Britain provides in a special relationship. Did you get that


sense, although the inauguration was razzmatazz, did you get a sense that


there was an undertow of this? That something has happened since the


inauguration, there is a different mood? I don't, rhetorically he is


sticking with appeasing his base. He has taken the view that he has won


by getting enough states to back me, just. I want to cling on to those


people so that four years I scraped through again, rather than appealing


to global leadership. It is clearly America first, is it necessarily


Britain second? No, I think that there is a correlation between what


Trump wants to achieve and what we want to achieve. When it comes to


combating Islamist terrorism, and trade. And this new philosophy. Six


months ago or so, Britain was a pariah in the world, we cut


ourselves off from Europe and we had a president who did not really like


us and we went to the back of the queue. Suddenly, we are best mates


with the leader of the world which is fantastic. Thank you.


Isn't it great that the British prime ministers first in line with


the new leader of the free world? Not with Donald Trump! I think that


Tim is underestimating what has happened this week in him becoming


president, banning refugees, endorsing torture... Hang on,


endorsing torture...? It is dizzying, starting a trade war with


Mexico today, listing sanctions on Saturday... This is not a normal


time. Her speech was a perfectly decent one, if it had been normal


times. But to align yourself so closely with his project? Which is


what she did. I think that was a mistake. If Ed Miliband was Prime


Minister, would you have gone? And, speaking to senior Republicans,


would... I probably would not have been speaking to senior Republicans!


What would your line have been? Let me put it this way, I prefer Angela


Merkel to Theresa May in how this is being handled. Think about what


Angela Merkel did the day after the presidential election. She said that


a partnership with America is important but on the basis of


particular norms and values, on human rights, commitment to equality


and things which are important. You don't take Tim Stanley's point? This


is mood music for a particular audience? Signals matter, Trump only


respects strength, and they matter to a reputation around the world.


Let me take issue with one thing in that film, and what Tim said,


President Obama... What is it about this sudden denigration of President


Obama? As Leader of the Opposition, are used to think that he has a


fantastic relationship with President Obama, David Cameron. I


was jealous! Suddenly, President Obama is cast as the enemy of


Britain... But let's be clear, during that debate on the EU


referendum, Barack Obama said quite clearly that there would be no


special treatment. But he took a position on Brexit, I think it was a


bad thing or a good thing, personally he said we need a strong


Europe and Britain would make Europe stronger. I think the notion that we


had an enemy in the White House and now we have a friend, on this trade


deal point, it is really important, people may not realise but those


tariffs we have with the USA are incredibly low already. What worries


me about this idea of a trade deal is that it goes to nontariff


barriers. That means regulation. Around health care, the environment,


employee rights. They have less regulation than us. So, I think this


trade deal is really dangerous, it's a Trojan horse where we seem to be


locking ourselves in Donald Trump's boot. We actually haven't, Theresa


May was quite careful. I think it is right what Mark said, when it comes


to going and lecturing other people, we all have memories. We have


memories of Gordon Brown going to China and expecting to hear great


things about liberty and freedom in China, was that behind closed doors


gritter muck it was not in public. I thought that you would mention Tony


Blair and George Bush. That ended pretty badly... There is a lesson


about that. Our alliances with America should be based on values


and those what we hold in common, not simply on the idea that we want


to be at the front of a notional queue. But the idea that you


ideological agree with every leader around the world caused nonsense.


You need to make priorities. I wonder if what you do, you say, if


you are going to ban Muslims from certain countries, we will not work


together. If you consider torture, we will not work together. If you


deny climate change, we went work together. Really? I think it is


time, this is about self-interest. Let me be clear, it is


self-interest, that we are strong defending climate change. It is in


our interests to defend a two state solution for Israel and Palestine,


Donald Trump wants to overturn it it seems. There were good notes in


Theresa May's speech tonight, she had to mention those things but that


was not the main thrust of the speech. Britain voted for Brexit,


Donald Trump supports it... There is one point of agreement. But he wants


Nigel Farage to be ambassador. Goodness me! What hinges on this


trade deal... If you think it is a get out of jail card for any


economic problems you might get for Brexit, maybe you think it is worth


us locking ourselves in the boot. I am very sceptical and let's not


forget, he is a protectionist. They are very sceptical of trade Guilds


and he's about to impose tariffs on Mexico. -- trade Guilds. Let's go


back to that question and conversation about torture. You said


it would be dependent on the chief and CIA... If you were Prime


Minister, would you, at this moment, allow British agents to share


intelligence with American agents, if there was any chance of torture?


No, we can't beat complicit in torture, absolutely not. We need


strong words and signals. Our reputation around the world matters.


Foreign leaders will be looking at what other faults tonight. Let's


talk a little bit again about Brexit and labour, Labour seems to be in


disarray again, we have had eight resignation from the Shadow Cabinet.


Will there ever be any kind of peace within Labour when there are two


distinct positions on Brexit. I'm not sure it is about peace, Labour


is wrestling with the difficult issue which is that we represent


lots of Remain voters and Leave voters. I think we should accept


that the exit is going to happen, but we should hold the Government to


account for the kind of deal, and let me just say this one point,


because people may not have focused on this. The vote and amendments


that we have to this article 50 bill matter, and a matter for this reason


most of all. What kind of odour we get at the end? Do we get a vote


which is take it or leave it, either for light of the European Union


without a deal, or do we get a vote that is meaningful, which is what


Keir Starmer and Jeremy Corbyn and others are pushing for, and they are


right to do so. Ed Miliband, thank you very much.


the Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn's doesn't want his MPs to block


Trouble is - not all his MPs are playing along with that plan.


I am joined by our political editor Nick Watt.


It will be a clear decision that we want all of our MPs


to support the Article 50 vote when it comes up next week.


But no commitment to a three line whip?


My constituents voted to remain in the European Union.


I am leaning towards voting against Article 50 because I'm


And if I have to resign my shadow ministerial position


because of the stance I take, it would be unfortunate,


but I am here as the MP for Hampstead and Kilburn.


I'm joined now by our political editor Nick Watt and the MPs


Amsterdam Kilburn did indeed resign. That's right, so Jeremy Corbyn faced


a mini rebellion today, at one point it looked like it might reach into


his inner circle of supporters with thoughts that Clive Lewis, the


Shadow Business Secretary, might resign, but in the end he stayed


put, and tulips -- Tulip Siddiq said the she would


go. And the transport Minister has told the Cambridge News that he will


be standing by his constituents, 75% of whom voted Remain, and he will


live with the consequences. So what does this mean for Labour? This is a


rare rebellion where the leadership has some sympathy with the rebels,


and that is not just because Jeremy Corbyn campaigned to remain in the


European Union, though not with much enthusiasm, but this says that they


are in eight unique position, two thirds of voters supported Remain,


but two thirds of Labour MPs represent constituents that voted


Leave, so there is talk about how opinion was divided, and we can


expect some defying of the leadership, but it may not take the


traditional form of the sack, and it shows a dilemma for a party that is


struggling to come to terms with Brexit Britain. Thank you very much


indeed. Now, in this age of alternative


facts and fake news, we thought it might be useful to provide


you with something rather more reliable -


a non-fake fact of the day. We've just been talking


about Tulip Siddiq's resignation from the front bench


of the Labour Party, so that she could vote


against Article 50 - in line with her constituency's big


Remain vote, and perhaps But that's not something that should


bother most Labour MPs. Only one in three of them


are in constituencies estimated And more than half of those MPs


have a majority greater than 10,000. In other words, most Labour MPs can


vote for Article 50 without worrying about misrepresenting


their constituencies - and most of those that can't


probably don't need to worry too much about losing


their seats over it. Tomorrow the Church of England


is likely to come up with a policy for sexual relationships among gay


clergy which as far as we understand will operate on the basis


of 'don't ask don't tell'.. In other words 'what the eye doesn't


see the heart doesn't grieve'. In many ways, the Church of


England's attitude to sexuality has changed radically in the last


century, and in many others it has stayed exactly the same. Today, the


church is fond of highlighting its important role in the Wolfenden


report in 1957 which was key to the partial decriminalisation of,


sexuality. But although several bishops gave public support to the


new law in 1967, it was not necessary evidence of a liberal


attitude. The then Archbishop of Canterbury Michael Ramsey stated,


there will be no declaring that homosexual practices are a correct


use of sex. A report in 1991 cemented the church is modern issues


toward sexuality, reinforcing Christian attitudes, and stated that


engaging in gay activity, or as they called it, homophile activity, was


not part of the clergy. But they also said, if we are faithful to our


Lord then disagreement of the proper expression of homosexual love will


never be a rejection of the homosexual person. The Lambeth


conference reaffirmed the ban on the blessing of same-sex couples. When


civil partnerships were legalised in 2004, the house of Bishops declared


this wasn't incompatible with holy orders, again on the condition of


celibacy. Gay marriage was legalised in 2013, creating the so-called


quadruple lock which made it illegal for the Church of England to perform


same-sex marriage is. The Pilling report of the following year stopped


short of endorsing same-sex marriage, but recommended that the


church conduct ceremonies that would be marriages in all but name. In


response, the house of Bishops called for a process of shared


conversations in a divided church. The results of that two-year process


will be unveiled tomorrow. Joining us in the studio


to discuss this further are Father Andrew Foreshew-Cain,


Vicar of St Mary and All Souls Church in Kilburn and Susie Leafe,


Director of Reform, an Evangelical


Anglican Organisation Good evening to you both. What is


the proposal to be? We really don't know. You are both in the Senedd.


The house of Bishops will make a statement tomorrow. The paper will


be released tomorrow, that is all we know. And your understanding will


be? There has been a certain amount of leaking, so I think it is going


to be don't ask, don't tell, so don't ask them, and you want to know


about it. What you make of that? Shabby, dirty and shameful, I think.


And what about you? The Church of England was looking for leadership


from the house of Bishops, and if that is what they have decided to


do, then it is just they have avoided all possibility. And we can


both agree on that, both sides of the debate agree that that is


failure from our leadership. What would you like to see? I would like


to see that as a Christian church following Christ we would be putting


forward a positive view of marriage being between one man and one woman


for life, talking about how wonderful that is as a way to


flourish of individuals and for society. So you are quite clear


about this. You are not in favour of gay marriage per se, and not in


favour of gay marriage in the church, but if you had to have gay


marriage in the church, you would only have it if it was celibate? I


don't think you can have a celibate gay marriage. I think that God is


very clear in the word in the Bible, Jesus himself as he was asked


questions about sexuality referred back to Genesis, referred back to


the teaching of the Judaeo-Christian worldview, which is that marriage is


between one man and one woman for life. So you share a place in the


Church of England with someone who actually doesn't believe... That I


married? That you should be gay in the first place, but no, not that


you are married. I think she would want all gay and lesbian people to


be celibate, and wouldn't mess necessarily approve our


relationships. There is within the Church of England quite a lot of


diversity around the sexuality and theology of marriage, and one of the


problems is that the bishops if they have done what rumour says they have


done are not acknowledging that diversity of opinion, and that


diversity that is reflected in amongst themselves which is why they


have not been able to show proper leadership. Andrew is in a gay


marriage, he is a member of the clergy. And he is not celibate, so


therefore, is he a sinner? I think we are all sinners, that is the


teaching of the church, that all of us are sinners. But as far as you're


concerned, Jesus does not promote or believe in the idea of


homosexuality? Yes, absolutely, we are all sinners. And how can you


remain in the Church of England? Surely in a way you are living a


lie? There has always been legitimate theological debate on


this, and the most recent survey in YouGov said the largest majority of


Anglicans is now in favour of supporting same-sex marriage...


That's not quite... Can I finish? The report is clear that they are


not people who are necessarily part of the church... One part was those


self identifying as Anglicans, supporting gay relationship, and


then there are specifically those who attended church, those who


attended also said they supported same-sex relationships, so can I


finish? The reason we stay in the Church of England is because we are


faithful Anglicans, and this is our church, and I would like to see a


church in which there was a mixed economy, where people like me are


free to hold the beliefs that we have, to celebrate the relationships


of straight people and gay people, and people like news -- Susie are


welcome to stay, to. Would you go to a service conducted by Andrew? I


can't imagine a situation in which I would, no. And yet why, he is a


minister in your church. He is living contrary to the teaching of


the church as well as the teaching of the Bible. Would it not be more


honest for you to change church? No, I am an Anglican and I have been an


Anglican for 30 years. Why should I leave my church? The Church of


England is a broad church. One of the problems at the moment is there


is a done I'll of the diversity of the church. So you can't be


honest... I am honest, I am married and never body knows I am married.


The bishops cannot be honest about the division berries within their


own ranks on this issue. I think it is difficult for me to hear you say


what it means to be Anglican. If we look at the founding documents of


the Anglican Church, if we look at our laws, if we look at the vast


majority of the Anglican Communion, they are all lined up absolutely to


say that marriage is between one man and one woman for life, because that


is what God teaches, and that is what gives a life of flourishing...


Even if I accepted that it was inappropriate to be married, which I


don't, this is one aspect of the whole of my personality and the


whole of my life and ministry, and that does not negate my theological


understanding of what it is to be the member of the Church of England


and the reasons why I am there. I would like you both to pause now,


thank you very much indeed. And we'll be continuing this


discussion on Facebook live via the BBC Newsnight Facebook page


right after we come off air, and you'll also be able


to put your questions to our two The long awaited sequel


to Trainspotting opens The world premiere in Edinburgh


on Sunday saw Renton, Sickboy, Begbie and Spud stravaiging down


the orange Trainspotting carpet The original 1996 film


was a raw, searing, drug- ridden ride, as much


about desperation as exuberance that As we get ready to meet


the friends again, older, more raddled and certainly not


wiser, what was it that made Trainspotting


an overnight sensation? This report contains violence,


flashing lights and very I'm going to start with


Trainspotting, first because it is an unusual powerful


and impressive film, and second because it will probably


cause a lot of fuss. I think it's a great tragedy that


young people are going to be Young people may be influenced


to experiment with hard drugs. Choose fixed interest


mortgage repayments. With a dialogue largely made up


of short words beginning with F, S and C, and much injected,


it accused of being at best nonjudgemental and at worst


endorsing heroin use. It is primarily a youth


book, and a youth movie. Because I would rather be, kind of,


on drugs in a bedsit in my 20s than I would be sailing around


the Bay of Biscay in a yacht Trainspotting exploded


onto the screen. There has never been


anything like it. It was an anthem for youth,


an exhilarating, defiant screen. It was about friendship


and belonging, pain and loss, laced with the blackest of humour,


and it was about surviving But the outrage only served


to reinforce the film's appeal, and make it one of the most lauded


British movies of all time. The novel became this kind


of classic great backpack novel that young people that were touring


the world wanted to own and have, and it was like going back


to the 60s and 70s where an LP or an album said something


about your identity. Like Kerouac in the 50s,


but for that generation it was Trainspotting,


that was the one you would have in your bag as you were


travelling, whatever. If I'm prepared to take


a chance, I might just get Witty, adventurous,


passionate, loving, loyal. A little bit crazy,


a little bit mad. It came along at


the exact right time. You know, I think every generation


has its music and has its movie, and Trainspotting just was that


movie, and it came at a time that Britpop had really


started to explode, and it was like a marriage


made in heaven. The other thing that can't be


separated from the screenplay or the acting in Trainspotting


is the soundtrack. It was such a banging


soundtrack for that film. Again, we never really had any


money, so it was basically asking Well, I think Iggy Pop was the only


one we had to pay for, really. I think he was very pleased to be


mentioned in the book and referenced, and he realy liked


the book, said he was quite favourable to help us


out as well, you know. Danny had the relationship


with Leftfield and Underworld through Shallow Grave,


and I knew people like Primal Scream and Blur


and Jarvis Cocker and all that. Much different the second


time around, we are kind The last 15 years, everybody has


been, if you do Trainspotting 2, One of the funny thing is for me


about Trainspotting was that Edinburgh people saw


Glasgow as no mean city, in the nation's capital,


the Athens of the North, and behind the elegant


Georgian facades and douce suburbs was a fetid,


chaotic otherworld of drug-addled That lassie got glassed,


and no cunt leaves here till we find The one that really resonated for me


was the character that became Begbie, because every Scottish


working-class housing scheme has a sociopath that you are more


scared than the enemy. You go to away games


at the football, and you are more scared of the guys on the train


than the guys you will meet There are two parallel Edinburghs,


there is the Edinburgh that is about the festival


and the Scotsman evening news, and a blocked drain in Morningside


and all that, and the Dutch elm disease that will transform Princes


Street and how horrible verses. disease that will transform Princes


Street and how horrible this is. Whereas you had this


massive HIV epidemic, the explosion in heroin


which was all to do with mass unemployment basically,


and people who worked in traditional industries no longer


having anything to do. So the drugs came in,


and they won by default, You are in a world that has


education opportunities, travel opportunities,


cultural opportunities, If you are going to take


something like heroin, you're going to flirt with it,


it is not a serious thing. But if you are going to take


something like heroin and you've got none of these things,


there is nothing else to go to, no plan B, nothing to jump off too,


then you are going to be stuck with that relationship


for a long time. It's probably not as consequential


to have a heroin habit now. There are so many ways of treating


it that there wasn't back then. Sick Boy, Begbie, Renton and Spud


are back, and it's not You are the emotional


heart of this film. That's very nice to hear you say


that, but I think all... I haven't seen the finished version,


but the version I saw, every character made me cry,


and I was moved by every It's a really


unexpectedly moving film. It's sort of not about


recapturing something, but looking back on it,


in a way, and I think all of the characters are doing that,


there is a sort of nostalgia for their use, for that time,


and somehow John has managed to write in a little nostalgia


for the movie itself, I don't know how he has done that,


but it is very clever. We on the other hand


are colonised by wankers. Can't even find a decent


culture to be colonised by. I think that without putting too


much weight on this, I think Trainspotting


was the beginning of a reawakening of Scotland, of a Scotland


on a new-found self-confidence, of a Scotland finding a voice,


of a Scotland believing that it didn't need to repeat the tropes


or the memes of other cultures, and it could speak


profoundly in its own voice. But that's not all that changed


in the last 20 years. Youth culture's been


eradicated in Britain now. Because of the Internet,


it doesn't get a chance to grow I think it is changing


a little bit now. There are signs that it's coming


back, like grime, and East London, South London has one of the few


indigenous youth cultures to emerge in Britain in the last


kind of ten or 15 years. I don't really believe that a book


like Trainspotting would be For all sorts of reasons, I think


because of the content of it, because it is in a relatively


inaccessible Scottish vernacular. There are so many different reasons,


both moral culture and commercial, that would conspire against a book


like that getting For the millions who loved


the book and then the film, and who have waited 20 years to find


out what happened to them all, That's just about it before tonight.


We were talking about the resignation of Tulip Siddiq. She


Leca we said that she was in the Shadow Cabinet, she was actually a


shadow minister. Apologies to anyone who thought she was promoted before


she resigned. If these cold winter nights


are making you gloomy, then perhaps snuggling up in front


of Newsnight is not the answer. Research from Goldsmiths University


suggests those who partake in naturism are happier


with their bodies and happier


Download Subtitles