:00:00. > :00:12.The ayes to the right, 494. The noes to the left, 122.
:00:13. > :00:17.Now the question is - will the House of Lords dare
:00:18. > :00:22.Government sources muttering veiled threats tonight about abolition
:00:23. > :00:25.of the upper house if they don't get their way.
:00:26. > :00:28.We'll look ahead at how easy the politics of exiting
:00:29. > :00:35.And - the agony of Labour MPs over tonight's vote.
:00:36. > :00:37.52 of them defied their leader Jeremy Corbyn -
:00:38. > :00:46.I have been a supporter of Jeremy Corbyn's politics for many decades.
:00:47. > :00:49.I thought Jeremy Corbyn becoming leader was an important turning
:00:50. > :00:52.point for the Labour Party and I would not do anything to undermine
:00:53. > :00:58.What should be the difference between modern marriage
:00:59. > :01:05.The Supreme Court today allowed one half on an unmarried couple
:01:06. > :01:09.We'll look at the rights that go with different
:01:10. > :01:11.kinds of relationships - and debate the right policy
:01:12. > :01:22.In Washington, another busy Newsday, I'm on Capitol Hill where I have
:01:23. > :01:25.been talking to senior Republicans about just how far they will support
:01:26. > :01:29.President Trump and his inimitable use of language.
:01:30. > :01:31.And this exclusive footage of the aftermath of Donald Trump's
:01:32. > :01:35.first military action - a special operations and drone
:01:36. > :01:38.attack in Yemen ten days ago on what the US says
:01:39. > :01:49.The villagers took out their weapons and began to shoot at them. That's
:01:50. > :01:51.when the fighting really began. Many of the people who ran out of their
:01:52. > :02:04.homes for cover were killed. The Commons has done its work, voted
:02:05. > :02:07.on the Article 50 bill and voted for it in overwhelming numbers.
:02:08. > :02:10.That was always the easy bit - it now makes its journey over
:02:11. > :02:12.to the House of Lords for a potentially more
:02:13. > :02:16.But the Commons was not that easy for the Labour Party.
:02:17. > :02:20.19 front benchers voted against invoking Article 50, and it
:02:21. > :02:25.lost its Shadow Cabinet someone tipped as a future leader.
:02:26. > :02:27.Clive Lewis, Shadow Business Secretary, resigned tonight,
:02:28. > :02:30.because he did not feel able to vote for Article 50.
:02:31. > :02:32.Diane Abbott, who seemed to be keeping everyone guessing
:02:33. > :02:34.as to her intentions, did fall behind the party position.
:02:35. > :02:38.Well, our political editor Nick watt is with me.
:02:39. > :02:47.Unamended, the bill, good for the government, amended Shadow Cabinet
:02:48. > :02:50.with Clive Lewis going such a difficult few weeks for Jeremy
:02:51. > :02:53.Corbyn and Labour. It has been an agonising process for the Labour
:02:54. > :02:58.Party with those resignations on the front bench and Clive Lewis
:02:59. > :03:00.resigning from the Shadow Cabinet because Jeremy Corbyn said you
:03:01. > :03:05.cannot remain in the Shadow Cabinet if you could not abide by the three
:03:06. > :03:09.line whip on the Bill. Some senior Labour sources were impatient with
:03:10. > :03:12.Clive Lewis. One of them said he has been trailing his conscience around
:03:13. > :03:16.the television studios in recent weeks but in a statement tonight
:03:17. > :03:19.Jeremy Corbyn responding to the resignation by Clive Lewis who
:03:20. > :03:24.supported him in both leadership contests, said he understood the
:03:25. > :03:29.dilemma facing Labour MPs ins constituencies that voted Remain and
:03:30. > :03:33.this takes us to be startling fact which explains why it is now Labour
:03:34. > :03:38.and not the Tories that is experiencing such grief over Brexit,
:03:39. > :03:43.and that is that two thirds of Labour voters voted to Remain but
:03:44. > :03:48.two thirds of Labour MPs represent constituencies that voted Leave. But
:03:49. > :03:56.there was one non-resignation, Diane Abbott, we had a clip of her in the
:03:57. > :03:59.menu. She was undecided but didn't go. As we heard earlier in the
:04:00. > :04:02.interview with Diane Abbott she was in supporting the bill with any
:04:03. > :04:06.great enthusiasm and it is pretty clear the reason she voted the way
:04:07. > :04:10.she did was out of loyalty to Jeremy Corbyn. I think it is fair to say
:04:11. > :04:13.she felt that if she, such a long-standing friend and a member of
:04:14. > :04:17.that campaign group, they never believed he would become leader all
:04:18. > :04:19.of those decades ago, she felt if she resigned as Shadow Home
:04:20. > :04:23.Secretary that would have been really damaging for him. In my
:04:24. > :04:27.interview, interestingly, Diane Abbott had quite a message for
:04:28. > :04:31.supporters of Jeremy Corbyn on the left who are perhaps relaxed about
:04:32. > :04:34.Brexit, thinking perhaps they are implementing the will and legacy of
:04:35. > :04:39.Tony Benn, they're great hero, who was one of the great leaders on the
:04:40. > :04:43.No side on the EC referendum. This is what she had to say.
:04:44. > :04:46.I respect the results of the referendum and no one wanted
:04:47. > :04:48.to thwart it in a perverse kind of way.
:04:49. > :04:52.This is not Tony Benn Brexit, this is Donald Trump Brexit.
:04:53. > :05:05.Donald Trump Brexit, the phrase of the evening. It will go to the House
:05:06. > :05:09.of Lords now and then what happens? The government says the bill goes to
:05:10. > :05:12.the House of Lords with two resounding message is. Message
:05:13. > :05:16.number one, it goes unamended. Message number two, in the two big
:05:17. > :05:20.votes, second and third reading, it was passed with overwhelming
:05:21. > :05:24.majorities, nearly 500 MPs supported it. What ministers are saying is
:05:25. > :05:28.that as we reported last week, if the Lords trying to thwart this bill
:05:29. > :05:32.and seriously delay it the government could be tempted to hold
:05:33. > :05:36.an election with two pledges, taking it out of the European Union and
:05:37. > :05:39.abolishing the House of Lords. Won the senior member of the government
:05:40. > :05:43.said to me, and I think I might edit these words on a family programme,
:05:44. > :05:47.this person said their message to the Lords was: if you muck with our
:05:48. > :05:53.build we will muck with you, you can guess what he was saying. One pro EU
:05:54. > :05:57.peer said this in response: abolition of the House of Lords
:05:58. > :06:01.seems a small price to pay to keep alive the prospect of finding a way
:06:02. > :06:04.to keep us in the EU. Crucial to say the Labour leadership in the Lord
:06:05. > :06:11.Snowdon there is only so far they can push this. Thank you very much.
:06:12. > :06:22.-- in the Lords, no there is only so far.
:06:23. > :06:24.We're joined by Peter Hain - now Lord Hain.
:06:25. > :06:26.And the Conservative MP and Brexiteer, Suella Fernandes.
:06:27. > :06:33.What would you propose to do to the Bill? I would propose to keep the
:06:34. > :06:37.border with the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland, crucial to the
:06:38. > :06:41.peace process. If you went back on that and started having blockages,
:06:42. > :06:46.it could unravel in a serious way. I say that as a former Secretary of
:06:47. > :06:49.State for Northern Ireland. Secondly, to keep the UK in the
:06:50. > :06:57.Single Market. Ken Bishop of? Membership of the Single Market not
:06:58. > :07:01.the Article 50 bill -- membership of. To protect jobs and prosperity.
:07:02. > :07:06.When people voted to leave the European Union, I understand they
:07:07. > :07:09.voted to leave, but they didn't vote explicitly to leave the Single
:07:10. > :07:12.Market and some of the Brexit leaders, Boris Johnson included,
:07:13. > :07:17.said they wanted to keep the Single Market. Boris Johnson did say he
:07:18. > :07:21.would leave the Single Market. He did seem to support the Single
:07:22. > :07:24.Market. If you do not get your way on the amendments, you have a good
:07:25. > :07:29.argument and bash it around, if you don't get your way how would you
:07:30. > :07:32.vote on Article 50? I will vote against. On principle and in
:07:33. > :07:37.conscience I cannot support something that I think will damage
:07:38. > :07:42.the country and damage especially the people who most need support
:07:43. > :07:45.from the government. Does that raise any red flags? That is an abuse of
:07:46. > :07:54.power, Peter. It is arrogant snobbery. Who are you actually
:07:55. > :07:57.voting for? Who do you represent? Most of your labour constituencies
:07:58. > :08:02.voted to leave, you have a three line whip from your leader to
:08:03. > :08:06.support Article 50. And you don't have any mandate or the jitter messy
:08:07. > :08:13.to do what you are doing. There is a blindingly clear message from the
:08:14. > :08:17.Commons -- legitimacy. It was passed with a huge majority sending a clear
:08:18. > :08:21.message to the Lords. They need to discharge their duty and to do
:08:22. > :08:25.otherwise would reduce this country to nothing more than an autocratic
:08:26. > :08:29.regime which trampled over the democratic will of the people. Look
:08:30. > :08:32.what the House of Lords has done on previous occasions. We amended the
:08:33. > :08:36.bill to protect 4 million people who were going to lose their tax credits
:08:37. > :08:40.in legislation you voted for in the House of Commons, as a result of
:08:41. > :08:44.which the Government had to do a U-turn and keep those tax credits.
:08:45. > :08:52.That's the role the House of Lords plays. It isn't going to be some
:08:53. > :08:56.attempt to wreck the Bill. There was a manifesto pledge to stay
:08:57. > :08:59.in the Single Market, it was in the Tory manifesto. As the referendum
:09:00. > :09:03.was also in the manifesto people were entitled to think the policy
:09:04. > :09:08.was to stay in the Single Market whatever the result of the
:09:09. > :09:12.referendum. Firstly, this bill is not actually about... This is about
:09:13. > :09:16.the process of giving the Government the mandate to send the notification
:09:17. > :09:20.to Brussels to trigger Article 50. It's not about anything else, that
:09:21. > :09:23.is why it has passed through totally unedited and unaltered. Secondly, we
:09:24. > :09:28.had months of debate and campaigning and discussion and argument about
:09:29. > :09:33.what Brexit would mean. Both sides agree that leaving the European
:09:34. > :09:38.Union would mean leaving the internal market. It doesn't make any
:09:39. > :09:41.sense... That was never made clear. The official campaign made that
:09:42. > :09:45.clear. Michael Gove made it explicit. Not all of the leaders.
:09:46. > :09:50.When I knocked on doors, two things were said, the 350 million a week
:09:51. > :09:53.would come back to the National Health Service, that resonated on
:09:54. > :09:58.the doorstep and it was like. That was not a lie at all. Are you
:09:59. > :10:02.promising it now? It is incontrovertible that this country
:10:03. > :10:06.since approximately ?350 million however you calculate it to the
:10:07. > :10:10.European Union. The second thing was immigration, the Single Market never
:10:11. > :10:13.came up on the doorstep. When people realised that, say Jaguar car
:10:14. > :10:19.makers, or a Nissan, will face tariffs and barriers and British
:10:20. > :10:23.industry and our exports and jobs and prosperity will be badly damaged
:10:24. > :10:26.by that, then I think there is an opportunity for the House of Lords
:10:27. > :10:31.to say, hang on, we can amend this Bill. There is no intention to wreck
:10:32. > :10:35.the bill. The House of Lords has never said we are going to
:10:36. > :10:38.absolutely try and... What you are proposing would fundamentally alter
:10:39. > :10:42.the nature of the bill as proposed. It would change the effect and it
:10:43. > :10:47.would have the effect of delaying the process, exposing the
:10:48. > :10:50.government's judicial review and weaken our position when it came to
:10:51. > :10:54.negotiating with the European Union. It is about the procedure of
:10:55. > :10:57.withdrawal, nothing more nothing less. And my amendment says the
:10:58. > :11:01.question of the Single Market, the Single Market has to be part of that
:11:02. > :11:05.process. You can leave under Article 50 but the Single Market has to be
:11:06. > :11:08.retained. I will not vote for anything which impoverishes this
:11:09. > :11:12.country, especially the low income poorer members of this country.
:11:13. > :11:15.Points made. I don't want to carry on with that, I want to ask whether
:11:16. > :11:21.this would provoke a constitutional crisis. Would this be an issue about
:11:22. > :11:24.abolition of the House of Lords, or is this a bluff? My sense is the
:11:25. > :11:28.Tory MPs don't want to abolish the House of Lords and they will not do
:11:29. > :11:34.it over one-vote. This would call into question the Lords. Really? The
:11:35. > :11:40.constitutional significance is important. You could get a majority
:11:41. > :11:44.in the house to abolish the House of Lords? Think about public trust. I'm
:11:45. > :11:47.more concerned about our voters and people who put their trust in us to
:11:48. > :11:50.go to Parliament to deliver on their instruction. You've seen the
:11:51. > :11:54.referendum, they voted for a referendum and got a result and they
:11:55. > :11:58.have seen the Commons vote in a particular way. And then by some
:11:59. > :12:03.quirk of abuse of procedure or constitutional technicality, a
:12:04. > :12:08.completely different outcome emerges because of Lords like you not
:12:09. > :12:11.honouring the instruction, the clear instruction and direction from the
:12:12. > :12:16.British people and now the Commons to do the right thing and follow the
:12:17. > :12:19.lead of your Labour MPs who voted with the government tonight. I would
:12:20. > :12:22.like to be elected to the House of Lords, I believe in an elected
:12:23. > :12:26.chamber but the existing system is appointed. I was appointed by the
:12:27. > :12:30.Labour Party and two thirds of Labour voters voted to remain within
:12:31. > :12:33.the European Union. They need to be respected. This country was split
:12:34. > :12:43.down the middle. If your government had been acting in a one nation
:12:44. > :12:46.fashioned to find a way through this that respected the 48% who voted to
:12:47. > :12:48.remain as well as the 52% who should be respected, I agree, for voting to
:12:49. > :12:51.leave, if they found a way of bringing the country together that
:12:52. > :12:54.might be very different but they are going for a hard right-wing Brexit
:12:55. > :12:57.and that I cannot support. Follow the lead of your Labour MPs who
:12:58. > :13:03.joined us in the eye lobby tonight and they did the right thing and
:13:04. > :13:05.they are adhering to democracy. You will hear that argument in the House
:13:06. > :13:07.of Lords over the coming weeks. Thank you for joining us.
:13:08. > :13:09.Now, over in the US, politics as abnormal continues.
:13:10. > :13:15.A day that saw President Trump attack Nordstrom the department
:13:16. > :13:17.store for dropping his daughter's fashion range, and attack the judges
:13:18. > :13:21.But perhaps more significantly there have been repercussions
:13:22. > :13:23.from a US raid in Yemen ten days ago.
:13:24. > :13:26.For that, and more, Mark Urban is over in Washington for us.
:13:27. > :13:35.As you say, just over a week since that raid in Yemen by US special
:13:36. > :13:39.operations forces. They were targeting and Al-Qaeda in the
:13:40. > :13:45.Arabian Peninsula leader's compound but some things went wrong. Several
:13:46. > :13:48.local people were killed, one of the naval personnel on the mission also
:13:49. > :13:53.lost his life and they had to destroy an aircraft as well. Despite
:13:54. > :14:02.that today the White House said the mission was successful and there was
:14:03. > :14:05.the sacrifice of the Navy SEAL on the mission. In order to better find
:14:06. > :14:11.out what has happened at Newsnight sent a journalist to the scene of
:14:12. > :14:18.the raid. Some of the images she captured were distressing, and may
:14:19. > :14:21.be to some viewers as she gathered eyewitness testimony.
:14:22. > :14:23.This is what was left behind following the first counterterrorism
:14:24. > :14:24.operation approved by President Donald Trump.
:14:25. > :14:27.A US raid on the small village of Yakla southwest of Yemen
:14:28. > :14:34.According to the locals 25 people died that day.
:14:35. > :14:36.Amongst them an American marine and an
:14:37. > :14:43.It's hard to ever call something a complete
:14:44. > :14:44.success when you have a
:14:45. > :14:51.But I think when you look at the totality of what was gained to
:14:52. > :14:53.prevent the future loss of life here in America
:14:54. > :14:57.and against our people and our institutions and probably
:14:58. > :14:59.throughout the world in terms of what some
:15:00. > :15:00.of these individuals have
:15:01. > :15:08.done, I think it is a successful operation by all standards.
:15:09. > :15:10.But from exclusive interviews with conducted
:15:11. > :15:13.with eyewitnesses on the ground, here is what we understand happened.
:15:14. > :15:18.At 1am US drones were heard hovering low over the village.
:15:19. > :15:21.Shortly after, three targets, a clinic, school and
:15:22. > :15:28.They were suspected of harbouring Al-Qaeda militants.
:15:29. > :15:31.At 2am and Osprey aircraft that took part in the operation similar to
:15:32. > :15:34.this one crash landed around three kilometres away from the village,
:15:35. > :15:43.The US later destroyed their own $75 million aircraft.
:15:44. > :15:47.These exclusive pictures showed the wreckage of the
:15:48. > :15:49.Osprey, which we've had verified by an arms expert
:15:50. > :15:53.from the Royal United Services Institute.
:15:54. > :15:59.Approximately 30 marines then approached the village.
:16:00. > :16:02.TRANSLATION: They came by foot and they were allowed.
:16:03. > :16:04.When the soldiers got here they spread out and the
:16:05. > :16:07.villagers took out their weapons and began to shoot at them.
:16:08. > :16:09.That's when the fighting really began.
:16:10. > :16:11.Many of the people who ran out of their
:16:12. > :16:19.The American government says they stormed a
:16:20. > :16:22.terrorist base and that the majority of those killed were Al-Qaeda
:16:23. > :16:26.But this local man believes that that's not the case
:16:27. > :16:33.TRANSLATION: This is the catastrophe that was committed by the American
:16:34. > :16:39.Marines and this is a new graveyard that was opened for the dead.
:16:40. > :16:43.The women were with their husbands and
:16:44. > :16:47.the children were with their parents.
:16:48. > :16:51.Locals who believe that of the 24 people killed just one was a
:16:52. > :16:55.Seven of the others were men believed to
:16:56. > :16:57.have been armed and firing on the soldiers.
:16:58. > :17:03.The other 16, unarmed women and children.
:17:04. > :17:06.This is an image of one of the children believed to
:17:07. > :17:14.Some believe that what happened in this
:17:15. > :17:15.village indicates a dramatic change of gear
:17:16. > :17:17.for US foreign policy in the
:17:18. > :17:20.This really looks like a much more aggressive American stance
:17:21. > :17:23.in terms of putting boots on the ground and trying to take
:17:24. > :17:26.Al-Qaeda militants out directly face to face
:17:27. > :17:30.rather than doing what they've done in the past which is either to use
:17:31. > :17:33.drones or allied Yemeni forces on the ground.
:17:34. > :17:37.They've only really launched one other operation where
:17:38. > :17:39.American troops have gone in and led the charge,
:17:40. > :17:42.and that was an attempt to rescue an American journalist
:17:43. > :17:47.which led to the death of that journalist.
:17:48. > :17:49.So it's certainly a high risk strategy and it feels like
:17:50. > :17:57.So was this, as Trump's spokesman says, a successful
:17:58. > :18:04.There may be questions in Washington about the
:18:05. > :18:06.planning of the operation but villagers here believe something
:18:07. > :18:17.That was Nawal al-Maghafi. I should have pointed out that Newsnight
:18:18. > :18:19.centre cameraman to the scene and she did her report based on those
:18:20. > :18:21.pictures. Until recently he was
:18:22. > :18:34.Senior Director for Counterterrorism You have intimate familiarity with
:18:35. > :18:38.these raids. We can start with the business about the Yemen government
:18:39. > :18:42.today saying that as a result of this mission, US forces are no
:18:43. > :18:49.longer going to be able to operate in this way. Is that a blow to the
:18:50. > :18:52.US capabilities? I think so, we have consistently relied on the support
:18:53. > :18:56.of the Yemeni government to do the things he wanted. But this type of
:18:57. > :19:01.ground operation for something other than a hostage rescue is unusual
:19:02. > :19:05.compared to the past so it might inhibit abilities to do this going
:19:06. > :19:11.forward but we have to wait and see but it is not surprising I would say
:19:12. > :19:16.that. Is it believable? I can many times when the Pakistani government
:19:17. > :19:22.said under the Obama administration we. Drone strikes and that was not
:19:23. > :19:27.exactly true. Compared to the cases of drone strikes, US boots on the
:19:28. > :19:30.ground and in a firefight that apparently broke out and significant
:19:31. > :19:35.reports of civilian casualties that the Pentagon is acknowledging that
:19:36. > :19:41.took place, so this is a different dynamic than drone strikes. Some of
:19:42. > :19:48.your colleagues have tweeted and spoken about the way this operation,
:19:49. > :19:52.one essentially with the same mission, was worked out what
:19:53. > :19:55.President Obama was still in office. How close to President Obama,
:19:56. > :20:03.himself to authorising such a mission? According to that, not very
:20:04. > :20:08.close, the deputies of the US government officials from across the
:20:09. > :20:11.security community said, we want to make sure this is something that the
:20:12. > :20:18.President's successor can take on and the President agreed. Did they
:20:19. > :20:22.feel this was much too risky? There is significant risk to forces but in
:20:23. > :20:25.these type of operations and a process that would have been run in
:20:26. > :20:30.the Obama administration would have looked at the range of factors. What
:20:31. > :20:33.are the risks to diplomatic relations in the region? Were doing
:20:34. > :20:37.this in the middle of an ongoing campaign from Saudi Arabia and the
:20:38. > :20:41.United Arab Emirates that is not popular and what was the
:20:42. > :20:47.intelligence value? There will be various things we need to work
:20:48. > :20:51.through before making this decision. People on the other side of politics
:20:52. > :20:55.say you are saying this to make Donald Trump look bad and you were
:20:56. > :20:59.involved in lots of operations, Libya and Somalia, in which similar
:21:00. > :21:04.risks were taken and they could attack on wrong. Is this about
:21:05. > :21:09.politics or are you after something else? No, this is certainly not
:21:10. > :21:13.about politics, or criticising the operation itself. The people who
:21:14. > :21:17.plan these operations and put their lives on the line to conduct them
:21:18. > :21:22.are very brave and take all appropriate measures to mitigate the
:21:23. > :21:28.risks. We are concerned about making sure that when we send people into
:21:29. > :21:31.harms way, we consider all considerations and the President has
:21:32. > :21:36.also asked his team to prepare for contingency plans. If there are
:21:37. > :21:43.accusations of civilian casualties. What is the message? Those types of
:21:44. > :21:49.things will have been worked out. We will eventually see a report on the
:21:50. > :21:53.follow-up operation. Thank you. We are talking in one of the office
:21:54. > :21:58.buildings of the Senate and you might hear some are coming here but
:21:59. > :22:01.this is really one of the front lines of politics. Yesterday there
:22:02. > :22:05.was a very remarkable occurrence, the first time in American political
:22:06. > :22:11.history that the Vice President had to cast his vote in favour of one of
:22:12. > :22:14.President Trump's nominees, Betsy DeVos, and that happened because
:22:15. > :22:19.Trump has a thin majority in the Senate. I have been looking at the
:22:20. > :22:22.question of just how far Senate and Congress will be the first real
:22:23. > :22:28.breaks on President Trump's ambitions.
:22:29. > :22:30.You can come here promising to drain the swamp or dethrone
:22:31. > :22:35.But this city has a way of protecting its interests.
:22:36. > :22:40.Slowing down those who challenge its ways.
:22:41. > :22:43.So the Trump administration's process of nominating a Cabinet
:22:44. > :22:50.This level of obstruction at the beginning of an administration
:22:51. > :23:00.is really record-setting in a very unfortunate way.
:23:01. > :23:03.While the senator blamed the Democrats for the go-slow,
:23:04. > :23:07.they don't have the numbers to wreck Trump's agenda.
:23:08. > :23:10.Rather, it is doubts among Republicans that could pose the most
:23:11. > :23:18.Keen to impress the people who voted for him, President Trump has signed
:23:19. > :23:24.some highly significant and emotive executive orders.
:23:25. > :23:27.But you cannot run the country by those alone, particularly when it
:23:28. > :23:32.comes to spending money or changing existing laws.
:23:33. > :23:35.For that, you need to go up to the Hill and get people
:23:36. > :23:40.Thousands of people work on the Hill.
:23:41. > :23:43.In offices so widely spread, the place has its own subway.
:23:44. > :23:49.Things here travel at the speed legislators can work with.
:23:50. > :23:52.As many presidents elected on a reformed
:23:53. > :23:58.John Feary has been a Hill insider for the best part of 20 years.
:23:59. > :24:01.With a Republican majority of just two in the Senate,
:24:02. > :24:05.he sees particular risks there for the White House.
:24:06. > :24:08.The members of the Senate, especially because they have
:24:09. > :24:11.six-year terms, they have tremendous power, they can gum up
:24:12. > :24:14.the works any time they want and you will see that,
:24:15. > :24:17.especially for some Republicans who don't really like Donald Trump,
:24:18. > :24:20.who don't really trust Donald Trump, they are going to step up
:24:21. > :24:25.There is no obedience with this Congress, there never has been.
:24:26. > :24:28.But especially with this President, I don't think there ever will be.
:24:29. > :24:32.The combination seen with the nomination of Betsy DeVos,
:24:33. > :24:35.of Democrats keen to thwart Trump voting with a small number
:24:36. > :24:38.of dissident Republicans, could pose all manner of problems
:24:39. > :24:45.To avoid them, he must stick to policies where
:24:46. > :24:49.he and Congressional Republicans are on the same page.
:24:50. > :24:54.I believe on the need for bilateral agreements,
:24:55. > :24:58.with the UK or Japan, I think there will be a partnership.
:24:59. > :25:01.We can work with him on tax reform, we all agree the tax
:25:02. > :25:06.There is over 70,000 pages in our tax code, it is too complex,
:25:07. > :25:09.people want a simpler affair and in many respects, flatter.
:25:10. > :25:12.So that is something we should be focused on and I think
:25:13. > :25:17.we'll find common ground with the administration.
:25:18. > :25:19.Among those on powerful Senate committees, there are already key
:25:20. > :25:23.figures who now challenge Trump on issues such as the handling
:25:24. > :25:25.of his immigrant ban or his professed admiration
:25:26. > :25:34.What do you think, realistically, you can do in the Senate to stop
:25:35. > :25:41.I believe the kinds of hearings we had this morning are important
:25:42. > :25:48.As we heard Senator Portman do, Russia has not been a partner
:25:49. > :25:56.And there are other opportunities that we will have.
:25:57. > :25:59.On Putin or the immigration ban, are you worried
:26:00. > :26:00.about what the President has been saying?
:26:01. > :26:05.Look, there has been a lot of things said that I would not say.
:26:06. > :26:14.But, you know, I think as time moves on, there will be a much more coming
:26:15. > :26:22.I think the administration is just getting going and my sense is that
:26:23. > :26:25.in the very near future I think we will be in the
:26:26. > :26:29.Several leading Republicans, including former Presidential
:26:30. > :26:31.candidate Marco Rubio, have already put down a marker
:26:32. > :26:40.Do the President's comments about Putin worry you at all?
:26:41. > :26:43.I am not worried about words as much as actions.
:26:44. > :26:45.What do you need to see in terms of...
:26:46. > :26:48.Right now we have sanctions and as long as they are in place
:26:49. > :26:51.Do you think sanctions should be put in law,
:26:52. > :27:00.And I am open to making them permanent without
:27:01. > :27:04.Once the President puts forward budget plans,
:27:05. > :27:07.the political machine here will really swing into action.
:27:08. > :27:11.Many will want to grab new spending but there is also a powerful caucus
:27:12. > :27:14.among Republicans who see Trump's pledge of tax cuts and big spending
:27:15. > :27:22.We're not talking about any kind of changes to the mandatory
:27:23. > :27:26.Which is where you need to save money.
:27:27. > :27:28.And that is where most of the spending is.
:27:29. > :27:33.And we will learn a great deal more about that when the President
:27:34. > :27:38.I'm not sure exactly, but over the next several weeks
:27:39. > :27:41.And perhaps we will get some answers then because right now
:27:42. > :27:49.it is hard to reconcile all these competing demands.
:27:50. > :27:51.On nominations, healthcare or Russian sanctions,
:27:52. > :27:54.Trump campaign trail pledges are already being modified
:27:55. > :28:07.As the President starts to spend money, that will intensify.
:28:08. > :28:11.Mark Urban there, over in the US with Republican lawmakers.
:28:12. > :28:13.There is certainly thinking going on, on that side as to how
:28:14. > :28:18.But perhaps the bigger challenge is for the Democrats.
:28:19. > :28:21.Despite having won the popular vote in six of the last seven
:28:22. > :28:24.presidential elections, with the demographics running
:28:25. > :28:27.in the party's favour, it has remarkably managed to lose
:28:28. > :28:29.the presidency, underperform in governorship races,
:28:30. > :28:32.and it is in a minority in the House and the Senate.
:28:33. > :28:35.How will rebuild and where did it go wrong?
:28:36. > :28:37.The man who was campaign manager for Hillary Clinton,
:28:38. > :28:41.Robby Mook has been speaking at the Oxford Union
:28:42. > :28:58.Good evening to you. Thank you. Where do the Democrats go from here?
:28:59. > :29:02.How do they rebuild? I think the future is potentially bright for our
:29:03. > :29:05.party. As you outlined we are already seeing that rather than
:29:06. > :29:08.focusing on creating jobs the Republicans are looking at how they
:29:09. > :29:13.can cut taxes for the wealthiest people in this country, cut taxes
:29:14. > :29:16.for corporations. I don't think that's the bargain the voters
:29:17. > :29:22.counted on. The other thing to keep in mind is I remember back in 2005
:29:23. > :29:27.after John Kerry lost his bid for President and less than two years
:29:28. > :29:32.later Democrats took back both houses of Congress, I also remember
:29:33. > :29:36.2009 just after President Obama won people said the Republican Party was
:29:37. > :29:40.dead and less than two years later they had the biggest pick-up since
:29:41. > :29:44.70 years. We have had swing elections for the last so many years
:29:45. > :29:48.and I don't see why the Democrats cannot fare well in the midterms.
:29:49. > :29:54.Let me tell you why perhaps, the traditional coalition of Liberals on
:29:55. > :29:57.the coast and the rust belt workers, the Democratic base, the coalition
:29:58. > :30:01.has fallen apart because those two groups of people don't agree on
:30:02. > :30:05.anything and one what are more inclined to vote for populist
:30:06. > :30:09.nationalism as you are seeing in lots of countries. Is difficult for
:30:10. > :30:13.the centre-left parties to hold back coalition together and it is true in
:30:14. > :30:17.the US, isn't it? I think that's a bit of an exaggeration for a few
:30:18. > :30:24.reasons. First of all the number of votes that Trump won Michigan,
:30:25. > :30:27.Wisconsin by was a small amount of votes, Hillary Clinton won the
:30:28. > :30:31.popular vote, the congressional elections in the house happened
:30:32. > :30:35.across the country. I disagree with the premise that people can't agree
:30:36. > :30:38.on anything, I don't think that is true at all. I think this was a
:30:39. > :30:43.change election, there were gale force winds coming at Hillary
:30:44. > :30:45.Clinton, not just because people were looking for change generally,
:30:46. > :30:53.but also because of what Vladimir Putin could delve -- Vladimir Putin
:30:54. > :30:58.did. I think Americans agree we need to focus on jobs and look at what
:30:59. > :31:02.the first thing is that Donald Trump does in this election. He is holding
:31:03. > :31:05.people up at airports. It is a poor policy, most people don't support
:31:06. > :31:10.it, and I think he will be held accountable for not focusing on what
:31:11. > :31:14.he promised, which is creating jobs and raising wages. I think Democrats
:31:15. > :31:18.are in a fantastic position to hold him accountable. You are focusing
:31:19. > :31:22.quite a bit of your comments on what Trump is doing wrong and I seek that
:31:23. > :31:26.is a big hope of how the Democrats will rebuild. Just looking back on
:31:27. > :31:34.the campaign, though, the gales did blow and there was a lot against
:31:35. > :31:37.Hillary. Is there anything you would do significantly differently that
:31:38. > :31:42.you think might have won the election? It is hard to say, such a
:31:43. > :31:45.small margin, as we discussed, that anything would make a difference. Of
:31:46. > :31:52.course we wish we had had more resources in Michigan and Wisconsin.
:31:53. > :31:56.We probably had four times as many staff in Michigan as President Obama
:31:57. > :32:01.did. We increased it quite a bit but we absolutely could and should have
:32:02. > :32:05.done more with that. I think I would have thought a lot longer and harder
:32:06. > :32:14.about how we could break through with our message. Great analysis was
:32:15. > :32:17.done by Vox looking at what candidate said on the stump, Hillary
:32:18. > :32:21.Clinton talked about jobs and the economy a lot more than Donald Trump
:32:22. > :32:25.but because of the sum of headwinds we faced that wasn't reaching the
:32:26. > :32:28.voters. I wish they had more of a chance to understand what Hillary
:32:29. > :32:35.was really running for, not the Republican opposition dump that was
:32:36. > :32:39.happening on the Hill through the farcical hearings that were held, or
:32:40. > :32:44.through WikiLeaks and Vladimir Putin. Do you think a fresher faced
:32:45. > :32:47.Democrat candidate, because basically it felt like a change
:32:48. > :32:51.election and it was somebody up there who was 25 years in the public
:32:52. > :32:55.eye. Do you think a fresher faced candidate could have done it more
:32:56. > :32:59.successfully? Look, I don't think we have ever had a more qualified
:33:00. > :33:03.candidate, grittier candidate, than Hillary Clinton. She would have been
:33:04. > :33:08.a big change, she would have been the first woman President in our
:33:09. > :33:11.history. Obviously we need to focus on the future now. I think you are
:33:12. > :33:14.going to see a lot of new faces coming into our party, I'm talking
:33:15. > :33:18.about a lot of young people planning to run for the first time whether it
:33:19. > :33:23.be for Congress or local office. You will see lots of people run for
:33:24. > :33:27.President that you and I wouldn't necessarily think about right now. I
:33:28. > :33:32.think we have a lot of opportunity and I have been encouraging people
:33:33. > :33:36.in our party to look forward, to remember that we actually won a
:33:37. > :33:40.majority of votes, that the margin was so close in those states and the
:33:41. > :33:43.headwinds were so unprecedented. We have a more favourable environment
:33:44. > :33:47.when Donald Trump must answer for his actions and our prospects will
:33:48. > :33:51.be brighter and we have a lot of good talent to carry us over. Just
:33:52. > :33:55.give us some advice in this country. We have been debating and there has
:33:56. > :33:58.been lots of controversy about inviting President Trump over and
:33:59. > :34:02.giving him red-carpet treatment and royal carriage. Do you think we
:34:03. > :34:06.should give him the royal carriage ride down the mall, or should we
:34:07. > :34:10.hold our noses and say we don't want to do business with you? I'm going
:34:11. > :34:14.to leave it to the British people to decide what kind of welcome they
:34:15. > :34:18.want to give. That is not my place. Our two countries have an important
:34:19. > :34:23.relationship and I don't want Donald Trump or any other President to
:34:24. > :34:27.damage that relationship so I'm glad that our countries are going to
:34:28. > :34:33.continue to maintain close ties and work together. I think people around
:34:34. > :34:37.the world need to speak up and listen to their conscience, the
:34:38. > :34:41.rhetoric happening whether it is from Donald Trump or any other
:34:42. > :34:44.politician around the world that is trying to divide people and trying
:34:45. > :34:51.to pretend to focus on helping families, when really they are
:34:52. > :34:54.helping a very limited segment of the population. Again, I have not
:34:55. > :34:57.seen what Donald Trump is doing to deliver for some of those families
:34:58. > :35:02.that are really hurting that put a lot of faith in him and that is
:35:03. > :35:07.where we have to keep our focus so I hope people here in Britain will
:35:08. > :35:11.speak out if he comes. We will continue to speak out in the US and
:35:12. > :35:15.I really do believe the world is going to work through this and our
:35:16. > :35:19.best days are still ahead. Robby Mook, thank you for joining us.
:35:20. > :35:19.Thank you. Cohabitation took a step
:35:20. > :35:22.towards marriage today with the Supreme Court finding
:35:23. > :35:32.in favour of an unmarried woman, and her spousal right or non-spousal
:35:33. > :35:35.to her late partner's pension. It was a public sector pension that
:35:36. > :35:39.would have paid to her if she had been married to him,
:35:40. > :35:43.or if he had specifically nominated her as a partner -
:35:44. > :35:45.but neither of those worked, and yet they had lived as man and
:35:46. > :35:49.wife for a decade before he died. Sometimes the state treats couples
:35:50. > :35:51.as couples regardless of marriage; sometimes it treats them as couples
:35:52. > :35:54.only if they are married. For example, cohabiting couples
:35:55. > :35:56.are treated as married for the benefit system -
:35:57. > :35:58.which counts the joint Which happens to save
:35:59. > :36:05.the state money. But the inheritance tax
:36:06. > :36:06.system treats cohabiting couples as unmarried,
:36:07. > :36:08.which also saves the state money. You can always get married
:36:09. > :36:11.if you want to avoid the bill, but not everybody does -
:36:12. > :36:13.such as Matt Hawkins And Sir Paul Coleridge,
:36:14. > :36:22.Chairman of the Marriage Foundation Good evening to you all. Why don't
:36:23. > :36:27.you want to get married to Matt? I think some of his family is
:36:28. > :36:33.horrified about the idea that we are publicly speaking out against the
:36:34. > :36:37.idea of marrying Matt. I very much love Matt but I don't see us as
:36:38. > :36:42.husband and wife. Do you see yourselves together for life? Is
:36:43. > :36:45.that the plan? Yes, we first met ten years ago and first got together
:36:46. > :36:49.nine years ago so we've been together a long time but I think
:36:50. > :36:55.it's just that I don't feel inside that I am a wife, I am not Matt's
:36:56. > :36:58.wife and he is not my husband. Matt, do you think you have the
:36:59. > :37:03.responsibilities of marriage? You can walk out on clear and as I
:37:04. > :37:08.understand it with cohabitation there would be no kind of, whoever
:37:09. > :37:11.was earning money or if you jointly made money during the time you are
:37:12. > :37:15.together you could just take it away, there is no responsibilities,
:37:16. > :37:19.is that right, Matt? There is only the responsibility in the sense that
:37:20. > :37:24.I love Claire and I want to do right and we are a team and I want to stay
:37:25. > :37:27.together, absolutely but I also want legal and financial protection. We
:37:28. > :37:32.don't see marriage as being for us but it is for lots of people. Is the
:37:33. > :37:35.state not entitled to say we define the difference between couples who
:37:36. > :37:40.do sign a contract, if you like, and those who say we love each other but
:37:41. > :37:44.not willing to sign? It is up to couples to have the right and safe
:37:45. > :37:48.how they want to have a relationship and is not right for the state to
:37:49. > :37:51.say there is only one way you can do that. We have heard the situation
:37:52. > :37:56.there. What is wrong with the argument they are making? Well, this
:37:57. > :37:59.is international marriage week so you wouldn't expect me to downplay
:38:00. > :38:06.the importance of marriage this week. But it is very interesting
:38:07. > :38:09.what they said. Because the essential ingredient of marriage,
:38:10. > :38:13.and indeed, it seems, of their relationship is that they have made
:38:14. > :38:16.a commitment. They have made a decision to stay together. Your view
:38:17. > :38:21.is the state shouldn't recognise it because it they haven't gone for
:38:22. > :38:27.half an hour to a local authority office. I think their position is
:38:28. > :38:32.that they would like to have a legal arrangement, namely a civil
:38:33. > :38:36.partnership, but for a principal reason which I don't know they would
:38:37. > :38:41.prefer it wasn't a married arrangement. So they would like to
:38:42. > :38:46.draw this supple, and I would say rather semantic distinction between
:38:47. > :38:49.the two. -- this subtle. The essential ingredient is they have
:38:50. > :38:52.made the decision to stay together and if people have made the decision
:38:53. > :38:58.to stay together it is important that it is recognised by some kind
:38:59. > :39:03.of legal agreement. If one of them died with pension rights, in this
:39:04. > :39:06.case law should make sure that the pension rights are transferred even
:39:07. > :39:11.though there was no marriage? I think if you are thinking about the
:39:12. > :39:16.Supreme Court case today, if ever there was a case of bad cases make
:39:17. > :39:19.bad law that was a terribly borderline case, they had been
:39:20. > :39:23.living together for ten years and they were engaged and he failed to
:39:24. > :39:26.get round to the paperwork. So it would have been grossly unfair for
:39:27. > :39:31.her not to have benefited in the same way. But I think it is most
:39:32. > :39:36.important for the state to retain a distinction between the unmarried
:39:37. > :39:39.and the married because a lot of people don't want to give each other
:39:40. > :39:45.obligations. When should we say you are properly responsible for each
:39:46. > :39:51.other and we are going to take you seriously? Is it six months, is
:39:52. > :39:54.kids? We are part of the equal civil partnership campaign and I think
:39:55. > :40:01.that there is a difference between cohabiting and having a legal...
:40:02. > :40:05.Piece of paper, a certificate. Yes, saying I want my relationship
:40:06. > :40:08.validated in law because we cannot assume what the cohabiting couples
:40:09. > :40:11.want. In this case it was clear that Denise has gone through eight years
:40:12. > :40:15.of pain and it was clear what they wanted, they were engaged, and in
:40:16. > :40:19.our case it is clear what we want, we want legal recognition for our
:40:20. > :40:23.partnership but you can't say that for all cohabiting couples. Some of
:40:24. > :40:28.them may see themselves as partners. We should say you have the right to
:40:29. > :40:30.cohabit with a minimal set of entitlements, more entitlements with
:40:31. > :40:33.a civil partnership and then people can do the full English and have the
:40:34. > :40:39.marriage, is that the kind of picture Matt? I think what we want
:40:40. > :40:42.is to see civil partnerships as equal to marriage. You will get the
:40:43. > :40:46.same rights but it is a different institution and a different way of
:40:47. > :40:49.getting those rights. Can we not forget the children in this
:40:50. > :40:53.discussion? The children is what matter, the children is what the
:40:54. > :40:56.Marriage Foundation is about. The most important thing in a child's
:40:57. > :41:00.life is stability and stability comes with a decision and commitment
:41:01. > :41:05.and legal arrangement. And that will come with the arrangement and
:41:06. > :41:07.becomes even more so with marriage. Thank you all very much.
:41:08. > :41:12.That's it for tonight. We leave you with 14-year-old
:41:13. > :41:14.Kyra Poh from Singapore, who took part in the Wind Games
:41:15. > :41:17.in Catalonia at the weekend. This is a sport that involves
:41:18. > :41:20.performing in a high-power Kyra unexpectedly trounced
:41:21. > :41:26.the mostly adult male line-up to win gold in the the freestyle section
:41:27. > :41:28.ans be crowned world's fastest flyer, performing in winds of up
:41:29. > :41:31.to 230 kilometres per hour. # But for now it's time
:41:32. > :42:40.to run, it's time to run! Plenty of cloud for the remainder of
:42:41. > :42:41.the weekend it will feel cold with a nagging easterly breeze