30/03/2017 Newsnight


With Evan Davis. Including an interview with the German defence minister, a look at the Repeal Bill, and Myriam Francois on dress codes.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 30/03/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



We're getting our independence from the EU, which means the EU


The German defence minister tell us they're thinking


It is true that our British friends were not enthusiastic about the


Meanwhile Brexit is underway on all fronts -


with new plans to change EU law into UK law today.


We'll rehearse the debate among Remainers as to whether to carry


on fighting Brexit, or to accept the referendum result.


We are in Scotland to hear how it's not the first time the country's


found itself making a choice between its neighbours.


There have been tensions before between these two


The country's sense of its Britishness and its Europeanness.


Until recently it could quite happily be both, but not any more.


Ivanka Trump - not the First Lady but probably the most powerful


Is it right that she now sits at the top


It's going to be a two year marathon,


not a two week sprint, so it's hard to know how much weight


we should be putting on the reactions of other European


leaders on Day 2, to Theresa May's letter triggering Article 50.


but the words imply that the EU wants to stick to its procedures


Dominating European politics at the moment is the centre right


It's called the European People's Party, and it's enjoying a two-day


The German Chancellor Angela Merkel is there, as is the European


Commission President, Jean Claude Juncker,


and Brexit of course, among the topics being talked about.


I wish to say here that Brexit is of everything. We must consider it to


be a new beginning, something that is stronger, something that is


better. If Jean-Claude Juncker's view there.


So much for the set-piece statements.


Perhaps it is better to step away from the platform speeches,


and to focus on more specific areas and at more length.


To that end, let's go to Berlin, because our diplomatic editor


Mark Urban is there, and he has been speaking


I know you have been speaking about a number of different things but in


particular, just the issue of the German attitudes towards the Article


50 talks. What have you been hearing? Well, the fascinating


thing, being here at this particular time, is watching German politicians


processing the way that the departure of the UK, which they


hoped wouldn't happen, is going to change the geometry, the balance of


power on all sorts of issues within the EU. They will end up almost


certainly paying more into the budget. We don't like the idea that


it -- they don't like the idea that it will even out differences in


wealth with them being net contributors. They can see some


positives and on the issue of European defence policy, that could


be one because obviously the British were standing in the way of that in


many areas. But what a moment to sit down with the possible successor to


Chancellor Merkel. She is the defence minister and we started


talking about the issues of the moment and what she made of


Britain's attempt, apparently, to use security as a bargaining chip. I


do not expect that we're going to Bagan with security topics because


it is in our mutual interests to exchange information and necessary.


-- I do not expect that we are going to Bagan. It is vital for the two of


us. It is about trade and the common market and those are the important


things. What is your view about the sequence of this? Can be no real


discussion about the wider relationship until it has been


settled that the UK will make a contribution on the budget? Well, I


have a different approach because at the beginning we said there would be


no negotiations before Article 50 has been pulled. This happened


yesterday. Then the experts will go into negotiations and one thing is


clear, the new contract, the new deal will only be signed once


everything has been negotiated. You cannot take bits and pieces apart


and close them and go further on other topics. So the whole deal will


be visible at the very end, but there is nothing, I think, that we


should not speak of openly and addressed directly. How important is


it, in that context, that the UK pay its Bill? People have talked about


up to 60 billion euros in contributions up to 2020. Of course,


as long as the UK is a member of the European Union, you have to meet the


contracts, but what that is, at the very end and at the beginning, day


one two after the letter has been brought to Brussels, I think we


should look at it calmly, and really sort out what is with the membership


that has to be paid for, and what is in the negotiation pot which is


another topic. You and your British counterparts working on a new


defence joint vision, what can we expect from that? Michael Fallon and


me, and we want to improve and strengthen the British German


military cooperation. That is why we are working on a joint vision, a


bilateral thing for the future, how we can improve cooperation with the


Armed Forces here, the Maritime forces for example. Exchanging


officers, going into training, having common capability


developments, things like that. How important is it to get big European


dimension of defence right at this particular time? Is the American


guarantee is becoming less credible for want of a better word? There


were a lot of worries on the European side when we heard


contradictory tones from the White House. Saying that it was obsolete,


that Nato was great. It was not easy at the beginning. What it triggered


was two things. First of all, the question, can we rely on Nato, and


today I say, firmly two more firmly than ever, this weekend. On the


other hand, the contradictory statements from the White House may


give the impression to the Europeans that we have to get our own act


together. Crudely, and be blunt, does the UK going make it easier for


you to get your act together at the EU level? Because Britain was


blocking a lot of this. It is true that our British friends were not


enthusiastic about the European security and defence union. Once


again, I think it is a pity that the UK is leaving. But it is a fact. And


what pushed the European idea forward was more what we heard from


the White House after the American election. There have been a lot of


reports about the meeting the Chancellor Merkel had. Is it true


that President Trump give her a bill for the American defence of Germany?


It is not true. But we have all seen the tweet. That presumably Germany


owes Nato vast sums of money. But we all know that Nato does not have


that account. But you think you can get to the 2% of GDP that it?


Absolutely. Because smaller countries, the Baltic states for


example, work hard on reaching this 2% goal, two, and nobody would


understand that better than a country like Germany, who is


determined to have a certain relevance in economic terms, and


will not shy away from taking over the amount of responsibility that is


necessary in security matters. The 2% goal, it is also a symbol for the


resolve to take a fair share of the burden. And we need it. Lastly, I


wanted to ask you about Chancellor Merkel. You are one of the very few


ministers who has been there right since the beginning with her.


Shoulder to shoulder. Did you think, for example during the refugee


crisis, I do not think she is going to make it, this is too big? During


the refugee crisis, I never doubted that she would make it, because as


you said, I was working very closely with her. The problem was that


within a few weeks we had to give a very complex answer on how to end


this influx of refugees, and when you start to give them an answer


that begins in Syria and Iraq and goes through Turkey, to Germany and


the local communities, and people go, please, give us a quick answer


but don't tell us this long story. Well, it is different now after two


years, so the long story now has been learned, and understood, and


therefore the confidence and trust is again, that the Chancellor is


leading us safely through those very difficult times. Thank you very


much, Minister. Mark Urban talking to Ursula von der Leyen, the German


defence minister. Meanwhile, we got more detail


on the gargantuan task of turning EU There are thousands of pieces


of European legislation, the idea is that one new act


of Parliament transposes The Great Repeal Bill,


as it is referred to now, and it cuts through the impossible


task of taking the laws Some of the laws need cleaning up,


so the government wants ministers to have the power to re-write


bits of them. These are called Henry VIII powers


as the egoistical king gave himself exactly


that law-making authority. Everybody recognises that some


delegated authority will be needed but you can't give completely


free reign to ministers. Our political editor


Nick Watt is with me. What do you take from today? Over


the last 48 hours we have seen the fruits of some careful planning


meant to tell the public that we are leading the European Union and that


the government has a credible plan to do it. Yesterday, as you were


saying, essentially what David Davis was saying is that the UK will land


in a legal safe zone on the day after we leave. But interestingly,


there is a debate going on in the Conservative Party on that point.


You were mentioning the incorporation of all that EU law


into UK law. Some of the old guard of Tory Eurosceptics are saying, you


know what we want to do with that legislation, we want to get rid of


it because Brexit has liberated the UK to be a more liberal economy, but


some of the younger guard, in the highly influential European research


group, the influential group of Brexiteers, they are saying hold


your horses, one step at a time, let's just focus on Brexit, and what


we might want to repeal, let's think about after the next election. So


what that means is that there is going to be quite a debate on what


you should have in the Conservative manifesto for the next election. So


look, here is what I have picked up today.


It has been dubbed a Briton's greatest peacetime challenge. Today


the government of the first steps to ensure that the UK leads you on a


sound legal footing, although the grand title was slightly downgraded.


First up, the scrapping of the legislation that took us into the


EEC in the first place. Once that has been struck down, the government


will incorporate the entire body of EU law into UK law. And then we will


see the return of England's favourite rotund monarch. As various


EU regulations are tweaked around 1000 times. This will be done


through a fast-track route with light Parliamentary scrutiny, known


as the Henry VIII clauses. And then we will see the return of England's


favourite rotund monarch. Various EU regulations will be tweaked around


1000 times and this will be done through a fast-track route with


light Parliamentary scrutiny known as the Henry VIII clauses. For


veteran Eurosceptics, this is a moment of liberation. Can I thank my


right honourable friend for making it clear that two years from today,


our sovereign parliament will indeed have the power to amend, repeal or


improve all of this ghastly EU legislation.


Downing Street is acutely conscious of the political sensitivities of


scrapping workers' rights such reason they wants to even enhance


them but as for other rights, Number 10 says, let us focus on Brexit and


leave that debate until the next election. It is fundamentally


important we have robust workers' rights, we have to protect workers


and we also heard ministers say that where we can we want to build on


that and make progress, we have often been at the forefront of that


work in the EU and in my constituency I work very closely


with the unions and I want to see a constructive debate in this country


about all of these different policy areas and come up with a set of


policies, we must get this right. In the heart of government there are


far greater nerves about the next step, the looming Parliamentary


battles over what is known as a Great Repeal Bill. Some ministers


are warning Theresa May and she may be forced to hold a snap General


Election next year if either of the Commons, the House of Lords or the


Scottish Parliament succeeds in delaying or even scuppering that


bill. In both the House of Commons and House of Lords there is a huge


amount of originally and argy-bargy, everything they have done at every


turn, not just this bill but way they had to be brought kicking and


screaming to accept that Parliament has a role, even if it is an


excessively limited role, in determining the final deal and they


have done the exact reverse to what they told the country they would do.


The Scottish Parliament could hold up the process by refusing to give


consent to the changes if a majority of MSPs decide they are unhappy with


the extensive EU powers handed over to Edinburgh. If Westminster


attempts to use the Great Repeal Bill as a power grab to take away


from Hollywood powers that are already devolved, we will have a


constitutional crisis and there is no way the constitutional Scottish


Parliament would give consent to having powers taken away from it. As


he drafts the historic legislation, David Davis is making clear he will


abide by the convention that gives the devolved bodies say but the


Brexit Secretary will issue a blunt warning to Holyrood- if you stand on


the way you may make Scotland and possibly the UK ungovernable. Nick


Watt. And that got stuck in the middle. And Nick Watt was not Nick


Clegg! Sorry about that! Well, should the Remainers


try to block the Great Reform Bill, Or is it time to accept


the referendum result and move on. Within the Remainer community, there


is something of a divide on that. Last night on this programme,


you might have seen Lord Heseltine, Tim Farron says there'll be


a "legislative war". But there are those with their views


of Brexit, who believe Let's both sides


of that argument now. Joining me is Labour


MP Chris Leslie, who's a supporter of Open Britain,


the group that came out of the Their former Deputy Director


was Lucy Thomas, who also joins us. She is now working at PR firm


Edelman, advising businesses on how Good evening. Lucy, you are running


the campaign at the top of the campaign, where are you on what we


should be doing about Brexit? Firstly, I'm still emotional about


it, even the sight of Theresa May with that letter did make me cry,


frankly. I am still emotional and disappointed. However, I think the


question is, what we do it that is constructive? For me, that is about


being constructive, coming up with solutions to the problem and working


together to find the right deal and that means businesses, thinking


about what they would like out of a final negotiation, for example, how


would they replace the current free movement rules and what they want


from a trade deal? And legislative war, trying to block by


Parliamentary tactics, the so-called Great Repeal Bill, that is not the


way to about this? The Leave campaign wanted to take back control


for Parliament and they wanted more sovereignty so I think Parliament


has a huge role in scrutinising the process and making sure it is as


good as possible, but where I do not agree with some people on the tenth


one side, people like Lily Allen, she tweeted this week saying every


bill in this country and every missed opportunity and every job


lost, but is down to Brexit and this name-calling... Chris, do you think


the Lib Dems or Remainers should use the Great Repeal Bill as a way of


holding the government, obstructing Brexit? I do not think we can


obstruct the outcome of the referendum but there are so many


consequences that flow from Britain's exit and divorce from EU


that we have a responsibility to not just hold the government to account


but hold the Leave campaign to account for those massive promises


they made and it is not just a vote at the end in 2019... What is your


objective? When we find we will not get ?350 million every week to the


NHS, apart from pointing out that is not an exact representation of what


the situation was, what do you hope to do when you say you want to


expose and hold them to the things they said in the campaign? For those


of us who take a world view about Brexit rather than this having the


moon on a stick, that view, we have to walk through with the public and


the business community and the wider economy, the consequences of making


this major decision, it might be that over time there is space for


people to change their opinion about these things. We're talking about


not just two years but possibly multiple years... What are you


trying to achieve? To reverse it or change it or watch? Or just get in


the way? I am on the centre-left, I want to fight. I might watch? Five


years of Alliance building and reaching out to our neighbours to


defence trade and living standards. It is talking about a special and


steep partnership. Unfortunately, because we had from the Leave


campaign, they will be unable to fulfil that cost free divorce,


making major savings, preserving the union, no problems in Northern


Ireland, Scotland will be integrated with the UK, migration levels will


fall and be here right now they will not even promised that. We have to


hold them to account when they have been breaking promises and secondly,


show people that there is actually a need for integration across Europe


and those are the close partners. Is that a coherent approach, Lucy?


Ultimately, it comes down to what your tactics are and your objective


at the end of it. The objective is key. What was interesting in the


letter yesterday was there were quite a few significant climb-downs,


the ECJ, there could be jurisdiction, we will end up paying


up to ?50 billion but we will see what the final figure is. On free


movement, it will not perhaps be as hard as we have been told so for me,


we have to wait and see more. I don't think jumping on every piece


of rhetoric is the answer, Theresa May had to be very hard line but


when it comes to the letters and the details, she will be pragmatic. I


don't think we should give up on the single market altogether, there is


potential to reform the single market, with a different government


we could have reformed that migration colour. Today, we heard


from David Davis. In legal terms, we are still in the European Economic


Area, which is the single market. Parliament has not voted to leave.


We might have a vote on that. We might need to still be in the single


market during the transitional period and I will fight to preserve


those benefits of membership and am disappointed with people who have


given up on that. You want to stay in the single market. Will you have


a legislative war to kind of get in the way of Theresa May's version? Or


will you be constructive? There is a moderate majority in the House of


Commons that believes in a pragmatic approach to European alliances and


there might be a sizeable number of quite hard Brexiteers to the right


of Theresa May but actually the rest of us should set that and in all of


those foods we have in the House of Commons, we can provide a space for


a sensible approach from the Prime Minister and she has to make copper


rises to preserve the alliances, that is do what we can to preserve


them. Thank you both very much. -- compromises.


We'll take a short break now, for Viewsnight.


Tonight, Myriam Francois looks at religion, dress


Imposing neutral clothing is just discrimination in disguise.


If I come to work wearing a headscarf or a face veil


or a cross or a hoodie or dress head to toe in tweed and a flat


Our clothing speaks to our background, our class and our ideals


and I would argue that all of those are political.


A recent European Court of Justice ruling upheld that workplaces


with a so-called neutrality policy were within their right to ban items


they thought weren't neutral, such as a cross or a head scarf.


For some, enforcing political and religious neutrality is key


But for others, it's just discrimination dressed


Neutrality is what is normal for the majority of people.


In white, secular Europe, neutrality reflects the norms


If we think of religiosity as a spectrum from areligious


to religious, no single position on that spectrum is any more


Dressing in a way that is areligious is just as political or just


as neutral as dressing with religious markers.


Either way, you are saying something with your appearance.


That is the very basis of advertising.


Are slogan T-shirts, which are all the rage,


What about dreadlocks or wearing a red or blue tie?


What about wearing your Afro hair natural or choosing rainbow


It crystallises a vision of what is normal and is used


to erase the differences that bother us.


Banning the headscarf at work, which - let's face it -


is what most conversations about neutrality in Europe


are all about, cannot be separated from broader discussions


about Muslims as a problem community.


Neutrality is being used to marginalise identities that don't


fit the myth of secular progress and that is just


We've looked at the Great Repeal Bill, and its Henry VIII


clauses; but that is not the only constitutional challenge facing us.


There is a potential second Scottish independence referendum.


Nicola Sturgeon wants to keep a Scottish link to the EU.


And therein lies a second Tudor analogy.


In the 1540s - after England had broken with Rome -


the Scottish court was divided between those who wanted to follow


England and those loyal to the 'auld alliance' with the French.


So Henry VIII sent an army up to Edinburgh to 'woo' the Scots over


Allan Little's been taking a look at the war of the Rough Wooing,


History seeps from every soot black rock of this old capital.


When England broke with Rome in the 1530s, the Brexit


of the Tudor age, Henry VIII sent an invading army to Edinburgh


to try to keep Scotland on his side, rather than Europe's.


The English army landed down there at the Port of Leith


and advanced up this road in vast numbers, laying waste


to the neighbouring borough of Canongate.


And when they breached the city walls, they destroyed much


of the ancient medieval heart of Edinburgh.


They wanted to wrest power away from those factions in Scottish


society that favoured alliances with the French and hand it to those


who wanted to draw Scotland into the English fold.


That Anglo-Scottish war came to be known as the Rough Wooing.


Scotland is, once again, torn between factions.


The wooing of the Scots has changed a bit since


England pours all manner of resources into it


when they arrive with a huge fleet and then sends thousands of men up


They turn up with artillery weapons, then you have a situation


where parts of the town are actually set on fire.


There is huge damage done to the Canongate.


You have damage done to Holyrood Palace and Holyrood Abbey.


So it is attacking a lot of the heart of the Kingdom of Scotland.


Theresa May's approach to wooing the Scots needs to be a bit more


But the aim is, in essence, the same.


To keep Scotland on board, to make sure that pro-union sentiment


So, in the mid-16th century, you have Scotland divided


in its loyalties between alliance with England and a


And I think in both cases you have Scots not necessarily being totally


Edinburgh's architecture celebrates the age when commitment


England and Scotland joined in the great enterprise


of Britishness, and often a Britishness that stood


against the perceived menace of continental Europe.


There have been tensions before between these two


The country's sense of its Britishness and its European-ness.


Until recently, it could quite happily be both.


A second referendum will bring that tension to the fore and confront


Which would you rather be - British or European?


The Port of Leith, where that English army landed,


was once Scotland's great gateway to trade with Europe.


Before the union, when Scotland turned west to the wide open seas


But Scotland voted 62% to stay in Europe.


Many see that as a chance to forge a new place in the world


It seems as if England is on a self-destruct path


and because it is the largest part of the UK population,


it is determined to bring everyone with it.


We talked a lot in the first referendum about Scotland having


a distinctive political culture and an awful lot of


The second they saw that 62%, they saw it.


But only 45% voted for independence in 2014 and about a third of them


There are dangers from Nicola Sturgeon in tying the case


for independence too closely to the case for Europe.


Of course, there are people within Scotland and within the independence


movement who don't like the idea of Europe one iota.


There has to be more drive and focus and progressive thinking


Denmark, Finland, Scotland, Sweden - a row of little, independent


northern states, determined to break up that hegemony of


But how entrenched is Scotland's European identity?


The age demographics don't look good for the union.


Polls show the young tend to favour independence


At Leith Academy, 36 languages are spoken.


Tomorrow's voters have multiple, overlapping, sometimes


I would probably go for European because I grew up with a lot


I just feel like I am more European than I would say I am British.


Harry, if it came to a choice between being European or being


Do you see a tension between the values that Britain


represents and the values that Scotland represents?


Because I always feel like there has been a big tension between Scotland


and England and I would identify myself more with Scottish


I think we have completely different values.


To be British represents being an imperialistic,


capitalist, unfair society where people don't matter.


Whereas in Scotland, we are more equal and we are inclusive


and we care about trying to help each other and trying


to make everyone better, not just the people at the top.


I am British and I think I have hit into the culture down in England


But if Brexit makes Scots inclined more to a European world


view, it also changes the independence proposition.


The prospect of a hard border across the island of Britain.


Jim Gallaher was a senior civil servant who has worked for decades


on relations between Scotland and Westminster and was


a leading thinker in the pro-union camp in 2014.


Outside the single market, and if the UK is outside


the Customs Union, you are talking about some form of border control


and some substantial restriction on trade


And since England is by far Scotland's biggest market,


the economic effects of that are very real.


Not to mention, even, potentially the effects


He needs no wooing from London, rough or otherwise.


Like Scotland itself, he voted to stay in both unions.


But he is clear about which matters more.


What it does do for the proponents of independence is give them


The English are different from us, they say.


Well, I rather suspect that in the long run,


the English are really much more like us than we are like


Henry VIII's English army made it this far,


But the castle held out and Scotland stayed, for now,


The English went home to work out why burning down the capital city


didn't win them the friendship of the Scots.


That phrase, "Rough Wooing", comes from a comment attributed


to the fourth Earl of Huntley, who said of the English...


"We did not like the manner of their wooing and could not stoop


That theme runs through Scottish history like a thread


The union has been at its strongest when Scotland has felt concrete


reason to love the shared enterprise of Britishness, whatever


It has been at its weakest when England, through sheer


superiority of numbers, has felt entitled to impose


on Scotland something Scotland has rejected.


England and Scotland married in the end and the marriage has


But they are leading increasingly separate lives these days,


The manner of that wooing could determine


Among Trump-haters, Ivanka Trump has sometimes caused a kind


She's a Trump, so should be hated, and yet she seems like a good


She seems more liberal - in the election campaign,


she championed childcare as an issue.


She comes across as a strong woman in the team, she was appropriately


disapproving of her father's remarks on that coach about grabbing women.


And she seems to have struck up a friendship with Justin Trudeau -


Well, what to make of the fact that Ivanka now has a formal role


She did have that role informally, but the arrangement was criticised,


it was seen as too powerful a position not


to be properly governed by the rules of employees.


But still some will say Ivanka's role is nepotism in action.


Others might say it is inevitable that


presidents will use family as trusted advisors.


Let's talk to Doug Wead, who was a special assistant


to President George Bush Snr and has written extensively


Very good evening to you. How often have president is given a proper


role, former or informal, to close members of family? All through


American history. I counted about 18 or 19, depending on how you define


them, and daughters who have had very powerful roles in their


father's White House. And you were there when George Bush senior


implied his son in the White House. -- employed. He was not in the White


House, he was in the campaign but we talked about that a lot and that was


why I began my study of presidential children. He came into the middle of


his father's campaign and what I learned is that even the White


House, if you make a decision and you are wrong, you get fired. If you


make a decision and you are right, you make everybody mad and you do


not get credit for it anyway, the credit goes up, so no one makes


decisions. The governments are present in this case the campaign


suffered. When George W Bush came into the campaign on March of 1987,


he made decisions, and it transformed the campaign. And I


wondered, how will his father be president of the United States


without his son in the White House with him? And I believe that if he


had gone in the White House with him, George HW Bush would have been


re-elected and George W Bush would not have become president. History


would have been very different. There is something a bit nepotistic


in there, that corrupt. The president of Congo would the idea


will stop I picked Congo at random. Appointing sons or daughters, it is


not what you think of advanced Western societies doing as a way of


running themselves, is it? They have been doing it from the beginning.


George Adams was the secretary to his father and Martin Van Buren


appointed his son as secretary. All the way through history. When he is


one of his father's bodyguard and secretary and a fractal Chief of


Staff. Anna Roosevelt ran the White House in FDR's last year of power.


It was inevitable, because they need loyalty. That is the most important


loyalty in the White House. And they need honesty. A lot of people will


not tell the president what he needs to hear but a son or daughter will.


And they need someone who will make decisions. And they cannot be fired,


the son or daughter. What you think of it like a Trump? -- what do you


think of Ivanka Trump. I wrote a book called Game of Thorns and


predicted that he would call on her and she would become powerful in


this White House. I have been an adviser in this White House and I


see this young lady as capable and talented. It is not about balancing


the politics, it is about the need for loyalty and competence and


continuity. She cannot be fired as daughter. She can be fired in that


position but she will come back to the dinner table, so if you give


information, she becomes part of the plan and there is continuity. That


will last and a lot of these leaders are around Trump will be gone in a


few years, but a backdrop will stay. -- but Ivanka Trump will stay. They


give very much. From tomorrow visitors


to the Naval College in Greenwich will get a rare opportunity to get


a close up view of the ceiling of its famous 'Painted Hall' -


the lavish centre piece at the heart It's been described as the UK's


Sistine Chapel and over the next two years, conservators will be


restoring the work - We leave you tonight


with the College's conservation director William Palin -


on why the ceiling is so important. We're standing beneath this


extraordinary painted ceiling, the greatest work


of English baroque art. This is the largest painted


ceiling in northern Europe. I think it's very hard


to find anything to compare I suppose 'the Sistine Chapel


of Britain' conveys something of the scale and magnificence


of this interior. And the idea was always


that this room would dazzle and amaze and overwhelm,


so visitors would arrive here, look up, see this amazing


ceiling and then think, "hmm, I'll leave some money


for the foundation to help This was Britain's response


to European culture, saying, "We can do this


as well, if not better We have a baroque decorative scheme


celebrating the Protestant monarchy and we have a building


of unparalleled magnificence. After today's warmth,


it's going to be a very A little rain could wander


into eastern parts of England for a while but most of the wet


weather is further west and it is tracking its way away


from Wales and Northern Ireland, So we're going to have a window


around the middle part of the day,


With Evan Davis. Including an interview with the German defence minister and a look at the Repeal Bill. Plus Myriam Francois on dress codes, Henry VIII and Scottish independence, and Ivanka Trump in the White House.

Download Subtitles