07/08/2017 Newsnight

Download Subtitles




In-depth investigation and analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines as Venezuelans respond to comments made by Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. With Evan Davis.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 07/08/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Corbyn's Venezuela conundrum - he doesn't want to desert his


old friends running the country, but he can't avoid acknowledging


In the end, he steered a carefully nuanced in-between line,


but the Venezuelan opposition tell us he's got it wrong.


Maybe the mothers and fathers of those that have been killed would be


willing to speak to Jeremy Corbyn to explain and to tell him what the


real situation has been. Justin Gatlin was booed


for his success at the World His agent explains why


the crowd had got it wrong. 80% of Google software


engineers are male. Or a sign that women


aren't into programming? There's an argument


at Google about it. And we'll ask if it's


politically incorrect to even Stacey Dooley meets


some its supporters. How helpful do you think it is to


put these posters on the bonfire? Because they are our enemies. We


belong to Britain. We are British. We are British subjects. I hold a


British passport and I'm proud to say I'm British.


We don't know what the Venezuelans think of Jeremy Corbyn,


but we do now know what Mr Corbyn thinks about Venezuela.


He's back from a holiday in Croatia and was under immediate pressure


to condemn the socialist government in Venezuela, having given it warm


It's not good to be too supportive of a government arresting political


opponents in the dead of night, but Mr Corbyn has a good deal


of political capital invested in Nicolas Maduro's Venezuela.


So how the big question today, was how he would


Many of his colleagues are clear, Maduro is to be condemned.


What I condemn is the violence that's been done by any side,


Violence is not going to solve the issue.


The issues of Venezuela are partly structural because not enough has


been done to diversify the economy away from oil.


That has to be a priority for the future.


We also have to recognise there have been effective and serious attempts


to reduce poverty in Venezuela and improving literacy


and improving the lives of many of the poorest people.


Earlier this evening, I spoke to Juan Andres Mejia, founding


member and National Director of one of the main Venezuelan opposition


I asked whether it is right that both sides are responsible


I don't think it's fair. What has happened in the past four months in


our country is that you have had the majority of Venezuelans protesting,


demanding change, demanding free and fair elections and they have been


received by the National Guard and the police with tear gas, with


rubber bullets and sometimes too with regular bullets with shot guns.


More than 120 people have been killed. According to the


Attorney-General, this is the person that was not a supporter of the


opposition until recently, she has said that more than 90% of those


that have been killed are opposition protesters. Especially young people,


between the ages of 20 and 30. There has been violence in Venezuela. We


condemn all violence. Its not fair to say it has been on both sides.


There is one side that has insisted in protesting peacefully and every


time that the police or National Guard appears, it ends with people


being killed. Just tell us about the opposition and who they are. The


opposition has evolved since it began in Venezuela. Today you have


parties from all ideologies. You have leftist parties, such as Accion


Democrata. Such as Popular Will, my own party. And you have centre-right


parties. The most important fact is that the opposition now has younger


leaders, younger members of Congress who want change for all Venezuelans


and who believe that this change has to happen within democracy. It is


more Democrats and those who wish to change the rules by which we have


governed this country for the past 50 years. The socialist experiment


in Venezuela has failed and it has failed very badly. The economic and


political crisis we have is tremendous. There has never been


something like. A lot of people are not eating three times a day. Many


people are eating from the garbage. Scarcity of basic goods is clear.


For most people who are willing to elect a different president, the


struggle nowadays is not between two halves, two parts of the country. It


is between the majority of the people who want change and those who


refuse to allow it. You're a party of the left, we should be clear.


Yeah. Are you saying socialism doesn't work and you've seen that in


Venezuela. Excuse me when I speak about socialism in such an easy way,


because when we say socialism in Venezuela we mean more Communist


than anything else. In Venezuela this is not a socialist experiment,


to be fair. It's more of a leftist, autocratic experiment. There's no


freedom of expression. There is no freedom of speech. You have hundreds


of political prisoners in our country. So this is not a very


socialist experiment. This is a country where those in power have


tremendous benefits. They move around the city of Caracas with


bodyguards, in bullet-proof cars. They have become an elite


themselves, while the rest of the country has been suffering. This is


not a socialist government. This is an elite, call themselves


socialists, but their interest is staying in power forever. Your party


Popular Will, is a member of the socialist international, which


actually means it is affiliated through that to the Labour Party in


the United Kingdom. I mean, how important is it that foreign left of


centre parties support your side of this argument rather than the Maduro


side? It is very important because the government has a strong


propaganda team. It is not fair, we don't feel supported when


governments around the world present the situation here as if it was a


conflict between left and right-wing parties. This is a conflict between


democracy and dictatorship. This is a conflict between respecting human


rights and violating human rights. This is a conflict between the


majority of the people who want change and who want to bring that


change with elections and between a minority who is willing to do


anything to stay in power. What do you think when you see Jeremy Corbyn


essentially trying to steer a rather fine line between the two sides in


this? What I would say to Jeremy Corbyn is that he really has to know


what's going on in our country to be able to make a statement. Violence


has not been done by both sides. Violence has been promoted by the


government. They have armed paramilitary groups that have taken


the lives of hundreds of people in Venezuela. Maybe the mothers and


fathers of those that have been killed would be willing to speak to


Jeremy Corbyn to explain and to tell him what the real situation has


been. People such as a 17-year-old teenager, who went out to the


streets to protest because he was convinced that he should have a


different future. Other people such as a man killed by a gunshot, shot


by a member of the National Guard and all he was trying to do was


raising his voice for a different country for democracy. I'm pretty


sure the family of these people that have been killed are willing to let


Jeremy Corbyn know what the real situation has been and how they have


been killed during the past four months. Thank you so much. Thanks


for your time tonight. No-one says it's easy


to make spending decisions in the NHS right now,


but among the unpleasant choices being made in parts of the country,


are cuts in IVF treatments. The NHS standard - set by NICE,


the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence -


is that women under 40, unable to conceive for two years,


should be offered three cycles But, the group Fertility Network UK


has found that almost half the areas in England have decided to breech


that standard - cutting the three cycles to two or one


or none, in some cases. With no NHS IVF, the only option


is then to go private. Elaine Dunkley has been to Bristol,


where they are consulting on plans This baby is Ellie's dream come


true. At 39 and after years of trying to conceive, Ellie's first


round of IVF was successful. Ellie was forced to go private and says


the system is unfair for those who can't afford to pay. We decided to


go private because I was refused by the NHS because I had an early


miscarriage. They told me I was subfertile rather than infertile.


They wouldn't fund it. Not being able to have a baby was horrendous.


I know not all people this is what they want. For me, it was my world.


It was everything I wanted. Then to be turned down by the NHS and told


they weren't going to help me was absolutely devastating. It's a lot


of money. For a lot of people that money isn't available. I was really


fortunate that my family was able to help me. But I know not everybody is


in that situation. If we have to go for a second round of IVF, we will


have to remortgage the house or get a loan. Under guidance by NICE,


those aged under 40 with fertility problems should be offered up to


three cycles of IVF. Those aged between 40 and 42 should be offered


one, if they meet a certain criteria. But this doesn't always


happen. A cycle of IVF can cost in excess of ?3,000. Decisions on who


is eligible are taken by local clinical commissioning groups. It's


becoming a postcode lottery because of the way we commission in the UK.


It doesn't have to be in that way, because we have NHS England for


example that has a national programme for Jen itics associated


with IVF. The commissioning groups are able to not only decide whether


they will fund IVF but to provide restrictive elability criteria if


they do fund it. Very few people get access to IVF that actually require


it. Some describe it as unethical, unfair and discriminatory, but


ultimately it comes down to cost and whether the NHS should be funding


the desire to become a parent when money is needed in so many other


areas. Five areas have now stopped offering IVF. Since the beginning of


this year, the number of cycles women are entitled to has been


reduced by 12 clinical commissioning groups. And in September, these


areas will decide on whether IVF should be restricted to women who


are 30 to 35, those most likely to conceive with treatment. One of


those areas is in Bristol, the place where the world's first test tube


baby was born. Mr Acardi has helped thousands conceive and doesn't


believe age should be the only factor. Success rates are very


reasonable until the age of 42. So yes, one can take an individual


approach and clinics do that all the time. Remember, fertility,


infertility itself is classified as a disease. That means there are some


couples and some people where without help there is absolutely no


way they will be able to achieve a pregnancy. Therefore, they need


medical help. Every day the NHS is forced to make difficult decisions


over what it can and can't afford. This is little consolation to those


who feel time and funding is against them.


It's really unfair that people are treated differently across the


country, you've got the postcode lottery. I can understand there's


funding issues and they need to find ways to restrict it, I think the way


they're doing it is really unfair. Well, now we are joined


by Professor Robert Winston, a world expert in fertility and one


of the early pioneers of IVF, also the freelance journalist


Sirena Bergman, who has written in the Independent today that IVF


is costly and ineffective and its time to stop offering it


on the NHS. You would argue that there shouldn't


be a postcode lottery and the NHS should pay. Thank you for putting my


argument for me. That's helpful. Explain why. I agree with that. If


we have a National Health Service it has to be national. At the moment we


have local Health Services because of the reforms in the Health


Service. That leads to inequality, inequity. What's the right level to


pay? Is it what NICE have specified, three for women at this age? Three


cycles is reasonable. There are a number of countries in Europe that


offer free IVF and who have a similar cost for their Health


Service that we do. They are investing the same amount. It's not


just shortage of money. It is a politically taken decision


essentially by most of the commissioners. Why did you write


that this shouldn't be a priority for the NHS? I think it's something


that I feel very strongly about. The NHS is woefully underfunded. We all


know that. The NHS exists to keep us healthy. IVF isn't a cure to an


illness. It's a solution for people who feel they're not achieving their


life goals. I don't think that is the responsibility of the NHS.


Have you had children? I don't see how that's relevant. It is very


relevant. You don't have to answer the question and I don't mean to be


discourteous but I have published hundreds of scientific papers and


you have kindly called me a pioneer, but of my achievements my three


children are what changed my life because they are the Next Generation


and that's what we can contribute to. People who are infertile suffer


hugely, they suffer the pain just the same as someone with an


arthritic hip. This is not being fully understood and you should know


better than that, I think. Sirena, I'm not going to ask whether you


have had kids but I'm interested to know whether you accept the feelings


people have about whether they can have kids or not are as big to them


as they may be for some of the other things the NHS spends money on.


Absolutely, the feelings for the individual are incredibly strong and


my heart goes out to people who cannot conceive naturally and want


to. But we consider the best way to become a parent is by conceiving


naturally and giving birth to a child, there are actually a huge


amount of options for people who cannot conceive and by putting so


much money into IVF and presenting it as the number one auction are not


giving alternatives. There is no children shortage. I'm afraid


adoption is not a treatment for infertility. Infertility is a


symptom of a disease and there are at least 100 different causes. At


the moment there is a message -- massive wastage of money. Moreover,


IVF is not being costed properly because in some authorities it costs


?1000, in others in this country it costs ?6,000 so until the NHS gets


its act in order there is a massive problem. The problem is costing in


the NHS is completely random. It is a big issue. But Sirena raises the


point, why not encourage people to adopt? Because there are less than


1000 babies that can be adopted each year and people don't necessarily


want to adopt a child that might have had very adverse experiences


early in life. Most of the children you are referring to have been in


care for years and you cannot adopt them early in life. I think it is a


brave person who is prepared to adopt somebody under those


circumstances. What is the point of Nice? May come up with a standard,


then the authorities go their own way and ignore it. I do think that


is a problem. You should know if you are going to be GP you will receive


the same care at the point of NHS. I also think it is telling that areas


are making these difficult choices, it doesn't reflect well but they


know they have to do it because we are facing such a huge crisis. Very


briefly, if you had to cut IVF services would you cut the age


threshold or the number of cycles? I would do IVF when it is really


needed, and at the moment nearly half are unnecessary. The work we


are doing now, the research we are doing can reduce the cost and I


think that is urgently needed. OK, we will leave it there. Thank you,


both. Justin Gatlin won the 100m


at the World Athletics If you watched, you could probably


tell the crowd was not happy. The booing undoubtedly reflected


the fact that Gatlin has served two doping bans and the feeling that,


as a result, it was unfortunate that he beat Usain Bolt


in this showcase event. But open-mindedness is a virtue,


and there are many in the athletics business who think that


Justin Gatlin deserves a lot more Among them is Gatlin's


agent, Renaldo Nehemiah. I spoke to him earlier,


and he told me about The first doping offence happened


when Justin Gatlin was a freshman at the University of Tennessee, taking


out a role for attention deficit disorder. They recognised he wasn't


trying but because of the rulings he was suspended for a year. They


didn't want it to reflect on his record, it was in the record that


they didn't want it to reflect as a doping offence or that he was


doping. The next second offence was some type of cream applied to his


skin in early April Spring meeting back in 2006. But he did claim he


was effectively sabotaged by a therapist who was actually trying to


damage his career because they were in dispute with the management,


correct? He had fired that massage therapist the previous fall, against


my better judgment we couldn't find any other physios that we could


afford at that time. Can you see why the crowds have great anger at


people who have doping offences? I can see it back in 2010 when he


first returned, 2011, when he was running again, possibly even as


early as 2012. He ran in the London Olympic Stadium and won the bronze


medal and no one said a word. No one said a word in 2013, 2014 or even


2015. Then suddenly when he started to challenge Usain Bolt when nobody


else could challenge him it became an issue. I don't have a problem


with everyone feeling the same way about anti-doping but let's be


honest, Justin Gatlin is not the only athlete who has tested


positive. He didn't create doping and there will be others after him.


It is unfair. There will be others in the stadium this week that have


come off doping offences. I cannot speak because they are not winning


but he has done his time, made by the rules, the IAAF reinstated him


and we should accept that. To put the narrative out that it is just


Justin Gatlin and he's the bad guy, it is not fair, it is inhumane, it


is not sportsmanlike. How did he feel after he wins the 100m and he's


booed? I had prepared him prior to this. We had been talking about a


year and a half prior to that not everyone will accept you and you


cannot please everyone. He who hasn't done wrong, and he without


sin should cast the first stone. You cannot control the viewpoints of


anyone, but he has conducted himself in a professional manner. Here is


the icing on the cake. He gave Usain Bolt the greatest respect by bowing


to him and Usain Bolt hugged him. He has no problem with Justin Gatlin,


he's a great competitor, so if it's good for Usain Bolt it should be


good for everyone else. Usain Bolt in his graciousness at published


that in the press conference. I'm OK with that. If the King, the legend


is OK with it, we all should be. What do you think though of the


professional commentators, the media, some of those involved in


international athletics, even Sebastien Coe and Steve Cram who


have taken a very hard line on Justin Gatlin and have done a lot to


set opinion about him? Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I take


offence to Lord Coe, he's part of the IAAF who set the rules and


punishments, and when you do that you are supposed to be reinstated


which means athletes who have offended have, and you don't allow


them in and still condemned them. We are talking Post 11 years after the


ban. Other sports release their own and move past it. I don't have a


problem with anyone having any issue with doping, I don't condone it but


I don't think Justin Gatlin is the poster child for it. That is fact,


and I will always say that. Thank you so much for making that case.


An internal memo written by a male employee at Google has caused


The author set out the view that some of the gender gap at Google,


for example in the numbers of men and women employed as software


engineers, may not be as a result of sex discrimination,


but simply as a result of biological differences in the way skills


and characteristics are distributed between the sexes.


His memo has found its way into the public domain


and if you want to read it, you can google it obviously, and


The memo argues women and men are different.


So the main point... Now the writer is at pains to point out you cannot


stereotype based on gender but his sharpest critique is of the kind of


corporate diversity that Google promotes.


Which brings us to the response of Danielle Brown, Google's


new head of Diversity, Integrity and Governance.


She chose not to take on the argument -


Well, the memo raises two questions - one is whether the author


is right that genders differ in the distribution of attributes.


But the other question is whether this should be


Is there an authoritarian liberalism, that tries


With me are the writer and campaigner Caroline Criado-Perez


and the Director of the Institute of Ideas, Claire Fox.


Caroline, do you think it is possible the writer is correct to


say the reason there are fewer women programmers is because they are not


as into programming? There is no evidence to suggest this is a result


of biological difference. The idea that having a uterus makes me less


predisposed to programming as opposed to the way we bring up boys


and girls, for which there is a lot of evidence. I found it interesting


reading his blog how much emphasis he put on facts and let's be


rational about this and yet provided no citations or evidence. Is it


possible he is right? There's no evidence he cites, he says it makes


evolutionary sense and says it is true across different cultures...


When you look at the actual evidence, so for example there is


plenty of evidence showing if you submit two scientific CV is, one


with a male name and a female name, exactly the same other than that,


the male name gets employed and gets given a higher salary. He makes


claims about women not negotiating, actually evidence shows women do


negotiate but get penalised for it. This guy is perfectly entitled to


his opinion, it's just that I have no respect for it because it's not


based on evidence. On the substance of the issue, do you think he has a


point or not? I don't agree with his point, but one substantial point he


makes which I'm more sympathetic to his he says the reason why there are


not as many female programmers for example is not because of sexism in


many companies, and I am sympathetic to that because everywhere I look,


and there is evidence for this of course, and every institution is


bending over backwards to try to do something about diversity and gender


imbalance. There is something else going on. The other thing is it's


quite interesting because he spoke about psychological differences as


well. This is an argument I have with many contemporary feminists,


I'm not saying you, but they say what we need is more female MPs and


more females on boards because that will lead to a softer, less


aggressive atmosphere in Parliament. I think that implies there is some


kind of innate femininity that makes you a nicer person so that identity


point of what he says is very familiar to us. When it is said by


feminists it's greeted as an interesting thought, when it is said


by this guy, it is let on, where is your evidence? To be fair to


feminists, there is disagreement within feminism and evidence


suggests there isn't an innate... There is a fantastic book written by


this actually. Studies continue to accumulate showing educated women in


industrial democracies when they get choice they opt for socially


meaningful work and fewer hours. Women do 75% of the underpaid care


and governments to provide good childcare.


We might have women choosing for reasons that society organises,


doesn't give you enough child care or whatever the reasons, it's


society that might mean that women choose to work less hours and so on.


That means that they therefore might not be choosing to do things with


long hours. It's not Google the sexist company. How free is that


choice? I know, but the point... Claire's point is it wouldn't be


Google's fault. I'm not suggesting that Google is deliberately - This


guy is making the point that's what is said. A great story last year. A


point made about a very, very bright young daughter who was equally good


as sciences as the arts. She chose to do the arts, she was treated as


though she was betraying the sifterhood because she wouldn't --


sisterhood because she wouldn't take up stem subjects. The important


thing is that women are going to be the engineers of the future, they


say. Brilliant. I love things like code first girls an the work they


do. I like all that stuff. But I think it has to be that they choose.


There is a danger, this is what this guy argues, that what happens is


that women who don't choose to take up stem issues get accused of not


being pioneers in the science and technology issues. Do you, would you


say that - you know people draw generalisations about left and right


handed people. Studies will say left handed people are better at maths,


because of right brain dominance. Do you reject all this afternoon and


just think it's nonsense? I mean, you know, I'm not going to be


completely dogmatic about it and say that there is no way in any future


there will be some kind of - but I would say that whatever we find will


be so minuscule as to be fairly irrelevant and will not demonstrate


any way enough of a difference between the sexes to show why we


have such a big difference. The science isn't 100% there to


determine whether it's biology or society. It's legitimate to make the


point. He can make whatever point he wants. And not get the sack. I don't


care what he believes he's just wrong. No, but this is very


important. He wrote this actually largely about how diversity has


become an ideology in Google. Hiring policies have been re-organised


around Diversity ends rather than hiring people who are best for the


job. I think that does no-one a service, certainly not women for


whom it is patronising. This guy is now getting absolutely


internationally pillaried and hammered for being anti-women. He


isn't. He raises an important illiberalism. I'm so sorry - The


best person for the job, because Diversity can lead to being the best


person for the job. It doesn't guarantee it. We need to leave it.


There -- to leave it there. Thanks both


very much. The DUP may be the most successful


electoral force in Northern Ireland, but in the rest of the UK the party


has something of an image problem. It is often seen as stuck


in the past, too religiously conservative, and sometimes


illiberal, or even bigoted. A party for old people,


not the young. So, is that image fair,


or simply a reflection of people making too little effort to get


to know the DUP and its supporters? Well, Stacey Dooley makes


documentaries for BBC Three, which is of course primarily aimed


at the younger audiences, and Stacey has been


to Northern Ireland to meet some of the party's supporters to get


to know the DUP better. Right now, I am on my way


to go and have a chat Ruth is a DUP supporter


and I think she actually campaigns for them as well,


so heavily involved. She's 19, so just


started voting really. My dad is Ian Paisley Jr's election


agent, so this was in 2010 when Dr Paisley was


helping Ian canvas. I agree with all their views,


but also things in Northern Ireland, it's more than just


like the political views on gay marriage and stuff,


it's about, like, keeping Sinn Fein out and they have very real


terrorist links in the past. What are your thoughts


on gay couples? I believe it's wrong, there's no


easy way about that, but... I have been called a homophobe


before, which is not true, because I have simply said


there that I disagree. Tell me what is so wrong when a man


kisses another man or has You can't have sex like, erm,


you can't have children with two males, you can't have children


with two women. Do you ever feel for Ruth


because her opinions are sometimes seen as being very extreme


or radical, controversial? Do you think it difficult for Ruth


at 19 to sort of stick her heels in? I think it probably is, because I


think there's an expectation amongst people in general,


and particularly for young people that they should be liberal


in their outlook. But I think you have to do what's


right, especially if you feel you're standing before God, that


you have to be right before him. And I don't think being very


conservative with a small C necessarily means that you,


you know, there shouldn't be a hatred towards people that


you don't agree with. Whereas I feel that's coming


the other way at the moment. I think that's the reason


possibly while you are here. Because there is that feeling


that the DUP are extreme. Jackie and Ruth aren't the only DUP


voters I meet who believe the party has been treated unfairly


following the deal. Young unionists in Northern Ireland


show their loyalty to Britain How do you think the DUP


are being perceived back in England? They are being made out


as if they are so against gays and they are really against abortion


and all, but it is the inner beliefs of the party and that's really,


for me anyway, that's Do you blame the DUP for turning


the screw on Theresa May? No, I don't blame Arlene Foster


for saying, right, you want to play If they were in the DUP's shoes,


they would have done 1.5 billion, that will be hopefully


poured into your communities. Well, I hope the government stays


as long as it can, like. I've been brought up being British,


don't know anything else. Where are they, Sinn Fein


and you say the others are Catholics and all,


they want just to wipe us When they say they want


the British out of Ireland, I need to meet the other side


that seem so threatening The second largest political party


in Northern Ireland is Sinn Fein. I'm meeting Dominic and Tam,


two of their supporters, They have said, you know, with every


inch of themselves they would never ever in a million years entertain


the idea of not being British As far as I'm concerned,


a united Ireland is inevitable. And I think the more they sit down


and engage about it and actually discuss what it would be


like within it rather than a blinkered approach


of never, never, never. I don't think it's a pipe dream,


I think it's something I definitely It's this faith that


Ireland will become united In Protestant areas,


they're building bonfires to commemorate a 320-year-old battle


won by a Protestant king. I've come to the Cragar Estate to


understand more about the DUP vote. Gwen is the community worker


who is in charge of safety Let me ask you this,


Gwen, do you think... How useful, how helpful do


you think it is to put these We are British, we


are British subjects. I own a British passport and I am


proud to say I'm British. Sinn Fein want the united Ireland,


that is the way they brought That is their main aim, and they


will do it through any means. I actually believe that we are more


British than the English are, Why do so many people


vote for the DUP here? We are sort of forced


to vote for DUP, bringing Do you agree with everything


the DUP stand for? With same-sex marriage


and things, we don't care. We have people in here that are gay


and we don't have a problem I suppose I came here assuming that


I would be spending time with people who were intolerant towards same-sex


relationships, same-sex Actually on the ground,


so many people here aren't intolerant toward their neighbours,


the nationalists. Because the Prime Minister


is relying on the DUP, it's hard for her to be


seen as truly neutral The danger is that Theresa May's


deal with the DUP will deepen That was Stacey Dooley,


and a longer version of her BBC Three film,


Stacey Dooley Meets DUP Voters, Now, before we go,


although we like to think we've been able to provide you with a whole


40-minute programme full of serious news, some of our colleagues


in other outlets have been, shall we say, struggling


with the news drought Here's the News


Channel's Simon McCoy. Just bear in mind, it is August.


This does not look like a walk in the park. Dog owners and their pets


in California have hit the waves in the second annual world dog surfing


Championships. Here are the pictures. There's confidence,


there's the size of the waves. Some events have big waves, some small.


There's style and technique. It's really interesting. The competitors'


main challenge is to stay afloat on the board. This is near San


Francisco. There are prizes for the best dressed and tandem surfing


dogs, the winner being crowned top dog.


That's a shame, we've run out of pictures.


I would like to have seen the extra pictures.


Maybe he should have taken a leaf out of another news anchor's book.


What you're about to see is a Channel 4 news exclusive. This is


Nutty the squirrel. He's three years old. How about that! That squirrel


can water-ski! That's hillarious. Hello, Tuesday is shaping up to be a


rather disappointing day again for the greater part of England and


Wales. It may not start


Venezuelans respond to comments made by Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. Plus Justin Gatlin's agent on doping, the IVF postcode lottery, Google's diversity memo, and Stacey Dooley on the DUP. With Evan Davis.