With Emily Maitlis. German coalition talks collapse, post-Brexit drugs rules, Zimbabwe, Charles Manson, and Paperchase v the Daily Mail.
Browse content similar to 20/11/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Political crisis in Germany -
the world's most powerful woman
sees her coalition talks collapse.
As Angela Merkel hits the buffers,
has Brexit just disappeared
off Europe's radar?
And where does that leave us?
Theresa May has won support
of her Cabinet colleagues
to increase their financial
offer to the EU.
But does that have any weight
if there is a power vacuum
at the heart of Europe?
We expect the motion to be moved
tomorrow, the committee set up and
we expect that by Wednesday we
should be able to vote in
Mugabe refused to be cowed by house
arrest or a resignation speech,
so why on earth does Zanu-PF think
they can impeach him in two days?
We'll ask them if the game
plan has gone wrong.
Pure evil, pure fantascist,
or just a dull man whom America
tried to make into a celebrity.
We look at the death of serial
killer Charles Manson.
Will his cult carry on without him?
And an effusive apology
from Paperchase after
advertising in the Daily Mail.
Why are activists claiming
this as a victory?
And what should customers do now?
It wasn't so long ago
the superlatives abounded:
the world's most powerful woman,
the mother of Europe, or simply,
in her mother tongue.
Tonight Germany's chancellor
Angela Merkel is looking unusually
vulnerable after a collapse
of coalition talks aimed
at forming her next government.
The decision by the
Pro Business Party -
the Free Democrats -
to walk out on the process -
has left Merkel isolated.
She has said she'd rather have
new elections than try and lead
a minority government.
Its Germany's problem
first and foremost.
But its also Europe
and by extension, ours.
Brexit has just sunk rather far down
the list of things Europe's biggest
player needs to think about now.
Our diplomatic editor
Mark Urban covered the German
elections in September.
Here's his take on the
mess two months on.
She has survived so many changes
of government elsewhere,
but now Europe's most powerful
national leader is in trouble.
From the moment the exit polls
came out in September,
it was clear that Angela Merkel had
some tricky coalition
building ahead of her.
Yesterday she apparently gave up
on Plan A, power-sharing
with the Greens and the Liberals,
and today voiced a readiness to go
back to the country.
TRANSLATION: New elections is one
option but for a stable country,
a country that has so many
challenges to face, the option
of a minority government
is something you would want to look
at very carefully.
I will not say never today,
but I am very sceptical and I think
new elections would be
the better solution.
There is still a possible plan B,
a coalition with the left-wing SPD
who have ruled it out up to now
but the fear a new vote.
Chancellor Merkel has said she does
not want to stand down.
She sees herself with the
responsibility to provide stability.
Of course some people think
the situation we have right now
is in fact a testament to her no
longer being able to
provide the stability.
She was not able to bring
the exploratory talks
to a successful end,
so I think what she is trying to do
by saying that she would rather have
new elections than a minority
government is to rope
the social Democrats, the SPD,
that into a rather lustreless,
probably grand, coalition.
But with Germany holding such sway
in Europe the current crisis
could have much wider effects.
France's president could try
to exert a stronger role
if Germany stumbles.
It is interesting for France.
In one sense I think it will mean
that the French are able
to drive the agenda and,
for example, will be dominant
on the European side in the Brexit
negotiations for example.
On the other hand, what it means
for Macron is he is not going to get
a German response to his proposals
on European integration and reform
in the eurozone for some time.
And of course there is Brexit.
Ministers today attended a Cabinet
committee meeting intended
to improve the UK's financial offer
head of a December summit.
But there is deadlock also
on the Irish border and little
chance that Mrs Merkel will be
pushing the other countries to agree
even if she wanted to.
This is not good news for Britain
because if Germany can't focus
on Brexit which has already not been
at the top of its priority list,
then that means that the EU will be
less flexible in its position
in the negotiations.
Talk to British ministers
and you find many still cling
to this idea that Angela Merkel
will deliver a benign
But among those from the other 27
countries you hear something
that it is Germany that is taking
the tougher stance on the financial
question and it is Germany that now
seeks to organise the others around
a very robust position
on the future terms of trade.
What difference will
a weakened Merkel make?
Well, it will mean she is less
liable to take political risks
in anyone's interests other
than her own.
For the Prime Minister trying
to navigate the shoals of Brexit
with her European partners
an already complex task has just
become even more so.
What concerns me is that if Germany
does not have an established
coalition, making decisions
on tricky issues in Brexit like have
we achieved sufficient progress?
Can we move to the next phase
of the negotiations?
Should we have a
It is going to be more difficult
for Germany and in those
circumstances it seems to me that
moving forward the Brexit
negotiation is made more complicated
by what has happened in Germany
in the last 24 hours.
Angela Merkel has been around
so long she has seen British prime
ministers come and go,
but increasingly people now will be
looking to the post-Merkel era.
We will discuss the ramifications it
will have an Brexit in a moment.
Ulrike Franke is a research fellow
from the European Council on Foreign
She joins us now from Berlin.
Sticking with Germany, how serious
do you think this is why is proving
so hard this time around?
reason why it is so hard is that it
was never the Plan A. It was never
was a project that anyone involved
wanted, it was born out of
necessity. It is not surprising that
You're talking about the
colours of the parties that make up
the flag, this is the short term of
the parties that she wanted to bring
with her into the Coalition. You
think that formation has failed for
good, do you?
I think so. These were
the pre-negotiations, not the
official once and they lasted for
four weeks and the three parties
involved could not make up their
minds, could not get together and
this morning, they decided not to
continue this any more.
Do you see a
way through this for Angela Merkel?
For Angela Merkel, yes, at this
point, there are three options. One
is to form a Coalition with someone
else which would be the SPD, the
only party that is left. That seems
very unlikely because they have
excluded that. The other possibility
would be a minority government,
under Angela Merkel. Our European
colleagues and partners in
Scandinavia for instance have a lot
of experience of theirs but this
would be new for Germany, we have
never had it before and it would be
particularly tricky at the moment
with the right-wing party in
Parliament. The last option would be
another round of elections, snap
It is very rare that the
same leader goes to the same
electorate and does better in such a
short space of time, do you think
she would go back to the polls is it
a double bluff?
Well, it seems that
her personally, she seems to prefer
doing another round of elections to
having a minority government. It is
true that the big concern would be
whether we actually get another
outcome, which is somewhat unlikely,
they may be some shifts but it is
unlikely she will win a stronger
majority. If we have another round
of elections, that would be in
spring, early spring, we might end
up with the result that is very
similar to what we have today and
then we can repeat the whole
process. I will ask you to place
your bets, do you think that Angela
Merkel will remain the German
Chancellor? Yes. I would put money
on that, absolutely.
We are talking
about the arrangement in which she
governs. Thank you very much.
Mark Urban is back and our political
editor, Nick Watt joins us.
At the moment there is all this
follows and we do not really feel
like a priority and even though we
are talking about the divorce
settlement, is anyone listening?
UK ministers, they have agreed to at
the 20 billion euros on the table,
no figure will be mentioned, no
figure is meant to be mentioned at
all during the process but it looks
like that 20 billion will double as
Theresa May puts flesh on the bones
of what she meant in her speech in
Florence which he said the UK
would honour its commitments as a
past member of the EU. The key thing
she said today was that the UK and
EU have to jump together. The UK
will not agree to this new money
unless the EU talks about the
transition period. And the future
trade relationship. I spoke to a
leading Brexiteer who said he is
buoyant and relaxed about this, but
I spoke to former Cabinet minister
who said we should not be offering
more money and this former Cabinet
minister, look at the front page,
this former Cabinet minister said to
me that the UK should be trying to
make something of Germany's
political difficulties. This person
said to me, Europe and Germany are
in paralysis, there is a great
opportunity for the UK to set the
No greater opportunity than
a crisis. Do you think this new
amount of money will be enough to
make Germany reach for whatever they
A lot of people that you talked
to say that this is about the money.
Recently, I think the
three-dimensional chess has got
harder with the winding end of the
Irish border question. It was always
there as one of the three key
separation issues but it has now
been explicitly stated by some of
the senior Europeans that this has
got to be sorted before they go on
to discuss the wider relationship
and really it has got to be sorted
before the summit is expected on the
14th of December. It went from being
just the money question where this
might well have been enough to move
things forward and make substantial
progress to the Irish question as
well and that is really complicated
now and if I had to bet, I would say
we will not be there by the 14th of
If I asked you whether the
negotiations coming up are, where do
It is interesting, Michel
Barnier, had some pretty tough
language about the Irish border in a
speech today and also he showed he
has been thinking very carefully
about the future trade relationship.
That Cabinet subcommittee today
talked about that but the whole
Cabinet has not talked about it yet
and Michel Barnier was essentially
saying we are up for a really
ambitious free trade agreement with
the UK but there has to be a level
playing field. If the UK, as the
Chancellor has said decides to go
down the Singapore route and
that would not be a level playing
field and the relationship would
have to be quite distant.
Speaker in your piece was talking
about a robust approach from
Germany, by the feeling more or less
robust now? They have been very much
so in recent weeks. One hears that
they have even been talking in very
rough terms about a figure that they
want to see, even though as you
said, all of what we heard publicly
by Michel Barnier was that they were
not after an actual figure. They
have been extremely tough, the
question is now, with Angela Merkel
in this crisis, will they hold out.
Probably the default position
because of the difficulties of
negotiating within the 27 is not to
move, rather than to let up.
you both very much.
Perhaps no one should be surprised
that a dictator who swore he'd rule
to the age of 100 wasn't prepared
to go quietly at 93.
Impeachment proceedings are about to
begin against Robert Mugagbe,
Perhaps no one should be surprised
that a dictator who swore he'd rule
Impeachment proceedings are about to
begin against Robert Mugagbe,
the Zimbabwean President
who led his country to believe he
was about to step down last night.
And then conveniently left that part
out of his long, rambling speech
on the world's stage.
His party, Zanu-PF,
who've led the process
to remove their leader of 37 years,
say they'll start impeachment
proceedings and the whole process
could be over within two days.
Outside Parliament students hit the
streets and boycotted their exams
demanding the man who is the only
President they have ever known to
We are sick and tired.
want him to resign. We want change,
the Constitution should change.
perhaps the strongest criticism came
from the group that used to be his
big supporters, the War veterans
Robert Mugabe, go now, your
time is up, please leave statehouse
and let the country start on a new
Well, a draft motion
of the impeachment document has been
leaked and it blames Mr Mugabe
for what it calls an "unprecedented
Zanu-PF say he is too old rule
and that he has allowed his wife
Grace to usurp constitutional power.
All bold claims.
So what will happen next?
I spoke earlier to Priscila
Misihairabwi-Mushonga an MP
from the opposition party,
the Movement for Democratic Change.
She told me that the impeachment
process can only happen
with their help.
If the impeachment process is given
what is in the Constitution,
yes, it can certainly
happen by Wednesday.
But it can only happen
with the cooperation
of the opposition and to use this
opportunity to then put the demands
and the things we have
been struggling over,
to then say, for example,
we need to demand that we put
into place the reforms that
will allow a free and fair election.
Because we cannot have the situation
in which the military is so linked
to a political party.
The reason why the military
intervened had nothing to do
with the issues that bothered
the people of Zimbabwe.
It had to do with the fact
that the military took a position
around the particular factions
and that cannot be
allowed to happen.
Nick Mangwana, the Zanu-PF
spokesperson in London joins me now.
The last time you were here you told
me he would be gone in two days.
writes his own script and what the
people of Zimbabwe are trying to do
is to make sure that he would not
have that prerogative all the time
and every time until this is played
You are pretty upbeat, you put
him under house arrest and he did
not want to stay and that and you
asked to deliver a resignation
speech and he did not resign and now
he is going to be impeached.
is going to be impeached. 210 MPs
were in the Senate and that is a big
number. We need about 234 to push
the motion through.
You talk as if
he actually abides by constitutional
rules. Your whole impeachment
process is about the fact he does
not abide by the Constitution, so
what makes you think he will listen
to 234 people?
He does abide by the
What has he got to
Once the parliament says he is
impeached, what is done is done. At
the moment people respect the
authority of the office. Once the
constitution has declared he is no
longer holding the authority of the
office that is done.
Are you willing
to use violence to remove them?
If he carries on
turning up to work Day after day and
has the office of President around
He does not work like that.
If he claims to be president, what
you are avoiding right now is
persuading another president because
that will be committing treason.
will be prepared to swearing a
general, the vice president who
stepped down, you will be prepared
to swear him in even if Mugabe does
not accept resignation?
could end up with two men in office
believing they are president?
will end up with one claiming to be
president. If he does make a claim
to be president, then he is the one
who has committed treason and we
will deal with him.
Do you think you
underestimated his willingness to
President Mugabe stepping down.
have known him a long time.
been ruling as for many years.
is interesting for the world looking
in is they do not say Zanu-PF
realise they had a corrupt dictator
at that time and they are going to
change it around, you are carrying
on transition as if it were
seamless. You have stuck by his
abuses as Vice President?
needs a lot of reform and that will
happen. At the centre of this whole
thing is corruption. If you listen
to the statement that was made by
the general it was corruption and
Why should the people in
Zimbabwe believe that the party that
has supported Mugabe for 37 years is
the party that is willing to root
They should have
shown their teeth much earlier than
this, but we are here now and we are
showing teeth. We deserve more
credit for it.
Thank you very much.
The cult leader and serial killer
Charles Manson fascinated
and appalled America.
Like so many of its criminals he
gained a kind of rock star status.
Perhaps he was crazy.
Perhaps he was evil.
Perhaps he was just
a pathetic and dull.
The man who believed he was Jesus
and once claimed he died 2,000
years ago was finally
pronounced dead today.
Stephen Smith looks back
on his life and crimes.
If it wasn't so dark and squalid,
the story of Charles Manson might
have something of the
Wizard of Oz about it.
The pathetic figure who pulled
the strings and exerted such
an unfathomable hold
over the susceptible.
Charles Manson was raised in prison
for more than half of his life
before he started the Manson Family
cult and he learned how
to manipulate people.
He became a master manipulator
and he fashioned himself
as kind of an outlaw,
and he melded together this group
of people that became like a family
and he controlled them like puppets.
He weaponised them.
He craved attention,
a wannabe rock star.
He and his followers
once lived at the home
of Dennis Wilson of the Beach Boys.
The band even recorded a version
of a song written by Manson.
He looked like a hippy
and set up home at a ranch
in Death Valley, California,
with his acolytes who became known
as the Manson Family.
Often young women from middle-class
families who had dropped out.
But the brutal murder
of the actress Sharon Tate,
Roman Polanski's wife,
and three of her friends in August
1969 was seen by some as a macabre
coda to the Summer of Love.
It was followed by more
killings the next night.
Detectives believe Manson hoped
to trigger a race war,
a phenomenon he called
Helter Skelter after a Beatles song,
and that he would somehow emerge
from the chaos as a messiah figure.
There followed one of the longest
and strangest criminal
trials in US history,
Manson's followers singing
outside the court.
The authorities insisted
Manson was the guiding
hand behind the murders,
though he was never accused
of striking a single blow himself.
I don't accept the whole situation.
I was in the desert minding my own
This confusion belongs
to you, your confusion.
I don't have a deal,
I know what I have done.
I judge me.
What have you done, Charlie?
In an extraordinary interview
from prison, Manson was still toying
with his interrogators.
Here is your chance before
the whole world to tell it
straight once and for all.
Did you do that?
Did I kill anyone?
No, did you go in and tie
them up them that night?
Very simple question.
August 10th, 1969.
That night, August the 10th 1969.
Why dodge it?
Why not answer yes or no once
and for all and put it behind you?
Why don't you want to
talk about it, Charles?
Because I'm an outlaw and I go
so far and that's all you know.
Manson was sentenced to death row,
though his sentence was later
commuted to life imprisonment.
Even behind bars he was not finished
as a cult phenomenon.
Not for nothing did the one-time
Brian Warner give himself the stage
name Marilyn Manson and rockers
Guns N' Roses cover a Charles Manson
song, gestures of rebellion
or poor taste according
to your point of view.
He became a popular
figure while in prison.
He received more fan mail
than any other United States inmate
in the prison system at one period.
Before they changed the law
he accumulated over $200,000,
selling memorabilia and whatnot
because of his infamy.
And like other notorious killers
Manson was not short of women
who wanted to visit him.
I always say it is easier to get
a date with Charles Manson
or Scott Peterson than it is with
Brad Pitt or George Clooney.
The only type of people
in our society who are celebrities
are either bona fide celebrities
or notorious killers and criminals.
So these women are basically looking
for their 15 minutes of fame.
Were you happy when you found out
you were not going to go
to the gas chamber, Charles?
I knew I wasn't going to go
to the gas chamber because I hadn't
done anything wrong.
Are you scared to die?
Sometimes I feel I'm scared to live.
Living is what scares me.
Dying is easy.
"We now know we were wrong,"
the high street stationers
Paperchase wrote to customers today.
"We are truly sorry
and won't ever do it again."
An advertising campaign
over the weekend that
ran in the Daily Mail.
Readers of that paper were offered
two free rolls of wrapping
paper by Paperchase.
But the promotion was spotted
by online activist group
Stop Funding Hate which targets
companies advertising in the Sun,
Express and Mail, arguing
that they promote divisive
and hateful views.
Stop Funding Hate has now commended
Paperchase for its change of heart.
The apology when it
came from Paperchase
was fullsome and earnest.
We've listened to you about this
We now know we were
wrong to do this.
We're truly sorry and we
won't ever do it again.
Thanks for telling us
what you really think
and we apologise if we have let
you down on this one.
What was this then?
A victory for the little people?
All those customers unhappy
with the way Paperchase
was doing business?
A professional boycott along the
lines of apartheid in the 1980s?
A professional boycott along
the lines of apartheid in the 1980s?
Or a robust attempt at online
bullying, not of an individual,
but of a corporation?
The group behind this protest
is Stop Funding Hate.
It works to change the media
by taking on what it
calls hate campaigns.
Recently they've accused
the Daily Mail of a torrid few
weeks of divisive stories
about trans people.
They congratulated Paperchase today
for pulling out and promoted
the apology to followers on Twitter,
many of whom have followed suit.
But the Paperchase statement may
have lost them equal
numbers of customers,
who've written their own disgust
that the shop has been cowed
into today's position by agressive
pressure from a small group
of activists and said
In the run up to Christmas,
the relationship Paperchase has
with its customers is likely
to be vital.
It's unclear yet whether
there will be net gains.
But if it was publicity
the company was aiming for,
then like it or loathe it,
they've got themselves talked about.
Well, Paperchase told this programme
tonight that they frequently trial
new brand campaigns and have taken
the commercial decision not
to repeat this promotion
following significant levels
of feedback from customers
in store and online.
And the Mail have put out
a statement complaining that
Paperchase has allowed itself to be
bullied by a small group of hard
left, Corbynist individuals.
Joining me now, Sarah Baxter,
deputy editor of the Sunday Times.
And Richard Wilson
from Stop Funding Hate.
Lovely to have you both here. I
guess this is political activism at
its best, a company listening to the
concerns of its customers and
Absolutely not, it is a
company being bullied by a small
army of Twitter and social media
patrols, using activism as a weapon
against the free press. It is a very
sad day for Independent media.
his activism, that is what it does,
it tries to change the world?
chase has blundered into accepting
the word of a few Twitter patrols
that Mauro less than 2 million
readers of the Daily Mail on
Saturday I somehow racists, bigots
and hate mongers. I am sure Paper
chase does not want to get involved
in that kind of political war.
an online version of bullying, that
you are inviting people to tweet
hateful things to a corporation
instead of a person?
concern is that experts have warned
that the hate in some of the biggest
newspapers is fuelling hate crime on
the streets and this is not just
stuff people find offensive and
disagreeable, this is having a real
impact in people's lives. If you
look at what Stop Funding Hate
supporters were saying and Paper
chase supporters were saying online,
they were very friendly and polite.
This is an idiotic argument. What
Richard and his group is doing is
spending all day trawling through
newspapers that they themselves
would never read or pay for
otherwise to find things they are
outraged and offended by so that
they can deploy social media to
harass advertisers into withdrawing
their support for a free press.
Newspapers have always depended on
advertising and the honest pound in
your pocket from the readers to
publish. What he is really trying to
do is close down these newspapers by
destroying their source of funding.
Do you deny that?
We do not do that.
Why not if you do not like them as a
mark maybe you are trying to close
The end result is four as
the media that does what we want
them to do, that upholds the public
You and your activists
want to decide what the people of
Britain can read or not, that is
very arrogant. It is very wrong for
The key point is that
people are being harmed. We had a
hate crime report from the
University of Leicester warning that
the media has been fuelling...
sorry, the University of Leicester
decides what people have to read?
You are setting the moral compass
and choosing the ethical standards.
If you decide Brexit, if you decided
Brexit was bad or immigration levels
or that feminist concern about self
identifying men are bad, then you
choose what stories are what papers
to boycott. That is how this works,
The only reason I am here
is that over the weekend thousands
of paper chase customers use their
freedom of speech and expression to
make... And they use their freedom
of choice to decide to advertise
differently. We are all about
You write for The Sunday
Times, do you think the Daily Mail
will start changing its editorial
stance? If people like paper chase
and others, because it goes down the
list, it was Lego and other
companies, if they start pulling
their advertising, does the Daily
Mail change the way it write
No, it won't and nor should
it. What we need in this country is
a plurality of views and different
newspapers. I hold no particular
candle, I am not representing the
Daily Mail or any other newspaper, I
am representing the fact that we
have a free press that represents an
enormous range of opinion and people
pay their money and choose what they
want to read. Richer has decided he
should be the arbiter of what people
If they were never
going to advertise their again, they
just got free publicity, the Daily
Mail will not change either.
chase made a decision and they have
every right to make that decision,
for whatever reason they want.
Advertisers are looking at this will
be wary of getting embroiled in this
sort of thing because paper chase
have basically blundered, they are
in the middle of a culture war and
that is not a place where you want
commercial brands to be. Newspapers
have always valued their editorial
independence from advertisers, it is
not right that advertisers call the
editorial line of the paper,
advertisers can choose to be in a
paper they feel comfortable in.
There is an irony that there is
nowhere more hate filled than
Twitter itself, which is very quick
to tell people just however they are
being about whatever they choose to
be, so why would tend to choose that
as a vehicle to do this?
There is a
climate of hate and parts of our
media -- Stop Funding Hate. It is
important when we talk about these
issues, we talk about it in a
Do you think this
will hurt or help paper chase?
think they have made a smart
Lego was rewarded for the
decision they made. I do not think
it was smart, I think it is a very
uncomfortable place for a commercial
brand to find itself in, where it
has bowed to the wishes of a small
number of people against what
possibly as a silent majority.
Two major European agencies
were relocated from London this
evening as part of the process
of extracting Britain from the EU.
The European Banking Authority
will now be housed in Paris,
the European Medicines Agency
will be moved to Amsterdam.
The move will mean Britain no longer
has control or involvement in either
of these insitutions.
As our Business editor
Helen Thomas reports,
the shift will also mean Britain has
to find a whole new system
of licensing and approving
which medicines can be used
here in the UK and how quickly
they can become available.
A convoluted voting system, a bit of
horse trading between countries and
a slightly uncertain reward. It has
been described as the business
version of the Eurovision Song
contest, but the European medicines
agency and the European banking
authority now have a new home. After
19 submissions, three rounds of
voting and a virtual dead heat, the
EMS will leave London for Amsterdam,
the bank regulators are headed for
Paris. E MA was seen as the bigger
prize. This is a therapy unit at Guy
's Hospital, regulators can mean a
cluster of expertise and scientific
know-how that could ultimately
attract businesses to the successful
city. From the UK's point of view we
are talking about maybe 900 jobs at
the medicines agency and a couple of
hundred at the banking regulator but
they are highly skilled roles and in
sectors the UK likes to think it is
pretty good at. Back in April, David
Davis suggested that subject to some
negotiation, the agencies could stay
in London. Now it seems they are
definitely off, so what does that
mean for the UK and what might take
their place? For the pharmaceutical
industry body, the departure of the
regulator could leave a golf that
causes other problems.
as £30 million worth of GDP to the
economy with the highest research
and development spend on the
economy. There are several concerns
with the uncertainty that we have
around Brexit. We could see delays
of up to one year in the approval of
new medicines and we could also see
some of the processes that require
certainty about regulation moving
out of the UK unless we get a
medicines cooperation soon.
the banking authority was perhaps
more a matter of prestige than
business, at least in the
short-term. One European financier
told Newsnight that the EBA just
spent a veneer of credibility for
Paris aims to bolster itself as a
financial centre. In London, the
departure of the EBA is seen as
symbolic, but unlikely in itself to
dent the city's heft and finance.
is really a coordinator amongst
regulators and we have got extremely
strong regulators of global calibre
already writing rules and
interpreting and applying those
rules. In fact, what it does is
allow the UK to do things more its
own weight which is frankly safer
for the markets systemically. So
that our regulators can make more
dynamic adjustments are more dynamic
of refinements to the rules of the
For others, the agencies are
about more than a few hundred jobs
and a European rule book.
and EMA are tremendous gatherers of
people and it is a great place to
meet people, clients and share ideas
and I think that that loss of power
or soft influence will be something
that the UK will feel.
medicines be checked and approved
after March, 2019? Will the city
have a deal that is roughly the
status quo or have to operate quite
differently? As Europe makes
decisions in its own unique way, it
highlights unanswered questions at
Helen Thomas there. He had seen the
front page of The Times, there are a
couple more, the Guardian and the
Telegraph Brexit stories. The
Guardian has. A claim that a
pro-Brexit group broke rules during
the referendum campaign. Vote leave
is under investigation. And there is
quite a nice story on the Telegraph
which is that Eurotunnel has changed
its name to create a more
Anglo-Saxon identity. Eurotunnel has
decided to call itself yet linked as
part of a corporate rebranding
exercise before Brexit, the French
company which runs it wants it to
adapt an Anglo-Saxon name as it
That's all from us, but before
we go, on the 20th November 1937,
under grey skies and cheered
on by thousands of well-wishers,
Princess Elizabeth married
Lieutenant Philip Mountbatten.
Today, exactly 70 years later,
the Queen and Prince Philip
are celebrating their platinum
Back then remember, Britain's
relationship with the rest of Europe
was about to change dramatically.
The Conservative Prime Minister
was engaging in crucial talks
on the continent while facing mutiny
from his own ranks back home.
And Spain was in crisis as warring
factions fought for control.
But some things don't change,
including these grey skies.
Here are some pictures
from that 1937 day.
Into the dull November morning,
two grays draw the Irish stagecoach.
Inside, her Royal Highness,
Princess Elizabeth and her father.
And now the solemn service begins.
# The quiet waters by...#.
THE WEDDING MARCH.
From the palace balcony,
Elizabeth and her husband waved
to the cheering crowds.
The nation and the Commonwealth
will pray that the young
couple may enjoy a long,
happy and fruitful life.
In-depth investigation and analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines with Emily Maitlis.
German coalition talks collapse, post-Brexit drugs rules, Zimbabwe, Charles Manson, and Paperchase v the Daily Mail.