With Emily Maitlis. What went wrong with today's Brexit deal? Plus the latest on eastern Ghouta, and are we too blase about the rise of pornography?
Browse content similar to 04/12/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Ever get the sense you're
being dragged around by someone
who shouldn't be able to do it?
Has Theresa May had her tail
caught by the DUP -
what did just happened to that
Brexit deal over the Irish border.
Is it gone or just on pause?
We were satisfied earlier today
to report substantial progress along
lines that would have enabled us
to advise President Juncker
and the Barnier negotiating team
to report sufficient progress
on these matters to
the heads of state.
We're not quite there yet, no.
But I think with goodwill,
we can get there.
The besieged Syrian rebel enclave
of eastern Ghouta is struck by one
of the worst bombardments
in nearly five years.
We talk to rescue workers
and medics on the ground.
it might have been Damian Green.
Or it might have been someone else.
But why aren't we more shocked
at the idea of thousands
of pornographic images
being discovered on a work computer?
Has porn become more
And what effect is that having?
Jean-Claude Juncker wore his
anglophile Burberry tie today,
a hint that the more eagle-eyed
amongst us took to be
a sure sign that a deal
with Britain was imminent.
In the end, it was not to be.
What looked, sounded and felt
like a potential Brexit solution
to the Irish border was put on pause
in the briefest of press
conferences at around four o'
clock this afternoon.
The sticking point?
What the DUP - who prop up
Theresa May's Conservatives -
suggested was "sloppy language"
on the part of the Irish government.
From what we understand,
Ireland had been expecting to sign
off a statement that promised
a continued regulatory framework
north of the border,
after Britain leaves the EU.
But following stern words from DUP
leader Arlene Foster,
the PM appeared to back track,
perhaps fearing she had
misjudged the moment.
The deal is far from dead.
But it needs more time
and perhaps - who knows -
new concessions to the DUP
for their support.
Let's go to Nick Watt
for his take on the day.
The Prime Minister had gone into
these talks with Downing Street
describing them as a staging post on
the way to the European Council next
week. But Theresa May had hoped to
get a deal today and had pencilled
in a statement to Parliament
tomorrow. But it didn't happen
because the DUP took fright at
reports from Dublin in the Brexit
deal, there would be a decoration
that there would be no regulatory
divergence between Northern Ireland
and the Republic of Ireland. So what
is actually in that deal? I
understand from the UK said that the
deal on Northern Ireland covers
three scenarios from good to bad.
The good scenario - there is an
overall free trade agreement between
the UK and the EU at the end of this
process, and you get a frictionless
board automatically from that deal.
Scenario number two is that if that
doesn't happen, there would be a
bespoke arrangement for Northern
Ireland. In the worst-case scenario
which the UK Government doesn't will
happen, you would then have, if you
fail to do that, a decoration that
there would be full alignment of
those elements that are currently
there, cross-border cooperation from
the Good Friday Agreement. So that
is transport, the single electricity
market and agriculture, and then the
document says, how do you achieve
that? It has two ideas. One is to
have harmonisation of regulation,
and the other is to have regulatory
equivalents. The UK would want it to
be regulatory equivalents because
the UK would decide, these are the
regulations, but that you would want
harmonisation because we were just
agree with them. So I have been
looking at how this row broke out
Love wasn't quite in the air, but a
deal appeared to be in sight.
Theresa May pitched up in Brussels
for lunch and over the road, Donald
Tusk dared to joke about how much he
likes Mondays. All seemed fine,
until the lunch run over schedule
and then broke up without agreement
when Theresa May and Jean-Claude
Juncker finally spoke, it was all
over rather quickly.
gentlemen, it was not possible to
reach a complete agreement today.
spoke for less than two minutes.
Thank you very much, Jean-Claude. On
a couple of issues, some differences
do remain which require further
She spoke for just 40
seconds. Hopes of a breakthrough
today fell apart over Northern
Ireland. The Irish Prime Minister,
who had been planning to hail a deal
just after lunch, kept his head down
for three hours, and then this.
Following the government meeting
this morning, the Irish negotiating
team receives confirmation from the
British government and the Barnier
task force that the United Kingdom
had agreed a text on the border that
met our concerns. This text would
form part of the border EU - UK
agreement on phase one and would
allow us all to move on to face two.
I was then contacted by the
president of the European
Commission, President Juncker and
the president of the European
Council, president Tusk. I confirmed
to them both Ireland's agreement to
that text. I am surprised and
disappointed that the British
government now appears not to be in
a position to conclude what was
agreed earlier today.
The deal ran
into trouble after reports that one
draft stated that there would be no
divergence in EU rules across the
Irish border would support the Good
Friday Agreement. This was
clarified, but the DUP were furious
at what they saw as an attempt to
prise Northern Ireland away from the
rest of the UK.
We have been very
clear. Northern Ireland must leave
the European Union on the same terms
as the rest of the UK and we will
not accept any form of regulatory
divergence which separates Northern
Ireland economically or politically
from the rest of the UK. The
economic and constitutional
integrity of the United Kingdom must
not be compromised.
frustration in Downing Street, where
there is a feeling that Brussels and
Dublin overhyped the proposed deal.
This has, if only temporarily,
torpedoed Theresa May's efforts to
inch forward the Brexit negotiations
with the support of the DUP. So we
can expect the Prime Minister to
embark on a charm offensive to
reassure the DUP that her plans are
far more modest. At their heart,
this would involve embedding in the
final Brexit deal those elements of
cross-border cooperation emanating
from the Good Friday Agreement. At
the moment, unionists in Northern
Ireland are nervous.
I think it has
made things much more difficult,
what happened today. If there had
been an agreed form of wording with
the DUP beforehand, it might have
been possible to present it as a
joint DUP - Conservative proposal. I
think it will be difficult now.
London and Dublin, there is hope
that a deal will soon be reached.
think today has been successful. We
understand that later this week,
there is every prospect of a deal,
so satisfying the European Union
that in its words, sufficient
progress has been made, which will
set us up for a favourable
conclusion to the summit on the 15th
of December. That is what we are
working towards. The mood here at
Westminster is far more upbeat than
I have known it for some time. So I
think with compromise on both sides,
because that is the nature of any
negotiation, we are set fair for
some good news before Christmas.
have negotiated in good faith with
the entire British negotiating team,
David Davis and Michel Barnier will
meet again this week. Theresa May
and Jean-Claude Juncker had a good
meeting today and we are hopeful
that the Prime Minister will be able
to get this agreement over the line
with the DUP and other factors in
time for the Council meeting in
December. We wish her luck and we
hope Wigan get this resolved as soon
as possible. We desperately want to
move to face two of the negotiating
Today, the hands of history
didn't quite meet. All parties in
the Brexit talks will be hoping we
won't have to wait too long for that
handshake. We heard Andy Muir and
saying he thought it would happen
next week before the summit.
The UK Government has always
believed unofficially that this
Friday is the deadline to get an
agreement, because after that it is
difficult to make substantial
changes to a European Council draft
summit. So the Prime Minister will
be talking to the DUP leader and
possibly going to Brussels to meet
Jean-Claude Juncker and Donald Tusk
again this week. One member of the
Cabinet said, we are fundamentally
in agreement with Dublin on this.
But this person said, there is a bit
of a dance. We are a minority
government, and so are they. But the
DUP are really upset. I spoke to one
senior DUP figure at the heart of
this, and this person said to me, we
in Northern Ireland cannot have a
border with GB. It is our biggest
market. We are not stupid. I said to
this person, is Theresa May
listening to you? And this person
said, oh, yes, she has no choice.
So, when and how did it all
Well, earlier I asked Ireland's
Agriculture Minister Michael Creed
what he made of the day's events.
Well, I suppose in essence
we thought we had a deal
in the early afternoon and it turns
out that we didn't and that's
obviously somewhat disappointing
but look, I suppose,
given the commitment of both sides
to further engagement and given
the fact that we have a deadline
of the December Council on the 14th
and 15th of December,
and given the fact that I think
everybody, Irish government
included, wants us to be
in a position to move to phase two,
I certainly think that with goodwill
on all sides, that can be achieved.
I don't want to underestimate
the significance of the issues that
have yet to be agreed.
What do you think actually
went wrong today?
Well, I think in essence,
that is probably a question that
would be best directed
to Prime Minister May.
Because we felt, as I indicated,
that we had the broad outline
of an agreement earlier and that
sufficient progress could be
reported by the European task force
to the heads of state.
It's obvious that the DUP
have issues with regard
to island of Ireland issues.
We have particular issues we have
put to the forefront from day one
and that's been about ensuring
that the UK leaving
the European Union doesn't give
rise to a hard border
with the island of Ireland.
Just to understand that,
was your understanding this morning
that the DUP had been signed
up to it?
Because obviously, they were always
going to have misgivings about this.
Was your understanding
that they were signed up and then
they changed their minds or that
they've never been signed up
and she was going to go
ahead with it anyway?
Look, the negotiations are conducted
primarily by the European task force
with Michel Barnier at the helm
and the UK Government.
Over the weekend, yes,
the Irish government was heavily
involved in the detail over
the issues of the island of Ireland
and in particular our insistence
that in the context
of phase one of these
negotiations, that we get in writing
a commitment that there would not be
a hard border re-emerging.
The DUP are critical to
power-sharing in Northern Ireland.
Wasn't it a mistake to overlook how
essential to these talks they were?
Well, I mean, the DUP are one
voice in Northern Ireland
which regrettably doesn't
have a power-sharing executive
in place at the moment.
They are a critical voice
in the context of the parliamentary
arithmetic in Westminster.
We're not a party to that.
We negotiate in the European Union
with the British government
and with Prime Minister May.
So it's not incumbent on the Irish
government to engage directly,
but we are of course open
and willing to engage with the DUP.
In fact, I personally believe
that our concerns, when they boil
down to it, are concerns that
are broadly shared by
the vast majority of people
in Northern Ireland.
Newsnight understands this evening
that three possible scenarios
were on the table for this deal
which may still go ahead.
Either an all-UK deal,
free trade with the EU,
which would look and sound,
I guess, like a soft
Brexit or a customs union.
Or a bespoke deal for
Northern Ireland or some deal that
would just look at areas
of cross-border co-operation.
Is that what you understand
this deal was about,
the cross-border cooperation?
Well, as I understand,
the deal was about ensuring
that we did not have
the necessity for a border
between Newry and Dundalk,
between Derry and Donegal.
And, you know, whatever means
we employ to achieve that,
remaining in the customs union
or the single market,
whatever political invention
is required to come up
with a solution that
delivers on that, you know,
that's something we are
excessively prescriptive about.
But we do know what it is we want.
Let me try and pin you down
on that, because that seems
to be where the language
is getting confused.
The Northern Ireland agreement,
as things stand, only mentions,
doesn't it, agriculture,
energy and transport.
Are you wanting to see every
regulation across every sector
covered by the same EU deal,
the north and south?
Is that where you're heading?
Is it convergence rather than just
alignment of what you have?
Well, I think the terminology
that was being used,
was regulatory alignment.
It's important to bear in mind
that this isn't in many respects
breaking new ground.
We have alignment on an all Ireland
basis at the moment on issues
that there isn't alignment
between Ireland for example
and the rest of the United Kingdom,
for example in the area of animal
health we have it, in the area
of food safety we have it.
So this isn't, you know,
revolutionary in its concept.
What I'm asking, are you looking
for convergence on all of the other
areas as well, all the other
sectors, or would you be happy
to stick with those three
in the Northern Ireland agreement?
No, what we want is a situation
where we achieve in these outcomes
a situation where there
isn't a border emerging.
We are preoccupied by that,
not for trade reasons
but for political reasons.
We do not want an emergence
of a border again and all
of the historical issues associated
with a border.
For good reasons.
These lessons aren't lost on any
section of the community
in Northern Ireland
or the Republic of Ireland.
And indeed in the broader
United Kingdom, they are not lost.
Because we've paid
an excessively heavy price.
We were satisfied with what we had
today in the context
of a regulatory alignment that that
would deliver on that.
Thank you very much indeed.
We wrong we labelled Arlene Foster
as the first minute, she is the DUP
Our Diplomatic Editor
Mark Urban is here.
There is a theory that there is a
game to what Theresa May is doing
and that there is something in place
If you take today's language
and misunderstanding is out of the
picture, those options you were
discussing, complete convergence,
partial or Northern Ireland or
Justice guarantee that was
controversial all of them would
create some kind of border, if
Ireland were taken to be on the same
regime. We know that is not
acceptable for the DUP. And
actually, in Dublin last week,
talking to a lot of people, it is
pretty unacceptable to the business
community who don't want impediment
on trade across the Irish Sea. That
gives us a clue that the softer form
of Brexit is in sight for the
government here. We've seen all
sorts of other clues, abandoning the
Brexit language, the transition
period, accepting the jurisdiction
of the European Court of Justice
during that period, the cannon of EU
law, it all trends in that direction
and we got a fascinating glimpse,
through the prism of Ireland, at
this possibility that there is a
plan and it's for a pretty soft form
What would that look
like? We've got examples of what
soft Brexit look like and they've
been rejected, whether it's the
Norway model or whatever.
Theresa May, she obviously wanted to
slalom around the critics on all
sides and that's why she came out
with Brexit means Brexit, red white
and blue Brexit, she's trying to
define it her own terms, because as
soon as she says we'd like something
like Norway it would become
impossible for people to coalesce.
Even in the Florence speech she
voiced this idea that no, we don't
want Norway, we don't want Canada,
we must be able to do better than
this binary option. Of course that's
what they hope, people say that it
is impossible, trying to have your
cake and eat it, you can't have this
deal, but it's possible that the UK
will get a bespoke package that, in
her terms, gets what she wants, the
closest possible relationship. That
means going pretty near to
convergence on the customs and
regulatory terms but carving out
As you may know by now,
this programme has chosen to focus
on a small area in the east
of Damascus, the only rebel-held
enclave between Assad's forces
capturing the whole of Damascus
and the surrounding area.
Eastern Ghouta is suffering
a humanitarian catastrophe -
children are starving,
the aid corridor is blocked.
But this weekend, things got even
worse: a bombardment of heavily
crowded areas by jets believed to be
Syrian and Russian.
The attacks left yet
more civilians dead.
Here's Mike Thompson.
While they discuss peace in Geneva,
bombs, shells and bullets do
the talking in Eastern Ghouta.
Last week's brief ceasefire has
given way to merciless violence,
inflicted mainly on civilians.
The current status quo
is systematic targeting of every
living creature in Eastern Ghouta.
There is a population of more
than 375,000 people here.
Besieged by the regime forces.
we are witnessing the annihilation
of an entire population.
In what is described as the fiercest
bombing of the area in years,
cluster bombs are among
the deadly weapons being used.
A quick look at a map of Syria
shows why President Assad
is so determined to retake,
at almost any cost, this
rebel enclave sitting
on the capital's doorstep.
The death toll over the last month
has been rising steadily.
More than 224 people
were killed due to the heavy
and deliberate bombardment,
and hundreds of civilians injured.
The tally could go up due
to the lack of medical supplies
in the treatment centres.
This long besieged area,
where malnutrition is rife,
isn't only pitifully short of food.
It's also fast running out
of much-needed medical supplies
to treat the soaring numbers
of ill and injured.
As a doctor I can see
that emergency units
are lacking even basic medical
tools and supplies.
For example we don't have any
anaesthetic or medicine.
And of course we have to work
under heavy bombardment.
The task facing hard-pressed
doctors and rescue workers
grows tougher by the day.
And some now see help
from the outside world
as their only salvation.
with all international
and humanitarian organisations
to help us lift the siege and stop
this barbaric machine
that is killing innocent people
under siege for the last five years.
And we ask them to open humanitarian
But with no sign of any letup
in the terrifying bombardment,
and President Assad evidently bent
on bringing this besieged
rebel area to its knees,
things might only get worse before
they get better for the hundreds
of thousands of people there.
Mike Thomson reporting.
Do you remember what you thought
when you heard police claiming that
a Tory MP's work computer had been
found with thousands
of pornographic images on it?
We were struck by how
little public outcry,
even surprise, there was.
Conservative colleagues rushed
to defend Damian Green,
who denied all the charges,
believing it outrageous
that the police had stored records
of a ten-year-old investigation.
Others reminded us that the images
were not illegal, not extreme.
Of course, we don't know
who downloaded the images,
or who used them, or how.
Instead, tonight we ask a bigger
has porn become socially acceptable,
even in the workplace?
Are we less shockable
than we used to be?
Jerry Barnett is a free
speech campaigner and
author of "Porn Panic!"
Clarissa Smith is Professor
of Sexual Cultures
at the University of Sunderland.
Steve Pope is psychotherapist
who specialises in young people
addicted to pornography.
He's in Salford.
Nice to have you here. As far as we
know, do lots of people look at
pornography at work?
been numerous anecdotal kinds of
stories around that, actually. They
are very from at least 80% of the
workforce looking at five minutes of
pawn a day, down to very few people.
Clearly there are people looking at
When you say 80%, is
that divided between the sexes?
is the problem with statistics about
pornography, we get straight into
that, they are extrapolations from
questions asked in particular
workplaces. No one really knows what
the stats are around pornography,
who is watching and where. We can be
sure I think that people are looking
at pornographic material simply
because we know that they spend
their time doing other kinds of
wasting work time, looking on eBay,
buying things on Amazon, a bit of
So people are putting
pornography in that same bracket,
it's like Facebook, Internet
shopping and cat videos?
I think if
someone is looking at these things
on their own in a private office and
aren't involving anyone else, then
the chances are that yes, it is like
Gosh. Did the story surprise
you? We're not bringing names into
it, we are looking to attach blame,
but would it surprise you is a lot
of people spend a lot of time at
It wouldn't surprise me. I
find from a lot of my civilian
friends, they are much more likely
to share pornographic images on
WhatsApp. It is ubiquitous, small
clips go around and people don't
seem to think much of it. If
anything, it was shocking, the idea
that people would be shocked by the
idea that an MP might look at
pornography that was allegedly
completely legal and not outside the
ordinary. I have been tracking the
pornography panic over at least a
decade. The moral panic seems to
have been within the media class and
the political class and from
When you talk about
moral panic, what do you mean?
many years we'd been told, falsely,
that pornography is linked to sexual
violence, that it's linked to
addiction, scary ideas. Actually,
what I wanted to do in writing my
book is look at why the panic is
happening. In the Digital Economy
Act In This Case, The Government
Used Pornography And Excuse To Make
Britain The First Democratic Country
On Earth To Introduce An Internet
Sensor With The Aim of censoring
pornography, a big story that the
media has missed.
Do you accept this
as a classification of panic over
I think we should be
concerned about it. I don't do
statistics and labels, people don't
get well from that. People are
dying, kids are having a very
jaundiced view of text and watching
pornography from the age of 12 and
we are having to pick up the pieces
-- jaundiced view of sex. It is
interwoven in our society and to
downplay its the way that gentleman
has just done, it is wrong. It is
You say you don't want
to cause panic and then went on to
say that people are dying.
he didn't want to use statistics but
why wouldn't you panic, because he
works with children?
with a couple today, a 12 and
13-year-old, both of them think that
50 Shades Of Grey is an acceptable
way to act out. If we think that's
acceptable, then the problem is
bigger than I think.
We've had this
before, we had it in the 80s with
the video nasty 's act, we had it
with the American, horror comics in
the 50s. When we say that people
think this way and they do that and
it's terrible and we need to deal
with pornography because it must be
that that's at the root of this, I'd
take the you make about the fact
that kids are learning about
emotional, well rounded sexual
relationships but pornography isn't
responsible for the education of
You don't believe it's
If we believe that
pornography is a problem then we
should have comprehensive sex
education that recognises that young
people need lots of information,
that it will need to be explicit,
that we'll need to mechanise what's
sex means in a broader context than
When you talk
about people sharing pornography on
WhatsApp, presumably you get it on
your phone and look at it wherever
you are, I've spoken to female
colleagues who say that the idea
that someone is looking at
pornography is looking on at
pornography and then carrying on a
conversation is freaky.
isn't best done at work.
But it is
and that is the problem.
upsets people, it's probably not
suitable in the workplace but this
is an employment issue, not a harm
issue. I'd like to quote from the
government to have done research on
this. I'd like to point out, there's
a lot of doubt on whether follow-up
of the addiction exists. People make
money, the pornography addiction
therapy has been compared to the gay
killers of the religious right in
America -- gay cures. A quote
suggesting there is no link between
sex crimes and the use of
pornography at early age but there
is evidence for the opposite.
go back to Steve.
Here we go again. I work day in, day
out with children from the age of 12
to 17 who are materially influenced
by what they see as being normal
sexual acts which are usually
sexually aggressive acts. They are
acting out behaviours and they look
for a bigger hit. They can instantly
access it on their iPad.
teenagers, sexual violence has
I am telling you what I see
on the street. I am hands-on. I see
it happen everyday, and what I am
saying is that children are being
influenced. It is an awful influence
on them by the effect of
pornography. I agree with the lady,
we have to take it into primary
schools and we have to educate
children on the potential evils,
because it is an addictive issue.
Not everyone is affected, but it is
an addictive issue. It is an instant
high for boys looking at pornography
and we have to do something about
Clarissa, the point is the ease
of accessibility. If it is skewing,
there is nothing that shuts this
down. When you talk about people
using it almost as a boredom tool at
There is a whole set of
things at work that we are mixing up
here. When we talk about how the
media influences young people...
There are various levels of reality
that people engage with when viewing
media. Porn is just one form of talk
about sex in our culture. It's not
the only talk about sex. Actually,
one of the problems we have is that
maybe we are not offering good
counters to young people. But
actually, in this process, we are
now talking about porn at work and
we have ended up talking about
12-year-olds. These are not the same
thing. While adults may be looking
at porn at work, we could talk about
why work is so boring if that is
what is happening. If we are going
to talk about accessibility, there
are ways in which our work and home
lives have changed, and a border
between them has disappeared.
carry our smartphone is everywhere.
That as a whole bigger question, but
it was great to have the chance to
talk to you all. Thank you very
If you can't tell your Jack Sparrow
from your chicken, your Taylor Swift
from your ostrich or Michael J Fox
from the creature that's knocking
over your bins at night -
then you're not alone.
Losing touch with nature
is a subject that also preoccupies
the travel writer Robert Macfarlane.
For Newsnight, we asked him
to author a film about his concerns.
Chanson de Matin by Edward Elgar.
There are two things
that the British sentimentalise
more avidly than anything else.
Nature and childhood.
But these are crucial subjects
and to me, it's unmistakable
that a gap is currently widening
between children and the natural
world in this country.
Slugs and snails.
Shall I go and get them?
Three years ago, I read a paper
in the journal Science
and its findings startled me.
It was about children's everyday
knowledge of nature in this country.
And what the researchers discovered
is that children aged 8-11
were substantially better
at identifying common Pokemon
species than they were at
identifying common species
of British wildlife.
For weasel, read Weedle.
For wren, read Wigglytuff.
For badger, read Bulbasaur.
Any conkers under your feet?
I have about a thousand conkers.
You have about a thousand, do you?
British children now spend
on average less time outdoors
each day than prisoners.
They're climbing walls, not trees.
Under an hour outside.
Screen time has soared and screen
time is mostly inside time.
Poverty, postcode, ethnicity,
risk perception, these all affect
children's experience of nature,
but they all, in my
opinion, need it.
Shall we run, everyone?
Come on, let's go.
When I first read the Pokemon paper,
as I've come to think about it,
my response was twofold.
An anxiety of what was being lost
and a wish, a powerful wish,
to do something hopeful in response.
And out of that came
The Lost Words: A Spell Book,
which the artist Jackie Morris
and I worked on for two years.
At its heart was a very simple idea.
We'd take 20 names for 20 common
creatures and plants in the British
landscape and then, by a kind
of magical thinking,
by the power of spells that might be
spoken and images that were painted,
we would try and summon back those
creatures and those trees and plants
into the mouths
and mind's eyes of children.
There it is.
I was thinking in a way,
it was and still is a very simple
thing we were trying to do,
to take 20 names
for 20 very common...
20 quite simple words.
Full words, wren, bluebell.
Your eyes, when you're
in a bluebell wood, it's almost
like the light comes up
from the ground and it
fills up your eyes.
I know it's called The Lost Words,
but it was only when I sat
in a classroom in front of 32
children and they didn't know what
A wren was, or Kingfisher. But they
would have heard wrens. Now, the
next little brown bird goes past,
they will be curious.
words from stone to firms, the world
around her slows. Wren song is sharp
song, and a wren's flight is quick
flight, light flight, yes. Each wren
edges, switches, glitches. Yes, now
you think you see wren, now you know
you don't. It's not just children
who are forgetting these things. A
wildlife trust survey from earlier
this year found that a third of
British adults couldn't identify a
bar now. Three quarters didn't know
an ashtray. And two thirds felt that
they had lost touch with nature.
Yes, the basic literacy of the
living world is slipping from us up
and down the ages. We were in the
exhibition and then we came out and
an amazing thing happened. We
released children into the wild, and
it took them about one and a half
seconds to start picking things up,
telling stories, giving names.
Finding leaves, comparing colours.
And a worm became a desert crossing,
this incredible creature machine.
And when you said, how does it move?
It appoints itself into its body.
was amazing, and that is exactly it.
We saw this unbelievable ability
that children have, in seconds, they
are natural is the nature. Put them
in a wood, a tree or a field and
they tell stories, they find, they
seek, they hide, they gather. Guys,
we have a raven here. Has anyone
ever seen one? They eat eggs and
they each sheep's eyes as well.
do they get them?
It's not a very
nice story. They peck the eyes out
of sheep that are ill or sheep that
are caught in snowdrifts. They eat
other birds' eggs. They are absolute
pirates. Why does it matter, though?
Why do names matter? Why does being
able to tell the difference between
a stunning red blackbird or between
a cherry tree and a hawthorn tree
matter? It matters because we are
losing nature as well as the names
for nature in this country. We have
more than 50% of species in decline.
Many of them are common. We have
stopped darlings and skylarks and
newts and hedgehogs going. Names,
good names, well used, help us see
and they help us care. We find it
hard to love what we cannot give a
name to. And what we do not love, we
will not save.
That was Robert Macfarlane. Let's
take you through tomorrow's papers.
They are all leading on the Brexit
talks. The new Deal shambles, says
the Daily Mail. And the same picture
on the front of the Guardian, DUP
Rex May's Brexit deal, no words
That's almost it for tonight.
But before we go, have
you ever wondered how some
people have all the luck?
The best job, the most beautiful
life partner, the coolest house.
And you just wonder how it happened?
Well, one British video artist did.
This is Swedemason's own mash-up,
with thanks to Talking Heads.
Evan's here tomorrow.
MUSIC: Once In A Lifetime
by Talking Heads
# ..Into the blue again
after the money's gone
# Once in a lifetime,
water flowing underground
# You may ask yourself
# What is that beautiful house?
# And you may ask yourself
# Where does that highway go to?
# And you may ask yourself
# Am I right?
Am I wrong?
# And you may say
# "My God!
What have I done?"
# Letting the days go by,
let the water hold me down
# Letting the days go by,
water flowing underground
# Into the blue again...
# Into the blue again...