08/11/2015 The Andrew Marr Show

As we remember the dead, are we really prepared for today's

With me for today, the Foreign Secretary,

Philip Hammond, the Chief of Defence Staff, General Sir Nick Horton,

the Shadow Defence Secretary, Maria Eagle on Labour's very different

It's a specially extended programme this morning, running through to

BBC One's coverage of the remembrance ceremony at

Two of our greatest actors, Ian McKellen and Simon Russell Beale,

are here to read some of the most powerful war poetry ever written.

We'll also hear from the film director, Danny Boyle,

on his film portrait of Apple founder Steve Jobs,

We have a trio of newspaper reviewers -

the Sunday Times journalist AA Gill, the Spectator's Isabel Hardman,

Beautiful music from Amy Dixon on the soprano sax.

So, a lot to come, starting with the news from Christian Fraser.

A service of remembrance will be held in the Russian capital,

St Petersburg, today for the 224 passengers and crew who

died on the Russian airliner that crashed in Egypt's Sinai Peninsula.

Egyptian officials say investigators will be carrying out further

analysis to try to identify a noise heard in the final second of the

Laying flowers on a wing, and a prayer for those who died

when the Metrojet airliner broke up in the sky and fell to earth.

At the crash site, Russian emergency service workers

Later, in St Petersburg, there will be a memorial service.

Egyptian investigators have confirmed early reports that

in the second before the disaster, on the flight recordings, there is

Detailed analysis will be needed to determine whether it was caused

The Egyptians said that other nations underestimate the challenges

they face, as intelligence sources say the evidence is pointing towards

the so-called Islamic State being responsible.

Overnight, more British tourists stranded in Sharm

You start to really get a bit frightened and throughout

the whole experience, you do question your mortality a bit.

We did not know when we would be getting back or anything.

One man says that despite improvements in security,

he was still able to carry this water bottle on board his flight.

Nothing has changed, it is completely the same.

It was hectic today. Such news will do nothing to reassure British

travellers still waiting to return home or Egyptian struggling to save

the beleaguered tourism industry. David Cameron will warn his European

counterparts that he might campaign for Britain to leave the EU if his

demands for reforms are ignored. The Prime Minister will set out how

he wants to change Britain's relations with the rest of the EU

in a letter to be made public on Tuesday,

as our political correspondent, David Cameron

and other ministers have already held a series of meetings with

European leaders to discuss demands In a speech on Tuesday,

the Prime Minister will use his strongest language yet to deliver

a blunt warning to his EU partners. He will say, "If Britain's

concerns were to be met with a deaf ear, which I do not believe

will happen, then we will have to think again about whether this

European Union is right for us." The speech will accompany

a letter to the President of the European Council, Donald Tusk,

setting out what Downing Street say will be the broad outlines

of the Prime Minister's agenda. David Cameron will challenge those

already campaigning to leave the EU now to consider the risks for

our economic and national security. And he will say to those campaigning

to remain in the EU that there are real problems

with the existing arrangements. The Prime Minister has already said

he wants an end to the commitment to an ever closer

union, more power for national governments, and restrictions

on benefits for EU migrants. This week, he will kick

off the formal negotiations before the referendum to decide whether or

not we should remain in the EU to Sebastian Coe has promised to

strengthen procedures within the governing body

of world athletics in his first response to allegations of extortion

and bribery at the organisation. Lord Coe, who became president

of the IAAF in August, said it was abhorrent that people had allegedly

extorted money from Russian athletes The joint author

of a report due to be published tomorrow says it will expose a whole

different scale of corruption. Figures obtained

by the BBC suggest that many police forces are struggling to investigate

a growing number of reported cases Hi-tech crime units,

which look at seized electronic devices for evidence of online

exploitation and grooming, have Officials insist the most urgent

investigations are fast tracked. Voting is under way in Myanmar, also

known as Burma, in the country's The opposition National League

for Democracy, led by Aung San Suu Kyi, is expected

to win most seats in parliament. But with a quarter reserved

for the military, she needs at least two thirds of those being

contested for the party's candidate I'll be back with

the headlines just before 10am. This is one of those days when the

night news editors, if there are still night news editors, they

cannot agree. The Observer has calls for new deer of airport security. I

love the Independent, but in terms of gripping the front page

headlines, it is 50-50 no one was watching CCTV, it does not quite

make it. The Scotland on Sunday front-page, very interesting, Alex

Salmond calling for Holyrood to get the power to call another

independence referendum. The mail on Sunday has... They have missed the

word wrapped. The Sunday express will be talking about bombers

speaking with British accents, they say. The Sunday Times, very wealthy

men have had money taken from them by fraudsters. Shocking story. It is

Remembrance Sunday and you have a beautiful photograph from Liverpool.

The Sunday Telegraph, the beautiful ceramic poppies, they are now

spilling out of St George's Hall in Liverpool. Such a beautiful tribute

last year, it would have been a shame not to use it again. To see it

in another part of the country is an example of what a good piece of art

it was, popular, people flocked to see it, now they can see it in

Liverpool as well. We were talking earlier, you are shocked by a story

in the Express about the merchant Navy not getting proper attendance

invitations, like Ukip of course. Let us put Ukip aside. We are

talking about men and women who gave their lives, who supplied the UK as

part of the war effort, without those individuals, they took huge

losses in terms of ships and submarines, to see them excluded

from the Remembrance Sunday celebrations, I think it is a very

bad mark on the government. A new book out by Jonathan Dimbleby

suggesting the Battle of the Atlantic was the single most

important battle in the Second World War. These boats were bringing

fuel, wood, metal. Everything contributing to the war effort. And

huge numbers of sailors died when the ships were sunk. I think we are

looking at a degree of discrimination and it is unfair. We

need to recognise the whole war effort, all of the people involved,

all of the units, and not just be very selective. Adrian, the big

story, the downing of the Russian jet. The front-page of the Express.

This is a story that says that that jihadis celebrating, maybe the

bombing of the aeroplane, they were celebrating with Birmingham accents.

Good grief. Intelligence chatter, we think must or just from the Sunday

Express backbench. Now, now. Nobody really... There does not seem to be

hard news, an awful lot of speculation and stuff coming out of

unnamed sources. Tough questions. The Telegraph has a big spread. A

really useful briefing on the six key questions about the holiday jet

bombing. Useful for anyone finding it slightly confusing. Very good

comment from Edward Lucas on the Russian position. We saw an about

turn from Russia at the end of last week where Vladimir Putin initially

criticised David Cameron for suspending flights but then did

exactly the same. We think that the Russians have just hit Isis's base.

That was the question, what will the Russians do next? A bomb again.

Domestic politics and the EU reform story is everywhere. You will be

surprised for me to ask you about that! David Cameron tough words, if

I do not get what I want, I will leave the outcome pain. Do you

believe him? I do not. I can see you smiling, by the same token, Ukip

MEPs, and the vast proportion of Eurosceptic voters, they will be

looking at this with a degree of cynicism, sarcasm may be, and

amusement, but here he is, walking a tightrope, we know the Prime

Minister wants to stay in, he has made no secret of that, he is

saying, I will ask, I have supposedly got tough demands, but my

backstop position is to stay in. You agree? The Sun, Brussels muscle, he

is playing good cop, bad cop with himself. A few weeks ago, he said

the idea that Britain could be like Norway, not the land of milk and

honey. Now he says he is prepared to leave. As Diane says, Eurosceptics

do not believe that. Those waiting to hear what he wants from the

renegotiation of getting impatient. They have not heard the tale that is

encouraging or suggests there might be a point when he would walk away.

Will we see the detail? In terms of the four year ban on migrants

getting in work benefits, if it is not there, it will be more

suspicious. You have hit the nail on the head. Over the last few weeks

and months, the consistent message from others European leaders, no,

that is non-negotiable. In some cases unlawful, contrary to the

treaty and such. We have had an admission this week that treaty to

range is not possible -- treaty change. A lot of what David Cameron

is setting out does not have that critical foundation that would

deliver it. You used to write about politics a lot, would you give David

Cameron a pass on this? Yes, I think he is in an invidious position and

you have to go into negotiations appearing that you have got a stick.

But actually, I think he is using his carrot as a stick, if you see

what I mean. I think I do! He wants us to stay in. I happen to agree

with him on that, I want to stay in. I think there will be more agreement

from a lot of the smaller countries in Europe for some of the things he

wants. I have been travelling through the Balkans, the refugees

coming from Greece, and there is an awful lot of fundamental dislike of

what is happening in Berlin and Paris. A moment for playing clever,

one could get alliances with smaller countries. I think so. We looked too

much towards Germany for what the European Community thinks. Let us

jump onto another big story, Jeremy Corbyn and Trident. Maria Riegel is

coming on later on -- Maria Eagle. The new shadow defence minister. She

will know more. Apparently Jeremy Corbyn has not met her to talk about

Trident. They may have talked about other things. He looked very

uncomfortable yesterday at the Royal Albert Hall at the Singh day. Is

there a gentle media bullying going on? -- at the Poppy Day. Nothing

gentle about it. It will be very important for Ukip. Nigel Farage is

doing a lot of hammering of Jeremy Corbyn for not being that drastic

enough. He will read a poem today to demonstrate he is -- patriotically

stop this is the first election test for Labour and Jeremy Corbyn and the

Tory party. We have got that aspects that George Osborne being defeated

on tax credits and such, the roll-out of the universal credit,

this is a test not just for the Labour Party, although of course the

Tory party would like to focus on that, it is a test, the first

critical test, since the general election. If we can turn what was a

huge amount of support, although we only got one MP, into a second MP,

it would be fabulous news from Ukip's point of view. If the Tories

can seriously bury Jeremy Corbyn with the by-election, it will be a

win-win for them. If Labour can survive and retain the seat, Jeremy

Corbyn is safe for some considerable time. In terms of what is going on

inside the Tory party, tax credits were mentioned, as he searches for

money, George Osborne is homing in on Iain Duncan Smith's budget for

universal credit, and if the papers are right, he is boiling with anger

about this and on the edge of resignation?

Osborne's quite suspicion of that way of making policy according to

beliefs. In this row, Owen Patterson's weighed in in favour of

Iain Duncan Smith saying George Osborne can't go for universal

credit. The headline says tax credits a fiasco. Your fault George.

There is a suspicion in Westminster that Osborne blames Iain Duncan

Smith for a tax credits row as well. Somehow it's Iain Duncan Smith

fault. Buckets of bad blood? Yes. I can't fully understand it given this

was Osborne's idea. Adrian, we don't plug anything on this programme very

well. You've written an interesting memoir of your ups and downs over

the years, the drinking and writing of columns of different kinds. One

thing which struck me is how much time you've spent looking at refugee

a cite Is. You've opinion just following people from Kos. There's a

story in the Sunday Telegraph saying the EU's trying to do a deal with

Africa. They are going to send back lots of African immigrants in return

for doctors and engineers and nurses? In is the most depressing

story. Even if it's a tiny bit true. It's ghastly. The idea we would say

to developing countries in Africa, look, we'll give you all the people

we really don't need or don't want here but can you give us all the

people you really do need, all the doctors, the engineers... All the

talented, trained ones. We'll bring them here, educate them and use

them. We don't care what happens to you in the meantime? Appalling way

of manufacturing more refugees. On a slightly lighter note. The John

Lewis advert? Such a disappointment. It's the big moment, the beginning

of Christmas. You wait for the John Lewis add. It's become a thing. It

used to be Christmas car rolls and snow men, now the John Lewis ad. It

seems to suggest you send your demented old people to the moon.

What you then give lonely people as a Christmas present is a telescope

so they can see at a distance other people having fun! It's very bleak?

It is supposed to be raising awareness of loneliness amonks the

elderly. I wonder if it becomes, people saying I wept at the John

Lewis advert, very sad but don't visit any elderly relatives or

connect with older people in the community. They see everyone else

having a lovely Christmas. Then they get sent a telescope to see it in

greater detail whilst still being lonely. It is the ultimate ideal of

this society? . That was a fascinating review as ever. To the

weather. Where have the crisp autumn days gone? It has been oddly warm

for the time of year. Might have to wait a week before the crisp

mornings return. If you're off to any Remembrance Sunday

commemorations, pretty wet for most at 11.00. The driest, south-east and

eastage Lee Y some rain heavy at times. Gusty winds across western

areas. Touches grail force. Things brightening up in Northern Ireland

this afternoon. Sunshine and a few showers. Parts of the Midlands, East

Anglia and the south-east staying dry. 17 or 18 degrees possible.

Heavy rain into the west later. Gusty winds. The winds will

strengthen further in northern Scotland. 50-0 mph gusts for a time.

Strengthening towards dawn on Monday. More rain returns. We stay

dry for much of the night towards the south and east after that

evening rain. A cooler start here tomorrow. Many will stay dry. Some

brighter weather in northern Scotland at times with a few

showers. For southern Scotland, Northern Ireland and Northern

England and north-west Wales rain on and off throughout Monday. Some rain

particularly heavy over the hills. Temperatures above where they should

be. The rest of the week, bit of sunshine, dark clouds never too far

away bringing further rain, some windy conditions at times. And,

temperatures still above average for the time of year. It's going to be

like living in a dirty old washing machine for the next few days? Is

short! The horrors of the First World War

inspired some extraordinary poetry - perhaps the greatest

of those poets was the young Wilfred Owen who died just a week

before the Armistice was signed. Here to mark this solemn day,

I'm delighted to say that one of our greatest actors,

Ian McKellen, is here to read What passing-bells

for these who die as cattle? Only the monstrous anger

of the guns. Only the stuttering rifles'

rapid rattle No mockeries now

for them, no prayers nor bells, Nor any voice of mourning

save the choirs - The shrill, demented choirs of

wailing shells And bugles calling for them

from sad shires. What candles may be held

to speed them all? Not in the hands of boys but

in their eyes Shall shine

the holy glimmers of goodbyes. The pallor

of girls' brows shall be their pall, Their flowers the tenderness

of patient minds, And each slow dusk

a drawing-down of blinds. Well, there are, of course, no

remaining survivors of the First World War and those who fought

in the Second are a dwindling band. But there will be some,

along with veterans of more recent conflict, gathering

for the ceremony of Remembrance Sophie Raworth is nearby

on Horse Guards Parade. Good morning, almost 10,500 veterans

and civilians are gathering here on horse guards parade. They've been

arriving all morning for all corners of the UK and from abroad. So many

faces, young and old, so many stories. So many conflicts out there

on Whitehall, huge crowds already. They've been gathering since very

early this morning, queueing to get in to take their places so they can

watch the march-past later this morning. Here on Horse Guards Parade

is Royal Marine JJ Chalmers who served in Afghanistan in 20011.

Lovely to have you here. What does it mean for you to be here this

morning? It is an incredible honour. I've never been here for

Remembrance. I've grown up watching it. Once I joined the military,

Remembrance took on a whole new meaning. Once I served in

Afghanistan, it really is specialalised. An incredible honour

to be here. You were in Afghanistan for two months. You suffered

terrible injuries? I was wounded by a bomb we went off very close to me.

All the shards and glass came my way ander to me to pieces. Crushed my

face, arms, legs. I walked away from it more or less in tact but with a

new body. You say you walked away from it. You've undergone something

like 30 operations in the last four years? You're right. I never walked

away from it, I was carried away from incredible friends, guys who

saved my lives into this incredible journey of recovery. Surgeons have

done incredible things for me. I've been held together by physios.

Staggering. We have the best healthcare and best service for our

military we could ever hope for. I'm proof of that. Who will you be

remembering today? I lost two friends in the blast that claimed my

life and several others throughout the tour. I remember them every

single day. They are the reason I continue in life and go from

strength to strength. I want to make them and their families proud and

show the opportunity and chance and luck I was given to survive. It

makes this whole experience and conflicts of the years gone past so

much more personal to me. When you look around here this morn thing, it

is extraordinary seeing people who come here, many year after year,

there is an amazing bond, isn't there? It is incredible. Conflicts

change, countries change but the thing which doesn't change is the

people involved in it. It's ordinary men and women being asked to do

extraordinary things. We find ourselves in some extremely

difficult situations. But the bond you get through that cannot be

created anywhere else, I believe. What about the public support? You

walked along Whitehall with me a few minutes ago ago. The crowds are big?

It is staggering, a wonderful reminder we do this job to serve the

people. This is an incredible country to have them come out and

support us is fan ohm fall, really. A lot of the people who will be

taking part in the march-past will represent charities, people who've

helped you in your journey along the way? We have an incredible care

system provided by the MoD and military. Throughout it, the

charities inter spores. They really improve that and bring it forward.

It is staggering how many people come together to make this happen.

Whether it is surgeons or a lovely lady in Aberdeen who put on a bake

sale to provide me with a better quality of life. Thank you.

If the Russian plane returning from Sharm el-Sheikh was downed

by a bomb planted by Isis, then we are under more direct threat

Would that change the mood at Westminster over air strikes

I'm joined by the Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond.

Back to you What's your instinct from everything you've seen about

this Downing of the plane? Is it a terrorist attack? We think it is

more likely than not that it was caused by an explosive device on

board. We are now seeing others taking action. Most importantly the

Russians, right in the heart of the investigation into the crash of

their plane, taking similar action to us. There are a lot of British

people still out there apparently very angry, many of them. What's

your message? How long will it be before they all get back? I've just

spoken to our ambassador to Egypt who's in Sharm. Rather a rough time

in the airport from some people? The media will always find discontent

people. He says the mood is calm generally. They appreciate their

safety is being put above all other considerations. We are getting

people out. 3,300 out so far by the end of the today, should be 5,000

people back home. Many people will want to stay and complete their

holidays and then leave. We haven't changed our advice with regard to

the resort of Sharm el-Sheikh itself. Those who want to come out

early, the airlines will do their best to accommodate them. There is a

constraint. We've imposed that on the system. A much higher level of

security checking. The Egyptians have been very co-operative in

making that happen. We're running up against the capacity limits of the

airport given the additional measures being applied. That's

what's causing the delay to some flights. How long before everybody

who wants to get out now gets out? What we are understanding is at most

people will experience a delay of two or three days. That's what

EasyJet have indicated, beyond their scheduled travel date if they want

to come out early. Other people will want to remain and complete their

holidays. If it was a bomb put on board at the airport, then

presumably this changes our view of lots and lots of airports across the

Middle East through parts of Turkey, North Africa, is the Foreign Office

conducting a review of airport security in that part of the world?

It is the department of transport who has that responsibility. But its

a he issior advice? We set the travel advice but the department for

transport has a body of aviation security experts who constantly

travel around airports. This scent' a one--- this isn't a one off. They

review security particularly in vulnerable airports. If this turns

out to be a device planted by ISIL or somebody inspired by ISIL, we'll

have to look at the level of the security we expect to see in

airports where ISIL is active. It is hard to see how this could be done

and keep those airports operating at the same level as they are now. If

everybody has to be properly screened across a third of the

world, it will change the whole way we think about flying, where we go

on holidays, the committees of many countries? It will have an impact.

It is doable. We know there are people in this country who would

love to smuggle an explosive device on to aeroplanes who would do it if

it was possible. Because our airport security is what it is, we have been

remarkably successful for over 25 years in ensuring nobody is able to

get an explosive device on to a plane. We have to ensure airport

security everywhere is at the level of the best. And that airport

security reflects the local conditions and whether there is

higher local threat level that will mean higher levels of security are

required and that may mean additional costs. It may mean

additional delays at airports. There will be a lot of people

wanting to fly to all sorts of parts of the Middle East and they will be

asking if it is still safe? That is the point of our aviation security

effort across the world. We rate and score airports. If we believe an

airport is unsafe, we would say so. We work with local authorities who

are almost always very keen to work with us. We support them and provide

expert advice we advise them on equipment they need. But it is not

just about equipment, it is about training and management and

motivation of staff. But as the key issue to keeping airport say. What

about the apparent missile that went towards a British plane over the

Sinai desert a few weeks ago, why did we not hear about it at the

time? A few months ago now. The Thompson incident. I looked

carefully at that, at the time. I am pretty sure it was a red herring and

we have a very good explanation of what happened. There was an Egyptian

military exercise going on on the ground and I was satisfied,

everybody in our system was satisfied, that it was not an

attempt on the plane. The plane was not in danger. Isil have accumulated

quite a lot of ex-Iraqi military material, some American and in due

course some Russian as well. What do you feel about the possibility of

this organisation having surface to air missiles and bringing down jets

across the region? It is not impossible but we have seen no

evidence that they have this equipment. Clearly, airlines and

aviation security organisations take into account the risks when they set

guidance to airlines about minimum heights they should fly out and

areas they should avoid altogether. Do we need a new strategy for Isil?

You have been talking about going to the House of Commons to get

permission for bombing and one of the reasons that MPs are lots -- are

not supporting it is because they have said it is not going to be a

war winning operation. So they say, why are we doing it? Clearly, we are

part of the coalition of more than 60 nations and a decision we make on

its own will not tip the balance in the campaign on the battlefield. To

be successful against Isil, we have to destroy Isil in its heartland in

eastern Syria and to do that effectively we have to get a

political solution to the broader civil war in Syria. That process is

now under way again with a meeting held in Vienna ten days ago, we are

having another meeting in Vienna next Saturday to take forward the

process. We have to get a ceasefire on the battlefield, a political

dialogue going involving the legitimate opposition groups in

Syria. So that we can get all people who believe in a future for Syria

working together against the terrorists in Isil. This is really

interesting because I was talking to Sir Nick Houghton and he thinks this

is a possible turning point in our relations with the Russians. They

may look again at the transition from Assad and it may be the moment

when Vladimir Putin becomes in some sense an ally. On this issue, Syria

and Isil, we see I do I with the Russians on lots of things, our

vision for a future Syria is broadly similar. Except for Assad. I will

come to that. The Russians agree with us on destroying Isil, they

have a very large Muslim population in the Russian Federation and they

are very alert to the risks of radicalisation. The one thing we

disagree on is the future of Bashar al-Assad. We and most of our allies

and partners believe he needs to go at a point in the transition process

and the Russians at the moment are still saying, no, he must be allowed

to stand in future elections if he wishes to. We are talking about a

transition, it does not sound like we are that far apart? It would be

perfect if Assad was to decide he did not want to do this job anymore.

It would be great. Then he would not be standing in a future presidential

election. The one person who has the power to persuade him that is in his

and his country's best interests is President Putin and I hope at some

point he will decide to do that. Is there any evidence the Russians are

spending more time focused attacking Isil themselves rather than other

enemies of Assad? That is the problem. We have a fundamental

difference of view. The Russians believe the way to deal with Isil is

first of all to strengthen the regime and then allow the regime to

finish off Isil. We believe so long as Assad is still there, the

opposition in Syria will be primarily focused on the Assad

regime. You will never get the opposition and the regime working

together and less an exit for Assad has been guaranteed, so that we know

he is going at a certain point. That is the crux. The talks are going to

happen? Next Saturday. Our plans for a vote in the House of Commons to

allow the RAF to target Isil in Syria, are they of the table? No,

not at all. We are in the same place despite the story that ran earlier

last week. When we think it is right to do so and when we are confident

there is a consensus in the House of Commons, we will go to the House of

Commons and hold a debate. With respect, there will never be a

consensus. Have you got enough Labour MPs to back you estimate we

are in a slightly different situation now -- to back you? The

Labour Party is a different organisation to that which we faced

before the summer. We need to understand where the Labour Party is

on this. At the moment, even its leader does not agree with its

policies always. There is an exploration process of understanding

whether a majority of Labour MPs would in fact back this action. When

we have worked in this country with one notable exception, 20 13th vote

on the Syria strike, the way we have always worked, for hundreds of

years, is that when it is a question of putting British troops in danger

in military action, we have always sought to work with cross-party

consensus. In government and opposition, that has been the toy

party's approach. Until 2013, it was the Labour Party's approach. -- the

Tory party. I want to get back to that approach. As soon as you think

you have enough Labour votes to do this, you will do it? When we think

it is right and we have a consensus to get a majority, we will go back

to Parliament. Another subject inquiry, all over the papers, the

Prime Minister's much tougher words about leading Britain out of Europe

if he does not get what he wants. This week a letter will go to Donald

Tusk setting out the objectives, have you seen it? I have seen a

draft of the letter, we have been working on it. Will it include

detail? People are interested on the detail above the four year ban on

migrants getting in work benefits. We were asked by the president of

the council specifically to write the letter in this format, drawing

together our arguments and our asks we have set them up before in

speeches and articles. We have never yet collated them into a single

document which sets out what it is Britain is seeking to change, why we

are seeking that change and to set out some parameters for the change.

What it does not do and will not do at this stage is set out detailed

specific legislative changes. That is for the negotiation. In many

cases, there will be more than one way of delivering the change that

Britain wants to see and it will be for a discussion with our neighbours

in Europe about how best to do it. We will not see details of four

instance that in work benefit proposals? We will set out a clear

marker for what we need to achieve. There could be different ways of

doing that, combinations of use of domestic and European legislation,

changes to treaties or other ways of delivering legislative change. We do

not want to be excessively prescriptive at the beginning of a

discussion. I understand. This is the beginning of the process. In

domestic terms, this issue has made headlines since 2014, talked about a

lot during the election and before and after. Lots of people are

focusing on this as the acid test as to whether the Prime Minister gets

what he wants. Do you accept, as a lot of MPs do, that the proposal for

a four-year ban on in work benefits would be illegal under EU law? Under

current EU law, it may not complied, but that is why we... Illegal? We

are looking for changes and some of the changes will require changes to

the body of law, the treaties and the EU secondary legislation, that

are currently in place. We would not be having to have a complex

renegotiation if we did not require substantial changes in the law

governing the EU. Do you accept that if you do not get big changes to

stop the inward flow of EU workers you will not be able to win

referendum? What I have said repeatedly, not just migration,

there are several areas where we have to get substantive,

irreversible, legally binding change, in order to satisfy the

British people. They will not be fobbed off with a set of cosmetic

alterations. This is about fundamental change in the direction

of travel of the European Union to make sure it works for Britain and

that it is an effective organisation for all of the citizens of Europe,

driving our prosperity and competitiveness in the 21st century.

If we cannot do that, we will not win the referendum. If you do not

get fundamental irreversible change of the kind you are talking about,

the Prime Minister has made clear he would not be in favour of staying in

the EU, is that your view? The Prime Minister has said and I agree, if

our partners turn a deaf ear to the reasonable demands of the British

people, in the interests of all of the people of the European Union, we

will have to think again about how to protect Britain's interests in

the future. If Britain gains significant economic benefits from

being in the European Union, but the European Union has serious problems

that need fixing and in this process we have to fix those things. Is

there a perfectly tolerable life of this country outside the EU if it

does not work? There would be big challenges for Britain outside the

European Union because many of our important trade and investment

partners around the world see us are merrily as a very user-friendly

gateway into the European Union. If you talk to Americans, Chinese, Arab

investors, they understand London and the British legal system, we are

an entry point for them to the EU. If we were not in the EU, we would

have to find a different way of promoting our economy. Not

impossible but it would be challenging. You sit in the Cabinet

and you know your colleagues very well, is it the case that things are

so bad between the Chancellor and Iain Duncan Smith that we are on the

verge of a Cabinet resignation? I do not think so. You do not think Iain

Duncan Smith is angry about a tense to go for universal credit? We all

have robust conversations with the Chancellor. Inevitably, we have

tough discussions. He very rarely comes with good news? The Chancellor

has a really tough job to do but the headline commitment we made to the

British people in the general election earlier this year was to

get Britain out of deficit and into surplus. That underpins everything

else we are doing and our ability to deliver a better quality of life and

education and health service for people in this country, we have to

deliver on that. Is Cabinet solidarity sufficient on that? Of

course people fight their corner and seek to sway the agenda in one way

or another, but every one of my Cabinet colleagues would agree that

the number one task in front of us is eliminating the deficit, getting

Britain's economy on an even keel for the future. Thank you for

joining us. Danny Boyle is one of Britain's true visionaries.

The man who gave us Slumdog Millionaire

and Trainspotting, he also directed the spectacular opening ceremony

His latest film is all about another visionary, Steve Jobs,

Boyle has made a revealing and compelling film about Jobs which

delves into the difficult nature of the man who some deemed a monster,

When we met, Danny Boyle told me why he saw this as a film about faith.

I sat in a garage and invented the future because artists lead.

Right, well, this guy's out of control.

They treated it with almost a religious fervour.

Early on in the film, you see him trying to convince people

The vision was a computer that would feel personal,

The way you express that vision, the fervour with which you express

It caused some of the damage, of course.

Anybody who was hostile or unappreciative of it,

He's a difficult guy, to put it gently.

He's the visionary to the question that Wozniak asks at one point.

You're not a great coder, not a great designer,

How come ten times in a day I read Steve Jobs is a genius.

It's a very uncomfortable question, that,

I don't really know how to operate these cameras, the same with

You sort of bring everybody together who has those skills.

You're the conductor of the orchestra?

Responsible for the rhythm of it arriving.

And you're responsible for the arc of the story, the stories of others.

The choices to make, Jobs relationship with his daughter

who at first he doesn't acknowledge but then grows up alongside him,

It was the way you could hold him to account.

It's that Shakespearean thing, the personal.

With all the achievements, history and products, the way you

hold into account his personal relationship with his daughter

but the responsibility of where you come from and what you've done.

Morally, you have to take that on board.

She was hugely helpful to Aaron Socking in writing the script.

The family, certainly his widow, and a lot of people at Apple, hated

Do you get why they hated it so much?

It's very difficult with the family. When a family's grieving, what do

you do accept to say this man was by his own choice a huge public figure

and a significant change-maker. The company I don't have any sympathy

with. This is the most powerful company in the word at the moment.

They want their narrative their way. It is crucial for everybody,

journalists, artists to tell the story not quite how Apple want it.

They get enough chance to tell their story their way. I believe it is a

very decent account of this man who was full of such contradictions.

It's neither a deif I can casing or a hatchet job. If I was going to do

a biopic of you, I'd ask questions about faith and so forth. You were

on the road to can abouting a Catholic priest at one stage? I was

until I was about 13 or 14. I was very close to becoming, my mother

was a very devout Catholic woman. She wanted me to be a priest. It is

weird, there's a number of film directors who have trod that path

early on. There's clearly a con ex-between the two jobs, poncing

around telling people what to do, I think. It is a great pulpit, a great

place to give your account of the world? You would think it would be

more acting. But, obviously, feel like you're more in control if

you're behind the scenes. Very often in your films, there and an uplift,

essentially benign view of the world. Slumdog Millionaire got

hammered by some for being too nice about poverty. It was very important

in that film that the human spirit wins through? I'm believer in that.

I'm an optimist about everything really, apart from success. Very

pessimistic about success which is quite healthy. You have to keep a

balance. Otherwise, I'm a very optimistic person. I certainly

believe in the trajectory of storytelling. There is a sense the

more you belong to the story the more it deserves to lift you out of

it towards the end of it. I am A believer in that. The opening of the

Olympic Games. You are in charge of how the British see themselves. You

discovered a bit of pat reO'Ism after it? I read a thing Orwell said

that Britain's the only country where the intellect use ensure you

should be ashamed of patriotism. We have that tendency, the intellectual

class to be very suspicious of it. Suspicion that's healthy sometimes.

We have a lot to admire about ourselves. We should only

occasionally admire it. We should measure it out. It is inspiring to

the world. One of the things about doing the games, you meet so many

people from so many different parts of the world who are part of it.

They look to us as a beacon of freedom, personal liberty. Our

culture as well, they admire and aspire to. It is a good thing. We

should celebrate it occasionally. Some folks said it was a little

roast tinted. The NHS and all the rest of it. We are not nearly as

democratic and open and optimistic and so forth as the ceremony

suggested? The slight wave of cynicism we usually have has swept

back in again. That's as it should be. Occasionally it clears. We do

have, certainly in comparison, we do live in a generally peaceful and

tolerant multi-cultural society. That's a thing a lot of people would

aspire to. Thanks for joining. In a moment,

you can see my interview with the Chief of the Defence Staff,

but first, over to Christian Fraser A memorial service will be held this

morning in St Petersburg for the 224 people killed

on the Russian airliner that crashed Egyptian officials say investigators

will be carrying out further analysis to try to identify a noise

heard in the final second of the The Foreign Secretary told this

programme that the Government will look again at

the security of airports in areas of the world where Islamic extremist

terrorists are active, if the plane Philip Hammond said it was important

to ensure that airport security reflected local threat levels

and warned that could involve extra costs and more delays

for travellers. Mr Hammond insisted the Government

still plans to have a vote in Parliament

about extending airstrikes to IS targets in Syria, when it judged it

was the right thing to do and there That's all from me for now. The next

news on BBC One is at 1.30pm. Now, appropriately on

Remembrance Sunday, I've been talking to the Chief of the Defence

Staff, General Sir Nick Horton. We discussed Syria and the

forthcoming defence review, but I began by asking him if this is the

most important day of the year for So I think so in many ways,

on a day when everybody has their own thoughts about Remembrance,

the Armed Forces, some of that is Some is still very raw because,

sadly, we continue to lose people I do think there is, over the last

few years, a growing awareness within the nation as a whole that

it's more than just a single day There is a remarkable sense

of remembrance about the whole Are you at all concerned

about the fact some communities in Britain have been

so hostile to recent conflicts that the general national consensus is

fragmenting at the edges? There has been public concern and

an awakening of public conscience In many ways,

I think this is a good thing. At the moment we're experiencing a

remarkable list the remembrances. For those who reflect on this, it

tells a story of a remarkable evolution of our country and its

democracy and what it's come to be today which is a remarkably

privileged country. Open society and freedoms. It documents over all

those years, the degree of service and sacrifice that's had to be in

vested in creating the country we enjoy today. Of course, for a lot of

people think enjoy today. Of course, for a lot of

people think being today. They'll be thinking about the Second World War

and the defeat of fascism. In that context do you think it is fair to

see ISIS as a fascist expansionist state? I wouldn't give it that

particular label myself. It present as significant threat. Perhaps an

extraordinary threat to what one might call the normal run of

terrorism. David Cameron said exostings? I think when the Prime

Minister speaks like that, I don't think he necessarily means in terms

of they are going to come and take our territory off us. But in terms

of, to undermine our way of life, freedoms, liberty, the values we

stand for, that's the true nature of the threat. A threat like Isis has

the potential to present. We do seem to be in this strange position where

there is a proposal for another eight tornado jets to help with the

American attacks inside Syria, which most people think will not be enough

to defeat ISIS but the Commons is against, without there being an

overall plan which is big and Booed enough to defeat ISIS on the

battlefield. If the politicians said, we've changed our mind, we

want to defeat ISIS on the battlefield, could you do it? Could

the West do it? I don't think you defeat an ideology militarily.

That's always been behind the international formulation of what we

are doing about ISIS. From a national perspective. The only thing

we can unilaterally own as a country is a strategy about ISIS which keeps

the people of this country safe. Our national strategy is about border

security, the remarkable work about our intelligence services. Reaching

out through the Muslim society within the country to assist them in

de-radicalising and delegitimising ISIS. But we've only ever said we

could make a contribution to the international defeat of ISIS. This

is as much down an eyed elogical route as a military route. It is

important in the end the military dimension of this is done by

regional players, by Muslim countries, local armed forces.

Therefore, I don't think we should play the decisive military role. It

runs the risk of adding fuel to the radicalisation of ISIS as an

abhorrent cult. How much do you think of bringing down of this

airline, don't know if you've security sources saying ISIS did it,

how much does that change the game? The important thing is how it might

impact on the thoughts of Russia. You can't just look at the

activities of Russia over the last year or so through the focus purely

of Syria. You have to fake a step back. This is actually part of them

wanting to secure regional influence in a part of world close to their

near abroad. What this might really make them think, this is more than

propping up our equity there. We've serious interest here in the

destrurnings of this abhorrent eyed e-Ogee. We've gone through a couple

of years where Putin has been raised as one of the big threats to the

West. Do you think this is a turning point in our relationships with

Russia? It could be. Those who talk about these things, attendant at

National Security Council debates, make the point there is also an

opportunity here. An opportunity for an element of political convergence

between America, ourselves, the West and Putin. That there will be some

identification of a common view on how a political transition of Assa

darks could work. Five years ago, there is what everybody seems to

accept a brutal strategic defence and security review. The army coming

down and navy coming down quite dramatically. Since then, the number

of troops has fallen faster than expected and the number of

reservists hasn't risen nearly as fast. I think there were only 20 net

reservists added to the army last year. Are you concerned now about

the state of the armed forces ahead of this new SR? Am I concerned? I'm

always concerned. That's my professional job. At I concerned in

a way as we approach this SDSR, more of the same? Not at all. Because the

world has changed since then? Not just that but the domestic situation

has changed. I think we have to base, as we look forward to this

defence review, which should be one primarily about confidence and

optimism and a reassurance to the people of the country that there

will be a bit of realism in the fact the world has become a somewhat more

dangerous place. If you like, the latent threats have become patent

ones. On defence spending, George Osborne promised you the extra 2%.

Are you concerned the Chancellor of the treasury will nibble away by

adding military pensions into if? It would be a miracle if defence and

the Treasury did not submit to Nato the things that are permissible as

defence expenditure. However the figures are done, my concern is that

is real additional spending for defence and that is the case. For

the first time in a long time, probably 25 years, this is about not

the management of decline but the management of betterment. What about

Trident? People like Crispin Blunt have suggested the amount of money

Trident is taking over the next 20 years is unreasonable compared with

all of the other threats we face? It is one of those things we have got

to keep a running ion. -- running eye on. It is not just the forces of

the UK, in concert with our allies. You should never run the risk of

creating an imbalance between nuclear and conventional forces or

the whole credibility of deterrence. Part. We seem quite

close to that given the small size of the Royal Navy, for instance.

That is why deterrence in the Western sense is all about

deterrence within Nato not just on our own. Collective security is

ultimately what preserves the security of the country. We now have

the Leader of the Opposition saying he would never press the nuclear

button. Does it worry you? It would worry me if that thought was

translated into power, as it were. If he wins, he is a problem? There

are a couple of hurdles to cross before we get to that. The reason I

say this, not based on a personal thing, pew early based on the

credibility of deterrence. The whole thing about deterrence rests on the

credibility of its use. When people say you are never going to use the

deterrent, you use it every second of every day, but the purpose is you

do not have to use it because you successfully deter. No point

spending billions of pounds if we would never use it. The deterrence

is completely than undermined. Most of the politicians I know understand

that and I think, dare I say, the responsibility of power is probably

quite a sobering thing and you come to a realisation, I understand how

this thing works. There has been a lot of coverage of the legal threats

faced by British forces abroad and we read today a new Bill of Rights

giving members of the Armed Forces new protections. Can you explain why

you think it is essential? There is a very specific thing within the

European Court of Human Rights and the act about the right to life.

Everybody does have a right to life but on a battlefield it is slightly

different. At a very low tactical level, occasionally, a young man's

Corporal, might have to buy design risk the life of one of his section

to achieve the mission or save the lives of the balance of the section.

If he is going to hesitate or stop doing that or worry about doing it,

it undermines the whole basis of the way in which we operate at a

tactical level. You can expand that right up the chain of command. At a

personal level, do you have any sympathy with Marine A bust up of

course I would have sympathy. Two years ago on the show I said what I

absolutely abide by the view is that we institutionally should not allow

ourselves or demand some default right to leniency as and of itself.

-- do you have any sympathy with Marine A? The judicial process has

to judge these things on their merits. I do not think we should

drop our standards institutionally. Do you think the press campaign on

this is misguided? To an extent, it is. The judicial process has run.

Some leniency has been shown. Another review potentially... Was

there any evidence that was not brought to bear which might afford a

review of the degree of leniency shown? But this is down to the legal

process, it is not down... Most of the people I talk to in the Armed

Forces absolutely get this. We might see a review? That I do not know, it

is a judicial process and not one I will be personally fighting for. You

have a very long day ahead of you, thank you very much. Ting it here.

Thank you, Andrew. -- thank you very much for starting it here.

Well, Labour's defence policy has been thrown into question

following the election of the CND-supporting Jeremy Corbyn

as leader and the vote by Scottish Labour against the renewal

Leading what she says is an open-minded review is the Shadow

Can I ask how many times you have met Jeremy Corbyn 121 to Trident? I

have a meeting with the diary but I have not met him yet to discuss that

aspect. Are you surprised? I am pretty relaxed. We are in opposition

for five years. This has got to be a serious meaningful review and we

need to design it properly. He needs to get his feet under the table and

then we will go ahead, design the review and do it. We were committed

at the election to having a much more transparent public facing

discussion about our place in the world and what our defence policy

should be. It is important we designed it correctly before we set

off on the part. You are a supporter of the Trident nuclear deterrent.

Have you heard anything in the debate that has changed your mind or

altered your view? Not at present, but I do not think it is surprising.

There are very important and respectable views held on both sides

of this argument. I do not think that simply setting them out without

going through the process of review is likely to change anybody's mind.

That is why we have got to get this right. I am not concerned about

this. I think the review will be genuine. It is going to be a serious

piece of work. It has to be. The Labour Party has had this policy of

having an independent nuclear deterrent, every Labour government

has had it. It is a moral confrontation between two different

views of the world. You cannot do the numbers between a moral

opposition to Trident and someone who believes that is the right

thing. Some people take a moral view of this. Others take a more

practical view. We still have to devise how we would defend our

nation and how we would meet our obligations to other nations, with

or without a nuclear deterrent. There is a lot of serious work that

has to be done ahead of any decision about this and at present, of

course, the Labour Party has a policy on this, it is very clear. It

was rewritten rated and reinforced at our conference in Brighton. --

reiterated. It is in favour of renewing the submarines. You are in

a very strange position where you have a leader who has said clearly

he would never press the button and Sir Nick Houghton expressed grave

concerns of the military, what is the point of having a deterrent if

everyone knows the new Prime Minister would never use it? It

becomes a waste of money and ceases to be a deterrent. We have to

explore ideas of deterrents. You have to convince him to change his

mind, don't you? We have to have a process setting out fully the

arguments on whether deterrents are effective, whether they work, it

requires evidence and a lot of input from party members, from those

affected by the decisions, not least our defence industry workers who

build the submarines and are going to be building the submarines. I

think we cannot do that without a serious long-term approach. It has

taken the Government a year to do the Strategic Defence and Security

Review will stop Whitehall started it in January -- Strategic Defence

and Security Review. The idea the defence team could do a review in

much less time than that is for the birds. How do you respond to Sir

Nick Houghton when he says he would be gravely worried if this policy

was translated into power? I understand the point he is making

and it is a point I made myself one Jeremy said what he said. I said

there are those who do not believe deterrence works. I am not one of

them. I think Jeremy's point of view is about whether he believes in the

effectiveness of deterrence. These are arguments we can have within the

process of the defence review, a space to be discussed and debated

and argued and conclusions to be formed in due course. You

comfortable with the CDF being involved in this debate question I

am comfortable with him being asked questions by journalists like you. I

do not think there is anything like wrong with him at stressing himself.

Everyone has to be open and make their arguments in front of the

public but at the end of that, if you have a leader who is completely

committed to never pressing the button, the whole thing is, in your

words, is for the birds, is it? We have to go through the process and

see what comes out. In the end, you have to persuade him you are right?

Yes, I will be attempting to do that, we will base our decision on

the outcomes of the review. The Labour Party has policy-making

structures and we will feed our review into those structures and the

great good sense of the Labour Party and its members and supporters will

come to a conclusion in the end. Nobody really knows what it would be

at this point. Could you be Secretary of State for Defence in

the unilateralist Labour government? I am not a unilateral nuclear

disarmament. I do not believe it works. I think I would find it

difficult. But we are not there yet. We have a big process to go

through. I think we should engage in that, in gauge the country in these

discussions. For too long, these decisions have been taken behind

closed doors. Agreed. Absolutely. Part of the reason Jeremy was

elected was on the back of this sense, not just in the Labour Party,

that people want a bigger say in decision-making in this country on

big issues like this. At the end of this long process, what happens? The

Labour Party has to come to a few, will there be a special conference?

Do you think new members should be part of that? Should it be

fundamentally for parliamentarians? It will be for the national policy

forum. The reviews will feed into that. The national policy forum have

an away day about the policy-making processes over the next few days.

Lucky them! It will feed into processes and we will have an

answer. Syria and the bombing of Syria is another big issue. Philip

Hammond is waiting to see if he can persuade enough Labour MPs to

support bombing in Syria to go back to the House of Commons for another

vote. What will happen in your view on the Labour side? It would help if

the Government came forward with proposals which they have not done.

We have seen noise and brief -- briefings in the newspapers. There

have been general briefings among backbench colleagues about the

situation in Syria but nobody has come forward with proposals. We have

been very clear. We will treat with the utmost seriousness any proposal

the Government comes forward with on the situation in Syria, but they

must tell us what the legal basis is, they must tell us the aims and

objectives, what is hoped to be achieved by adding our planes to the

60 countries already there engaged in action in Syria, what is the

military advantage? We must come up with a process through the United

Nations to make sure we can tackle the root cause of this problem which

is the Civil War in Syria. Simon Fisher, a young enthusiastic

socialist advising your leader, he appears to have advised people in a

particular constituency to vote for class war rather than a Labour Party

candidate and he has been suspended for that. Should he be fired? As far

as I am aware, his suspension is an administrative suspension, whilst

there is an investigation. It is not unusual. It does not carry with it

any suggestion that he is guilty or not guilty. The NEC which is charged

with doing these things, they have all of the fun, they have to

investigate and they will do that, and at the end of that process, they

will make a decision about his future. I re-christened him Simon

Fisher. He is Andrew Fisher. A lot of people around the new leadership

comes from, as it were, parts of the world to the left of the traditional

Labour Party. Are you concerned there is too much of that already

coming in? I think it is good new people are joining the Labour Party.

For years, we have talked about increasing membership, 164,000 new

members, I think that is important. We will have a lot of debates that

perhaps will go wider now than in the past 20 years. If you are

obdurate and confident politics matters and the Labour Party

matters, you welcome these things, and I do. Maria Eagle, you have a

fascinating few months ahead of you. Thank you for joining us today.

Simon Russell Beale is regularly referred to as the leading actor

A regular on our screens in everything

He's back on stage in London's West End playing the leading actor

There will be people out there who don't know about Samuel Foote. He

knew everybody in London at the time. He had an extraordinary life.

He set up a theatre that specialised in comedy. He was a satirist. Is it

true he redid O'The low? -- Othello. He tried to do it and it was rubbish

so he turned it into a comedy. He was great friends with Garrick, a

great actor of his time. He had a bet which involved horse riding and

he lost a leg. Mr Foote lost a foot. The leg had to be amputated? There

is an unbearable moment on stage where that leg disappears. It is

horrible. In the play, Ian Kelly, the writer, goes through in a lot of

detail what it's like to amputate a leg without anaesthetic, of course.

It is horrible to live through, even in your mind. He then very bravely

went back on stage, unheard of at the time, but he became

progressively more reckless in his tatter Calais tacks. Ended up

attacking a woman for big ohmy, which was true. She went on trial, a

very wealthy woman. She replied by accusing him of sodomy. A hanging

offence at the time? Indeed. But he had the support of the king for a

short period. He cross-dressed? He was an extraordinary man. An Oscar

Wilde-style wit? A huge celebrity. The play is partly about celebrity?

Yes. It's about a lot of thing. Stuffed with stuff actually. It may

be slightly over-stuffed? A lot of things talked about. The celebrity

thing, his main concern in the play is to be remembered actually. As he

now is, of course? We is one of the delights of doings it, to resurrect

him I I don't know why he was so forgotten? Perhaps being a comic. It

is a wonderfully fun play. A lot of people will remember you most from

Spooks where you are the Home Secretary.

You've told me we can't risk letting that aircraft reach the mainland.

Interceptors are making contact in 60 seconds.

They're trying to force us to do it for them.

The plane's in cloud cover, the fighters can't get

a visual with the cockpit and they're still not responding.

The men on board interfering with communications.

But we have a non-response of aircraft in our airspace.

How late can we issue the go code? We should fire now.

How late, damn it? Six minutes but we'd risk debris striking land.

Wow! Exciting, isn't it? Very. It's more complicated than that. Not that

simple, the Home Secretary says, now we've heard Philip Hammond dodging

various questions from time to time and answering others. Did you have

more sympathy with the complexity of decision making? He didn't have much

support from his political lieges in Spooks. All my scenes were with one

actor, with Peter. I never saw the rest of the outfit. But the idea of,

yes, I did have sympathy for him. The idea the pressures that man must

have been under. The last time we talked was national poetry day. You

did fantastic readings for us. That was a remarkable moment in a sense.

You're reading some for us in a moment, but we don't celebrate our

extraordinarily rich poetic culture. That hour I spent reading the 17th

Century poetry with Michael Sharma, it was one of the most enjoyable

hours I spent. The BBC should do more of this. Poetry year. British

maths day. That's much more tough for me. We might do this entire

programme in rhyming poetry. Marvellous. You're going to read one

of the great war poems in a second. Do you read much poetry yourself?

Yes. Not professionally. You have a slim volume at the side of the bed?

I consider three shelves by the side of my bed. So have I. Snap. Good

man. Thank you very much for joining us.

Thanks to all my guests today on this special programme.

Next week, we'll be joined by the man heading Labour's campaign

and we'll talk and hear the blues with Lenny Henry.

For more politics, join Andrew Neil and the Sunday Politics team

at the later time of 12.25pm after the Service of National Remembrance

We're going to leave you with some more poetry and some music.

In a moment, the saxophonist Amy Dickson will play us out

But first, Simon Russell Beale is going to read

one of the most famous of all war poems, The Soldier by Rupert Brooke.

If I should die, think only this of me:

That there's some corner of a foreign field

There shall be in that rich earth a richer dust concealed

A dust whom England bore, shaped, made aware

Gave, once, her flowers to love, her ways to roam

A body of England's, breathing English air

Washed by the rivers, blest by the suns of home.

And think, this heart, all evil shed away

Gives somewhere back the thoughts by England given

Her sights and sounds; dreams happy as her day

And laughter, learnt of friends; and gentleness

In hearts at peace, under an English heaven.