24/03/2016 This Week

On This Week tonight, as indiscriminate terror once again

comes to Europe, do we still underestimate the Islamist threat?

And what, if any, are the political implications for the UK?

Counter-extremism activist, Maajid Nawaz fears we're facing

We are failing to understand the scale of the threat against us.

This is a global jihadist insurgency, and we face

In Westminster, the Government is rocked by sudden in-fighting,

as Iain Duncan Smith quits the Cabinet.

The Spectator's Isabel Hardman is our guide to a week

How did David Cameron manage to turn around what was supposed to be

the worst week for the Conservatives since coming into government?

And as President Obama makes a historic victory to Cuba,

thoughts naturally, turn to his legacy.

Joining us to discuss how history will remember us,

James Brown's legendary band leaders, Fred Wesley and Pee Wee

Welcome to This Week, a week which looked like being dominated

by a full-blown Tories-in-turmoil crisis when the Secretary of State

for welfare cuts resigned because even he could no longer

Boy George's Budget melted faster than a chocolate Easter egg stuck

in the microwave, along with his leadership pretensions.

And Call Me Dave's Government was forced into a Whitehall U-turn

Top Gear had managed with its inappropriate petrol-head

Bliss it was, for those of us in the Westminster bubble,

to be alive to witness such machinations.

But by Tuesday it was all myopic irrelevance when the same Islamist

scumbags who'd brought carnage to Paris in November

visited their barbarous death cult on the people of Brussels,

leaving our politics parochial, even pathetic in its wake.

The intelligence services tell us there are between 400 and 600

jihadists now deployed across Europe by Islamic State's "external

command", battle-hardened in Syria, trained in automatic weapons,

explosives, surveillance, counter-surveillance and special

forces techniques, tasked with waging guerrilla war

in Europe's urban heartlands, including our own.

Many are EU citizens, others have used the cover

of the migrant crisis to come to our continent.

It is far from clear, even after Paris and Brussels,

that Europe's powers-that-be have any real idea of the scale

of the threat and the daunting counter-insurgency task before us.

But it is something we will have to play our part in addressing,

Speaking of people with questions to answer, I'm joined on the sofa

by what the deluded might regard as the dream team

Sensible folk will more likely see it as the stuff of nightmares.

I speak, of course, of #smoothoperator Chuka Umunna

and #sadmanonatrain Michael 'Trainy McTrain Face' Portillo.

Your moment of the week? We are going to be discussing the sombre

events in a moment. I will choose a somewhat flippant moment to say my

photograph appeared in the Daily Telegraph. This is an unusual event.

It was a photograph taken 20 years ago of me emerging from Downing

Street with Michael Howard, both of us being at the time "bustards".

That is to say, we were much concerned with the European Union

question. And it reminded me, because it was taken 20 years ago,

that this curse of Europe, which has racked the Tory party, has been

going on for 20 years, for more than 20 years. They could have produced

an old photograph. The paper printed the photograph precisely to make the

point that the nightmare just goes on and on. We have the terrible

events in Brussels this week. In some sense, that is the moment. But

the moment I have chosen is the reaction of the very likely

Republican nominee, Donald Trump, on breakfast television in the US. He

responded, his reaction was to call for the water boarding of terror

suspects, to call the torture of terror suspects, to call for

increased surveillance of Muslims, particularly of mosques. Of course,

shortly after he said this, he then had a further victory in Arizona,

and has as many delegates, almost, as the other candidates put

together. And the real question is, is this man ready to become the

commander-in-chief of the most powerful nation on earth? And, God,

we should quake in our shoes if that is the case. It may still be a

brokered convention in Cleveland. We shall see. Then there is a general

election, but I take your point. Now, terror returned

to Europe this week, this time in Brussels,

only four months after Paris. And some of the same

jihadists were involved, backed up by the same

logistics team. Islamic State is on the defensive

in Syria but it's clearly on the offensive in Europe

and the security services They're up against terrorists far

better trained and determined than the local losers who carried

out 7/7 in this country and the new tactic is simultaneous

multiple attacks to stretch So what exactly is the scale

of the threat now? Here's Quilliam founder and activist

Maajid Nawaz with his take After the Boston bombings of 2013,

I made a film like this one, cautioning that Syria is looking

like the new Afghanistan, and if so it won't be long

until we see the blowback right They want to threaten

everyday things. Dinner with friends,

going to a concert, The images from Brussels

earlier this week appalled but did not shock me,

because as Islamist terrorists strike at another European capital,

we have to call this We are failing to understand

the sheer scale of the threat we are facing, and Brussels was just

one expression of the blowback An anonymous Belgian

counter-terrorism official gave striking insight into the problem,

the impossible situation of monitoring hundreds

of radicalised individuals who want to wage

violent jihad on us. We do not have the infrastructure

to prevent an attack on our streets There is only so much our already

stretched security services can do. We need a full spectrum,

whole of society, But instead, whilst the threat

is increasing, we are in danger of handing victory to the jihadists

with talk of their impact on Brexit. Terrorists are relishing having

this level of influence. Think back to the Madrid bombings

in 2004, where the Spanish government pulled its troops

from Iraq in reaction, resulting in crowing

from the jihadists over victory. Responding to attacks by linking

terror with Brexit in the media is a gift to those seeking

to destroy our society. And we must not let any further

attacks that may take place before the referendum be seen to influence

the result of our vote. Otherwise we are as good as inviting

the jihadists to continue And from an empty Tube carriage

in Walthamstow to minding the conversational gap

here on This Week, Maajid Nawaz Welcome to the programme. Why do you

think, after all that has happened and what we now know of Islamic

State's external command, are we still underestimating the threat?

There are many reasons but I think we are simply underprepared, and

underestimate the extent of the appeal of this Islamist ideology

with in certain pockets of Muslim communities across Europe. It has

been festering for decades. Roughly 800 British born and raised citizens

do not join Isis from a vacuum. There must be a level of support for

this ideology across our communities, and we are not

comfortable in speaking openly about this and challenging this ideology

on the ground. Whatever we can do to stop that from happening in the

future, it's already happened. And if we are faced with, as a result,

and insurgency, we had better be prepared for a long and bloody

counterinsurgency. Indeed. This is why my central message is not that I

will tell people how to vote but that however we vote it should not

be determined due to our fear of terrorism. Terrorism seeks to

influence our political decisions upon the whims of people without

Syria motives, who want to sway us this way or that depend on --

depending on their ideological dogma. The key thing is fast show

was aliens, to make decisions based on what we think is in our national

interest, and not what we think is going to stop people intimidating

us. Is Western Europe basing an insurgency? I don't know how you

would define that. I don't know what you mean by saying we don't

appreciate this. I think we rather do and have been successful in

preventing a large number of terrorist attacks. You point out

that these go back to 2004 in Madrid, 2005 in London. What has

been remarkable in that period is the number of attacks thwarted. As

for this separate question about not allowing ourselves to be entranced

in the vote, I really don't quite know what that means. It sounds as

though you think we should not be exit in the European Union and you

don't want it to be influenced, but of course people are going to debate

their own security. That is part of the appreciation of the problem. Of

course you've got to debate whether you think you are safer in the

European Union or outside, just as you debate every other question to

do with the European Union. I think there are interesting points on

either side. I want to stick to the nature of the threat from minute

before we decide the response. Do you agree it is an insurgency? I am

not sure it is in the UK. I sit on the Home Affairs Select Committee

and we have been taking evidence on this for weeks. I get your point.

You are saying that if we are seeing, never mind in relation to

the referendum, but to allow terrorism to affect the way we think

about policy, as citizens, then they have achieved their aim. I would say

two things. First, I think it is not helpful to conflate the EU

referendum debate with this issue. I will tell you why. In part because

if we look at the terrorism that has really shocked people in the UK, it

has been home-grown. Free movement has not affected Brits carrying out

these atrocities. The second thing is, to the extent that people wish

to conflate it with the EU debate, there is the debate as to whether we

are stronger and safer in the EU or not. Cards on the table, I want us

to stay in. But where those who want to stay in perhaps make a mistake is

that the argument should not be, if we come out of the European Union

the cooperation with other EU member states, saved through Europol, --

lets say through Europol... The real cooperation is bilateral. French

intelligence is embedded with our intelligence and ours is embedded in

Paris. It is both, but the point is, to the extent that this is a

cross-border issue, which it is, we need the EU and cross-border

mechanisms to be more effective. I would much rather that the UK, which

has a very highly regarded intelligence set of agencies, if we

are in the driving seat to the extent that there is possible

activity in Europe, that should give us comfort. Generally, the French,

US, British and US intelligence ease are considered in the Premier

League. I'm hearing two different

statements. The attacks in Brussels have been the eighth of seven

others, two in Pakistan, two in a number of Turkey, one in Mali, one

in the Ivory Coast and one in another place. We are on a global

level facing a Jihadist insurgency, an uprising across the world. Hang

on, it's different though in different cities. If you look if

Brussels and the history of the city, and I think Saudi Arabia,

there there was a certain... The people in Brussels are the same

people, it's the same logistics and attitude. But compare that to

London, each of the different cities have different things going on, so I

mean in some senses it has been underestimated in the UK because

people focus on that number of I think we have had 700 UK citizens go

for example from here to Syria, what people often don't realise is that

600 have been stopped from dog the same. Yes, but hold on. There are

thousands of British and European citizens that have gone to Syria to

be trained by Islamic state. According to Europol at least 5,000.

Is it wise to let them back in? Well I think the problem is, we don't

know who's come back in, we know some have, but the problem is, we

don't know, that's the problem. We don't know who has returned? The

Security Services tell us they are completely overworked and they are

saying that an attack in the UK is almost inevitable. What I am saying

has been underestimated is the level of support for the idealology on the

ground and grass roots and what I'm saying we are not doing enough of is

the work within the communities to take the ideas head-on. I'm actually

very happy with the fact that our Security Services are doing a great

job. They are doing the best they can but they cannot win every time

and, the more you study the Paris and Brussels attacks, the more you

realise, for all what Chuka says, the terrorists have better cross

border coordination than the terrorists? It does appear there has

been some intelligence failures because these people were known to

the police. They have been backwards and forwards across borders. They

were stopped at one stage. The French forces allowed them to

continue because the Belgians hadn't kipped them off that they were on a

watch list. Then it said the Turks tipped off about one of them being

deported from Turkey. I'm quite doubtful about what you think

Governments can do within these communities this's not going to be

counterproductive. What is the magic thing that Government's meant to do

to persuade young men that they are being... It's not the role of

Government to be directly involved. They need to put in a strategy to

take on some of this themselves. We have a counterextremism strategy

that Communities and Local Government should be leading.

Unfortunately, it hasn't rolled out yet, although it exists on paper.

Are you talking about Prevent? There's preevening violence and

extremism. I'm talking about preventing extremism being part of

the work. But the problem... Is this whistling in the wind? We have

people back in this country, in Brussels and in France, who've been

trained. They are not amateurs or people just with a grievance, they

have been trained in Special Forces techniques. That is the danger that

threatens us now. We have two distinct problem, one is people

who're already trained, operational hi capable and who they are able to

recruit from while they are here. That's what happened. Some attackers

didn't travel to Syria, they were recruited. We have two distinct

problems here. The securtiy services in the UK have prevented another

major attack. Woolwich wasn't a major multiple attack, but the level

of support for the ideaology in the communities is something that... How

are you measures that? Surveys, statistics. After Charlie he believe

bow, 33% of Britain's Muslims expressed sympathy. Poll after poll

indicates a level of support -- Charlie Hebdo. I'm afraid we are out

of time. It's going to get worse before it gets better. Yes. I fear

so. Now, say it loud -

it's late and we're proud. Because waiting in the wings,

two funky members of James Brown's Alfred "Pee Wee" Ellis

and Fred Wesley are here to talk about their legacy in

music and in politics. And sadly for everyone,

especially us, the internet So look us up on The Twitter,

the Fleecebook, SnapChuckle, What's Up Doc and Gordon Brown's

intergalactic web sphere. Now, with the Prime Minister

ignoring his own advice to holiday in the flood-hit north of England,

jetting off to Lanzarote instead, as far away from IDS as he can get,

the Westminster elite are taking their usual

un-earned Easter break. So with springtime in the air

and chocolate on our mind, we sent The Spectator's Isabel

Hardman to, where else, Only kidding, she went to make

Easter Eggs in Borough Market, that's as far as our

budget will stretch. Here's her round-up

of the political week. As MPs prepare to head off

for Easter recess this week, what better opportunity to learn

about the transition from cocoa bean A smoother journey, I hope,

than the rocky road the Tories have David Cameron spent the beginning

of this week dealing with the fallout from the shock

resignation of Iain Duncan-Smith I felt really semidetached,

in a sense, isolated more often in these debates, because I'm not

able to be able to convince people that what we are losing

progressively was the narrative that the Conservative Party

was this one-nation party, caring about those who don't even

necessarily vote for it, David Cameron probably needed

a stiff chocolate stout as he looked at Monday's statements

and questions in the Commons, which gave Labour three separate

opportunities to put pressure on the Government over the weekend

meltdown over welfare cuts. George Osborne suddenly found he had

an urgent date with some paperwork, and dispatched poor old David Gauke

to the Commons to answer questions This Government, through our

long-term economic plan, is creating growth and generating

employment, cutting the deficit and securing long-term prosperity

for the people of this country. David Cameron then gave his own rich

defence of the Chancellor, arguing that without the work

of his close friend, Britain would still be

in an economic mess. This Government will continue

to give the highest priority to improving the life chances

of the poorest in our country. None of this would be possible if it

wasn't for the actions of this Government and the work of my right

honourable friend the Chancellor Instead of covering up

for his friend, ask him if he'd be kind enough to come along

to the House and explain why, for the first time in my memory

in parliament, a Government's Budget has fallen apart within two days

of its delivery. But the strange thing was that

Corbyn managed to completely omit any mention of Iain Duncan-Smith

from his response to The Leader of the Opposition

was presented with an opportunity, But for some reason,

he chose not to take it. He was as powerful as a chocolate

fireguard. At least Labour's Owen Smith had

another chance to savage the Government over its climb-down

on cuts to personal Smith was facing Stephen Crabb,

the new Work and Pensions Secretary, who had a surprise first

announcement of his own. I can tell the House

that we will not be going ahead with the changes to PIP that

had been put forward. We have no further plans

to make welfare savings beyond the substantial savings

legislated for by Parliament The way this mess has been handled

is a textbook example of Tory social security policy,

long on divisive rhetoric, totally lacking in competence

and compassion. But while George Osborne had managed

to swim under the radar, submarine- like, for a few days

after Iain Duncan-Smith's resignation, he still came

to the Commons to speak at the end Would the Chancellor

survive this Commons clash? Where we have made a mistake,

where we have got things wrong, The behaviour of the Chancellor over

the last 11 days calls into question his fitness

for the office he now holds. What we've seen is not

the actions of a Chancellor, a senior Government minister,

but the grubby, incompetent manipulations of

a political chancer. And it still wasn't over

by Wednesday, when David Cameron had In his failure to explain how

he would fill the hole in his Budget left by the change of heart on PIP,

the Chancellor said, and I quote, If it's so easy to absorb

changes of this nature, why did the Chancellor

and the Prime Minister ever announce From Labour, all we have had is more

proposals for more spending, All of the things that got us

into the biggest mess with the biggest black

hole in the first place. The strange thing, although this

should have been the worst week for David Cameron,

following the resignation of a member of his Cabinet,

he ended up bouncing around the chamber like the Easter Bunny,

teasing Jeremy Corbyn for a leaked list of Labour MPs that categorised

them according to how By the end of the session,

Cameron appeared to have won We've got the spreadsheet

of which Labour MP is on which side. The Chief Whip is being a bit quiet

because she is in "hostile". Mr Speaker, I thought

I had problems! So at the end of this

dramatic week in politics, Labour has failed to turn

the heat up on the Tories, which means that David Cameron

and his party are in a much better mood than they deserve to be

as they head off to Easter A lesson in the politics

of Easter Eggs from Hotel Chocolat's At the Rabot 1745 restaurant

in Borough Market. And Isabel Hardman joins us now.

Isabel, don't speak Did anybody see this resignation

coming? I think they'd had threats from Iain Duncan Smith over the

years that remight resign, but like the boy that cried wolf, they

probably got used to those threats and thinking that heldn't follow

through with it. They didn't see it coming at the end of a week on a

Friday night when everyone was relaxing. The timing was the

surprise but it had been on the cards. There had been a growing rift

between the Chancellor and Iain Duncan Smith at the Department of

Welfare in effect? Yes. But again, I don't think they expected the

resignation. I think it arose, as I understand it, because the

Chancellor and the Prime Minister appeared to be hatching a lot to

blame him for the whole thing, that they'd decided they couldn't get the

thing through and needed a fall guy and since obviously Iain Duncan

Smith agreed to this with the greatest reluctance and that by the

way knowing the context of the budget which he would not know, for

him to be left dangling was the last straw. So I repeat that I don't

think they saw it coming and I don't think one could see it coming.

If I still have the floor for a moment, I think Iain Duncan Smith

exaggerated grotesquely what the Government's done. I think actually

the Government's been pretty progressive. When you think that the

highest rate of tax is now 5% above what it was when Tony Blair was

Prime Minister. You think of the huge changes there has been to tax

relief for the higher rate pensioners in their savings, the

personal allowance has been ground away for the higher rate payments,

then when you think about the way payments to disabled people have

grown inexorably which is the core of the problem, which is also a

problem by the way which every Government, whether Labour or

Conservative, has wrestled with because you create payments intended

for disabled, but somehow the payments explode and you end up

having people that you didn't have in mind in the first place. Any

Government that was in would need to deal with that. I don't buy this

whole thing from Iain Duncan Smith that he's suddenly become the

champion of the disabled and people who need support because OK, he has

seen the light in respect of Personal Independece Payments which

is going to whack 700 people in my constituency, but he was the most

vociferous advocate of the bedroom tax and two thirds of the people

impacted by that are disabled people and actually, the sadness is not so

much that it's taken him so long to kind of see the light, as it were,

IDS, but the sadness is that, to the extent that if you think that his

approach has been harsh on those needing support, which I think it

has been, the sadness is that actually you look at the polls and

the surveys, much of the public have tended to agree with the agenda that

has been prosecuted by Iain Duncan Smith. Actually, I think it's

evidence of just how quite segregated we have become as a

society. The overwhelming majority of people in work don't know anybody

on unemployment benefit. Really? The survey showed that. Really? Yes. Not

sure I buy that. It was in the social integration commission

report. The issue was important and it wasn't even an issue linked to

what was happening to disability payments. Over the years, because

the Government had ringfenced pensions and ringfenced the NHS and

were spending more on both, the only other really big line in Government

spending that has three figures in the billions is welfare?

Iain Duncan Smith's Major complaint was that they kept raiding welfare

again and again and it was making him impossible to taper the return

back to work, to make it worth while people working more and keeping more

of what they earned. Yes, and this is why the debate about whether or

not ministers are saying there will be no more welfare cuts in this

Parliament slightly misses the point. Politically, it is difficult

for them to make more welfare cuts, even though the public supports

welfare of, because of the way the cuts have been pursued in the past

few years. The disability benefit cuts which they have rowed back on

have shown you cannot cut disability benefit now because it has been done

clumsily. Similarly, tax benefits, it will be difficult to cut benefits

for those in work after that row because the Tories are now so

sensitive to this politically, that anyone who tries to do it,

particularly George Osborne, will be accused of political gameplaying.

You have another protected area of spending, which means the

unprotected areas, places like the business, innovation and skills

budget, which for every ?1 you put in you will get many pounds back in

future because they are growth enhancing, that is the type of place

which will hit more. I buy into industrial policy. You think HS2 is

growth enhancing? I am talking about the business budget. Also, the local

communities and low budget. The central government grant local

authorities over the next four or five years will cut by 60%. It is

worth remembering this is not the Budget George Osborne planned. He

planned a Budget with enormous pensions reform. That had two

effects. One was to bring forward a whole lot of money to plug the hole.

Secondly, it was immensely progressive because it would

transfer money to people who are lower paid away from those who are

higher paid. The Prime Minister, I assume, vetoed that because there

must not be any controversy running up to the referendum, because that

is the most important thing in the world. So now the referendum

dominates politics, George Osborne is forced to come forward with a

stupid Budget with a great big hole in the middle of it. Since George

Osborne was against the referendum in the first place, I cannot imagine

he is overly chuffed. It does huge reputational damage to the

Government and to the Government strategy. The strategy has been to

move to the centre ground, because they think Labour has left. For Iain

Duncan Smith to come and say, you don't care about those who don't

vote for you, you are taking this money away from the most vulnerable

in society but you are cutting capital gains tax and corporation

tax, that is a disaster for that strategy for the Prime Minister.

That is why David Cameron was clearly furious after IDS'

resignation, because he had taken aim at everything the Prime Minister

had stood up for at the Tory party conference. It undermines the

central mission, the mission David Cameron wants to make his legacy as

Prime Minister. Iain Duncan Smith was basically saying, you don't know

what you are doing. There are Tories in Government who are worried that

although Cameron has the right intentions, he is not good at

following through. He makes speeches, but where is the delivery?

They set up a private group to encourage more rigorous policies on

social justice. One of the damaging things IDS said was the notion that

they were prepared to hit the disabled because they do not vote

for us. That, in particular... He was more talking, actually, about

taking tax credits from the working poor. Well, I think that is pretty

awful. People want to know the impact on the referendum. It seems

to me that the main impact is that it is likely to make the Prime

Minister less popular. There is a poll mouse saying his ratings are

the same as Jeremy Corbyn, give or take a percentage point. Given that

the Prime Minister is try to win a referendum in which, because half of

Conservative voters will vote against him in the referendum, he

has to attract voters who voted Labour last time, and voters who

voted for the Scottish and at the lists, if his popularity goes down

it makes it much more difficult. On the Labour list, are you happy to be

in the "Hostile" category? Is that accurate? No. Would you rather be a

little bit hostile? I don't know, what was the other option? I did not

support Jeremy in the leadership contest but he is our leader and I

want him to do well. A couple of weeks ago I interviewed someone who

was trying to join the Labour Party who went on and on about the Jewish

question, and so on. I think in the end he was kicked out after being in

briefly. According to a Labour member, a Corbyn supporter, you are

not politically black. What does that even mean? I don't know. You

tell me. I didn't say it. I didn't say it either. Why would someone in

the Labour Party say that you are not politically black? I think this

came out of momentum. I think one of the problems is that the desire for

a kinder, gentler politics is a very noble aim and desire but it is not

always matched by the way people behave. But to go back to the list,

it is interesting, the range of emotions it has produced in Labour

MPs. In the first instance it was greeted with some hilarity.

Everybody was asking, what are you? But there has been a lot of anger,

actually, among people who have been identified as negative who are on

the front bench during the grind and work. The biggest disappointment is

that in the end it meant that Cameron got away with it at PMQs,

and we should have knocked the ball out of the park. My favourite was

the Labour MPs who said he was not on any of the lists. He did not know

if this meant a first-class ticket to have an hour or a train to the

gulag. Now, how will we be

remembered here on This Week? For my penetrating questions

and thoughtful interjections? For Michael's considered

opinions and Diane Abbott's Or for our infamous "rave credits"

where former Home Secretary Jacqui Smith found herself doing

the Big Fish, Little Fish dance, as I pretended to cue up my next

record in an imaginary DJ booth? Sadly, I think we all

know the answer. That's why we're putting legacy

in this week's Spotlight. He'll go down as America's

first black president, but with the clock ticking

on his time in office, how will history member

his achievements. US-Cuba relations looked

like a whole new ball game this week, after Barack Obama did

something his predecessors haven't done for 88 years, visit

the communist country. I have come here to bury the last

remnant of the Cold War David Cameron must be concerned

about how he will be judged over time, but it ain't over till

the quiet man sings. After IDS quit the Government over

benefit cuts, will he be remembered for an honourable resignation,

or kicking his colleagues I don't want to resign but I'm

resigning because I think it's Maybe that's what you call

a good track record. In helping to save the Settle

to Carlisle railway from closure in the 1980s, did our very

own Choo Choo preserve his And they've been playing it

on the one for decades. James Brown's horn section,

Pee Wee Ellis and Fred Wesley, helped define black music and black

pride in the funkiest way possible. So, whether politics or music,

does a lasting influence And fresh from being on stage

tonight at Ronnie Scott's Jazz club in Soho, we're joined in the studio

by legends of the horn, Good to have you. Some of the songs

you were involved in. Say it loud, I'm black and I'm proud. I don't

want nobody to give me nothing, I'll get it myself. These were political,

weren't they? Absolutely. And you knew at the time that they had a

purpose? Absolutely but who knew they would last so long. Say it

loud, I'm black and I'm proud. That became an anthem for black people.

The first recording I did with James Brown, Pee Wee Ellis wrote the track

and James Brown did some words. He brought some kids in the studio. I

didn't know what was happening. When he said, say it loud, I'm black and

I'm proud, that meant everything to me. Did it mean a lot to the

audience as well? Absolutely. We recorded that in Los Angeles and

next week we were in New York at the Apollo Theatre. James Brown said,

say it loud, and the whole audience said, I'm black and I'm proud. They

knew it already. Already. He had a machine that turned out records one

after the other. Every six months he had a new album out. Every six

months? That's a legacy worth having. Providing what became the

black anthem for a long period of time. It was a good job to have. I

was on that job for just about two months. That record came out. I was

glad to be there. Did things change? They are slowly changing now. Just

now. Very slowly, but they are changing. But the attitude changed,

you know. Black people stopped thinking about being second class

and being downtrodden and everything. We started to really

think about being proud. But also, you just wanted the opportunity. I

don't want nobody to give me nothing. Just don't get in my way,

don't hold me back, that's all. Open the door, I'll get it myself. That's

still true. What is president Obama's legacy going to be?

Obviously the first black president but what else? That's enough. But

it's just a start. It's a start but you've got to start somewhere. Has

he been a good president for American black people? Yes, he has.

He has been an example, a role model. He is a politician, number

one. He is a great politician. And he has been able to operate between

the races. There are many races in America. We have the Mexicans,

Asians, black people and everybody in America. As you do here in

England, too. But he has been able to manoeuvre through all of the

races and still remain a good president. He has clearly broken

through a barrier, and having done that, it makes it easier for those

who come after, whether black, Hispanic, Asian and so on. But even

having a black president for eight years has not really reduced the

propensity of American police forces to kill black kids. Well, the

Republicans give him a hard time. They are stopping everything he

tries to do. Because they control Congress. Yes. He can't make a move

without everything being wrong about him, you know. The Republicans will

say is thing about it. I look at it as strictly racial. They don't like

him because he is black. I really feel like that, I've got to feel

like that. Everything he does is wrong. I've seen that. Was it a good

night at Ronnie Scott 's? Great night. We played with a big band. We

don't usually play jazz with a big band. We had a great time. We know

you have come straight from there and we are grateful. We are playing

there tomorrow and the next night, too. Thank you to you both.

That's your lot tonight folks and for us.

We're giving Lou Lou's a miss tonight.

I'm off to France tomorrow and intend to spend the afternoon

"en terrasse", as the French say, sitting in a pavement cafe,

sipping coffee and cognac, watching the world go by.

Islamic State hate us for who we are and for how we live

life, so I feel this little act of defiance is the least I can do.

And so we leave you tonight with a man who has already beaten me

to it and the Prime Minister is no doubt already pointing at fish

for the cameras in a Lanzarote fish market as we speak.

Nighty night, don't let Dave's staged holiday photos sting

# It would be, it would be so nice...#