tv Dateline London BBC News July 22, 2017 11:30am-12:01pm BST
and we discuss the ever increasing problem of migrants to europe. my guests are: the conservative commentator alex deane, the middle east expert rachel shabi, thomas kielinger of die welt, and the american writer and broadcasterjef mcallister. welcome to you all. the second round of brexit talks were held this week — for four days at the end of which both sides described discussions as robust, and michel barnier, the eu's chief negotiator said more clarity was required from the british side on a number of key issues. some conservatives in this country are beginning to talk of a transition period. there will be further talks at the end of august. certainly in the uk the advantages of leaving — or remaining — are getting lost in the rhetoric. let's ta ke let's take some time to discuss them. alex, last week polly toynbee called brexiteers lunatics. ..
i think it is extraordinary rhetoric. i know we will not have a discussion like that today! a majority of the country voted to leave the eu, imagine having such co nte m pt leave the eu, imagine having such contempt for your fellow countrymen that you would use such a turn. if remain won, i would not refer to them like that. after four days of talks, what is your reading of it? it's a two year process, at the beginning people posture and pose on both sides and people set out the very highest points of their stores, they know that you will go inwards to a co nve rg e nt that you will go inwards to a convergent point so you want to
stretch things as far as possible. the fact that there are a lot of good mood musics, they get on on a personal level, michel barnier and david davis, and they have a history where they understand each other a bit. my instinct is, good start. this will emerge quite quickly, a good outcome is in the interests of both countries and europe. so far, we have been looking at britain as being the odd one out. and a character we want to get rid of, that's the wrong perspective. europe will be very interested in making sure that this is an amicable separation which does not destroy the network of connections and trade relations, and in the end, i think i predict quite an acceptable outcome for both camps, as it were. i do not buy this adversarial atmosphere which still reigns over the negotiations. i think that eventually, we only have 18 months left. but mindful had to accept themselves here! it is not long. —— both minds. this will have to be positive, aside from the money and separation issue, and the divorce bill, that needs to be resolved as there is a lot of anger attaching itself to money. there really is,
there has been so much focus. do you have focus that that is an inevitable sticking point that will work out. why is there so much anger? that people who voted to leave did not realise it would be a thing? it's inevitable the subject arises, we get more than we put out, arises, we get more than we put out, a lot of money goes from the uk every year. the second largest net contributor to the eu is about to leave, of course it was going to be an issue that after a0 years in partnership, i do not normally seared phrase like this but there is something slightly grubby about trying to grab the pennies, as that group goes out the door. if it was right for us to join in the first place, we could discuss that if you want, iam place, we could discuss that if you want, i am convinced it is no longer right for us to be here now but if we could part as friends and have a reasonable relationship thereafter,
it seems the shouting over a set amount of money, whatever the amount of money comes to be, is somehow losing side of the broader picture of the relationship between our country and the european friends and partners for generations to come. if you'd think from that perspective, the demands for at the end will be a relatively small amount of money, but that is short—sighted.” relatively small amount of money, but that is short-sighted. i hope we can come back to that. jeff and rachel, i'm interested in how you are portraying that and what people are portraying that and what people are making a bit elsewhere, as various european nations continue to battle it out? for me, it is interesting, the way that it has been portrayed is, of course, shaded by people's positions. quite emphatically. we saw some of that la st emphatically. we saw some of that last week. it is a concern, i do not think we can deny that, however much goodwill we think that there is or there should be between eu and the uk in this negotiation. it does seem
clear that the people charged with the negotiation are not equipped to do so. now, i do not... in a practical sense? they clearly did not think on it before, they did not have a plan. i do not think they are constitutionally, or in terms of their personality, very well equipped to deal with it. they do not seem to be good negotiators all seem not seem to be good negotiators all seem to think about what is best for britain... which is, of course, we wa nt britain... which is, of course, we want to leave in jobs and the economy, the environment, environmental protections, employment protections for the uk, that should be front and centre of their thinking. that should be front and centre of theirthinking. in that should be front and centre of their thinking. in looking at the way negotiations are going, it clearly does not seem to be the case. i think it is ok... i do not think it is ok for people who want to remain to disparage those who voted to leave in this way. but i do think that it is ok to say that
actually, if the mood does shift, because this does seem intractable and impossible, it is perfectly a cce pta ble and impossible, it is perfectly acceptable for politicians to be sensitive and responsive to that. four days into the negotiation, i cannot see how you definitively say what you are saying, you say what you want to see... i began by saying it is too early to say how it was going and you say, but obviously all of this is not working. it has been a yearand we of this is not working. it has been a year and we haven't heard of any progress since we decided to leave. we are starting negotiations soon andi we are starting negotiations soon and i would agree with you...m we are starting negotiations soon and i would agree with you... it is nice to hear the good mood music that at the practicalities are going to overwhelm the project. the fundamental differences will have to reassert themselves, will there be free movement of people? will there
not? will there be re—entry into the common market, on a wholesale basis or sector by sector? where everybody gets a veto? the financial times recorded that there were 750 individual treaties that the uk needs to renegotiate with third partiesjust to get needs to renegotiate with third parties just to get back to a standing start. there are food safety points, the movement of atomic products, a giant number of vocabularies that need to be carefully pulled a —— pulled apart. in the middle of this, a lot of people in europe end up getting a veto over specific details. it is showing a softening of interest in the hard brexit, and the banks and foreign companies are now beginning to get space in frankfurt and dublin, and big banks putting money down for 50 private school spaces
because they expect more people. this will not be easy, and all of these transitional arrangements are not clear yet. all of these businesses need certainty. we are at the point where people make decisions for the point where this was already going to be done and nobody knew what this would be like, i think all of the barnacles will get thicker and thicker, and it will feel like a dumb idea. 0k, get thicker and thicker, and it will feel like a dumb idea. ok, you said earlier, at the risk of rerunning the referendum campaign, from here, where we are now, what are the key benefits going to be? 0nce where we are now, what are the key benefits going to be? once this is done, from your perspective, what will be better? they are as we were a year ago, we can govern ourselves in the way a sovereign nation can do, and we currently can't within the eu, determine eu trade agreements, the competence that the eu reserves for itself, and controlling our own borders. what we do with those things is up for negotiations but it is up to us rather than determined by others. if
you think of those principles behind those broad areas, in sovereignty terms, we were one of nine, and prietos were common, now we are one of 28, those out of the eurozone where they coalesce together it is smaller. —— vetos. 0n money, i know we can talk about how much we putting and what it equals but will clearly we put in more than we get out. we should be able to decide how we spend our money and that is what a sovereign nation gets to do. and on immigration, this is where people are most upset, but when commentators on the remain side said it was racist to want to control our borders, they helped the campaign to leave the eu. it is very helpful to be sneered at and it is still happening others, polly toynbee and others. we could fill the entire programme with this, but still 18 months to discuss, alex, as you pointed out! sean spicer has gone, after anthony
sca la sean spicer has gone, after anthony scala was appointed the director of communications. it comes after a difficult week discussing health care, with the president discussing proposals, for replacing what we often call 0bamacare. proposals, for replacing what we often call 0bamaca re. let's proposals, for replacing what we often call 0bamacare. let's begin with the events overnight, what do we know of the new man, the new directive —— director of communications. what is going on there? he is a friend of donald trump, a new york guy, giving advice, they talk a lot. he is really a buddy of trumps, he worked in banking, but sean spicer, he has been leaked against a lot, in a
chaotic white house, he could not ta ke chaotic white house, he could not take the thought of another enemy, they did not like each other, and they did not like each other, and the fundamental problem is that donald trump believes that he is his own best communications director and he does so through his tweeting. he thinks his communications staff, when things are not going well with big media and with the country, he thinks it is the communication's shops fold. he has a parade of people beneath him who he often disses and trades out and contradicts and sends up with wrong information but it is their fault. sean spicer became unusable in a classic sense of a press secretary because nobody could trust what he said, and he talked himself off the air. the usual tv briefing because he did not want donald trump to see him all the time, donald trump would see the briefing and get mad at him. anthony scaramucci is a pugnacious fellow and i'm sure that he will satisfy donald trump for a while, but i don't know for how long! and
what about those disparaging remarks he made about donald trump, being totally out of his depth and so forth, he was very negative about the troubled presidency. he does not sound very close to him, does he?|j ee, sound very close to him, does he?” agree, but donald trump himself... he calls on people and manages to make deals with people he hates! it isa make deals with people he hates! it is a good question. what will happen with health care? this keeps hitting the buffers, it was a massive campaign pledge, where is it now? for him, it wasn't so much a campaign pledge, he does not care one way or the other. he does not really care about policy. he does not care at all about it. he wanted to win. the republican conference really wanted to defeat 0bama care. that is right that they had no plan. shockingly, they knew because 0bama
would veto any attempt, as he did 55 or 80 times or something, they would never have to worry on details but when needed, it turns out their bill was going to get at least 20 million people uninsured and 0bamacare is popular, it's gone over 50% popularity rating for the first time. people are realising it may be taken time. people are realising it may be ta ken away and time. people are realising it may be taken away and so people think, this is pretty good. if you give people an important set of benefits, as 0bama counted on, it works into the syste m 0bama counted on, it works into the system and they do not want it taken away any more. that was difficult for the republicans to recognise in advance, they would go for their meetings and people would be screaming at them. it essentially became politically toxic and impossible. i do not think there is a way of wholesale reform but the syste m a way of wholesale reform but the system needs tweaking. it is a republican health care system called romney— care, invented by the heritage foundation 25 years ago, it doesn't defend their interests in a fundamental way, it needs tweaking
and money but it will be done if they are willing to work with democrats. that's an interesting pa rt of democrats. that's an interesting part of the equation, moving it wider and taking it further, there has been a change in public opinion over 0bamacare. now most people, including republican voters, support it and that has to be partly because they have understood the benefits but once it was introduced, and also because with the threat of it being taken there was a campaign that, quite proactively demonstrated to people, this is what you would be benefiting from and how you would be benefiting. this is why it is a bad thing to take away. moving forward, i think on it as something like migration, where we look at freedom of movement coming up against the economic need for migrants in this country, i am economic need for migrants in this country, lam not economic need for migrants in this country, i am not saying people who voted for brexit are racist but i think there was a lot of misinformation about migration and
benefits to the country perpetrated over 20 or 30 years in the uk. i am interested in how the usa turned the conversation around, in a factual way. i wonder if it can be done over things like migration in the uk in an equally factual way. it does not seem to work with the audience, they do not pay attention until it is a contentious issue. as it is now, with economic benefit versus borders. they haven't just escaped intentions. it becomes controversial and they zero in on those issues without implication. it is interesting, when george bush's press spokesman changed, or 0bama's spokesman changed, we had no idea but we are so fascinated by the trump white house we are gripped with this show with sean spicer in the centre. people will miss him. many satirists and commentators will miss sean spicer and which he was
still there but it is telling of a wider peace. i saw an analysis that one day last week, the cnn news cove rage was one day last week, the cnn news coverage was 92% about trump and the administration, 8% left for the rest of the world. that is an outlet that trump hates. isn't it fascinating? he isa trump hates. isn't it fascinating? he is a genius at it, by being centre of attention all the time and saying impossible things, doing a million things that no president in his right mind could or should do. he gets himself in the centre of attention all the time, that's what he cares about most. people think the show cannot go on like that, but it can! but we do know melissa mccarthy now has to work currently on another impersonation, that's what we take from all of this. let's turn our attentions to the migration crisis. the un tells us that a0,000 migrants has struggled across the mediterranean so far this year, nearly 2a00 have died in the
attempt. the migration crisis has all but disappeared, certainly from the british media this year, but it is not the most pressing problem facing europe. do you think it is, actually? rachel, despite what we have discussed in the last 20 minutes, migration is an issue in this country that has, for some reason, gone off the radar.” this country that has, for some reason, gone off the radar. i think it is because people think we are leading the eu so we are no longer party to this issue all issues around it. i do not think it is a crisis of migration but a crisis of approach and solidarity. so, when you look at the situation, like in italy at the moment, it isjust under extraordinary pressure because it has become the port where migrants have gone. there is a massive increase in numbers going to italy. the balkan route has closed, and the eu arrangement between turkey and greece, that route has
been closed. part of it isjust, migrants are going to move, whatever you do. if you close one illegal route, they will pursue another illegal route. that is the point, that it illegal route. that is the point, thatitis illegal route. that is the point, that it is illegal. it is perilous and unsafe, thousands of people are dying. they are drowning, because it is illegal. the best way to tackle this is to make it legal. to open up a legal route. the other way is to share responsibility and shared the dispersal. that is the thing, there seems to be a big clash between southern europe and northern europe. clearly, southern european countries are taking more of their share, not just in terms of numbers but the financial implications of that will stop and other european countries are just turning away, and if the eu is supposed to be a collective there is supposed to be a collective there is not a collective approach to migration and that is the crisis. not the actual problem. the
political element... it is an explosive issue, in germany and austria, which also has elections this year. austria is threatened if any more migrants come to italy and try and migrate further north, they will put the pounces on the brenner pass and make sure that they do not come through austria, they will be dead set against any further distribution of numbers. also, there isa distribution of numbers. also, there is a crisis because it has to be seen as a politician —— you have to be seen as a politician responsible for your nation's welfare, dealing with the possibility of thousands more africans on your shores. that isjust scaremongering, more africans on your shores. that is just scaremongering, if you more africans on your shores. that isjust scaremongering, if you look at the numbers, it is tiny percentage points across europe. most of the migrants are either internally in africa or are going to third world countries, like lebanon, jordan, they are not coming into
europe. for you to raise this spectre of millions of africans... it is pure scaremongering. spectre of millions of africans... it is pure scaremongeringm spectre of millions of africans... it is pure scaremongering. it was a last year, it may not look like a large number but you need to ensure they are being integrated in europe, thatis they are being integrated in europe, that is one thing that has not been resolved. we do not know how to make sure that they find a home or a place to work in, so forth. it's a social, intellectual problem, and a racial problem. europe has a demographic problem that it needs an influx of migrants because it is ageing! are not at the extent it is currently happening. the african influx of migrants, and their nominations, they are not going to add to the workforce, as it were, as they are being displaced, housed in rather shabby accommodation. it needs to be resolved. no country can
absorb... germany took 1 needs to be resolved. no country can absorb... germany took1 million, there was no limit. well, there was, it was1 million! they there was no limit. well, there was, it was 1 million! they are there was no limit. well, there was, it was1 million! they are now corralled in areas outside towns which no longer resembled the little german town it was before. it is a town stuck on the side of people who we re town stuck on the side of people who were not there two years ago, it is causing huge unrest. there can be no amount of movement that quickly, and suggesting that it is wrong, it is impermissible to point that out, thatis impermissible to point that out, that is crackers. what we should be proud of as a british country is the amount we spend in countries where refugee camps build—up on borders. we are among the largest contributors of those things and thatis contributors of those things and that is web resources should go. but europe—wide, it's the wrong way round. —— where resources go. we essentially ince ntivise, round. —— where resources go. we essentially incentivise, deadly traffic going across waters, we are incentivising that by picking people up, often with the open can i and is
of those doing the picking up and indicating to traffickers where they will be so they can collect passengers, we are operating a ferry service, instead we should take them back to the country they came from because in international law if you go because in international law if you go through a safe nation you are no longer illegitimate referee g taking asylu m longer illegitimate referee g taking asylum seeking refugee status —— a legitimate refugee. this is the problem... the solution is making people not want to migrate which means their own countries need to be sta ble means their own countries need to be stable and prosperous. with libya alone, you have a 20 year project. forgive me for four point gap something obvious, coming across an ocean you are leading a country which will not be syria... you return them to the nation to which they are safe, investing far more in refugee camps but if you let people make their way through france or
wherever, you encourage and facilitate that kind of human movement. for a long time, we need to be honest, our neighbours like the french were complicit. carry on until you get to calais, then we bottleneck and it becomes britain's problem. we obviously cannot resolve this, people are desperate and are going to try. there may be perverse incentives in them being not dead, thatis incentives in them being not dead, that is the problem. there's a huge human cost. yes, negi is paying enough attention to think about bigger solutions. —— nobody. enough attention to think about bigger solutions. -- nobody. is it that political failure? since the tremendous political interest in this subject one year ago, it was cataclysmic in germany, austria and eastern europe, it has completely disappeared. thomas is right, the austrians will assert a national interest. alex mentioned the
solution of the camp in the countries they come from, we at least have to invest, if we cannot improve the economic performance of these countries, they create economic or otherwise migrants, they need to build up camps, save holding areas, as we have done in lebanon and syria and jordan —— safe. some have been operating for 50 or 70 years now. in the middle east. this is not a solution. but it is better than people dying in the ocean. you need to restore public trust in the process , need to restore public trust in the process, making sure it is notjust boatloads of young men any more. it has undermined public confidence in these asylum and refugee placement processes , these asylum and refugee placement processes, people supposedly fleeing oppression are men of fighting age. iamso oppression are men of fighting age. i am so sorry, rachel. this happens every week. that's all we have time for this week. it's good to see you all as ever. plenty more to discuss next week on the same place. thank you for watching and goodbye. hello there, low pressure will be
with us for most of the weekend, and it is going to produce sunshine and showers. the winds will ease, not as strong as what they were on friday. some showers could be heavy on both days but saturday will be the focus of the most frequent and heaviest. this area of low pressure responsible for it all, feeding showers into southern and western areas as the afternoon wears on, cloudy weather is brought to central, southern scotland and the far north of england. there are good areas of sunshine, especially the northern half of scotland where we could make 20 or 21 degrees.
sunshine appears in parts of northern ireland, the central belt of scotla nd northern ireland, the central belt of scotland towards the south and northern england here, it will be wet and heavy, thundery showers developing here as well. in england and wales there will be sunny spells, especially in central and northern parts of the midlands. for the south, frequent and heavy showers, and in the south—west there could be thunder and lightning. top temperatures and the best of the sunshine at 21 degrees. the weather has been changeable in the gulf at royal birkdale, we could catch a shower on saturday and sunday. generally, light winds which is good news. this evening and overnight, showers fade away from many areas. but mainly in northern england and scotla nd but mainly in northern england and scotland as well. it is fresh across central areas, clear skies and light winds, some mist and fog could develop. we start on a fresh note on sunday morning, some mist and fog, they should lift and burn away. some sunshine before showers develop, quite widely, focus is the heaviest
of showers in central and eastern parts of england. for eastern scotland, it turns out to be quite dull with an onshore breeze, quite cool dull with an onshore breeze, quite cool, and temperatures up a notch at 22 degrees. no pressure responsible for the showers gradually slips into the near continent. a ridge of high pressure will build in across many western areas. the further west you are, the better the chance of staying dry with sunshine. the further east, more of a breeze in catching showers. the odd heavy one, but warm sunshine, up to 2a degrees. 0n but warm sunshine, up to 2a degrees. on tuesday, it looks good thanks to a ridge of high pressure, warm in the sunshine, as we head to middle parts of the week where it looks to turn and settled with rain in the forecast. this is bbc news. the headlines at midday: boots has said it is "truly sorry"
for its response to calls to cut the cost of one of its morning—after pills. boots spectacularly misjudged where public opinion was on this issue and that's why they responded initially in the way they did. the number of homeless children being housed in temporary accommodation in england rose by more than a third in the last three years. former white house press secretary sean spicer has moved to minimise talk of divisions within the trump administration after announcing his resignation. ijust thought it was in the best interests of our communications department, of our press organisation, not to have too many cooks in the kitchen. also in the next hour: the government plans to bring in closer monitoring of drones. owners of the small unmanned aircraft will have to register and take safety awareness courses.