tv Beyond 100 Days BBC News November 4, 2019 7:00pm-8:01pm GMT
you're watching beyond one hundred days, releasing the transcripts. democrats put out the testimony of those who have come before the impeachment inquiry. it comes as four white house officials are no shows — told by president trump not to appear before lawmakers. the transcripts give a more complete picture of what has been happening behind closed doors including an ambassador saying she felt threatened by the president's remarks. as other witnesses fail to show up — democrats say this will not slow down their work and vow to move forward. we are not going to delay our work, that would merely allow these witnesses and the white house to
succeed in their goal, which is to delay, deny, obstruct. also on the programme. john bercow has vacated the seat, so who will replace him as the next house of common speaker? the voting continues we may well have a result for you in the next hour. and the world series champions the washington nationalsﬂ are welcomed to the white house. maybe a tad more formal this afternoon, than the parade at the ice hockey last night? hello and welcome — i'm michelle fleury in washington, christian fraser is in london. democrats moved their impeachment inquiry into the next phase today, with the release of the first transcripts from interviews they held behind closed doors. the testimony comes from the former u.s. ambassador to ukraine marie yovanovitch and state department official michael mckinley. ms yovanovich — who was fired at donald trump's instruction — told congress she felt threatened
by comments the president had made about her during a july phone call with the ukrainian president volodymyr zelensky. she also relayed a conversation she had with gordon sondland the us ambassador to the eu. who told her to flatter the president via twitter to keep herjob: "you need to — you know — tweet out there that you support the president, and that all these are lies and everything else. it was advice that i did not see how i could implement mckinley, a former top adviser to secretary of state mike pompeo, said in his 37 years in the foreign service, working on many controversial issues, he had never seen anything like this. he said he quit, in part, because he thought foreign policy was being politicised and that us missions were being used to procure negative political information for domestic purposes. meanwhile four further witnesses were called to testify today in private but all of them refused to appear. seperately we are told the anonymous whistle—blower —
whose complaint kick—started this whole impeachment inquiry — will answer written questions under oath from house republicans. let's get the thoughts of kim wehle — former us assistant attoney who worked on the whitewater investigation. author of how to read the constitution and why. i was reading to the deposition and stuff about rudy giuliani, we keep on going back to him, what do you make of it? i think what is important to note here is that rudy giuliani is not a government employee he did not take an oath of office, he is not bound by the ethics and norms and conflict of interest rules that apply to government employees. there's a whole legal apparatus in place of people who work for the federal government to ensure that when they do theirjob, they do it on behalf
of the american populace and here we have a private attorney for the president of the united states, essentially dictating a different foreign policy relating to the and career public servants have been following doctors for this president, but with the prior presidents and that is deeply troubling, not just as presidents and that is deeply troubling, notjust as a matter of foreign policy but also as a matter of the rule of law and ensuring that people go to government and do what is best for the american people. it is best for the american people. it is hard to imagine rudy giuliani had that at all in his mind when he was essentially telling them directly and indirectly that the efforts to support the ukraine democracy was not what the american government under donald trump is going to push any further. i am reading these transcripts, yet the commander—in—chief bad mouthing his own staff oversees to the ukrainian president, so within the transcript they are asked about what he said to
they are asked about what he said to the president saying that she is going to go through some things, said donald trump. what did you understand that to mean. she said i did not know what that meant, did you feel threatened she was asked. yes i did. so here you have her who was threatened by her own president. and also the ukrainian diplomat said she should be concerned and this woman was really caught, just stunned by this process, she was scapegoated, ta ken and stunned by this process, she was scapegoated, taken and basically fired because she was following the policy that had been carefully developed by career public servants with deep expertise in this area over many years and other presidents. and that is a problem in addition to as you mentioned, this idea that she continues to have fear for her own safety and that is not
surprising given that the president of the united states is at the apex, not only of the entire federal criminal justice system not only of the entire federal criminaljustice system but also the military. this is at the heart of the ukrainian inquiry is to use that military funding to the ukraine and exchange with hoarding it and asking the ukrainians to start a investigation into a political opponent. there is no other person that has that level of power they can use it and ways to benefit himself. so can use it and ways to benefit himself. 50 career diplomats can use it and ways to benefit himself. so career diplomats who we re himself. so career diplomats who were listening in or part of this discussion on the ukraine felt uncomfortable and there were others on the 25th ofjuly phone call. the security council, he was supposed to testify today, one of the four no—shows and he is important because it's i understand it, he would've shifted the conversation from this
from the white house to the secret server. from the white house to the secret server. yes, though his his decision. —— that was his decision. working inside thejustice department and also the federal trade commission and has a fair amount of experience, the number of people who were complicit in what i think most would agree is very unusual, if not malfeasance. people with long history of good experience and reputations inside the various administrations and this is one example that is absolutely stunning that a government lawyer would sanction that because of the end of the day, even if it is technically legal, you're hiding information that doesn't bear national security. it bears on embarrassing this president and it is something that the american voters should know about. thank you for being with us this evening.
in light of the information coming out of the closed hearings — the washington post has reported that some republican senators are considering acknowleding there was a quid pro quo but will argue it doesn't rise to an impeachable offense. for more on that and the white house blocking witnesses to testify we're joined by former advisor to george w bush, ron christie. you're looking at this testimony in looking at some of the testimony that has leaked so far the facts really that people are working in the state department that there was a back channel into the ukraine, they thought there was a quid pro quo. is that why some senators say, thatis quo. is that why some senators say, that is undeniable now, which is of the gourd that but sort of argue that it doesn't, in our view region in reach an impeachable offence? yes, i think that is the gist of it. people on capitol hill that i've spoken with who feel that their support of the president continues
to erode. why is it eroding? because the president takes to twitter, television and says very inflammatory things that they feel is very difficult for them, the senators and the staffers to continue to defend the president. but my question with all of this has a high crime, misdemeanortaken place that you remove the president from office before the next november election and at this juncture, i say to that note. but how, you have a president who was running a back channel into the ukraine for his own political purposes to underminejoe biden as a political opponent. he is almost trying to obstruct the investigation, leaning on the ambassador, the career diplomats and state department, bullying them. you have one one woman here that feels that he was personally attacking her. i have been pretty outspoken on
the show but my opinion about the president's behaviour. certainly it can appearto be, president's behaviour. certainly it can appear to be, it is not conventional, but again for one was worked in the white house for four yea rs, worked in the white house for four years, one who did not always agree with the policies of the administration put forward by george w. bush, that is yourjob. they get to initiate policy and administrative foreign policy and domestic policy, and if you do not like it, you can resign and so the question that a staffer felt threatened and then investor felt threatened, the president still does get to formulate foreign policy. you still have donald trump notjust with the ukraine, but publicly on cameras asking china to investigate the bidens. is that all right? there is no doubt that the president is acting ina is no doubt that the president is acting in a very unconventional manner. i do not like it because a lot of our allies around the world are saying what is the united states doing non—foreign policy. what is the status quo? how are we supposed to trust with the american president
might do in the future? however, does it rise to a high crime or misdemeanor? that is the question i keep going back to. and if we're to remove a president that so many put in office, we have an election 264 days from now. i wanted to ask you -- 364 days from now. i wanted to ask you —— 364 days. i wanted to ask you about donald trump over the weekend repeatedly pressing on this question of the whistle blower and finding out what identity. dealing with corrupt politicians, he must be brought forward to testify, written a nswe rs , brought forward to testify, written answers, not accept. this is after the whistle—blower agreed to answer in writing, questions from republicans. this is a cancer he might to bring the whistle—blower to capitol hill, bring them behind a screen, modify their voice and whoever this person is should be subject to cross—examination rather than having written answers stop by
but held to a different standard than the president was in the mother investigation. it was not a removal from the president from office or ending an impeachment proceeding. thank you so much forjoining us on the programme. there is been so much going on today, it is difficult to keep track of everything. but there was a ruling in the new york appeals court today saying that he would have to produce, the president that is, eight years of tax reports going back eight years. that seems to be a growing problem for the president because he has not been forthcoming with those tax returns and now am i right that he goes to the supreme court? this is something that donald trump has over the convention so much, typically candidates even before they are elected released
copies of their tax return, this is only that donald trump did not do. this then followed on and off there are various attempts to the court, the latest in new york where you had lawyers there are basically trying to pursue donald trump and get his tax returns released. it is going to the appeals court as you point out and they have basically ruled against and says yes to turn over eight years. he goes to the supreme court. it is interesting is that a frequent commentator and guest on this programme tweeted out that it is certainly no foregone conclusion where they may go on this. because it is so atypical for an official not to release their tax returns. doesn't rain, it pours. certainly the case. but to the report includes evidence of uk intelligence the uk governement has
decided not to publish a sensitive report on russian meddling in elections. the report includes evidence from uk intelligence services concerning russian attempts to influence the outcome of the 2016 eu referendum and 2017 general election. the 50 page document has been with the prime minister's office since october 17th but needs to be cleared before being released. but it seems the report will not see the light of day until after the election. to understand what could be the government's motives, i spoke with bbc newsnight‘s diplomatic editor mark urban. they have seen this report and said it is something that should be published before a general election. do you have any clues as to what is in it. effectively he is the author because he is the chair of the intelligence and security committee of parliament which is a rather unusual setup. we have only the broadest ideas, the draft of the report is still classified, secret in downing street and we now understand not before the general election. we know the right from the start of their inquiry, they were looking at things attached to whether or not russia try to influence the brexit referendum in 2016 and possibly 2017 election. but also whether the russians of trade
through political donations or other means of influence peddling to get their teeth into the political parties here. for applying for the government and says that many select committee reports are produced in the government has to respond properly and it cannot be done in haste. despite the fact that parliament is due to be absolved in two days' time and therefore has to be shoved into parliament comes back. yes and the main downing street argument has been dominant grief tried to put this through without undue speed. it is the clea ra nce without undue speed. it is the clearance of the thing to be published and then you can expect in the time, the government response. the problem with this is the downing street people talk about several weeks, but i've spoken to a number of officials and i would stress that they have told me in the context of they have told me in the context of the work that needs to be done in ten days, which is quite reasonable from the point of your committee
will be quite normal, the thing on the 17th of october, i think it is reasonable to assume that it should have been ready by now. it took them quite a while to get this investigation off the ground. quite a while to get this investigation off the groundm quite a while to get this investigation off the ground. it did indeed and the origins go back to 2017 but most of the evidence was heard last summer. the evidence that you heard about the uk intelligence agencies giving testimony, how does it compare in terms of what we think happened with russian interference with what happened stateside and russian interference in the 2016 election? i think you would argue in a way that this is not as high up on the ladder of state interference in the ladder of state interference in the sense that clearly the most shocking are one of the more shocking are one of the more shocking aspects of the 2016 election and interference with this claimed that russian intelligence and military intelligence hacked the dnc and then passed it on through
proxy and then used networks to amplify its effect on the political picture in the us. some aspects of that we know from previous things that we know from previous things that intelligence services in the uk said were replicated with regard to brexit and that there were accounts amplifying those messages but what you do not have is that element of hacking and stealing information from a political party or one side of the referendum and getting it out into the wider political atmosphere the time. the life pictures, the race has been narrowed down to two. eleanor lange has now bowed out and we are down to a two horse race. deputizing for john bercow, he is probably the favourite, but he is up against
chris bryant, the labour mp, both labour and peace but chris bryant the labour mp. so two of them and to the labour mp. so two of them and to the rules, the successful speaker would need to have 50 plus 1% of the commons so a would need to have 50 plus 1% of the commons so a majority, a simple majority in the voting and it seems that they have just gone out into the lobby so if we get a result in the lobby so if we get a result in the next few minutes, we will bring that to you. sticking with news from russia, and the last ever leader of the soviet union, mikhail gorbachev, has warned that tension between russia and the west is putting the world in "colossal danger" because of the threat of nuclear weapons. gorbachev, who is now 88, negotiated with president reagan to reduce the nuclear arsenals of the two world superpowers of the era. he has been speaking with our moscow correspondent, steve rosenberg, to mark 30 years since the fall of the berlin wall. these days, it's rare
to see mikhail gorbachev in front of a camera. aged 88, he avoids the limelight. "i'm slowing down," he tells me. "i can barely stand up." but the man who helped to end the cold war has a message for the world — that his achievements are at risk. and one of his greatest achievements was ending the arms race between the soviet union and america. his diplomatic double act with ronald reagan slashed the two superpowers' nuclear arsenals. but the arms race has reignited. there is new tension and fierce rivalry between moscow and the west. how dangerous do you think the current confrontation is between russia and the west?
translation: as long as weapons of mass destruction exist, nuclear weapons, the danger is colossal. all nations should declare — all nations — nuclear weapons must be destroyed. to save ourselves, and our planet. in the past, we used to talk about the cold war. how would you describe the current stand—off between russia and the west? translation: chilly, but still a war. look at what is happening. in different places, there are skirmishes. they are shooting. ships and aircraft have been sent
here, there and everywhere. this is a situation we don't need. it was gorbachev‘s reforms at home that inspired millions across eastern europe to rise up against communism. he did nothing to stop it. but 30 years ago, how did he react when the berlin wall fell and east and west germany were set to reunite? translation: there mustn't be bloodshed. that was our view. we couldn't allow that over an issue of such magnitude for germany, for us, for europe. the whole world. so we declared we would not interfere. from iron curtains to iron ladies. he famously hit it off, with margaret thatcher. but what does gorbachev make of brexit? translation: you can figure that one out yourselves! you british are clever clogs.
i won't give you advice. you decide. so, not only a president, but a true diplomat. steve rozenberg, bbc news, moscow. the labour party has today accused the conservative government of running the nhs into the ground through austerity. the party has published findings today from a freedom of information request that show nearly 80,000 operations were canceled at english hospitals last year. but nhs bosses have hit back — warning that political parties shouldn't be using the national health service as a ‘political weapon' in the election campaign. let's speak now to barry gardiner, labourmp and shadow international trade secretary.
very good debut with us and thank you for coming on. the headline figure, 1800 hospitals last year, the truth is that the number of cancellations is down. it is 1% of all operations in the health secretary tells us that 90% of these operations were rebooked within 28 days. slightly down from last year, but continues austerity and i think you would agree that having her operation cancelled is something that no one wants to have. speaking to the clinical care group the other week, they're not talking about reducing the number of referrals that gps make for consultants. they talk about closing 24 hour round—the—clock facility at our local treatment centre so these cuts
are hitting hard and hitting patient services, so does not like people are not suffering. if you look at amd, there are more than 3 million people waiting more than four hours in emergencies. that figure was 300,000, so he really is a huge impact of this ten years of austerity put in place and he needs to end. but what our government is proposing to do is expose her national health service to the risk of even greater privatisation, taking money off of profit in a trade deal... on that issue, the shadow chancellor gave the impression that he wanted to remove every trace of privatisation in the nhs and clearly that is nonsense because the bulk of care services in the nhs have provided on the contract the nhs have provided on the co ntra ct of the nhs have provided on the contract of giving serves as a gps, dentists, if you cancel those contractors, you would end up you
would end the nhs as it is. the sort of scaremongering is that the parties need to stop doing this. i am sorry. it really is not tonight agree. what he said about scaremongering, i entirely agree with. everything that we are saying is evidence—based. so for example, ifi is evidence—based. so for example, if i tell you the ways in which our nhs is in danger through the us trade deal and many of your viewers will see in the dispatches programme the other evening, there has not been 11 separate meetings between trade negotiations in this country and the us trade negotiations and big pharmaceutical companies in america which have talked about drug prices and if you look at the representatives negotiating rules and what it set out as its mandate for these negotiations, it is very clear. they do not want the national institute of evidence to be able to
say no, this drug is not actually worth purchasing because it is not good enough. they‘ re worth purchasing because it is not good enough. they're also saying that they want to see their intellectual property rights extended. this is how we are in danger here. i'm going to thank you very much and i'm sorry to cut you short, thank you. good evening. today brought persistent rain and scattered showers and for others, i think of the next few days, things will continue to look quite similar with some rain at times but not all the time. however, things will start to feel a little different as it turns colder from the north. feel a little different as it turns colderfrom the north. this feel a little different as it turns colder from the north. this area feel a little different as it turns colderfrom the north. this area of low pressure spiralling around it, have brought the outbreaks of rain during today and this is the rain picture from this afternoon if you can see the weather is most persistent feeding into eastern
parts of scotland and that is now facing southwards and will continue to do so to the rest of the nights are turning quite damp in areas of northern england, elsewhere it is likely to fade to some extent and there be some clear breaks and generally quite a lot of cloud around and overnight lows of six or 7 degrees, certainly not as chilly as it was on some nights later this week. as a going to tomorrow, this area of low pressure starts to pull away eastwards we will see more the way of dry weather but as the low pulls away eastwards, we open the door to a northerly wind and that will be bringing in some cold air in our direction. so there tomorrow press england and wales, generally a lot of cloud, showery rain confined to central and eastern areas for northern ireland and scotland were more ascension, some showers feeding in from the north and some of these could be wintry over the highest mountains in scotland because those temperatures really will be
struggling in aberdeen, still scraping into double digits further south but as we go through night as we clear away for a lot of clear cloud in that quarter continues to build southwards, it is going to be chilly. certainly a cold star for wednesday morning with a touch of frost in place especially for northern england and scotland were some areas will get down below freezing. so wednesday starting a bit chilly, but fairly bright note is one or two showers are around but things will change as the day wears on, randall spread the very highest ground up at the scotland and it could be a little wintering mixed in. going up to ten in london, cardiff and plymouth thursday will bring in more rain at times much of the clearing does stay rather chilly.
you're watching beyond 100 days... our top stories... us house investigators release the first transcripts of those who have come before the impeachment inquiry. mps make their pitches to succeed john bercow as speaker of the house of commons, in the first election for the post in more than a decade. we're now down to the final two with a winner expected in the next hour. also on the programme... plus, as mcdonald's fires its uk chief exec for dating a fellow employee — we'll ask whether its ever ok to cosy up with a colleague. and the world series champions the washington nationals are welcomed to the white house.
we'll be talking to our number one fan— ron christie. returning now to the release of certain transcripts in the impeachment inquiry. today, we got a look at what former us ambassador to ukraine marie yovanovitch and top state department official michael mckinley said during their testimony. the role of rudy giuliani was also more fully outlined. it came on the same day four white house officials failed to show up to testify. but the chair of the intelligence committee adam schiff vowed this would not slow their work down. we are not going to delay our work. that would merely allow these witnesses and the white house to succeed with their goals, which is to delay, deny and obstruct. for more we are joined now by the bbc‘s north america editorjon sopel. you just heard adam schiff they're
saying we will not be delayed or put off. you have these four witnesses not appearing today and the democrats releasing these transcripts. what is that part of in terms of the democratic strategy?” think the democrats try to do would like to have everybody giving evidence and if they have subpoenas, they expect people to turn up and that has not happened yet but i think the democrats will seek to use that as evidence that they are trying to obstruct the inquiry. that will become part of the impeachment and the ingredients that go into the pot as they cook up this stew of weathered their articles to impeach the president for what happened on that call with ukraine. but what is fascinating is the testimony that has been released today. which again cast a fascinating light on decision—making within this administration and the fact that there seems to be a completely securities route to ukraine via rudy giuliani that was completely outside all the normal parameters of decision—making and interdepartment
to cooperation and all the rest of it. it makes pretty uncomfortable reading, ifany it. it makes pretty uncomfortable reading, if any by sister and breached the testimony of the former ambassador maria evanovich, and michael mckinley, and makes uncomfortable. —— if anybody sits there and reads the testimony. the allegations they made are terrifying. the strategy and the republicans so far to say look at the process and the that there is not a public hearing that we are not being able to call legal counsel to interview some of these witnesses that have appeared. but clearly in the statement from the three committee chairs today, you see the democrat strategy they will drip out these testimonies and transcripts so that the american public and see for themselves what is been said.” think the democrat strategy is to keep this as simple and straightforward as possible a call took place, the president sought help from his ukrainian counterpart, a country that was directed by
russia, america's adversary, and in return for which he might get military assistance if you dish me dirt onjoe biden, my main democratic rival for the presidency in 2020. that is the democrat strategy because they think that is as simple narrative to convey to the american public. i think the republican response to it is more complicated because they don't know whether to take donald trump off line which is to say there was no quid pro quo and i didn't ask for any favours in return, in the face of his acting chief of staff having said that is exactly what happened, and the testimony of the people whose evidence we have laid before us as whose evidence we have laid before us as well who said it was clear that donald trump was trying to use leverage military aid in return for political debt. do the republican the some of house say there was quid pro quo, but that is not an impeachable offence, or do they continue to maintain at the president does that there was no quid pro quo because at the moment, it seems to me that there is a
pretty confused response from the republicans on how to deal with this. thank you forjoining us. an important contacts as these transcripts start to drip out over the course of the next few weeks. that's an important context. cable television will be consumed by this inquiry in the coming weeks. by the middle of this week we will be into the election campaign proper and six weeks of back and forth that will veer from the constructive — to the downright destructive. for every bit of policy we get on one side, there will be an attempt on the other to vilify whichever party has put the policy forward. we are already pretty familiar with the themes — labour's slogan ‘who's side are you on?‘ — the conservatives "the people versus parliament. not that the uk is alone in this type of divisive campaigning. goodness knows what sort of atmosphere is going to surround the campaign season here in the us. and remember we are going to have ten months of it! for my next guest, these shifts in politics are a cause for alarm.
elif shafak is turkish novelist who moved to london more than ten years ago and lives in self—imposed exile from turkey, where she fears arrest. you don't like it. why? because some of the things that i see sound and look very familiar. it is like a feeling of deja vu. i believe those of us who come from wounded democracies such as turkey, hungary, poland to a certain extent, venezuela or brazil, we do recognise the signs. all around the world, i think we have seen more countries drifting away from a liberal democracy compared to countries and moving towards liberal democracy. so it shows us that democracy is far more fragile and more delicate aquatic ecosystem of tricks and balances. that's checks and balances. that's checks and balances. countries can go backwards come as a writer and novelist, i do think it all starts with language, the change in the shift. is it that
fragile? we are talking today about these committee hearings, the impeachment inquiry, the congress holding donald trump to account, we have seen here the supreme court in the uk has defended the role of parliament? how fragile is a? each and every country can be different. but i think we need to understand that turkey has elections, russia has elections, they are not democracies. so for a democracy to exist to survive and to thrive, i think we need more than the books. i have respect for elections and referendums, all i'm saying is that in addition to the ballot box, any rule of law, separation of powers, checks and balances, a free diverse media, independent academia, women's rights, minority rights, lgbt rights, minority rights, lgbt rights, that make drifting away from that? i see all of those things there. when these components are damaged there is an erosion of democracy that we need to be aware
of. and i see signs of that in country at the country. also in my opinion, it might be a mistake to think that some countries are inoculated or just immune think that some countries are inoculated orjust immune to the rise of populists and nationalism or authoritarianism, i think in the year 2019, we do know countries are not immune in the past, political scientists used to think germany was immune because after having... we cannot be complacent basically. how do you think the united states is doing at the moment? in the figure of donald trump being famous for his tweets ? of donald trump being famous for his tweets? in the united states, the system is very different. it is much more decentralised. it does have a constitution that protects polymer asa and constitution that protects polymer as a and also a very long tradition and history of liberal democracy, all of that matters. and i think in that regard it is not as easy to dismantle democracy in the us compared to countries like turkey or hungary. but that does not mean there is no damage. and when i lick
it and listen to the ways in which political language has been used in the states today, metaphors like civil war, being used again and again, that worries me. also when we look at the surveys today, one third of americans believe that the media is the enemy of the people. that is quite dangerous. thank you for coming into sharing your concerns with us today. in the uk general elections tend to come every two years at the moment. but the election of a speaker, for the house of commons is a much rarer thing. had been in the chairfor 10 years. this afternoon they have been electing the person to replace him. a key role of course because the speaker has huge influence in shaping how parliament debates issues and passes legislation. john bercow was a conservative. but once the speaker is appointed, they resign from their party and do not then campaign in general elections. seven mps put their hat in the ring
this morning and as things stand only two remain... it's a process of elimination. so this was the result of the third ballot. with the deputy speaker lindsay hoyle leading the way... hoyle received 267 votes, chris bryant received 169 votes, and eleanor laing was eliminated — coming last with 127 votes. let's speak now to tom peck — political sketchwriter for the independent newspaper — who joins us in westminster. when you look at these two runners getting to the final battle, who do you fancy and what would they bring to the chair? lindsey hoyle is miles ahead, they have going to have another vote in half an hour, maybe another vote in half an hour, maybe a bit less and he only needs about 20 more of the i think 130 is going spare to get over the line and chris brian needs all of the spare ones so
lindsay hoyle is heavily fancied. what they would bring to the chair is difficult, if you want to talk about the difference between the two thatis about the difference between the two that is one thing but the key thing is both of them will be a significant break from what is before and that is the main thing. there is not really much to choose between these two compared tojohn burkle essentially but that is what it's when the most interesting factor of the whole day. —— john broke out. when the seven candidates gave their speeches at three o'clock, almost all of them, the case put forward by all of them was that they would all be completely different from john break—out in the house of commons will be a different place when it comes to mid—december. ——john place when it comes to mid—december. —— john bercow. there place when it comes to mid—december. ——john bercow. there isn't that much to choose between i think possibly of those mp still trying to make their mind up, i think they might decide that chris brian a slightly more to offer to those who will in the event of a hung parliament my start playing remain based chicanery, they might fancy
brya nt based chicanery, they might fancy bryant more than lindsay hoyle, but thatis bryant more than lindsay hoyle, but that is the only difference really. because michael gove has backed him. he has gone for brian. he has but thatis he has gone for brian. he has but that is why there is a really that much analysis. you can put on this. they will both be so different from john bercow but certainly, in the event of a hung parliament in december, if i were hilary benn or pa rt december, if i were hilary benn or part of a gang with my sl 24 debate, pending that i might use to take control of the order paper and so on and so forth, going in that road, they might find more mileage from chris bryant and they went from lindsay hoyle, who is more straight down the line and will not do anything controversial. not that chris bryant went but they might find a tiny bit more wriggle room from chris bryant for the looks like he will lose anyway. presumably, how different is he going to let going forward. you said this will be a
separation from the john forward. you said this will be a separation from thejohn bercow, is this a reaction to him are testimony to how successful he has been? he did a lot of reforming, john bercow. a lot of reforming influence and granted more urgent questions, made ministers come to the despatch box to a nswer ministers come to the despatch box to answer questions and much more regularly than anybody before. probably, although we are sure, that will aspect of the reform will live on but what won't live on is the fa ct on but what won't live on is the fact thatjohn bercow was a very abrasive character and not held by the fact that he was so low by such a large percentage of his own party because he began life on the very first this not match for a sketch writer for you, it must be heaven. he was but i try to not really write too much about the speaker in my sketches because i just too much about the speaker in my sketches because ijust i think they are the umpire and they shouldn't be too much of a key player in what you
write about and the royal politics and what is happening. i can't think i ever wrote too much about him. i've been doing it forfive i ever wrote too much about him. i've been doing it for five years. i ever wrote too much about him. i've been doing it forfive years. i think the bercow stick where as i find you very quickly. almost like the borisjohnson find you very quickly. almost like the boris johnson one. find you very quickly. almost like the borisjohnson one. but parliament will be losing a character. no doubt about that. thank you. we will bring you the results as we get a bit and looks at the moment that lindsay hoyle is in the driving seat. now, on thursday we were expecting the travelling ron christie to join us from arkansas to talk about the world series, and that extraordinary achievement of the washington nationals. however mr christie, confused his time zones and forgot to ring in. we have all been there. fortunately another opportunity presents itself — because today the champions are at the white house with the president. hopefully in a better state of dress than they were last night at the ice hockey. where the shirts were off.
not sure whether ron christie's shirt was off? it's perhaps he can tell us when he joins us now. where is your shirt off last night? i am happy to report the you that my shirt was indeed on. i had the you that my shirt was indeed on. ihada the you that my shirt was indeed on. i had a sweatshirt on. go on, what isa i had a sweatshirt on. go on, what is a bit like these last few days? the white house set a come of the ice hockey last night, what is washington been like the last four days as you have been celebrating the world series? a non-ending celebration. a lot fun. washington, dc is often so divisive and so divided on their political affiliations, but we can really come together and say we love the washington nationals in the hockey tea m washington nationals in the hockey team and love the baseball team and the capitals, and the washington mystics are women's basketball champions. there is a real sense of camaraderie. for the white house, my four years when i work for president
bush, there is nothing greater than saying a victorious team come to the white house, you see them on the truman balcony, celebrating and theirfamilies are truman balcony, celebrating and their families are there, all in all from your number one nationals fan come i'm here to report that all is well in washington, dc. at least relates to the field of sports. did i hear relates to the field of sports. did ihearon relates to the field of sports. did i hear on the great bryant you got me some world series merge? —— the great divide. you are the only person i know other than yours truly who loves what we left to call swag. so yes, you do have some world series swag, christian. i'm holding up series swag, christian. i'm holding up waiting for you. michelle, however has her world series crackerjack onset. which i'm was not able to give you but michelle hazards. you already have yours. i like it. it won't last that long if i send it to you. we haven't even talked about the influence i had over this world series win. but ryan heard it all before. —— ron heard it
all. no doubt. laughter. ileave heard it all before. —— ron heard it all. no doubt. laughter. i leave you to to celebrate. this is beyond 100 days. still to come — as mcdonald's fires its uk boss for dating a fellow employee — we'll look at the politics of going out with someone from work. the leader of the snp, nicola sturgeon, has accused boris johnson of treating scottish voters with "contempt," after he ruled out allowing a second referendum on independence. our scotland editor sarah smith reports. in sterling, the fight is as tight as it gets. the tories won by less than 150 votes when they took the seat from the snp in the last election. no wonder voters are fortifying themselves, ready for a vigorous campaign. i think it will be independence related, so if all of scotland is covered with snp members of parliament, then that clearly shows something important.
i think independence will be a big issue, but there are other aspects to look at. that you think we should be looking at? we should be, yes. the yes movement gathered en masse in glasgow's george square have one clearaim. they believe this election could be the next step toward independence. especially now the snp have chosen to put it at the heart of their campaign. do we want our future determined for us by the likes of borisjohnson or do we want to take our future into our own hands and determine the path we take and the kind country we want to be? the tories are looking to spread the same message. independence is a much easier topic for them then brexit, especially in a marginal seat here. they love it every time nicola sturgeon talks about another referendum. what do you think? i think "yippee"! because every time nicola goes on television and bangs on about independence, we get more votes. are you sure?
absolutely. obviously the conservatives are not the snp's only challengers in the election. throughout, the campaign will explore other issues and speak to other parties. but the demand for another independence referendum is central. the snp are hoping for a result that will make it hard for the next prime minister to say no. steve easterbrook seems to have been a successful chief executive of mcdonalds. under his stewardship its share price doubled, the firm's menus and restaurants were revitalised, and delivery and payment options expanded. but he's lost his job for having a relationship with an employee of the company. not much is known about the colleague's role or their relationship — but it is described as recent, and consensual. mr easterbrook — who's british — is divorced.
the food giant acknowledged the consentual nature of the relationship but said he had "violated company policy" and shown "poor judgment". the company's rules for managers prohibit them from becoming romantically involved with a subordinate. the bbc‘s nada tawfik is in newark, newjersey and joins us now. many people have met their significant partners in the workplace. in 2019, is this the sort of right approach or not?” workplace. in 2019, is this the sort of right approach or not? i think what is really interesting is that we have seen what is really interesting is that we have seen ever what is really interesting is that we have seen ever since the me to movement that companies, where the relationship is consensual or not have had to be very clear about their company policies and they've had to do that because of really a cultural change we have seen where they've had to grapple with the fact
that if there is a company policy, that if there is a company policy, that all levels of employees have to be held to account. so with steve easterbrook for example, the board after being alerted to the fact that he had this relationship which they say was consensual, had to really make a decision here because mcdonald: oh conduct is very clear that employees cannot have a relationship with any either they directly or indirectly report to, they had to make this decision saying made poorjudgement and he acknowledged that saying that it was acknowledged that saying that it was a mistake, but certainly what we are saying that advocates after the #metoo movement, those who want to fight for those with sexual harassment in the workplace have said that companies need to hold eve ryo ne said that companies need to hold everyone to account including their executives. that is what we see here and at mcdonald's showing that they are taking this seriously. he has been champion for women in the workplace. we should really point that out. he was working for a nonprofit which would says seeking to build workplaces that work for women but there has been criticism
of the company, not him, but the company for the way they dealt with the #metoo allegations. is it in that context that may be this was disclosed and they thought while we are dealing with this we can also deal with him having a relationship within the company? yes. i think it is interesting timing becausejust in october, mcdonald started training all of their us employees on the company code of conduct, relationships, sexual harassment, saying had the rope report harassment, what is the correct way to deal with others, how to have not have favouritism in the workplace, all of these issues mcdonald said will lead to a better culture in the work environment. but at the same time as that was happening, you have this issue arise and so i think for mcdonald's, is a clear case of optics and a clear case of breaking the code of conduct, they really had a firm stance here and i think it is interesting that the group fight for 15 which is been on mcdonald's really strongly have having strikes
in the #metoo movement saying they haven't tackled some of these issues, have put out a statement saying they want transparency on so thatis saying they want transparency on so that is something they are hoping to see. thank you indeed for that. so many of us meet our partners at work. we spend so much time here thatisitis work. we spend so much time here that is it is inevitable. let's speak now to reema mysorekar — who met herfuture husband while they were working together at heathrow some years ago. lovely to have you with us. wasn't allowed at your company? were you allowed at your company? were you allow today people from within? -- was it no such rule when ijoined saying you were allowed to have a date with someone at work. but you don't plan these things. i don't think they should be regulation that you cannot do it. there was something where you have to inform them if you are in a relationship with someone. and i can understand that because if there is any misconduct, you know if there are
two people involved, i can understand that, but there was no such thing, a guest there is an ethical thing to do, tell your seniors come if you are dating someone or seniors come if you are dating someone or if you're in a relationship with someone, or planning to get into relationship. did you and your husband notify your managers at the time that you started a relationship?” managers at the time that you started a relationship? i wasjust saying kim, my now husband come as a date. just going out for dinner. it became a date. there was a point when i thought yes, we decided to be together and that is when my partner told because he is to step sing it told because he is to step sing it to me, he told his fingers first, i wa nted to me, he told his fingers first, i wanted to keep it discrete until we we re wanted to keep it discrete until we were 100%, after that we did tell stop —— he is more senior than me. we both at the same level? you can see a scenario, being the chief executive. if she gives bonuses or perks, and he is not disclose that,
people that make liquorice bad blood, doesn't it? i can totally understand that. that is what we did. my partner, my husband now was my leader's manager, so he made sure that he informed his seniors, straightaway. i was the one who kept it quiet and i didn't want to say it out loud... did you hear somebody bad—mouthing's you kept it quiet dominic did you hear somebody mad about the limit bad—mouthing your partner at work which work is that why you made it public? no, when my friends said he didn't say the right thing and managers and every day but ididn't want thing and managers and every day but i didn't want to tell anybody about this. it was her decision. i kept the work and pleasure are separate. that was my husband. i didn't mix anything whatsoever. we were trying to be professional. we kept these two things totally separate. getting
you to come on and talk to us about it. thank you very much indeed for that. —— thank you for coming on. ididn't i didn't meet my partner in a work context but not a bus. just make that clear. see you tomorrow. that i did meet my partner. that's not a box. today brought consistent rain and scattered showers and dryer interludes for others. over the next few days, things will continue to look quite similar with some rainy times but not all the time. however, things will feel a little different as it turns colder from the north. this area of low pressure in the limbs and clouds spiralling around it have brought the outbreaks of freight during today. this is the picture from this afternoon. you can see the most persistent rain fading into eastern parts of scotland. now sinking his way southwards and will do so through tonight. turning quite damp across many parts of northern england. some showers elsewhere but
they are likely to fade to some extent. there will be some clear brea ks extent. there will be some clear breaks and the artemis patch, generally what a lot of cloud around and overnight lows of six or 7 degrees. not as silly as it will be on some nights later this week. going into tomorrow, this area of low pressure starts to pull away eastwards, we will see more in the way of dry weather spreading from the west, but as the low pulls away eastwards, we opened the door to a northerly wind and that will be bringing some cold air in our direction. due tomorrow across and will and wealth, generally quite a lot a cloud, somehow breaks up shall be rain which will increase become confined to central and eastern areas for northern ireland and scotland, more in their way of signs signed by showers feeding in from the north, some of these could be wintry. those temperatures really will be struggling. 8 degrees at best in aberdeen is still scraping into double digits for the south. going through tuesday, clearing away the cloud and the winds in the cold
air filtering, the cloud and the winds in the cold airfiltering, it is going to be chilly. a cold start to wednesday morning and a touch of frost and places, especially for northern england and scotland were some areas will get down below freezing for some wednesday starting on a chilly but fairly bright note, wanted to showers around, things will change the day on, cloud and rain will spread from the leading edge the leading edge over the very highest going of the pen ines come up with the scotland, maybe a little bit wintry and this looks again at temperatures for many second single digits getting up to ten in london and cardiff and plymouth. looking towards the end of the week, more rain, much of that clearing by friday, but it does stay rather chilly.
this is bbc news. the headlines... doctors and health service managers tell the main parties not to use the nhs as a political football in the election. let's try and avoid getting into cheap political slogans and trying to weaponise the service as a means of fighting a party political battle. order, order. the house of commons is voting to elect a new speaker — the first election for the post in more than a decade. the baby goods retailer, mothercare, plans to call in administrators — putting 2,500 jobs at risk. a special report on the children who go missing from care, across england and wales.