be wet and windy, like in weymouth and it will be wet and windy, like in weymouth and many southern counties. these gusts of 50 or 60 mph, giving nasty conditions out on the road. that rain heading northwards through the night, adding a wintry mix to the night, adding a wintry mix to the weather is special in scotland. an icy start to saturday. but the sunshine will stuff that wintry mix with the wind, and the showers in the south—west litter. for many parts, not as mild as it has been this week but dry with good spells of sunshine. sunday will pick up with showers across central areas and an icy start and possibly some fog again. there will be some sunshine, some frost, but sunshine for most of us. you are watching bbc news. our

headlines at 8:30pm... a royal marine has pleaded guilty to terror charges after he made bombs and stored weapons for dissident northern irish republicans. the trump administration has targeted iran — imposing sanctions on 13 people and a dozen companies in response to the country's recent ballistic missile test. the man who was shot and wounded at the louvre after attacking soldiers with a machete has been identified as a 29—year—old from egypt. he arrived in paris a month ago on a short—term visa. sheffield city council has apologised after failing to prevent one of its employees, a predatory sex offender, from abusing his victims in council offices over two decades. theresa may has briefed eu leaders at a summit in malta about her recent meeting with president trump, as well as trying to build up good relations ahead of brexit. now on bbc news it's time for hardtalk.

welcome to hardtalk, i'm stephen sackur. just how ugly is britain's divorce from the eu going to be, and how damaging for the unhappy couple? as british mps debate the formal triggering of the exit process, my guest is an eu politician who'll be at the heart of the complex negotiations over a brexit deal. belgium's former prime minister and current mep guy verhofstadt has warned britain to expect no favours as it heads for the exit. but how confrontational is he prepared to be? guy verhofstadt, welcome to hardtalk.

yes. i want to talk about brexit with you, but i don't want to start with the detail, i want to start with the context. when the british public voted for brexit onjune 23rd 2016, barack 0bama was president of the united states. now the white house is occupied by donald trump. to what extent do you think this fundamental shift in global politics — the most important power in the world, after all — how important is that as a changed context for brexit? i think it gives an opportunity from the european side to show and to work on more unity. because let's be honest, what trump has said since now in a few days and weeks is very hostile towards europe. he's saying openly that he thinks that europe could disintegrate further. he thinks more european members

of the eu will follow britain out of the door and he thinks that is a good thing. he thinks it is a good thing to have a disintegrated european union, while i think it's quite the opposite. in fact the interest of the americans is ot —— in fact the interest of the americans is not in a disintegrated union. the interest of america is to have a very united european ally. and you can only walk on two legs. trump needs an american leg and he needs also a european leg. whatever your sceptical view of donald trump as president and as an individual, the fact is the european union needs to be closely allied with the united states of america. that is one of the pillars of european security policy. exactly, and that is what he is putting in danger. with respect, you are too. some of the things you have said in recent days are actually extraordinary. you have said, you said this yesterday, i am quoting you —

"under the enormous political influence of trump's political adviser, stephen bannon, he sent people to berlin, to paris, to prepare the ground for similar referendum as that seen in britain." yes, exactly. well, what evidence do you... you're essentially saying trump is taking active steps to undermine the european union. stephen bannon has launched breitbart also in europe. everyone knows that's an extreme right—wing news site he is promoting. in fact, extreme right—wing radical views. yes, but that's not the trump administration. you're saying these hostile things about donald trump as president which seem to me to have no evidence at all. i'm a little bit puzzled that you are saying it's not the trump administration when mr bannon has been appointed as member of the national security council of the us. even putting outside... you cited something that is happening at breitbart, a news website. i think it is maybe not the trump administration, but mr stephen bannon, the special adviser of trump. we can discuss about what the influence is of mr bannon

on mr trump, what i see is what mr trump is saying. that's more important. his quotes are very clear. so are yours. i hope to be clear. that is the reason i am in politics. normally you have the politics or politicians maybe here, who are trying to escape the question. i, in my statements, try never to escape the question. yes, let's think about your choice of words. it makes it boring, maybe. it makes it fascinating. your choice of words. my view, you say, is we have a third front that is now undermining the eu and that third front is now donald trump. exactly. it is a word i am coming back to, hostility. you are downright hostile to what you're seeing. i am not saying... i'm not hostile. i am only seeing and i am only hearing what mr trump is saying. you are using the language of warfare.

0k, let me explain maybe. i think we have first of all the threat to europe by radical, political islam, jihadists. secondly, i think we have a threat by putin, an autocrat in the kremlin who tries to divide europe, already years from now. aand now we have an american president who is no longer seeing the european unity as a pillar for his foreign policy. and he is saying openly he hopes for a disintegration of the european union. so i think we are very much alone. i think that we are for the moment in an existential moment for the european union, and i hope, my response to this is that only european unity can be the answer. i am mindful you havejust written this book... that is my book about it. europe's last chance: why the european states... its subtitle, why the european states must form a more perfect union. ironically, you've taken a phrase from the american constitution. yes, exactly.

i think it's gonna be difficult right now to persuade europeans that they should regard as a model the federal united states of america, but that's obviously... you wrote this before donald trump arrived in the white house. it's not about trump. that's about donald trump now. you're making it trump is the same as the american institutions. what i'm seeing is america, for example, after the financial crisis was capable to react immediately to that financial crisis. they did a cleaning up of their banks, they detailed an investment programme, they did quantitative easing. well, if i look to europe, we are not a union, in fact. what we are is in fact a loose confederation of nation states still based on the unanimity rule, and we are always acting too little too late. in the financial crisis, for example. in migration, in refugess. so this book, i have to tell you, is even more eurosceptic than all the eurosceptic books that have been published

in the united kingdom in the last few months. you think the current formulation of the european union simply doesn't work. it cannot survive. you just made an interesting point about the importance of nation states. what trump is, avowedly a self—confessed american nationalists. "america first" is his message and, interestingly, that message, which is essentially a nationalist message, is echoed across europe in different nation states where politicians are winning with a nationalist message. it's not echoed. it's the opposite. it was first born in europe. nationalism has been born in europe. nationalism has not been born outside europe. what is more than that, i think it is a very tricky thing that is happening. that is, that an american president is bidding on more nationalism in europe.

you know what nationalism in europe means? that's not nationalism based on values, it's nationalism in europe based on ethnicity. and what nationalism has done in the last 100 years in europe, we all know it! 20 million deaths, victims, pogroms, the shoah, all of this is based on nationalism. so an american president thinking, "0h, european unity is not necessary, let's go back to national identity, to ideas of nationalism." that's playing with fire in europe! this is not america! this is europe! we had the shoah, we had the holocaust, we had the pogroms. well, you can... i think it is a fair argument. you can cite the events of the 1930s and 40s at me but let's stick with what's happening today. yes, but it can come back. let's stick with my opening question about the context for brexit. i come back to this basic point about the situation today in europe. you have just seem theresa may in the white house with donald trump talking about the steadfast alliance between britain and europe. you've heard donald trump saying that he is going to seek a very quick trade deal with britain. talking in the most positive terms about britain post—brexit. it weakens your hand as an eu negotiator, does it not, that britain is now looking at this very close relationship with donald trump? i am not reasoning in those terms

because i know that the interest of the uk is more in europe than in the us. you know the figures, you know the figures. 44% of the exports of britain goes to the continent, to europe. 0nly12% goes to the us. so whatever free trade agreement is made between the us and the uk, the main interest of the british industry, the british companies, british workers, british citizens, sits in europe and is in europe. and so these negotiations will be very important. and i am very open about it. i think fairness is the basic principle we need to apply in these negotiations. so when theresa may says, alongside donald trump, that, she said to donald, "as you renew your nation, we renew ours, the opportunity is here to renew the special relationship, the post—eu britain and trump's america will lead together again," your response to that is? my response was yesterday in the streets of london, i think, i have seen thousands and thousands of people not agree with this. i don't believe in the rhetoric

or in the narrative of trump. i think it is devastating. also for the american economy, because protectionism, because that's also part of his narrative. how you can make an agreement between the uk, which is an open society who believes in trade, i think, and on the other hand an american president who is seeing every trade deficit with whatever country as an existential threat. and there is a trade deficit from the us towards the uk. so, good luck with it. i think that it is more interesting for the uk authorities to work together on a fair partnership with the european union because that is the biggest market for the british industry. and i want to tease out what you mean by a fair partnership in a moment. but before we get to the detail of the negotiations, which you will be involved in, just one more specific point which i think arises out of what we're seeing in the united states and what we've heard from theresa may and that is a question about security. we will get to economics.

but security, you know as well as i do that britain has been a linchpin of european security. 0ur armed forces are superior to most in europe, our intelligence services are superior to most in europe. if you talk to people in germany, poland, the baltic republics... all true. ..they all say we need a close security relationship with britain come what may, whether brexit happens or not. that is also my point. i think that we have to discuss not only the economic partnership between the uk and the european union, it will be necessary, besides that, also to talk about internal and external security. what i don't want, it is not my position... it is leverage for the uk. ina minute. it is what i want to say. i don't want a trade—off between the economic discussion we will do and on the other hand the question of internal and external security. i don't think it is serious to make a trade off between... germany has already indicated... yes, but let's be honest, the important thing to do

on the security issue from the european side is to create a european defence union as fast as possible. you know the figures. but if you don't have britain, it devalues the whole thing. may i give the figures, 42% we spend in europe on military, and we are only capable to do 10%—12% of the operations of the american army. i am not a mathematician, i'm a lawyer. but i know that it means, these figures, that we are three to four times less effective. and why are we less effective? because we don't have a european defence community. we delegate everything 28 times between the 28 member states. i think this whole discussion, also on security, internal and externally, is a good chance to create finally what we needed to already do decades ago, that's to create a european defence union. right, well... that's also in the book. yes. let's get to the nitty—gritty of negotiating a complex deal with the uk on its departure

from the european union. just some very quickfire practical questions. you said recently that you thought getting a trade deal within the two—year time frame was impossible. you stick to that? i think that's impossible, yeah. everybody knows that it's impossible. well, they don't know it's impossible in london. if you talk to the ministers responsible, they say it's entirely possible. no, no, no, no. all the people that i am talking with know that very well. what we're going to do in this iii—15 months, it is not two years, it is iii—15 months, because at the end of the process, before the end of 2018, we need to start a consent procedure in the european parliament, because it is the european parliament who has to give the green light for the final agreement. so we are going to start at the end of may, beginning ofjune, that gives us a timeframe of 1a or 15 months. what can you do in this 1a or 15 months, realistically? i think the withdrawal agreement is the first thing to do. not an easy thing, i can tell you. to put it in common parlance that is the divorce agreement. before you get to

the new relationship, you have to do the divorce. then you have also to define the new relationship in general terms. but do you do them in tandem? because there is a big debate about whether the two sets of negotiations, one about the divorce arrangements and one about the new relationship. take the treaty, the treaty, article 50, is very clear. the treaty says, first of all you start with your withdrawal agreement in the light of the framework of the future relationship. so you need to have an idea, not more than that, about your future relationship and then you can conclude your withdrawal agreement. to continue then... for example, if it is an fta, a free trade agreement, it will take years. how many years in your opinion? i think the whole period of transition and the period of transition will be two years? three years? so besides the two years, or the 1a or 15 months i'm talking about, you will need the whole transition period to conclude what will be the final agreement with the uk. that's a realistic timeframe. there are cracks appearing,

it seems to me, in the eu's position on some of the key fundamental principles of a negotiated deal. you've said the four freedoms that underpin the single market, they're not going to ever be negotiated upon and there will be no cherry picking. others have sent signals suggesting there can be sector by sector deals which, while britain leaves the single market, will allow britain preferential access to certain sectors of that single market. is that possible? there will be no cherry picking. nobody of the three institutions of the eu will accept that. mrs may has indicated she wants to go out of the union, out the single market, out the customs union, out the european court ofjustice and then saying, "but that is an eu programme that interests me and that is a sector that interests me." that will not happen, sorry. because then she has to take also the obligations, and the payments were linked

to these advantages. you can never create a status outside the european union which is more advantageous than to be a member of the european union. it would not be fair towards the members of the european union and to our taxpayers. you want to believe there can be no cherry picking, but others have sent a different message. even mr barnier, who is, with all due respect, probably more important to the negotiations than you... that's true. ..because he is negotiating on behalf of the commission. he is negotiating and we have to approve his negotiations. exactly. you're an observer and he's a negotiator. according to a leak that the guardian newspaper got hold of, he told meps that there needed to be a special relationship between big finance and the city of london... that has been denied two times by mr barnier. in the nature of politics he had to deny it because it was an unauthorised leak. sorry, i was there in that meeting and he has never said that. i was in that meeting.

it was a meeting of the conference of committee chairs of the european parliament. i was present as the brexit negotiator for the european parliament and he never said that. be assured of one thing, cherry picking, we shall not allow. so when the german car industry, for example, pleads with the german government and says, be real, and i'm quoting the head of the federation of german industry, "imposing trade barriers and protectionist measures between the eu and britain, or the two political centres, the eu on one hand, the uk on the other, would be a very, very foolish thing to do." that's a german speaking. i agree with all this, i'm against protectionism myself, but that's not the point. it's not a point about protectionism. the point is, if, for example... i think that is still the best option, the uk should ask for... to be part of the single market, to continue to be part of the single market, at the same time accepting the four freedoms of the european union. the problem doesn't start with the european union, the problem starts with the uk government saying, "0h, the freedom of movement of people inside the european union, we don't like it because there are polish people coming to work on our construction sites here in london, we don't like it." i think that these people are very necessary in the uk economy. you know what the labour

mobility in europe is? 196. you know what the labour mobility in the us is? 10%. ten times bigger. one of the reasons we have 2 million vacancies in britain and in europe is because we don't have enough labour mobility. isn't the truth, mr verhofstadt, that you take the position you take — no cherry picking, no negotiation on these sector deals — you take that position because you're deeply insecure. you worry that if britain is seen to get a deal that works for britain, that actually makes the british economy successful... no. ..that it will encourage others in europe to follow britain to the exit door. you're deeply insecure about the fragility and vulnerability of the european union. the problem of the future of the european union is not so much

linked to brexit negotiations. the problem of the future of the european union is linked to the courage and willingness of the european leaders for the moment to go forward, like i describe in this book, with the unity and integration of the european union. creating a defence community, creating an economic governance for the single currency, creating an external border and coastguard. so the future of the european union is depending on that. not so much on, i think, on a fair partnership with the uk. you've been writing books about the need for a federal europe for an awful long time. you wrote the united states of europe in 2006. as prime minister. you wrote another book in 2009 called how europe can save the world: emerging from crisis. you have written these books, which now look like museum pieces, europe has moved on. no, sorry... europe's politicians are no longer talking about union and federation. it's the opposite that is happening. you are laughing a bit at my books but at the same time i was the one who said we need a banking union before we can overcome the financial crisis.

in the meanwhile, you agree that the banking union is now in place. how europe can save the world was your title in 2009. frankly, europe has done nothing to save the world in the last seven years. exactly, because we didn't have the institutions on a european level that were necessary. i already explained to you, we are still a loose confederation of nation states based on the unanimity rule in which we act always too little, too late. i have described the financial crisis in the book as a typical example of that. and i said we need a banking union and today we have a banking union. they have laughed at me as prime minister when i proposed a number of initiatives on the defence union. today, these initiatives, european headquarters for example, are on the table. when you talk like this, mr verhofstadt, you play into the hands of people like nigel farage — one of the most imprtant leaders of the leave campaign in the uk — when he says you are a dangerous fanatic and, he says, you have long been anti—british to the core. that's completely nonsense. you know i'm racing with an old car,

it's a 1954 right—hand drive aston martin. how can you be more british than that? i'll tell you, i look at your own words and i wonder about your attitude to britain. you said in 2016, according to politico, the website, "politically, the uk is already on its way to becoming an adversary rather than a trusted partner of the eu". is that how you see the uk today? certainly that is what mr farage is exactly standing for. but these are your words. when i am attacking him, i am attacking not britain, i am attacking somebody who wants to destroy the european union. the uk is on its way to becoming an adversary. is that the way you feel about the uk today? absolutely not, what i'm feeling about is that we can find a fair partnership. but people like mr farage, who are at the heart of the brexit campaign and are really to destroy the european union, that's our problem and that is the thing i will fight against. the thing is, it's not

really just about britain. when you said of the brexit campaign, you described it as the latest high mass of tribalism in europe. it isn'tjust actually in britain where people are expressing great scepticism about the european union, great scepticism about immigration and its effect upon europe. you could look at le pen in france and wilders in the netherlands. look at poland, look at hungary, look at so many nations across the european union. i don't deny this. i'm fighting against these people. i don't deny le pen exists. i don't deny wilders exists. but i can tell you one thing, the public opinion on the continent, in countries in the european union, is not against europe, they are against this european union. that's exactly why i'm saying to you this book is maybe more eurosceptic than all other books that have been published, because i think this european union will not survive. what you need to do to convince people who are voting today for le pen, is offering them a vision for the future,

showing them unity for europe can tackle the financial crisis, the economic fallout of it, the migration flows, refugees coming to europe. security externally. you have been peddling the federalist dream for ten years. at what point are you going to realise it's a dream and not a reality? the banking union today is a reality because we have pushed for it. i also think tomorrow the european defence union will be a reality because the world is changing and we cannot count on mr trump. so it will arrive. i see, for example, what is happening in france, the french presidency, macron, you're following it, what he is saying about europe? it's a frenchman who is saying we don't find sovereignty anymore on a national level, we need it on a european level. let's say a frenchman was saying that, that's somebody you have to invite on hardtalk as fast as possible, i should say. and we'll get you back to discuss

the state of brexit in a few months or years‘ time. but for now we have to end there. guy verhofstadt, thank you for being on hardtalk. not a nice evening to be out and about, particularly across much of northern ireland england and wales. we have conditions like this. this was earlier today. rainy, strong winds, winds gusting up to about 76 mph in the needles. we have more gusty winds to come over the next few hours over the eastern half of the country. tied in with this is an area of low pressure. it is across east anglia and lincolnshire. there is snow over the hills of wales. it

is snow over the hills of wales. it is now moving north. but it illustrates how cold that air is over the next few hours. we may well see snowfall temporarily over the peak district, pennines and parts of northern and south—west scotland. the worst will be over as we head towards midnight. the rain, though, and the hill snow stagnates across scotla nd and the hill snow stagnates across scotland through the remainder of tonight and much of tomorrow. after some sunshine today in scotland, tomorrow will look very different. behind it. talking about snow. it is colder air. this week it has been milder by night but tonight we could have frost and ice. there are already warning to answer that. that patchy ice affecting areas in the south but could also affect parts of scotla nd south but could also affect parts of scotland where we have the snow falling. notjust murmuring that sunday morning, as well. a few showers behind. —— notjust tomorrow morning, but sunday morning, as well. there is another area of low

pressure in coastal areas, which is likely to give turbulent weather across northern france. for rugby fa ns across northern france. for rugby fans coming across to twickenham but it's not great news. for most of us come away from scotland, it does not look too bad. it will be windy at times and pretty cold, sixes and sevens temperature wise. but elsewhere decent spells of sunshine. —— for most of us, away from scotland, it does not look too bad. wintry showers on saturday night. and therefore ice problems on sunday morning. 0nce those diminish we will see perhaps a few showers with this low pressure towards the east coast of northern england and scotland. but not a bad day again. some usual weather, around five and 6 degrees of high. some rain around. but not for everybody. some sunshine but it'll feel colder both by day and night this weekend. this is bbc world news today, broadcasting in the uk

and around the world. and peter i'm geeta guru—murthy. the headlines: rising tension between the trump administration and iran. the us imposes new sanctions following a recent ballistic missile test — iran says they breach the deal under which it agreed to curb its nuclear programme. a man who was shot and injured after trying to attack french security forces outside a paris museum has been identified as a 29—year—old egyptian. also coming up — the un says myanmar‘s army has committed mass atrocities against the rohingya muslim minority, including systematic rape and the murder of children.