this is bbc news, the headlines. the united nations is warning of an increase in sexual violence against rohingya refugees fleeing a military crackdown in myanmar. doctors in bangladesh say that many of the women and children who have crossed over the border from myanmar have been sexually assaulted and abused by soldiers. separatist leaders in the spanish region of catalonia insist that polls will open in the coming hours for an independence referendum banned by the central government. spanish police are working to block the vote but catalonia's vice—president said ballot boxes would be available at polling stations. the situation in puerto rico after the devastation by two hurricanes is still dire — amid deepening political tension over the us relief effort. in a series of tweets, president trump has promised his support but tried to blame local officials, democrats and the media for the poor situation. now on bbc news, dateline london.

hello, good morning, welcome to date line. —— dateline. let the people decide. in kurdistan they have, and this weekend catalans wanted to do the same by holding a referendum on independence. in the uk, a referendum gave us brexit. jeremy corbyn, leader of the opposition labour party, has announced he'd give similar, decisive votes to people he says politicians ignore. in germany, the voters rewarded angela merkel with another term as chancellor, but also gave the far right their first seats in the bundestag in more than 50 years — though the taboo against holding a referendum there remains as strong as ever. to discuss all that, i'mjoined by: henry chu, international editor at variety,

polly toynbee from the guardian in the uk, maria margaronis, who writes for the nation, and stefanie bolzen from germany's die welt. let's begin with the referendum question. what do you make of how these votes in iraq and spain have been handled? it makes you more in favour of referendums then i would normally be inclined to be, because i tend to think referendums put very complex questions in very simple terms, which is something we saw with the brexit referendum very vividly, when everybody was actually voting on a different topic and for different reasons to an apparently simple question. but when you see spanish government resorting to the most repressive tactics to prevent the catalan referendum happening, you think, well, there is a reason to do this after all.

and if i were a catalan and inclined to vote no, i might begin to think about voting yes because of it. germany suggests an indifferent attitude to referendums, does that never resonate in germany? it does but more on a local or regional level, but because it is a federal system, we have something like a popular vote on issues like closing down the station, for example, there has been referendums in the past, like in stuttgart there was a big thing about a station being built. but there is generally a trust in the parliament, which is out of german history. hitler used referendums and plebiscites as a way to stir up nazis and exploits the results. yes, this is a functioning democratic system and gradually

the parliament is in charge of taking these complex decisions and as we have seen the brexit, for example, such a complex historic question putting down to 50—50, to a nation, that actually, if it is true that the day after the referendum, the most googled word was european union, it might be doubtful whether it is a good idea to hold a referendum! this idea that parliament can decide, some decisions are so fundamental that they must be left to people to make them, because otherwise we cannot be sure they will have the authority and trust in the politicians making the decision for them, that tension between a representative democracy and that kind of democracy of the people is quite a difficult one to resolve. traditionally, we've always thought of referendums as being instruments

of demagogues and they have turned out to be, the brexit referendum is the best example you can have of why referendums are monstrous. ithink... because you lost? no, i don't think so. people might have changed their mind the next day anyway. it comes like a guillotine. something that happens at one time, that nobody can rescind, that is nothing to be done about it. in representative democracy, you choose the people who are going to do the best they can within a certain ambit of political ideology. and there is flexibility and you can vote them out again. time will come out, if they get it wrong, you can get rid of them. i do think, though, that a referendum for self—determination is a different thing. a referendum for the scots or the kurds or for the catalans, i think that is the only way, maybe at some point for the northern irish, who knows?

i think that the idea of trying to stop people expressing who they think they are as a nation, and that a simple question, i think that's quite a different sort of referendum to me than the ones, say, the mad ones you have in california. there were 17 ballot initiatives in california last year and complex questions that then nobody was able to wade through and understand, for example, one ballot initiative counteracted another one and so it became not an exercise in direct democracy, but in confusion. i agree that referendums can make very complex questions into reductive yes—no answers, which do not really fit. i'm not sure. i mean, the referendum is the only peaceful way to choose self—determination. but that is not a simple question either. from what i know if the kurdish referendum, i mean, the kurds are, like the palestinian,

historically stateless people, there is no question that there is a kurdish nation, linguistically, culturally, but it is divided among other countries and turkey has said, if you vote yes, we will block your oil pipeline because turkey is in a state of civil war with its own and has been for years. there are internal politics and demagoguery going on there because i know that's it's not popular with certain voters. the president of kurdistan? that result was clear, 93% in favour. of course they're going to vote for independence. how can the implement it? they cannot. referendums do not take place in a vacuum, when it comes to nationhood with south sudan, for example, that was something with un backing, a framework internationally for something like that to happen and in these cases, you do not have that. i have heard this argument before,

if referendums polarise people into this or that camp and never the twain shall meet, is the argument if you have referendums, they have more than one question, they might dissipate some of this if you had multi—question referendums? it doesn't make it much easier. you would still have a lot of complexity in it. you're still going to have people very often, by the time you get to the day of voting, they are actually voting on different sorts of issues, for instance, we had the referendum on the alternative vote system. you would think it was a no—brainer, you said your electorate, would you like a little more choice in your voting system? and the people who were against it, mostly the conservatives who would possibly be the losers out of a constitutional change, managed to persuade people that they didn't want more choice. that they wouldn't rather put a one, two, three,

order on the ballot paper. because they were told, it was going to, politics was going to cost a lot more money, millions of pounds would be wasted on elections. it was all absolute nonsense. also, people wanted to get their own back on the liberal democrats, who they thought, it was a fix of theirs. it became about a whole lot of different things. afterwards, you stood back and thought, this is extraordinary, people are offered more choice and they say, no thank you. and you know something has gone badly wrong! one choice but a little simpler was the outcome in germany, where angela merkel was re—elected as chancellor. she is now linked to have been in office for 12 years and will be for another four. it has left with few options for forming a government. angela merkel has been chancellor of germany for 12 years and, after last sunday's federal election, could be in office for a further four. yet it's left her with few options

for forming a government. the social democrats, who came second, say they won't continue in coalition with mrs merkel‘s cdu. she couldn't stomach working with the next largest party alliance for germany, the far right which won 12 % of the vote. as for the free democrats and the green party, who together could secure her a parliamentary majority, there's little on which they agree. the chancellor has already dumped her finance minister, apparently to please them. french president emmanuel macron‘s ambition to re—shape the eurozone depends on german support, and such a coalition might not give it. stephanie, same leader but how much changes as a result of this election result? it should have been a celebration for angela merkel. how much will this change? of course it was not the result she hoped for, she said that strategically we have achieved our goal because i am back in office but, as you say, it is going to be a very bumpy time now because there is only one option and this is the so—called jamaica coalition between the cdu, fdp, the liberals and the greens. but it is going to take quite some time to form this coalition. 60% of germans want this coalition. so there is quite a lot

of pressure on the government. they feel there has been too much compromising. especially the greens, who are pro—eu, pro—refugee, pro—eu in the sense of what the bavarians don't like. more money to southern states, so it's going to be very difficult but other thing that will put pressure on them is the afd, the right wing party. so, i think there is a sense in germany that we need to form a coalition, a solid one, soon, because the majority — have in mind 80% of the people did not vote for afd, they see this as a threat. maria, in terms of how it is perceived in the rest of europe, as mentioned,

emmanuel macron this very ambitious plan to reshape, certainly the eurozone part of the eu. britain will have left the eu anyway, that might make things a bit simpler in 18 months or so, is that made less likely by what is happening in germany? i don't know. who knows what is going to happen in the eu? the right of the md is of a piece into what's happening all over europe, we have been seeing far right parties gaining support and we have been seeing this revolt against the consensus, that has become this kind of big lump in the centre left and centre right, which is neoliberal economics, globalised economy, etc. my worry is that europe is going to perhaps restructure itself internally but close its borders more firmly outside. the first thing macron talked about in his speech was defence, security, borders. and of course, i merkel was damaged in part by her approach to immigration domestically. to me, that policy was the bright

spot in a shockingly bad response by europe to the refugee crisis. but she paid a price for it. these are difficult things to work out but i do not want to see a fortress europe bordered with military defence against the rest of the world but nevertheless more comfortable inside. is that more likely, stephanie? will angela merkel adopt that approach in order to ride the two horses of her coalition? yes, and of course that is what she has been doing. in 2015, there were 12,000 people daily coming into only bavaria. now this has stopped, why has it stopped? because in the balkans, the borderers have been going up and also because external borders are more secure and also because it is a deal with turkey and merkel has been travelling to north african countries to find a way to stop it.

and i think there should be no delusion about it. it could've been worse with the afd, if not, other countries might have helped angela merkel by stopping the flow of migrants. do you see, polly toynbee, as a result of this, and given that in a sense europe might be getting less fractious if britain leaves, because it has always been a sort of reluctant eu member, do you see the task could be easier or harder for angela merkel? of the well, she remains the key figure. she and macron together, one shouldn't forget that it's a great relief that both of them are there as the stabilising factor in europe. all of these fringe nationalistic extreme right parties have been essentially defeated. they didn't win in france, in holland, in germany. not this time, though. at one point in britain, ukip won 15% of the vote, just because we have a different electoral system, they didn't get

a single mp. but they're still very much on the margins and i don't think we should be overly obsessed, the great majority of europeans remain decent anti—racist, anti—extremist and i don't see an imminent move to change the essential values of europe, which sadly, britain is leaving. but we should be a part of that. a quick point, i agree with you but i think, looking only at germany, also will be called liberal centre, has moved more to the right, also in the german election, that is why i do not think the policy of open borders from germany can continue. i can't talk for other countries but this is a no—go because the long price that might be paid for this is too big. but do you think that if it changes, it will actually mean that britain need never have left europe because they themselves, i mean, if it was anti—immigration

that caused our referendum result, do you think the rules will change so much within europe that actually we will say, why on earth did we ever leave? i think it is going to be far too short to change until march, 2019, when this country is out anyway. and open borders is about people coming outside of europe and there is not as much objection with inter—eu migration the way there was here in this country. i'm not sure that that would solve... a lot of that was very confused, fear that those outside europe would eventually come through the borders and come to us. it was a much more anti—muslim, to put it crudely, feeling, than it was really anti—polish or east europeans. i think, i agree with stephanie that the danger is not so much that is far right parties will take

power but that their rhetoric and thinking seeps into what used to be the centre—right parties and move the whole spectrum to the right and i think that is happening. in europe, we also have two very right wing governments, hungary, poland, czech republic, so, the issue is really how to manage this, so that it does not infect the whole system. but i also don't think it is only about immigration. i really don't think the far—right right is only about immigration and racism. in terms of angela merkel‘s position, she had been regarded as the most powerful force in europe in politics, if she is weakened, what are the implications of that, notjust within europe, but internationally, given that germany is taking more of an internationalist role in recent years.

she was once described to me at the queen of europe and that crown is now tarnished. in terms of keeping the grand coalition together or keeping domestically everything on side, it was easier until the refugee crisis sparked a fragmentation, this unfortunate seeping into the far right, and that means she's going to have to take care of her backyard and implement with macron a wider european vision, which is pretty much on the rocks at the moment. even macron at home will not necessarily want to put some of vision through. so, i think she is quite weak and i mean something for europe, more than just germany. but i do think this sense of a loss of identity and loss of culture is notjust about immigration and foreigners coming in, it is also about the decline of the old communities, industrialisation, it is about what has happened all over europe for economic and political reasons and notjust because of foreigners coming in. germany had been thought to be a country that had kind of got the balance right.

that it had had a sense of confidence about its social system, that people felt there was a german identity and leaving aside the nationals in question, they were comfortable... in general, that is true but as we see with the result of afd, this is very much a western german phenomenon. they do not see this in the east. cultural and economic reasons, but in germany this historic reasons as well, they follow the communism, socialism, the people left behind in north of england are the equivalent of east germans. people who could not benefit from the capitalist system. this is where you have to pick up these people and bring them in but this is the big challenge and this is also why there is a sense of urgency in germany to find the answer to this now because it has an effect on germany and europe because if angela merkel can't move quickly,

she will not be able to do much about europe and there is a lot of, as you said, macron is desperate, the clock is ticking for him. and she could be spending months forming a government? theoretically, but there is a sense that this needs to be done by christmas. where have we heard that before? and then brexit is low on the agenda, of course. we think is the most important thing in the german elections! germans generally like to hug the centre ground in politics. it makes the rise of ba you see all the more dramatic. tony blair persuaded little's labour party was only possible to win power by occupying the centre ground. jeremy corbyn was a sceptic, a fringe figure on the left convinced that the majority could be won by shifting his way. 20 years later,

tony blair is the embarrassing relic of labour past. this yearjeremy corbyn did much better than many predicted and he told his party conference that the next election could see his dream delivered. jeremy corbyn was saying that the centre of british politics shifted around and it has shifted towards him. is he correct? i don't think the concept of a centre is useful because in the end you have a binary system. the tories are in total disarray, led by somebody no—one in their party likes very much. it is a question of which is least worst. i think that is what the lexton is about. there is no doubt that he has w011 about. there is no doubt that he has won 40% of the vote with the ma nifesto won 40% of the vote with the manifesto that was extremely popular. the moment his manifesto was published, the public opinion polls changed suddenly. he had been 11 points behind and suddenly he is up 11 points behind and suddenly he is up there as a contender. people are

in favour of ringing back our appalling rail system, the disaster of the privatisation of utilities is 110w of the privatisation of utilities is now being exposed as a mistake. there really has been a change of attitude. whether people would call themselves left—wing i don't know. it was pragmatic, retail politics, promising students that they would get free tuition, promising people they would get bigger pensions than ever before. it was an old—fashioned bribery, actually. and right and left are relative terms. there is a lwa ys left are relative terms. there is always going to be a shifting centre. we should not forget that this tory government, certainly, under the previous prime minister cameron was one of the most radical in terms of cuts it was implementing. we have not seen austerity cuts at that in generations, so that pulled the country in one direction as well. we do not talk about that much but if

we talk now about jeremy corbyn pulling at the other way, pulling it back towards what may have been the ce ntre back towards what may have been the centre at the time. i think that things have shifted in this country, stefanie, when you look at it as an outsider trying to explain his back to your readers in germany, tuc something similar in terms of a kind of moving centre ground? from what you were saying, you spoke about moving to the right in germany. isn't moving left in britain?“ moving to the right in germany. isn't moving left in britain? if you look at the polls, it is moving to the left but i was also at the party conference in brighton, especially at this fringe meeting. people were talking about the revolution, about a clear break. you can't reform the country, you need a clear break towards socialism. i cannot understand why people find the ideas of labourfar understand why people find the ideas of labour far better. there understand why people find the ideas of labourfar better. there is

understand why people find the ideas of labour far better. there is so much social injustice, especially for the young generation, this appalling outlook of the future, they cannot afford their own property, they do not know how they will live when they are all. it is scary for the younger generation and something we do not experience yet in germany. i struggle to grasp the shift to the left in this country. in germany. i struggle to grasp the shift to the left in this countrylj can understand it. you have always had people on the fringes of the labour party talking about revolution... but it is now in the ma nifesto. revolution... but it is now in the manifesto. that is the big difference. actually, actually, jeremy corbyn's labour party in terms of labour history is quite conservative in the sense that it is the old mainstream of labour tradition. it was blair who was the labour radical who shifted the party way off its original base and what jeremy took corbyn is talking about is taxing people in order to have a good welfare state, that is what the labour party was all about. tony baird said you could not win if you did that because britain had

changed. it is worth remembering. people forget this, blair's manifesto in 1997 was incredibly radical. he had a £5 billion windfall tax just radical. he had a £5 billion windfall taxjust ripping money off in the utilities because they had been badly privatised. he had a whole series of very radical policies. and now people regard him... he is iraq wartony policies. and now people regard him... he is iraq war tony blair and people forget. is that suggest that he is how you dress this up. he was doing radical stuff but saying his rapunzel and serious. jeremy corbyn says we will do radical stuff and the public a more sympathetic. says we will do radical stuff and the public a more sympatheticlj think the public a more sympathetic.” think so. this was an old—fashioned bribery manifesto. he said he would not raise anybody's tactics at the top 5%. that is impossible with these sorts of things he wants to

do. i think it was quite traditional in terms of here is something for everybody. and casting votes here in britain and around vote is purely left and right misses the issue because we have a emmanuel macron who is of neither. is kind of centre, but for france that is radical. many people feel both directions are wrong, whichever direction, right, left beyond that, people want to force course or feel that the present course they are on is not the will write one. thank you all very much. fascinating stuff and some big issues are. important countries and we will talk about more of those on dateline next week.

there. at its mildest in damp across wales, cold in scotland throughout the day. we have rain moving in a heavy rain across western scotland. we will see rain and drizzle at times across england and wales, perhaps a glimmer of sunshine now and then that the best of the weather in the afternoon after the rain in scotland, moving across western areas later. a muddy field across england and wales but will be windy out there as well. the wind grows, skies were clear overnight and we will see frequent heavy showers across scotland, perhaps northern ireland, northern england as the winds continue to strengthen and draw in some chilly air as well. the gusts are 50 miles an hour perhaps across northern parts of the ukfor perhaps across northern parts of the uk for rush—hour on monday. a touch

stronger across parts of scotland is well. may be some travel disruption. they will be combined with frequent and heavy showers. further south, should be largely dry and less windy. welcome to bbc news. the bbc has heard disturbing accounts of sexual violence and brutality against rohingya women and children who've fled the military crackdown in myanmar. the rohingya — a muslim ethnic minority — live in rakhine state in mainly buddhist myanmar — but more than half a million are now living in refugee camps on the southern tip of bangladesh. a warning, you may find some of the details in sanjoy majumder‘s report distressing. the memory is still fresh, the pain very raw. her village inside myanmar was attacked two weeks ago, allegedly by the burmese military and a mob of rakhine buddhists.