have killed at least ten people and forced around 20,000 from their homes. the governor has declared a state of emergency in three counties. at least 1500 properties have been destroyed, as the flames spread in hot weather, fanned by winds gusting up to a0 miles an hour. president donald trump's testy relationship with top republicans has reached new levels in a war of tweets, with senator bob corker. the president accused him of not having the guts to run for re—election. the senator said the white house was like an adult day care centre, and "someone had obviously missed their shift." the mayor of barcelona has urged the catalan separatist leader and the spanish prime minister not to do anything that might destroy the chance of dialogue and mediation. the catalan leader is due to make a crucial speech to parliament in barcelona later on tuesday. now on bbc news, hardtalk. stop smoking, eat less, exercise more and pay your taxes on time.

so many things governments want us to do; so hard to get us to do them. hardtalk speaks to behavioural economist richard thaler who thinks he has the answer. it's called ‘nudge‘ theory, but it's notjust an academic idea. britain's prime minister is so impressed, he's set up a whole ‘nudge unit‘ in the heart of his government. if you live in britain, you may unwittingly already be part of a nudge experiment. so is the nudge guru richard thaler teaching those in power how to encourage us to live better, or helping politicians to control us? welcome to hardtalk. what is this nudge theory? it is some feature of the environment that attracts

attention and influences behaviour. how does this differ from the traditional approach that has been adopted to improve behaviour? i think the basic idea of the ‘nudge unit‘ is reallyjust to take all we know about behavioural science, and how people think and behave, and make use of that to figure out how to implement government policy that is effective. economists have traditionally thought of people as rational in the choices they make but also rather selfish. do you think that is being too narrow a view? i think so. i don't like the word rational. we are human. difficult problems we will

trip us up sometimes. we don't always have the self—control to do what we think we should do. many are obese, many smoke. if you ask most smokers, they say they'd like to quit if they could figure out how. economists view everyone as doing precisely what is best for them at all times, and that's just not accurate. give us some examples of how this is being used. i have seen a quote about something the british government has done with letters sent out to people that are slow on paying their taxes. there is a unit of the treasury whose job it is to collect

from the people who have not paid tax. most people who are on a salary in britain, their taxes are done automatically. they pay as they earn. if you have outside incomes from various sources, it's up to you to write out the cheque at the end of each year and some people forget or whatever. there's a division in the treasury whose job it is to collect from those who owe money and have not paid. they write letters. they wonder whether the letters are effective or not. the thing we try to teach people in whitehall is that nobody knows all the answers in advance. i don't know what the best letter is. social science gives us a few hints.

my first guess at what the letter may be, may well work better than the current letter. so let's try ten letters. we've been running various random controlled trials. we send out one version of the letter and other people get other versions. we see which one works best. what has been the most effective technique for getting people to pay up? there are two principles that seem to be most effective. one is reminding people truthfully that most of their fellow citizens pay their taxes on time. that's called the positive social norm. most people behave and you should also behave. the other one is making it personal. saying things like "most people pay their taxes on time" and we say "most people where you live pay on time." that helps a bit more.

if we mention some of the benefits that the town receives from the taxes and that will help even more. that's the basic idea. we do continue to try to find out what the most effective one is. these are randomised trials. the essential element of what you persuaded the british government to do, the analogy is in medical research. you can take part in trials. they know they are taking part. in this approach, people are part of the experiment — having no idea they are being experimented upon. that's true, but you know, that happens every day. you get a letterfrom the bank. they ask if you'd like to take a credit card. thousands of versions of that letter exist. there's nothing really very

new or sinister about this. this isn't that different because it's the government doing this as opposed to a private entity? it's more likely that it's an attempt to do something that is in society's best interest, rather than in the interest of the company sending you the letter. i don't see it as sinister. when does motivation, persuading people to improve their behaviour, become manipulation? i suppose manipulation is a pejorative word. i don't know if we can draw any hard lines. one of my favourite nudges, one i make use of all the time is — when i spend time in london is — the helpful little signs that appear

at intersections reminding us to look right, because, as you know, you drive on the wrong side of the road over here. those big buses come from the wrong direction. i consider those signs a helpful nudge. if you consider them manipulation, i'd say that's inaccurate. that is explicit. the interesting thing about the way the ‘nudge‘ theory works is that these things are not explicit. you don't say it's an incentive to do something, but you are encouraged to change your behaviour. perhaps that explanation is not given in those letters. we don't tell you this because it's more likely to make you behave in another way. that right, but we are publishing the research about this. it's not a big secret. i don't think the letter would work particularly well if you told people

that we are trying to manipulate them. you are trying to motivate them? it's in society's interest for them to pay their taxes. if you look at the european governments that are in the most trouble right now, one of the biggest reasons, perhaps the biggest single reason, is that most people don't pay taxes. is that about the social norm? it's not a question about whether the government thinks they should, that it's right or wrong, what society thinks. 0ne criticism i see about these theories on its own, is that it does not work. it only works if it builds on an existing cultural social—accepted form of behaviour. you cannot go against that. i don't think that's right. in the last few decades, in the us at least, some people have taken to cleaning up

after their dog. i live across the road from a park in chicago. i see dog owners walking in the park, having a little bag with them. i think there's a law. i've never heard of anyone being arrested for failing to follow that law. we have changed the social norm. the park is more pleasant to walk in. i think it would be possible to change the social norms in a country like greece where people felt that they needed to pay taxes, as opposed to now where they think only a fool would pay their tax. how does this differ from some places in europe that are called a ‘nanny state‘ where the government and the machinery of government tells you the structure of how you should live your life. the whole idea behind

the book that we wrote, the title is ‘nudge‘. we gave that the title of lebertarian paternalism. we gave that the title of libertarian paternalism. it sounds like a contradiction. it does sound like an oxymoron. here is what we mean by that. we never force anybody to do anything. paternalism means simply helping people achieve their goals. if i'm lost, i usually am in london, and i ask somebody the way to piccadilly circus? they point me in the correct direction, and they are paternalist by definition. they try to help me achieve my goal. i think the nanny state involves connection. —— cohersion.

if we banned cigarettes, that's fine to call it a nanny state. if we help people and make it easier for you to give up somehow, then that creates a nudge. the presumption is that all governments are doing things for the right reasons. i don't run any governments. you're being quite involved with one at the moment, with one set up in the heart britain. influencing the way government makes decision and saying you save millions of pounds in taxpayers‘ money. you‘re an influential figure. that‘s right, but when people ask me to sign a copy of my book i sign it ‘nudge for good‘ which is a hope that nudging us every day taking our money and putting it in their pockets. i think that those who live in democracies, we elect

a government to help run society. if they do that just for evil we should vote them out. the way it normally works traditionally, is that the government comes up with an idea — putting it forward. they establish legislation and regulations because of that process. there‘s a debate and an argument. there is a vote and it‘s up front and visible. there is the potential risk that a government who is enthusiastic about this theory, that much of this is done and very subtly in a way that people cannot necessarily see. that‘s when the ethical doubt is raised. i think that‘s a complete misconception. we‘ve been working in job centres. they are there to help

people find jobs. and we had a few members of the team spend a few weeks in various job centres watching what they do. the end result of that is that we will be running experiments to help the people who work in those places to be more effective at finding peoplejobs. now, there are... everybody in government is trying to do the job. someone at the bbc has coached you on the best way of conducting this interview. you have not revealed that to me or the audience. you are manipulating me. you‘re manipulating the audience. i would not use that word. i‘d say you‘re doing yourjob. you‘re trying to make this interview as useful as possible. so i think manipulation

isjust a red herring. but no case of manipulation in providing a motive? you say nudge the good. but it has the potential to be misused. one said he thought it was a kind of mind trickery into getting the people of britain to adopt a state ordered lifestyle. yeah, that‘s rubbish. there is no secret plan. there is no big brother. in fact, one of the most important things we are doing, this is in the process of working

its way through parliament right now, getting consumers to have the right to see their own usage data from the suppliers. so if you go to a supermarket and they have a shoppers club, they are collecting data on all the things you buy. they seek to nudge you by changing the arrangement of things... exactly. we want you to be able to have that data, say you are a kid with a peanut allergy, by allowing you access to that data someone will write an app, you‘ll be able to upload all of your purchases and get back a list of things you can stop buying. the nudge unit mantra

is — make it easy. we are trying to make life easier for the citizens of britain. there are areas this has not been used in so far. it is not being used for foreign policy, macro—economic policy. but i wonder if it might help with things like tax rates? in britain, they cut the highest rate of tax from 50p in the pound down to 45p in the pound. part of the theory was that people would be more likely to pay if it was 45p. i do not know if your unit was used to provide evidence for that. might there be a case to say that big policy decisions like that could be helpfully influenced by using the sort of information you used to decide on what will nudge us to do the right thing? well, first of all, if we‘re more

effective at getting people to pay the taxes they owe, we can reduce the rates. the second thing is, britain is about to launch a new pension scheme that has all kinds of behavioural principles drilled into it. it has been in the works for several years, lord turner was involved in this. and so people will be automatically enrolled into the programme. that is not a nudge. that‘s compulsion. precisely not. not compulsion. they‘re automatically enrolled and they are free to get out... government thinks they won‘t, though. otherwise he finance of the thing fall apart.

if everyone opts out, it will be a useless programme. but what we know is if you make it... if you automatically enrol people, most people think they should be saving for retirement but never get around to it. if we make it easy, our mantra, "make it easy", fill out all the forms, then more people willjoin and fewer people will become wards of the state in their older age. what impact does culture have on this theory? a behavioural scientist is doing similar work with the french government. he said the french do not comply as easily with social norms compared to brits and americans, the anglo—saxons.

he says it will not be enough to get them to change their own behaviour in france. are there cultural limits you‘ve encountered ? as a rule, there is vast literature on cross—cultural differences. and a great simplification would be, they tend to be second order. so, the first order results that people are more sensitive to losses than gains is a fact about the human condition. whether the chinese are less loss averse than the ethiopians, perhaps. as things spread out, one of the young guys in our unit is going off to do a year in australia because they want to try some of these things over there. if the aussies are different to the brits, maybe things will have to be done differently. that‘s why we test.

the longer term question, if you change behaviour, can it be a sustained change in behaviour? my little dog walking example works. when i was a kid, you had to nudge people to buckle up their seatbelts. now people don‘t think about it. kids grew up buckling their seatbelts, now they just do it. you can change cultural norms. in 2010, a journalist said it has become a case study in how big ideas get corrupted. that author suggested politicians looking for a short—term fix, cost—effective solution, take an idea like this and run with it. actually, they take it away from what it was intended for. well, some people may do that. i would say precisely the opposite

is true of the behavioural insight team in britain. everything we do we test. there is no rush into anything. the first trip over here, when i was taken around to see one minister after another, the phrase i kept saying, we cannot do evidence—based policy without evidence. everything we try to do we try and test. the alternative to what we‘re doing is arrogance. it is arrogance to think that you know what the right way of doing things is. i don‘t think i know. i‘m pretty sure that if you automatically enrol people into a pension plan, most of them willjoin. and we have millions of data points in america to support that because companies have adopted it.

but, you know, not every one of my ideas is right. that‘s why i insist that we test everything that we do. i‘m human. everybody on the nudge unit is human. we‘re just trying to help british citizens go about their lives more successfully. one of the famous examples you have quoted is the one of putting a fly inside a urinal, a toilet, improving men‘s aim. a classic example of sustainable behaviour. are men still aiming better? i haven‘t seen any new data. but, you know, it is a fun example. it is probably one sentence in the book.

but it‘s probably the most famous. but i think it is an illustration of an intervention that was nearly costless and helpful. if you want to say we‘re manipulating men to aim where they should, then i plead guilty. let me put this to you. there has been a british inquiry into this, behavioural change is a good thing, nudge is useful but people need 20—25 years before their behaviour changes. i don‘t know what studies the baroness was reading but that is false. richard thaler, thank you forjoining us on hardtalk my pleasure. thank you. hello there.

quite a lot of cloud first thing across the southern half of the british isles. some drizzly outbreaks of rain, as well, in parts of england and wales. the best of the sunshine first thing today is likely to be across scotland. for northern england, perhaps some breaks in the cloud, and for the midlands, too. here‘s the picture first thing, as you can see. fairly solid cloud across england and wales. we‘ll take a closer look at where the breaks are to be found injust a second. but really, you can already see the contrast — scotland and northern england looking much clearer. northern ireland likely to see some sunshine in shelter from the westerly or south—westerly wind. but some showers arriving through the morning as well, one or two of them heavy during the rush hour. still strong winds and some heftier showers for the northern isles. the showers as we head onto mainland of scotland a little bit more scattered. some heavier ones possible through the central lowlands.

but here at least, in between the showers, some decent sunshine. sunshine across northern england first thing, too. although look out for some rain around the liverpool bay area, stringing across towards lincolnshire. some glimmers of sunshine for the midlands and perhaps the south—east of england. thicker cloud, however, across the south—west, and some more persistent, if not especially heavy, outbreaks of rain to be found here. stretch those across the bristol channel into southern wales, as well. to the lee of the welsh hills and mountains, however, there should be some sunshine to get the day underway through herefordshire and up into the likes of warwickshire and into the midlands. to the lee of the welsh hills and mountains, however, there should be some sunshine to get the day underway through herefordshire and up into the likes of warwickshire and into the midlands. things improve through the morning. i think we‘ll see more in the way of sunshine, whereas further south, some of that cloud is going to filter its way further eastwards into the south—east of england. so enjoy any early brightness, because it looks like the afternoon for the south—east of england and east anglia will be cloudy, with some outbreaks of rain. further west, a little brighter. but then cast your eye towards the north—west,

where, after that glorious start for scotland, it‘s all really gone downhill — thicker cloud and outbreaks of rain arriving. that‘s this frontal system here, coming in from the north. tightly squeezing isobars, as well, mean strong winds, and that wet weather pushes across northern ireland, northern england, into wales and the midlands through the small hours of wednesday. so a pretty wet and windy story as wednesday gets underway, and this rain is really going to tot up as well for some parts of southern scotland, northern england and for wales. particularly, i think, the cumbrian fells and the mountains of snowdonia getting a real dollop of rain, perhaps up to 100mm before we‘re through with this weather system, the rain getting further south into wales and the south—west of england come the afternoon. the south—east, with some sunshine, could see up to 18 degrees though, and northern ireland and scotland will clear as the day goes on. thursday probably the best day of the week across the board, in terms of some dry and fine weather. just light winds, as well. and temperatures around average for the time of year, in the mid teens.

this is bbc news. i‘m ben bland. our top stories: the leader of catalonia prepares to address the regional parliament will he declare independence from spain? at least ten people are killed as one of the worst firestorms in california‘s history tears its way through the state‘s wine region. and why a court case over dual citizenship could cost the australian government its majority in parliament. schools closed, flights cancelled and demonstrations — french unions urge more than 5 million workers to take to the streets. and staying relevant — the world bank says more needs to be invested in education, before artificial intelligence axes millions ofjobs.