of heightened uncertainty as we did around the 2016 referendum. we are closely monitoring market developments, we can lend in all major currencies and if required the ftc stands ready to cut the receptacle capital buffer if economic stresses worked to materialise. the bank's ability to achieve its monetary and financial stability objectives also depend on both the transition and the end—stage. the level of preparedness of business and infrastructure such as ports, custom systems and transportation will be important determinants of how well the economy adjust to new trade barriers. evidence from surveys with other uk authorities suggests the country is not yet fully prepared for a cliff edge brexit. surveys suggest that less tha n edge brexit. surveys suggest that less than half of businesses have initiated contingency plans for no—deal. less than a fifth of small businesses have done so. after quarter of a million traders have never completed the customs

declaration, 11 of 12 major projects to replace keyboard of projects are at risk of not being delivered by march 29, 2019. securing an implementation period will minimise the impacts on the uk economy. a sauber, objective assessment of the length of that implementation period as desirable, to get brexit off to the right start. this implementation period should be as as necessary to prepare properly for new trading relationships, but no longer. turning to the end state, as you know, the uk is to the world's leading internationalfinancial centre. at around ten times gdp by asset size, the scale of activity of the uk financial system and its complexity is unmatched in other jurisdictions. this confers a special responsibility on the back to ensure that that system is robust to ensure that that system is robust toa to ensure that that system is robust to a wide range of potential domestic and global shocks. that's

why, irrespective of the particular form of the uk's future relationship with the eu, and consistent with its statutory responsibility, the bank of england will remain committed to the implementation of robust financial standards in the uk. this will require maintaining a level of resilience that is at least as great as currently planned, which itself exceeds that required by international baseline standards. it will also require maintaining more generally the uk authority's ability to manage uk financial stability risks. so, to conclude, the bank of england is ready for brexit, whatever form it takes. england is ready for brexit, whateverform it takes. analysis released today confirms that the courel the uk financial system is resilient to worst—case brexit scenarios. we have contingency plans in place to support market functioning if necessary. but, to be clear, the back being ready for brexit is not sufficient to

guarantee a particular economic outcome. as monetary policy continues to set the hits to supply that brexit could entail. are unwavering commitment to price and financial stability will support the necessary adjustment of the real economy and feature the potential of this economy and its implications forjobs, real wages and wealth are not in the gift of central bankers. rather, the economic consequences of brexit over the longer term will depend on the nature of the uk's future trading relationship, on other government policies, and ultimately, on the ingenuity and enterprise of the british people. and with that, my colleagues and i will be pleased to take your questions. if you could give your name and the organisation you represent, please just name and the organisation you represent, pleasejust one name and the organisation you represent, please just one question first time around. ben parsons from

sky news. the bank has to date presented a picture of a no—deal, disorderly brexit that would lead to one of the biggest economic slumps in the recent history of this country. so, are you part of battlebus project via or do you really think that we are looking at economic catastrophe? —— are you pa rt of economic catastrophe? —— are you part of project fear. ourjob is to prepare for the worst. as i hope i made clear in my opening statement, we have looked at a potential no—deal, no transition brexit and made a series of worst case assumptions around that. so for example that port infrastructure is not ready. for example that the eu

does not recognise, there was no grandfathering of uk product standards and other detailed factors and a sharp reaction in financial markets. the reason we do that is to be prepared for all eventualities. it is to make sure that our banks have more than enough, three times what they had even after that shop, more than three times what they had going into the financial crisis, they have more than enough capital for a disorderly brexit to make sure that they have more than enough liquidity and that as a whole the way that they are managing risk and protections they are from capital liquidity means that they can continue to serve businesses and households across the united kingdom. so, we look at that in order to be prepared for that worst—case scenario, for a purpose. and the thing that i would —, and one of the things buried in an avalanche of paper, buried in

reports, but also the minutes that would come out, the record that will come out ten days from now, will agree that a series of discussions that the ftc, and analyses, that the ftc has been doing for the last couple of years, which is exactly looking at these scenarios and making sure that we're getting the financial system ready for something which is an unlikely scenario. and evenin which is an unlikely scenario. and even in an unlikely scenario we have taken it do what we think is a worst—case version taken it do what we think is a worst—case version of that unlikely scenario to make sure that we have done ourjob, we have got the system ready, and what we are telling you, if there is one thing that you take from the avalanche of paper and the numbers under discussion today is that the cora the uk financial system is ready for brexit, whatever form it takes. —— the core of. system is ready for brexit, whatever form it takes. -- the core of. what

comes through in your report, you say the bank of england is ready, the financial system is ready for brexit, but britain is not ready for brexit. there seems to be much in your report saying that part of the severity of some of these outcomes is to do with the unpreparedness of business, households, whatever, for what is ahead. can you unpack that, the severity of some of the situations? eyeball -, particularly, because this is all relevant to no—deal, no transition, and obviously we have looked at the forms of economic partnership where there is an transition so, in the case of no transition, and again with our worst—case hat adviser on, as you would expect us to be, there are several drivers of those outcomes. it starts with the frictions of the trading system,

because suddenly they're notjust carrots in place but rules of origin checks, a series of customs and other checks, for which this system is not yet prepared and so that adds on top of it additional friction, and then we have laid all of this out very clearly, i think, there are risks that come into financial markets at the same time, in part belatedly, because of the scale of the economic shock and a degree of unpreparedness and the economic shock and a degree of unprepa redness and the the economic shock and a degree of unpreparedness and the uncertainty effects which hit business. to take it back to the core of your question, which is, so what's actually happening on the ground? it is our observation and has been for some time that the number or proportion of businesses that have contingency plans or have initiated or activated contingency plans remains a fraction of businesses as

a whole. as you dig deeper into that and you have conversation with business, in several cases it is very difficult for those businesses to plan for border frictions. very difficult for those businesses to plan for borderfrictions. they can plan for tariffs, for a change in the price of selling their goods, but in terms of the logistics of making that happen, it is very difficult. i heard an example on your programme this morning about the very sophisticated business which has that issue. that is a very common phenomenon. which has that issue. that is a very common phenomenon. so let's flip it around, though. the situation is that the european union, the united kingdom, certainly the uk government, what's a transition period to whatever form of brexit we are taking —— wants a transition.

and certainly from what we have seen for the economy as a whole, it is advisable to how that transition and implementation period. and, if i may, this should be an objective assessment of preparing this, and the time it will take to ensure that not just for businesses, the time it will take to ensure that notjust for businesses, i go back to the point that in some cases the logistical issues, you can't plan for these logistical issues, you can't plan around them so it goes first and foremost to making sure that the infrastructure is there and ready and ready to go so that we can move as seamlessly as possible to the new relationship, whateverform it takes. joel hills from itv news. all of your scenarios assume that britain is up leaving the european union in some shape or form. what happens to your growth forecasts if

britain ends up remaining? we were asked by the treasury committee and we will discuss it with them next week to compare those scenarios that ijust went week to compare those scenarios that i just went through, that you referenced, to quote unquote, the present position. which is a slightly ambiguous phrase. and from our perspective you could interpret it in two ways. the first is the present position, and other words, the current forecast that we have for the economy, which has an element of brexit in it, obviously, because there has been an effect as you know on business investment because of the uncertainty over brexit, the pound is where it is because of brexit fracture as well, so you can interpret its first as that, but also as a scenario where we are part, we remain part of the european union. and the cleanest, the simplest approach to that, for

us, is to take the last forecast we had prior to the referendum and as you'll see the documents there is a straight line from may 2016 trend, which isjust straight line from may 2016 trend, which is just an extrapolation of the path that the economy is on. it is nothing more, to be absolutely clear, than a mechanical extrapolation of the trend rate of growth that the economy was on which was around 2% at that time. and then it is done throughout the document. you can compare scenarios. i appreciate you using the word, scenarios, not forecast, whether it is no—deal or partnership relative to the forecast we just came out of in the fpc or your own. we will come back for a second go, can we go to ben at the front? you mention this avalanche of

documents mentioned several times, there is no historical precedent for a disorderly brexit, nothing to guide us from history books. given that, what is the scientific basis for saying as you have several times that this is a worst—case scenario that this is a worst—case scenario that you have painted here? doesn't that you have painted here? doesn't that give us a sort of false sense of precision about what we are looking at, here? obviously one could take the most extreme moving credit spreads, the most extreme move in uncertainty in the most extreme moves in borderfrictions and add all of those up. we're pretty close to that, not precisely at that but pretty close to that, in terms of what we have done. what is

one of the most important things, andi one of the most important things, and i want to stress this, in thinking about the dynamics, how quickly does the economy respond to the sharp decrease in openness? and it isa the sharp decrease in openness? and it is a sharp reduction in openness in the disorderly scenario. notjust because of paris and nontariff barriers but because of the logistical problems and other factors. with that sharp reduction, we have made an assumption, and it is grounded in some case studies and some work, but we are very clear about this, this is an uncertainty, we've made an assumption that the adjustment is pulled forward, the adjustment is pulled forward, the adjustment in the economy is more rapid when you put up barriers than the adjustment of the economy when you drop them an terms of a new trading agreement. and that adds a degree of difficulty, challenge, it

makes it worse, the scenario worse. so what we would suggest is that, we move to these very sharp moves, two standard deviation moves of uncertainty, plus you have this dynamic that is brought in. it is justified, but we do it in order to have a worst—case scenario. justified, but we do it in order to have a worst-case scenario. we do have a worst-case scenario. we do have a worst-case scenario. we do have a lot of information and by we imean have a lot of information and by we i mean the community of economists, on the effect of differing trading relationships on where volumes of trade end up and what those do to productivity. you're right, in general, in terms of the changes in those things, they have tended to go ina those things, they have tended to go in a positive direction, certainly in developed economies, more or less continually since the second world warand we continually since the second world war and we have not had the reverse experience. so one important

assumption we make is that the magnitude of these effects is the same in reverse as it has been on the way up, as it were. i think that's a reasonable assumption to have made. what is harder tojudge, this is what the government was talking about —— the governor was talking about —— the governor was talking about, is the speed at which these effects come through. we could imagine that they would come through faster in the most disruptive cases. there is one case study that was used on the loss of access on the same terms to the uk by new zealand in the mid—19 705. that is about the only concrete example we could find. we think there are independently good reasons for that related to the 5tate good reasons for that related to the state of pre pa redne55, good reasons for that related to the state of preparedness, and we think the5e fracture will come through fa5ter the5e fracture will come through faster in the worst—case scenario that i would point you do. several page5 beginning at 26 of the report, why we think that is the case. i can

reiterate, i don't think the scale of the eventual numbers is founded on as little data as you suggest. we have got quite a lot. the speed of the adjustment we are less sure about what we are confident it would be slightly faster on did the integration side and then you have trade integration. the bank of england, effectively endorsing government policy and those that set a risky precedent as your former colleagues in the bank of england are saying that it could set a risky precedent for the independence of the central bank? let's be clear what is going on, here. the bank of england has tremendous responsibilities, tremendous powers. it is accountable to parliament, accountable to the people of the uk, through parliament. parliament has

demanded this analysis. now, this is the type of analysis, as i referenced earlier, we have been doing this type of analysis in order to do ourjobs, in order to deliver financial stability, monetary stability, and particularly on the former, on financial stability, to think about exactly what we have just been talking about is, what could go wrong? what could be really difficult? work at the financial system be caught out and how can we get it repaired so that the financial system is part of the solution, not part of the problem? and the good news is that we have the foresight of pretty substantial evidence analysis and in the end, cold, hard, capital liquidity and if you would like to hear sam woods ta ke you would like to hear sam woods take up the rest of this press conference by going through the numbers, more than do it. in terms of the assessment of a partnership

arrangement, this is something that we also have to do, in order to develop. these are scenarios, not forecast, and this gets to one of the links between the two, which is, we have to have a sense of the potential implications of an arrangement that is different after all than the arrangement we have today with the european union. and we have to have a sense of what uk businesses and households think about that arrangement, which isn't necessarily the same thing as what that arrangement could all will be. and obviously what financial markets think about it, as well. and all of those mapping to what, ultimately, the man, supply and the exchange rate and therefore the path of monetary policy. —— demann, supply. therefore we have to do it. and we have done it. and if you have to do

it and you have done it, and parliament demands it, you are accountable to the people of the united kingdom through parliament, you expose it, and that's, there's nothing more here than that. just a reminder, you have mentioned which organisation you represent as well. fill all that, at the times. in your scenario planning, worst—case scenario, you suggest interest rates will rise to 5.5% as the economy crashes further i did during the financial crisis. ijust crashes further i did during the financial crisis. i just want crashes further i did during the financial crisis. ijust want to establish, are we looking at the reticle extrapolations or is this realistic that interest rates would do the complete opposite to what happened in the financial crisis, and what's your estimation of the likelihood of the worst—case scenario happening? ok. so, the first thing is, in terms of the

financial crisis, it is a very well structured question. so the complete opposite of what happened in the financial crisis. in many respects this is the opposite of what happened in the financial crisis because as you know, the financial crisis principally at least initially, for the first few years was a shock of demand and when you look back over the course of our professional lifetime and stretched further back all the way into the 70s, that is effectively what the collective we have been dealing with, which is demand shocks, gradual changes in the supply path of the economy, sometimes the economy doing a little better in productivity or labour supply, but gradual changes to the supply side of the economy and then demand shocks, both positive and negative, therefore monetary policy can be calibrated to adjust demand and accordingly bring information to

target or not if it is miss calibrated. and to support the economy that way. what is different about this is, first and foremost, it isa about this is, first and foremost, it is a supply shock, which then has demand obligations. it is a totally different situation than people have been living with and experiencing, certainly in advanced economies, for the last 30—110 years. we, in that situation, that is why we have stressed the supply and demand and exchange—rate element, in that situation, we would be faced with a real challenge to be absolutely clear, which is, we know the direction of the hit to supply, and negative shock to supply, determining exactly how much of it is coming in, at what pace, and how persistent that is, will be difficult and it is part of what

then was just talking about in terms of, do we think it will come in more rapidly than historic integration, and if it is a scenario, which is unlikely, to be absolutely clear, we have got to prepare for the unlikely, i will come back to the second part of your question, if it isa second part of your question, if it is a scenario with logistical issues and other elections that are not pa rt and other elections that are not part of the new trading relationship but are just frictions from adjusting to the new trading relationship, we will have to make a determination about how much of a hit to supply is temporary, versus persistent. and that will have a bearing on substantive policy. but, all things equal, in a sharp supply shock, the role of monetary policy, a sharp supply shock with and exchange—rate adjustment driven by future real incomes with an

inflationary effect on tariffs, the last one who got through, the next one, not necessarily, it is likely to be inflationary, and in the end we have a remix, which is an inflation target dream it, we can balance that remix to a certain extent, but we cannot ignore it. . in terms of likelihood, when one stacks up worst—case, worst—case, worst—case, the joint probability means that it is less likely. the possibility, but it is a possibility, but it is a possibility, that we will have no deal and no transition. we have a lwa ys deal and no transition. we have always thought that it was a possibility, maybe the possibility has increased, you tell me, you're probably closer to it. although it has increased with time. but even when it was just a small probability, ourjob was to get the system probability, ourjob was to get the syste m rea dy probability, ourjob was to get the system ready to deal with that, and

you can't get it ready overnight. we think the system is ready, certainly the core of the system is ready. that is the governor of the bank of england, mark carney, with his brexit assessment, the one that he was stressing the government asked him to carry out with his various scenarios. as he was explaining, scenarios, not forecasts for what could happen in various different brexit settings. lots to chew over, we had a government assessments earlier today, i'm we had a government assessments earliertoday, i'mjoined by we had a government assessments earlier today, i'm joined by our economics correspondent andrew walker to pick his way through all of this. let's concentrate on what the banks say first. this is a report with a lot of things in it but we have selected one or two to give some sort of labour. first of all, let's look at the scenario that the bank describes as an economic

partnership, various degrees of close as one might have in terms of keeping the barriers to trade load and this is the range that the bank has coming before the possible impact on the british economy, compared with where it would be, in 2024, compared with where it would be, in 202a, if compared with where it would be, in 2024, if it stayed on the part that was on before the referendum with 2% growth. and i've got a little chart which seems to be suggesting that, in that scenario, we would be looking at continued economic growth, but significantly slower than we had before the referendum. so by no means a catastrophe, one would say. the bank has also been looking at a very much more adverse scenario, one in which we have a very disruptive brexit with no transition period and the possibility of seeing a cut in the level of economic output activity to 8%. that is not compared the some

hypothetical path projected from the past, but compared with roughly where we are now and that would be a deep recession, deeper than we saw in the aftermath of the financial crisis, but it is worth emphasising that mark carney was saying that this is very much a case of preparing for the worst, accessing the banks to check they are capable of withstanding that kind of shock and the conclusion is that they are. he described this as being an unlikely scenario and the worst—case version of it. as you said yourself, this is not a forecast, and it is important to emphasise that point. just describing what could happen if everything went wrong. he says we are obliged to prepare for the worst. that is part of theirjob to ensure that the banking system can cope with the worst. that was what the bank said. we saw the various government figures earlier this morning. so talk us through those by comparison. there is a bit of a

difference in the nature of the exercise. the bank has been looking ata exercise. the bank has been looking at a rather more short—term horizon path for how the economy might develop over five years or thereabouts. whereas the government forecast or scenario, i should say, we're looking at how things might look in 15 years' time after the end of the transition period. and, if we have the kind of partnership that the government would like to achieve, a range of forecasts, a range of possibilities, the worst of which was a figure of 3.9%, compared with where we would be, if we stayed, the government economist think we would be, if we were to stay in the eu. they also have a rather more alarming rigour for a disruptive no—deal type exit from the european union, and that is 9.3% below where we would otherwise have been. now, these figures from the government are not putting out detailed year by year path where we

can see a recession happening at any point, but nonetheless, that is quite striking difference, compared with where the government thinks we could be, if we maintained current arrangements, as they put it, and in other words, remaining arrangements, as they put it, and in otherwords, remaining in arrangements, as they put it, and in other words, remaining in the eu. thank the guiding us through andrew. let's get some political response to that. archie political correspondent vicki young is at westminster. well, a flurry of numbers and analyses of different brexit scenarios. 0ne earlier today from across government departments and now this one from the governor of the bank of england. let's get reaction to order with the former brexit minister david jones, whojoins me now. i appreciate you have not heard all of what mark carney has to say but he says a disorderly brexit would trigger the worst recession and the financial crisis, if there was no transition deal and it wasn't a managed no—deal

scenario. what is your reaction to what he's saying? visiting the bank of england has published on this day. the bank of england more gloomy than the treasury. i think we have to be very careful about these forecasts. you'll recall that before the referendum, we were told there would be in immediate recession if the country voted to leave the european union and we were told there would have to be an emergency budget and we will be in a financial crisis and it did not happen. now nobody is suggesting that there should be a distorted lubricant, so really i think the more lurid forecast that we have seen in the bank of england analysis can be discounted. that's what organise brexit. beyond that we have to understand these are analysis that are based upon models and assumptions that are not readily published. and i think i asked in the house only this afternoon that the house only this afternoon that the government should publish its own assumptions so that third—party

organisations such as economist of free trade can analyse them and can say whether or not they agree with them. the difference now than during them. the difference now than during the referendum and all these analysis coming out if we are four—month from leaving the eu. so understandably, businesses whether they are motor or manufacturers or farmers, small businesses, are extremely concerned because they don't feel ready for a no scenario which is what we assume will happen if theresa may's deal vote down. that may be the case. i would say that i happen to know that there is a great deal of preparation that has gone on for the potential of leaving without a negotiated deal. but i think one has to look at the alternative that is not 0pera, which is that the government withdrawal agreement which would keep us in the customs union for ever and unless we we re customs union for ever and unless we were to find a way out of the backstop which is not obvious right now, and it would be would be tied toa

now, and it would be would be tied to a declining economic block with a smaller trader. sol to a declining economic block with a smaller trader. so i think we have to look at both of these options. i think that nobody wants either extreme and i think that probably can afford my's time, with the government finds the proposal has been voted down, we can see them going back to the eu would try to arrange something that is more sensible. what do you think it is likely to be given the eu has made it clear that this agreement is closed? what do you think realistically theresa may could get out of them if her deal is bolted down? i think the eu is saying that his clothes closet until somebody from this country come back. that is what it's going to be happening in a few weeks. that's like saying this deal will be close. we know the eu will agree to a canada style free trade agreement. that is what i believe we should be pushing for all along. and given we are already in complete alignment with the eu, there is no reason why we cannot agree to free—trade agreement within

the period that remains to us. even under that scenario, many analysis to say that the country would be worse off than it would be at the state in or under theresa may's deal because there is inevitably more friction under that scenario as it is not terror barrier" we can realise immediately the eu because the country had voted to leave the eu. we have to remember also that we vote to leave, it is not really on economic grounds. on grounds of such issues as sovereignty and independence was people want to re cove r. independence was people want to recover. but i think that a canada style free—trade agreement is one that we should be aiming for, i was ata that we should be aiming for, i was at a meeting of economist for free—trade as morning when it was pointed out that under such a arrangement we would actually see economic growth. and it all depends on the economic assumptions. and the treasury assumptions today have always been very suspect. thank you. there will be of course and

arguments over the numbers and of course polymetal have a chance to debate this, five days of debate about the deal that theresa may has got for the meaningful vote. thank you. theresa may has continued her nationwide tour to sell her brexit bill. she made a visit to a factory near glasgow today and are scotland correspondent is there. what has she said and where has she been? theresa may is still a satisfactory. a village outside of glasgow. she's been there for an hour and a half taking her message to the people. not taking her message to the people. n ot exa ctly taking her message to the people. not exactly a walk through the centre of glasgow. heavily staged managed, she was driven from the airport directly here and one assumes it will be driven directly back and float back down to london this evening. also heavily controlled in terms of the number of media allowed inside, just a few

broadcast is allowed, to ask questions, a lot of photographers and other media waiting outside but she did take questions and her message is trying to get out as she thinks this agreement is good for protecting jobs and investment going forward. it free-trade area with no tariffs, no fees, that would mean an opportunity to carry on the trading thatis opportunity to carry on the trading that is owed important for companies like bridge of weir were i that is owed important for companies like bridge of weirwere i am that is owed important for companies like bridge of weir were i am today but also gives the opportunity to negotiate trade deals around the world that will be good for great scottish exports from unlike scotch whisky and scottish salmon, and of course what ought i have also seen today, is the importance of this duo for employers and organisations across scotland. employers like biagio, the national farmers union, scotland, and also scotch whisky association have all said this is an important deal and have all raised

the concerns about the prospect of no deal for scotland, so this is a deal that is reference colin and for scottish fishermen. how difficult a solicits for the prime minister given how scotland voted in the referendum two years ago? -- how the vocal acl is there. the majority of people voted to remain in the eu referendum. that has remained a co nsta nt of referendum. that has remained a constant of course the smp block of mps say that will vote against this bill. -- mps say that will vote against this bill. —— snp. while she's sent the message and then to the public i think it is also to be fair probably and that her own block of 13 conservative mps here in scotland among that is on this squire about how this deal will eventually shake down when it comes to fishing. to that end, theresa may released a letter today saying that if no deal was made by the end of 2020 there will be no access to british waters for eu vessels, she is trying to

reassure them what that message and trying to reassure the wider public with her message when it comes to the economy. of course, nicola sturgeon would say something entirely different when it comes to the economy, the first minister did interview earlier on today when she said that theresa may it was denying reality by talking about economic opportunity for scotland, when nicola sturgeon's on government has published findings that we are going to be she says for her as a result of brexit. those numbers came out yesterday, nicola sturgeon's advisers modelling the scots will be £1600 ahead for her as a result of brexit. thank you. one of the main arguments for leaving the eu, has been that it will allow the uk to strike new trade deals with some of our closest allies — including with the us. however, that hope took a hit on tuesday — when president trump said the brexit deal was great for the eu and he cast doubt on whether the uk would be able to make a trade

arrangement the us. sounds like a great deal for the eu can't and i think we have to do this. we have to take a look at seriously whether or not whether the uk is allowed to trade because right now, if you looked the deal, they may not be able to trade with us. that would not be a good thing. i don't think they meant that and i don't think they meant that and i don't think they meant that and i don't think that the prime minister meant that and hopefully she'll be able to do something about that... the president speaking a few days ago. joining me now is the us ambassador to the uk, woodyjohnson — who has also been a friend of the president for more than 30 years. welcome. thank you. let's pick through those comments. a great deal of the eu, the implication being it is not a great deal for the of the eu, the implication being it is not a great dealfor the uk. of the eu, the implication being it is not a great deal for the uk.” think what he was referring to his what he has been talking about for the last year and half which is

strong robust bilateral free trade deal between our two countries. and thatis deal between our two countries. and that is really what he is talking about. and being able to do that he is talked about saying very positive with such an important trading partner between our two countries, about $250 billion a year in trade and a lot, over1 trillion invested in each other‘s countries and all that, so it is logical to have one of these agreements and this would kind of... this had the chance of setting a standard for these free—trade agreements around the world. were your country could control the rules and regulation, willful engagement, and a much more positive way. that might be what he wa nts positive way. that might be what he wants one in which you want, but he said going beyond the clip ijust mentioned, right now if you look at the deal, the uk may not be able to trade with us. that is what he said. right. clearly not what theresa may

wa nts to right. clearly not what theresa may wants to hear. she said she was a free—trade agreement. she said that all along. that is what she wants. she has made that point. the president seems to be implying that the current deal that she is trying so hard to sell to the british people into parliament will not enable that. i think there will be a delay for sure will stop if you read the agreement, this is a separation agreement and the trade agreement will follow at some point. that is the point... can tell that the point the point... can tell that the point the first, it is my understanding that a free bilateral trade agreement between the two countries can occur i may be reading it wrong. no, ithink can occur i may be reading it wrong. no, i think you're absolutely right. we might be entering a period where negotiations could take place, assuming we get past march with this withdrawal deal agreement. correct. but no implementation. correct. and the president is cognizant of that scenario. i think he is. that was

the point of what he said. he wants to get on with this and get a free—trade agreement as soon as possible and is willing to do with it right at the front of the schedule. going back to the great dealfor the au remark, i will return to my first observation, that sound like something theresa may would not want to hear. —— eating remark. the satellite perhaps some of the people she is currently opposed by political in the uk might say. —— eat you remark. opposed by political in the uk might say. -- eat you remark. i don't think he meant it that way. he is a president. he's an executive. he is impatient to get on with it. and to get i think he feels that this trade agreement, this trade agreement will be so beneficial and enhancing our security, our shared prosperity, that he is anxious to get it done. that is what he meant. let me talk about that possible trade deal. you ridden in the time new paper today about how you see that unfolding.

give us a vision of how you see that going forward. —— you were wrote in the times newspaper today. talking at the end of 2020, had easy things unfolded? a long way between here and there. —— how do you see things. it isa and there. —— how do you see things. it is a complex negotiation. to get these things done. but having the president state that he wants to get it done soon and fast and at the front of the line, indicates that all of the resources of the treasury and trade and commerce and the executive branch will be fulljuice and put in on that, so i will suspect it will be done as quickly then some although he has done it. he did it in a recent trade agreement with revising nafta with canada and mexico. that was done reasonably quickly. when you talk about the numbers working on in the near future are the people working ona near future are the people working on a potentially even now. we have working groups working out right

now, we can negotiate now, butjust setting up the parameters, what could be done and what will the issues likely be, what are the ongoing agreements like aviation, the fans, and sharing data and all of that, that is being worked on. he talked about soon. front of the line. how soon. but a number talked about soon. front of the line. how soon. buta number on talked about soon. front of the line. how soon. but a number on it. i think if he was in a position to start negotiating quantities it could be very quick. it is hard to know. we did nafta pretty quickly. to the new agreement. we have a long—standing relationship with this country. we have been trading for 100 years. i would think that we get it done sooner rather than later. put a figure on that. i can put a number on it but very quickly i would think. if it's in the oval 0ffice, would think. if it's in the oval

office, if it has the executive's signature on it, saying i want this done fast, i suspect it will be done very fast. —— i cannot put a number. it december 2020, went from negotiation to implementation talking much potentially? one can predict those. and in a to, but all ican predict those. and in a to, but all i can say is there is a inclination to do it. —— one cannot predict those. the sooner we get it done, the better. the president of course is very strong on the phrase that has been much touted by him and his supporters, america first. how will that play a part in his thinking when it comes to negotiations with the uk? i think the president is a good negotiator, buti the uk? i think the president is a good negotiator, but i think the uk is also a good negotiator i hope. you had done this for a few years, soi you had done this for a few years, so i think you know what you're doing. america first means focusing on american and a different way than he soured being focused on what he was talking about a lot of things.

maybe the people in the middle part of the country that had been kind of avoidance or forgotten or whatever. but he knows that prosperity comes and has to be shared. and both countries have to have prosperity in order to have good markets on both sides. so it is shared prosperity and he understands that. he supports that 100%. the fear in some quarters it is you will be aware that america first might mean that comes the crunch, given the american economy is bigger than the uk economy, you hold more of a card, if you were adamant that certain standards should apply to make a trade agreement work and they are currently uk standards, it would be the uk that had to give in. is that afair reading the uk that had to give in. is that a fair reading of the? no, i don't think so. i think that you have to...i

think so. i think that you have to... i don't think that is a useful strategy and a useful proposition. the same thing will be true between the eu and the uk. the uk and china or whatever. so, i the eu and the uk. the uk and china orwhatever. so, ithink the eu and the uk. the uk and china or whatever. so, i think you the eu and the uk. the uk and china or whatever. so, ithink you have the eu and the uk. the uk and china or whatever. so, i think you have to have three fair and balanced approach and that is with the president wants. he doesn't want free—trade with with without there and balanced, so you have to have everything. laura regulations and more freedom and lower tariffs and so on. “— more freedom and lower tariffs and so on. —— will regulation. more freedom and lower tariffs and so on. -- will regulation. final thought, perhaps people see how he is currently dealing with china for example when it comes to trade, can the uk expect that sort of treatment in negotiations? china is a different discussion. if you want to ta ke different discussion. if you want to take a look at the china row book, the rule book they follow in the rule book that the rest of us have to follow, there are some adjustments that have to be made. this president is willing to tackle

that issue i think in a way that others have not been willing to do politically or operationally. the world will be the benefit of that. you are confident the uk will follow the rules? i think we are ruled by society. 0ne the rules? i think we are ruled by society. one of the great advantages that you have here, you speak the language, you speak english, we speak the same language, you have a rule of law, a great tradition, great regulations, you have everything here to be successful. ambassador woodyjohnson, thank you. and looking a little further ahead tomorrow, with 4 months until brexit, we've got a special day of coverage looking at what it might mean for the nhs. what will happen to nhs staffing, the supply of vital medicines or your access to new treatments? we'll be answering your questions, here on the bbc news channel. a victim of child exploitation has called for a change in the law,

amid claims a man who raped her has been offered the chance to play a role in her son's life. sammy woodhouse — who's waived her right to annonymity — says rotherham council approached arshid hussain, even though he's in prison for raping her, as a child. jon donnison has the story. sammy woodhouse was just one victim of the rotherham grooming scandal. across the town, hundreds of young girls were sexually abused by gangs of men. when sammy was just 15 she was raped, and became pregnant. she had a son. in 2016 this man, arshid hussein, the biological father, was jailed for 35 years for abusing more than 50 girls. sammy says he has now been contacted by rotherham council in relation to a case in the family court. they asked him to apply for custody, so then he could make all the parental decisions.

so how that would work, because, you know, he's in prison for 35 years, he would decide where my son would live, and make all the decisions. then my son would go and visit him in prison, which is just absolutely outrageous. rotherham council says the case relates to family court proceedings, on which it's unable to give details. in a statement a spokesperson said... but some are now calling for a change in the law. i think most people would be horrified to find that a convicted rapist could apply through the courts to access their children, but in this case the social worker went to him and encouraged him to apply for custody. now, i think they've got the law wrong in this case, but i think as a parliament we have a responsibility to make it crystal clear in law that convicted rapists have absolutely no parental rights when it comes to accessing their children. and sammy woodhouse says

her case is not unique, she says there are many more women who faced years of abuse, now fighting to protect their children. jon donnison, bbc news. wales' first minister, carwynjones, has told the inquest into the death of the former welsh minister, carl sargeant, that sexual misconduct allegations against him "could not be ignored." mr sargea nt was found hanged last november, shortly after being sacked by mr jones. 0ur correspondent tomos morgan was at the inquest. first minister taiwan jones has just finished giving evidence in the inquest up call started, the former was government minister that died just four days after being sacked from cabinet after they were allegations of inappropriate behaviour towards women against him. jones told the inquest hears that he received a formal complaint in riding of those allegations just

days before he planned cabinet reshuffle. ask about the allegations and about the reshuffle, he said there was no realistic way of enforcing one from the other. the first minister said he had lost sleep and he also had felt a feeling of dread before going into the meeting with kyle sergeant which he told him that he had been relieved of his duty as community intelligence minister and told him there were allegations against him. michael wynn—jones was also a question about whether or not he had done enough and offered enough personal care. —— michael wynn—jones. earlier this week, the inquest has heard about it another written no written by a sergeant worries that i failed you, i let you down badly. after two and a half hours in the sand, jones is not finished to bring evidence in the inquest can be continued and concludes on friday. a woman and her former boyfriend have been found guilty

of being responsible for the death of her three—week—old son. stanley davis died in march last year after sustaining 42 fractures to his body. he was three weeks old. roxanne davis, from gosport, and samuel davies, from southampton, were convicted at winchester crown court of causing or allowing the boy's death. in australia, thousands of people have been told to leave their homes, as bushfires devastate parts of queensland. a catastrophic fire warning has now been issued, for the first time in the state's history. extreme weather conditions have also hit new south wales, with torrential rain and flooding in sydney, from where hywel griffith reports. fleeing the fires while they still can. for 8,000 queenslanders there's has been no choice but to leave their homes behind. bush fires are a familiar threat in australia — but not here and not at this time of year. a heatwave, combined with fierce

winds, created what the emergency services called a firestorm. it's not normal for queensland. people will burn to death. their normal approaches probably won't work if the situation develops as it is predicted to develop. it's no different to a category—five cyclone coming straight through your door. as the day ended, more than 130 fires continue to burn. some homes have been destroyed but rescue teams have stopped lives from being lost. 800 miles down the coast it was a very different storm testing the authorities as sydney was battered by a month's worth of rain in a day. the worst downpour in over 30 years brought four inches of water. as the storm swirled, flash flooding began. paramedics were left dealing with four times the usual number of car crashes. two people were killed

during the storm. summer may only be a few days away in australia. but wild, unpredictable weather is testing many people's resolve. the duke and duchess of cambridge have paid tribute to the five people killed in a helicopter crash at leicester city's ground, william and kate laid a floral memento near where the crash occurred and mingled with leicester city players and the family of the club's owner — vichai srivaddhanaprabha, who died with four others when the aircraft came down in october. harry leslie smith, the veteran campaigner for the poor and for refugees, has died. he was 95. he grew up in poverty in yorkshire — living through the great depression, and serving as a pilot in the second world war. but it's his work championing human rights and the welfare state, for which he'll be best remembered.

richard galpin, looks back at his life. if i close my eyes i can smell the poverty that oozes from the dusky tenement streets of my boyhood. it was this speech at the labour party conference four years ago about his life and the importance of the nhs that propelled harry leslie smith into the limelight as a passionate activist. the speech reducing some to tears. growing up in yorkshire during the great depression, he had to provide for his family from the age of seven, working as a barrow boy after his father lost his job. and during the second world war he joined the raf at the age of 22 serving as a pilot. the huge number of people he had witnessed displaced by the war led to him campaigning on behalf of refugees and migrants right up to the last years of his life. including visiting the makeshift camps in northern france

from where many tried to reach this country. but he also took to the media to highlight what was another key campaigning issue for him, poverty in britain. a massive amount of people living almost payday to payday. this of course something he experienced as a child. and then late in his life he decided the world was going backwards and he felt he had to stand up and be counted and campaign to save the nhs, the homeless and poor and refugees, and he was a moral light in the world. tributes have been pouring in since the announcement he died. he had been with his son in canada and is thought to have had pneumonia. his son has vowed to follow in his footsteps. harry leslie smith — who's died aged 95. time for a look at the weather, with helen willetts.

thank you. it's been a really wet and miserable day for many parts of the country, you can see that on the satellite picture here. this ran rattled through to the early hours of the morning, passed on a scale of can see if kerry arranged so it is going to be pretty miserable if you're heading out of the next two hours. standing water on the roads and windy, already we are turning our attention here at the weather centre, this next mass of clouds and the atlantic which is tomorrow speued the atlantic which is tomorrow spelled of what was their potentially stormy. a travel advisory for you. winds gusting up to 50, 60 mph, maybe more across scotland. and then again tomorrow, england and wales getting the brunt of those strong and gusty winds. that's how it looks for this

evening, rain across northern parts and quickly being blown away as that strengthening south—westerly wind pushes up into northern isles and we get a brief window of dry weather and more frame comes in by the morning, at least it is mild. however the will be quite a lot of fog around them already that spray is standing water returns to the road first thing in the morning and this wind will pick up. indicative here, once close to 60 miles an hour, along the south coast, english coast, very gusty elsewhere perhaps not as windy for scotland and northern ireland, but certainly more rain to compare, bear in mind has been really wet today. and yesterday. so that rain is just mounting up in the room below heightening and the ground is getting more saturated. in the afternoon and should be a brighter affair, with showers. however that rain slow to clear from parts of northeast scotland and there will be some heavy showers or brown hail and thunder and score the winds but it is mild, that is the positive of this, then we go into friday that

low pressure still with us, we have the westerly wind driving and more showers but because we have this next area of low pressure rain developing it should dampen down the shower activity and more showers but because we have this next area of low pressure rain developing it should dampen down the shower activity a little across the south. the still a lot of shower around. eight and the still a lot of shower around. eightand nine, back the still a lot of shower around. eight and nine, back to near average for the weekend, we have low— pressure for the weekend, we have low—pressure coming back in and yes, more rain is due and it looks mostly for england and wales, maybe elizabeth driver chillier further north, windsor on the website. —— maybe a little bit chillier. the bank of england warns that leaving the european union without a deal would hit the economy harder than the financial crisis of 2008. the governor has set out a grim forecast, predicting several parts of the economy will be badly hit. lower supply capacity, we could demand a lower exchange rate and higher inflation. the government's released its own

figures, suggesting the uk will be poorer after brexit, compared to staying in the eu. also on the programme. the health watchdog says the uk's worst performing mental health trust repeatedly fails patients, some harming themselves, waiting for care. he wanted a professional to tell him that he was going to be ok, which that's all of our story, that's all he ever wanted and they couldn't do that.