a "pointless attack." a man's been arrested in connection with the murder. smokers and problem drinkers admitted to hospital in england will get help to quit or cut down — to try to reduce demands on the health service. an investigation has been started after a 31—year—old man was shot dead by police in coventry. officers had gone to an address near the city centre as part of a pre—planned operation. now on bbc news — it's time for dateline london. hello, this is dateline london, the programme that brings together some of the uk's leading

commentators with foreign correspondents, filing for the folks back home, with the dateline "london." this week: divided government is back in washington. why has china taken a bite out of the big apple? the latest on brexit. and from bangladesh to brazil — the politicians who glory in the adjective "authoritarian." to discuss that, dateline‘s authoritative panel: the canadian—born, emmy—award winning broadcaster jeffrey kofman. eunice goes, portuguese writer and academic. the sudanese journalist nisreen malik, and the british conservative commentator alex deane. donald trump's trade team will be in china next week, as the two countries attempt to replace a truce in the trade war with a more permanent peace. apple, the technology giant blamed a slowing of the chinese economy rather than trade hostilities. for cutting its sales by between five and ten billion dollars in the quarter ending last week. either explanation should worry the united states, but its leaders have been pre—occupied by the political battle between democrats — emboldened at taking power in the house of representatives — and a president emboldened by the pre—christmas

white house clearout. in the space of a year or less to drop has lost his the retired generals and others, how well equipped as the administration to deal with the stand—off? if you thought the last two years were engaging reality television, you have not seen anything yet because donald trump's bluster and modus operandi is, i am the guy who makes decisions, he now faces something he has neverfaced before which is a divided government. the democrats control the house of representatives, he can no longer force through his agenda, he has to negotiate and compromise and that is a word that is not in his lexicon.

it is going to cause a lot of problems, we're already seeing it, the government shutdown is entering its third week, a quarter of the us government employees, about 800,000, are not being paid, some like workers who check your luggage at airports, transportation administration working without pay with the promise of back pay. how long is that sustainable? he wants to build the wall, he says no one is going back to work until the wall is built. congress says no way. this is a stand—off, we have a big problem in washington right now and how it is going to be resolved is anyone‘s guess. it is difficult to make the political arguments that you are refusing to have the federal government reopened because of public security but one of the departments are being funded is homeland security. many employees are still operating on the precedent where people get

back pay later but this is not the usual experience of europeans but americans will know these government shutdowns have happened before, people are accustomed to getting their pay backwards. in december the us economy added 300,000 jobs, exceeding expectations so when belgium do not have a government they are better off. most of us, judging by his results, his economy right now is performing fantastically. but this government acting as the art is posturing but it is both sides. the democrats on the end will give way and it will not keep them on shutdown for years, they will come to an agreement. the damage done any maintain this bottom, there is am argument that the democrats

are exceeding their remit. he is the executive elected to build this wall, that will not happen now? that is the main headline in the story that what democrats and objecting to is not the fact he wants to build a wall even though there are objections to that, the environment etc, but has pledged and people continue to roll out is that he is meeting his campaign pledge that the us taxpayer would not have to foot the bill. the democrats are on very strong ground for a change in that they have have him bang to rights. there is another difficulty for the trump administration that federal workers are not receiving their salaries, they will get them later, we hope. but the top officials

of us government just received a massive pay increase and that does not look good. for most members of the government that amounts to $10,000 added to their salaries, it does not look good when no one else is getting their pay, the administration is getting a pay increase for shutting down government. i think the administration will go back to compromise sooner rather than later. the optics are not great and the other element which is new is that government shutdowns have happened but they have been reluctant affairs and there is a sound bite from trump saying i will shut government down, so it looks very much like he was relishing the opportunity to do that to show that he can. as far as trump's base are concerned, his pledges as far as they are concerned and why

the elected town are to disrupt other people's lives not themselves. you're not wrong that people claim be all trump is doing as he is quite often is what people may not actually see and load. lots of governments and people in congress will go in thinking as long as i can stick the blame on you, then bring on the shutdown. trump is just saying what other people have thought. we are approaching these longer shutdowns of three weeks. i reject the view that people are better off, this is an enormous hardship for 800,000 people but about the democrats overreaching, i would challenge that. the us government, the fathers of the american constitution based on a concept of checks and balances and one of the concepts added a very only was this notion of executive oversight by congress. it is completely within

the authority of congress, now governed by the democrats, to challenge and demand accountability from the executive branch. is that different from what nancy pelosi said that there was not going to be a war? they have democratic accountability and mandate to do that check and question what the president is doing. what about the republicans in this? there are signs of nervousness about trump's agenda. they are now the minority party but do not have much power, 53 seats in the senate. i think this is trump's skill set is not received in compromise and this is really becomes difficult. two have already said they want to get the government reopened,

both in states with will be in states from the election and they will start to feel the pressure if this drags on. the hope of the democrats is to divide republicans and vice versa. that is the nature of politics will stop. compromise will be looked for in beijing this week as trading negotiators meet. do any of you see this apple announcement as a warning sign about what is happening in the chinese economy is a purely that the message has gone down from beijing however apple's executive might say because you want to cause offence but it is not patriotic to buy apple phones and it is a good way to put pressure on. there are lots of things playing into the story, apple has its own challenges even outside of china getting people to upgrade their iphones, the chinese economy is slowing down, also propaganda in china about how apple is american therefore you should buy other products.

some of it as related to the trade war but i think it is the kind of business story people like to shoehorn political narratives into. it'sjust a bad quarter for apple and something that happens more often across the world. because it is china having a particular challenge and in the middle of a trade war with the us that it has been blown up but is worth keeping an eye on. and the reason for both to be looking for a way out. there have been signs already, the chinese announced a number of concessions to the united states, the difference here is that the chinese are playing a long game. they have been very strategic for many decades in the way they manage their economic policy so they are not going to budge on the main demand of the trump administration of which is to change their economic approach where the state has such a big role

in running the economy. we covered by the station is far more practical so i think, trump being more tactical and the chinese to is going to be concessions that look good for trump but in the end we got through google win the trade war but it will not be easy for either side because both countries are suffering from a slowing down in industrial production as a result of this trade war. i agree, i think the focus the trump administration has become a shutdown puts the imperativr of coming back from beijing with a win and it is at the favour of china to present himself like he has had that win. i think we should expect the possibility that he comes back with something that surprises people and if he does

and is able to say look at the success even though people want to criticise them for stopping wars they hate him so much, if he walked on water they would say he cannot swim. if he comes back from china and says look at this deal that has there is potential for kick—starting things and china and the us that will surprise people. let's talk about deal—making and other people open to surprises which brings to mind theresa may who has had a christmas to reflect and regroup her approach to brexit. donald trump may be looking for something from the chinese, does theresa may have much hope of mercy from the eu, will the christmas spirit have invaded the corridors of brussels? christmas was a long time ago. jean—claude juncker and other european leaders, everybody is fed up with brexit and europe. the european union has made clear what kind of deal and relationship can be carved out,

it is up to the british government to come up with a solution, and the reality is theresa may has drafted a plan that does not seem to get the support of the majority of mps in the house of commons so she is in trouble and the problem is she doesn't seem to be having a way out of this. who knows what will happen. both sides within the eu they want to have a deal, when everyone says that are no more negotiations to be done, you are still negotiating. still bluster on both sides and thirdly and we have observed this, we tend to go to the last minute, sometimes last second. we still have a couple of months for compromise. we have the parliamentary deadline and the dup this week... mrs may has stopped the planned vote

already, though a week when it is supposed to happen in ten days. on that basis do you see anything that has shifted domestically that might increase the odds of her being able to get this through? yes, two things, more immediacy, if it gets closer the prospect of being this deal or no deal becomes more realistic. then interesting things happen, perhaps labour mps say i would rather have this deal. part two as it focuses the mind on both sides of negotiating not necessarily in the uk but abroad on whether or not you are going to allow the so—called backstop is due to derail the whole thing. if you are going to let it is that disproportionate harm to the eu economies with which there's negotiating and charged? i think it is like that will be a situation where the backstop if invoked it will cease

after so many years without the unanimous agreement of the parties. the challenge will be to sell that to the dup, i think she can. iadmire youroptimism, 83 days before the door slams shut. i agree sometimes these things come through at the last minute. this is a constitutional multi—generational change for this country, not simply a trade pact and the infants being born at this very day will feel the repercussions of the decisions being made in westminster and the next 83 days and in brussels. i think it is very concerning and reasons to be frightened and that there was no sign of a deal that is both palatable to the british people

and parliament and europe. i think this is extremely dangerous. why use terms like frightened and dangerous? because the economic structure of britain and its largest trading bloc, we do not know that it will look like. i think it is crucial that mps will act the only pressure on them to act as how their own constituents feel about the deal or no—deal brexit. my sense is that there is such a sense of exhaustion with the whole brexit debate especially towards the end of the year where we crashed into several hurdles, the no—confidence vote, the cancelled vote, and i think the justifying of terror of a no—deal brexit

is now less likely, people just want it to stop. the attention span is too low, they are sick of politicians, they do not trust anyone and so a no—deal brexit might become more palatable to people who before has not thought because theyjust want it over. and i think it is a growing number of mps in the conservative benches who actually relishing the idea of a no—deal brexit. conservative party supporters who want might create some momentum. we also have momentum coming from those mps from other parties who think there is an opportunity to campaign for a second vote and it is closing but these are too many factors that make the whole process highly unpredictable.

we watched theresa may and the expectations are low and then she comes through with chequers and people around this table will look foolish and any clashes and she comes back with another deal and it crashes and it is in everyone's interest to see something constructive and positive for this country to come out of this but it is hard to see theresa may as the person to pull it off. sheikh hasina, who last weekend won a third term as prime minister of bangladesh with a remarkable share of the vote, regards the label authoritarian as a badge of honour, according to her son. so too, it seems, jair bolsonaro, who was sworn—in this week as president of brazil. he says his election "proves people want hierearchies, order and progress." the dictionary definition of authoritarian says it is favouring or enforcing strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom.

why does that seem to have become politically more attractive? in brazil, it's because they have such a significant crimewave go on for so long with the apparent truth that neither side of mainstream politics could do anything about it. if neither side of your traditional political system can address the main concern of voters another force arises that can. and very often with austrailia one nation grew out of concerns about migration or ukip in our country, if you fail to offer voters a choice that addresses their concerns in that situation, which can be either way, more freedom or authority oriented, then something else will emerge. and we live in a time when there's been a wave parties have come to offer that choice and brazil is the remarkable example notjust because of the authoritarian position but because of the remarkably unpleasant extra bits that come along with bolsonaro, especially

towards minorities and homosexuals and women. people have been willing, many who voted for him, are willing to overlook. i agree with alex that usually authoritarianism comes off the back of instability and we have seen that in arab spring countries. a sense things have become too unstable but there was also i think a contrast in dynamic which is on a global level — we are seeing this happen everywhere, the south, bangladesh, and india, europe and south america and the us. there is also a different dynamic when you have peacetime for a long time the stakes become quite low for people who want to vote for hierarchies.

people who vote for bolsonaro and trump, etc, i think they want the re—establishment of a totem pole where everyone knows where they stand. but that is a reaction of too much stability, basically. because lack of hierarchy is actually what creates consensus and flattens power structures and people forget hierarchies are very toxic. there is also an anger universally including in the us at the elites, polarisation of wealth, which is systemic in latin america and become amplified in the us and that is this sense of the left behinds. in brazil, venezuela, i covered the region for ten years. colombia is remarkably stable right

now but there is this nascent anger of why do you have it and i don't? that used to be exclusive to developing countries during the '505 and '605 and 705, the post—war boom in the west, stars were rising. that stopped in the '805 and '905 across the west and allowed this universal animosity towards authority. i think the question of inequality is very important. this is happening in countries that are highly organised, ——polarised. social inequality but you also have to think about political institutions and developing world, weak democratic institutions, democratic cultures which allow big for politicians with personalities to promise wealth, authority and order. there is the short—term factor,

which is the trigger, the sense of insecurity, which often happens after economic crisis. and this is happening after the period of big economic recessions and crisis following the global financial crisis so the ingredients and all there for the saviours to appear. i do not doubt you are both right, there's something about inequality at the heart of this but it is all over the world. but there is another thing about the so—called elite which is language and the way people think that is not about money and what i have got all you have not got, and that is what donald trump is good at getting hold of and echoing. "let's say christmas." as if there was a great lobby of people saying you cannot say christmas. 0n more meaningful things, people like bolsonaro can get away with their view which are rabidly

homophobic, allowed to get away with that because we have changed the way we treat language. if you are concerned about migration, you are a racist, if you think women should not have to compete in cycle races against someone who was born a man now transitioning to be a woman, then you are now a homophobe and against transgender people. many people with mainstream views think i do not hate gay people, i do not hate migrants but if you are telling me i am a homophobe and a racist if i hold these views, what is the difference between me and bolsonaro? that is an interesting point because it ties in to the cultural element of all this and i think that what you have mentioned, the language is massively overblown, when it is analysed attributed to why people vote for authoritarianism. what people are saying is that there's a culture war and they happen when a traditionally powerful part of society

that is losing its power to minorities, women. the question of language, it is quite important and what has happened in the last decade at least as the normalisation of a certain way of talking about minorities, and migrants in particular. before, we had politicians were restrained far more in the use of language and that was quite good because it educated the masses. a calming effect. when we see our politicians using very unrestrained language to talk about migrants and refugees that is giving a free for all for people to demonise. finally, sheikh hasina was saying, this is about west versus east and actually having a successful authoritarian ideas, he mentioned malaysia and singapore, people look back on as successful

and bringing the countries forward, but dismissed by the west as authoritarian. it is about the lens you look at this through. i think there's something to be said about the euro and western—centric approach towards democracy. but i think i think the north is coming to the way of the south here, you can hear it in the way the media talks about donald trump, he is getting things done and his people like him. that is what people were saying about dictators in the arab world. i do not think he has to convince western governments on the virtues of that. that's it from eunice, nisreen, alex and jeffrey, and from me, shaun ley. carrie gracie will be in this chair at the same time next week. from all of us on dateline london, goodbye. the first weekend of 2019 is proving

to be a gray affairfor many. but it is dry and quite, here and there are a few breaks in the cloud — particularly to the east of the country which will see the best of the sunshine this afternoon. echo slowly slide is way southwards and this would this evening. as it i’u ns and this would this evening. as it runs into that area of high—pressure, watch of the rain

will peter out. clear spells behind it. some breaks ahead of it as well for southern parts of england. if the floodgates for any length of time, the temperature gets close to freezing. that cloud could be thick enough tomorrow morning to bring some drizzle across parts of modern england, nose—mac, the midlands. elsewhere, in mainly dry and cloudy day. the best of the cloud to u bright sunny spells. temperatures up to nine, or ten degrees in some places. this deepening area of low pressure in the monday will bring some outbreaks of rain. some very strong winds as well, particularly across scotland. monday morning, are bricks of rain will move into more ofan bricks of rain will move into more of an northern england, maybe parts of an northern england, maybe parts of wales. it is the strength of the wind that we are most concerned

about. for parts of northern scotland, we could see those gusts touching 70—80 mph at times. it is mild, ten or ii touching 70—80 mph at times. it is mild, ten or 11 degrees on monday. but not for long. bands of rain were made softwoods and behind it, we will see some colder air. through tuesday, those winds will start to lose their strength by wednesday. the other south, it will be mainly dry. after that brief mother spell, things can colder again midweek. this is bbc news. the headlines at five. police name the man who was fatally stabbed on a train in surrey — as 51—year—old lee pomeroy. a man's been arrested in connection with the murder. in a word in relation to what we know so far

regarding what happened, it is not random in terms of their was no contact between the two people before the incident. we know that they were talking together. that's all that we know about at this point in time. the police watchdog begins an inquiry — after a 31—year—old man is shot dead by armed officers in coventry. amid the government shutdown, president trump threatens declaring a national emergency, in order to build a border wall without congressional approval. smokers and problem drinkers admitted to hospital in england will get help to quit or cut down, to reduce demands on the health service.