so forgive me if i say that it is not exactly clear that it acted unlawfully when it suspended parliament where you want to head earlier this week. and how you want to leave the european union. scotland's high court ruled that borisjohnson's action no, you lay out very succinctly some was unlawful because his intention was to prevent parliament from doing itsjob ahead of brexit. of the varying political currents in london right now, forest fires in indonesia but my question to you comes back are causing toxic smogs to prime minister borisjohnson, which is spreading to neighbouring countries. because he is the new factor in this hospitals in the region have been protracted brexit mess — inundated with people complaining of respiratory issues. i think we can call it — the fires have spread across sumatra, borneo and kalimantan in recent weeks. and he says, and he said it again yesterday in dublin, when talking to the leader of the irish government, scientists say they have discovered a planet which appears he said he overwhelmingly to have water in its atmosphere. wants a negotiated deal. do you believe him? it's known as k2—18b, the question is not exactly it's around 110 light years away, and it's being described as the most whether we believe him or not, likely place to find life away from earth ever discovered. but i might say that i am now lost in translation because we have a british prime minister saying that's all. that he does not want elections stay with bbc world news. but still pushing for elections, now on bbc news, hardtalk.

saying that he wants a deal welcome to hardtalk. but his negotiator i'm stephen sackur. british prime minister borisjohnson comes to brussels and provides has positioned himself with no proposal, no idea... strictly nothing to replace as the country's brexit champion, the withdrawal agreement, so it's a little bit confusing and, indeed, it does not really but his pledge to take britain help to build trust. well, the government led by borisjohnson says, and ministers repeat this, out of the eu on october that they are now straining every the 31st is in trouble. sinew to strike a new agreement parliament has passed a law requiring him to seek with the european union a deadline extension from the eu, so either he negotiates negotiators in brussels. a new exit deal in short order, or he attempts to defy the law. they say the old withdrawal how is this british melodrama agreement cannot stand and, being viewed in europe? my guest is french mep as you well know, the prime concern they have is over the so—called and former europe minister, nathalie loiseau. irish backstop, that is, the plan to avoid has eu patience with british a hard border in ireland, so they say we have serious indecision run out? negotiations about a different withdrawal agreement. to your knowledge, is that true or not true?

if you remember, borisjohnson first said that he would not come to paris or berlin or brussels until we abandoned the backstop, then he changed his mind and he came to paris and to berlin and to biarritz, saying that he wanted a deal, nathalie loiseau, in brussels, welcome to hardtalk. hello. and chancellor merkel as well as president macron i want to pick you up told him, well, come with ideas, come with proposals, which are credible, on something you said yesterday, in fact, you talked of a brexit madness. how would you characterise this madness? who exactly is mad? which respect the priorities that we set together — no hard border on the island of ireland, protection of the good friday agreement, peace and stability well, first and foremost, on the island of ireland, and consistency of i would say that, even if we respect the decision of the british people, the single market." we still regret it very much because, at a moment in history, where there is a need for unity,

where we have big powers throughout the globe which are not always supporting of our priorities, the choice of being more isolated so far i have not heard michel barnier, and weaker than what the uk the european negotiator, is right now is difficult coming back to us and saying, to understand and, yes, there are new, credible if i was a british citizen, proposals respecting these redlines. i would certainly ask myself, let me just clear up a couple of points of detail on ireland is it exactly what we wanted and then we can move on. first of all, there is mooted in london now the possibility that boris johnson, over the next few days, will suggest to the european negotiating team that that is going to happen? britain might accept some form of northern ireland—only backstop, that is, that the british would accept that northern ireland would abide by the regulatory framework of the single market you are, of course, and the customs union, not a british citizen, you're a french politician looking at britain. so i'm just wondering, when you talk about "brexit madness" that the rest of the united kingdom whether that is your would not and thereby there would be judgement on the first few weeks some sort of regulatory border, of boris johnson's premiership, if you like, notional border, because he is the new factor in all this, isn't he? along with the irish sea. would that be acceptable well, for quite a long time, to the european union? the eu27 have waited if you remember, this was precisely the proposal from the eu 27 well, for quite a long time, in the first place, the eu 27 have waited when we were negotiating with a lot of respect, with a lot of patience,

and with a lot of concern, for a clear signal with prime minister may. from the united kingdom. until now, we know what you don't want, but we still don't really know the first version of the backstop was northern ireland only, what you want. in terms of regulatory alignment with the rest of the european union. at that time, it was changed due and especially now, we know to the british negotiator, that the british parliament into customs union for the whole wants an extension but we do not know what for. of the united kingdom. we, of course, have no problem we know that the british parliament with our own proposal doesn't want a no deal, but now, having said that, and we do understand why. 00:04:37,471 --> 2147483051:39:03,450 we know that the british prime 2147483051:39:03,450 --> 4294966103:13:29,430 minister wants to leave, we all know that the devil is in the details and i have not seen and i have not heard of a precise proposal off borisjohnson. just one other thing on ireland, which puzzles me, the european union says that, if there is a no deal exit on the 31st of october, then there will have to be a hard border between northern ireland and the irish republic, to protect the single market.

but that is strange because the british government say there is no way they are going to build the infrastructure of a hard border, and that europeans, at the same time, say, oh, well, if the infrastructure is put on the border, that will threaten the good friday peace agreement and stability in ireland. so is the eu seriously saying it is going to put infrastructure on the border and thereby threaten the peace agreement in ireland? is that what the eu wants? what the eu want is pretty clear. it is within the withdrawal agreement which we adopted and, of course, we don't want a no deal and we don't want hard border but coming to downing street comes with responsibilities. the british prime minister cannot say that he seriously considers a no deal and say, at the same time, that he has no interest in the protection of his own borders, when brexit was supposed to be about taking back control

so it sounds weird to me to say, well, i am taking decisions but i'm not interested in consequences. let's get away from the detail and talk politics. is it true to say — and you are a very close ally of his — that president emmanuel macron has tired of this entire brexit process and just wants to see britain out as soon as possible? well, if you listen to everything that was said by emmanuel macron for two years, he has repeatedly said that he would prefer having the united kingdom inside the european union, because we face challenges together, in terms of security, in terms of defence, in terms of trade or environment, climate change — all these huge challenges which deserve to be addressed...

i do understand that... if i may, just make this very clear, he has also said — and he said it again after he'd seen boris johnson — "we are not going to go through this sort of crisis every few months," which indicates to me, that when people talk of a two or three—month extension, after october 31, the french are really against it. i would not advise that you single out one member state, compared to others. we have been united from day one on brexit. not against the united kingdom but in favour of a solution that protects the interests of our fellow citizens, of ireland, and there is strong unity and, indeed, there is strong brexit fatigue, not because of brexit but because the absence of a clear choice made by british

authorities on the way forward. if we hear that no—deal is not a solution, that the withdrawal agreement is not a solution, and if we have nothing to build on, what can we do? and you know, in the european union, we are about to confirm a commission we have a lot of work to do... and we are still dealing with brexit. we'll get to that point of whether brexit is becoming a deeply unwelcome distraction to europe's other business in a moment butjust finishing up on this idea of whether an extension can happen — your foreign minister, jean—yves le drian, the other day, seemed to be pretty sure that — quoting him — that "in the current circumstances," he said, about an extension, "it is a no". but the truth is, france, as you say, does not want to be out of step with its european partners,

most european member states appear to believe that, if britain asks for an extension, it will have to be given, so, in a sense, it seems to me france overstepped the mark, and is having to row back and now you're acknowledging that, if the member states agree to an extension. we in france will go along with it. um, there is no change in the french position and there is no change in the position of the eu27. there has to be a good reason for an extension. you cannot simply say that, after two years, you are not ready. you have to tell us, what would you do with an extension? if i may... ..is it general election, is it people's vote? if i may, you know when the vote is coming — you know because borisjohnson no longer has a majority, you know that a general election is coming in britain, if not before october 31 then certainly soon afterwards, so that clearly is a good enough reason to give an extension,

is it not? let me tell you from experience about brexit, until things are confirmed, i know nothing. if there is a clear position from the prime minister and from the parliament about a general election with a date and with the need to prepare for the election, this might be a reason for an extension. if there is a clear position about a people's vote, that might be a reason for an extension. if there is a clear proposal which is credible and acceptable from the british side, supported by a majority in the parliament on a withdrawal agreement, this is a reason for an extension. if there is nothing, why should we wait longer? at some moment decisions have consequences and we cannot wait forever, if no—one takes responsibility on the british side. it is a very sad. it is heartbreaking

but it is your choice to make. but the — if i may say so, the confusions and indecisions aren't all on the british side. let me pick you up on what seems to be one of yours. because last year you said you were in favour of the uk going for a second, another referendum, to settle this issue and sort out britain's position. and in the recent past, in recent weeks and months, you've suggested a second referendum would not be a positive thing. you said it would simply leave the uk as divided as ever. and you said i think it is necessary that the uk simply moves forward and that brexit takes place. so you've ruled out a second referendum, have you ? from europe's point of view? we have not. because it's your choice. it's a political choice to be made by the brits. it's not ours. we have not chosen brexit in the first place.

even if it has consequences on the eu 27, we will live with the decision that we have not taken part, too. if there has to be a second referendum, it has to come from the brits. it's not the eu 27, which would patronise or monitor the british people and tell them you have to go back to the polls. you have to decide, but please, make an effort. it's been more than two years that we have been discussing this. everything has been discussed in detail. we know everything about how the withdrawal agreement should be decided, adopted, ratified, and the most important conversation has not even started on our future relationship. and on this i have a number of big question marks. because at the moment we had the government of theresa may, we knew that she was reassuring

the eu 27 on the environment and labour laws, she didn't want to withdraw from the key communities. now we have a prime minister saying with brexit he will get rid of eu regulations on environment and labour, that has huge consequences for british citizens, for british business, but also for the european union. it's going to cost, according to the bertelsmann institute in germany, going to cost eu citizens at least a0 billion euros if a no—deal brexit goes ahead. we know it is going to cost the uk government and awful lot of money, in proportion, more. but it is going to cost europe a great deal. are you putting that firmly at the top of your mind as you consider what to do over the next few weeks? we have it fully in mind.