sexual relations with virginia roberts, the woman who says she was forced to have sex with him when she was 17 years old. he's spoken in detail for the first time about his links with the convicted sex offenderjeffrey epstein. an investigation is under way into the cause of a fire at a block of student flats in bolton. witnesses say the blaze spread quickly to the upper floors, prompting concerns about the cladding on the block. two people were injured. protests have erupted across iran after the government unexpectedly announced it was sharply increasing the price of petrol and rationing supplies. the country's interior minister says security forces will act to restore calm if protesters damage public property. now on bbc news, dateline london.

hello and welcome to dateline london. i'm carrie gracie. this week... he says his style is modern presidential. but will impeachment hearings leave the american public agreeing with donald trump on that? "pushed to the brink of total breakdown." grim warnings from hong kong police. and this week's tv pictures may look like apocalypse now, but climate scientists say these fires and floods are just the start. so, how are politicians framing their message on averting apocalypse ahead? my guests today: chinese writer diane weiliang,

american broadcaster jef mcallister, stefanie bolzen of german newspaper die welt, portugese writer eunice goes. thank you for coming in. for most politicians, it would have been a day to hide. a former ambassador gave startling evidence against his administration and a former close adviser was convicted on counts of lying to congress, obstruction and witness tampering. but this is donald trump and instead of hiding, the us president took to twitter to undermine the former ambassador to ukraine even as she delivered her testimony in congress. so is trump still teflon with his supporters or will his enemies succeed in tarnishing that modern presidential over the course of these impeachment hearings? jef, start us off. i think it is useful to stand back a little bit because trump is so unusual. it's very easy to go right into the horse race. is he up, is he down? let's just stand back to think about who this guy is.

12,000 lies since he has been president. he has had his personal lawyer go to jail... who said it was 12,000? the washington post. it is well acknowledged. his campaign manager went to jail, his national security adviser. now his good friend, long time associate. the guy he was conduit to the russians are getting the e—mails. the guy who has a tac2 of nixon on his back. —— tattoo. now let's go to the strange thing of impeachment. if there any doubt possible left from his own transcript of the call from the interlocking witnesses, good american bureaucrats without an axe to grind backed up by what is coming on ukraine, clearly he tried to pressure ukraine into giving him dirt that doesn't exist onjoe biden.

with any other president, anyone would say, of course it is impeachable. but that is not donald trump. you are right. he says it is all hearsay because he won't let his own people testify. that's obstruction. also, again, it becomes a big blow up politics. the polls show now a margin in favour of impeachment. but not growing, decreasing very much. i think the democrats hope that the humanity of the people they are asking to testify before the cameras, like marie yovanovitch and the others seem like decent people and clearly have been put in an impossible situation by trump and being defended by republicans with conspiracy theories and attacks don't really add up, that this will in the end turn suburban women and others into the democratic camp for the election if they can actually turn the senate into wanting to vote two—thirds to impeach him. diane, your thoughts. you havejust

come back from the us. in fact, i was in california which is a very strong liberal state. there people are already convinced that what he is doing is an impeachable offence. however, if we look at the process. there isn't the numbers in the senator that will push this through. —— the senate. what is interesting is not california, it is the swing states. wisconsin, arizona, pennsylvania, florida. if you look at the voters, the polling are showing actually that 53% are against impeaching donald trump. so, what this process is doing is a legal issue, however, it's very much a political issue. the democrats are hoping the public hearing will generate evidence that people have been asking for, sway some of the voters in the election

that's coming up. and at the moment, it doesn't seem to be working. hopefully they will bring more witnesses to testify. in a way, it's very political and will come down to the swing states. so, eunice, you're a professor of politics. we have just heard them looking at the electoral policies of this. but there are other audiences as well. inside the us federal federation, there is the state department. we heard the former ambassador to the ukraine on friday about the hijacking of us foreign policy in ukraine. how damaging is all of this to the morale of diplomats? two public officials? i think it is very damaging. she made a comment that the whole process was hollowing out the whole civil service system

in the united states and there are — people asking themselves, "am i putting myself in danger by refusing to do things that are illegal?" diplomats are not supposed to meddle in the domestic politics of their own countries and the request to interfere, to dig dirt onjoe biden — this was clearly a breach of what a diplomat should be asked to do. they can do other things for the diplomacy of the state, but to help a president, the electoral possibilities of a president, that is not within the realm of the job of a diplomat. and yet i supposed they might feel now that they are been weaponised by the other side by being hauled into these public testimonies. possibly, but they didn't have any chance given the obstruction of the trump administration in terms of providing witnesses to these hearings. and, in fact, the professional foreign service

has been empowered by the model that has been shown by yovanovitch and other public servants. they feel inspired. i talked to diplomats and the crowdfunding pages, because they think here is somebody standing up for the values of diplomacy. i think the most worrying thing is that constitutionalist, diplomat and diplomat and so on are looking at what the trump administration of is doing in terms of undermining the different institutions that are absolutely necessary for the maintenance of democracy in the united states. but this is too niche for most voters in the united states. the election will be roughly in one year's time so no—one will remember this. so this is quite a fundamental story — a president asking diplomats to politicise themselves, to do the dirtyjob of preparing the electoral campaign.

this is something that is not part of theirjob descriptions and yet this is too technical, too niche for ordinary voters to essentially make an assessment — did the president act in a legal, in a constitutional manner or not? it is not too technical for foreign governments. we have talked about the voters in the public officials in the us. what are foreign governments going to make of what they see here and how are they going to act upon the information that they hear? in general, it is important to have in mind that this has consequences far beyond the us. if you think about the fact that the us president, for own interests, is holding back military aid to the ukraine, it is a most important literary aid that the ukraine get of us$1.5 billion of which 400 are now frozen, as far as i understand.

this is destabilising a region where 30,000 people have died already in a conflict and that is something that european governments look at washington — look at donald trump, they have now seen so many erratic decisions in syria. that makes him feel very nervous about what it means, especially in europe, because it's an incentive for russia to maybe do something in ukraine because there is a vacuum created by completely national personal interests of the us president. these impeachment hearings will continue so we will have the opportunity to come back to them. we are going to move on now. it's been another terrible week in hong kong. 0ne proteseor was shot by police, one government sympathiser was set on fire by protesters, one 70—year—old bystander died after being hit with a brick, a university campus was turned into a battlefield and the economy went into recession. i'm not even finished. the chinese president warned that hong kong's political arrangements were under threat

and the police warned that law and order was on the brink of collapse. diane, your assessment? i think that is a pretty accurate assessment of what is happening in hong kong. for anybody observing hong kong for the past six months, and being on the ground in hong kong or in beijing, probably the consensus is there isn't a solution in sight. what's significant is with the violence escalating in hong kong, we are seeing chinese mainland students who have been studying in hong kong packing up and going home. i've seen footage of trains packed with people and they're leaving hong kong. the chinese residents, some expats working for multinationals, they are leaving or considering leaving. so, hong kong is in this particular dangerous situation and we probably are looking

at the violence escalating. what does that mean for hong kong? what's significant is what xijinping had said, that one country, two system is under threat. 0ne country, two systems means limited autonomy and freedom so that hong kong is distinct from the rest of china. yes, when hong kong was handed over to china, that was agreed with the british government. back then, the leader, that hong kong would stay for 50 years and its own ecosystem, not being part of china. in fact, recently there had been discussions revisiting that idea, that china thinks that was unnecessary. that policy was because china back then lacked confidence

as an economic power. now, china believes hong kong does not need one country, two systems. hong kong can prosper under the chinese system. xijinping is basically saying they are saying this is no longer works, we are going to... even people in hong kong believe that the integration of hong kong into china will be escalated after this event. but how fast, at what pace — that's the question. let's get some other answers on that. you look at comparative politics all over the world. eunice, we have heard over the course of the past week the protesters blaming the excesses of the police, the police blaming the protesters. do you see any middle ground and where would it come from? there is no middle — in hong kong, we are not seeing any middle ground. 0n the other hand, we have beijing

and their statement two days ago. i think they signalled that mainland china is getting ready to take some action. the only parallels i can think of is the hungarian uprising in 1956, where ultimately moscow came in with their tanks and put an end to what kind of autonomy those countries had. so, i think that what we have — there is no middle ground in the protest. what we have seen is a polarisation of positions. the hong kong government has been enabled to calm the situation and also to create a galvanising position of people supporting their own government. 0n the other hand, the students have radicalised their actions. they are going to lose sympathy with the radicalisation of... so, there is kind of a vacuum and that vacuum may very well be occupied by the chinese government. very worrying analysis.

where do you view this as going? the growing demand from outside government is to say, why is it not possible to have an independent investigation into...? this is what the protesters have wanted for a long time. you get the impression that mainland china doesn't want it. the big question is, why don't they go down the road of reconciliation or trying to calm down the situation? that comes back to, well, the fear that this is actually going to escalate deliberately. jef, hong kong is such an important hub for the global economy. what do you see others, from a business perspective, doing now in the light of this kind of analysis and the recession? which is now a fact. the hang seng index is down this week and big law forms and global players are keeping their people out, having them work from home. deciding it is not an attractive place to do business anymore. it is accumulative thing.

if it becomes less prosperous because of the protests, in a way, then it is no longer the golden egg from the goose and it has less importance to china, in a perverse way. i think it is embarrassing for china to have to use troops and it is bad in terms of a long—term image of china and for unification with taiwan as well. but what kind of humiliation are they going to take? humilitation of people saying they are not going to pay any attention to china or humilitation through the use of force? if it comes down to... we are going to get it back in 2047 anyway. there is another narrative here in terms of the financial hub. ali baba, which is the most successful chinese tech company is planning a $1.3 billion ipo in coming days. in china's eyes, hong kong can prosper as part of china,

part of the chinese financial hub. and that works. thank you on that story. now we are going to move on — and fire, flood and plague. venice declared a state of emergency this week after the worst floods in half a century. eastern australia burned in bushfires. china saw plague deaths. greta thunberg boarded another sailing boat to return from the us to europe for next month's un climate conference in madrid. and in the british general election, flood response became one of the hot campaigning issues of the week. so let's look at how politicians are framing their message on climate change. stefanie, i want you to start on this one. take a look at the uk campaign. we have seen a lot of flooding over the past fortnight and flood response has become a hot topic with a lot of criticism of the government. how are politicians shaping this message? well, i think in the case of boris johnson, that wasn't a very happy week because he was seen as arriving to help with the flooding far too late. he was actually attacked. it was a really bad image for him this week. it was not a successful week.

in terms of climate change, i don't see it is such a big topic in the british campaign, which is surprising because the extinction rebellion, which is such a successful movement, actually comes from here and has been very popular. climate change is a top priority when the public are asked what are their urgent priorities. yes. if i compare it to my own country, where climate change is now the top priority, if you ask people. two—thirds say this is the biggest dangerfor our two—thirds say this is the biggest danger for our existence. the green party in germany is now topping all the polls and it is quite likely or possible that after the next general election, there will be a green party leading the german government. and yet, in the uk, coming back to the comparison, the uk has a first—past—the—post electoral system, so the green party struggles to make any milage at all, despite its votes. it will be very difficult in the british political system

to have a purely green—driven policy being really part of their power in britain, and i think that i don't see so far very convincing ideas from labour or the conservatives. but can compare to the challenge of that. so the ideas we have seen, big climate change fund, tree—pla nting projects, we have seen a pledge for carbon neutral by 2050. but are you saying this is a less aspirational offer than you are getting in germany? it is, i believe it is because it is very costly. the german government has adopted this week a new law or climate package and they had to very clearly say, "this is going to cost each consumer more for their heating. more forflying — the further you fly, the more you have to pay." that is something in a election campaign that you don't want to say. eunice. i think labour has announced a green new deal and their plans

have been attacked on the grounds of being very ambitious, extremely radical. they will involve massive public investment in renewable energies. and so on. it is tied up with universal basic income proposals and so on, which is part of other green new deals that have been proposed elsewhere. alexandra because cortez in the united states. —— alexandra 0casio cortez in the united states. in the united states and even the green party in the uk, they are tying up, doing proposals for a universal basic income. the problem we face with the british election is that manifestos have not yet been launched, but what we have seen with labour is that they are using the climate emergency — and i think it is interesting they are using the term 'climate emergency' — with their very ambitious public spending plans will break the mould of the way the british economy has been run for the past 40 years. and that is scaring a lot of investors and so on.

so take that thought more global. the climate emergency — the use of that term or the refusal to use that term — because we have got bushfires in california and brazil, and yet, you get an american president who questions climate science and a brazilian president who questions climate science. so this idea of a climate emergency is not universally accepted. no, it is not, but those democratically elected positions will feel the fire of public opinion asking them to do something about it because when people are losing homes, when their businesses are being heavily affected, and there... the irony wasn't missed by the italian president when the local government in venice had declared and denied a fund to tackle the climate emergency. and two minutes later, their offices are flooded by the largest floods in venice.

so i think the politicians were refusing and they are now trying to react to this emergency in a peaceful manner. —— piecemeal manner. eventually, they will have to tackle it in a much more comprehensive way. jef, do you see them tackling it to a mitigation way or adapting to a crisis way? because of course we are now getting scientists saying the window of opportunity is now. economist are saying the same thing. you need to spend now to avoid the crisis later. is that a message that politicians can deliver to their voters? they have clearly avoided doing it. the evidence about the growth of climate change and strange weather events has been increasing. but in the united states, at least, it is not part of the political conversation in a serious way. imean, it i mean, it does. it becomes... "i have a local wildfire. "why aren't there more fire trucks here?" it is not, "0h, we needed to have built windbreaks and buried the electricity lines 30 years ago and it wouldn't have cost us billions."

—— needed to cost us billions and billions and billions. for politicians, it is very difficult to raise taxes to avoid problems that are going to happen 20 years later because they don't get to get any of that benefit from it and they get all the pain. the difficulty is, let's say, in 20 years if miami has to close down — there the water table is getting higher. if you go outside now on a sunny day, there is water on your shoes because water is coming through the sandstone. you can't build a sea wall around it. what kind of politician is going to say "ok, let's evacuate miami." it is not on the cards. there is so little long—term thinking going on at all and it needs a comprehensive thinking from the private sector, the government and a lot of regulation, all of which are sort of off the table in american discourse these days. let's turn to china and the

long—term thinking because i mentioned plague in the introduction, and the chinese media are muttering about how the plague is possibly related to a drought in inner mongolia and the expanding population of rats brought the plague. china, can it do the long—term thinking better than a kind of electoral politics of western liberal democracies? it is dealing with climate change as an emergency? china has been dealing with environmental change but in a different way. it is by dealing with pollution, because china, during the past 40 years of development, had become very polluted. so they are tackling air pollution. they are tackling water supply pollution, and they are tackling some of the animals' sanitary conditions. by doing so, china has made a lot of progress which, in fact, has brought down

the carbon emission in china. the air is cleaner and they have closed down lots of polluting factories and it's — funding lots of infrastructures on renewable energy, etc. in a way, the chinese government is less concerned with money or the voters' sentiment. it is not quite dealing with that issue of eating less meat, flying less, driving fewer cars. diana, i am afraid i have to get you to hold that thought. and to close the programme, i'm going to ask each of you for a crisp assessment of week two in the british election campaign. who wants to start? jef? the thing that surprised me is a borisjohnson has not been more impressive on the stump. he has hidden from people. he has floundered in the floods. you would think a guy who has been

such a good after—dinner speaker and such a good television performerfor so long could handle himself under this of pressure and i am surprised he hasn't done better. diane, what interests or surprises you? what surprised me or interests me is that the labour brought out a huge programme of nationalising lots of industries from bt to national grid to utilities and that is very radical. on top of that, there is a radical 1.2 trillion in borrowing and infrastructure. thank you. and stefanie? i think this week felt the fun is over because there is the anecdote of the prime minister giving a speech using a very risky word. he took it out. he thought, with all the floods going on, i should be more serious. and, the word? i can't say the word on air! just a line? the end of austerity. definite. end of austerity, maybe the beginning of big state intervention. there we have to leave it. we are packed a lot in today.

i'm sorry we have not covered everything in the detail you would like but we only have half—an—hour for dateline london. we're back next week at the same time. goodbye. hello there. you might remember in the news last week venice was hit with severe flooding and we could see very similar conditions building up later on today. the high watermark coming in a little bit after midday at 1.6 metres — not quite as high as it was on tuesday, but still one of the highest of the last 90—odd years. widespread flooding will result. now, looking at the weather conditions here.

well, at the moment, we've got patches of frost forming where we have the clearest skies in scotland. a few patches as well across southern england. where we keep the thicker cloud, we have got some fairly persistent damp weather across north—east england at the moment. and through the rest of sunday, it's gonna this zone, really, across north—east england, the north midlands and wales will see the thickest cloud with patches of rain coming and going. brighter skies in the south, although a few showers coming into kent, maybe the thames estuary, and also clipping the far south—west of england. the best of the day's sunshine for northern ireland and for scotland. there will be some showers, though, for northern scotland and it will feel chilly here, with temperatures just around six or seven degrees.

welcome to bbc news. i'm james reynolds. our top stories: prince andrew denies having sex with a 17—year—old girl. in an exclusive bbc interview, the duke of york speaks publicly for the first time about the allegations against him. i can absolutely, categorically tell you it's never happened. do you recall any kind of sexual contact with virginia roberts, then or any other time? none whatsoever. angry crowds take to the streets in iran as petrol pricesjump by 50% and fuel is rationed. leaked documents reveal new details about the mass detention of china's uighur muslims. and a shock defeat for roger federer at the atp finals in london,