president trump has set out his plans for lifting coronavirus restrictions in the us. he said state governors would be allowed to tailor their approach to meet their local conditions. the process would be carried out in three phases, which would be reached sooner in some states than others. however, the british government has extended its national lockdown for at least three more weeks. the foreign secretary dominic raab said any relaxation at this point would risk undoing the progress already made. the announcement came on a day when the uk recorded another 861 coronavirus deaths. the head of the european commission has said europe owes italy a heartfelt apology for not offering enough support at the start of the pandemic. her words have been welcomed by the italian foreign minister. eu leaders are to meet next week to discuss sharing the costs of economic recovery.

now on bbc news, hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk, i'm stephen sackur. donald trump, the leader of the richest, most powerful nation on earth has just suspended american funding for the world health organization. what does that tell us about the international community's ability to co—operate? to combat the covid—19 pandemic. my guest today, in an exclusive interview, is the former british prime minister gordon brown. he is pushing hard for a much bigger international response, but what chance does he have, given the current geopolitical climate?

gordon brown, welcome to hardtalk. hello. you are leading a big international effort to get the world community to do so much more in response to the coronavirus challenge. i wonder, in response to the coronavirus challenge. iwonder, therefore, how you respond to the news overnight that us president donald trump has suspended america's funding of the world health organization?” suspended america's funding of the world health organization? i think it is difficult by think we can ove i’co m e it is difficult by think we can overcome this and i think we must not be discouraged. i was dealing with a financial crisis in 2008 and 2009, it was very difficult to persuade people to come on board in the beginning. we didn't have a degree of international cooperation that we wanted in the first few weeks but people to come around to it copy what encourages me, as i have seen opinion polls of american, public opinion, they want international cooperation to deal with this, i have central from the

governors in the states that they wa nt governors in the states that they want international cooperation and i think there is something of a misunderstanding here copy when we talk about the world health organization, we are talking about a network of networks. we are talking about one group that is searching with a global funding for the vaccine and for the cure, another group that is looking at therapeutics, another looking at diagnostics, another looking at what we can do to help the poorest countries. i don't actually think america's going to pull out of help in these areas. i think this is domestic politics coming through into international actions, but i do think that when we start looking at pledging on health, we can go around the world, starting with the european union, britain, thenjapan, then canada, then korea, then africa andi then canada, then korea, then africa and i do think that we will get the ones in that unnecessary over the next few weeks, and i do think it is a test of whether, in our generation's rendezvous with destiny, we're not going be

condemned to the condescension of posterity by failing to act. so i am discouraged but i am not giving up and they do think we will get the international cooperation we need but the sooner the better. let me quote you the world—renowned development expert professor ian goldin who said this: stopping funding for the who as trump has is as bad as cutting the budget for the fire brigade while unprecedented fires are raging. would you agree? hello i think you could even put it with, that this is what some people would call the sabotage of the world health organization is actually an of self—harm on the part of america, because to deal with this locally, in any country, we have got to act globally. the three things we need foran globally. the three things we need for an exit from this virus, one, the search for a vaccine and cure. two, the buildup of capacity for testing, and for ventilators and so on, and three, preventing a second

round of this disease, which could come out of africa, the developing countries which would have no protection from health systems, their little safety nets, you can practice the same social distancing in these countries, and then if it comes back in a second wave to hit america then we all suffer, so i think the exit strategy depends on increased cooperation, and i do think american public opinion will understand that self lies and solidarity... in your view, then, understand that self lies and solidarity... in yourview, then, do you believe it is incumbent upon the british prime minister, other allies of the united states and indeed the world community as a whole, to put urgent pressure on donald trump to change his mind? yes, and i think they are already saying that. of the world health organization did not exist, it would have to be created. you have got to have the collection of data, the exchange of information, the pooling and sharing of expertise, the global funding of the search for the vaccine, the

globalfunding of the search for the vaccine, the global funding of therapeutics and diagnostics. you've got to build up capacity to deal with these issues around the world and you have got to prevent a second round, so it is our duty to try to persuade the americans that this solidarity is actually in the self—interest, and i do believe that president trump realised that when he signed up to the g20 realised that when he signed up to the 620 declaration on the 26th of march, which actually said all these things, that he wanted to strengthen the who, that he wanted to give it more resources for preparedness and for dealing with the problems of developing countries, the search for a vaccine and everything. president trump actually signed up to that on the 26th of march and he should be held to that by his 620 colleagues. let me ask you bluntly, do you see president donald trump as the biggest obstacle to ramping up international cooperation to fight coronavirus right now? what i see is our failure coronavirus right now? what i see is ourfailure to come coronavirus right now? what i see is our failure to come together. i had to deal with a 2009 financial

crisis, and what i've learned from thatis,it crisis, and what i've learned from that is, it wasn't enough for me to stay in britain, i am doing what they can, i am doing the best i can. it wasn't enough for the imf or the world bank to say we are doing all we can, we are doing our best. you had to be able to say, we are doing whatever it takes, and to be able to do whatever it takes, you have got to be co—ordinated globally. this is a global medical emergency, this is a global medical emergency, this is a economic crisis. both are happening simultaneously and they are happening in almost every continent of the world, and you have to be able to say to people, you may think that what i'm worried about is what is happening in my street and my family what is happening in my street and myfamily and what is happening in my street and my family and yes that is true, but what is happening globally affecting what is happening globally affecting what is happening in my family and the only way to vent what is happening to our family continuing and being subject for example to a second wave of the virus, is to act globally. so, it's not one person, it's the general idea that has gone out of fashion, that we should be

cooperating when we have a global problem that needs to be dealt with. 6lobal problems need global solutions, and we don't need to rerun the debate between globalist and nationalist. we have two persuade people issue by issue that it makes common sense, it is in your self—interest for the cooperation to happen, andi self—interest for the cooperation to happen, and i do say that the exit from this virus will not happen without international cooperation, because without it we cannot guarantee it won't be second, third, and fourth rounds. i hear that message loud and clear, but you have to a cce pt message loud and clear, but you have to accept the world as it is, not as you wish it to be, and surely you must recognise that there is real concern right now, and many capitals, and thinking notjust of washington, dc but we have heard it in tokyo, canberra australia as well, a feeling that china didn't tell the truth about the beginnings of the coronavirus outbreak, that it lacks transparency, that it has an agenda, a nationalist agenda that

affects the way it handles this entire crisis. i think all these questions come up as we review what has happened but the immediate issue is how we can actually deal with the problem that we are faced with, stop it spreading to other countries, get a vaccine and a cure, get the therapeutics and diagnostics, build up therapeutics and diagnostics, build up our capacity, and i am not sure it is going to help us to spend all ourtime it is going to help us to spend all our time analysing what happened in january where there was a failure, clearly a lack of action, in fact probably president trump is complaining more about the lack of cooperation internationally in january than anything else. you want the world bank, the imf and the 620 all to play a much more prominent role in co—ordinating a massive international response, and it is a response that you have outlined that involves a n response that you have outlined that involves an awful lot of money in different forms, going to the who, going to economic assistance to the poorest countries as they are hit by

the coronavirus. do you really believe that is going to happen, when even the rich nations are now looking at the most cataclysmic economic fallout which, even in britain itself, could cost 30% of economic output over the current economic output over the current economic quarter? do not feel able right now to consider a massive boost... i think you have answered your own question because the only way out of this economic global crisis is by global action, and so if we take physical action in the united kingdom, and then others don't, or if we take monetary action in the united kingdom and others don't, then the effect of that will be limited. we are past the first phase which was to get money into the control of the infection, and to have employment protection. in a few weeks time, we will move into the second stage, if you like, where we are going to have to recreate growth in the world economy. to recreate

growth in the world economy, as we found in 2009, you need a co—ordinated fiscal stimulus, you need co—ordinated action by the central banks on monetary policy but also currency swaps and everything else, and you need to bring in the whole of the world and notjust one pa rt whole of the world and notjust one part of the world to this recovery, so again it is in the enlightened self—interest of britain and other countries to work together with the international community to get a global and a globally co—ordinated stimulus going, and i think that is a lesson of 2009 but i think it is also being proven to be true when you see that what one country can do is insufficient. to be able to do whatever it takes, we have got to be able, as political leaders, to be able, as political leaders, to be able to tell the imf and the world bank that we will give them the resources that are necessary for them to play this co—ordinating role. you are talking amassing resources , role. you are talking amassing resources, you are talking about a of assistance to be brokered through the g20, of assistance to be brokered through the 620, you have talked about

massive debt forgiveness programme for the current year which could add up for the current year which could add up to 35 or $40 billion... (crosstalk) | up to 35 or $40 billion... (crosstalk) i have up to 35 or $40 billion... (crosstalk) i have got an article with larry summers showing that if we could relieve the debt interest payments of the poorest countries, they are now spending more on that than they are on their health systems. if we could help them prepare their health systems for what is an accelerating epidemic in their countries, then we might prevent a second round of disease coming into the west. so it is not only in their interest that it happens, it's in our interest, and when you think of the debt relief, i think we are talking in the order of something like 30 or 40 billion, compared with the 2 trillion that america is already spending itself on its own economy, this is a relatively small sum, givena economy, this is a relatively small sum, given a 90 trillion global economy, but just sum, given a 90 trillion global economy, butjust think of the difference it makes if you can now spend on health protection instead of having to spend on these debt interest payments and i think most

people now agree that that has got to be done for the poorest countries. it only works if world leaders get it on the way that you describe, in terms of the interdependence of the entire global community and the idea that the entire global chain is only as strong as its weakest link. but the indications are, they don't get it. i willjust point you to the fiasco that we saw around the last virtual meeting of the 67, when they couldn't even agree a joint declaration because the americans insisted on describing it as the will hand virus, which others wouldn't sign up to. this is the reality of our world today. we have got america first, we got china first, we've got india first, america first has in a sense gone global. with got an international coalition of anti—internationalists running countries and different parts of the world. but when the 620 actually came together, my complaint is not that they don't realise that

they had a big problem that they had to work together to solve. my complaint is that having realised that and set it out in a communique, the follow—through is not there, so many of it is in the interest of some people but what you think is missing is the co—ordination at an executive level. i would bring the imf, the world bank, the who and the world leaders together but i would have working with them a group of national leaders from individual continents around the world, and i would form that into an executive like the 620 which met in 2009 and a two day, week to week decisions in some areas could be given to these people and then we get on with the business of doing what they said they would do when they met on much they would do when they met on much the 26 but haven't actually followed through, and that would be, for example, putting this 8 billion, which is only $1 per person around the world, behind the search for the vaccine and cure. that is a technical issue, once you agree it has got to be done, you build up

your productive capacity and you build up the ability to get these bits of equipment into different countries instead of undercutting each other and competing with each other, and then you build up your resilience for the future by co—ordinating your fiscal policy. all these things can be done so i'd get is as you say that people are not recognising they have got to do this, i think that is a failure of follow—through, and i think that we have got to press the government of the important countries of the world, to be honest, we are dealing with a number of countries that ought to be leaving here. —— ought to be leaving here. if i am sitting here in scotland and you are sitting and london, you are asking yourself all the time, what does it mean for

my family all the time, what does it mean for myfamily and all the time, what does it mean for my family and my community and my neighbourhood, and you are right to do so, because they are worried and anxious about what is happening in my local area and so are you, but you have two paint the bigger picture, that if this is a global and medical economic emergency, you protect yourself and your own area, your own family and your own homes, not simply by a locally and nationally, you have got to act globally stopping you can't get out of this without a vaccine. you can get out of this with our better diagnostics or preventing a second round, and if they can remind people that these problems have got to be resolved globally as well as locally and nationally, then this interview serves a purpose. i want you to reflect on something a little bit different. what does it say about governance around the world that right now, many people probably feel safer living in seoul or taipei or beijing than they do in london or new york? is there

something that we are learning about systems of governance, about attitudes to the state, about attitudes to the state, about attitudes to the state, about attitudes to central authority, that is actually quite damaging to notions of liberal western democracy, and suggests that the most effective form of government may be something else? certainly there is an issue about government intervening quickly to do testing, tracking, and that does raise issues about private — privacy. and certainly the case from korea, taiwan and some other countries is— but also from germany — is that by tracking and testing they have done a lot better. but there is another set of issues about the social contract, about people who are vulnerable, and whether they are protected. and i think we're going to see a wholesale reassessment of the social contract, as well. whether people are prepared to

accept the risks without security that happen not just accept the risks without security that happen notjust in some parts of asia, but also in america, where people have to take more risks and there is less welfare and social security provision, that is going to be an issue. and then, of course, i think these issues of, if you like, protectionism, nationalism, again i going to arise. i mean, how far individual countries feel that they canjust walk individual countries feel that they can just walk the global economy. so i think can just walk the global economy. so ithinka can just walk the global economy. so i think a whole series of issues, authoritarian government but also the social contract, risk and security, all these are coming up, andi security, all these are coming up, and i don't think we should say one country has got all the answers, because some countries may have done well in testing but are not so good on social security. i want to ask you about one country in particular, thatis

you about one country in particular, that is your own, the united kingdom. as a former prime minister do you feel that the current government is failing many of the corona challenges right now? i am thinking of the failure to deliver mass testing, as we have seen in countries like 6ermany. mass testing, as we have seen in countries like germany. i am thinking of the problems getting protective equipment to the people who need it, notjust in the health service itself but on the front line generally, people who have to deal with difficult situations with the general public. there are many ways in which one looks at britain and one sees a country which may well have the highest death toll in europe when the final count is done, and one may conclude britain is failing the test. well, any discussion of what is happening here must start with always my sympathies for all those people who are facing bereavement and all those people who are suffering as a result of having this virus, and ifeel are suffering as a result of having this virus, and i feel particularly for people who are in the front line, who are putting themselves in danger to save lives, they are risking their lives. so i think any debate about what is happening in our country has got to start from our country has got to start from our understanding of the difficulties that so many people are facing trying to help save lives, and trying to help also save livelihoods. you know, there will be a time when people are going to review what happened, and what

happened in january and review what happened, and what happened injanuary and february and march, what happened in the assessment of what was the right policy on testing and herd immunity, and so on. if you don't mind, mr brown, iam and so on. if you don't mind, mr brown, i am asking you for your judgement. because there will be a time when we will have to review the evidence, but this is not the right time. the time at the moment is not to be, if you like, critical. the time is to be constructive. the time is not to look back so much as looking forward. in my role and this is to emphasise my experience of having to deal with the previous crisis, which was smaller in actual practice. it was less complicated, because it wasn'tjust — it was an economic crisis, and this is a health crisis, and cannot be solved without solving the medical problems first, and my experience is that you have got to co—operate more successfully in an international level, and that is the message that i would like to get across to the government. well, ithink i would like to get across to the government. well, i think we have heard that message. ijust want to be clear on one thing. the new leader of your labor party, keir

starmer, has said the government, the british government, must come clea n the british government, must come clean on its exit strategy. am i to understand from what you have said about exit credit is with me today that you don't believe there can be any returned to anything like normality until a vaccine has been found and delivered to the public? —— labour party. found and delivered to the public? -- labour party. what i said was that there were three elements of an exit strategy that required international cooperation, and the three other search for a vaccine, but that may be preceded by having better testing equipment and may be preceded by having these better diagnostics that would enable us to identify who was a carrier of the disease and so on and so forth. and of course, an exit strategy depends on preventing a second round of the disease. as you know, at the moment, many people are very worried that this disease will come back if it is flattened in april and may, will come back in september, october. and the danger is that, as we reopen trade, as we reopen travel, as

people's restrictions are lifted, that from other countries which have been less successful with their health systems and containing this, the disease comes back to hit us. so iam not the disease comes back to hit us. so i am not saying that the disease cannot be — we cannot have an exit strategy until we have a cure. what iam strategy until we have a cure. what i am saying is that there are three elements of an exit strategy that depend on international cooperation. two quick thoughts to end. do you think that the british public, and indeed publics around the world, yet have a grip onjust indeed publics around the world, yet have a grip on just how severe the economic damage done by this pandemic is going to be?” economic damage done by this pandemic is going to be? i think anybody who is not working at the moment and anybody who is feeling insecure about the future of their job, or anybody who is self—employed and doesn't have a livelihood, knows that this is a global crisis that cannot be solved easily and is not going to go away very quickly. so i do think people have an understanding. perhaps what we haven't — can't have a full debate about yet is what it means for the future structure of our economy. i think it's going to be a very

different economy over a year or two it's going to emerge from this, and one of the disappointments after the globalfinancial one of the disappointments after the global financial crisis that i had, we left power in 2010, is that there we re we left power in 2010, is that there were structural changes that were neededin were structural changes that were needed in the world economy and in the british economy, arising from the british economy, arising from the financial crisis. we got ourselves out of the crisis, unemployment was low, we prevented mortgage repossessions, we prevented business bankruptcies, but we did not have a chance to rebuild the economy, and it has to be a very different economy in the future. that leads me, if i may come my last point. and i am going to quote to you the french president, emanuel macron. he said to me the day after we have conquered this virus, it will not be returned to the day before. we will be stronger morally and we will draw the consequences, all of the consequences, of this —— emmanuel macron. now, that's an optimistic view of what the world is going to look like after coronavirus. there are many pessimists who think it is simply going to deepen divisions, fragment

the world even more, and make the world a re the world even more, and make the world are more dangerous place. which camper you? well, that's the choice. i'm always trying to say let's look at what we can do to prevent the inequality, to prevent the long—term damage to our economy, to prevent the ruining of lives, to be honest, as a result of our failure to invest properly in health and social care and everything else. i think we are more aware now of the decisions we have got to make, and that's the balance between the risks people are prepared to take for income, for less attacks and for everything else, against the security that people now know that they need. and i think a lot of the gig economy was based on taking large amounts of risk but not thinking about what security was needed. if a new social contract emerges out of this, then that i think is good for those people who feel most vulnerable in our country at the moment. people who are worried about their future jobs, people who are worried about their future as young people getting jobs in the first place. and of course, older people worried about the future of social care, which is

obviously under huge pressure, without the proper resources to deal without the proper resources to deal with that at the moment. gordon brown, we have to end there. but i thank you very much indeed for joining me on hardtalk. thank you. hello once again. while some areas saw a really glorious enter thursday, the cloud began to fill in across some parts of the british isles, especially in the south. signs of a change, to the extent that there is in the forecast, a little bit of rain on the way for some areas, and for many of you, that will be really quite welcome after a really dry start april. now, after a really dry start april. now, a waft of cloud was all that we really got from this major area of low pressure, throwing belts of

weather ever further towards the north. but this is the direction that we are looking in over the next few days, to see these areas of cloud bringing perhaps a little bit more on the way of significant rainfall to some as we get through friday, and indeed on into the weekend. first signs of that change really getting into the south—western counties of england quite early on friday morning. elsewhere, it's a dry enough and define enough start. you'll see that this rain around about lunchtime in the early afternoon, gets into the south and central parts of wales but it struggles to get north of the m4 corridor. and elsewhere, away from the north—eastern shores of england, where again there is a fair amount of cloud and an onshore breeze, and still that onshore breeze into the eastern side of scotland, well, there is dry and bright weather to be had to western scotland, northern ireland and the north—west of england, and here we will see the template is coming to the teens. on the east coast, though, eight or nine degrees only. through the course of friday evening, that rain again begins to make a little bit of progress into the northern parts of wales. there are odd heavier,

thundery bursts perhaps just trying to get across the channel into the southern counties of england. saturday not a great deal of difference, just that we will see further pulses of showery rain just trying to work their way that little bit further north. so it's saturday where we may well see the odd showery burst of rain just trying to get into the north of england, may be flirting with northern ireland. but the bulk will be found across the midlands and towards wales as well. not a great deal changing in the overall set up, so again the template is on the east coast around about eight or nine degrees, but inland we will be looking at somewhere comfortably into the teens. come sunday, it looks as though we are in for essentially a dry day. perhaps more cloud just coming up through the irish sea into northern ireland, with the chance of a burst of rain here, but elsewhere it is dry and fine, and by this stage, at last, at last, we can talk about double—figure temperatures on the east coast.

this is bbc news. i'm simon pusey with the latest headlines for viewers in the uk and around the world. president trump sets out his plan to re—open the american economy. our team of experts now agrees we can begin the next front in our war, which we're calling ‘opening up america again'. the lockdown in the uk is extended by at least three more weeks, but we're told there is light at the end of the tunnel. in brazil, president bolsonaro fires his health minister after he called for a national anti—virus lockdown. plus, the 99—year—old british army veteran who's completed a charity walk in his garden — raising millions for