i was going to when i was asked what i was going to be doing, to being elected, i said we would re—establish the strength of american relationship so we can be counted on again. alliances. and suggested that, well, maybe you should not get the quad meeting india, japan, australia and the united states working together. and maybe you shouldn't be pushing strengthening the european union to deal with the west, notjust to have, and so on. and i said for an american president to... every president to be sustained and prime minister has to represent the values of the country. and i pointed out and i mean it sincerely, we are unique as a country. we are built on, we are unique in the sense that we are not based on ethnicity or geography of religion. we are one nation and we organise on an idea. we hold these truths to be self—evident that all men and are created equal. it sounds corny but

it is real. and so what we are able to do, we know that corruption undermines the trust in government, siphons of public resources and makes economies much less competitive and constitutes a threat to our security, so we're going to work together to address issues like the abuse of a shell companies, money—laundering through real estate transactions, and we've agreed we're going to work together to address cyber threats. and hold countries accountable that harbour criminals or don't hold them accountable. the g7 nations have confirmed that the democratic values that underpin everything we hope to achieve, that we are committed to put them to work. one, delivering vaccines and

ending the pandemic. two, driving substantial inclusive economic recovery around the world. three, dealing infrastructure development in the places that most badly needed. before, fighting climate change. the only way we are going to meet the global threats is by working together. with our partners and our allies. and i conveyed to each of my g7 counterparts that the united states is going to do our part. america is back at the table. america is back at the table. the lack of participation in the past and full engagement was noticed significantly, not only by the leaders of those countries but by the people in the g7 countries, and america is back in the business of leading the world is alongside nations that share our most deeply held values. and so, the bottom line is i was very pleased with the

outcome of the entire conference. and i noticed there was a lot of coverage of my individual comments made by my colleagues about how we were all getting along together, but the truth of the matter is that we did. it wasn't about me it was about america. ifelt a genuine did. it wasn't about me it was about america. i felt a genuine sense of enthusiasm that america was back at the table fully engaged. i know i'm going to be heading off to brussels, to nato, and many of the same people are going to be at that table. to make the case we are back as well. we do not view nato as a protection racket, we believe that nato is vital to our ability to maintain

american security for the remainder of the century. and there is a real enthusiasm. i made it clear and i pointed out, i thanked them. article five, one american sometimes forget, remember what happened on 9/11. we were attacked, immediately nato supported us. nato supported us. nato went until we got bin laden. nato went until we got bin laden. nato was part of the process. and i want them to know, unlike whether they doubted that we believe nato and section five is a sacred obligation. the bottom line is that i think we made some progress in re—establishing american credibility among our closest friends and our values. now i don't i take some of your questions. and i'm told jonathan, i'm supposed to recognise you first. i jonathan, i'm supposed to recognise ou first. . , , . ., ., jonathan, i'm supposed to recognise ou first. . ,, . ., ., , you first. i appreciate that, sir. mr president, _ you first. i appreciate that, sir.

mr president, vladimir- you first. i appreciate that, sir. mr president, vladimir putin i you first. i appreciate that, sir. l mr president, vladimir putin who you first. i appreciate that, sir. - mr president, vladimir putin who you will be _ mr president, vladimir putin who you will be seeing in a few days in geneva — will be seeing in a few days in geneva said a couple of days ago that he _ geneva said a couple of days ago that he believed the us— russia relations— that he believed the us— russia relations were in a low point. and what _ relations were in a low point. and what concrete ways could your stomach — what concrete ways could your stomach change that? secondly, you have said _ stomach change that? secondly, you have said previously in the run—up to the _ have said previously in the run—up to the summit that you would be unafraid — to the summit that you would be unafraid to call out russia's disruptive actions, like cyber attacks, _ disruptive actions, like cyber attacks, election interference, ukraine, — attacks, election interference, ukraine, but you are not having a joint _ ukraine, but you are not having a joint press — ukraine, but you are not having a joint press conference with putin. why not— joint press conference with putin. why not stand by side with him and say those _ why not stand by side with him and say those things where the world to watch? _ say those things where the world to watch? let— say those things where the world to watch? . ~ say those things where the world to watch? ., ~ . ., ~ watch? let me make it clear. i think he is riaht watch? let me make it clear. i think he is right that _ watch? let me make it clear. i think he is right that it _ watch? let me make it clear. i think he is right that it is _ watch? let me make it clear. i think he is right that it is a _ watch? let me make it clear. i think he is right that it is a low _ watch? let me make it clear. i think he is right that it is a low point. - he is right that it is a low point. it depends on how he responds to act inconsistently with international norms, which in many cases he has not. as i told him when i was running and i got elected, before i was sworn in, that i was going to find out whether or not he did engage in trying to interfere in our election, that i was going to take a look at whether he was involved in

the cyber security breach that occurred, etc, and ifi the cyber security breach that occurred, etc, and if i did i was going to respond. i did, i checked it out, i had access to all of the intelligence, he was engaged in all of those activities, i did respond and made clear i would respond again. i always found, and and made clear i would respond again. ialways found, and i and made clear i would respond again. i always found, and i don't mean to suggest that the press should not know, but this is not a contest about who can do better in front of a press conference or try to embarrass each other. it's about making myself very clear what the conditions are to get a better relationship with russia. we are not looking for conflict. we are looking to resolve those actions which we think are inconsistent with international norms, number one. number two, where we can work together we may be able to do that in terms of some strategic doctrine that we may be able to work

together. there may be other areas. there's even talk of an ability to work together on climate. so the bottom line is that i think the best way to deal with this is where he and i to meet, he and i too our discussion. i know you don't doubt that i will be very straightforward with him about our concerns. and i will make clear my view of how that meeting turned out and he will make clear how from his perspective how it turned out. but i don't want to get into being diverted by "did they shake hands? who talk the most." he can say what he thought the meeting was about and i will say what i think the meeting is about. that is how i am going to handle it. i'm sorry, i'm going to get in trouble with the staff i don't do this the right way. fin with the staff i don't do this the riaht wa . ., ., with the staff i don't do this the ri . ht wa . ., ., , , with the staff i don't do this the riaht wa . ., ., , , ., right way. on china, china seems to be doinu right way. on china, china seems to be doing exactly _ right way. on china, china seems to be doing exactly what _ right way. on china, china seems to be doing exactly what it _ right way. on china, china seems to be doing exactly what it wants - right way. on china, china seems to be doing exactly what it wants to . right way. on china, china seems to be doing exactly what it wants to do j be doing exactly what it wants to do

with regard to hong kong, with regard — with regard to hong kong, with regard to — with regard to hong kong, with regard to edging jang, with south china _ regard to edging jang, with south china sea, and many other issues, despite _ china sea, and many other issues, despite pressure from you and allies — despite pressure from you and allies. the final language in the g7 communique which are different from past years. _ communique which are different from past years, but i know it's not as tough _ past years, but i know it's not as tough as— past years, but i know it's not as tough as you and your team have wanted _ tough as you and your team have wanted it— tough as you and your team have wanted it to be. we saw a draft of the communique and it's not quite as tough _ the communique and it's not quite as tough so— the communique and it's not quite as tough. so why isn't it as tough? there _ tough. so why isn't it as tough? there isn't— tough. so why isn't it as tough? there isn't very much action in it. there _ there isn't very much action in it. there are — there isn't very much action in it. there are some calls for china to be respectful — there are some calls for china to be respectful. but why isn't that communique a little bit tougher? are you disappointed? and what can you do to— you disappointed? and what can you do to change some of these actions by china? _ do to change some of these actions b china? , ., . ~' do to change some of these actions b china? , ., ., ,, .,, by china? first of all, i think, as ou by china? first of all, i think, as you know. _ by china? first of all, i think, as you know. the — by china? first of all, i think, as you know, the last _ by china? first of all, i think, as you know, the last time - by china? first of all, i think, as you know, the last time the - by china? first of all, i think, as you know, the last time the g7 i by china? first of all, i think, as - you know, the last time the g7 match there was no mention of china. but this time there is mention of china. the g7 explicitly agreed to call out the human rights abuses in shing jails the human rights abuses in shing jang and hong kong explicitly. to come out to communicate a strategy.

they've agreed that that is under way now. three, to take serious actions against forced labour and solar agriculture and the garment industries, because that is where it's happening. and they have agreed we will do that. the launch of what i said earlier, i really feel very strongly. i proposed that we have a democratic alternative to the built road initiative, to build back better. and they have agreed to that, and that is under way. the details of that, we agreed and put together a committee to do that. thirdly, that we are going to assist on high standards for climate friendly, transparent alternative to the built road initiative. in the meantime, we are going to move forwards. look, ithink

meantime, we are going to move forwards. look, i think it's always... let me put it this way, i know this is going to sound somewhat prosaic, but i think we are in a contest. i'm with china per se. we are in a... as to whether or not democracies can compete with them in the rapidly changing 21st century. and i think how we act and whether we pull together as democracies is going to determine whether our grant kids look back 15 years from now and say, "did they step up?" our democracies as powerful? and i walked away from the meeting with all of my colleagues, they are convinced that that is correct now, too. notjust because of me. they believe that to be the case. so i think you are going to see straightforward dealing with china.

and again, as i told him myself, i'm not looking for conflict stop where we disagree, i'm going to stated frankly and we are going to respond to actions that are inconsistent. we talked about trade. it's one thing to talk about whether our agriculture policy makes sense, another thing to say, by the way, you are demanding that if i do business in your country i have to give you all of my trade secrets and have the chinese partner have 51% of that? no. not us. pare have the chinese partner have 51% of that? no. not us.— that? no. not us. are you saying, are ou that? no. not us. are you saying, are you satisfied _ that? no. not us. are you saying, are you satisfied with _ that? no. not us. are you saying, are you satisfied with what - that? no. not us. are you saying, are you satisfied with what came i that? no. not us. are you saying, i are you satisfied with what came out in the _ are you satisfied with what came out in the communique? | are you satisfied with what came out in the communique?— in the communique? i think there is [en of in the communique? i think there is plenty of action _ in the communique? i think there is plenty of action on _ in the communique? i think there is plenty of action on china. _ in the communique? i think there is plenty of action on china. there - in the communique? i think there is plenty of action on china. there is l plenty of action on china. there is always something, i'm sure my colleagues think there are things that they could improve, but i'm satisfied. . ., . .,

satisfied. the communique cited a varie of satisfied. the communique cited a variety of fronts _ satisfied. the communique cited a variety of fronts on _ satisfied. the communique cited a variety of fronts on china. - variety of fronts on china. everything from human rights, the origin— everything from human rights, the origin of— everything from human rights, the origin of the covid virus, taiwan, what _ origin of the covid virus, taiwan, what do — origin of the covid virus, taiwan, what do you _ origin of the covid virus, taiwan, what do you think china needs to do to ease _ what do you think china needs to do to ease tensions? | what do you think china needs to do to ease tensions?— to ease tensions? i think china has to ease tensions? i think china has to start to act _ to ease tensions? i think china has to start to act more _ to ease tensions? i think china has to start to act more responsibly . to ease tensions? i think china has to start to act more responsibly in | to start to act more responsibly in terms of international norms and human rights, and transparency. transparency matters across the board. and i think the idea... for example, one of the things i and others raised at the g7 is that we don't know... we haven't had access to the lavatories to determine whether or not... i haven't reached a conclusion because our intelligence community is not certain yet. whether or not this was a consequence from the marketplace of a bat interfacing with animals and the environment that caused this

covid—19, or whether it was an experiment gone awry in our laboratory. it is important to know the answer to that because we have to have access, we have to build a system whereby we can no when we see another lack of transparency that might produce another pandemic, we have to have access. the world has to have access. we are trying to work out at the g7 whether we can put together an international basis upon which we could have a bottom line with what the transparency accounted for.— line with what the transparency accounted for. ., ., . accounted for. you mentioned that the argument _ accounted for. you mentioned that the argument behind _ accounted for. you mentioned that the argument behind the _ accounted for. you mentioned that the argument behind the scenes, l accounted for. you mentioned that i the argument behind the scenes, you had not _ the argument behind the scenes, you had not mentioned china three years in one _ had not mentioned china three years in one of— had not mentioned china three years in one of these communiqu s. what did you _ in one of these communiqu s. what did you argue behind—the—scenes to try to _ did you argue behind—the—scenes to try to bring — did you argue behind—the—scenes to try to bring people to the point where — try to bring people to the point where they got it? the try to bring people to the point where they got it?— try to bring people to the point where they got it? the answer to that question. —

where they got it? the answer to that question, there _ where they got it? the answer to that question, there is _ where they got it? the answer to that question, there is no - where they got it? the answer to that question, there is no way i where they got it? the answer to that question, there is no way to | that question, there is no way to answer that without sounding self—serving. let mejust answer that without sounding self—serving. let me just say this, i laid out what i thought was the need for us to be consistent to protect our economies and to see to it that other struggling economies that needed help got the help and were not held captive by other nations. but you might ask that to others. i'm not trying to be the wise guy. wall streetjournal. this wise guy. wall street journal. as ou wise guy. wall streetjournal. as you said, the g7 countries seti trillion— you said, the g7 countries seti billion coronavirus doses overseas. but the _ billion coronavirus doses overseas. but the world health organization says it _ but the world health organization says 11 billion doses are needed. how are — says 11 billion doses are needed. how are you going to bridge that gap? _ how are you going to bridge that gap? will— how are you going to bridge that gap? will the us committee sent additional doses overseas? given the -ap, additional doses overseas? given the gap. is _ additional doses overseas? given the gap. is it— additional doses overseas? given the gap, is it realistic to end the pandemic— gap, is it realistic to end the pandemic by 2022? it gap, is it realistic to end the pandemic by 2022?- gap, is it realistic to end the pandemic by 2022? it may take sli . htl pandemic by 2022? it may take slightly longer— pandemic by 2022? it may take slightly longer worldwide, - pandemic by 2022? it may take slightly longer worldwide, but i pandemic by 2022? it may take i slightly longer worldwide, but the united states is going to continue.

i think there is a possibility over 2022 going into 2023 that would be be in the position to provide another billion, but that is not done yet. i have been very careful as i have dealt with this pandemic to tell you what i know and say what i thought could be done, and when i have announced that i have gone and done it. what i don't want to do is be getting too far ahead and suggesting that we can do things, that i can do things, that the united states can do things that i don't have done yet. there was a clear consensus among all our colleagues at the g7 that this wasn't the end. we were going to stay at it until we were able to provide for the needs of the whole world. look, it's notjust the right thing to do from a moral standpoint. but it is also the correct thing to do in terms of our own health. our own security. you cannot build a wall high enough to keep out new

strains. you can't do that. so i think this is going to be a constant project for a long time, and there may be other pandemics. we are again setting up a system whereby we can detect before it gets out of control, a pandemic or virus that may be on the horizon. as long as there are nations in need, not only that, we have been engaged in helping, which i've made clear, and most of my colleagues understood it, knew it from trying it themselves, this is a gigantic logistical effort. it's one thing to send nation x y number of vaccines, it's another thing to have the people who can get it in somebody�*s arm. so we are also providing the ability for other countries to manufacture their

vaccines. we have all agreed on that. india has the capacity to do that, they don't have the material capacity thus far to do the manufacturing. but there is a lot going on to provide not only "give" vaccines, but to provide the ability of the countries in question to produce their own vaccines. last question. i'm not going to answer it. i'mjoking. nbc news.- question. i'm not going to answer it. i'mjoking. nbc news. it. i'm 'oking. nbc news. thank you ve it. i'mjoking. nbc news. thank you very much- — it. i'mjoking. nbc news. thank you very much. about _ it. i'mjoking. nbc news. thank you very much. about vladimir - it. i'mjoking. nbc news. thank you very much. about vladimir putin - it. i'mjoking. nbc news. thank you| very much. about vladimir putin and your meeting, as you are aware of the us— your meeting, as you are aware of the us has— your meeting, as you are aware of the us has been slapping sanctions on russia _ the us has been slapping sanctions on russia for years, and russia has not stopped. so what specifically will you — not stopped. so what specifically will you do differently to change vladimir— will you do differently to change vladimir putin's behaviour? first of all, there vladimir putin's behaviour? first of all. there is— vladimir putin's behaviour? first of all, there is no _ vladimir putin's behaviour? first of all, there is no guarantee - vladimir putin's behaviour? first of all, there is no guarantee you - vladimir putin's behaviour? first of all, there is no guarantee you can i all, there is no guarantee you can change a person's behaviour, or the behaviour of his country. autocrats have a lot of power and they don't

to answer to a public. and the fact is it may very well be, if i respond in kind, which i will come out that it doesn't dissuade him, he wants to keep going. but i think that we are going to be moving in a direction where russia has its own dilemmas, let us say. dealing with its economy, dealing with covid, and dealing not only with the united states but europe at large, and in the middle east. so there is a lot going on together with russia. for example, in libya, we should be opening up the passes to be able to go through and provide foodie assistance and economic assistance, vital assistance to a population thatis vital assistance to a population that is in real trouble. i think i'm going to try very hard... by the

way, there are places where i shouldn't be starting off negotiating in public. let me put it this way, russia has engaged in activities which we believe are contrary to international norms, but they have also bitten off some real problems they are going to have trouble chewing on. for example, the rebuilding of syria, of libya. they are there. as long as they are there without the ability to bring about some order in the region, and you can't do that very well without providing the bait mekelle basic economic needs of people, so i'm hopeful that we can try to save the lives of people in for example

libya. consistent with the interest, maybe for different reasons, but the same result. maybe for different reasons, but the same result-— same result. vladimir putin said toda , same result. vladimir putin said today. but _ same result. vladimir putin said today. but why _ same result. vladimir putin said today, but why do _ same result. vladimir putin said today, but why do you _ same result. vladimir putin said today, but why do you think - same result. vladimir putin said today, but why do you think he i today, but why do you think he hasn't — today, but why do you think he hasn't changed his behaviour in spite _ hasn't changed his behaviour in spite of— hasn't changed his behaviour in spite of everything the us has done to this _ spite of everything the us has done to this point?— to this point? he's vladimir putin. i'm not to this point? he's vladimir putin. l'm rrot going _ to this point? he's vladimir putin. l'm rrot going to — to this point? he's vladimir putin. i'm not going to get _ to this point? he's vladimir putin. i'm not going to get into - to this point? he's vladimir putin. i'm not going to get into much - to this point? he's vladimir putin. i i'm not going to get into much more of that because i have to sit down with him. i'm happy to talk after that. , . ., with him. i'm happy to talk after that. . ., . with him. i'm happy to talk after that. , ., . ., that. just to conclude, today he said that russia _ that. just to conclude, today he said that russia would - that. just to conclude, today he said that russia would be - that. just to conclude, today he said that russia would be ready that. just to conclude, today he i said that russia would be ready to hand over — said that russia would be ready to hand over cyber criminals to the united _ hand over cyber criminals to the united states if the us would do the same _ united states if the us would do the same to— united states if the us would do the same to russia. and an agreement came _ same to russia. and an agreement came out— same to russia. and an agreement came out of— same to russia. and an agreement came out of this meeting coming up. are you _ came out of this meeting coming up. are you a _ came out of this meeting coming up. are you a prince that kind of a trade? — are you a prince that kind of a trade? . ., . , trade? yes, if there are crimes committed _ trade? yes, if there are crimes committed against _ trade? yes, if there are crimes committed against russia - trade? yes, if there are crimes committed against russia and| trade? yes, if there are crimes i committed against russia and the people committing those crimes are harboured in the united states, i'm committed to holding them accountable. i heard that, iwas

told as i was flying here that he said that. i think that is potentially a good sign of progress. thank you all very much. thank you. thank you all very much. thank you. thank you. l’m thank you all very much. thank you. thank you— thank you. i'm going to get into trouble with _ thank you. i'm going to get into trouble with my _ thank you. i'm going to get into trouble with my staff. _ thank you. i'm going to get into trouble with my staff. go - thank you. i'm going to get into | trouble with my staff. go ahead. thank you. i'm going to get into - trouble with my staff. go ahead. you have often said _ trouble with my staff. go ahead. you have often said repeatedly that america — have often said repeatedly that america is back. at the same time, you have _ america is back. at the same time, you have kept in place some trump era sanctions. i wanted to ask, when you are _ era sanctions. i wanted to ask, when you are having these conversations with european allies who are very concerned — with european allies who are very concerned about these sanctions, how do you _ concerned about these sanctions, how do you justify that? give concerned about these sanctions, how do you justify that?— do you 'ustify that? give me a break. do you justify that? give me a break. i need _ do you justify that? give me a break. i need time. _ do you justify that? give me a break. i need time. thank - do you justify that? give me a| break. i need time. thank you. joe biden making his thoughts clear at the end of the g7 summit. he

clearly thought it was an extraordinary collaborative, productive effort in his words. everyone understands the challenges. he gave an awful lot of that press conference over to the issue of china. he thinks there needs to be more from the eu in tackling the human rights abuses in china, particularly where it comes to forced labour in challenging province. he thinks there needs to be efforts to tackle competition. "we have two provide a democratic alternative" and the g7 will be setting up a committee to do that. if you want a window into the soul ofjoe biden right now, this is the line that he gave the journalist there. "we are in a contest with autocrats around the world and we have to see whether democrats can compete this century", will ultimately tell us how that is possible. also a bit in there about russia. he goes here, via nato, to geneva for a sit down with vladimir

putin. clearly it's going to be a very frank and full discussion, everything from cyber security, ukraine, interference in us elections. but it is a stick and carrot approach, because he talks at the end there about russia biting off more that it can chew in the area, libya, where they are going to have to put enormous economic resources in order to rebuild these countries, and maybe that is an area where "we can work together." a lot of people, just on the personality. a lot of people have welcomed backjoe biden. he touched on the issue that some people have referred back to the comments he made about borisjohnson, but he said, " generally, we did get on." and may be borisjohnson has made an impression on him. and that shouldn't be surprising, because

there is not a lot they agree on. yes, that's right, christian. it was really— yes, that's right, christian. it was really interesting because one of the moments of the press conference, joe biden— the moments of the press conference, joe biden made a point of saying that the — joe biden made a point of saying that the leaders are really happy to see him _ that the leaders are really happy to see him and have a president who believed _ see him and have a president who believed in— see him and have a president who believed in climate change. he didn't— believed in climate change. he didn't mentioned donald trump's namef _ didn't mentioned donald trump's name. but — didn't mentioned donald trump's name, but he was deftly referring to in that _ name, but he was deftly referring to in that respect. he went into a lot of issues — in that respect. he went into a lot of issues in — in that respect. he went into a lot of issues in his press conference. all leaders— of issues in his press conference. all leaders are giving a positive spin because they want to come out of this— spin because they want to come out of this looking good, and journalists ask these questions to try to _ journalists ask these questions to try to pick— journalists ask these questions to try to pick holes at it. and president biden is often criticised for not _ president biden is often criticised for not giving enough press conferences, so we just gave one. he started _ conferences, so we just gave one. he started off— conferences, so we just gave one. he started off by talking about proud democracies. this is a big thing for him _ democracies. this is a big thing for him he _ democracies. this is a big thing for him. he really wants to emphasise the fact— him. he really wants to emphasise the fact that the global challenge today— the fact that the global challenge today in— the fact that the global challenge today in his mind is global

democracies versus autocratic authoritarian regimes like china. he did talk— authoritarian regimes like china. he did talk about the pandemic. and dealing _ did talk about the pandemic. and dealing with that, helping countries who are _ dealing with that, helping countries who are poorer in terms of vaccine contribution. — who are poorer in terms of vaccine contribution, confirming that half $1 billion — contribution, confirming that half $1 billion of pfizer vaccines are dealing — $1 billion of pfizer vaccines are dealing with future pandemics. on china. _ dealing with future pandemics. on china. i_ dealing with future pandemics. on china, i went through the communique, china only seem to be mentioned _ communique, china only seem to be mentioned six times i think. and i don't _ mentioned six times i think. and i don't think— mentioned six times i think. and i don't think the language was as tough _ don't think the language was as tough as— don't think the language was as tough as he probably would have wanted _ tough as he probably would have wanted it — tough as he probably would have wanted it to be. i mean, there were certain— wanted it to be. i mean, there were certain issues mentioned there on hong _ certain issues mentioned there on hong kong, first labour at south china _ hong kong, first labour at south china sea. — hong kong, first labour at south china sea, all those issues. there are calls _ china sea, all those issues. there are calls for— china sea, all those issues. there are calls for china to be more respectful— are calls for china to be more respectful of the human rights record — respectful of the human rights record. joe biden defended it by saying. — record. joe biden defended it by saying, "look, last time with the g7, saying, "look, last time with the 67. china — saying, "look, last time with the g7, china wasn't even mentioned, and this time _ g7, china wasn't even mentioned, and this time it _ g7, china wasn't even mentioned, and this time it is" — g7, china wasn't even mentioned, and this time it is." quickly on russia, he is _ this time it is." quickly on russia, he is off— this time it is." quickly on russia, he is off to — this time it is." quickly on russia, he is off to meet putin on wednesday. he didn't really mince his words— wednesday. he didn't really mince his words when he was asked about relations— his words when he was asked about

relations being low with putin, he laughed _ relations being low with putin, he laughed and said yes they are. he also went— laughed and said yes they are. he also went on to defend why he is having _ also went on to defend why he is having a — also went on to defend why he is having a solo press conference rather — having a solo press conference rather than having one with putin. he said _ rather than having one with putin. he said he — rather than having one with putin. he said he doesn't want to get into the situation where these conferences are analysed. it is not a contest — conferences are analysed. it is not a contest about you can do better. he said. _ a contest about you can do better. he said, although he is not looking for a conflict, which some would argue _ for a conflict, which some would argue it — for a conflict, which some would argue it sounds like he is, he said he will— argue it sounds like he is, he said he will be — argue it sounds like he is, he said he will be looking for shared values with russia. it will be editing to see how— with russia. it will be editing to see how that goes because there are a lot of— see how that goes because there are a lot of things he did accuse vladimir— a lot of things he did accuse vladimir putin of in that press conference. he says he believes he interfered — conference. he says he believes he interfered in the us election, he has accused him of cyber hacking as well _ has accused him of cyber hacking as well in _ has accused him of cyber hacking as well. in terms of the g7, i think that— well. in terms of the g7, i think that there — well. in terms of the g7, i think that there are a lot of things that joe biden— that there are a lot of things that joe biden probably would wanted to have achieved more, particularly on china. _ have achieved more, particularly on china. but— have achieved more, particularly on china, but ultimately for him the message — china, but ultimately for him the message was that america is at the table _ message was that america is at the table and _ message was that america is at the table and i— message was that america is at the table and i think as far as that goes. — table and i think as far as that goes. he _ table and i think as far as that goes, he is probably happy with achieving — goes, he is probably happy with

achieving that. you goes, he is probably happy with achieving that.— goes, he is probably happy with achieving that. goes, he is probably happy with achievin: that. ., . ., . �*~ achieving that. you are watching bbc news. we achieving that. you are watching bbc news- we will _ achieving that. you are watching bbc news. we will have _ achieving that. you are watching bbc news. we will have more _ achieving that. you are watching bbc news. we will have more from - achieving that. you are watching bbc news. we will have more from carbis bay later. it is approaching 330. we've had quite a few developments. some are very few news afternoon and we are a news channel. first something that emmanuel macron said. he was asked about the dispute. "inconsistencies from the british side should not be blamed on the eu." on the situation with christian eriksen, the danish player who collapsed yesterday. the team doctor in a news conference was asked by the bbc how close the medics work to losing erickson on the pitch. "it was cardiac arrest. we got him back after one d fib. so that was quite fast." he has spoken to eriksson this morning, he doesn't

remember much of what happened. he has the west, including britain, not to renew the nuclear deal with iran. speaking at the g7 news conference, said that mandatory quarantine could be introduced for travellers from england if cases in england of covid and the delta variant continued to rise. all of those developments in the last hour. another want to bring you is that presidentjoe biden is travelling by airfrom newquay airport to london. he is going to windsor to have tea with the queen. and my colleague is there. thank you very much- — and my colleague is there. thank you very much- a — and my colleague is there. thank you very much. a gorgeous _ and my colleague is there. thank you very much. a gorgeous day _ and my colleague is there. thank you very much. a gorgeous day here - and my colleague is there. thank you very much. a gorgeous day here in i very much. a gorgeous day here in windsor _ very much. a gorgeous day here in windsor. the sunshine showing of the town and _ windsor. the sunshine showing of the town and the castle behind me at their— town and the castle behind me at their absolute best. town and the castle behind me at theirabsolute best. i town and the castle behind me at their absolute best. i don't think anyone — their absolute best. i don't think anyone could fail to be impressed with the _ anyone could fail to be impressed with the castle in the sunshine. i'm

sure president biden and first lady jill biden _ sure president biden and first lady jill biden will be no exception to that _ jill biden will be no exception to that the — jill biden will be no exception to that. the queen and senator biden met for— that. the queen and senator biden met for the — that. the queen and senator biden met for the first time briefly back in the _ met for the first time briefly back in the early 1980s, but until friday. _ in the early 1980s, but until friday, that g7 dinner, they hadn't met in— friday, that g7 dinner, they hadn't met in all— friday, that g7 dinner, they hadn't met in all that time. judging by the images _ met in all that time. judging by the images from friday evening, they looked _ images from friday evening, they looked to— images from friday evening, they looked to be getting on famously. broad _ looked to be getting on famously. broad smiles. today, here are the castle. _ broad smiles. today, here are the castle. a _ broad smiles. today, here are the castle, a chance to get to know each other— castle, a chance to get to know each other a _ castle, a chance to get to know each other a little — castle, a chance to get to know each other a little bit better when they have tea — other a little bit better when they have tea together, the queen, the president — have tea together, the queen, the president and the first lady. beyond that rapport, i think what the two of them _ that rapport, i think what the two of them have very much in common is a life _ of them have very much in common is a life of— of them have very much in common is a life of service. the queen was crowned — a life of service. the queen was crowned when she was just 27. joe biden— crowned when she was just 27. joe biden won — crowned when she was just 27. joe biden won a — crowned when she was just 27. joe biden won a senate race when he was 'ust biden won a senate race when he was just 29. _ biden won a senate race when he was just 29, becoming the fifth youngest us senator ever. so i think a big point _ us senator ever. so i think a big point in — us senator ever. so i think a big point in common that the two of them have _ point in common that the two of them have let's _ point in common that the two of them have. let's discuss all of this a little _ have. let's discuss all of this a little bit — have. let's discuss all of this a little bit more now with our royal

correspondent. daniela, let's look back on— correspondent. daniela, let's look back on friday. they really hit it off, back on friday. they really hit it off. didn't — back on friday. they really hit it off, didn't they?— off, didn't they? they definitely did. off, didn't they? they definitely did- there _ off, didn't they? they definitely did. there was _ off, didn't they? they definitely did. there was an _ off, didn't they? they definitely did. there was an obvious - off, didn't they? they definitely . did. there was an obvious personal connection there, as well as some of the more diplomatic elements of the conversation. it was very much a welcome to the uk from the queen. she was sent down to cornwall as part of this wider soft diplomacy programme to welcome some of the world leaders, and to smooth the road ahead for any discussions, create a well of goodwill there, and to use her power, her longevity, her history to welcome people here to the uk. and it was clearly a personal connection between them. we couldn't hear what was said, but from the pictures we saw they all seem to get on very well. tell from the pictures we saw they all seem to get on very well.- seem to get on very well. tell us more about _ seem to get on very well. tell us more about the _ seem to get on very well. tell us more about the plans _ seem to get on very well. tell us more about the plans for - seem to get on very well. tell us more about the plans for this - more about the plans for this afternoon. more about the plans for this afternoon-— more about the plans for this afternoon. this is an informal visit, it won't _ afternoon. this is an informal visit, it won't last _ afternoon. this is an informal visit, it won't last very - afternoon. this is an informal visit, it won't last very long i afternoon. this is an informal. visit, it won't last very long here to windsor. it is nothing like a state visit. people will remember the trump state visit from a couple of years ago. but it won'tjust be

that informal, to be