this tour has had its challenges, from whether it would happen at all because of the king's cancer treatment, to yesterday's protest. but it draws to a close today in front of huge, supportive crowds. earlier, at sydney's national centre of indigenous excellence, yesterday's protest in canberra was acknowledged by elders, but there was pride that the king had visited. i'm just so happy that he came to the community, because they choose to go wherever, and he chose to come here, and we have to be respectful of that, and i'm happy to have him here. he also had melanoma in the brain... meeting two doctors developing pioneering cancer treatment, an engagement of great personal interest to the king as he navigates his own cancer journey. it is australia, of course, so no trip would be complete without some barbecuing royals. this is the most prolonged period we've seen the king on duty this year. buckingham palace will be relieved

he has coped ahead of the next stage of this trip, to samoa. daniela relph, bbc news, sydney. time for a look at the weather. here's tomasz schafernaker. thank you. and he is on a media lights. what does that tell us about robert jenrick�*s hopes of becoming the next

conservative leader? he is here live. —— on a media blitz. welcome to newsnight for insights and interviews. the prime minister keir starmer appears to have been pulled into us presidential election. tonight, the trump team have filed a legal complaint against both the harris campaign and the labour party here for — and i quote — "illegalforeign campaign contributions and interference in the us election". in a moment, we're going to talk to a man tipped for the job of secretary of state if donald trump wins. we can talk to him right now. thank you for talking to our british audience. good evening. thank you

for havin: audience. good evening. thank you for having the- _ audience. good evening. thank you for having the. this _ for having the. this legal complaint. _ for having the. this legal complaint, doesn't - for having the. this legal complaint, doesn't that i for having the. this legal- complaint, doesn't that sound like donald trump is getting desperate? i think whenever a foreign government tries to interfere in an election, that is desperation. so we shouldn't be having that, and you shouldn't be having that, and you should not be defending having a government interfere in another country's elections. i government interfere in another country's elections.— country's elections. i have not defended _ country's elections. i have not defended that _ country's elections. i have not defended that allegation. - country's elections. i have not defended that allegation. can | country's elections. i have not. defended that allegation. can you tell me what evidence you have for, as you put it, a foreign government interfering in the us presidential election? ~ , ., ., election? well, you are the journalist. _ election? well, you are the journalist, you should - election? well, you are the - journalist, you should be looking into the labour party, you should be looking at what the allegations are, and not somehow blaming the trump administration for being desperate. we do not want to have foreign interference, we don't want to have any foreign interference in our elections, we certainly do not want to do it in other country's elections, so i think this is a pretty open and shut case. do not interfere in the american elections and you will not be sued. and

interfere in the american elections and you will not be sued. and how is it different, — and you will not be sued. and how is it different, labour _ and you will not be sued. and how is it different, labour party _ and you will not be sued. and how is it different, labour party members l it different, labour party members and activists going to america to campaign on behalf of the democrats, compared to, for example, liz truss, who used to be the conservative prime minister, or nigel farage, who is the leader of reform, going over to your country to campaign for donald trump? i to your country to campaign for donald trump?— to your country to campaign for donald trump? i think they were s-ueakin donald trump? i think they were speaking on _ donald trump? i think they were speaking on his _ donald trump? i think they were speaking on his behalf. - donald trump? i think they were speaking on his behalf. no - donald trump? i think they were speaking on his behalf. no one l donald trump? i think they were | speaking on his behalf. no one is going to shy away from having people speak on behalf, whether it is an event or some sort of speaking engagement. i think it is quite different, though, when you actually pay for people to go door knock and organise. pay for people to go door knock and oruanise. ~ g pay for people to go door knock and organise- i — pay for people to go door knock and organise.- i think— pay for people to go door knock and organise. why? i think it is more of an operational— organise. why? i think it is more of an operational and _ organise. why? i think it is more of an operational and involvement in the election rather than just speaking out. we have a first amendment in the united states which allows people to speak out and say anything, but it is quite a different story when you are paid to

be an activist on a campaign. find different story when you are paid to be an activist on a campaign. and so is this ou be an activist on a campaign. and so is this you pointing _ be an activist on a campaign. and so is this you pointing at _ be an activist on a campaign. and so is this you pointing at the _ be an activist on a campaign. and so is this you pointing at the harris - is this you pointing at the harris campaign and saying, actually, they are desperate, they are going to lose? ., ., ., ., , lose? you are the one who used the deserate lose? you are the one who used the desperate rhetoric. _ lose? you are the one who used the desperate rhetoric. i— lose? you are the one who used the desperate rhetoric. i am _ lose? you are the one who used the desperate rhetoric. i amjust - desperate rhetoric. i am just answering your questions. the labour pa sa answering your questions. the labour party say they — answering your questions. the labour party say they have — answering your questions. the labour party say they have done _ answering your questions. the labour party say they have done absolutely l party say they have done absolutely nothing wrong. party say they have done absolutely nothing wrong-— nothing wrong. well, then, they should not _ nothing wrong. well, then, they should not fear _ nothing wrong. well, then, they should not fear anything - nothing wrong. well, then, they should not fear anything from i nothing wrong. well, then, they. should not fear anything from the investigation. we see what has happened, they should not be participating in the elections. i think the better answer for them participating in the elections. i think the better answerfor them is to say, gosh, we are not going to participate, we do not want to have a ruling party — remember, it is the ruling party — trying to somehow interfere in america's elections. we do not think that is right, and frankly i think the media in the uk should also say that this is a terrible precedent. i understand that most of the media is for the

ruling party there, but i think there is a difference because what we call in america the slippery slope, the president, i think is a really dangerous precedent to have the ruling party of an ally somehow playing politics, getting involved and actually campaigning with such short notice. it is the last month of our campaign. flan short notice. it is the last month of our campaign-— short notice. it is the last month of our campaign. can i ask you, how hiuh do of our campaign. can i ask you, how high do you — of our campaign. can i ask you, how high do you think — of our campaign. can i ask you, how high do you think this _ of our campaign. can i ask you, how high do you think this goes - of our campaign. can i ask you, how high do you think this goes up - of our campaign. can i ask you, how high do you think this goes up in... | high do you think this goes up in... 7 i high do you think this goes up in... ? ., ., ., you high do you think this goes up in... ? ., ., . you do high do you think this goes up in... ?_ you do not - high do you think this goes up in... ?_ you do not knowl high do you think this goes up in... | ?_ you do not know if ? i have no idea. you do not know if it aoes ? i have no idea. you do not know if it goes up — ? i have no idea. you do not know if it goes up to — ? i have no idea. you do not know if it goes up to the _ ? i have no idea. you do not know if it goes up to the prime _ ? i have no idea. you do not know if it goes up to the prime minister? i i it goes up to the prime minister? i have no idea, but maybe we can talk about another subject. i have no idea, but maybe we can talk about another subject.— about another sub'ect. i have many auestions about another sub'ect. i have many questions to — about another sub'ect. i have many questions to ask — about another subject. i have many questions to ask you _ about another subject. i have many questions to ask you about - about another subject. i have many questions to ask you about foreign | questions to ask you about foreign affairs. first of all, if you're offered thejob of affairs. first of all, if you're offered the job of secretary of state if donald trump were to be re—elected, would you accept? in america, we get those questions a lot, but the media knows that we are not talking about anything past november five. not talking about anything past novemberfive. i not talking about anything past november five.— not talking about anything past november five. ., november five. i am campaigning in north carolina. _ november five. i am campaigning in north carolina, it _ november five. i am campaigning in north carolina, it is _ november five. i am campaigning in north carolina, it is a _ november five. i am campaigning in north carolina, it is a swing -

november five. i am campaigning in north carolina, it is a swing state, l north carolina, it is a swing state, i've just been in north carolina, it is a swing state, i'vejust been in michigan, i will be in pennsylvania and wisconsin, i'm completely focused on the swing states and try to get us to the next 14 states and try to get us to the next ia days, ia days from now we have an election. we 14 days, 14 days from now we have an election. ~ ., ., ~ , election. we have heard mr trump say ofthe election. we have heard mr trump say of the ukraine- russia _ election. we have heard mr trump say of the ukraine- russia conflict - election. we have heard mr trump say of the ukraine- russia conflict that - of the ukraine— russia conflict that he could sort it out, you could end it in 2a hours. i wonder if you could give us some insight into how he might do that. in could give us some insight into how he might do that.— he might do that. in america, we have this thing _ he might do that. in america, we have this thing called _ he might do that. in america, we have this thing called credible - have this thing called credible threats. we do notjust talk about have this thing called credible threats. we do not just talk about a threats. we do not just talk about a threat of military action or a threat of military action or a threat of military action or a threat of terrorists or a threat of action, we call it a credible threat because we understand there is a difference between a credible threat and just a threat. what we have seen from jo biden isjust and just a threat. what we have seen from jo biden is just a and just a threat. what we have seen from jo biden isjust a simple threat, he says no when confronted with whether people are not should take military action. jo biden has not spoken with vladimir putin in more than three years. but billions

of dollars have been spent by us taxpayers to continue this war. what we think donald trump has as a credible threat. when he says, "we are going to end this," other parties know that he means business. let me give you an example, when an evangelical pastor was being held against his will in turkey, president trump, when he was president, said to the turkish president, said to the turkish president, "you should release the pastor by tomorrow at noon, and if you don't, i will ruin your economy." that is what president trump said. the pastor was released the next day before noon, simply because the turkish president believed donald trump was credible enough to actually ruin his economy. so president edrogan acted in that situation, we think that means that president trump has credibility and others will act accordingly. that

was an interesting _ others will act accordingly. that was an interesting example that you gave to us, but we know that donald trump admires president putin. are you suggesting that he might say to president putin, "you need to pull out of ukraine or i will ruin your economy," or something similar? here i do know where you get this idea he admires putin. that is not true. i have looked at words that donald trump has said about mr putin. let me answer your question. i think you are misinterpreting what donald trump has said. donald trump recognises that world leaders have a lot of power, and he understands that somebody like putin has power. he does not admire putin. i think thatis he does not admire putin. i think that is not a great way to characterise it. i do not believe thatis characterise it. i do not believe that is true. but we certainly respect the fact that vladimir putin has nuclear weapons. we don't want to see worse, donald trump handed

europe a war free continent. he handed biden a war free continent. he also handed biden a war free middle east. all they had to do was follow the simple policy directions that donald trump has laid out. but we now have a massive war in europe and a massive war in the middle east thanks to biden and kamala harris. i think most americans and europeans should want to go back to the days when we had peace in europe and peace in the middle east.- when we had peace in europe and peace in the middle east. thank you ve much peace in the middle east. thank you very much for giving _ peace in the middle east. thank you very much for giving us _ peace in the middle east. thank you very much for giving us your - peace in the middle east. thank you very much for giving us your time i very much for giving us your time tonight and talking to our british audience. i think you have to make a speech, but we are very grateful. thank you very much. richard grenell, who is part of the trump team. now our political editor nick watt — what do you think of what mr grennell has just said? those comments saying, "if you do

not want to be sued, don't do this." it shows that they are taking this seriously. this has not been done on the back of an envelope. we had a very punchy statement from their campaign, harking back to the war of independence 1776 and all that, he said, when representatives of the british had previously sought to go door—to—door in america, did not end well for them. door—to—door in america, did not end well forthem. it door—to—door in america, did not end well for them. it talked about how it is anti—election interference. this is what it says about the labour party, the far left labour party has inspired kamala's dangerously liberal policies and rhetoric in recent weeks. they have recruited and sent party members to campaign for kamala harris and critical battleground states, attempting to influence our election. i attempting to influence our election. . r' attempting to influence our election. ., . ., attempting to influence our election. , election. i asked richard grenell for the evidence, _ election. i asked richard grenell for the evidence, he _ election. i asked richard grenell for the evidence, he pushed - election. i asked richard grenell for the evidence, he pushed it i election. i asked richard grenell. for the evidence, he pushed it right back and said as a journalist i should be looking for the evidence. what is their actual case? we should be looking for the evidence. what is their actual case?— should be looking for the evidence. what is their actual case? we have a leual letter what is their actual case? we have a legal letter to _ what is their actual case? we have a legal letter to the _ what is their actual case? we have a legal letter to the federal _ legal letter to the federal election commission. the

legal letter to the federal election commissi