schemes and real economic injection into traditional crafts and i think we can certainly learn from that because they really have faithfully restored it down to the very pegs in the timber, so i think it is a real example of what can be achieved in the modern day but using both traditional crafts.— modern day but using both traditional crafts. thank you so much _ traditional crafts. thank you so much for _ traditional crafts. thank you so much for talking - traditional crafts. thank you so much for talking to - traditional crafts. thank you so much for talking to us i traditional crafts. thank you i so much for talking to us about it and there will be plenty more on bbc news, from paris, with the images of notre—dame as it is reopened today. there will be the mass later on this morning. to remind you, the latest from syria is that rebel forces entering damascus, these are the latest pictures from syria, they say they have freed the capital city and they have said that syria's president, bashar al—assad, said that syria's president, basharal—assad, has said that syria's president, bashar al—assad, has left the country. plenty more. stay with

us. hello there. storm darragh has continued to pull out, now weakened as it moves into the near continent. however, it's brought a swathe of disruption across parts of the country, with damaging gusts of wind. part two of the weekend does look better. although it'll stay very windy, we should see some sunshine across northern and western areas, and it won't be quite as windy as what we had through friday night and saturday. however, the winds could still cause some travel disruption, particularly for the channel ferry crossing, so just stay abreast of the weather forecast and keep up to date with your latest local radio stations. you can see the system, then, pushing across the near continent, sitting over the low countries. still lots of isobars on the chart, so sunday will be a very windy day, especially so across more eastern and south—east areas in towards the channel islands, with gales here, further cloud and showery rain. wintry showers affecting northern scotland, but more in the way of brightness for western parts of the country — for northern ireland, wales, perhaps into western england. but when you factor in that cold northerly wind, it's going to feel cold wherever you are,

with temperatures through the day ranging from around 5—9 celsius. so it stays blustery through sunday evening and sunday night across large parts of england and wales, south—east scotland, especially strong towards the south—east into the channel islands, where we'll have further showers here. further north, though, high pressure begins to topple in. so for monday morning, it's going to be a cold start for scotland, northern ireland, with clearer skies here, light winds, some frost and some ice. a little less cold further south and east, but we'll have more cloud around and more of a breeze. but you can see the remnants of storm darragh pretty much fizzling out at this point. so we'll have more of a breeze again across the south—east corner, though nowhere near as windy as it has been. the further north and west that you head, closer to the high pressure. the winds will be much lighter with widespread sunshine here after that cold and frosty start. temperatures struggling to get much above three degrees, perhaps, through the central belt of scotland. further south, we're looking at 7—9 celsius.

but as we move deeper into the week, this area of high pressure dominates the scene, sitting across the uk, bringing very light winds and settled weather — quite a difference to what we've had at the weekend. it does mean, though, it will turn quite chilly, and with that benign air mass with very little wind, we could see quite a bit of cloud at times too. where skies clear at night, we're likely to see a return to some frost and some fog. that's it from me. take care. hello and welcome to talking business. here's what's on the programme this week: trump taxes and tariffs — donald trump talks tough on trade. we'll assess what his second stint could mean for the global economy as he promises new tariffs on overseas imports. the incoming us president has mexico and canada in his sights, as well as long—standing foe china, so what will new tariffs mean for trade with the world's largest economy? i'll discuss all of this with these two — former chief economist at the international monetary fund

will tell me the impact that new tariffs could have on inflation and how governments around the world may deal with a us president that's vowed to put america first. and i'll speak to the head of the american chamber of commerce in china. it represents hundreds of companies, including boeing, nike and facebook. he tells me how his members are adapting to manage the fallout of further tariffs. plus, finding the sweet spot — the boss of britain's tate & lyle tells us how the company's turned its back on sugar to focus its science on feeding the world's growing population. wherever you're watching, welcome to the programme. now, donald trump hasn't even been sworn in as us president, but he's already got the global economy in a spin. he's promised to start imposing new tariffs or import taxes on his first day in office. that's the 20th of january next year. he'll focus first on the three countries america does most trade with — china, canada and mexico.

but businesses and consumers all over the world will likely feel the impact. when it comes to goods, last year, mexico was america's biggest trading partner with nearly $800 billion worth of stuff crossing the border in both directions. it was followed closely by canada and then china. for america's two neighbours, mexico and canada, president trump says he'll impose a 25% tariff on what they sell to the us. for china, he's pledged an additional 10% tariff above any additional tariffs on what it sells to the world's biggest economy. according to mr trump's social media posts, the tariffs are part of an effort to crack down on illegal migrants and drugs entering the united states. and for other countries, it's about making sure they keep using the us dollar for global trade. but during his last presidency, tariffs were used to rebalance the global economy in favour of the united states, as well as protecting american

jobs and technology. well, trump's first—term tariffs led to many big companies like apple, dell and nike moving some of their manufacturing to countries that wouldn't attract tariffs. but what are the implications of mr trump's new proposals? well, we'll hear from businesses in canada in a moment, but first, here's the view from china. translation: if the tariff is higher for chinese - businesses like us, maybe we have to raise our prices, so when the products sell there, the prices will go up too. hopefully it won't have too much impact on these small products. translation: we can't do too much about this problem. - we can try to increase some exports to other countries. for example the middle east, africa, south america and russia, and also southeast asian countries. if you're not able to do it, you have no other way out. i hope that this won't happen. so we can keep doing business more easily- with our neighbours. now, is it going to be like...

..it�*s going to have a snowball effect on everybody? to be honest, i'm not sure. i hope not. so what are those potential snowball effects? well, us inflation is currently 2.6%, but the tariffs could push it up to 3.5% next year as goods get more expensive. that's according to wall street bank goldman sachs. interest rates are currently set at a range of 4.5%—4.75%, but if inflation goes up, so too might the cost of borrowing. that would reduce the spending power of consumers, in turn stifling economic growth. well, governments around the world who often borrow in dollars would also end up spending more on interest payments, leaving them with less to spend on other stuff. well, mexico's president has been reflecting on her conversation with donald trump a few days after he made his tariff threat. translation: from our point of view, there are going to be | other conversations between now

and when he takes office between the teams because the important thing was to address the argument he made for which he would be imposing tariffs. there will be no potential tariff war. translation: china's stance of opposing unilateral tariff i increases has been consistent. imposing tariffs arbitrarily on trade partners cannot solve problems within the united states itself. if trump opens a new trade war, starting putting tariffs _ to everybody, it's not going to help the world economy. it's going to create - difficulties to everyone, starting with the - americans themselves. so where could it all leave the global economy? well, growth in many places remains fragile after the pandemic, the war in ukraine and stubbornly high inflation, so could the promised tariffs derail the recovery? well, i've been speaking to a former economic adviser to president 0bama, who was also chief economist at the international monetary fund. he's now with the washington think tank the peterson

institute for international economics. maurice 0bstfeld, good to have you on the programme. and we're talking about what these promised tariffs from donald trump could mean for the global economy. what is your assessment of the impact they could have, notjust in the united states but around the world? well, for the united states, the tariffs would clearly be inflationary. i think they would also be contractionary because if they are, as promised, levied on intermediate goods that are used as inputs to production, those would raise costs and lower business profits, hurting investment, but they would also have a very negative effect on us trading partners, who depend on accessing the us market to sell their wares. by raising these prices and reducing the demand for those products, foreign exporters would be hurt and therefore foreign economies would be hurt. talk to me about the impact on america's neighbours. i'm thinking here particularly canada and mexico.

they are in the firing line of these tariffs, front and centre. the two biggest trading partners with the united states. what does it mean for them? well, the tariffs could be particularly devastating for them. and at the same time, those tariffs could be particularly harmful to the united states. mexico and canada are part of the usmca agreement and goods flow tariff—free across borders. the goal of nafta, which was the predecessor, was to establish an integrated market. and so the market for autos, for example, depends on a supply chain that is spread across the three countries. if you disrupt that supply chain, you have massive disruptions in the auto market. what is your assessment of the real focus of this, donald trump suggesting this is about migration and drugs, and limiting their ability to get into the united states?

this is just about protecting the us economy, though, isn't it? it's about bringing jobs back to the united states, "putting america first", as he often talks about. well, i think he does care about the migration and drug issues, and i think he views tariffs as a way of exerting pressure on trade partners more broadly. for example, he recently threatened the brics countries, to which brazil, russia, india, china, south africa are the central players, with 100% tariffs if they go ahead with plans for what they call a brics currency. now, there obviously is an agenda of bringing manufacturing back to the united states, an agenda of reducing us trade deficits. that is the prime motivation for these things, but i don't think president trump feels he will or need be restricted to the use of tariffs for purely economic goals.

that can be geopolitical goals as well. critics would say the timing could not be worse, just as the global economy's starting to get back on its feet after the pandemic, after soaring, stubbornly high inflation, after the war in ukraine that still causes so many problems when it comes to both supply chains and inflationary pressure. what do these tariffs mean for the global economic recovery? is there a risk that this absolutely derails that pretty fragile recovery we've seen around the world? well, at the moment, the us is really the brightest spot in that recovery. you know, we see china struggling, we see europe struggling, we see latin america struggling. even asia, which has been a very strong performer, is not doing as well as it had been, so introducing these types of tariffs into a world which is heavily dependent on trade could be harmful to growth, could throw the world into recession.

the us, with stronger growth, is better positioned to withstand the effects, but even the us, i believe, would be negatively affected, so this is not a great strategy for an economy where there are definite fragilities which could be exacerbated by this type of policy. do you ever foresee a time where this battle for supremacy reaches a sort of natural conclusion, where the us and china can coexist harmoniously when it comes to global trade? how much they will have given to this means notjust for the united states but around the world. put america first and to hell with everyone else? i don't think there's much consideration for the effects on or in countries. it may be either this broad tariff director is primarily meant to because she had tactics. i

think there's a sense the tariffs would be helpfulfor the united states, shift demands towards the united states. donald trump himself seems to separate a pretty limited understanding of how tariffs work. insist throughout the campaign and before that tariffs are paid by foreign exporters. went in fact they are a tax on american consumers and businesses. i don't think there's a lot of deep thought into the state of the world economy and how this may negatively impact on the country. there is an even really astounding about me negatively impact the united states. d0 negatively impact the united states. ., , ., states. do you foresee a time where this — states. do you foresee a time where this battle _ states. do you foresee a time where this battle for- states. do you foresee a time l where this battle for supremacy which is a natural conclusion where the us and china can coexist harmoniously when it comes to global trade? well, i think "harmoniously" is a heavy lift for these two,

er... ..competing countries with very different systems and very different agendas. you know, if things get bad enough in the global economy as a result of rounds of tariffs and retaliation, maybe there can be some accommodation, but it will require certainly some big changes on the chinese side, such as rolling back some of their subsidisation policies, which have led to excess capacity in a number of areas, including electric vehicles. there's no evidence that the chinese are willing to do that, but if things get dire enough, perhaps that could happen. maurice 0bstfeld, it's so good to have you on the programme this week. fascinating to talk to you. thank you for being with us on talking business. my pleasure, ben. some of the world's biggest companies are on the front line of this new trade war. the likes of apple, ford, and nike all make a lot of their goods in china and then sell them in the united states,

so they'd face a direct hit from these tariffs. now, they're among the hundreds of members of the american chamber of commerce in china, and i've been speaking to its president. michael hart, welcome to the programme. it's good to have you with us. talk to me about these tariffs that have been proposed by donald trump on the campaign trail. what impact could they have on your members if indeed he follows through with that promise? so i think it's important to keep in mind that, currently, us—china already has some tariffs that were put in by donald trump when he was president. president biden didn't take them away. and so, of course, incoming president donald trump has talked about adding new tariffs, everything from 60% to 10% — the numbers being bandied about seem to change every day — but what does seem likely is that president trump will again go to tariffs to try to extract whatever terms that he thinks he can get from the chinese. so amcham china member companies are expecting that there will be some sort

of tariffs that we have to deal with in our trade with china. it's interesting you talk about this as a negotiation, we expect tariffs to be part of the regime this time. it's interesting you talk about this as a negotiation, you know, what president trump may be able to extract from the chinese. is this about politics or economics? i would certainly say politics first. in many cases, we try to remind our chinese friends that it is actually about politics. there are generally tariffs put on for a reason and not specifically economic, but because president trump, at least before, he felt the trade wasn't balanced, it wasn't fair, and he felt that tariffs were a way to go forward. a number of folks that we've spoken to who were in the previous trump administration pointed us to robert lighthizer�*s book no trade is free, which... he was president trump's ustr head the first time around and they state pretty clearly that president trump really looks at balance of trade, and if he thinks that one country has an advantage over

the other, then he'll look to try and extract some concessions out of them. and again, tariffs seem to have been president trump's favourite tool. if you're a big american company, maybe making stuff in china to sell to american consumers, what are your options right now? and i know we don't have the detail yet, but are those businesses thinking, "look, we'rejust "going to have to put prices up," or is it getting to the stage where they say, "you know what? "we just don't make it in china any more." covid—i9 and zero—covid in china for three years was really a wake—up call for us companies, and all companies, actually, doing work in china, but in that case, supply chains were disrupted, companies started to look around. there is no easy option to producing in china or sourcing from china. from covid—i9 forward, companies have started to look around to see who else in southeast asia, who else in other parts of the world could replace china. again, no easy answers. companies have very slowly started to move supply chains

to other locations. but if you remember, it took 30—a0 years for china to emerge as such a strong supplier and manufacturer. it's not going to be an easy transition to anywhere else in the world. companies have tried to mitigate some of those risks, but, again, no—one's prepared now to completely replace china. it's often said no—one wins in a trade war when tariffs are imposed, the person who loses most is the consumer. how frustrating is it for you and your members that this is being weaponised and politics is affecting economics in this way and ultimately the person who loses is once again the consumer?— loses is once again the consumer? . ., , , ., loses is once again the consumer? . , ., ., consumer? china has been one of the moderating _ consumer? china has been one of the moderating factors _ consumer? china has been one of the moderating factors in - the moderating factors in us—china relations because we do know that companies continue to trade even during trade wars, the us and china 2—way trade continues to arise. it's

frustrating to us sometimes that number one company or consumers are a political football, the frustrating part is politicians in the us and consumers in the us don't realise the benefits that us consumers and companies get from trading with china and so whenever we go back to washington, dc we try to remind folks that you are doing well in the stock market, you are doing well as a consumer because china is engaged in the global trading regime and we don't want that to change. it's a lot of work to remind folks that parrots are only going to hurt those who consume, which are primarily those consumers. the chinese economy itself is in a very different position than it was in the first trump presidency. it's grappling with its own debt crisis, its property crisis, unemployment, particularly amongst young people, still an issue. does that change the balance of power in these negotiations, that china may be forced to come to the table in a way that in the first trump presidency, they didn't need to? it certainly is true that more

recently, when the chinese leaders talk, in some ways, i would say, they're a little more humble or they're realistic that their economy itself does have challenges. the chinese economy is not growing as fast as it used to, which makes it harder within china itself. many companies not only produce and source from china, but they look to sell to china. and so companies are very aware that the chinese economy has been softer. this does mean that when foreign companies are looking at their production in china or considering additional investments in china that the chinese government is more welcoming of that investment. and so, you know, recently i had a meeting with premier li qiang with a small group of business leaders, and he said a couple of things. 0ne, he said, you know, "we really appreciate companies "who participate in the global supply chain, so we don't "that to go away," but he also hinted that indicators in the economy are that, in his view, the chinese economy is recovering. and he said, you know, indicators are strong. and so, at the same time, the chinese government

is trying to continue to get support from foreign companies to participate in the chinese economy by making things here, sourcing them here. he also wanted foreign companies to be confident that the chinese economy was getting stronger. and if you look at the figures, there was a i7% fall, i think, in trade between the us and china last year. that's even before president trump's second term. do you get a sense from your members that they say, "actually, it'sjust not worth it any more." given the limitations, the restrictions, the potential for further tariffs, they say, "hang on, you know what? "it's just not worth it. "we will go elsewhere"? so i do worry that foreign investment in china has hit a number of challenges, and so i often refer to this as the ecosystem for foreign investment. there are a lot of things over the years that built up to make investment by foreign companies in china easier. we're starting to see some things reverse. for example, earlier this year, we've seen a number of us and international law firms close their offices in china and leave.

that means future investment in china will be harder, because there won't necessarily be those helpers, those consultants, those experts to assist foreign companies. but i don't think people are going to, by and large, throw up their hands and say, "let's leave china now, "it's just too hard," because china continues to be such a large market and such a large supply base that, you know, most companies are going to continue to play in china for a long time. you know, i spoke earlier today with a company who sells commodities to china. and, you know, us farmers are going to want to continue to sell commodities into china. china is going to continue to be a huge consumer market, and so we certainly want trade going both ways, and it's not an easy puzzle to try and figure out. michael hart, really good to talk to you. thank you for being with us on the programme this week. thank you. now, you may know tate & lyle as a sugar business, one that was founded in britain more than 150 years ago, but whilst it's still in the food business, it's turning its back on sugar

and now trying to use science to solve one of the biggest problems facing the planet — just how to feed a growing population. well, i've been speaking to its chief executive about the future of food. nick hampton, welcome to the programme. and we've been focusing in this programme about what president—elect trump's tariffs could mean for business right around the world. what significance would tariffs have on your business and what you do, given where you source your material from? well, i mean, it's important to say that we should wait and see what the incoming administration actually does. i mean, for us, we're a global business, so we're looking to source ingredients globally and deliver products to customers globally, and what tariffs could mean is reshaping our supply chain in a way that allows us freedom of trade in a cost—effective way for the business. that shift away from being a sugar business, a lot of businesses are

wondering if they can pass on charges to customers to higher prices. given we are facing a squeeze on incomes for so many people around the world, how much can you pass on to people? that's a good question. we've seen significant inflation in food prices over the last three orfour food prices over the last three or four years, food prices over the last three orfour years, something we focus on as a business because we are in the food industry. fortunately for us although we provide proof of functionality for our customers products we are relatively low cost pass to that overall finished products. we have been able to successfully pass through inflation without impacting consumer price too much of the past few years. that shift away from being a sugar business, loads of people around the world will know you for exactly that. they think what you do is make sugar and sell it around the world. describe the business to me now. what does it look like? so, in some ways, you could say we've gone from being a sugar producer to a sugar reducer.

and we're now a business very much focused on where the future of food is going, which is aligned to the growing consumer demands for healthier, tastier and more sustainable food and drink. and we do that through three core platforms. we've got a sweetener platform, which help take sugar out of food. we've got a platform that we call mouthfeel, which helps complement the taste of food, and we've got a fortification platform as well, which is primarily focused on adding fibre and protein to food. we've made five acquisitions in the last few years and that's not easy. we've renovated or refocused the business in a way that keeps it relevant for today. you've touched on those acquisitions that you've made as a company. what do they tell us about your strategy in terms of what you want to become? because you've been on that acquisition campaign, haven't you, quite aggressively recently? and what are you looking for? what do you want this business to be? i mean, ultimately, we're trying to create a company in tate & lyle that is

a growth—focused speciality solutions business. what does that mean in english? so what does that mean? we're trying to provide ingredients and solutions to our customers that allow them to create more sustainable, healthier, more nutritious food and beverage products for consumers of today. and what is it that you're buying? you know, what do you need to purchase that maybe you can't do organically? is it stuff like technology and r&d that allows you to do new things that maybe you couldn't do in your current form? we're looking to buy new ingredients that complement our current platforms. so cp kelco, the big acquisition that we've just completed is a really good example of that because they're bringing new ingredients in our portfolio that allow us to produce better solutions for our customers. it enhances, if you like, the strength of our platforms to allow us to build new solutions for customers that will delight their consumers and drive growth.

and a final thought in terms of ultra—processed foods, though, in the sights of so many people right now, and i understand the argument you make about needing to feed a growing population, and that's going to involve science, but there is a big backlash against ultra—processed foods. do you worry about that? so it's something that we're very focused on. and, look, what science tells us is that the nutritional content of food is what's really important, not the level of processing. and i think it's also important that we should remember that processing does some really important things. it makes food safe and preserves it, so it can be accessed by millions of people affordably. it reduces waste. so, currently, 30% of the world's food goes to waste. that's a huge problem when you think about the climate impact and the growing demand for food, and it offers a convenient way to provide nutritious foods forfamilies. however, it's also important to say that many or some ultra—high—processed foods are not nutritionally balanced, and that's where reformulation comes in.

it's key. we've got to improve the nutritional content of processed food so that it creates better balance nutritionally for consumers, and that's where we're trying to focus our efforts at tate & lyle. so how do we help take sugar, calories and fat out of food, and add fibre back in and add protein back in, and create more nutritional balance in processed food that will be critical to the feeding of a growing population? nick hampton, good to have you on the programme this week. thanks for being with us. thank you. that's all from us for this week. you can keep up to date with all the latest on the global economy on the bbc news website and smartphone app. we'll see you very soon. bye— bye.

good morning. welcome to breakfast with rogerjohnson and rachel burden. good morning. 0ur headlines today: rebel forces in damascus declare the capital city free of long—time ruler bashar al—assad as government forces withdraw. reports say assad has left damascus by plane for an unknown destination. this is an extraordinary moment, a seismic_ this is an extraordinary moment, a seismic change in the balance of powen _ seismic change in the balance of power. this happened so very quickly and there _ power. this happened so very quickly and there are so many questions about_ and there are so many questions about what happens next. here, two men are killed by trees in storm darragh, as strong winds and heavy rain continue across the uk. gusts of 93 miles an hour in some

parts _ gusts of 93 miles an hour in some parts of— gusts of 93 miles an hour in some parts of northern