♪ john: hello, i am john mickelthwait. tony blair is the only leader to have won three consecutive general elections. he remains a controversial figure both in britain and the wider world. in an in-depth interview, i asked him at his role, donald trump, about jeremy corbyn, and about brexit. tony: i think we will remain. of course, it is a referendum. if you look at the opinion polls, it is very close. you've got to be concerned about

it. john: most of the polls seem to show that the old seems to be the ones who are winning to come out and they are most likely to vote. tony: i think there will be a big turnout for this. i think people understand it is a decision with seismic economic consequences. particularly economic consequences. i can't believe people will shuffle this one off. i think we will get a higher turnout than a general election. i may be wrong about that. john: it will be more similar to the scottish referendum in that way? tony: that's what i think. it is one of these decisions of where you would have to be pretty small minded not to understand its importance. on the assumption that people realize if you remain or leave has got consequences for the country and you as an individual. i would expect people to come out and vote and probably look at the nature of it. there is some simplicity in the

decision. i think you'll get a bigger turnout than a general election. john: are you surprised about the fervor of the brexit? has it always been there? tony: i do think it has always been there but i think british people are coming to terms with what it's all about. they find it confusing. we should remember that when you look at the issues that dominated the last general election, it was only last year and europe is pretty far down the list. even though there was actually an exceptional difference, it made the difference in the conservatives getting in. i think there is a small, relatively small group of people who care absolutely passionately. now the debate has been joined. it concerns the whole country. john: what is your advice to david cameron? i remember in 2005 you went on the masochism strategy.

you let people attack you or ask you questions. do you think he has done enough like that? tony: i think he has fought the campaign you would expect from him and you would want from him. there is nothing more he could do as prime minister. he has put himself out there. he has put the arguments out there. he has taken a strong position. john: boris johnson, has he gone too far? is he somebody you think would be fit to be prime minister? tony: that is not dependent on this vote. i just find it hard to understand how someone who has been the mayor of london can seriously think it is not going to be economically damaging if britain leaves the european union. one of the things that i find strange is when people say i am not quite sure, but i have come down on the side of remain.

this is not one of those decisions. you should only be for remain -- leave, rather, if you are absolutely clear. if you're not clear, then don't do it. john: and you are not convinced he is, really? well if you look back on , some of the things he has said in the past, it has indicated he thinks it would be wrong for britain to leave the european union. so now he is frankly the most out there campaigner of the leave campaign. i think it's a strange position to find yourself in. if you've been in government and in a sense being mayor of london, that is some situation of government, you know how big this decision is. if britain leaves, the day after

you will get the beginnings of what will be a serious economic shock to the country. you literally cannot dispute that. you will put them on the table. your entire relationship with the european union has been over four decades of interlocking trade agreements and service agreements. all of that has got to be renegotiated or scrapped. given that half of our trade is with the european union, how can you not think you're going to at least suffer a years of economic uncertainty. that is why hard to think -- john: do you find it hard to picture him at number 10? tony: i might find it hard anyway. i am not convinced either way. john: is that what is driving politics in the west, not just brexit. you've got donald trump. you have marine le pen. is it a revolt against the third way? to this extent, you and bill clinton took politics and you melded it with globalization and with a cosmopolitan approach to things. now you have that sense of that all being turned over.

do you think that something has changed? tony: i think something has changed. the center ground has lost its, what i would call its muscularity, it's traction on the political debate and we have got to get it back. what i find on both sides of the atlantic is there is a sense among people that they are frustrated with the system. they do not feel the system is responding to their anxieties and concerns. and they want almost, it is about rattling the cage. it is about saying, you've got to listen. what you find when you dig a little deeper on this, what is the consequences if you take a brexit vote or elect donald trump? people kind of almost say, that is the question i'm going to answer. it's about shaking up the system. it is an insurgent movement of revolt and rebellion.

now what happens today in the social -- in the world is social media gives in the ability to mount those movements with speed and at scale. so, whereas when i was starting had time to they build up. now they are very fast and they make an immediate impact. you get a sort of dismissive attitude toward people saying, no look, these situations are very complex, the problem is very difficult, solutions take time. it is almost a revolt against that whole strain of political thinking. in the end by the way, if you take these actions, they do have consequences. and the only country in the , western world that has bought this populism

+++ government, the only country that has ever done that in the developed world is greece. the consequences are very obvious. in the end, the leadership that came in split between those people who had come to terms with the reality and those people who just refuse to come to terms with reality. the country has lost several years. the bailout program is more severe than the bailout program they put out. three or four years later, i think in the end that is one response to this. but the other response has got to be from the center ground and you have got to get a radical centrist agenda. in other words you've got to be , the changemakers in society and not the guardians of the status quo. john: where do you think that radical center should push now? tony: i think it has got to poke -- push on where you've got to make globalization work. it's not a policy of government. it's driven by people, the internet, migration.

the freedom that people have to travel. it's driven by the way the world works today. the world is coming closer together. john: i also come from a position of defending globalization a lot to in the previous guys. it's difficult to explain to people who've lost their jobs or gone through things that they have to wait until things get better. it has a kind of cruel magic. you're bound to lose out. tony: if you just tell them you have to wait until it gets better, that's not a good response. if you say to them, look, there is a way through it. it's around education, infrastructure, making sure we reduce the cost of government through, for example, the use of technology. but to we are able to spend money in different ways. it's about reshaping the way government works. if you say it's about making sure, for example, we as a

country reform our public services in a way that allows you to access better quality education, better quality care, you can make this argument work for people. what does not work is telling them it's very difficult and you have to trust us. that is not going to work. let's be very clear. the answers are not with the populists. the left and right, they come together in this anti-globalization. it's not going to work. you know it's not going to work. the people who are unemployed in some of the seaside towns in the u.k. is not the answer they are giving. the answers better education and infrastructure and linking the country up in a better way. that is the answer. john: up next, more with tony blair. ♪

♪ john: two things which always come up in this debate, one is immigration. the other is the fact that some

people have gotten very wealthy out of this. on the immigration side, you where the person who allowed people to come in back when poland and others joined the european union in 2004. do you regret that open door approach now? do you think that is something which is come back and bit us? tony: i think you look back in hindsight and i understand the criticism. by the way, our economy in 2004 was booming. we actually had a requirement for people to come in. in any event, free movement is a principle of the european union. john: we could have put restrictions on it or staged it. tony: you could have staged it. but it's where you are today, you would still be in the same position. however, what is important to is, freedomt this of movement is a two-way street.

it is true from the enlargement of the european union, you had more migration into the u.k. one of the things that has been missing from this european debate is the advantage to having an enlarged european union. enlargement happened underneath but it was the policy of margaret thatcher, of john major. it is the policy of british governments for a reason. if you look at the world today and you look at the anxiety people in eastern europe have about resurgent russian nationalism, we should be glad that these countries are bound in the eu. you compare poland today and the ukraine. which is in a better state? which? not just better for the polish people but for us in the u.k. in the end, these debates, it's important to get across to people that when these decisions are taken, they are not taken lightly. they are taken for major strategic reasons of our own national interest. john: it is also something to do with the way the elite explain

things. at the time i think we thought it would only be 15,000 people a year. it's been hundreds of thousands. was there a fault in that? tony: the forecast was wrong because a lot of people came. people came because people here were employing them. this again is -- if you took eastern european labor out of the national health service, you would have to replace about 100,000 people. some of the people come in on short-term contracts. for example, in the agricultural sector in the u.k., they are not taking somebody else's job. yes of course i understand the , fears about immigration. by the way, in 2005, i fought my last election with immigration as the critical issue. i am completely sympathetic on this issue about how communities get changed by these waves of migration, but the answer is not to shut our borders down.

if you do that in the european single market, you're going to cause a huge amount of problems for this country. by the way, if you want back into the single market, for example norway is accessing single market, there is a demand that's we allow the free movement of people to get access to the market. norway, they have got their free movement of people even though they are not in the eu. they don't have the ability to fashion its rules. if you look at these arguments rationally, they stack up very strongly. i understand, we have gotten to a somewhat absurd situation where someone is an expert, for example that's the worst , insult you can level at somebody. if some institute produces a report that shows people coming into our country pay more in taxes than they receive in benefits by a long way and they are dismissed as experts, i mean, ok additionally --

occasionally rational evidence is a good thing to work on. john: you understood the politic gain in this country probably better than anyone else. when you look at what you handed over to gordon brown, do you recognize that today? tony: the fate has been transformed by this post financial crisis anger and angst. i also think social media is a revolutionary phenomenon. it is in itself a revolutionary phenomenon because it creates these waves of sentiment and emotion and movement. it is clear to me they can take over a political party. we are an example. it is not clear to me that they can take over a country, not a major successful, developed western nation. so, you know, we will see. john: we will come back to america in a minute. there is an issue of the super wealthy. that seems to be one thing that really drives people. immigration is one issue.

the unfairness of it, people say people seem to get rich of regardless of what happened. do you understand that side of it as well and do you think that is new or is that an old thing revisited? tony: there is that feeling for sure. when you look at the figures, those people at the very top have done much better. that is absolutely true. i'm not sure they haven't always done that, but nonetheless, the way wealth has been created and you can point to people with hedge funds. john: it is an inevitable part of globalization. everyone who defense globalization has to accept that. if you have a global economy, the winners of the top going to be bigger winners than they were before. you once used david beckham as an example. he is able to make more money because the market is bigger. tony: again, it depends that people think it's worse if they make money in business and if they are a film star or a football star. there is a certain lack of rationality in that. i think that's an issue. i think it is much more of an

issue because people feel that as it were, that low middle class and working class, if you look back over these last years, the labor market is a lot more uncertain for people. again, my solution to that, because i think the labor market is going to carry on, i think we've got a new technological revolution around big data, perhaps around artificial intelligence. you will find the service sector is starting to get disrupted by new ways of providing services to people which are much more individualized. i think you are going to find a huge disruption and a greater economic insecurity. the issue is the answer to it.

i know this makes people anxious. the answer is not to protect a world that is changing inevitably as a result not of government but this is the way the world is changing. john: there is this question of what you do for people at the bottom of society. the other question is the philip green argument, that some people at the top seem to be able to get away with a great deal and that causes enormous resentment. tony: but if you look at the private sector, you find people say people responsible for the financial crisis, there was no penalty paid by them. actually, if you look at most of the main banks in the u.k. i think you will find that all ceos are different. there were thousands of job losses in the finance sector. i think ultimately this is more about how people feel about their own circumstances and i think they feel that -- when i was growing up there was an escalator that you thought you got on by hard work and endeavor. if you carried on working hard, your children would probably get better opportunities than you,

do better than you. i think there is a feeling on both sides of the atlantic that that has stopped. i think the answers to that are difficult. but for sure, they are not about trying to stop the world changing because you can't. it's about equipping people for that era of change. that is a much more difficult argument to make. it's also the only one that works. john: one thing on green. i saw that he got a knighthood deck on your watch. do you think he should be stripped of that? tony: i don't think about that at all. you have also got to realize that over a long period of time, there have been many, many jobs created in the u.k. john: up next, tony blair on jeremy corbyn. ♪

♪ john: tell us about your sense of purpose in the labour party. jeremy corbyn has talked about trying you for war crimes if you were found guilty of them in the report. you said he is a dangerous experiment. is the labour party in a worse state in terms of disunity and direction than it was under michael foot when you first started? tony: leave aside the fact that i am accused of being a criminal for removing saddam hussein who by the way, was a war criminal. jeremy is seen as a progressive icon as we see the people of syria barrel-bombed and starved into submission and we do nothing. the issue to me is what is the best way you take the traditional values of the left and apply them to the modern world?

it's always been that. whether it's foreign policy or it is domestic policy, the question is how do we improve people's lives? look, when we were in government, we did improve people's lives. significantly. didn't the minimum wage enormous amount. -- did and enormous amount. if you take one example of foreign policy away, the international department of development that we started and that we funded, that helped millions of people around the world. it is probably regarded as the foremost development agency in the world. progressive politics is about being in power and finding modern solutions to the modern challenges of the world. it's not just about expressing your protest or anger about the people that are in power. john: it is not just an emotion. i remember you saying that earlier. it is about having some degree

of purpose. tony: it's about understanding that unless you are prepared to take the responsibility of power, there are two types of politicians on the left and there always has been. there is a guy whose face is on. hate that guy. the placard. that's me. you are the person in power making difficult decisions. you become a figure of controversy and people protest against you. that's my type of politics. you are the face on the placard. jeremy is the guy with the placard. ok? he is the guy holding it. one is the politics of power and the other is the politics of protest. and in the end, if you want to change people's lives, you've got to be the politics of power. john: how well did you know jeremy? did you ever deal with him? tony: i met him in and i knew him.

he has a good constituency and i have nothing against him personally, but in the end, the leader of the labour party has to be an instrument of power because you cannot help people otherwise. if you are worried about those people who haven't got opportunities at the moment, who are in dead-end jobs, how are you going to help them if you are not in power? when we protest against the conservative cuts, cuts to what? cuts to things we introduced? john: on the other side, on david cameron, it seems that he is going through some of the same experiences that you did, not having unity. unity within his cabinet. what advice do you give him? tony: do your best. look this is politics. to, today, it's a more difficult profession than it has ever been, i think, even more difficult than when i left office. the interaction between conventional media and social

media -- john: do you think david cameron on has a more difficult job then you did? tony: the wall of noise around him as he makes decisions is larger and louder than anything before. this is probably a very politically incorrect statement. twitter and all these things, if you are not careful they create -- you read the stuff on twitter. it's 140 characters. they try to sum up foreign policy. believe it or not, you can't. people have these very strong opinions. if you are a politician and trying to lead a country, leadership is always calibrating and getting in front of people in order to lead them.

far in front that you look behind you and no one is there. john: isn't that what joins together both jeremy corbyn and donald trump? tony: it is the same phenomenon, left and right. john: who are you more worried about? jeremy corbyn or donald trump? [laughter] tony: i have probably been indiscreet enough. john: what about how you persuade people to change away from that? what do you think happens david cameron post-referendum? tony: i think there is a real opportunity for him because i think he has secured that, settled that. he is not standing in the next election, so -- john: do you think you should serve all the way through to the end? tony: he has a real opportunity to provide leadership and it

could do it domestic issues and europe and national security, but as a whole, the issue is how you provide solutions that meet what people conceive of as the need for radical change. what is making that change sensible and in tune with the modern world and not in contrast with it. because if you advocate policies that go against the grain, you end up in a cul-de-sac. john: we have looked at the different issues and the cruel magic of globalization. we have looked at internationalism, how you have tried to make britain a more cosmopolitan place. those things are in retreat. tony: i find it disconcerting and discomforting sometimes. you've got to hold your position

and if you think it's right, you see it through. ultimately, if you take a city like london, which in the time i was in office really came into its own as a great city. you know, we won the bid for the olympics. it's become a great multicultural, iconic city in the world today. what makes it great is this ability to go across the boundaries of race and culture and be socially liberal around issues like gay people and race and gender. i think this idea of a culture that is based on values, it is still where most people really want to be.

what is necessary and what is obvious is when i was in office, there was a fair degree of consensus behind that view of the world. thatve to understand today, it is under strong attack from the left and right. that's not completely new. the context in which it is happening is much deeper and more powerful than before. we're going to have to go out there and construct an agenda for 2016 and the years to come that is about a radical center and that to is about making change. but making change that helps the modern world work and it does not say stop the world. john: do you see anybody in the younger ranks who looks like they can carry forward that flame? tony: i think there are lots of people. in the end, however much under attack, there is strong support for this position. without choosing names, when i

look of the younger generation of the labour party, there are some fantastic people. really excellent and strong people. it takes a lot to go into politics these days. you have to read a bit of the traffic on social media to realize you've got to be a strong-minded person. john: henry kissinger said it's very difficult to prepare for leadership now because you live in an era where people grow up and i am sure you made mistakes that you would not jump on now. it's now much harder for people to develop those political skills when you've got social media following every single thing you do. tony: i think because of the importance of these political positions, we will find a way of adapting to that. i think the ecosystem of politics has definitely changed. you have to develop different skills. there is a level, i was going to

say rude behavior in politics. abusive or rude. even the politicians in the end, it's a much rougher business. part of a problem with the way the modern world works is if you do for example, a debate on television and there is an audience there, the only thing that will get reported is if a member of the audience interrupts you, shouts or makes a demonstration of some sort. a new type ofy is environment and it makes it very hard for modern politicians. they will have to adapt to that. they will find a way to do that because in the end, these decisions matter. you can argue what you like about brexit, it matters. john: up next, tony blair on donald trump and the american presidential race. ♪

a

♪ john: there is another campaign this year in america. you famously found common ground with george w. bush. now the republican candidate who we alluded to earlier wants to trade more with china, wants to build a wall with mexico. he wants to discourage muslims from visiting america. could you find common ground with a president trump? tony: it's not clear to me what the common ground would be. john: that's a very different answer. you managed to find common ground with george w. bush, that implies you would almost find it impossible? tony: the american election is up to the american people. it's not clear to me what these policies really are. if they are some of the things that have been talked about, a

trade war with china would be devastating to both sides. i can't believe that's what he would actually want to do. if you literally say no muslims can come into america, thus not -- that is not a policy we could go along with. people often forget something like this of president bush, leave aside even foreign policy, george w. bush was in favor of alliance, free trade and the transatlantic alliance, and strongly in favor of nato. he worked with me on africa and he was the largest life-saving program that any developed a policy has ever had in africa. we worked together on debt relief for the poorest african nations. there were lots of things we could work on together. i have no idea what a trump presidency would look like. john: trump has never had elected office before. george w. bush was the governor of texas. is it easier to find common

ground with other politicians? tony: it's a big change going on with the center right in the center left. you've got quite a lot in common. probably more in common in a strange way than the center left has with the far left in the center right has with the far right. that's the way the world is today. it's one of the curiosities. you've ended up in a situation where there are those of us who are trying to find solutions that are based on values. but are what i would call non- ideological and practical solutions and sometimes you can find common ground.

john: you would see donald as part of the same phenomenon? people like yourself and david cameron and barack obama are in a different place? tony: we come from different traditions. we will remain in different traditions. i have been a member of the labour party for about 40 years. for all of that time, i've been in the same labour party as jeremy corbyn. it would not be a shock to people to say my type of politics is different from his. what marks it out as different, in my view, the labour party and the politics of the left has got to be a project of modernization all the time or we are defenders of the status quo. john: hillary clinton is someone who is not exactly in favor of free trade, which she mentioned earlier. she is against charter schools. against academies as we would see it. is she someone who is still a

modernizer in the sense you would want? tony: i have no doubt as president she would be a modernizer and a center ground politician. her for ahave known great many years and i have worked with her closely and she is someone i've got enormous respect for. i'm am sure the types of toicies she would want pursue our political policies an engagedmerica as power in the world. john: the kind of america and britain that you and bill clinton pushed, do you think that is gone? do you look back and think some of the things we did helped prepare the ground for this in one way or another? tony: we were arguing the case very strongly. also, the economy was very successful. both under him and when i was prime minister of the u.k. when

we had 10 years of uninterrupted growth. it was easier to make that case. i think the financial crisis changed the context in which that debate is happening. but i think the really interesting thing is that it doesn't change the fundamental nature of the debate. you know what i mean? in other words, the idea that really motivated bill clinton in the united states and myself in the values around social justice, commitment to .quality of opportunity those values do not change. we have to apply them differently. the world is different. that's the fundamental difference. it was true then and is to now.

we are not going to resolve the problems of the financial crisis by shutting down free trade between nations. we are not going to do that. the one lesson that is clear is less free trade means more unemployment and less prosperity. john: is the rest of the world ready for president trump? you travel a lot. tony: i think it is pretty obvious what the world thinks. the world will, it will come to terms. let's wait and see what they the americans actually decide. john: do you take into account a president trump when advising people? tony: right now, it's not clear what that would mean. once you get the nominating time out of the way, you get down to a real debate. let's see what happens. the world is uncertain and difficult place today. let's say this presidential election will be watched as closely as any i can remember. john: up next, tony blair and the middle east. ♪

♪ john: let's look at the middle east. envoy there. an when you were prime minister, america was energetically involved in the middle east, too much some say, do you think it is possible that any kind of resolution can happen without america being more involved? tony: america is involved on the israeli-palestinian front, but i personally do not think you'll get that resolution with the issue. i spent a huge amount of time on it. i have been to the region two or

three times every month. muchkerry is still very involved in it. i think the key there is in cooperation. [indiscernible] the key to opening that door is the palestinian -- [indiscernible] i think the important thing to realize about israeli public opinion today is two things. anxietyt thing, the about palestinians about the government. palestinian politics in favor of peace.

that concerns the israelis because when you look at that, thathave to be sure palestine is going to be a safe and secure neighbor for them. the second thing is i also think that the majority of people in israel understand that one state with two peoples inside it is going to be a very difficult, if not impossible, task of management. on the one hand, they need to know that this palestinian state is going to be securely governed, but on the other hand, they do understand in principle that two states need one solution. john: can you push it toward that? or is there a position on both sides? tony: right, again, right now,

the politics are not strong enough to carry on their shoulders the weight of a peace protest. if you involve the region -- john: and possibly the world? tony: and obviously would have to involve america and europe, but it is the region in my view that is the key player. if they are helping carry this process, and this is why the arab peace initiative might be the right framework to reach this, if they are involved, then it will give the israelis confidence that they are making peace not just with the pasta -- palestinians but for the region. and it will give the thattinians confidence they will be aided and assisted in the region. john: the other ally in the region is saudi arabia. you have talked about the poison that is failing. we now have a deputy prince who

is trying to bring economic reform to saudi arabia. do you see a change that might affect the politics in saudi arabia? tony: i think that it has been one of the most significant changes that has come about in the region and these past years. and i think the program of economic change and social change will be of fundamental importance to the future health of the region. john: do you think it can be pushed through? he is a young man. tony: yes. he is young. to be frank, the saudi system has been discussed many years. it has gone from being the one it has gone from being a rather slow moving to one that is moving fast, but it is a young population. young people in saudi arabia understand they need change.

he is really driving that change. the vision that they set out is obviously sensible, modern, forward-looking visions but the country. implementing it will be hard, but i think he has the executive capacity and the support to do it. by the way, it is an absolutely vital, strategic interest for the west that he succeeds. john: what about the saudi-iran relationship? it is very cross with america in some ways doing the deal with iran. is that the biggest source of tension in the region in the long-term? the clash between the saudis and iran? tony: i think the longest and biggest tension is the need for the region to achieve new role-based economies and a religiously tolerant society. these are the two big things at the heart of the struggle in the middle east. i think that is far more

important, even though i understand all the implications of the tensions between saudi arabia and iraq. the saudis problem with iraq is their desire to export the stickda stick -- anaconda anachronistic revolutionary ideology, so it is not with what the americans had them with iran that is wrong, if you put a constraint on the program, that is a plus and not a minus, the problem is what the iranians continue to do within the region is export instability and chaos. they are supporting in yemen and they will do anything they can to put hostility toward israel rather than lead them into a position when they can be part of the peace process, so when you look at what the iranians are actually doing around the region, it is hostile to her interest and hostile to religious tolerant societies and so this is a problem,

frankly. in the end, i think you'll find that the saudi issue it iran is not to do it sunni versus shiite, it has to do with the impact of iranian policies that is dictated by those who are ultimately fine iran from -- govern iran from the rest of the region. john: is there any sign of a change in iran admits the nuclear deal? tony: it is really difficult to read. the iranian people are smart, educated and capable. and i have no doubt that if they had the freedom to elect, they elect. but the truth is they are not. the ultimate power still remains with religious [indiscernible] you can debate this and people have different views about this, and it may be that they want to take the country a different direction. i think it is hard to judge. if you look at the activities of the religious leadership and the

iran,tionary guards of they are doing what they have always been doing. i think when you look at the roots of all of this terrorism around the region, i think in retrospect, we hugely underestimated the impact of the 1979 iranian revolution and shortly afterward the mecca. i think we have greatly underestimated the impact of those two events on the way the region developed. john: you also talked about underestimating iran's interest on iraq after the invasion. was that also part of it? tony: absolutely. that resistance in iraq with too much iranian influence, i think we could still use that because i think in the end, the iraqis do want to stay where they are. john: you have inquiries and in the past few weeks, you have apologized about the faulty intelligence, apologize

for not realizing what would happen once sudan left and you put a lot of blame on that in al qaeda and iran and you say you now understand the middle east better than you did then. do think there is anything you can do to draw a line under this? tony: i have said those things for many years and not just the past few weeks. one of the reasons why when the arab spring's again, i was cautious at that point, precisely because of the experience i went through, so they would be an opportunity to go into these arguments. but i think in the end, the most important thing to understand is how you step back now in the context of the middle east. it is in turmoil in part because it is in transition. the transition is all about whether this dogmatic religious view of how countries should develop triamcinolone what would

should develop triamcinolone what is more materialistic and should be more tolerant. religiously tolerant. john: thank you for joining us. tony: thank you. ♪

>> in this week, how to shoot to like staff curry. i am here with the editor of bloomberg businessweek, ellen will look to talk about the current issue. text, ie get into the want to talk