Skip to main content

tv   BBC News at Ten  BBC News  July 6, 2017 10:00pm-10:31pm BST

10:00 pm
tonight at ten. police in germany clash with protesters, as world leaders gather in hamburg ahead of the 620 summit. police used tear gas and water cannon to try to disperse a crowd of several thousand anti—g20 p rotesto rs. president trump has arrived in germany after a visit to poland, where he warned of threats posed by both islamist terrorism and government bureaucracy. today, we're in the west, and we have to say, there are dire threats to our security and to our way of life. tomorrow, president trump will hold his first face—to—face meeting with the russian president, vladimir putin. also tonight. the iraq war — tony blair was not straight with the nation about his decisions in the run—up to the invasion, says sirjohn chilcot, who led the inquiry. i think any prime minister taking a country into war has got to be straight with the nation, and carry it, so far as possible, with him or her. i don't believe that was the case in the iraq instance.
10:01 pm
fragile and precarious — inspectors warn that a quarter of social care services for adults in england are failing on safety grounds. and what a debut forjoe root as england test captain — he scores a century against south africa at lord's. and coming up in sportsday on bbc news: it's not the centre court debut british number two kyle edmund would have dreamt of, as he's beaten in the second round at wimbledon. good evening. president trump has used his first major speech in europe to warn police and protesters have clashed
10:02 pm
in germany tonight, as world leaders gather their ahead of tomorrow's g20 summit. president trump flew into hamburg after a visit to poland, where he used his first major speech in europe to want the very survival of the west is at risk. addressing a large crowd in warsaw, mr trump drew on poland's example of fighting warsaw well nazi oppression. he called on the west to fight against islamist extremism, terrorism and government bureaucracy. the famous port of hamburg, tonight a disembarkation point for anarchists and capitalists, anti—globalisation protesters, and the leaders of the world's 20 richest nations. protesters, stones and fireworks being met by police tear gas and water cannon. no such hostility when the president ventured out to warsaw this morning. not everywhere in europe would they chant donald trump's name so loudly or so approvingly.
10:03 pm
but with its populist anti—immigration government, this was politically the ideal place to come. and by dint of poland's history and geography, the perfect location to deliver a message about the challenges facing the west. the fundamental question of our time is whether the west has the will to survive. do we have the confidence in our values to defend them at any cost? do we have enough respect for our citizens to protect our borders? do we have the desire and the courage to preserve our civilisation interface of those who would subvert and destroy it? —— in the face of those who would subvert and destroyed. in the 1940s, the threat was nazism. this sculpture commemorating those who died in the warsaw uprising. the backdrop against which the president delivered his speech.
10:04 pm
today, he identified the threat as islamist extremism, but he had another target in his sights, too. we urge russia to cease its destabilising activities in ukraine and elsewhere, and its support for hostile regimes, including syria and iran, and to instead join the community of responsible nations in ourfight against common enemies and in defence of civilisation itself. that's the most outspoken he's been about russia, and it comes on the eve of his eagerly anticipated first meeting with vladimir putin. but on moscow's interference in last november's us presidential election, something his intelligence services say is an undoubted fact, the president again equivocated. i think it could very well have been russia, but i think it could well have been other countries, and i won't be specific, what i think a lot of people interfere. i think it's been happening for a long time, it's been
10:05 pm
happening for many, many years. but the most immediate and looming threat is north korea, testing and intercontinental ballistic missile, something likely to dominate the 620. as far as north korea's concerned, i don't know, we'll see what happens. i don't like to talk about what i have planned. but i have some pretty severe things that we're thinking about, that doesn't mean we're going to do them, i don't draw red lines. one other important thing that came out of this trip to warsaw was a clear commitment to nato‘s article 5. that an attack on one nation is an attack against all, a welcome announcement for all those anxious countries on russia's western border. then it was on to germany, and what promises to be a testing summit, with disagreements over north korea, free trade, immigration and climate change. and angela merkel and donald trump, who met this evening, disagree on much of this. the joint communique is going to be a test of the bureaucrats' drafting skills. jon sopel, bbc news, hamburg. thousands of protesters are still on
10:06 pm
the streets of hamburger tonight. a large security cordon has been created around the city centre to stop them reaching the g20 summit venues. stop them reaching the g20 summit venues. police have used water cannon and tear gas to try to distance —— disburse them. protesters say they are angry because leaders have failed to solve many of the issues threatening world peace. jenny hill reports from hamburg. the world's leaders aren't exactly welcome in hamburg. there are tens of thousands of protesters in the city, they dance to many different tunes but they are united in their resistance to this summit. then, after a peaceful afternoon, police moved in to disperse them. within minutes, stalemate. this is now stand—off for a half an hour or so. the police in riot gear,
10:07 pm
water cannon at the ready have been waiting here, holding back the demonstrators, who say they are not going anywhere. hard to say who provoked whom, but this is exactly what police feared. they say 8,000 extremists are targeting the summit, many of them armed with improvised weapons. the demonstration may be over for now, the protests are not. we are shocked how the police is treating all the people and we saw how scared the people are. they are just doing theirjob, but maybe a little sometimes too hard! this evening this city is uneasy. after all, the summit hasn't even yet gun. jenny hill, bbc news, hamburg. we can speak tojon now.
10:08 pm
jon, what's the situation there tonight? well, the position is that the immediate area where we are now, the protesters have cleared away about an hour ago. there was a lot of tear gas in the air, riot police on the streets. you can probably hear the police helicopters overhead. they've moved about a mile away from our position now. but i suspect tomorrow the focus will turn to the g20 summit itself, and that most on sequential meeting taking place, that between president trump and vladimir putin —— consequential meeting. i went to a briefing big or coming out here and the president's national security adviser said there's no agenda, the president will raise what he wants to raise. will he raise the issue of russian interference in the us election? i suspect probably not, given what he said earlier on today. and that's bound to fuel suspicion in washington i gain, with all these
10:09 pm
multiple enquiries going on. but there are the wider issues of the 620 there are the wider issues of the g20 and we've already seen that donald trump is disagreeing with the russians and the chinese over south korea. he's isolated over climate change, but may have the support of the russians on that. on trade, the president seems to be pretty much alone, because there are great fears here that there could be a trade war. then you've got other issues as well, why people don't see eye to eye. angela merkel and donald trump on immigration, very far apart. what you see in this g20 is there are flexible alliances and some very profound disagreements. jon sopel and hamburg, thank you. the chairman of the inquiry into the iraq war, sirjohn chilcot, has told the bbc that tony blair was not straight with the nation and the inquiry about his decisions in the run—up to the invasion more than 14 years ago. speaking a year after the publication of his report, sirjohn said the evidence mr blair gave to the inquiry was "emotionally truthful",
10:10 pm
but he had relied on beliefs rather than facts. mr blair's office insists that five separate reports — including the chilcot inquiry — have found that there was no falsifying of the intelligence. sirjohn was speaking exclusively to our political editor, laura kuenssberg. the truth... tonight british servicemen and women are engaged from air, land and sea. and the whole truth about britain's war in iraq. we will approach our task in a way that is thorough, rigorous, fair. the man charged with finding it, the man who took us in. responsibility but not a regret for removing saddam hussein. a year since his vast report emerged, sirjohn chilcot‘s unvarnished view. tony blair is always and ever an advocate. he makes the most persuasive case he can, not departing from the truth, but persuasion is everything. there is, i argued,
10:11 pm
the responsibility of the leading politician of a government, both to make the case for the policy decision taken but also to balance that with realism about risks, downsides, counter—arguments. if you act simply as a one—sided advocate, you risk losing that, and i think that risk became apparent. but you spent years studying this intelligence. yes. the way you put it in the report and what you just said suggests, as somebody who spent their life in government, in public service... yes. that you feel he manipulated the evidence to make his own case? again, i'm declining the word "manipulate", and using "as best he could" but it's only fair to him to say that on the very eve of the invasion, he asked the then chair of the joint intelligence committee, can you tell me beyond reasonable doubt that saddam hussein has weapons of mass destruction, to which the answer was, "yes, i can". he was entitled to rely on that
10:12 pm
but would it have been wise to rely on it? do you feel he gave you the fullest version of events ? i hesitate to say this, rather, but i think from his perspective and standpoint emotionally truthful. i think he was under really great emotional pressure during those sessions, far more than the committee were and he was suffering, he was deeply engaged. do you believe that tony blair was as straight with you and the public as he ought to have been? can i slightly reword that to say i think any prime minister taking a country into war has got to be straight with the nation and carry it, so far as possible, with him or her, i don't believe that was the case in the iraq instance. there were no lies, there was no deceit, there was no
10:13 pm
deception but there was a decision. sirjohn didn't then, doesn't now, say tony blair intentionally deceived anyone. and the former prime minister's friends reject the accusation that he wasn't completely straight. in the report he made it clear that tony blair did not seek to deceive the public or parliament and to use the words he was not straight, gives a slightly different spin in relation to it. so i think it is unfair and wrong and notjustified by the evidence. did he do a good job in our relations with the united states? the enquiry produced dramatic evidence of their close ties. 0ur formal policy right up to the autumn of 2002, was one of containment, that was the concluded decision of the cabinet. but the prime minister was running one of coercive diplomacy, with the knowledge and support of the foreign secretary but the foreign secretary hoped that diplomacy would win and not coercion. i think the prime minister probably looked the other way around. when you saw some of the most notable documents that emerged, and i'm thinking, of course, of the note...
10:14 pm
0f course,"| shall be with you whatever". .. what did you think of that when you saw it the first time? you mustn't say that! because? because you're giving away far too much. you're making a binding commitment from one sovereign country to another which you can't fulfil, you're not in a position to fulfil it. i mean he didn't even know the legal position at that point. so many documents like this end up simply on the shelf. but the author, this time, believes the narrative of britain's misadventures in iraq has already changed things. do you think we could ever go to war in the same way? oh, yes, in an existential crisis, certainly, no question about it, but more generally, i think we have seen evidence, not of a failure of nerve but of an insistence on much better control of capacity, resources, before reaching a decision to do something on that scale. the report has brought
10:15 pm
in a new level of challenges? i believe so. in fact i'm assured so, and hope it's so. by whom, what assurances have you had? the rising generations of military. what about the families? i was extremely uncertain as to what kind of reception we would get. i didn't know whether you'd get booze or brick bats or even rotten tomatoes, still, we got loud applause. now the sense of relief i experienced was huge. my hope is that some future minds will have been changed, because you can'tjust say that block of volumes never existed. it's there now. it's standing in the way of a retreat back down the road to a lesser standard. giving too, an intensely detailed post—script for his reputation, built on power, political passion and ambition, defined so much by one decision. so a year after the chilcot
10:16 pm
report was published, some relatives of those who died in the iraq war have been asking why sirjohn has chosen to talk about it again now. our home editor, mark easton, has been gauging reaction to sirjohn‘s intervention. it was the largest protest march in british history, and for many of those who took part, tony blair will always be tony b—liar. chanting: "war criminal". sirjohn chilcot‘s suggestion he was not straight with the public, whatever the official record might say, will be held up as evidence he took britain into an illegal war. kris 0'neill was among the 179 british service personnel killed in iraq. his family say sirjohn‘s latest comments are to be welcomed. what he says today adds strength to our case, to go further, to try and bring some sort of justice to parents against tony blair. what that will be, i don't know yet, that is still in the hands of the solicitors.
10:17 pm
sirjohn portrays tony blair as an emotional advocate for action against a tyrant, rather than a leader using objectivejudgment, but the british un ambassador at the time disagrees. i don't think that tony blair ever really wanted to go to war in iraq. he wanted to find another way, he was desperate, and i worked for him on that, to find another way to persuade saddam to back out without war. it was only as he was dragged into it, that he realised he couldn't escape. friends and colleagues of tony blair have called sirjohn‘s comments inappropriate and unfair. the family of alex green, also killed in iraq, agree. to be honest, ifind it really, really puzzling, and i'm wondering what his motives are, because there doesn't seem to be any positives at all that can come out of this and i'm stunned as to why he's popped up and said this. sirjohn‘s comments have once again
10:18 pm
stirred passionate arguments about the iraq war and tony blair's role in it, but they've also focused attention on the public inquiry process, and whether an investigation that takes seven years achieves its purpose, if the head then feels the need to make further comment another year later. i think what chilcot has done today is draw attention once again to the process by which we were taken to war. was it sufficiently transparent? no, i don't think it was. was prime minister blair sufficiently open with parliament and the british people? no, i don't think he was. but what is really important, and i wouldn't want today's illumination of this issue again to make the families of the 179 people that we lost in southern iraq think that their sacrifice was in vain — it wasn't. southern iraq, for our intervention, is a much better place today than it was in the past. it's 15 years since the decisions and actions which divide this country on iraq were taken, but for some they remain as bitterly contentious as ever. mark easton, bbc news. laura's in westminster for us tonight.
10:19 pm
what impact is sirjohn‘s intervention likely to have?” what impact is sirjohn‘s intervention likely to have? i don't think it settled the old arguments, the views held passionately on either side. tony blair has rejected the suggestions he was somehow pursuing his own version of the truth. perhaps the real impact, i think, that is likely, that to erpart of government, politicians, eve ryo ne erpart of government, politicians, everyone weather in the ministry of defence, downing street, the foreign 0ffice defence, downing street, the foreign office or the intelligence service, it's a heavy reminder that their responsibilities to all of us as and when the political wind moves to a potential war is extremely great and they must, in his view, never make they must, in his view, never make the same kinds of mistakes again. now sirjohn was absolutely clear, he thinks there have already been
10:20 pm
some changes in the 12 months since he report was published but i think if anything he hopes that the legacy of that inquiry, that remember took longer than the conflict itself, will be to ensure that the military, the government machine, will never again fall short in quite the same way. laura kuenssberg, thank you. finding the right care provision for the elderly has become a game of "russian roulette", according to the charity age uk. it follows a new report from the care quality commission which found that a quarter of services in england are failing on safety. one million vulnerable people use care services in england. about 500,000 get care in their own homes. and 200,000 are looked after in nursing homes. inspectors in england identified a lack of staff and errors over drugs as some of the most serious problems. 0ur social affairs correspondent alison holt reports. mum, can you open your eyes just a little? bernie jarvis carefully gives her 78—year—old mother lunch. betty, who has dementia, is now back with family, but she used to live in a nursing home.
10:21 pm
the family put in a secret camera because they had concerns, and it quickly picked up the sort of poor care highlighted in today's report. it showed a care worker pushing the chair betty is slumped in sharply towards a desk. later, when betty objects to her top being changed, her head is slammed back into the chair. i don't want to. last february in court, the care worker accepted her actions were reckless rather than intentional. she was given a 12 month community order. query everything. don't let them dismiss you. because they did with us for about eight months. i wish we would have pursued it a lot quicker than we did. because mum, you know, mum probably wouldn't have suffered the way she did. today's report by inspectors said most care in england is good. even so, a quarter of all services, including home care and residential homes, failed on safety.
10:22 pm
and 37% of nursing homes weren't safe enough. also when reinspected, quality of care in some good homes had deteriorated. there's good care out there, we can be confident about that, but what it's saying is that some of that care is fragile and it's precarious, and we've really got to concentrate on making sure we shine the spotlight on poor care. at a time when the number of older people and younger disabled adults is increasing, this report raises serious concerns about the quality of care that some are getting. but those at the sharp end say it also underlines the importance of rapid action to sort out how we pay for and organise care in the long term. for individual older people and their families, they're facing a degree of russian roulette. will they get good care? will they get any care? will it be affordable? will the carer turn up? will the care in a care home be safe? will there be a nurse in the nursing home? these are such fundamental
10:23 pm
questions, and it's unfair to expect older people to be facing them at the most vulnerable time of their lives. this home in south london is rated outstanding. jane ashcroft heads the not—for—profit organisation that runs it. they've done research which suggests a quarter of people still think the state will pay for their care, which she says shows the need for a proper debate now. if we're still talking about this in three years, that will be a disaster for people looking for services, living and working in services. we have to recognise this is a crucial issue and move with some pace. the government says poor care is completely unacceptable and that as well as putting in more money, it will be consulting on how to place social care on a more secure footing for the future. but the question for many is how quickly will that happen? alison holt, bbc news. a brief look at some of the day's other other news stories.
10:24 pm
counter—terrorism police in manchester say they believe salman abedi, who carried out the suicide attack in the city in may, was not part of a larger extremist network. but officers say other people might have been aware of what he was planning, and they want to question his younger brother, who is in custody in libya. a man who killed two of his girlfriends, five years apart, and claimed they had died in theirsleep, has been jailed for life. robert trigg, who's 52, was convicted of the manslaughter of caroline devlin in 2006 and the murder of susan nicholson in 2011. both women were found dead at their homes in worthing. urgent large—scale tests have been ordered on combinations of cladding and insulation used on high rise buildings, in the wake of the grenfell fire. so far, tests on cladding have involved only the plastic core of panels used on tower blocks. a group of prominent business leaders say britain should stay inside the single market and customs union until a final brexit deal is in place.
10:25 pm
the cbi says that adapting to a transitional arrangement and then a final agreement would be difficult and wasteful. our business editor, simon jack, is here. simon, how significant an intervention is this from the cbi? i think this is probably the most significant intervention by a business lobby since the referendum. what they are saying is that the chance of doing a full deal by march 2019 when due to leave the eu is almost impossible, given that, there is no point for a two—stage process, the negotiated transitional deal and a final deal. we should, until there isa a final deal. we should, until there is a fully negotiated final deal in place, until the moment it is in force, we should stay in the single market and the customs union. that could take years and it could be controversial as it comes with strings attached like the movement
10:26 pm
of people. and michelle barnier has been saying ican hear and michelle barnier has been saying i can hear people saying you can leave the single market and keep the benefits, that is not possible or leave the customs union and have a frictionless border trade, that is not possible. this is a negotiation, of course he will say that say some but it shows the gap between what the british government thinks is possible and what the eu says that the reality is still wide and other businesses threw in with the cbi, that the best way over the gap is a bridge and the best bridge is pretty much the status quo. simon, thank you. simon, thank you. the largest change to the welfare system in decades — universal credit — should be stopped until significant problems in its roll out are fixed. that's the warning from the citizens advice charity, who say it is creating financial problems for thousands of people. the new credit brings together six separate benefits, such as housing benefit and tax credits, into one monthly payment. but citizens advice say people are being forced into debt due to problems with the system.
10:27 pm
michael buchanan reports from somerset. before the doors have even opened, people gather at the citizens advice office in bridgwater. seeking help with debt and benefits, universal credit is now the fastest growing problem. have you done your claim online? for the third time. 0k. are you using yourjournal? vicky kelly juggles her young daughter and two cleaning jobs. she's no internet access at home, so struggles with the online application process. i have to take a day off work to sort this out! they want you to work, yet they won't let you take the time off. so, this is you making a universal credit claim? in the back room margaret woodward has the increasingly unenviable task of helping people claim universal credit. so you're not getting an awful lot, are you? it's disgraceful.
10:28 pm
0nce someone claims it, any other benefits immediately stop and you typically wait six weeks before receiving any money. i think at the moment it's probably not fit for purpose. nobody can survive with without any income for six weeks. we have people getting into rent arrears, can't pay their electric, can't pay their gas, haven't got money for food. at the local food bank, they say they're seeing the consequences of those difficulties. figures they've gathered indicate problems associated with benefit changes and delays have increased by more than 60% in the past year. louise summer—hayes has been here several times over the past few months. her first visit, she says, was due to troubles caused by universal credit. it was a nightmare. we had to borrow money off of friends, family, come to the food bank because benefits are late or in the very beginning, we had to wait those six to eight weeks. bridgwater was one of the first places in britain to experience the
10:29 pm
full impact of universal credit. a year later it is ideally placed to assess the largest overhaul of the welfare state in decades. the problem around here is not unemployment, as such, it is low wages — people need the benefit system to top up their incomes. most people i spoke to actually support the idea of universal credit butjust need it to now work for them a lot better than it has done so far. 0ne change sees housing benefit paid directly to claimants, which has led to increasing debts. the housing association say two thirds of rent arrears are now due to universal credit. holly reninhan is one of those tenants, she says problems with universal credit caused her to build up three months' of rent arrears, as well as other household debts. to cover some household bills i had to look at getting payday loans and because of my money being up and down
10:30 pm
each month, it's put me further debt due to me not making the payments on the loans. ministers say that universal credit is a success, that it's moving people into work. they say that it's moving people into work. they say most claimants are satisfied with the benefit and that help is available for those with problems. but the increasing demands on a small office, tell a very different story. michael buchanan, bbc news, bridgwater in somerset. at wimbledon today, despite a shaky start, third seed roger federer is through to the last 32 after beating serbian dusan lajovic. earlier in the day on centre court, britain's kyle edmund failed to become the fifth british singles player to reach the third round. he lost in straight sets to frenchman gael monfils. cricket now — and on his first appearance as england test captain, joe root has scored a century against south africa. england ended the day 357—5. 0ur sports correspondent andy swiss was watching the action.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on