you are up to date on the headlines. now on bbc news, hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk, i'm zeinab badawi. the covid—19 crisis is not only a threat to people's health and wellbeing, it is already having severe financial consequences, which many fear will result in a crisis of the kind we saw over a decade ago. my guest is a professor on globalisation and development, who six years ago predicted that the next financial crash would be caused by a pandemic. he is ian golding. will his prophesy come to pass, or can this be averted? a public health emergency will lead toa a public health emergency will lead to a global recession? an goldin, welcome to hardtalk. it's a pleasure to be here. what made you predict six years ago that the next globalfinancial predict six years ago that the next global financial crash would be caused by a pandemic? it's almost inevitable, as we connect more, as more and more people live in big cities close to airports, which are not only the super spreaders of the goods of globalisation but also the bads, that contagion would cascade around the world. we've seen many pandemics in the past, they've a lwa ys pandemics in the past, they've always been the biggest killers of humanity and i believe this continued to be a major threat that was being ignored, so i felt very strongly and still do that this is likely to be not only the biggest threat to our lives but also to our financial systems and economies. you said that the coronavirus shows how globalisation spreads contagion of all kinds, so you're attributing it to globalisation there, but i have to put it to you that during the spanish flu outbreak in 1918, when eventually 50 million people died, there wasn't globalisation then in the sense that we talk about it today? no, there wasn't, and that was spread largely through troops returning home from europe after the war. shipping was the way it... that's why it was so slow. it affected one third of the world's population in some way, 50 million died. now we have this but in a much more virulent form given our collectivity, and the threat is much more instantaneous. we've seen in cyber it can instantly spread around the world, we've seen in the financial crisis that overnight there was cascading risk and with pandemics near big airport hubs, anything can be anywhere in the world in 36 hours. and you attribute that to globalisation? yes, it is the result of globalisation, which has brought immense benefits, i'm a huge believer in it, it's brought better things for more people more quickly than anything in the world just why 2 billion people have been lifted out of property while you have these openly growing cities and airport hubs, but globalisation is also very bad and very ugly and it needs to be managed so we can sustain it. you been making comparisons between the financial crisis of 2008 and 2009 and what we are seeing now and attributing it, as we said, to globalisation, but you're not really comparing life with light. 0ne globalisation, but you're not really comparing life with light. one is a health emergency and another one was born of finance. what i analyse in my book, the butterfly defect, is how these integrated, complex systems and lead to interdependency and in that sense it very similar. it's about something that starts somewhere in a hub, spreading around the world rapidly, through the arteries of globalisation. in that case it was financed, in this case it's airports and airlines and travel, but they are similar both in the way that they originate and travel, but also that we need to think about their management in similar ways. we need to think about the way to co—ordinate to stop these things. all right, so there was a crash then more than a decade ago, financial crisis, are you saying we are now heading towards a global recession? 0r are now heading towards a global recession? or are we already in one? can you clarify? i think we're on the cusp. 0n the cusp. a cliff edge, and it's up to us and our government that we decide whether we're heading over it or we are able to our actions. i think concerted actions by governments nationally and globally could that a major crisis, a collapsed equivalent to 2008, but if we don't do more quickly i think we're heading for that and it could be much severe. i'll ask you what we think we should do in a moment but let's examine the severity of what you think will happen. angel ta lavera you think will happen. angel talavera at economic set is pretty difficult to avoid a recession in the first half of the year. the spread of the disease in europe is a game—changer, the questions are how deep will be and how long it will last. so if you say we are on the cusp, just elucidate. when will we get into it and how long do you think it would last? is it a given it's going to happen?” think it would last? is it a given it's going to happen? i think we're definitely going to have a major, major slowdown in the world economy. we could see negative growth in much of europe, even in the us, and we could see much, much slower growth... it's been over 6% down to 296 in china. growth... it's been over 6% down to 2% in china. so this will slow things down. if countries respond by rapidly addressing the crisis, by transferring money to those that most need it, to helping those that can't get to work, to trying to sustain businesses so they don't go bankrupt through underwriting their loa ns, bankrupt through underwriting their loans, extending their loans in other ways, and if there's a co—ordinated bible activity, to give money to those countries that are going to desperately need it, including italy and many other countries already on the verge of bankruptcy, we might avoid the worst effects but yes, we are heading towards recession. let's be honest, you don't really know. nobody knows. a... negative affects will be with us a... negative affects will be with us for a while, your seatbelt hard. the british chancellor of the exchequer, rishi sunak, said there will be a significant impact on the uk economy but it will be temporary. it's all words like this, a wild, temporary, it's all a bit obsessed gate three language. temporary, it's all a bit obsessed gate three languagelj temporary, it's all a bit obsessed gate three language. i don't think it's obvious gate three we don't know how extreme the pandemic is going to be in written. is it going to be like italy or is it going to be much milder? are we going to bounce back quickly, as in china with juve province, bounce back quickly, as in china withjuve province, is it going to linger longer? is it going to tra nsfer to linger longer? is it going to transfer to the southern hemisphere as winter comes there? there's many questions we don't and experts don't know the answers to and they have dramatic implications for the economic impact. we know it's going to bea economic impact. we know it's going to be a big knock, we know it will probably be equivalent to 2008... for sure? i think it will be, yes. but i don't know how it's going to play out around the world because we don't know the response. you just said we know there's going to be an economic impact, so what kind of impactare we economic impact, so what kind of impact are we talking about? is it going to affect people's livelihoods, are they going to be compromised, are they going to be widespread shortages of consumer and industrial goods? impact on people's social lives, what kind of impact are you talking about? all of the above. we're already seeing a dramatic on people who are vulnerable. people's pensions have gone down dramatically after the stock market crash, they have less to spend, people on hourly work, 5 million in the uk and 50 million in the us, people around the world on hourly work depend on going to work to get their income, they day, no unemployment benefit, supporting theirfamilies, unemployment benefit, supporting their families, migrant workers unemployment benefit, supporting theirfamilies, migrant workers but domestic workers, people in the travel industry, people work in hospitality of different types, restau ra nts, hospitality of different types, restaurants, hotels, all of these people are extremely vulnerable. either their workplace will be closed down or the airline, as british airways is telling people, don't come to work to certain staff in italy, for example, or they will be quarantined because they know someone be quarantined because they know someone who's been somewhere. and thatis someone who's been somewhere. and that is their livelihood, so i think this will exacerbate inequality, i think it will slow economic growth. that means the businesses that produce things we whether it is restau ra nt produce things we whether it is restaurant meals or clothing, going to the shops, whatever it is, all of the businesses go out of work and then the supply chains are disrupted as well, we can't get the components and so the auto factories and start closing down, otherfactors start closing down, otherfactors start closing down. people's cars and start breaking down and they can't fix them. this leads to a decline in demand, a decline in supply and we are going into a downward spiral of consumer confidence and economic activity, that's how the 2008 crash happened and that's how crashes generally happen. you get a downward spiral and a much lower level of activity. you said it would also exacerbate inequality, is that within countries and also between countries, a sickly poorer nations and poorer communities within countries are going to be hit harder? within our countries it will exacerbate inequality. if there's a strong safety net, that will reduce it but many countries, including the us, and poor countries, don't have safety nets so people lose theirjob 01’ safety nets so people lose theirjob or whatever, they can't get it, people don't have access to medical ca re people don't have access to medical care and in the us is over 20 million people who don't have access to medical care and are not insured, these people can't get tested and won't be able to go to hospitals though it exacerbates the inequalities within countries dramatically. it makes people who depend on things like retirement savings much worse off. obviously the virus doesn't discriminate against people depending... no, that's the difference between a pandemic and other shops. the industrial north in italy is the one most severely affected, 10,000 cases there. but within that, the rich have savings and the ability to withstand this crisis but poor people, when they lose their income, can become destitute and homeless if they can't pay the rent. that's also between countries because poorer countries don't have the resources, they don't have the health systems and other systems in place. professor goldin, though, are you not scaremongering a bit? the director general of the world health organization, doctor ted roscoe prieto, said panic and fear is the worst. are you not doing that with all the things you are saying? the scientists are saying by the end of the year we might have a vaccine which will be able to be rolled out and so on... i hope we well. that's what we are saying. tessa gilbert from oxford university has said hopefully by the end of the year, she is one of the scientists involved. i hope one of my worst fears on realised, and as roosevelt said in1933, fears on realised, and as roosevelt said in 1933, the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. but you are scaremongering. is there an apocalyptic phase and of what's going to happen? i think they could bea going to happen? i think they could be a massive crash coming out of this. all the outcomes of systemic risk are about what we do about them. the reason to raise the red flags, or at least the orange lights, is because we want people to act, i want governments to act, i wa nt act, i want governments to act, i want them to stop this and learn from this, which they never did. they are doing that, both in terms of mitigation and containment against covid—19. the eu commission has set up a 25 billion euros fund. giuseppe conte, the prime minister of england, said we're going to have 7.5 billion euros spending measures —— italy. 7.5 billion euros spending measures -- italy. these numbers are tiny compared to what was given to solve the financial crisis. alistair darling set aside... a formally politician who was chancellor at the time of the financial crisis. he set out £500 billion to bailout the banks. the us treasury secretary set aside $750 billion to bailout the us banks. you're saying that they should pay more? i'm delighted the chancellor today set aside £30 billion and what he's advocating for in the uk is very sensible, but compared to the response in the financial crisis, this is tiny. so, what, you're talking about finding money that order? hundreds of billions? if needed. we should have the ammunition that's going to be required. i put it to you that containment and mitigation measures have been undertaken and there having some success. doctor ted rosser at the who has raised china for its containment, so they've now got fewer cases. south korea has seen got fewer cases. south korea has seen a got fewer cases. south korea has seen a decline in cases. singapore also. he has said, doctor ted ross, the bottom—line is we are at the mercy of the virus so things are working without these vast injections of funds that you're advocating. i would say it is too early to say. it has worked in china, dramatic applications. in italy, we have an absolute clampdown. that is not what is happening in other countries, not least in the uk and are generally in the us. it is too early to tell how this virus is going to spread and the effect on economies but i am saying it could be dramatic and we should be prepared for that and be prepared to react dramatically to stop that happening. you have said we have to act dramatically, lots of money, new ways of working, greater cooperation because this is a global threat so you cannotjust have nationstates responding in that way. what are you advocating? what should nations be doing? what has compounded the risks is that in 2008, the world was relatively harmonious. george bush called a meeting immediately after the 2008 crisis and he had 28 heads of state including the chinese. china flew in more than the rest of the world to mitigate the impact of 2008. now the world has turned its back on... you do not have to gather in a summit but you need to co—ordinate in action. the us which is not fighting. fighting the country which was its key ally in 2008, china. whether it is on climate change, pandemics, cyber, any big risks we need to work together. we have the world health organization. the who has been starved of resources and legitimacy of authority. it is not up legitimacy of authority. it is not up to 21st century purpose. legitimacy of authority. it is not up to 215t century purposem legitimacy of authority. it is not up to 21st century purpose. it does not have the resources... it is not... pandemics are unusualto financial or climate. it can come from anywhere. the poorest countries are at risk. with climate a small group of countries could resolve the problem, the same with finance. when pandemics arise, to act on them, thatis pandemics arise, to act on them, that is what you need. once it is in a major airport, it is really anywhere in the world. should they be new structures? they need to be reinvigorated, reformed. help them. the next pandemic. the british journalist commentator robert armstrong says coronavirus is a global crisis, not a crisis of globalisation and that globalisation provides the solution and that is what you are saying but, as you know, there has been a lot of retreat from mobilisation across the world. a lot of voters have said we're not reaping the globalisation. we have seen politicians likejeremy corbyn railing against it, only sanders has also said globalisation has left far too many people behind. —— bernie sanders. not a big vote of confidence. i think it is right to see that globalisation has been not only a major source of progress but also it has brought rising inequality and new risks. pandemic spreading, climate change, and many other risks. the financial crisis was an underbelly of globalisation. the answer is not to bring higher walls. there is no wall high enough to prevent fibre change, pandemic but we have to manage the system we have built and ensure we co—ordinate actions and ensure we understand the pads and we are building institutions to manage it, whether it is climate change, finance, cyber, pandemic but we have to have the will to do it. the cause of the problem is the vehicle to solve it despite scepticism? absolutely. part of the scepticism is because the experts have got it dramatically wrong. they have led a liberalisation which is wrong. when people say we do not trust the experts, they become nationalist but we have to say, you were right not to trust them because they did not manage the system. bernie sanders has said unfettered free trade has allowed multinational corporations to make the rich richer while workers are sucked into a race to the bottom. could what we're seeing now have an impact on trade? you have said the epidemic will also prompt a re—examination of the central reliance on china as a ground zero for manufacturing. could china cease to be... i think we will continue to see incredible growth of global economic... the centre of gravity is moving to asia and asia is very enthusiastic about this integration. in general. in the us, europe, we are marginal to this globalisation. it will continue to be asia centric but we have reached a peak supply fragmentation. other things are happening. increasing automation in robotics ringing systems back home. it will not be workers are building things back home but machines, whether it is call centres, or to manufacturing and then we will have increasing customisation, modelled to our bodies. all these things are coming together. coronavirus will be an accelerator. that's right. it is a trend underlying already. does that also apply to other ways of living, for example people have rolled back on their travel, businesses are holding videoconferences, people are saying they are going to holiday at home and not go abroad, could this have long—term consequences? home and not go abroad, could this have long—term consequence57m home and not go abroad, could this have long-term consequences? it will have long-term consequences? it will have some long—term consequences but on an upward trend. the growth in tourism and travel globally has been almost 10% a yearfor the tourism and travel globally has been almost 10% a year for the last ten yea rs. let's say almost 10% a year for the last ten years. let's say comes out a couple of% it does not mean it stops growing but it means it does not growing but it means it does not grow as rapidly. tourism out of asia will not stop growing as people get wealthier and it will as asia grows. people will travel. people have seen in china, with fewer people travelling now because of the coronavirus, carbon dioxide emissions have gone down. there are some silver lining is out of this. could that really be a wake—up call for people that actually the coronavirus will transform people's habits? i do not think it will transform it in that dramatic way. we will see some easing off. when we look back and see how people have rebounded to old habits. what we need to instill in society is we need to instill in society is we need to instill in society is we need to manage these risks. oil prices have collapsed stop it will become much cheaper and worry about that in the context of climate change. our push to get off fossil fuel will be reduced by the fact that oil is so cheap and competitive. one idea also discussed is it could encourage the free flow of information in countries which are authoritarian. the tragic death of the doctor in china who raised theissue of the doctor in china who raised the issue on line and he died of the disease and he said on his deathbed, i a death healthy society should not have just one kind i a death healthy society should not havejust one kind of i a death healthy society should not have just one kind of voice. i a death healthy society should not havejust one kind of voice. could it have that impact? i hope so but i think the chinese will be saying our way of managing it has been extremely effective and they will not be taking away from this that they were not doing the right thing. of course, it was picked up too late, there was not the medication around but the actions afterwards have been draconian, helped spread the virus and a big hit on the economy said china has taken a big hit in trying to protect itself and the world. we have already seen in the world. we have already seen in the financial impact of coronavirus. professor ian goldin, you foretold there would be a global economic crisis as a result of some pandemic. when are now looking at coronavirus. you must hope you are wrong?” absolutely do but i hope we learn that the lesson from this and did not become complacent as happened in the run—up to the financial crisis that we thought we knew we were doing and failed to the system. i hope this is a massive wake—up call to stop the next pandemic which is inevitable and could be more severe, to stop financial crisis, to stop climate change and other risks, to learn that we are interdependent and we all depend on people around the world to be doing the right thing, to be taking the cautions, to stop risks and if we can do that internationally and nationally it would have been worthwhile. thank you very much indeed, ian goldin. i should take the precaution of not shaking hands with him but thank you very much being on hardtalk. thank you. hello. meteorologically speaking, it is now the start of spring. but of course, winter is not that far behind us and i think we will get a reminder of that through the next couple of days. cold air flooding into the uk around an area of low pressure will bring us quite a few showers actually, on thursday, the most frequent closest to the low centre, so across the northern half of the uk. but can't rule out some pretty sharp ones whipping through on that strong wind further south, either. and as you can see, the blue has flooded its way right across the uk for today, but all sitting in the polarair. so it will add a definite chill to proceedings, even where we see some sunshine. after showers overnight and plunging temperatures, snow and ice a possible hazard as we start our morning commute. there could be some further falling snow through the earlier part of the day as well for scotland, the higher ground for the higher ground of northern england and for northern ireland. we should see the snow levels rising as the day progresses, however. some showers to the south, though, could have a little bit of hail mixed in with them from time to time. there'll be quite squally winds here, too. but the showers should be more scattered, they'll tend to come in more persistent bands to the north of the uk, across northern ireland, parts of northern england and scotland. it will feel chilly and the wind, while the strongest across southern scotland, northern england, northern ireland and to the north—west of wales, gusts could touch up to 60 miles per hour here but gusts of a0 miles per hour quite widely. through thursday evening, still a lot of showers around, then we move into the small hours of friday and things start to become quieter. we pick up a northerly wind on the length of the north sea, that will feed some showers into eastern counties the uk, temperatures fall away across the northern half of the uk and in particular again into the small hours of friday. so ice a risk for the north of the uk for first thing on friday once again but our showers will tend to shift offshore quite quickly through friday morning as high pressure starts to build just a little ridge — a brief ridge of high pressure starts to buil for friday daytime. so the early showers clear, the northerly wind eases, there'll be pleasant sunshine the majority for a time at least before our next low starts to approach from the south—west as we get into friday afternoon. the wind will begin to pick up once again and we'll see the arrival of some further rainfall. and then it's another weekend, another area of low pressure. saturday the wettest of the weather to the north—west of the uk. for sunday, this front needs to make its way through so i suspect all of us will see some rain at some stage. so quite a bit of cloud around widely around the uk on saturday, rainfall fairly limited. sunday definitely looks like soggier prospects across the board. this is the briefing, i'm sally bundock. our top stories: president trump bands or flights from mainland europe for 30 days to defeat the credit pandemic. to keep new cases from entering our shores, we will be suspending all travel from europe to the united states for the next 30 days. the new rules were going to effect friday at midnight. tom hanks and his wife rita wilson confirmed they have tested positive for the virus and will self isolate in australia. we have a special report from the middle east as muslims and christians take unprecedented measures to try and halt the spread of
now on bbc news, hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk with me, zainab badawi. as the covid—i9 pandemic takes hold, the capacity of governments around the world to respond is being seriously tested. —— zeinab. my guest is the secretary general of the united nations, antonio guterres, who hasjust launched a humanitarian appeal focused mainly on helping a0 of the most vulnerable countries. he says that a global approach is the only way to fight the virus, and that without critical support, the impact of covid—i9 will be deep and particularly severe on poorer nations. but how realistic are his proposals and who will pay for them? secretary general antonio guterres, welcome to hardtalk. you have described covid—i9 as a threat to humanity. what do you mean by that and how worried are you? first of all, it's a pleasure to be with you again. well, it is clear. i mean, if this pandemic would be left alone, if you wouldn't be able to suppress it, it will reach millions and millions of people. it will have millions of people, victims, dying of it. and it is clearly the biggest threat to humanity that we have seen in the recent past. and that is one reason why it is so important that instead of acting separately, each one doing what each one wants, it is essential to have effective international cooperation, co—ordination, to defeat this virus, to win this war against covid—i9. but when people hear the secretary general of the united nations use such language as "millions could die," are you not going scare people? and i put to you what professor michael levitt, who is a nobel laureate and stanford biophysicist who has done various projections, and he projects a quick coronavirus recovery. he told the la times this week we are going to be fine. what we need to do is control the panic. as a matter of fact, what we are seeing is exponential increase of cases, everywhere in the world. we had the first death in china, then we are having it — the epicentre in europe. there is a strong risk of the epicentre to come to to the united states. and we are seeing now in the global south. the global south is much less equipped to defeat the disease. we are seeing an enormous increase in cases globally. and the best scientific evidence indicates that, unless there is a fairly strong effort to suppress the disease, these might reach — until the so—called herd immunity is reached, this might reach 60 to 70% of the global population. even if this disease kills less than other outbreaks, like ebola recently, this would always mean millions of people dying in the world, and this is absolutely unacceptable — also morally unacceptable. so we need to make sure that we have an articulated response, a co—ordinated response under the guidance of the who. and i believe the g20 meeting this week is a good opportunity to create a mechanism of co—ordination under the guidance of the who. an articulated response to be able to suppress collectively this virus, and then, once suppressed, to be able to contain it until a vaccine is found. because only with a vaccine will we be able to eradicate the disease. and i truly believe that, in the absence of an effectively co—ordinated action, if each country will go on acting by itself, we risk to have this pandemic with catastrophic impacts in people, and let's not forget, catastrophic impacts in the global economy, in the livelihoods, and especially, with the most vulnerable suffering the most. you've put a lot in that answer. let's just unpack it a little bit. you've just launched a humanitarian appeal to raise funds for developing nations, which you predict are going to be struggling to cope with the covid—i9. but i put it to you that 500,000 cases globally, nearly 20,000 deaths — should the un not have done something like this much sooner? well, probably, yes. we have been acting, but we believed at a certain moment that we needed to enhance our response. there was the first appeal from the world health organization of $600 million. but this time, we need to look very carefully into those situations of extreme vulnerability. i'm talking about areas of conflict. i'm talking about fragile states, refugee camps, displaced people's camps, and all other situations in the poorest countries of the world, where the capacity to respond is much less effective. and the disease is now coming to those areas. and so what we want is to increase the medical capacity, increase the volume of equipment that is available, but also to look into health and water and sanitation. to look into all the things necessary to contain the spread of the disease. to look into the livelihoods of the populations most affected. but this is just for the most vulnerable of the vulnerable, and this is why it is a drop in the ocean. we're talking about $2 billion when, for instance, the package being discussed in the us senate, just for the us economy, is $2 trillion. where is the money going to come from? and let me tell you what one former government minister in liberia said during the ebola outbreak in 2014, that killed 11,000 people in west africa. and he said now, in the past you could look to the west for help, but they are battling the same thing so it is not clear any help is coming at all. so how confident can you be that the global south that you're so worried about is going to get the assistance it needs? it's a matter of enlightened self—interests. we are talking of a pandemic. now, first of all, our main objective with the appeal is to avoid the humanitarian support that we are already receiving for all other aspects — water and sanitation, food, protection, shelter. all of those vulnerable situations in the world, from syria to yemen, south sudan, to the drc. what we want is to make sure that we have additional support for covid—19, and that the money doesn't come from the humanitarian action that we are already having. addressing your question, this is a matter of enlightened self—interest. if this pandemic is controlled in the developed world, but is left to spread like wildfire in the developing countries, we would have millions of cases, millions of people dying, but not only that. that will create the opportunity for mutations of the virus. and the virus can come back in a way that even vaccines which are developed will not be effective even in the developed world. so there is no way to fight this with half of humanity. either you fight it globally, or you risk to be defeated by the virus, and we cannot be defeated by the virus. but are you not trying to scare richer nations by kind of saying, if you don't fight the virus in poorer countries, it leaves the virus free to circle back around the globe and affect you ? it is not a matter of scaring, this is the reality. this is the reality. it's in the enlightened self—interest of the developed world to support the developing world, to suppress this virus, in co—ordination with the more developed countries of the world. and that is a very important thing for the g20 to take into account. i believe we need in the g20 a mechanism, under the guidance of the world health organization, in order for the countries of the g20 to be able to, together, combining different approaches in some countries, the emphasis more on testing and tracing and quarantine, and less in lockouts. countries with less testing capacity, if there are more lockouts. in any case, it needs to be very tough everywhere and in a combined way, an articulated way. the g20 represents 80% of the world economy. but that is not enough. even if it is together, with the g20 countries, suppressed in that part of the world, it's absolutely essential not to leave other countries behind, and that is why i've been advocating for a very strong package, a package of the level of two digits of the global economy. part of it, of course, will be spent by each country itself. you can see what the united states is doing, what the european union is doing, what china has done. we need $2—3 billion to be able to support the response to covid—19 in developing countries as a whole. not only the most vulnerable situations, like we are addressing now with this appeal, but in all of the developing countries as well. and you have the imf, already with $1 trillion of lending capacity. you have the possibility of special drawing rights to be issued. you have swaps among central banks that can help, especially emerging economies. we have a number of insturments that can be put in place in a co—ordinated way, and we can win this battle if we are together. you made reference to the fact that the united states is going to be pushing through trillions of dollars to ensure that covid—19 doesn't have such a detrimental impact on the united states. are you kind of saying that, look, rich countries like the us could cough up more for the developing nations? is that the kind of message you're trying to put over — that they could do more? yes, but there are instruments that allow it to happen. as i said, the imf has already $1 trillion capacity to lend. we are in a war situation with the virus. we need a war economy. and, as the us is printing money in the us, we can do it globally in a way that is effective to address the challenges of the covid—19. all right, you are clearly arguing for a co—ordinated international response to deal with what is after all a global threat. what do you think about the way individual governments have been responding to the pandemic? we've seen quite a difference in approach. france, for instance, has more stringent measures than the united kingdom, which has taken more of a wait—and—see approach. donald trump in united states, seems to be more relaxed, and says that he wants to see the us economy going back to normal at easter — 12 april. what's your sense of how national governments are responding? are you content? well, of course i'm not happy with the present situation. there is an effective dysfunctionality in the way all this is all happening. we have not a global government system. of course, the world health organization is the un authority on health. they have issued guidelines, but many of the countries have not respected them, or sometimes they do and sometimes they don't. so the only way out is through effective international cooperation, and i believe the g20 can be the nucleus of that international cooperation, aiming at acting together in an articulated way. but look, i mean, this is not only the covid—19. if you look at peace and security — i mean, the relationship between the biggest powers has never been as dysfunctional. the security council has been paralysed in relation to many of the conflict situations in the world. for climate change, it has been so difficult to bring people together. so, we are witnessing a serious problem, and that problem is that international cooperation has never been at this low level, and we need to make sure people understand that as threats are becoming global, covid—19 is another one, climate change already existed, terrorism, global terrorism is there. as these threats are becoming global, we effectively need to have a very strong commitment to international cooperation, and to strengthen multilateral institutions. i know this is not popular in some media. i know that many think they can do it by themselves, that each one by itself is — or himself is the best way to deal with these problems. but the reality shows, and covid—19 is showing it dramatically, eitherwejoin, either we are in solidarity, either we are together, or we can be defeated. secretary general, you sound as a man really, a world leader, in despair about the state of the lack of international cooperation. what do you think lies behind this dire situation, where key powers are not cooperating in the way you would like to see them? what's the reason? we are in a transition moment. we lived in a bipolar world, and lived in a unipolar. now we are in a chaotic situation. it's not yet multi—polar or unipolar or bipolar. power relations are unclear. we are seeing more and more spoilers in international relations, less capacity to control them. and as i said, relations between the biggest powers have never been so dysfunctional as they are today. why, can i ask you to clarify? are you talking about united states and china? could you be more specific? well it is very specific, the united states and china are two fundamental pillars of the global economy and they need to come together to fight covid—19. i mean, there are problems, there are questions, there are eventually failures here and there. but instead of making that the issue, the issue is to bring people together and look at global supply chains. you need to have ventilators everywhere, you need to have tests everywhere, you need to have medical equipment everywhere. i mean, it's a good reason to do it in a way in which there is a common planning, a common supply chain and the possibility to provide it to people everywhere in the same circumstances. this is not a moment to fight each other, this is not the moment for division — this is a moment to come together. it's not easy in the present world and we know all the contradictions that exist but the choice is between chaos and united action to respond to a very dramatic threat that humankind is facing. so it's not helpful when you hear comments from the trump administration, including the president himself, referring to covid—19 as that chinese virus? i think this is not the moment for anyone to blame others. probably, i believe in the end we will need to do lessons learned and need to see what failed and why it failed in several parts of the world, but this is the moment to come together, to unite and to defeat covid—19. to rescue our lives. i want to put to you an alternative view which is notjust compounded by president trump, but we have also seen for example, philip thomas of bristol university in britain, a professional of risk management saying, "i'm worried that in order to solve one problem we will create a bigger problem," and he says keeping the economy going is crucial otherwise measures will do more harm than good, and that kind of reflects president trump's view that he says if it were up to the doctors, they may say let us shut down the entire world and you cannot do that. do you accept there has got to be a trade—off between killing the economy and tackling covid—19? but that is exactly the reason why i am saying we need to have together a package of, a double digit of the percentage of global economy, and a package that each country can do by itself, but obviously it is much more powerful if everything is combined. a package that today is different from 2008. it is no longer to rescue the financial system, this is not a financial crisis, this is a human crisis. this package needs to be put in place in order to support salaries of those that are losing theirjobs. in order to support companies for them to preserve those jobs and preserve their existence. in order to keep households afloat, keep companies afloat, especially small and medium—sized business. in order to have the global economy able to survive this crisis, and then, to have also a concerted action in relation to the exit strategy and in relation to the, i would say, recovery of the economy, with an opportunity. this is an opportunity to have a recovery that can be of a more sustainable and inclusive economy. we don't need to rebuild everything as it was, we can do it much better in the future. and who takes the leadership for that? you've mentioned the g20 and you can look to them, but shouldn't the united nations do that? after all, the world health organization is part of the un family, and surely you should be saying, i want the united nations empowered, which is the point that professor ian golding makes, a professor of development and globalisation, we need to empower the un so that we can come together to tackle this threat. why don't you say i'm antonio guterres, i want to be the focal point of tackling this covid—19? this is not a question of narcissism. what we need is a concerted action, and the un is ready to do whatever the un is asked for. we are now, for instance, putting together all our supply chain capacities, in order to offer the international community a possibililty to be much more effective in relation to, for instance, medical equipment in all parts of the world. but i believe the g20 represents 80% of the world economy. the leaders of the g20 have an opportunity, with no other similar, in the concentration of power, because power is not in the un. power, whether we like it or not, is in the member states. they are coming together, 80%, they have the chance to prove a co—ordinated action. in terms of the message you would like to give to the world in terms of how they should respond to covid—19, young people in particular, dr tedros ghebreyesus, the director general of the world health organization, has said to them, you are not invincible, don't think this is just something that affects older people or people with underlying health conditions, what's your public health message to the world? and un is ready to fully support it. i could of course be very happy if there would be a global agreement to increase the governors‘ powers that could be placed in the un, but that is not my objective. my objective, at the present moment, is not to stress the un. my objective is to help rescue the world in relation to covid—19. you have a voice though and i ask you to use it now. be responsible, be smart, but above all, understand that only with solidarity we can defeat this disease. only with solidarity but also with a vaccine, which is something that you referred to earlier on in this interview, so where do you think we stand with that? are you optimistic about us having one quite soon? and are you also confident that when it is developed, it will be shared amongst all the countries that need it, in particular poorer countries? i am not an expert, so i cannot say i am optimistic. i insist that everybody should do everything to make it happen as soon as possible, which means working together instead of competing among the different research centres on the different countries, and i think it is absolutely vital that when the vaccine is distributed, to be distributed globally and not to have the privileged having the vaccine and the poor submitted to the disease. and you also mentioned that the most vulnerable of the vulnerable are people living in conflict areas, and refugee camps. of course, as a former head of the united nations high commission for refugees you know very well that what jan egeland, from the norwegian refugee council says, how can you do social distancing when thousands of people are crowded together in a tiny camp or refugee settlement, this is a disaster waiting to happen. you have got to make sure that people like those are protected. it is a nightmare that we face. the united nations high commission for refugees, together with organization for international migration, many ngos and the red cross are coming together. the main objective is to prevent, to avoid at all costs the virus tp come to these settlements. some are isolated, others unfortunately not, and at the same time to boost to the extent possible the local capacity and what washington's facilities, these disinfectant devices, and all other mechanisms, the medical equipment, the medical capacity, but i have to say looking into refugee camps, or into the slums of many of the big cities in the developing world, these can be an effective nightmare and one reason more to do everything possible to support these countries for them not to become the weak point in the world. let's never forget one thing. our global health system is as strong as our weakest health system in the world. so there's all reasons to mobilise resources to support those that have less capacity today. finally, antonio guterres, i want you to just reflect on how you think the covid—19 crisis is going to affect the world? what is the impact going to be socially, economically, politically? what is the long—term impact in your view and could there be some positive benefits, like people travel less for reasons other than pressing ones? i think one thing is clear, the digital world will have a huge boost. i think one of the big questions of humankind is how to make sure that artificial intelligence, cyberspace in general, are a force for good. and it is clear that we will have a boost in the digital world, digital technologies because they are proving their extreme importance now to allow us to go on working, but largely digital communication mechanisms and using digital instruments, so the digital world will have a boost and there must be a lot of international corporations making sure that we also address the challenges that it poses, but to make it really a force for good and for a much broader capacity, to answer to the challenges of development in the world. on the other hand, i think this will give us an opportunity to look into climate change seriously. it is not through the virus that we fight climate change but there is a clear demonstration that when we rebuild our economies, we will have the chance to do it in a more sustainable way. we don't need, now that we are consuming less energy, now that we are moving less, it is a moment to think, how we consume energy, how we move, and to do it better in the future. and in relation to many other aspects of international cooperation, i hope, that this will be a kind of wake—up call to make the world understand how important multilateralism is, how important mobile governance is and how important it is for international corporations today to be the normal way in which countries relate to each other. secretary general antonio guterres, in new york at united nations headquarters, thank you very much indeed for coming on hardtalk. hello there, temperatures on thursday reached highs of 18 degrees across the far north—west of england, thanks to plenty of sunshine. southern scotland didn't do too badly as well with the sunshine but generally speaking, friday is going to be a similar picture to thursday, this weather front bringing more cloud across northern parts of the country, so it could be quite grey and drizzly through the day across central and eastern scotland. to the north of the weather front, northern scotland should see some sunshine appearing at times across northern ireland but the most sunshine across england and wales the cold and frosty start. we will have more breeze bearing in from the north—east for many of us particularly across southern and eastern areas, so it will feel a bit cooler generally, as we had through friday night, it looks like that cloud across northern areas begins to drift southwards into parts of wales, northern england and the midlands, and because there will be more of a breeze generally it is not going to be quite as cold as what it has been the last few nights. so for the weekend, if things are set to turn colder in fact, high pressure will be dominating the scene, sitting to the north—west of the uk but it will be bringing down these very cold winds from the north, you can see the blue colours enveloping the whole of the uk, and the wind arrows indicating the wind will be quite a feature as well, accentuating the cold particularly on sunday. saturday starts off chilly, quite a bit of sunshine around but the clouds will tend to build across northern and eastern areas, and that strong north, north—east wind will push a few showers into north—eastern scotland and eastern england, these will be of a wintry flavour. single—figure values in the north and just about double figures in the south. sunday could be a bit of a cloudy day generally, there will be glimmers of brightness here and there and wintry showers in the north and east, a key wind especially across the east and the south—east. these temperatures sticking in single figures for most, factor in the wind and it is going to feel almost like freezing in one or two places, so a noticeable chill factor particularly on sunday. as we head on into next week, it does look like high pressure sits again into the north—west of the uk, bringing in further chilly air but it is going to be a little less cold for the start of the week than what we have over the weekend. monday's picture, again quite a bit of cloud, a few glimmers of brightness here and there, one or two showers affecting the far north but most places dry once again and those temperatures may be up to a degree or so, highs of ten or 11 degrees. it stays pretty chilly throughout the week, there are signs of colder air returning to northern parts of the uk, again with the risk of wintry showers across some exposed coasts. welcome to bbc news — i'm duncan golestani. our top stories: the us becomes the country with more confirmed cases of coronavirus than anywhere in the world. the virus outbreak prompts a wave of closures and a surge in unemploymen — more than three million claim for benefit. as europe continues to be the worst affected region, leaders of the g20 countries promise to inject $5 trillion into the global economy. 115 people die from coronavirus injust 2a hours in the uk — as the government announces a multi—billion pound rescue package for the self employed. britons take to the streets to applaud
now on bbc news, hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk. i am stephen sackur. it may be a global pandemic that covid—19 has hardly united the world in a collective response. national governments are focused on self interest, not international cooperation and that could spell disaster for the world ‘s most vulnerable people if and when the virus spread through their communities. well, my guest today is the former uk foreign secretary, now president of the international rescue committee, david miliband. in this age of coronavirus, is the world getting the leadership it needs? david miliband, welcome to hardtalk. thanks very much, good to be with you. this terrible pandemic represents a huge challenge right across the world. if we are to generalise massively, at the outset of this interview, how do you feel the international community is handling the response? to generalise, badly. we know that some countries have handled the disease well. germany springs to mind. south korea as well but we know there has been far too much what i call to nihilism, head on the sand, hoping for the best and not enough of the group and unified action that is important, both in some countries, i'm talking chiefly about the united states where the holes in their safety net have been shown to be very serious, but also internationally, where there has been is little international leadership. the gym 20 seems asleep and the group of seven industrialised democracies could not make a statement and so we face a crisis, the bigger spices in 100 yea rs crisis, the bigger spices in 100 years in health terms and we have a very wea k years in health terms and we have a very weak governmental response where it matters. surely, you cannot be surprised that leaders and governments around the world right 110w governments around the world right now have turned inward and are putting all their priority on protecting their own citizens? that is what they are elected to do and it is what they must do. that is absolutely right and of course local action is absolutely key, the isolation that everyone is trying to practise, but we all know this is a disease of the connected world and a return to anything like normality, anything like the kind of global connections that existed before is not going to be possible without international action that addresses the wea kest international action that addresses the weakest links in the global chain as well as takes local action. we cannot have a future for what the israeli author ferrari calls a network of fortresses, that is no future at all to address the potential of humankind never mind the challenges of humankind and i think the wise leaders are taking wise action but a thinking regionally and globally as well — herrari. idsa many watching this interview would already be saying to themselves and to you that we don't wa nt to themselves and to you that we don't want to return to that completely open, globalised world. —— idsa, many watching. that makes the spread of pandemics so very easy. we mustn't return to a world with inequality and insecurities but we don't want a world where we cannot travel abroad and visit and where trade is so circumscribed it does not address needs and so i think that we must say a globalisation has to be changed and we need a different kind of globalisation that is more equal and sustainable, but i think that i world of fortresses, national fortresses, would think that i world of fortresses, nationalfortresses, would be a dangerous lesson to draw from this crisis. just a few days ago, your international rescue committee released a long and detailed report looking at the most vulnerable countries and communities in the world and assessing just what coronavirus might mean for them. we looked at south sudan, for example, which has a total of four ventilators in the entire country. syria has 11 and not only has a resident population but also a refugee displaced peoples of 11 million, venezuela lacks supplies. is it your belief that we have to assume coronavirus, this pandemic, will sweep through those most runnable places? yes, a matter of when and not if. a short window of opportunity to take vital preventative steps, hand washing facilities, triaging through testing, isolation centres for those who get the disease. true information to tackle fake news which is also right. but we have to prepare for a health emergency that is virulent and dangerous, given the density of population in many of the places you mentioned, many of the places you mentioned, many of the places that the international rescue committee works, given the weakness of the health system and given the underlying health conditions, remember, malnutrition, 50 million children under the age of five are acutely malnourished. these are all factors that drive the danger of the disease. i will also add that the report talks about a double challenge, yes, the health that challenge, yes, the health that challenge of coronavirus but also the collateral damage to economy and society that threatens to be a second consequence of the disease. alcohol is a simple one. simple to say, anyway, hard to do. take the preventative steps now and don't let it go by —— our call is simple. we will not get massive numbers of ventilators in but we can get primary care in and protect countries from the collateral economic and social damage, that the other thing from the macroeconomic response from the international monetary fund meeting this week but also the national and local efforts to make sure that aid reaches the people who need it. you say these words to deliver our easy but harder to deliver, and frankly impossible to deliver, and frankly impossible to be implemented. it is airily said by people like yourself that we must make sure clean water is available to people all around the world but there is no way in the next few weeks that will happen. that is the grim reality that so many hundreds of millions of people have lived with for years. they do not have access to clean water. there is nothing airily saying about saying that we have staff on the ground, 30,000 international rescue committee staff into hundred field sites in the world, ready to go to work and they can, they won't be able to go and get a hand washing station in every one of the houses of3 station in every one of the houses of 3 million people who have no hand washing facilities in their homes but they can establish communal and washing facilities for one in 1000 people and i'm certainly not pretending we can make would the failings of the last 20 years in the next two weeks, that would be absurd but equally to pretend we cannot do anything and cannot be done, and to leave those people in this situation, whether shortages and global medical kit that will exacerbate the problem. one of the focus of your teams are the displaced people, northern syria to the bangladesh were so many thousands wrecking gains are in those crowded camps —— is it true that those people are ever more suspicious of displaced people add corona virus is exacerbating tensions and suspicions ina way exacerbating tensions and suspicions in a way that you and your team will not be able to overcome? —— — rohingans. there it is the case in some places and i was on on the phone to my team and they were striking in the way they explained the way that the local host population has their own needs but actually the kind of virulent anti— refugee sentiment has not come to the fore, and it is a real danger and you are right to raise that and thatis and you are right to raise that and that is why we say the services of the international rescue committee are open to host populations as well as refugees and displaced people and remember when you're talking about displaced people, were talking about internal displacement in a country, citizens of the country, the people in italy and north—west area, his facilities are bombed by their own government, they are syrian civilians and this is not xenophobia, this is about filling for their fellow citizens and it is very important we take seriously the danger you raise but we also recognise there is evidence of how to counter those tendencies and one way is to make sure services are open. another way, which i think is vital, is to make sure economic support for areas that refugees and displaced people as well a social support. you are a former senior politician, former uk foreign secretary annie no more than most that in the context of a crisis, which are senior economists predicting that there will be an economic contraction between 5— 25% of gdp in the world ‘s richest nations, over this year it is impossible to imagine the kind of urgent, collective assistance being poured into the world ‘s disadvantaged places, i kind of initiative you talk of, when governments are looking at spiralling deficits, massive national debt. there is simply going to be in no position to deliver on your words. i would say two things to what you said. first of all, it is very possible to imagine it. the difficulty is not imagining the appropriate revolt —— response, the difficulty is predicting how it will happen given the myopia that dominates too much of the governing, around the world. the second thing that i think is very important is that i think is very important is that the argument that quote unquote there is not the money to tackle global problems is being exploited by governments around the world who are discovering that actually sustainable finances are important, in emergencies, you need to draw money and so for example the call we are making for special drawing rights for poor countries from the imf, that is something that tries to mirror some of the macroeconomic measures being ta ken mirror some of the macroeconomic measures being taken in countries like the us or the uk and make sure they are available for countries that are more heavily indebted in the developing world. i would say to you it is possible to imagine it. the difficulty is doing it but it doesn't mean we shouldn't stop arguing for it. do you think there should be a debt holiday that the imffor should be a debt holiday that the imf for example should forgo debt repayment from the world ‘s poorest company — countries for at least a year or longer? that should be on the table and it is vital that we do learn that countries who cannot get out of the debt trap even though that they are doing the right thing need help. for example, we know that jordan's debt to gdp ratio has gone from 50—90 plus % in the time they have been hosting syrian refugees. there has austerity programme in place hits bothjordanians and syrian refugees. they need help to get a sustainable base for that finance. this crisis should be the occasion to examine those issues. finance. this crisis should be the occasion to examine those issuesm a sense and i don't mean this in a pejorative way, you are sitting there, lecturing the world ‘s current leaders, having been in politics yourself recently, you know how hard it is but it seems to me you are also forgetting something really rather important about context. in your day job really rather important about context. in your dayjob you seek in new york city, i know you are not there at the moment for safety and health reasons —— you sit in new york city but nonetheless you know what is happening in new york. to think the american public will listen to your take on what needs to be done internationally when they are seeing their own country being ravaged by coronavirus and for new yorkers, sing their own city at the epicentre of the epidemic with so many people, particularly disadvantaged, black and latina new yorkers, being killed by this virus, do you really think that their horizon will go so very much wider quasi low look, i'm not lecturing anybody. i'm as afraid for anyone else for my own family and community and the city i'm living in. else for my own family and community and the city i'm living inlj else for my own family and community and the city i'm living in. i am a citizen of the uk. that is a very personal thing that we feel in this crisis and that this crisis in that senseis crisis and that this crisis in that sense is a great leveller. the people in the bronx, the area in your greatest hit by this disease, the area dominated by african—americans and hispanics, the idea that helping them makes it impossible to help people in south sudan where there are only four ventilators, that is really wrongheaded and that is not about lecturing and i think this striking thing if i look at my own organisation, we have not found that donations have dropped through the floor in the last month. we have found people are grateful for what they have but they also recognise, some of them, that this is a global crisis. to say something else to you thatis crisis. to say something else to you that is even more important. i was in government in the 2000 and certainly during the global financial crisis. i watched as gordon brown, he had on the show, i watch the chancellor, the now co—chair of the international rescue committee in new york, the organisation i now run, now the treasury secretary in the us when i was in government, i watch the way they address problems in their own country as one of a new global contract. they took action in 2008, 2009, and 2010 that was global action that served national purpose as well and i think that that lesson, and i'm not claiming credit for myself, i was not the finance minister, i am observing the way ministers and ministers raced to the occasion in the gfc and the need to rise to why are they not? there is no question that when the world public leading democracies in america first means nationalism, that a block on international cooperation, there is no question that when the group of seven leading industrialised countries meet and can't come to an agreement on a statement because the us insist on calling the virus not covert 19, but wuhan virus, there is no question that american leadership is absolutely essential. there is an extra element of this, because this isa extra element of this, because this is a crisis that is taking place when there is a second superpower. the chinese superpower is now is not a democracy, it is drawing different lessons about the right kind of government and my point would be it is especially important at this point that the world's democracies, not just point that the world's democracies, notjust in the geographic west, but the political west, they have to realise the stakes here, and the sta kes a re realise the stakes here, and the stakes are not just realise the stakes here, and the stakes are notjust about our local response to covid—19. they are about the global lesson about the right way to build a strong society, and one argument will be that it is through more autocratic government. another argument led by countries like germany which have shown how democracies combined with public trust to say no. it is about a democratic future. that is a really big argument. it can't take place without america playing an important role. can't take place without america playing an important role, you say, and yet donald trump is the reality of american political leadership. you are not going to see him waved goodbye to the white house tomorrow. are you suggesting that with donald trump in the white house, everything you want to see in terms of international leadership cannot happen? first of all, the congress of the us holds the purse strings was national aid, which we have been talking about in this interview, and it has been sustained and there is a new and further supplementary bill with $12 billion contribution, six times as much as the original world health 0rganisation un appeal. so we shouldn't forget that there are a number of aspects to us global leadership. but when it comes to the politics of this, i do think that on the one hand there is a debate about nationalism versus internationalism, and a second and related debate about democracy versus autocracy and they will come together and i think it is very important that we don't learn the wrong lessons from this crisis because if we are not careful, we will build a network of fortresses that we talked about in the first part of this interview, and we will find credit being claimed by authoritarian regimes for all the wrong reasons. but isn't the truth of this, and we have already talked about new york city, that if one is honest about the way the coronavirus pandemic has affected the world, as an individual, one may well feel safer right now in singapore, seoul, maybe beijing as well than one would feel in your home city, new york city, or indeed london. and that tells us something about what kind of governance has been most effective in tackling this challenge, doesn't it? yes, there is no question america first today america first in the league or coronavirus cases. the holes in the us safety net, the fragmentation of political leadership, the polarisation and loss of public trust, all of those are deep—seated in the american crisis here. and on the other hand, you have got the extraordinary american response, which is public—sector, private sector, civil society pulling together in quite remarkable ways. so you are seeing both sides of the american story, i think, in the really very serious conditions that exist here. you are right it is safer to be in berlin or singapore at the moment than it is to be in new york, and that is something that is going to really affect america's ability of a global leadership, it has to deal with his own home problems if it is going to be able to lead effectively internationally. the quote the writersjohn nicholls wait and adrian aldridge who write a lot on global affairs with some authority, they say this, asia has taken government seriously in recent decades while the west has allowed it to survive. you were part of the western system. did you and you now acknowledge that ossification, if i can use that word, has happened, and post coronavirus, something really profound has to change?” post coronavirus, something really profound has to change? i think that you can't make a blanket statement like that. if you look at the figures coming out of germany, for example, you can't say that their system of government has ossified and failed. it has responded in quite effective way. you can also find the nihilism in parts of asia as well, and so i am sceptical of saying that this is a confucian versus western issue. what i would say is that the politics of anger that has dominated the last ten yea rs, that has dominated the last ten years, that has dominated the period since the global financial crisis, the demonisation of foreigners, the demonisation of expertise, that does not stand us in good stead for fighting the corona crisis. and so if you are asking, does a different kind of politics have to come out of this coronavirus, my answer would be yes. the world is being changed by this crisis. i don't think there will be a snap back to the status quo, and there are different versions of that beautiful to what is quite dystopian. it is xenophobic, it does lead to really quite worrying, what is called a liberal democracy. you watch what is happening in hungary and anyone who ca res happening in hungary and anyone who cares about the future of europe in the future of democracy has got to be worried. 0n the other hand, there are be worried. 0n the other hand, there a re lessons be worried. 0n the other hand, there are lessons that ice thinks speak to the kind of global action that is necessary as well as the local systems of trust that are vital. and thatis systems of trust that are vital. and that is a contest about the lessons of this crisis even as we are trying to battle it. right. politics is a completed mix of trends and individual influences, leaders in particular. there is a leadership coming from in the industrialised rich world? you have made it very plain in this interview you don't think it is coming from donald trump, at least not leadership you would want to see. so where are you looking optimistically for the kind of leadership that get us through this and takes us into a better place? i think there is a real struggle at the moment. no country can say we have done it perfectly. i have mentioned countries like germany and south korea, but i don't wa nt to germany and south korea, but i don't want to put all of my chips on those squares. i am saying that out of this crisis, there needs to be a new reckoning, and it has got to be a reckoning, and it has got to be a reckoning about global as well as local inequality. yes, the issues in the bronx, but the issues in south sudan, there has to be a reckoning to do with quite profound issues about the way the democracies of the world beyond public trust and co—operate with each other. it also raises some profound issues about do you trust google or the government when it comes to the tracing of your contacts. those are political, and i think rather than looking to say, yes, this is a politician that will lead us out of the crisis, we don't know yet, we don't know how long this crisis will last, but my argument is we can't, no politician who thinks they will go back to the status quo is going to succeed. yes, it seems to me nobody really denies that this will be some sort of watershed moment, and that history is going to move very fast. the historian ian golding put it, ian golding i should say, he said, look, there is a way of thinking about this that relies on our knowledge of 20th—century history —— goldin. will we react to this pandemic and its implications as we did after world wari implications as we did after world war i when the world basically went into camp ‘s comment was divided, fragmented, impoverished and sowed the seeds of terrible conflict, or will we be more like we were after world war ii when we built multilateral institutions, we tried to develop international trust and a collective intent? which way are we going? well, i am an optimistic person even in pessimistic times. i think that rationality does beat quack theories, i think rationality tells you that rebuilding a global is essential for a connected world and covid—19 is the disease of the connected world, world war i is aftermath is a terrible lesson in failed leadership. we cannot afford that again. we need to see the kind of vision that helps drive the world forward after world war ii, and so even though these are dark times, i don't want to make them darker. so i will put my bets on the optimistic side of human nature. david miliband, we have to end there, but thank you very much indeed for being on hardtalk. thank you very much. hello there. yesterday was a warmer kind of day. again, plenty of sunshine for most of us, withjust a little bit of high cloud crossing the skies. we had some rather dramatic skylines, for example, in the shropshire area. now, it was the north—east of the uk that had the day's highest temperatures. durham and parts of aberdeenshire seeing highs of 21 degrees, but look at this drop in temperatures on the way through thursday. for some, it's going to be around 10 or 11 degrees cooler. the cooler weather is arriving with a cold front. it's this stripe of cloud that's sinking its way southwards across scotland right now, leaving the clearest of the skies and the lowest temperatures further south across england and wales, where there could just be a few patches of frost in the countryside. for thursday, well, it gets a little warmer across england and wales, but across the far north of scotland and increasingly into eastern scotland and north—east england, we've got the colder air setting its way in. now, into the afternoon, we may well see a few brighter spells for 0rkney and shetland, but otherwise, for much of scotland, it's a cloudy day. the cloud could be thick enough for an occasional spot of rain. not amounting to too much, mind you. for most, it will stay just about dry. it's going to feel a lot colder, though. temperatures 9 to 11 degrees, 11 degrees the high in durham rather than the 21 we had on wednesday. further southward across england and wales, again, most areas will have lots of dry weather and sunshine. there'll be a little bit more in the way of higher cloud moving in, and, yes, we could see just a few isolated showers across south—west england, southern wales, but even here, the majority will probably stay dry. a little warmer, temperatures into the low 20s more widely. for friday, an area of low pressure that's been affecting spain and portugal wobbles a little bit close to our shores, and it looks increasingly likely that we'll see some rain arriving. although the amount of rain you see from place to place across parts of england and wales is going to vary significantly. still mild, but those temperatures are falling back a little bit. highs of 17 in london, the cold air in scotland tending to seep down some of these eastern areas of england, knocking the temperatures back in norwich to just 12 degrees. now, the weekend, scotland stays fine and dry throughout, but it looks like we could see a little bit of patchy rain still left over across parts of england, wales and maybe northern ireland on saturday. sunday, for all of us, looks like the driest day of the weekend. that's your latest weather. this is bbc news with the latest headlines for viewers in the uk and around the world: president trump says the us is passing the peak of new coronavirus infections, despite the number of deaths doubling in a week. the data suggest that nationwide we have passed the peak new cases. a landslide election victory for south korea's governing party and its president as their handling of the coronavirus outbreak pays handsome dividends. is europe about to open up again? from being the epicentre of the crisis, now some countries are moving to ease restrictions. as the uk's lockdown is expected to be extended by three weeks, social care chiefs condemn the governments handling of the pandemic as "shambolic".