Adam Fleming (2:11)

So you meet their new Iron Lady Prime Minister.

Chris Mason (2:13)

Well, indeed, yeah. And then we will head back, probably having kind of circumnavigated the earth, I think. Cause by the time you get to Tokyo, I think the plane might just carry on and keep going east?

Adam Fleming (2:22)

Mm, I'm not sure they go that way also. Can you go the whole way to China without stopping or is this one of these ones where you gotta stop and like.

Chris Mason (2:29)

No, you can. We. We are going non stop to Beijing and, and then onto Shanghai and then on to Tokyo.

Adam Fleming (2:36)

So that's what Chris is doing on Tuesday. Let's find out what he's been doing on Monday in this episode of Newscast.

Chris Mason (2:41)

Newscast, Newscast from the BBC. Fat Boy Slim and me in the classroom doing our violin lessons.

Sarah Smith (2:47)

I was the tattletale in the class.

Chris Mason (2:48)

Can I have an apology, please? I trust almost nobody that daddy has to sometimes use.

Adam Fleming (2:54)

Next time in Moscow.

Sarah Smith (2:55)

I feel Delulu with no Salulu. Take me down to Downing Street.

Adam Fleming (2:59)

Let's go have a tour.

Chris Mason (3:00)

Blimey.

Adam Fleming (3:02)

Hello, it's Adam in the newscast studio.

Chris Mason (3:04)

At Westminster and Chris in the same studio as Adam.

Adam Fleming (3:07)

Right, this is getting to be quite a regular thing now and I don't mean you and me talking to each other face to face rather than down the line. Conservative MPs defecting to Reform because there was another one today and it was Suella Braverman, former Home Secretary.

Chris Mason (3:19)

Yeah, when you and I were talking on newscast and five Live on Sunday evening, I was weighing up whether or not I was making a mistake not heading to Manchester to see if I could chase Andy Burnham around. In the end, I concluded I wouldn't because I didn't think he'd want to say very much, which is true. Joe pike, our colleague, did some fantastic scurrying about and did get him on camera, but he wasn't keen on saying.

Adam Fleming (3:41)

Much, including the classic shot of Andy Burnham getting into a lift and the doors closing so that Joe could say the door has closed on him coming back to Westminster.

Chris Mason (3:48)

This is how television magic is made. Anyway, I stayed at Westminster marginally concerned I might be in the wrong place, which is a clear classic journalistic anxiety and getting on with various other things, not least this trip that's coming up. And then somewhat out of the blue. I mean, it's not that surprising in the grand scheme of things, but certainly as far as it coming today is concerned, reform hosting a news conference which purportedly was about veterans, and Soella Braverman turns up in quite the moment, quite the kind of choreography around her defection. And yeah, this is the fourth big name this month, the third MP in the last 10 days. It's quite the. It's quite the momentum they've got.

Adam Fleming (4:31)

My favorite bit of the defection, though, came later on because they then did a news conference, her and Nigel Farage and after you'd asked your question, the other Chris, Chris Hope from GB News asked a question and then Nigel Farage said, well are you surprised? And Chris Hope said no because actually people had been watching Suella Braverman and kind of defection watch for a while. Yes.

Chris Mason (4:51)

So I missed Chris Hope's question. I needed the answer because I had to scurry out in order to get back for the six o' clock news. So yeah, look, if you were drawing up a list of likely conservatives to defective Reform UK sort of problem would have been pretty near the top. But I still think it's quite something. I mean defections are pretty rare at Westminster and we've just had three in a fortnight or 10 days. Four if you include Nadeem Zahawi, albeit no longer, no longer an mp. So I think that's quite something. You know, former Home Secretary someone, I mean I've known her for 25 plus years and like being a Conservative sort of in her DNA or at least it wasn't at lunchtime. I mean she would say she is still a Conservative. In fact she said in the news conference about the Conservative Party isn't a Conservative party. So in that sense she thinks the party has left her, which is often the mantra of the defectee. But yeah, as I say, still quite a thing. I mean and in terms of her.

Adam Fleming (5:44)

Tone, it was quite emotional. So in the morning when she revealed herself, she was quite emotional and then in that news conference later she was using quite powerful analogies like an unhappy marriage.

Chris Mason (5:54)

Yeah, yeah, completely. So I mean in the news conference you got a sense of the kind of emotion. We've said this before but I think it's worth saying again, you know people, a lot of people, when they defect, they're leaving in, they're leaving an affiliation, if you like, that they have had for decades, decades and decades. On a human level, it's a big moment. I thought you could see it in Cuella Braverman's facial expression when she finds herself uttering out loud words that, I don't know, maybe she's practiced in the mirror or whatever, but you're suddenly saying it out loud and you can't say that's it, that's it, you have crossed, you have done, you have done it. And then the emotion that that provokes and it's a kind of one way direction. Now in that news conference I'm flicking through my notebook in classic, your huge notebook. I like A4 news. A4, yeah, can't be doing with those notebooks. They're too small, you know. The Conservative Party is a social democratic left leaning party. Chino Conservative in name only. The fear, insecurity and weakness of Kemi Badenok. That was a reference to how long, in her view, it had taken the Conservatives to come around to the view of leaving the European Convention on Human Rights, which Sweller Bravo had advocated for some time. The Conservative Party is full of craven, superficial careerists. So there's a pattern in these news conferences. So the newly arrived former Conservative goes through a process of publicly saying their previous party was a shower and then the second thing they do, or at least the last few have done, and Robert Jenricks certainly did, is to paint this dividing line. They're really keen on reform uk, which is to say that Britain is broken, which is something the Conservatives say is not true. They'll point to lots of what they see as problems with the uk, but they say that doesn't add up to the country being broken, which reform absolutely are of the view of.

Adam Fleming (7:35)

And there was quite a lot of activity in Toryland today, wasn't there? Because Andy street, sorry, Sir Andrew street, former Mayor of the West Midlands, and Ruth Davidson, former Tory leader in Scotland, have launched this new group.

Chris Mason (7:46)

Yeah.

Adam Fleming (7:47)

What are they trying to do?

Chris Mason (7:48)

Prosper uk? So I think if we take a little bit of a step back and we can look at some of the catalysts in this group and they're not all of one mind, but if we take a couple of steps back, the Brexit process flushed out in quite a sort of brutal way, those who might vaguely fall under the label of being one nation, Conservatives, Wets, to use the label of old, the left of the Conservative Party. These labels are never perfect. They never quite describe anyone to the full extent. And as I say, in this group you have Andy Street, Sir Andy Street, I've forgotten about his knighthood, actually should have mentioned that on the radio earlier. Sorry, Sir Andy.

Adam Fleming (8:27)

He doesn't seem like the kind of person who'd be bothered.

Chris Mason (8:29)

No, I don't think so.

Adam Fleming (8:30)

I think Andy is his brand.

Chris Mason (8:32)

Baroness Davidson, Ruth Davidson, the former Conservative leader in Scotland. I think he described both of them fairly well.

Adam Fleming (8:39)

Baroness Davidson of podcasting.

Chris Mason (8:40)

Indeed, as being sort of broadly on the, if you like, of the left of the party, funny enough. Full disclosure, I was just talking about this on the Radio four six o' Clock News and our esteemed fellow podcaster Nick Robinson pointed out to me that there are some others within the, within this grouping. Who would they fit under that label quite so comfortably so Philip Hammond, the former Chancellor, Andrew Tyree. So Philip Hammond was very much on the remain side of the Brexit argument, but you might argue, economically, it's not quite in the same place as some of the others, blah, blah, blah. Anyway, I think it's fair to say quite a few folk who, for whatever reason felt squeezed out, either literally or psychologically, from the sort of key tables of the Conservative Party of much of the last at least half decade, are setting up this vehicle, arguing that there is a chunk of the electorate who currently might feel homeless. And I just think it's quite interesting that they're finding voice and finding expression again. And you sort of wonder, where does it leave Kemi Badenok, who is simultaneously losing folk, broadly speaking, on the right of the party? Again, these labels are only of so much use, but the likes of Robert Jenrick and Suella Braverman and Andrew Rossendahl, whilst at the same time you've got these sort of folk who are finding a voice again, very loosely, broadly on the left of the Conservative Party, Kemi Badenoch is someone of the right of the party, losing people to her right and then people to her left, if you like, are getting noisy. She's quite discombobulating, I think, for her, in the same way that the Andy Burnham Stu, another Andy who is a mayor, the other Andy's a former mayor, is doing his stuff where reform are often central to that conversation too.

Adam Fleming (10:25)

Although I wonder, kind of counterintuitively, some people are saying Suella Braverman leaving the Conservatives is helpful for Kemi Badenok because she's got quite extreme positions that might be off putting to people who are quite kind of more center right. And then you've got the idea that actually this group gives Kemi Badenuk a lot of kind of ballast in the Conservative Party to drag that bit, to stop it being dragged to the right by reform and to bring it into a more centrist position where there were more voters potentially.

Chris Mason (10:54)

Well, indeed.

Adam Fleming (10:54)

So actually, my initial reaction was none of these things. Neither of these things are helpful for Cami Badenoch. But actually, you can then think of them both being quite helpful.

Chris Mason (11:01)

Possibly it's the extent to which she would be comfortable with that scenario, given her, you know, her sort of core, how she would see her core conservatism. So I just think it's really interesting, as I say, you've got these contortions being inflicted on the Conservatives and then a key part of our conversation, which I think is where we left our last episode on Sunday evening of what's going on in the Labour Party is that you've got the Labour Party who are horrified at the prospect, the possibility of losing the general election, albeit a long, long, long way down the track to reform uk. And that is turbocharging a lot of the conversations about Keir Starmer and his competence or otherwise as the party has to come to a judgment. And in so doing, given where Labour are in the opinion polls, clearly a factor in where Labour are in the opinion polls is where Reform are. Is this speeding up of a sense of asking those big questions about Keir Starmer. And in that context, the potential big name rivals have a more of a greater prominence as a result. You know, as we said, I think on the last episode, if Keir Starmer was hugely popular and was sweeping all before him in Parliament, et cetera, et cetera, Wes treating Andy Burnham would matter much less because they would be less threatening. And part of that is because of where Labour finds itself vis a vis Nigel Farage and reform.

Adam Fleming (12:28)

Have you been picking up any consequences among the Labour Party for Keir Starmer's decision to block him on Sunday?

Chris Mason (12:35)

I think broadly speaking, Downing street will be happy in that the alternative scenario would be one where Andy Burnham was heading towards becoming Labour's candidate. It wasn't guaranteed, there was other hoops to jump through, etc. Etc. With all of the hullabaloo that would have followed, I mean, unquestionably, versus what they've done, where Andy Burnham has gone back to doing his day job. I mean, I'm sure he'll have something more to say in time where his immediate path to Westminster is blocked, where the potential oxygen grabber of his candidacy in a by election that would have stolen attention from all of those other elections in Wales, in Scotland, in local elections in England, at least for the next month or so and indeed after that. Because the assumption at the moment is that by election could happen in about a month. But let's see, a lot of the bandwidth for a conversation about who people might want to vote for would have been sucked up by the Andy Burnham conversation in one constituency out of 650 when there's all these other racist going on and that's not going to happen. So I think in the short term and even into the medium term, Downing street will be pleased with what they decided to do and had the willingness to do. But as we said before, it is symptomatic of their an underlying sense of their own weakness, which we'll see manifest itself down the track, particularly, by the way, if Labour lose the by election. Because if Labour lose that by election, which Andy Burnham hinted at the prospect of in that social media post midway through our last episode, then obviously the alternative hypothetical won't have happened, which is what would have happened if Andy Burnham had run. But people will say, I mean, not least Mr. Burnham himself, quite possibly. Well, it might have been different if I'd run. And then does it stick to Keir Starmer in that scenario, that he would have rather reform win than Andy Burnham win? Now, that might be a gross simplification.

Adam Fleming (14:35)

Of what he would get. Keir Starmer would get blamed for it.

Chris Mason (14:39)

In that case, but that argument would be made.

Adam Fleming (14:41)

And also. So that by election is gonna be in a couple of weeks, last week of February.

Chris Mason (14:44)

Yeah.

Adam Fleming (14:44)

I think now the story the government wants to be talking about today, kind of like their official business, if you like, is the unveiling of those reforms to the police in England and Wales that Shabana Mahmood, the Home Secretary, was kind of previewing on LK's show on Sunday. And so I've read the White Paper now and watched her statement in Parliament while you were off doing other things. So to my mind, it seems that there's three main things here. There's the reorganization thing for police forces in England and Wales. And the idea there, I think, is that the right type of crime gets dealt with at the right level. So there's gonna be national police service, which will deal with national crimes like terrorism or fraud. Then you have police forces at a regional level who will have the clout and the expertise to investigate things like murders. And then you'll have your local police forces within that who will deal with local crime like burglaries and things like that.

Chris Mason (15:34)

And do we have a number? Because it's 42.

Adam Fleming (15:36)

So there's going to be a review done. Classic Labor. There'll be a review which will report by the end of the summer. So I think that gives us to, what, mid, late September, maybe end of.

Chris Mason (15:47)

The summer, in political terms is like November.

Adam Fleming (15:49)

Exactly, exactly. The autumn budget in December.

Chris Mason (15:52)

Exactly.

Adam Fleming (15:52)

And so I think that. So we'll now have a good few months of speculation about, well, which forces will be merged to become a regional force.

Chris Mason (16:00)

Then you're only sort of two and a half years or under three years away from.

Adam Fleming (16:06)

No, this document is explicit that it's a two Parliament process that will have to be continued in the next month.

Chris Mason (16:11)

And therefore, I just wonder, so when did you and Westminster first entangle 2006. Okay, so this is about the right.

Adam Fleming (16:19)

When Charles Clark was resigning as Home Secretary.

Chris Mason (16:22)

So one of the things I remember doing when I was working on the regional desk here at Westminster for BBC Local Radio was the whole business, when Labour were lasting government of police service reform, as they call it. And this was about police mergers. And it never happened because it was so controversial in England and Wales. It did happen later in Scotland with the formation of Police Scotland, but, yeah, it didn't happen. And what intrigues me here, whatever the case that might be made for or against this argument, is that given its time frame, what are the chances that come the next general election, opposition parties could run on a ticket. I'll vote for us. And save your local force now. Now, whether that is a good idea or not, in crime prevention, crime tackling terms is one thing. The other thing is a kind of local affinity thing, that sort of sense that I live in Cheshire or Gloucestershire or wherever it might be, and that sense of closeness and proximity and history and heritage.

Adam Fleming (17:20)

And I imagine in that imaginary election campaign, we've just conjured up out of nothing. Shabana Mahmood, who may be Prime Minister at that point, if the rumors are to be believed, would say, but hang on, you can only have the extra police officers that we are promising if you do the work of reforming the police service. So you can see the argument might not just be get rid of police forces or not, it might be more complicated.

Chris Mason (17:42)

Yeah, and we've seen similar carrots being dangled, haven't we, in the context of the mayoral model being introduced into local government and other elements. If you feel like changes of structures of government, or in this instance, structures of the wider state, and trying to either make the case for it or incentivise it amongst those in the thick of it.

Adam Fleming (18:04)

And the other two bullet points from the three bullet points of these reforms are embracing AI and setting up a new organization with some big funding to help the police embrace the use of artificial intelligence. Again, likely to be controversial because look at what people say about facial recognition, which is being rolled out more widely. And thirdly, this idea of a set of new national policing standards so that the public can better hold the police to account and also individual officers will have to live up to, so it'll be easier to keep them trained and easier to fire them if they're not living up to those standards.

Chris Mason (18:38)

Intriguing.

Adam Fleming (18:39)

Right, Chris, before you go, quite a few people have emailed us newscastbc.co.uk. asking that perennial question of why does a defection not automatically trigger a by election. The answer is it just doesn't.

Chris Mason (18:52)

The answer it doesn't. And the reason it doesn't is that it is the person's name on the ballot paper that is associated with the ticket to Parliament. Now clearly a significant motivator for a lot of voters, probably the vast majority of voters in any given election is the affiliation of said person, in other words, the party. Now people, you know, individuals might build up a sense of loyalty or the opposite if they've kicked around in a patch for a while. But party affiliation is usually the biggest determinant of success or otherwise. And hence you get this sort of disjuncture, this feeling of, well frankly some people just feel let down that you might have faithfully voted Conservative in Soralla Braverman's corner of Hampshire and to discover you've now got a Reform mp. And this kind of, this very thought with her defection kind of cuts both ways because the Conservatives are making the point that Reform finished fourth in that patch and therefore there might be a lot of people who voted Conservative who are now irritated and the Reform support was relatively small. If you're Suanna Braverman, you might make the argument that the reason for that is that her politics were very clear and she was able to appeal to long standing instinctive big C Conservatives as well as recent those recently drawn towards reform, but would happily back Suella Braverman. So the reason is that it is the name, not the party on the ticket and the tradition, or what has often been the case, but not exclusively been the case, is that when defectors defect they don't tend to trigger byelections. There were two examples, weren't there, when by elections did happen. Douglas Carswell in Clacton when he joined UKIP from the Conservatives and Mark Reckless in Rochester and Strood in Kent when he did the same. They both held by elections and both won them under their new affiliation. But that is not normal as much as many people might argue that it is the noble thing to do.

Adam Fleming (20:47)

Which reminds me of going to cover one of those by elections and bumping into the two of them at the train station. And they then gave me a lift to their campaign event, which was the first thing I was going to film from my piece and I thought I just cannot be seen getting out of a car with these two. They're just giving me a lift. So actually it was ultimately saving the license fee payer cause it meant it didn't have to get a bus or a taxi.

Chris Mason (21:06)

So I've had Two similar incidents to that. So one was literally an hour ago as we record, which is I went into the Reform UK news conference with Suella Braverman and Nigel Farage and plunked myself down on the front row and then realized as time went on that the Reform MPs were all sitting next to me and I was the only journalist on the front row. So at which point I thought I should scuttle a few rows back to, you know, cause that was clearly a spot for reforms MPs. So yeah, and then the other one was Ed Davy. Once I was doing a general election piece in Greater Manchester and I was late and I jump out of the car and start charging to this news conference on the top of a hill where he was painting beakers with the Mancunian Bee on it. And this car door flies open in front of me and I'm thinking, oh, somebody else is late. Thank goodness for that. It was Ed Davy. He piles out. So he was almost late for his own event.

Adam Fleming (21:51)

Well, there you go. Political history, how it could have unfolded differently. Chris, safe travels.

Chris Mason (21:55)

Thank you.

Adam Fleming (21:57)

Now, before me and Chris were chatting, I recorded a conversation with my podcasting cousin Sarah Smith from AmericasT. And we were talking about the wave of protests that has greeted a shooting of an intensive care nurse called Alex Pretty in Minnesota by Border Force officials. This follows a shooting in the same city a couple of weeks ago by officials from ice, the Immigration and Customs and Enforcement unit of a mum called Renee Goode. And it's caused huge political uproar and I wanted to catch up with Sarah to find out what is going on. And I started the conversation by asking Sarah about the competing narratives that are being put forward by people who have viewed the footage of the killing.

Sarah Smith (22:41)

So there are two extreme and opposite stories being told very, very quickly. The Department of Homeland Security and Kristi Noem. For instance, the Homeland Security Secretary came out to say that this is somebody who was posing a danger to agents, that he was a men on the streets of Minnesota and that the agents operated in self defense because they were in fear of their life. And she mentioned that he had a gun with him, which is true, although in her statement she made it sound as though he was brandishing this weapon at ICE agents, whereas in fact it was in a holster on his hip the entire time. On the other side, his family have asked the administration to stop telling sickening lies about him and his motives. And a lot of people have been able to draw their own conclusion from watching videos from various different angles of exactly what happened. And a lot of people have concluded watching that, that this was somebody who posed no threat to these agents. The only time his gun was removed from its holster was when an agent took it off him and removed it from the scene. It's unclear why they tackled him to the ground in the first place, when all he seemed to be doing was helping up a woman who'd fallen over after being pepper sprayed, why it took so many agents to pin him down on the ground, and why they decided whilst holding him down there, that he posed any kind of threat and shot him. But, I mean, there were several administration officials rushed to say that he was planning a massacre. That was why he had taken his weapon with him. And to very quickly also say, you cannot bring loaded weapons to protests unless you expect something like this to happen. Which, of course, is in complete violation of the treasured Second Amendment, which says that Americans do have the right to bear arms, even when they're attending protests.

Adam Fleming (24:31)

Yeah, it's interesting that it's become a debate about gun control, but sort of from a different direction from what we're used to.

Sarah Smith (24:38)

Yes, because this one incident has slightly changed the tenor of Republican and conservative response. You've had quite a few Republican senators and Congress people coming out and saying that they're very, very uncomfortable about what happened. Several governors very critical of the way ICE has been operating in the streets of Minneapolis. Some people who are normally unbelievably loyal to Donald Trump, very, very critical about what they've seen. And one of the reasons, because of this suggestion that Alex Peretti was somehow asking for this because he had a weapon with him, and people who really, really firmly believe in their right to take legally held weapons wherever they want to, are pushing back against that notion. Other people are very upset about the First Amendment, which is the right to free speech, which gives you the right to protest on the streets. Is that being hampered by the way in which so many protesters are being arrested and detained? And does that breach the Fourth Amendment, your right against them? Illegal stop and searches and seizure and detention? So you actually have quite a few people on the right for different reasons. Some of them who just shocked by what they're seeing happening in the streets, and some of them who are constitutional absolutists, think that what you're doing here is seeing federal agents in Minnesota breaching the fundamental constitutional rights of Americans and citizens.

Adam Fleming (26:03)

And in terms of getting to the bottom of what actually happened in a way that maybe more people could unite around, it sounds that even that like some kind of investigation into this is quite polarized as well.

Sarah Smith (26:15)

Oh, yeah. So the ICE themselves will investigate this and a lot of people will have no faith whatsoever in whatever conclusions they come to. And as we were just discussing, a lot of politicians don't feel they need to wait for any kind of investigation to establish the facts before they go out and put their own story out there. State officials working to the Democrat Governor Tim Waltz are also trying to investigate this. They're being hampered somewhat by ICE who don't want a state investigation and say that they've got no right to investigate them because they're federal agents. But nonetheless, the state police are trying to investigate this, get hold of whatever evidence they can that wasn't already swept away by ICE agents. And there will be a real battle over the jurisdiction of this, whether the state can try to charge these federal agents with manslaughter, for instance. If it goes that far, that will be a legal battle in itself. And interestingly, by coincidence, but importantly, a US Judge actually has to take a decision today, Monday on whether or not it's legal for ICE agents to be in the streets of Minnesota at all. The state has taken a case asking the courts to tell the 3,000 immigration agents that there are in Minnesota to go home. And that decision will be reached at some point today as well as well.

Adam Fleming (27:35)

And where is Donald Trump in all of this? Because usually we can expect him and as he has been in the past when it comes to ice, be quite gung ho about what those officials are allowed to do and very, very critical of the people who are protesting or kind of pushing back against them. But equally, Donald Trump is not always bull in a china shop. He is very receptive to public opinion if he feels it's turning against him.

Sarah Smith (27:58)

Yeah. And I think he can sense that he, he might end up on the wrong side of public opinion if he is as bullish about this as some of his administration officials have been. He's been much more measured in what he's said and talking about wanting to wait for the results of an investigation that they need to review everything. Even in the case of Renee Goode, who was shot just over two weeks ago, he wasn't quite as critical or as harsh in his language as somebody like J.D. vance, the Vice president, was. He's been playing it a bit more carefully. But the really interesting development is that he is sending his borders are Tom Homan up to Minneapolis to take charge of the ICE operation there. Now, this is somebody who is a real immigration hawk who has been in charge of A pretty strict clampdown on the southern border, people trying to get across there. But he hasn't been saying the incendiary things that other people at the head of the FBI and the head of Homeland Security have been doing. He's been quite measured in his response to what's happened in Minneapolis. And I think it's very telling that he is being sent to take charge of this operation and to take the heat out of it. I would say to crack down a bit on the tactics that are being used on the streets. And that's a sign that Donald Trump can see that there is political danger in this, because people can look with their own eyes and see these videos that are put up on social media that have been shot by protesters. The video of Renee Goode being shot in her car has been seen by more than 80% of Americans. And there's no reason to assume that the videos of Alex Pretty will be viewed by any future pure people. This is something that everybody is very, very gripped by. And the administration can tell you as often as they like that this is somebody who was threatening the life of ICE agents. If that's not what you see with your own eyes as you watch this video evidence, then there is a limit to how much you are prepared to believe administration officials, no matter how much they align with your political sentiments.

Adam Fleming (29:55)

And when I was doing five Live on Sunday night, I was chatting to a US Former military guy, and he was saying maybe one of the ideas could be that you change the rules of engagement for ICE so that the firearms use becomes less central. Can you imagine a world where this big ICE deployment, which is happening in many states, not just just Minnesota, sort of changes or is different, or maybe even they're withdrawn.

Sarah Smith (30:23)

Well, it may be scaled back if the administration sees too much political danger in the this it does appear, not just from these two fatal incidents, but from videos we've seen in other states of the way in which protesters are being handled or the way in which raids are conducted, that these are not people necessarily who are sticking to every letter of the rules and guidelines about how they may conduct themselves. So you can change the rules as much as you like, but it's the training of the officers. The number of ICE agents that there are in the country doubled very, very quickly last year. So I think there are some very significant questions about how well trained these guys are, about if they even know when the use of force is justified and whether they're just too trigger happy, whether that's because they're scared for their own safety or because they think they have complete immunity to do whatever they want to. So it will be fascinating to see whether or not anybody does end up being charged for this. And also the way in which, which they try to contain these agents. And well, and I don't think any, nobody wants to see another fatal incident. What are they prepared to do to try and stop that happening? It's both a very, very important practical question, but in America at the moment, it's a political one as well right now.

Adam Fleming (31:39)

And Sarah, you know, I like to end on a philosophical note. I notice most news stories in America these days end up being about the fate of the nation or the fate of democracy or freedom, liberty, the end of society as we know it, or the birth of new society that we've never known before. This story, though, seems to have taken those elements to the max, really. It's become very existential, really, for America in a lot of people's minds.

Sarah Smith (32:07)

It has, and for two reasons, I think. One, because it's like, like an ink blot test in terms of looking at the same image and people seeing different things in it. Whether they see, you know, ice brutality or whether they see people using measured force. And being that these protesters have no to be on the streets and are asking for what happens to them essentially. So it's very, very divisive in that way. People looking at the same evidence and coming to different conclusions. But also because of the way in which it is about people's fundamental constitutional rights as well as about the, the big political argument of the day, people do see it as rather existential. Lots of commenters over the weekend were saying, okay, this is the point at which we have to say that this is autocratic rule from the Trump administration. Well known people saying, oh, I never wanted to use the word fascist because throw that around, it devalues the word in itself. And it's a cheap political argument if this is not totalitarian control you're looking at. But now I have to use the F word because things have gone so far and people getting extremely het up about the way in which they're discussing this and whether it truly is the end of America as we knew it. At the same time, of course, as we're debating whether we've come to the end of the rules based order in the rest of the world. It's a big week, shall we say, for the Trump administration. If people, people are debating both. Yeah, the end of the American Republic and its place in the globe.

Adam Fleming (33:34)

Sarah, thank you very much.

Sarah Smith (33:35)

Lovely to talk to you, Adam. Bye bye.

Adam Fleming (33:37)

And that's all for this episode of Newscast. Thank you very much for listening. We will be back with another one very soon. Bye bye. Newscast.

Chris Mason (33:44)

Newscast from the BBC. From one newscaster to another, thank you so much for making it to the end of this episode. You clearly do, in the words of Chris Mason, ooze stamina. Can I also gently encourage you to subscribe to us on BBC Sounds?

Sarah Smith (34:00)

Tell everyone you know.

Chris Mason (34:01)

And don't forget, you can email us anytime@newscastbc.co.uk or if you're that way inclined, send us a WhatsApp on +440-330-1239480. Be assured I promise we listen to to everyone.

BBC Announcer (34:31)

At the BBC. We go further so you see clearer with a subscription to BBC.com you get unlimited articles and videos ad free podcasts, the BBC News channel streaming live 24. 7 plus hundreds of acclaimed documentaries trees from less than a dollar a week for your first year. Read, watch and listen to trusted independent journalism and storytelling. It all starts with a subscription to BBC.com. find out more at BBC.com unlimited.