C (4:01)

Well, in answer to your first question, Georgina, this is the first time that a US President has been invited for two state visits to the UK but it isn't as President Trump has claimed, the first time anybody has been invited twice. Two Scandinavian monarchs in the past have had two state visits, Queen Margrethe of Denmark and King Olaf of Norway. Nevertheless, it is a very rare honour, as you say. It's important, I think, to recall why the was issued in the first place. When Donald Trump was re elected in November of last year, the British government was very anxious to find any way at all that it could ingratiate itself with him. After all, we had just had a general election here which had resulted in a huge parliamentary majority for a Labour government, a center left government very much of a different political persuasion from Mr. Trump. So what could the UK offer Mr. Trump that would make him feel good about the UK answer? A royal visit. Everybody knows he is very keen on the royal family. He's very keen on gold and glitter and bling. And we've got plenty of that, particularly at Windsor Castle. That's where he's going to be spending the today and he's going to have a wonderful time.

A (5:21)

Tom, what do you think that Trump wants out of this?

E (5:26)

Well, the hint was really standing outside of the White House before he boarded Marine One yesterday on his way to Andrews. He said look, this is all about really Windsor. And then Robin is absolutely right. He loves the pomp. The ceremony. You guys are probably gonna like this. But this is not a radio story, this is a TV story. It is all about the optics. It is all about the ceremony. This is a made for American breakfast television, if you will trip on the back of that. Yes, there are some political implications. There could be talk of things like the Chagos Islands behind the scenes. Okay. Talking about that. The fact that the UK and some other European states may soon be recognizing Palestinian lands, that that is out of step with with Trump. Freedom of speech may come out, but in the public domain it's Going to be positive, small incremental steps. Maybe some talk about increasing, if you will, business dealings on the technical side, the possibility of maybe having joint efforts in the field of nuclear power. As we all know though, even if those things are signed, both of these guys are going to be in the, in the rear tail light mirrors. Those things take many, many years, maybe a decade to come to the fore. Ukraine as well might be talked about behind closed doors. But the big focus is today. Everything royal, the politics, wait a day, that is for Thursday.

A (7:06)

I mean, Robyn, Tom is talking about this as a made for television event and in fact we've already seen some, some visuals which were very arresting, which was an image of Trump alongside Jeffrey Epstein projected onto the walls of windsor.ca what form British opposition, public opposition to the visit is taking. I mean, we know four people have been arrested for that so far, but are we expecting more? And will that disrupt the whole wonderful televisual aspect of this visit that Trump so desperately wants?

C (7:40)

It's important, I think, to remember that Mr. Trump is extremely unpopular in the UK. I saw an opinion poll just the other day which suggested that 80% of British voters haven't unfavorable opinion of him. So, yes, there are going to be protests, particularly in Windsor, where he is spending the day today, but they will be kept well away from where he is going to be. I mean, Mr. Trump is going to be very well protected on this visit. He's spending one day at Windsor, at Windsor Castle, inside the walls where nobody's going to be able to get near him. And then tomorrow he'll be at Chequers, which is the British Prime Minister's country residence, a bit like Camp David in the United States. And again, the protesters will be kept well away. But yeah, there is a lot of opposition, public opposition, and I think there will be a potential embarrassment tomorrow, Thursday, when there will be a joint press conference with Mr. Trump and Keir Starmer, the British Prime Minister. And all questions will be, you know, they can be asked. The press will not hold back. And the focus, I'm afraid, much to Mr. Trump's displeasure, will be on his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. The focus, much to Keir Starmer's displeasure, will be on the sacking of the British Ambassador to Washington, Peter Mandelson, because of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Both of these men would rather have anything else in focus rather than that. But that's where the press's interest is going to lie.

A (9:16)

I mean, Tom, obviously they're going to particularly Starmer wanting to steer this onto the huge tech deals that are reportedly going to be signed with Microsoft and Google. Billions of dollars of investment coming into Britain. But I wonder if those big tech companies agree with Trump's public comments that UK tech regulations threaten free speech.

E (9:37)

Oh, very much so. We've seen the Telegraph kind of the attitude of the administration through remarks made by J.D. vance covering this, what, six years ago? Yes, the floating balloon of Trump. That's all water off the back of Trump. This is all about what Starmer can possibly get out of the equation. And of course, you're looking at a Prime Minister with the most unpopular numbers in recent years, many, many decades. So he has something that he has to fight for. Trump is not really fighting for anything politically in this particular trip. So we'll see what shakes out. So it's everything to gain for Starmer. Will he be around by Christmas time? Will he be around after the local elections in May? Big, big question marks. So, in that regard, if you want to put it in the parlance of Trump, Trump holds by far the best cards going into this political meeting tomorrow at Checkers.

A (10:39)

So, Robyn, I mean, what are the reputational and political risks for the UK government, and particularly for Starmer? As we've discussed very much on thin ice at the moment?

C (10:49)

Yes, I think Tom raises a very important point. One of the things that most impressed Mr. Trump about Keir Starmer when they first met was that Starmer had won this huge election victory. And as we know, Mr. Trump likes nothing more than somebody whom he regards as a winner. Now, he is well aware that Keir Starmer is in very serious political trouble. Now, he has met with the main right wing challenger, this new upstart party, Reform uk, and its leader, Nigel Farage. JD Van, the vice president, is very close to some of the people in that party. So I wouldn't be at all surprised if Mr. Trump has been asking his officials on the way over here, you know, just how important is this guy anymore? Is he still a winner? Or is he, as Tom suggests, perhaps not going to be around that much longer? Is he, in fact a loser? And everybody knows Mr. Trump does not have any time at all for people he regards as losers. So it's not going to be quite as much of a love fest as some of the previous meetings between these two men have been. If Mr. Trump has been persuaded that Keir Starmer is on the slide.

A (11:58)

And finally, Tom, I wonder how you see this visit shaping perceptions of Trump in Britain and of Britain in the us Will this enhance the special relationship.

E (12:08)

I think it will. But again, going back through the years, I had the pleasure of covering Reagan and Thatcher during Reagan's second term all the way to the present. Sometimes Washington and London are on the same page and it is, in fact, a love fest. Sometimes they're on different pages. But guess what? The special relationship carries on, regardless why. For defense reasons, for finance reasons, cultural reasons, fill in the blank reasons. So, yes, that will always carry on ad infinitum. And again, we're in interesting political times. Very much so this time because of there's a big question mark over Starmer. But again, as I think on the back of this, I think Trump will be talking about Windsor for years to come. Talking about a press conference the day after, probably not so much, but we'll see how that plays out. What kind of stinging questions may come to the fore?

A (13:03)

Tom Rivers and Robyn Lustig, thank you very much indeed. This is the globalist. It's 9:12 in Gaza, 7:12 here in London. Israel says Gaza is burning. As ground incursions into Gaza City began, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu set the goals as defeating Hamas and evacuating civilians, but he made no mention of the Israeli hostages. The move comes as a UN Team of experts accuses Israel of committing genocide in Gaza, allegations Israel rejects. Well, I'm joined now by Janet Anderson, president of the association of Journalists at the International Criminal Court. Janet, many thanks for joining us. What does this ground incursion in Gaza involve and how accurate are Israel's claims to already control significant amounts of territory?

B (13:57)

Well, without international journalists being allowed into Gaza, we're relying on reports that we can get of what's going on in the scene. What it looks like is quite a massive attack on Gaza City. What we understand is that they're trying to say that they're trying to wipe out what is left left of Hamas fighters there. There are some specific details that I've read about the different kinds of weaponry that they're using. But what I'm also hearing from a civilian population who is out of there is they're looking and seeing again, homes, residential areas all being massively destroyed in this attack.

A (14:40)

Netanyahu has not said anything about the hostages. I wonder how that's being interpreted alongside the remarks by Donald Trump saying that Hamas would be in big trouble if they use hostages as human shields.

B (14:55)

Well, we've never known exactly where the hostages are being kept. Each time. It looks like the Israelis have some specific information at different times that has led them to try to recover particular individuals. It could be that the Israelis are just concealing what they know again, and that they will, in fact, manage to rescue the. I think it's just tens of people who are left now. What we have seen is a demonstration administration by the family of hostages outside the prime minister's residence again in Jerusalem. And the polls that you see from Israeli society, it's not that people disagree necessarily with the attacks on Gaza, but they do still care about the hostages. So I think Netanyahu does look like he's using this in a political way to potentially keep himself in power and not necessarily listening to what the majority of Israelis want to see happen, which is the release of hostages.

A (15:56)

And even the IDF have said that that's what they really want. I wonder, how strong is the case made by UN experts that Israel's committing genocide? How does it differ from their previous findings of war crimes and crimes against humanity?

B (16:13)

Well, it does feel like the majority of international lawyers are coming to this conclusion. And as you point out, it is different from previous conclusions. But that is also because it is kind of a cumulative effect. What you had back at the beginning of last year, some kind of six months into the attack on Gaza, was from the International Court of Justice, the highest court of the United nations, the suggestion that there was a plausible risk of genocide to the Palestinian civilian population. And at that point, they called on Israel to stop the kinds of attacks that it was doing, which has not happened. So what you've seen since then is the issue of starvation come very much to the fore, which got a lot of press for a few weeks and then dipped down again in public consciousness. But it hasn't actually stopped. What the assessment of experts has been that there is starvation going on. So the prevention of the amount of food that is needed to sustain the population. We've seen massive movement of people, of civilians. And that's also connected to your first question about what is going on in Gaza City, where the Israelis told everybody that they have to now leave, but where exactly to go to? Somewhere in the south, how safe would they be? And then this massive bombardment. So experts are really kind of adding up all of these things, and they may have said to start with, hey, this looks like it might be some war crimes, because maybe it's not being the things that international lawyers like to use, like proportional, that they haven't been clear, but. And then they say, well, you know, it's targeting a lot of people. So then you start talking about crimes against humanity. But genocide is really special, unfortunately. I mean, it takes place an enormous amount of evidence to support it. And you have to support this idea that it is intended, that there is an intended destruction. And what the experts are now saying is if you take the public statements of Israeli officials, that's how you can actually prove intent in the end.

A (18:36)

And now that it's proven, now that the UN has made this announcement, to what end? How can this be used to end it?

B (18:46)

Well, I would just caveat to say that proven, no, it's not a court of law and it is not the whole UN that is saying this. This is an independent part of the un, the Commission of Inquiry, which reports to the Human Rights Council and to the General Assembly. So it's very significant, it's very important. It's, you know, they haven't pulled their punches at all. But, yeah, your question's entirely right. Now, what. What does anybody do? Every country that has signed up to the Genocide Convention, which is, you know, most countries in the world, including Israel, including the United States, including the uk, has a duty to prevent genocide, has a duty not to support genocide. So what does that mean? Does that mean sanctioning Israel in some form? If they accept the details of this report, We've had a statement by a parliament from the Foreign Office to say that they do not consider it a genocide and they would always wait until an international court has made that ruling. And that, in my world, in the Hague, is several years down the line until the International Court of Justice actually hears the details on the merits of the case for and against whether Israel is committing genocide as argued by South Africa against Israel. So a long time away before we will get an international court making that ruling.

A (20:19)

Janet, thank you. That's Janet Anderson there now. Still to come on the programme, it.

F (20:24)

Looks like fashion designers are ready to take risks again and start new brands. Within the last week, there were three consecutive announcements of creatives venturing into new businesses.

A (20:36)

Monocle's fashion director, Natalie Teodosi will tell us more on the new moves happening in the world of fashion. This is the globalist craft is its own reward. Which is why, at UBS, we're honoured to work alongside over 50 of today's leading Nobel laureates, each an expert in the art of economic science, bringing you engaging discussions, actionable insights and inspired solutions, all focused around the questions that shape our world today. For a better outlook, find a Nobel perspective. UBS banking is our craft. Well, let's continue now with today's newspapers. And joining me in the studio is Julia Jen, who is a Monocle researcher and writer. Good morning to you Julia, thank you for coming in. In the dark and the rain and everything else that signals autumn is Gilio. As we're reporting in our headlines, Tyler Robinson says the reason he killed the US Conservative activist Charlie Kirk is because he'd had enough of his hatred. So Kirk famously took on all comers, debating hot issues in front of mass audiences for viral hits. Now, this has prompted a think piece in the New York Times by Bret Stephens on the. On the vanishing culture of argument. Tell us more.

G (22:06)

Yes, absolutely. So this is a think piece. Yes, as you said, from Bret Stephens. And he's drawing on the example of his university that he went to, the University of Chicago, which in America and really around the world has held up as this model for free expression. So you've got plenty of statements and reports throughout history, you know, throughout its operating years, really supporting the idea that you have to. And as Bret Stephens writes here, you have to engage with an argument, you have to read it, become close and sympathetic to it. And he argues that this is really part of Westminster civilization. So he gives the example of Abraham bargaining with God to protect Sodom, to not allow Sodom to be destroyed, Socrates wandering around Athens picking up people from the crowd to debate with. And so he talks about how we perhaps have lost. Well, in fact, he says, definitely we've lost that ability to actually contend with someone. And he says, you know, Charlie Kirk wasn't perfect at this because as you talked about the kind of viral hits, and it's sort of for entertainment almost rather than for the pure joy of debating. But he says that that's something that we've lost specifically in America. And ominously, he ends the piece with, you know, that's when gunshots will ring out. But the reason I picked it was because I was thinking about my education, reading ancient Greek texts and going into Renaissance English texts and how people were really taught how to argue. And I was thinking, was I taught to argue at school? I don't know.

A (23:28)

But I mean, I suppose the wider point here is that that art, as long as well as dying is. We've become such a divisive world that it's just about not listening to somebody else's point of view. It's about killing them.

G (23:43)

Yeah, absolutely. It's a very dangerous precedent that this has created. And it's also something he talks about where identity wipes out arguments. So something that someone might hold within them, a viewpoint they will hold within them, that wipes out any other possibilities of any other views that someone else might hold. So we find that A very dangerous moment. As you were talking about what Tyler Robinson and said, you know, I can't listen to his hatred anymore. So that means that he must therefore stop existing. So that's what Bret Stephens thinkpiece is really bringing into question. How do we actually engage with each other? How do we actually talk to each other?

A (24:17)

Yes, we're going to see an example of that, I hope, in the state visit to see how these leaders speak to each other. Very much looking forward to that press conference which is coming up between Donald Trump and Keir Starmer. And I think that there'll be a lot of, a lot more think pieces along those lines when we see what comes out of that. Now let's go to Poland, because of course, as we know, there was a Russian drone attack on Poland and now this is affecting property, the property market there, because Poles are selling up and they're buying elsewhere. Where are they buying?

G (24:51)

So the number one kind of luxury location that they want to go to is Spain. Spain is the kind of, that's the ultimate aim because it's very far away, they say, from anything that's going on in Central or Eastern Europe. They provide examples in the article about how, you know, World War II stopped at the Pyrenees. So somehow there's this kind of hope that that will happen again. But also Bulgaria, Bulgaria is where, if you have a little bit less money, so under €100,000 to spend, that's where you'll go for that. Now, why I found this interesting was because lots of. So this is a reporter, she went to a property market fair in Krakow and she was talking to different people. Lots of people were saying, well, let's not spread panic. That's not why we're here to buy sor of property abroad because of the war. But then other people were being quite honest and saying, well, I need an address for my son. I need him to be registered somewhere else so that in case there's some conscription here in Poland, I need him to be able to quickly get across the border and flee. What's interesting about that is that we've seen that in Ukraine, mothers and fathers going to extreme lengths to be able to protect their sons from conscription and really, you know, buying them basically a life abroad, sending them to university abroad when they're still under that age, under that cutoff age, when you have to be conscripted into the army. So that's kind of of buying this ideal life abroad. But what also this really shows, I think, is actually what's happening in the property market in Poland, Poles have so much money to spend and they actually were writing about how, you know, prices in Spain and Poland are very much on par, if not higher, in Poland itself. So actually the spending power that polls have abroad is very high. They were actually in the ninth largest kind of proportion of buyers in Spain, foreign buyers in Spain, of property, and there was a 35% leap from the year before. So that's in 2024. So there's a really big kind of Polish move we can see from the GDP. It's got very strong GDP growth in Poland over 3%, which is very rare now in the Eurozone. So that's why that article really piqued my interest, because it really shows, you know, how dynamic the Polish market is. And actually it's lots of, lots of investment going from Europe into Poland itself into the property market. There are lots of developers buying up plots of land, building very nice developments, really. If you walk around kind of the suburbs of Warsaw, you'll see very beautiful things going on there, something Trump would probably be quite interested in. And we can see rent to buy market really growing there in Poland as well.

A (27:23)

But going back to what we were talking about, it being such a divisive world, one of the key issues is immigration and how people are reacting. And I wonder how Spain feels about an influx of new Polish residents.

G (27:36)

Yeah, I know, it's quite interesting. I guess we've got this kind of moving of population. So we had this. We have Spanish people in Britain, there's that resentment there potentially. And then Poles also going to Britain and now we have this other exchange. Definitely. And I think there's a culture shock as well between the very west of Europe and the very well and the east bit of Europe. And I think that that's also Poles, something Poles are very conscious about as well, because they're very protective over their borders. And we know they closed them actually in to immigrants. And we know that they're carrying out border checks between Lithuania and Germany still to this day, which is unprecedented really, in the Eurozone, and something, you know, Spain has never done that other countries haven't really done. And they're very protective over the kind of basically ethnic makeup of their country. So, yes, this is, I think, a really live sort of situation. But we know, we know that immigration within Europe doesn't spark as much kind of anxiety as other types of immigration.

A (28:32)

Well, Canadians who are hoping to relocate to Spain or even just visit it can now do so on a narrow body transatlantic flight. So tell us about this.

G (28:43)

Yes. So this Is Air Canada buying up the A321? Airbus narrowbody. This is a very, very popular type of plane, model of plane to use for narrow body long haul flights. And so they're buying up this kind of batch of these models and they'll arrive into their fleet in early 2026 and then in the next summer they're going to start this long haul flight from Montreal to Parma de Mallorca. They'll also use the A321 for other routes. So that's Montreal to Toulouse or Montreal to Edinburgh. Those are already routes that they operate. But they're going to use that A321 model for those routes specifically. And this is really part of a growing trend. So you want to take less passengers further. There might not be as much interest, but the interest that's there is definitely worth exploring. So the A321 is a really great narrow body for that. And actually, actually it operates 6 out of the top 10 kind of longest range long range flights around the world in 2025. So it's a great aircraft for doing that. You know, fuel efficient, you give more comfort, I guess to people. And actually in the business class section of that Palma de Mallorca route, they're going to have sort of a lie down flat option. So you'll have that kind of long haul, long haul comfort, but kind of just with less people around you. I don't know about you, but I don't really like being on a plane. We've got ton tons of people around me. It's much more relaxing to be in that single aisle.

A (30:11)

Yeah, that 2, 2 configuration is just great. Julia, thank you very much indeed. That's Julia, Jen there. And you're with the Globalist on Monocle Radio. And here's what else we're keeping an eye on today. The U.S. administration's first weapons aid package for Ukraine have been approved and could soon ship as Washington resumes sending arms to Europe. Kyiv, this time under a new financial agreement with allies. This is the first use of a new mechanism developed by the U.S. and allies to supply Ukraine with weapons from U.S. stocks using funds from NATO countries. Utah prosecutors say they will seek the death penalty for the accused assassin of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. And revealed new details of their case, including text messages in which he was alleged to have proclaimed privately confessed to the fatal shooting. Transcripts say that Tyler Robinson, 22, told his roommate and romantic partner that he committed the act because he'd had enough of Kirk's hatred. And actor, director and producer Robert Redford, who was both the quintessential handsome Hollywood leading man and an influential supporter of independent films through his Sundance Institute, died on Tuesday at the age of 80. Redford passed away at his home in Sundance in the mountains of Utah, surrounded by his loved ones. This is the Globalist. Stay tuned now for a look behind the headlines. Here's Monocle's fashion director, Natalie Teodosi.

F (31:54)

It looks like fashion designers are ready to take risks again and start new brands. Within the last week, there were three consecutive announcements of creatives venturing into new businesses. Olivier Taeskins, the Belgian designer whose collections for Nina Ricci Rochas and his now defunct eponymous label are still a point of reference in fashion, will debut Boloria in 2026 alongside the Belgian group We Are One. New York based Peter do has also introduced a new label, PD168. Rooted in the concep of the personal uniform, it's a collection of clean, lined, monochromatic pieces designed to adapt to the working lives of an array of customers, from chefs to dancers and consultants. Brian Rice, a Ralph Lauren and Oscar de la Renta veteran who shot his eponymous label 14 years ago, is also making a comeback with a smaller scale made to order model. Aware of the financial risks involved and the fierce competition by luxury luxury groups, fewer designers have been willing to start their own brands in the last five years. Now that the luxury market is slowing down and in need of fresh ideas, some creatives are ready to take the leap again. They could have as much impact in resetting the fashion system as the flurry of creative directors debuting new collections for the world's biggest heritage brands this September.

A (33:27)

That was Monocle's fashion director, Natalie Teodosi. And for more, you can sign up to our daily newsletter, the Monocle Minute. Head over to monocle.com forward/minute. This is the Globalist. It is 1533 in Tokyo, 833 in Zurich. Japan's ruling Liberal Democratic Party will hold its presidential election on October 4 to choose a new leader who'll become the country country's next prime minister. Five candidates are competing and the winner will face the challenge of governing without a stable majority in Parliament. Well, I'm joined now from Tokyo by Jeffrey J. Hall, who's a lecturer at Japan's Kanda University of International Studies. Jeffrey, welcome to the program. I wonder if you could briefly explain this LDP presidential election, how important is this for Japanese politics?

H (34:23)

Well, it's very important and thank you for having me on to talk about this. This is a chance for the LDP to turn a new page and try to reverse its decline after losing two elections in a row. So whoever wins this election will become Japan's next Prime Minister and will be facing this crisis of having a minority government and trying to cooperate with other parties to get legislation passed.

A (34:53)

And who do you think will win?

H (34:57)

Well, right now, among the five candidates who have announced that they will be running, most people see it as a race between two of them. One is Shinjiro Koizumi, the son of a popular Prime Minister. And the other is Sanae Takaichi, who would become Japan's first female prime minister. And she represents a very conservative wing of the party. She. She might be considered sort of like a Japanese Thatcher, but it will probably come down to these two candidates. Unless there is some kind of gaffe or mistake made during the campaign that causes one of their campaigns to falter.

A (35:37)

We understand that factions are very important within the ldp. How are they influencing this leadership race?

H (35:45)

Well, the LDP has always been a very big tent conservative party. So there are groups of lawmakers who are loyal to certain important politicians, like former prime ministers. And these former prime ministers will try to use their clout to convince younger lawmakers to back the candidate of their choosing. But what it will really seem to come down to is whether or not the people within the parliament who are LDP members, whether they think they can gain some advantage by backing a certain politician. So maybe they can get a cap cabinet post or a vice minister post or some other form of help. And that is probably going to be the most important factor in who they choose. That and whether or not they consider themselves a hardline conservative or a center right conservative.

A (36:38)

And with the instability of the coalition government as it is right now, do you think that the election of a new leader will resolve that the earliest? As you pointed out, the LDP have lost their majority. What kind of difficulties will the next administration face, regardless of who's in charge?

H (36:57)

Well, if a centre right LDP politician becomes the next leader of the party, they can cooperate with two different center right opposition parties to get legislation and budgets passed. So that could be relatively stable. However, if a hardline conservative like Ms. Takechi wins, there could be, frankly, friction with those other parties. She might be able to reach out to the far right parties for help. And so this will be a very interesting dynamic. Depending on which wing of the LDP succeeds in the election, and depending on.

A (37:34)

That result, how might it change relationships with the us, with China, and with South Korea?

H (37:40)

If a moderate center right LDP figure becomes Prime Minister, it probably won't change much. But if a hawkish hardline conservative like Ms. Takeichi becomes Prime Minister, it will lead to friction with China and Korea, especially over history issues. They have considerable nationalistic views in this wing of the party that she's a member of, so it could cause some trouble there.

A (38:08)

Jeffrey, thank you. That's Jeffrey J. Hall speaking to us from Tokyo. You're with Monocle Radio. It's just coming up to you. 8:38 in Lilongwe and that's 8:38 in Zurich. Malawi went to the polls yesterday in a high stakes election that could deliver either continuity under President Lazarus Chakwera or a dramatic comeback for former leader Peter Mutarika. With results expected within the coming days. Malawians are voting against a backdrop of runaway inflation, fuel shortages and the devastation of drought and cyclones. The outcome will be closely watched not only at home, but also by neighbours and international lenders looking for for stability. Well, I'm joined now by Zoe McAfee, who's a country Risk analyst at Signal Risk based in Cape Town. Zoe, good morning to you. I wonder how the voting day itself unfolded. Was it orderly? And how engaged did the public seem despite all of this backdrop of economic hardship?

I (39:12)

Good morning. Yes. So voting day has been a bit of a mix. So far we've seen that voter turnout has been not incredibly high. A couple hours before the end of polls last night, the MEC did say that approximately half of the voters who had registered had turned out to vote. So we are expecting to see a bit of a low vote turnout on this occasion. And then in terms of how the voting progressed, there have been mixed reports of this. Some reports have said that things have gone smoothly. However, there have been been a few divergent issues that have emerged. Firstly, some polling stations didn't manage to start voting at the correct time, so this resulted in a bit of a late vote. And then in other polling stations, opposition parties have claimed that the vote was marred by some irregularities, specifically that ballots that had been pre marked had shown up and these ballots had been premarked in favor of the incumbent President Lazarus Chakwera. And some MEC personnel have said that there is absolutely no legitimacy in these claims. And there are reports that observers have also rejected these claims. But the opposition observers at the boat have been consistently saying that there are these irregularities.

A (40:39)

So look, both of these leading candidates have faced corruption claims and I wonder if Malawians are voting for credible solutions or, or are they weighing in on whose least compromise. And we're Seeing a sharp contrast. Chiquera has a stalled reform record too. Muthurica has this troubled legacy. What is driving the voter choice?

I (41:00)

Yes, absolutely. I think you will find that there is some recency bias in this. The public, public sentiment has turned against Chiquera recently specifically due to economic hardships during his tenure and also his inability to effectively address corruption issues which had emerged during the 10 years of previous governments. Specifically Mutarika Chakra had run his previous campaign on a strong push for anti corruption efforts and anti graft and addressing these things that he had said were very present during Mutarika's previous tenure and as a result the population had been expecting more progress than had actually emerged. So we are going to see the public coming to the ballots and balancing concerns over corruption in the past with current economic concerns which are impacting them daily.

A (41:55)

And I wonder how much repeated natural disasters from Cyclone Freddie to last year's drought have shifted the debate onto climate resilience and food security.

I (42:07)

Absolutely. I think for the population specifically food security is a massive issue because Malawi's population, a lot of them are in poverty. It is estimated that around 70% of the population over this is under the poverty line and as such food insecurity is a big issue that will weigh on voters minds and Malawi as an agriculture dependent economy does.

B (42:34)

Have a big.

I (42:35)

Agricultural issues can very much be impacted by climate events such as the drought that we've seen in the past year and cyclone issues. And this has decreased food security. It's also impacted the country's exports and impacted their fiscal position as a result. And that's prevented the government from effectively being able to import to goods such as fuel and necessary food items that it doesn't produce itself. So this is a big, big issue for voters.

A (43:03)

Zoe, thank you very much Indeed. That's Zoe McCarthy who's a country risk analyst at Signal Risk in Cape Town. This is the Globalist. I'm Monica Ray radio with ubs. You have a truly global partner incorporating new technologies, innovative approaches and unexpected opportunities leading you to insights that help answer the questions that matter. Delivered with passion, care and unmatched expertise. Because it's about rising with the dawn each day knowing that we can do even better. That's what banking is to us. Not just work but a craft. UBS banking is our craft. And now we head to Brazil, more specifically to Lensoys Maranasas national park, the new go to destination in the country. Amadna was there from the beginning of the tourism boom is the hotelier Pierre Biden Moldeva who's owner of Chez Georges hotel in Rio and also La Ferne de Georges in Athens, close to the national park that's attracting more attention than ever. To discuss Brazilian hospitality and more, Pierre spoke to Monocle Radio's Fernando Augusto Pacheco. Fernando started by asking him which of the two hotels came first.

D (44:27)

I'm a kite surfer, so first I wanted to be close on the beach. So start by Atins, then Sois. But it's. I mean, it's a.

J (44:36)

It's a.

D (44:37)

It's being there, it's a paradise. But living there for a long time could be difficult because you are far away from everything. So I wanted to mix and to balance with a place in the city. And so for sure we. We decided to come to Rio. So first it was Atins and then Rio.

F (44:53)

And one thing about aching, I mean, the place is magical. The Lingsuis Maranhes is magical. And it's becoming very popular. It is booming. But you were one of the first actually to have a very beautiful property there. Sometimes not so easy to reach, but that's what makes it special as well. So you had your eye on it before, because now, you know, it's in the papers and a lot of people. There are a lot of visitors coming from Brazil and abroad. But you were there before for.

D (45:21)

Yes, at the very beginning we were almost alone, I mean, with the people from the village. But I was even nudes on the beach. I mean, I was with my dogs. We are without electricity, without bad water. So it was really rude. At the very beginning, we were alone in the middle of nowhere with the dunes, with the lagoon. I mean, it's just incredible. But finally I started to exchange with a lot with French tv, with newspaper, even in New York. And so it changed a lot. So it's still magic. But for sure it was. It was already at the very beginning, it was really unique. I mean, being in paradise alone was just incredible.

F (46:01)

But inside the property, things remain very peaceful and cool around. You know, we can get very busy. But I think la Femme de Georges is one thing so beautiful about it. It feels very connected to the place. It doesn't just look like a luxury hotel that it's built out of nowhere, if you know what I mean. Right?

D (46:20)

Yes. We try to keep something really unique, I mean, with our own garden, with the same thing. Since the very beginning, we have something quite simple. So we try to have something simple and chic. And I think it's still the same, I mean, but for sure, Athens is changing, but keeps something really unique and magic.

F (46:39)

How is it to be an atelier in Brazil? Of course, you're coming from a different country. I know there are challenges, for sure, but I think perhaps your passion for Brazil is bigger than any of those challenges. But was it? I presume it was not so easy. Perhaps in the beginning, for sure it was not.

D (46:57)

Because I became Otoli by accident. In Santa Teresa there were a big party and I came to complain. And a guy was organizing this party, his name was Klaus and Winger, it was a boss from Design Hotel. So we became friends and he said, oh, why don't you build a hotel? So I really became an authority by accident. It was a funny story, but for sure it's a big challenge, but it works. People are still really happy when they leave the place. Yes, I mean, it's difficult, for sure, because I mean, again, managing this project far away from us is a challenge. But finally we still have a good review and it seems to be still okay. It's still a beautiful place, so it's okay.

F (47:38)

And the place is magical indeed. I mean, for our listeners who don't know, tell us perhaps your feeling, because. L' Enzois Maranhas. It's something out of this world. I think it's very unique, the way it looks. We have dunes in other places, but I think the way the lagoons are formed, you know, after the rainy months, I never seen something like it.

D (47:59)

1500 kilometers of dungeon, dunes with. After the rainy seasons, full of water. And even if you are prepared, because we have seen, everybody have seen a lot of reportage. So we know how it looks. But the sensation when we are there, I mean, the connection with nature, it's really unique, something you. It's difficult to describe, but you have a really strong feeling. Something really unique. And the place where you can change, meditate, state. Yes. If there is a place to visit in Brazil, for sure people need to go to Lensaus.

F (48:34)

I mean, it is the place to be. And another place to be. I mean, it's not a surprise, but Rio de Janeiro, it is always a star city. How was your presence? Are you. You are kind of based in Rio these days, right?

D (48:47)

You live in Rio? Yes, we are a single dad with studio, so we live in Rio. At the very beginning I wanted to buy a place on the beach, but I fell in love with Santa Teresa, which is a unique place. Place in Rio. I mean, there is Rio, but there is Santa Teresa. It's an artistic place with a lot of gallery, artists. Singer. There is really something unique and magic in Santa Teresa. So I fell in love with this place and we decided to stay there. So it was also a crazy project compared with Athens. I mean, Atense was really crazy, but Rio was also really crazy. We. It took two years to reform everything. I decided to build on music studio because the idea was to. I mean, I'm crazy about architecture, but also about music. And I wanted to. To do something unique. So we have a music studio at home with a connection with a music studio, which means we can receive a philharmonic. And so today we received some artists from everywhere in the world and they come to record with this beautiful view on the Sugarloaf, on the Pierre Biden.

A (49:49)

Mordeva there in conversation with Fernando Augusto Pacheco. Thank you very much indeed. You're listening to the Globalist. I'm Monica Robert, radio. And finally today it's time for the latest from the world of television. I'm joined now by Scott Bryan, who's TV critic and media contributor for Monocle, the Guardian and the New York Times. Good morning to you, Scott.

J (50:15)

Morning.

A (50:16)

I understand that you're in Spain.

J (50:20)

I'm just here for, for a few days and it's sort of now, coincidentally, one of the shows. Well, one of the new stories I'm actually talking about today is actually from Spain, but that is mere coincidence, I assure you.

A (50:34)

Well, tell us about this story.

J (50:37)

So, I mean, it's, it's about Eurovision, of course, because Eurovision Song Contest, they're starting to lay out the plans for next year. But you might have seen headlines all throughout the next few days about countries unwilling to participate in Spain is one of them, and that is because of the inclusion of Israel. Now, it might sort of pique some interest to say, well, why is Israel taking part in this competition in the first place? Well, it's primarily because it is down to the European Broadcasting Union, which is a union of broadcasters which are primarily within Europe, but have been. It can reach throughout the world too. And of course, Eurovision does include Australia, but with the reports over the course of the last few weeks in regards to the un, but also just because of Israel' inclusion in Eurovision over the course of the last two years, now countries are being vocal, stating that they won't participate in next year's contest that started with the Netherlands, Slovenia last week. But now yesterday, Spain's broadcaster RTVE stated that they won't be participating in next year's Eurovision if Israel is included. And that's quite significant, I think, just because Spain is one of the big five. They are one of the big five. Countries that contribute the most to the contest and Eurovision, despite having an audience of about 180 million, really does need these countries to have their backing because it does actually cost quite a lot of money to put on.

A (52:09)

I mean, this is not the first time it's happened, is it? Because Russia was banned from the contest after its invasion of Ukraine?

J (52:16)

Yes, but I would say to that that the reasons, according to the ebu, why Russia did not. Were not allowed to participate was because the broadcaster based in Russia had been seen to ban, had been seen sort of fail quite a few of its rules in regards to the country being a public service broadcaster. I think the EBU saw that after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, it became a propaganda outlet for the Russian state, whilst Kan Kan, which is the Israeli broadcaster, according to the ebu, meets the minimum requirements for them to becoming a participating country. Because I think what's important to point out is that your revision is not based. It's not a competition between governments, it's not a competition between countries per se, it's a competition between public service broadcasters throughout Europe. And I think that's the challenge, is that so far Israel are all above the rules in terms of participating next year.

A (53:21)

And I'm sure just for the ebu, the headache of having Israel there and the protests that that would bring from audience members would just be a step too far. Let's talk about sky because. Because they are going to cut hundreds of jobs in the uk. So this is all about the shift really from broadcast to streaming. Tell us more.

J (53:41)

It is, it is, yes. I mean, sky of course has been a dominant player in satellite broadcasting for. Since its inception, really. It was how it has been able to become a huge global powerhouse. It was then sort of bought by Comcast in a high profile deal. So there's no more involvement in the Murdoch family about sort of seven, eight years ago. And since then they've really doubled down into the streaming age. There's been products such as Sky Stream, which allows people to watch without using satellite, also sort of Sky Glass, which allows you to just watch directly through a TV without a box at all, as what a smaller sort of company such as NOW tv. And I think that's essentially sort of pulled people away from traditional satellite sort of broadcasting. Sky are now saying that to compete more with the streamers such as Netflix and Amazon Prime Video, the house having to cut back in a very big way from sort of existing products, double down on improving them. So basically they said that 600 jobs are going to be lost. I guess to make the company a bit more nimble. But I would also say that what is key in Sky's future is that for once that they used to be the exclusive place where you could see a lot of US based dramas, particularly on hbo. But that contract's coming to an end. This contract with Warner Brothers Discovery. Warner Brothers Discovery who are now planning on launching their own UK based streamer. So I think Sky's got to double down maybe on its own unique programming to kind of maybe highlight the fact that they are the one stop shop because otherwise they could just lose people to two rival competitors.

A (55:22)

And is it mostly within the tech side of the business that those jobs are being lost?

J (55:27)

It seems to be within the tech side. According to a Financial Times reporter, one of their sources stated that they see their sort of product upgrade as being quote unquote complete for now. I think that's piqued my interest because of course I think that you have to keep improving your products rather than just sort of updating them once and just leaving them be. I guess it'll be interesting to see how sky innovate or whether they just sort of push more towards Internet based broadcasting.

A (55:57)

While the Emmys is one product that updated, it had a new host this year it also hit hit 7.4 million viewers. Those are record numbers.

J (56:08)

It is, I mean in recent years, yes, it's an 8% increase from the 6.9 people who watched the last year's 6.9 million people who watched last year's ceremony on, on ABC. It's the most watched Emmy since 2021. I mean I always see Emmys a really interesting one because in terms of the viewership I think is a good litmus between what's popular in the public domain as in what are the mass public watching versus what is maybe to sort of basically people who live in New York, Louisiana and work in the media entertainment industries. And I think what's interesting is that two big shows seem to be the big talking points from this year's Emmys. The studio, which is on Apple TV plus, which is sort of a Seth Rogen sort of comedy set within Hollywood, which I think mocks Hollywood, is a love letter to Hollywood, but I doubt has a mass audience appeal. Also the fact that it's on Apple TV plus, which is one of the smallest streamers compared to to adolescence, which is of course the huge British warp films made shows starring Stephen Graham, Owen Cooper who of course were big winners then. And I think that maybe perhaps the reason why the Emmys did So, well, is not only is it on a different network who may be marketing the show in a different way. And of course, as you were saying there, it's got a new host. But I also think maybe part of it is down to the fact that the shows that ended up being nominated and winning were historically shows that more people have watched, including also the Pit, which is a new sort of medical drama. I think the more shows that get nominated and win are actually viewed by the public, the more likely that they're actually going to be watching them to see them win.

A (57:44)

And a very quick look at the fact that the original pitch to Ted Sarandos from Reed Hastings about Netflix streaming future was judged to be nuts.

B (57:56)

Yes.

J (57:56)

So Ted Sarandos, who's the co CEO of Netflix, joined in 1980, in 99 and met Reed Hastings, who is the founder of Netflix. And during that meeting, Reed Hastings said, we have to make Netflix entirely on the Internet. That's where the viewers are. They're not going to be on cable. Ted Sarandos was a little bit dubious, just sort of saying, well, actually the Internet's incredibly slow and who is going to really not be relying on people having DVD sent through the post. He did accept the job, is now, of course, running it. And the company that Reed Hastings sort of said will exist does exist and is now worth more than $500 billion. So it just sometimes being smart about predicting the future can work out.

A (58:42)

Absolutely. Scott, thank you very much indeed. Scott. Bryan there. And of course, Reed Hastings has gone on to really, really prove himself as an entrepreneur, so much so that we've actually got him on a recent episode of our program, the Entrepreneurs, talking about his latest venture, Powder Mountain, a ski resort in Utah that's also an outdoor art museum. Now, that's all for today's program. Thanks to our producers, Laura Kramer, Carlotta Rebelo and Hassan Anderson, our researcher, Daniela Brauer Smith and our studio manager, Elliot Greenfield. More music on the way. The briefing is at midday in London and the Globalist returns at the same time tomorrow. I'm Georgina Godwin. Thanks for listening, Sam.