PM rules out UK tariff retaliation as tensions rise (Full Transcript)

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: We're going to cross over to Downing Street because our political editor, Chris Mason, joins us live. Chris, you were in the briefing room. You put the question to the Prime Minister as to whether trade tariffs, reciprocal trade tariffs are off the table. Was the answer conclusive in your mind?

[00:00:21] Speaker 2: It's a fair question that. Hello to you. We were just checking with some Downing Street officials at the end of the news conference. It explains why it's taken me a few minutes to dash out from number nine Downing Street to here in the street. Exactly that question. And they were telling us that he was as definitive as he could be. He absolutely does not want to see retaliatory tariffs imposed by the UK on America. And then that opens up, as Nick was hinting at, a fascinating potential dynamic just a few days down the track. Were the European Union, as some are advocating, to do precisely that? Could there be a difference between the UK and the EU? And what consequence could that have in Washington? Of course, that power lying with the UK as a result of the UK leaving the European Union after the referendum of a decade ago. Coming out of that news conference, the thing I'm most struck by was the Prime Minister's tone, the gravity of where he finds himself, where the UK finds itself, where Europe and NATO finds itself. The Prime Minister's put great effort into building a strong relationship with President Trump. The view in this building is that it is considerably better than many other European leaders have. And it is striking that in that sequence of phone calls yesterday, it was European leaders and indeed the NATO Secretary General to whom the Prime Minister spoke first. Then he had his conversation with President Trump. And there is clearly a desire to continue prizing that relationship, as Nick was reflecting, to try and dial down the rhetoric, to not talk about the prospect of retaliation and the hope that calm language can find a way through. The big question is, can it? What in practical terms does the Prime Minister do next? That's what I sought to ask him a few minutes ago. Could he, for instance, alongside other European leaders, go to the World Economic Forum, the summit of business and political leaders in Davos, in Switzerland, in a couple of days' time? The President's going to be there on Wednesday. The Prime Minister is not due to go as things stand. But I'm told that it does remain an option. Could it be useful for a delegation of European leaders to go to see President Trump face-to-face in the same room? We saw something similar in conversations around Ukraine back in the summer, when a handful of European leaders crossed the Atlantic to do precisely that on that theme. Could there be a temptation to do that in 48 hours or so? I'm struck that when that question is put, because he ducked it when I asked him on camera, when that question is put to people in Downing Street, there is an acknowledgement that Wednesday currently is a long way off. That's how quickly things are moving, how volatile things are, how many different plates are spinning here.

[00:03:12] Speaker 1: Yeah, Wednesday is a long way off, as you put it, given the tumultuous events that we've been watching over the weekend and now today. But you pushed as to whether the Prime Minister will go to Davos. And he did come back and answer your question eventually. And it's all a little bit vague. But what the Prime Minister was keen to stress, and he said it a few times, is that his team are in conversation with members of the Trump administration on a daily basis.

[00:03:42] Speaker 2: Yeah, absolutely. So we saw the Prime Minister had that phone conversation with President Trump last night. But the emphasis from the Foreign Office and indeed from Downing Street is the depth and frequency of that relationship, one administration to another, not just one leader to another, or one Foreign Secretary and Secretary of State to another, but at every level of every level of both administrations. And the argument that is made, and is so frequently made, is that the depth and value of that UK-US relationship is huge economically and in security terms, and that that should never be overlooked. Now the question is going to be, because this is the first big fracture that the UK has had with the Trump administration since the inauguration of a year ago, there's been a real attempt over and over again from Downing Street to dial down any sources of difference and disagreement. There have been one or two others, for instance the recognition of a Palestinian state, but this is the first biggie in terms of being in a very, very different position on a live question where there are big swirling questions about the whole future of the NATO alliance. I'm really struck that over the weekend the Foreign Secretary was having lunch here in London with the UN Secretary General, who was here to mark the 80th anniversary of the birth of the United Nations, one of those big multilateral organisations founded in the months and years after the Second World War. And a matter of hours later, the latest case study in President Trump whipping out his smartphone, tapping something out on social media, and yet again imperiling that whole post-Second World War order, suggesting, implying that might is right and that international institutions are so often, in his view, useless or past their sell-by date. It's an unprecedented moment this, I think, geopolitically and in the relationship between the UK and the US, and so, so difficult for the Prime Minister to get right. And at just the point, he is desperate to be talking about domestic issues. A couple of weeks ago, on the first Monday of this year, he took a load of us reporters to Reading, just to the west of London. He wanted to talk about the cost of living. We were at a community centre. All the questions were about Venezuela. Today, he was also due to be out and about, away from London, again talking about the cost of living. So often, the number one issue that comes up in focus groups and opinion polls for millions of people around the UK. What happened instead? The visit is cancelled. He's taking loads more questions about geopolitics. The man with the megaphone in the White House is dominating so many conversations, and that matters politically on the international stage, of course, but it has implications for the government trying to make its argument to voters here in the UK as well.

[00:06:35] Speaker 1: It's a fascinating point, but what he has done, actually, Chris, sometimes we see this when it comes to Donald Trump. I'm thinking about the latest additions, Sweden joining NATO, for example, these kinds of consequences that are unintended when it came to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. But when it comes to Donald Trump, he has unified the politics of this country, because you've got both Kemi Badenov, the leader of the opposition, and the leader of reform, Nigel Farage, saying that the tariffs will be a burden and they will be wrong. So you've got these political sides coming together, talking against these tariffs.

[00:07:19] Speaker 2: Yeah, that's right. I thought it was very notable, actually, that the Prime Minister chose, in his scripted remarks before the questions, to praise the Conservative leader Kemi Badenov's response, not just supporting what the government was seeking to do, but the tone that he struck. The Prime Minister railing against, as he frequently has in the past, what he sees as the performative politics of politicians tempted to go onto social media and say something explosive, which might generate them a few short-term headlines. Of course, in so doing, he's also offering a commentary on the man at the other end of the phone last night when he was talking to President Trump. But yes, you're right, it has brought together UK political leaders. There are some subtleties, there are some differences. The Liberal Democrat has been particularly outspoken, for instance, around the question of tariffs. But broadly speaking, it has brought together UK politics. Whilst on the international stage, it has not been missed in Russia, nor I suspect in Beijing, in China, that what we're seeing right now, yet again, is a fracturing of that Western alliance of 80 years heritage, where you have countries that for so long have been allies, both publicly and privately, at least rhetorically, squaring up to each other over the future of Greenland. And I think a growing recognition from quite a lot of folk here that yes, sometimes for Donald Trump, it's all about the rhetoric, it's about taking a position that might be out there and generate lots of headlines in order to move negotiations to a position where he can chalk up a win. There's also just the thought that maybe, just maybe, on Greenland, this is what he wants, that this is what he believes. And if that is the position, if that is what he really, really seeks to secure here, how on earth does the NATO alliance and the European alliance with America hold together? It's a huge question and it's really hard to see what the answer is at the moment.