the king is back in business, his cancer treatment progressing well. so when he is out and about, what will that mean to different people? tonight we'rejoined by laura lee, the head of maggie's,

the cancer care charity, and historian tessa dunlop. also tonight, labour's shadow chancellor rachel reeves, who's tried to forge a reputation for fiscal discipline. where does that leave spending on defence? churchill didn't say, "let's have a defence review." he said, "there is in existential threat right there, let's arm." he lost that argument. shouldn't we be getting down to it right now? we are committed to get defence spending up to 2.5% of gdp. and also, crucially, working with our nato allies, because it's important that other countries also play their role. scotland's first minister, who yesterday unceremoniously dumped the snp's coalition partners, is trying to save his skin by wooing back the scottish greens. what are his chances? as humza yousaf fights for his political survival, some snp sources tell me he can salvage his premiership, whilst other argue it's over. and i pay a visit to the newly appointed, and first, official artist in residence at abbey road studios, who shares his thoughts on al.

to sort of type into a computer, "make me sound like stevie wonder", and then it comes up with a hit stevie wonder song, thatjust seems so disingenuous and it sort of doesn't serve the purpose of music, which is about expressing oneself in the most rawest way. good evening. on tuesday king charles returns to public duties with a symbolic visit to a cancer care centre with queen camilla. since his diagnosis in february, he has been carrying on with his private work as head of state, but tuesday's visit is his first official public engagement this year. it's dominating tomorrow's papers. look at the sun, the king back in the saddle, smiles as the king goes back to work, fit for a king, and the express, kering king joins cancer crusade. i'm joined by by dame laura lee the ceo of maggie's cancer care, and the historian, tessa dunlop. good evening, both. first, laura,

you know queen camilla well because she is president of maggie's and by extension you know king charles was of this photograph very much says we are going through this together, which is very much the message, but the photograph is interesting, isn't it? because absolutely, the focus is on camilla, she is the rock in all this, she is the carer, as it were. yes, and it so often is, when someone is affected by cancer, it's the person who is closest and alongside them, they are going through it too, but there are also there supporting and being that back—up, and she has filled in for him whilst he's been undergoing his treatment, and she is going to be there right alongside him as he comes back to work.— there right alongside him as he comes back to work. tessa, though, we actually — comes back to work. tessa, though, we actually still _ comes back to work. tessa, though, we actually still do _ comes back to work. tessa, though, we actually still do not know- we actually still do not know anything about the nature of the cancer after we heard he was in for a prostate operation. nor, of course, do we know princess catherine's diagnose either. as a historian, how does this compare with the kind of information that

came out for the last, say, two generations back? i came out for the last, say, two generations back?— generations back? i don't think even geora e vi generations back? i don't think even george vi knew _ generations back? i don't think even george vi knew he _ generations back? i don't think even george vi knew he was _ generations back? i don't think even george vi knew he was dying - george vi knew he was dying of cancer, — george vi knew he was dying of cancer, it— george vi knew he was dying of cancer, it certainly came as a shock to his _ cancer, it certainly came as a shock to his daughter, she was quickly summoned back from overseas. so there _ summoned back from overseas. so there is_ summoned back from overseas. so there is a _ summoned back from overseas. so there is a difference. but i do think— there is a difference. but i do think they— there is a difference. but i do think they have the really clever by telling _ think they have the really clever by telling us _ think they have the really clever by telling us they're showing a lot, they've — telling us they're showing a lot, they've told us catherine and charles — they've told us catherine and charles have cancer, but what's the statistic? _ charles have cancer, but what's the statistic? one in three, winning 20 of us _ statistic? one in three, winning 20 of us how? — statistic? one in three, winning 20 of us now? one in two of us will at some _ of us now? one in two of us will at some point— of us now? one in two of us will at some point have cancer. and cancer has the _ some point have cancer. and cancer has the most — some point have cancer. and cancer has the most incredibly broad spectrum and the first thing you do when _ spectrum and the first thing you do when your— spectrum and the first thing you do when your friend says they have cancer, — when your friend says they have cancer, what great, what's the prognosis? and actually, and quite rightly. _ prognosis? and actually, and quite rightly. it's— prognosis? and actually, and quite rightly, it's their prerogative. it's rightly, it's their prerogative. it's their— rightly, it's their prerogative. it's their confidential health information but byjust using that word _ information but byjust using that word can — information but byjust using that word can see, we've been expected to back off _ word can see, we've been expected to back off -- _ word can see, we've been expected to back off. —— that word cancer. i wonder— back off. —— that word cancer. i wonder how— back off. —— that word cancer. i wonder how long that will hold. we saw the _ wonder how long that will hold. we saw the for or until we discovered kate had — saw the for or until we discovered kate had cancer, and then hold your

horses, behave yourselves... —— we saw the _ horses, behave yourselves... —— we saw the furore _ horses, behave yourselves... —— we saw the furore. | horses, behave yourselves... -- we saw the furore.— saw the furore. i think it's interesting _ saw the furore. i think it's interesting how _ saw the furore. i think it's interesting how little - saw the furore. i think it's i interesting how little there's saw the furore. i think it's - interesting how little there's been on social media. i interesting how little there's been on social media.— on social media. i think it's fair of them to _ on social media. i think it's fair of them to not _ on social media. i think it's fair of them to not talk _ on social media. i think it's fair of them to not talk about - of them to not talk about their specific cancer and i think they've done this do not shine a spotlight on one cancer when there are so many people affected by different cancers so i think they have been very thoughtful about not being that specific. but by seeing the term cancer, they've allowed the whole cancer, they've allowed the whole cancer conversation to open up. yes. but that whole — cancer conversation to open up. yes. but that whole issue _ cancer conversation to open up. yes. but that whole issue about how it's been, the tsunami of interest at the beginning, and then after both cancers were revealed, as it were, it's been interesting, social media, we've not had the memes, we have not had the third night, it's as if there's an element of respect because as you say, one in two people have cancer. —— we've not had the memes or trolling. people have cancer. -- we've not had the memes or trolling.— the memes or trolling. there are almost a no-go _ the memes or trolling. there are almost a no-go zone, _ the memes or trolling. there are

almost a no-go zone, you - the memes or trolling. there are almost a no-go zone, you can't l the memes or trolling. there are i almost a no-go zone, you can't talk almost a no—go zone, you can't talk about— almost a no—go zone, you can't talk about them — almost a no—go zone, you can't talk about them at the moment, respect. and i_ about them at the moment, respect. and i think— about them at the moment, respect. and i think it's fair enough, it's their— and i think it's fair enough, it's their personal information, keep it broad, _ their personal information, keep it broad, keep the kind of democratic family— broad, keep the kind of democratic family of— broad, keep the kind of democratic family of cancers, the appeal as wide _ family of cancers, the appeal as wide as— family of cancers, the appeal as wide as possible. but he is our head of state. _ wide as possible. but he is our head of state. and — wide as possible. but he is our head of state, and for example, in the wake of— of state, and for example, in the wake of the _ of state, and for example, in the wake of the late queen and philip dying, _ wake of the late queen and philip dying, between them, they were patrons — dying, between them, they were patrons of— dying, between them, they were patrons of some 1000 organisations and charities, i was at the royal society— and charities, i was at the royal society of st george's cadet parade and i noticed over the tannoy they said, _ and i noticed over the tannoy they said. we are — and i noticed over the tannoy they said, we are still waiting to hear if the _ said, we are still waiting to hear if the king — said, we are still waiting to hear if the king will be our patron. it -ot if the king will be our patron. it got me — if the king will be our patron. it got me thinking and i went on to great _ got me thinking and i went on to great ormond street hospital, still without— great ormond street hospital, still without a _ great ormond street hospital, still without a patron in the wake of the queen's— without a patron in the wake of the queen's death, and i think things like that, — queen's death, and i think things like that, just the practical mechanics of the royal institution that we've — mechanics of the royal institution that we've come to rely on, actually, _ that we've come to rely on, actually, some will have to go into abeyance because there aren't the numbers, — abeyance because there aren't the numbers, there are not the young coming _ numbers, there are not the young coming uu — numbers, there are not the young coming up. on numbers, there are not the young coming up-— coming up. on this question, in business you — coming up. on this question, in business you might _ coming up. on this question, in business you might call - coming up. on this question, in business you might call it - coming up. on this question, in business you might call it a - coming up. on this question, in . business you might call it a phased return. the whole idea when you're going through cancer treatment is it can actually be very up and down. exactly, and i think the announcement they have made today is

that he will be back doing some of his public duties, when you have a cancer diagnosis and you're going through treatment, you can experience fatigue if your having chemotherapy, you might have some cognitive function and memory, and it's not a constant thing. but work can also be really good for people when they are going through cancer. so it's not about no work while you are going through treatment or full on work, it's about pacing it. fin on work, it's about pacing it. on this question of, there was a suggestion that actually, there might be more outdoors events, and of course, we have garden parties and so forth. why the emphasis on ulster�*s? 50 and so forth. why the emphasis on ulster's? .,, ., , , and so forth. why the emphasis on ulster's? ., , , �* ulster's? so obviously when you're havin: ulster's? so obviously when you're having cancer— ulster's? so obviously when you're having cancer treatment _ ulster's? so obviously when you're having cancer treatment can - ulster's? so obviously when you're having cancer treatment can have l ulster's? so obviously when you're i having cancer treatment can have an impact on your immune system and therefore make you more susceptible to infections, so we know through the experience of covid that seeing people outdoors reduces that risk of infection from meeting others. you're talking about how little we know, and everybody�*s, as it were, cancer is different. but there is a

material difference in and out of the monarch and a very young princess. —— an elderly monarch and a very young princess. princess. -- an elderly monarch and a very young princess.— a very young princess. yes, and it is interesting. _ a very young princess. yes, and it is interesting, in _ a very young princess. yes, and it is interesting, in a way, _ a very young princess. yes, and it is interesting, in a way, kate - a very young princess. yes, and it is interesting, in a way, kate took all the _ is interesting, in a way, kate took all the flak~ — is interesting, in a way, kate took all the flak. the king, is interesting, in a way, kate took allthe flak. the king, in is interesting, in a way, kate took all the flak. the king, in terms of him being — all the flak. the king, in terms of him being our head of state and pneumonic and this anticipated big tour at _ pneumonic and this anticipated big tour at the back end of the year to australia, — tour at the back end of the year to australia, etc, —— head of state and a new_ australia, etc, —— head of state and a new monarch, the pressure has been off him _ a new monarch, the pressure has been off him because she soaked up so much _ off him because she soaked up so much of— off him because she soaked up so much of the interest, a grotesque amount, — much of the interest, a grotesque amount, it — much of the interest, a grotesque amount, it was totally inappropriate, i think everyone realised — inappropriate, i think everyone realised that in the wake of the subsequent revelations. but at the same _ subsequent revelations. but at the same time, there is something extraordinary about both their second, — extraordinary about both their second, the royal institution has diminished, if you like patridge and so forth, _ diminished, if you like patridge and so forth, but their stock has risen. -- lroth— so forth, but their stock has risen. -- both their— so forth, but their stock has risen. —— both their cachets. there is something _ —— both their cachets. there is something extraordinary about a man able to— something extraordinary about a man able to return to work part—time age 75 with— able to return to work part—time age 75 with a _ able to return to work part—time age 75 with a cancer diagnosis, albeit for instance, ascot might suspect we will see _ for instance, ascot might suspect we will see him — for instance, ascot might suspect we will see him at the summer, that's the rub _

will see him at the summer, that's the rub of— will see him at the summer, that's the rub of our royal family, there they are, — the rub of our royal family, there they are, working at ascot, here he is, with— they are, working at ascot, here he is, with cancer, the series of contradictions that make them so addictive — contradictions that make them so addictive. . contradictions that make them so addictive. , ., , ., .., addictive. interesting that you can either be pro-monarchy _ addictive. interesting that you can either be pro-monarchy or - either be pro—monarchy or anti—monarchy, but fundamentally, when someone is unwelcome that you have simply for them. —— when someone is unwell you have sympathy for them. someone is unwell you have sympathy forthem. ~ , someone is unwell you have sympathy for them. ~ , , ., someone is unwell you have sympathy forthem. ~ , ., ., , for them. absolutely and in many families, for them. absolutely and in many families. you _ for them. absolutely and in many families, you have _ families, you have multi—generational, folks going through treatment for them, different family situations and all needing support. so we are very respectful of what they are going through and i think we should respect that. and also, they are still turning up and doing things. i mean, the queen has been very visible, and out there, and supporting. visible, and out there, and supporting-— visible, and out there, and supporting. visible, and out there, and su--ortin~. �* ., ~ supporting. and do you think there is, what supporting. and do you think there is. what you _ supporting. and do you think there is, what you were _ supporting. and do you think there is, what you were saying, tessa, l is, what you were saying, tessa, there is an element of out of sight, out of mind? and people who don't necessarily take much interest in the royals will actually feel there is much less, much less of the

limelight on them? it’s is much less, much less of the limelight on them? it's interesting. i would limelight on them? it's interesting. i would never _ limelight on them? it's interesting. i would never have _ limelight on them? it's interesting. i would never have predicted - limelight on them? it's interesting. i would never have predicted that i i would never have predicted that the kate — i would never have predicted that the kate narrative, disappearing kate, _ the kate narrative, disappearing kate, would have hogged notjust british— kate, would have hogged notjust british attention but global attention in the way she did. and when _ attention in the way she did. and when you — attention in the way she did. and when you imagine now, for instance, this year. _ when you imagine now, for instance, this year, wimbledon, for instance, without— this year, wimbledon, for instance, without kate, she is their new patient — without kate, she is their new patient with a lawn association, without her... we patient with a lawn association, without her. . .— patient with a lawn association, without her... we don't know that. -- she is there a _ without her. .. we don't know that. -- she is there a new— without her... we don't know that. -- she is there a new patron. - without her. .. we don't know that. -- she is there a new patron. i- without her... we don't know that. -- she is there a new patron. i am| -- she is there a new patron. i am 'ust -- she is there a new patron. i am just hypothesising _ -- she is there a new patron. i am just hypothesising was _ -- she is there a new patron. i am just hypothesising was perhaps . -- she is there a new patron. i am| just hypothesising was perhaps she won't _ just hypothesising was perhaps she won't be _ just hypothesising was perhaps she won't be trooping the colour, for example. — won't be trooping the colour, for example, the king won't be trooping the colour, for example, the king going _ the colour, for example, the king going to _ the colour, for example, the king going to be, but imagine she won't be there. _ going to be, but imagine she won't be there. it — going to be, but imagine she won't be there, it will almost all she does _ be there, it will almost all she does return, be this wonderful flip, this glorious re—entry stuff and you can't _ this glorious re—entry stuff and you can't take — this glorious re—entry stuff and you can't take away her state is now. she is _ can't take away her state is now. she is world—famous for and the king. _ she is world—famous for and the king. by— she is world—famous for and the king, by definition, he been around for so _ king, by definition, he been around for so long. — king, by definition, he been around for so long, he is world—famous. at one of for so long, he is world—famous. one of the for so long, he is world—famous. git one of the things that is happening is there will be a state visit by the emperor ofjapan and the empress, the first in 25 years, and when you have his work ethic, you

wonder, if you feel better you end “p wonder, if you feel better you end up doing something that perhaps is too much strain. but. up doing something that perhaps is too much strain.— up doing something that perhaps is too much strain. but, you know, he has his wonderful _ too much strain. but, you know, he has his wonderful wife _ too much strain. but, you know, he has his wonderful wife alongside . has his wonderful wife alongside him, who will be helping him judge that. and work makes him happy. work makes him feel productive. and so it can also have a benefit.— can also have a benefit. you... you talk about— can also have a benefit. you... you talk about democratisation - can also have a benefit. you... you talk about democratisation of - can also have a benefit. you... you | talk about democratisation of cancer in the sense that you're not pitting one cancer over another, but with all this coming out, will it refuel interest in what these cancers are? it's inevitable that people want to know the specifics of the cancer and the treatment, we are all naturally curious. but what we don't want is a national debate about one specific cancer because so many people are affected. i cancer because so many people are affected. g . �* affected. i think we mustn't underestimate _ affected. i think we mustn't underestimate that - affected. i think we mustn't underestimate that there i affected. i think we mustn't underestimate that there is j underestimate that there is industry behind _ underestimate that there is industry behind the royal family, they drive clicks. _ behind the royal family, they drive clicks, some people have dollar signs— clicks, some people have dollar signs behind their eyes, they want more _ signs behind their eyes, they want more meet — signs behind their eyes, they want more meet on the bounce, more

diagnosis. — more meet on the bounce, more diagnosis, they want a story. it's a commercial— diagnosis, they want a story. it's a commercial interest in the royal family— commercial interest in the royal family as — commercial interest in the royal family as well as genuine aficionados and charities wanting patrons — aficionados and charities wanting patrons -- — aficionados and charities wanting patrons. —— they want more meat on the bones. _ patrons. -- they want more meat on the bones-— patrons. -- they want more meat on the bones. ., ,, i. , . the bones. thank you both very much indeed. today humza yousaf, scotland's first minister, wasn't displaying quite as much of the bravado that characterised his defenestration of his scottish green power sharing partners yesterday. but he claimed he can survive the two confience votes he is facing. one conservative, the other labour. he cancelled a speech but did appear to say he'd not meant to upset the greens. if that cuts no ice — he'll be at the mercy of former snp msp, now alba msp ash regan, and that could be a very bitter pill. joe's with me. where does all this leave the first minister, 2a hours and were later? minister, 24 hours and were later? i think it leaves him on a shoogly peg, spending as weekend trying to get msps on—site of these votes, he won't to do them in the same afternoon, i think.

won't to do them in the same afternoon, ithink. it's won't to do them in the same afternoon, i think. it's the parliamentary body tops but he will want to get them done as soon as possible, rip off the bus to parties probably want to drag it out on the days, potential. despite rip off the plastic of opposition parties will want to drag it out. there two, one, the labour one, perhaps the most dangerous, vote of no confidence in the whole remit, it will be binding, it could bring down his administration and lead to an election, but the key thing for him is that the greens have said their position is under consideration. —— vote of no—confidence in the government. the other, brought by the scottish conservatives, is in humza yousaf�*s leadership, and on that the greens have said they will oppose him. of course that position could change but it means at this stage of the best possible scenario, i think, for humza yousaf next week is this. six to 4— city for split, that's the snp msps, 63 of them put up that's the snp msps, 63 of them put up —— 64—64 split, that's snp msps plus at riga on the other side. and

then the other side, the scottish green, scottish labour and scottish lib dems. —— snp msps plus ash regan. that would lead to the speaker having the deciding vote and according to convergys she would be on the side of the status quo and he would just about survive. it’s on the side of the status quo and he would just about survive.— would just about survive. it's an extraordinary — would just about survive. it's an extraordinary story _ would just about survive. it's an extraordinary story that - would just about survive. it's an extraordinary story that in - extraordinary story that in one defecting msp, former now alba —— former snp, now alba, her boss is no alex salmond. former snp, now alba, her boss is no alex salmond— alex salmond. that's ash regan, her -a had alex salmond. that's ash regan, her party had not — alex salmond. that's ash regan, her party had not done — alex salmond. that's ash regan, her party had not done well _ alex salmond. that's ash regan, her party had not done well in _ alex salmond. that's ash regan, her party had not done well in elections l party had not done well in elections but have done well in defection is that it certainly seems unlikely that it certainly seems unlikely that ash regan, who you can see here, is the one who would want to move towards a scottish election, poll suggest her party wouldn't do well and that, she will want to put on issues that matter to her, a second referendum, women's rights, while she has that power. it she second referendum, women's rights, while she has that power.— while she has that power. if she has this list of desires, _ while she has that power. if she has this list of desires, needs _ while she has that power. if she has this list of desires, needs and - this list of desires, needs and demands, and the very nature of what

the snp will be persecuting as administration would presumably have to change. —— prosecuting as an administration. absolutely, that's a difficult puzzle scenario humza yousaf will have to think about this weekend, because for every concession or reassurance to ash regan or indeed the scottish green party, he is going to frustrate or even anger some of his own msps on the snp back benches, that's a really difficult situation to be in, and even though there is not as yet vacancy, everyone behind the scenes talk about who could possibly... well, who are? let's talk about the runners and riders. you well, who are? let's talk about the runners and riders.— well, who are? let's talk about the runners and riders. you may know the faces, runners and riders. you may know the faces. kate — runners and riders. you may know the faces, kate forbes _ runners and riders. you may know the faces, kate forbes run _ runners and riders. you may know the faces, kate forbes run last _ runners and riders. you may know the faces, kate forbes run last time, - runners and riders. you may know the faces, kate forbes run last time, of. faces, kate forbes run last time, of course, to the right of the party, very socially conservative, the education and health secretary are seen as rising stars, as is mairi mcallan, she of course announced a pregnancy in february, she is going on maternity leave over the summer, not the ideal time to be running for leadership, and of course stevenson, who leads the party in westminster

for so how could that happen? it could happen, they are secretive about their roles, but he has himself had said it isn't ideal to have an mp leading a party when they are in government, and of course there are others who think perhaps there are others who think perhaps the party should look to the past andindeed the party should look to the past and indeed someone likejohn swinney, former leader, former deputy first minister and nicola sturgeon, as a sort of caretaker or even veteran parliamentarian like angus robertson or keith brown. i should say that humza yousaf doesn't want to get anywhere near thinking about these people but its national sum told me tonight he's effectively facing a tsunami and we do not know now what will be happening at the end of next week when the waters recede, i suppose, end of next week when the waters recede, isuppose, will end of next week when the waters recede, i suppose, will he survive or potentially will he have been washed away? ais a is the way leads to how quickly, because they only have 28 days to find another first minister, and

thatis find another first minister, and that is looking a bit like rats in a sack. . . sack. that is with the confidence votes, sack. that is with the confidence votes. one _ sack. that is with the confidence votes. one of— sack. that is with the confidence votes, one of the _ sack. that is with the confidence votes, one of the other, - sack. that is with the confidence votes, one of the other, if - sack. that is with the confidence votes, one of the other, if he i votes, one of the other, if he survives those votes of no confidence, to talk about policy as he has been today, on housing, wanting to look like he has a programme for government but of course every single day of bad headlines for humza yousaf does according to some in his party, damage him. and his ratings in the polls. well, while all that was going on in scotland, not too far south of the border, sir keir starmer and his number two were today in darlington highlighting the cost of living. and newsnight was there as well — to sit down with rachel reeves, who hopes to become the first woman to be chancellor of the exchequer. nick asked her how she could transform the economy, given that inflation was largely caused by the energy price spike, and the economic growth she hopes for won't happen overnight.

i've been really clear that i am under no illusions about the scale of the challenge that i will inherit if i become chancellor of the exchequer. the worst economic inheritance since the second world war in terms of debt, the first ever parliament where living standards are lower at the end than they were at the beginning. we're not going to be able to turn everything around straightaway. but our plan to grow the economy, built on a rock of economic stability, with a tough set of fiscal rules that i will adhere to as chancellor, will start to turn around our economy so that living standards improve, we get growth and prosperity in all parts of the country, and then start to have the money to invest in public services that are on their knees after 14 years of conservative government. now, one of the things that you've been talking about in all of this is what you call the active state. one of the big elements of that active state was you spending, investing £28 billion a year in clean power by 2030. you've had to come off the £28 billion, but you're still committed to clean

power by 2030. that's not bidenomics, is it? that's scaredy cat—enom. .. economics, isn't it? a new term coined by nick watt. so, when i first announced the green prosperity plan, interest rates were close to zero and the economy was growing and we hadn't had the catastrophic conservative mini budget that pushed up interest rates, that are now at 5.25%, and has also seen government debt increase. and you have to recognise that when the facts change, you have to change your plans. it doesn't mean the scale of our ambition has changed, but the way that we achieve that ambition has to change. and crucially, as well, getting putin's boot off our neck, because we are producing home grown energy. that is the ambition that we have, and working with business, i know we can achieve it. so you say when the facts change, you have to change your plan, there speaks the true keynesian economist.

on that theme of putin's boots, you have two ironclad commitments. one is an ironclad commitment to fiscal discipline, but keir starmer has an ironclad commitment to the defence of ukraine. if those two ironclad commitments come into conflict, which one comes first, fiscal discipline or commitment to ukraine? well, look, fiscal discipline is at the heart of everything i offer. and if you lose control of the public finances, then everybody pays a price. and you saw that with what liz truss does. so that's why we've been really clear, keir and me, that everything we put forward is fully costed and fully funded. you don't get that from the conservatives these days. in the budget, just over a month ago, the conservatives made an unfunded commitment around national insurance worth £46 billion without being able to say where a penny of that money comes from. and just this week they've said that they're going to get

defence spending to 2.5% of gdp, which we fully support, and keir said thatjust a couple of weeks ago when he was visiting our submarines in barrow, and that commitment is important. but if you're going to attach a date to it, then you've got to say where the money is going to come from. and all the independent analysts last week said that the government hadn't done that. we will never make spending commitments without saying where the money is going to come from. so you're fully committed to 2.5% gdp on defence, but you can't say by 2030. we have an existential threat on our doorstep. do we not need an ironclad commitment to that 2030 target on defence, because of what we have on our doorsteps from putin's russia ? well, we will get to 2.5% of gdp and our national security is non—negotiable. our commitment to nato is non—negotiable. and that's why we've committed to doing a full review of defence spending in government. a full defence review — that might take a year. we might have to wait 18 months.

i mean, in the 1930s, in the so called wilderness years, churchill didn't say, "let's have a defence review." he said, "there is an existential threat right there. "let's arm." he lost that argument. shouldn't we be getting down to it right now? we're committed to get defence spending up to 2.5% of gdp, and also crucially working with our nato allies, because it's important that other countries also play their role in increasing their defence spending. because this isn't just on our doorstep. it's on the doorstep of every other member of nato. and it's important not only that we increase spending on defence, but that other countries do as well and that we work collaboratively across the member states of nato to ensure that ukraine is supported. and i would also say that, you know, every time the government have made a commitment to ukraine, labour have backed it ioo%. national security is too important for party politics and we will always do the right thing when it comes to keeping our country safe. rachel reeves, thank you very much. thank you.

nick there. we will be speaking to a treasury minister next week. if to be chancellor is rachel reeves�* dream job, then surely, for many musicians, the role as artist in residence at abbey road studios would be right up there. the first person to bag that title, officially, is the grammy—nominated vocalist, multi—instrumentalist and producer, jordan rakei, whose new album the loop is out next month, and who is playing the west holtz stage at glastonbury and the proms at gateshead. earlier this evening i sat down with him in the hallowed studio 3, besidejohn lennon's piano, where among hundreds of albums, lady gaga recorded the song born this way, and florence and the machine, the album ceremonials. sojordan, what does the first official artist in residence at abbey road do? well, that's a good question. there's so much that i want to do this year. a few things.

i want to write new music, record with the massive scene in the uk and europe. i want to sort of build—up and grow the grassroots music scene, because the modern, young artists that don't get an opportunity to come to studios like this, too, like, have a massive writing week, or a hub, where people can collaborate, but lots to do. lots to do in this year ahead. is it also the key to kind of unlocking strange treasures? bits of tech, john lennon's piano. yeah, definitely. you can walk into a room like this and feel like, wow, this is where pink floyd were, decades ago, and then you are just naturally inspired by the general ambience, even though the room has changed over the years, there's so much history. # how i wish, how i wish you were here # we're just two lost souls # swimming in a fish bowl year after year. ..#

you talk about the importance of grassroots venues. and we already knew from the music venue trust, that two small venues were closing every week in 2023. had it not been for those grassroots venues, would you be here? oh, definitely not. i mean, i learned how to play guitar when i used to do gigs to no one in small venues, growing up, and then building your craft, building a rapport with an audience, because stagecraft is a thing you can learn through those trials and tribulations of those early gigs in your career, so it's so important those venues to develop as an artist for sure. # if my head gets so dizzy # not a word from the rest of the world... # with my secret # if i'm... # still searching for space right here # with a burden...# there is a new initiative called mainstays, i think from the independent newspaper,

as well as the music venue trust, to try to encourage more venues to be funded, and for some of the big funders to fund more small venues. i mean, without that, what happens? well, i guess, like you said, there would be just a collapse of all of the lower level venues, which is really important for the majority of the industry, because not every artist can go and play the 5000 capacity venues. you need to, like i said, build your career, and that # if a friend or a foe, or at least someone that you know # disappears from the soil of this sphere... # only then will you know that a version of your soul # will fade away and never re—appear.# at the beginning of the month, billie eilish and nicky minaj, stevie wonder, among 200 high—profile musicians demanded

protection against ai in an open letter. do you think it is a big threat to musicians, or do you embrace ai? no, i do think it is a threat because there's so much about music where you have like, ip, identity, especially with singing, and i think it's scary to think, for me as an artist being a singer, that someone could sort of re—encapsulating my voice and use it in their own music, it doesn't seem fair when i've spent all of my 20 years trying to learn how i sing like i do, and now a computer can sort of steal my identity and use it. it's a bit worrying, for sure as an artist. and of course there aren't enough protections at the moment, is the suggestion. yeah, exactly. i think that could be something that they should do, sort of set thresholds, on how much can be used in al, because i guess, in one way, you can't deny its use, because ai, it is integrating into all industries so there needs to be an element of ai in the industry somehow, but i think you need to stop at some level, although i don't really

know where that is, yet. the best will in the world, people have asked to use al, to write a song in the manner of nick cave, and he was absolutely furious. yeah. but you can't stop it, it seems. no, you can't, and that's the thing. that is the thing. songwriting is really about these vulnerable stories that detail, and you are real, and you are telling your own experience, so, to sort of type into a computer, "make me sound like stevie wonder," and then it comes up with a hit stevie wonder song, that just seem so disingenuous, and it doesn't serve the purpose of music which is about expressing oneself in the most rawest way. you know what i mean? and your album comes out next month. but you are going to play us out on newsnight with something that we can hear and buy right now. yeah, i'll be playing my track called

marco now i'll say that i never can # be the bed of roses # be the bed of roses # because my heart stretched open patients it is the thing of seeing you. # 0h, you. # oh, my love, days in your arms, # oh, my love, days in your arms, # all my days i've spent # all my days i've spent # my patience of finding # my patience of finding # by the grace of your heart, you

surrender... #