Episodi
-
The Himalayan Kingdom of Bhutan, sandwiched between China and India, is perhaps best known around the globe for its unconventional measure of national development: Gross National Happiness. The concept was introduced back in 1972 by the fourth King of Bhutan, Jigme Singye Wangchuck. It assesses the country’s overall wellbeing on the basis of sustainable and equitable socio-economic development; environmental conservation; preservation and promotion of culture; and good governance.
But the Bhutanese are now finding that their cautious approach to balancing economic growth with the well-being of their citizens, is proving difficult to sustain in light of mounting economic problems. The country which has a population of less than 800,000, is experiencing high levels of youth unemployment and many young people and skilled workers are leaving for countries like Australia and Canada.
To try and counter this brain drain and to attract new investment into the country to help the economy grow, Bhutan has plans to create a ‘Mindfulness City’. This multi-million dollar project is being spearheaded by the current monarch. At its core will be a scaled up, less cautious version of Bhutan’s key concept, which the Bhutanese Prime Minister has called Gross National Happiness 2.0.
So on this week’s Inquiry we’re asking ‘Can Bhutan retain its happiness?’
Contributors: Dr Ha Vinh Tho, Founder and President, Eurasia Learning Institute for Happiness and Well-Being, Switzerland.
Dr Rishi Gupta, Assistant Director, Asia Society Policy Institute, New Delhi, India
Dr Lhawang Ugyel, Senior Lecturer, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Jan Eeckhout, Professor of Economics, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain
Presenter: Charmaine Cozier Producer: Jill Collins Researcher: Matt Toulson Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: James Bradshaw Production Co-ordinator: Tim Fernley and Liam Morrey
-
Accusations of sabotage have been made after a Chinese merchant ship cut through two important undersea cables in the Baltic Sea. Eight of the nine states in the Baltic are members of Nato but Russia has access to the sea from St Petersburg and for its Kaliningrad exclave.
With previous incidents of damage to underwater pipelines and cables, there is concern that the security of critical underwater infrastructure is at risk from ‘grey zone’ activities - damaging but deniable incidents below the level of outright war.
David Baker hears how countries’ security is threatened by incidents like these. The pipelines that were cut ran between Finland and Germany and Sweden and Lithuania. He asks who can intervene to protect these assets in the Baltic. Can Nato respond?
Our experts this week are: Elizabeth Braw, senior fellow at the Atlantic Council Scowcroft Centre for Strategy and Security, and the author of an upcoming book called The Undersea War; Helga Kalm, director of the Lennart Meri Conference in Tallinn, Estonia; Marion Messmer, senior research fellow in the International Security Programme at Chatham House; Tormod Heier, professor at the National Defence University College in Oslo, Norway and a former officer in the Norwegian Intelligence Service.
Presenter: David BakerProducer: Philip ReevellResearcher: Katie MorganEditor: Tara McDermottSound engineer: Craig Boardman
Image Credit - Rex/Shutterstock via BBC Images
-
Episodi mancanti?
-
When Chancellor Olaf Scholz fired his finance minister, Christian Lindner last month, Germany’s ‘traffic light’ government collapsed, an uneasy coalition between parties with differing perspectives and strained relations, the Social Democrats, the Greens and the Free Democrats.
At the heart of the political dispute lie deeply opposing views about spending plans, and how to fund much needed investment in infrastructure projects such as transport, education, green energy and digital technology, in order to boost Germany’s international competitiveness.
Falling demand both domestically and overseas for manufacturing goods, the pandemic, war in Ukraine and high energy costs have weakened Germany’s economy. So how can Germany reinvigorate its exports and economic growth? On this episode of The Inquiry, we’re asking: Does Germany need to reinvent itself?
ContributorsMichaela Kuefner, Chief Political Editor, DW Deutsche Welle.Marcel Fratzscher, President, German Institute for Economic Research & Professor of Macroeconomics, Humboldt University.Julian Hinz, Professor of International Economics, Bielefeld University & Director, Trade Policy Research Group, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.Monika Schnitzer of Economics & Chairwoman of the German Council of Economic Experts.
Presenter: Tanya BeckettProduction: Diane Richardson and Matt ToulsonProduction Co-ordinator: Liam MorreyTechnical Producer: Matthew DempseyEditor: Tara McDermott
Image credit - Reuters via BBC Images
-
The car industry across the European Union employs over thirteen million people, both directly and indirectly, that’s around six percent of the bloc’s workforce. But in recent years, Europe’s manufacturers have been struggling to cope with issues like economic downturns, clean energy requirements and the digital revolution. Some of the oldest, biggest carmakers are considering plant closures and job cuts in order to try and stay afloat.
They are also facing fierce competition in the electric vehicle market from China, who have taken a lead in producing cars that are much more competitively priced and equipped with much more sophisticated technology. China’s own economy has been flagging, so the EU provides it with its largest overseas market in terms of the electric car industry.
But now, in a bid to protect their own car industry, the EU has introduced tariffs on electric cars made in China. These tariffs are set to rise from ten percent up to forty five percent for the next five years. Beijing has condemned them as protectionist and there are concerns that it could spark a trade war between Brussels and Beijing.
So, on this week’s Inquiry, we’re asking ‘Is Europe’s car industry at a crossroads?’
Contributors: Carsten Brzeski, Global Head of Macro Research, ING, Germany Tu Le, Founder and Managing Director, Sino Auto Insights, United States of America Beatrix Keim, Director, CAR Centre for Automotive Research, Germany Stefan Deix, Director, EUCAR, European Council for Automotive R&D, Belgium
Presenter: Tanya Beckett Producer: Jill Collins Researcher: Matt Toulson Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Matthew DempseyProduction Co-ordinator: Liam Morrey
Image Credit: Westend61 via Getty Images
-
When protests against decades of rule by the Assad family were crushed by Syrian government forces in the spring of 2011, opposition groups took up arms and the country descended into civil war. The conflict drew in Syria’s Kurds, jihadi groups including Islamic State and al-Qaeda, and the international community.
13 years on President Assad controls around two thirds of the country, but northern Syria remains out of the regime's grip and is highly volatile. Internal divisions, international influences and a worsening humanitarian situation may be about to further destabilise the region, with potentially serious consequences for Syria and the world. So, in this episode of The Inquiry, we’re asking ‘What’s the future for Syria’s divided north?’
ContributorsDr Burcu Ozcelik, Senior Research Fellow for Middle East Security at the Royal United Services Institute.Charles Lister, Director of the Syria and Countering Terrorism & Extremism programs, Middle East Institute.Qutaiba Idlbi, Director of the Syria Initiative at the Atlantic Council.Emma Beals, Senior Advisor at the European Institute of Peace and a non-resident scholar at the Middle East Institute in Washington.
Presenter: Emily WitherProduction: Diane Richardson and Matt ToulsonBroadcast Co-ordinator: Ellie Dover & Liam MorreyEditor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Cameron Ward
Image credit - NurPhoto via Getty Images
-
Aerospace giant Boeing has had big problems to overcome since the crashes of two of its 737 Max aircraft. Its situation was compounded this year with another safety scare and a strike losing it billions of dollars. It has a new CEO who has pledged to return the company to its engineering roots and away from cost cutting and in October, Boeing managed to raise 21bn US dollars by issuing new shares in the company. However, catching up on lost production will take time and money and financially the company is nowhere near out of the weeds.
Can Boeing regain the trust of regulators, airlines and passengers?
Contributors:Richard Aboulafia, AeroDynamic Advisory, a US aerospace consultancy Sharon Turlep, an aviation industry reporter at the Wall Street Journal Christine Negroni, an aviation journalist specialising in safety Scott Hamilton, aviation analyst
Presented by David Baker. Produced by Bob Howard. Researched by Matt Toulson. Edited by Tara McDermott. Mixed by David Crackles.
Image credit - Kevin Burkholder via Getty Images
-
Earlier this year the global video sharing platform You Tube dominated TV viewership in the United States, knocking Disney off the top spot and leaving major media names like Netflix, Paramount, Amazon and Fox in its wake. In a first for the streaming platform, the time people spent watching YouTube on television accounted for 10.4 percent of total TV in the month of July.
In terms of its world reach, the platform is now available in more than one hundred countries and pulls in nearly three billion users every month, the majority of which are between 25 and 34 years old, that’s younger than the core audience for traditional television.
Launched in 2005, YouTube has since expanded and diversified, but it’s niche area for dominating the market is still in user generated content and the advertising income it draws in provides the platform with its main source of revenue, leaving the traditional TV market in its wake.
So, on this week’s Inquiry, we’re asking ‘Is YouTube’s disruption of TV now complete?’
Contributors: Mark Bergen, Reporter with Bloomberg Technology, Author of ‘Like, Comment, Subscribe: Inside YouTube’s Chaotic Rise to World Domination’, London, UK.
Chris Stokel-Walker, Journalist, Author of ‘YouTubers: How YouTube Shook Up TV and Created a New Generation of Stars’, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK Rahul Telang, Professor of Information Systems, Carnegie Mellon University, Co-Author of ‘Streaming, Sharing, Stealing: Big Data and the Future of Entertainment’, Pennsylvania, USA
Dr. Marlen Komorowski, Professor for European Media Markets, Vrije Universiteit Brussels, Senior Research Fellow, Cardiff University, Wales, UK Presenter: Charmaine Cozier Producer: Jill Collins Researcher: Kirsteen Knight Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Cameron Ward Production Co-ordinator: Tim Fernley
Image: Silhouettes of laptop and mobile device users are seen next to a screen projection of the YouTube logo
Credit: Reuters/Dado Ruvić
-
The International Space Station will be decommissioned in 2030 and crash down into the Pacific Ocean, ending more than three decades of international cooperation.
Launched in the wake of the Cold War, the ISS is seen as a triumph of global diplomacy between the US, Russia and other nations. Its demise will mark the end of an era.
Nasa has awarded contracts to commercial companies to develop potential successors to the ISS, and maintain a U.S. presence in low earth orbit. Meanwhile Russia and India have said they plan to launch their own individual stations, and China has already got its own space station, Tiangong.
As the era of the International Space Station nears its end, this week on The Inquiry, we’re asking ‘What will happen after the International Space Station?’
Presenter: Tanya BeckettProducer: Matt ToulsonResearcher: Kirsteen Knight Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Operator: Ben Houghton
Contributors: Jennifer Levasseur, Museum Curator at the Smithsonian Institution’s National Air and Space Museum, Washington D.C., US
Mark McCaughrean, former Senior Advisor for Science & Exploration at the European Space Agency and astronomer at the Max Planck Institute for Astronomy, Heidelberg, Germany
Mai'a Cross, Professor of political science at Northeastern University, and director for the Center for International Affairs and World Cultures, Massachusetts, US
Wendy Whitman Cobb, Professor of strategy and security studies at the School of Advanced Air and Space Studies, Alabama, US
CREDIT: State of the Union address, 1984; Courtesy Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
-
This year wildfires in Canada have caused devastation to the country’s treasured town of Jasper. The wildfires have ravaged the landscape, destroyed communities and displaced hundreds of thousands of people.
The causes are many, and fires are a natural occurrence. But humans, and the climate, are making them worse. As the number and intensity of fires increase, the methods used to both prevent and fight them may need to change.
How can Canada fight its wildfires?
Presenter: Tanya BeckettProducer: Louise ClarkeResearcher: Anoushka Mutanda-DoughertyEditor: Tara McDermottTechnical producer: Cameron Ward
Contributors: Mike Flannagan, Professor of wildland fire at Thompson Rivers University in Kamloops, British ColumbiaLiz Goldman, World Resources InstituteJohn Keeley, senior research scientist with the U.S. Geological Survey and an adjunct professor at the University of California in Los AngelesCordy Tymstra, former wildfire science coordinator for the Alberta Wildfire Management Branch
(Image: Getty/ Anadolu)
-
Ukraine’s President Zelensky recently presented his ‘Victory Plan’ to end the war in Ukraine to both Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, the two candidates competing to be the next President of the United States of America. President Zelensky’s view is that if his plan is supported by Ukraine’s allies, then the war could be ended by next year.
But both US Presidential candidates, whilst in agreement that the war has to stop, have expressed a very different approach to how they would work towards that. And there are concerns from Ukraine that there will be a significant decrease in getting support in the future, regardless of who will be sitting in the White House. The United States is the top donor to Ukraine in terms of military, financial and humanitarian aid, but if their support did wane, it would mean Ukraine would have to become much more reliant on European backing. Whilst Europe has pledged much in terms of military support, it has yet to deliver everything it has promised. And there is the issue of Europe’s political will and financial backing to fulfil its pledge. In light of this President Zelensky is hoping Europe too will be convinced by his ‘Victory Plan’ and perhaps act as an insurance plan to keep the US focus on this war.
So, on this week’s Inquiry, we’re asking ‘How might the next US President affect the war in Ukraine?’
Contributors: Mariia Zolkina, Head of Regional Security and Conflict Studies, Ilko Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation, Kyiv, UkraineMary Anne Marsh, Democratic Strategist and Political Analyst, Boston, USA Matthew Kroenig, Vice President and Senior Director, Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, Washington DC, USAMatthew Savill, Director of Military Sciences, Royal United Services Institute, London, UK
Presenter: Charmaine Cozier Producer: Jill Collins Researcher: Matt Toulson Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Ben Houghton Broadcast Co-ordinator: Jacqui Johnson
(Image: BBC file photo)
-
A court room in the US State of Nevada provided the setting for the recent hearing between media mogul Rupert Murdoch and his children, over who will inherit his empire on the 93 year old’s death.
The succession battle, worthy of the TV drama Succession, which was partly inspired by the Murdoch dynasty, was played out behind closed doors and it’s unlikely that the decision, when it comes, will be made available to the public.
Murdoch’s News Corp owns hundreds of newspapers and media outlets around the world. It includes the right-leaning Fox News in the US, which gave Donald Trump a major platform in the run-up to the 2016 Presidential election, as well as widely read newspapers like the Sun in the UK.
Speculation over who is most likely to take control of the multi-billion dollar business currently centres around the eldest son Lachlan Murdoch, the sibling most closely aligned to his father in terms of their vision for the future. But at this point the outcome all depends on whether legally such a takeover can happen.
So, on this week’s Inquiry, we’re asking ‘What’s the succession plan for Murdoch’s empire?’
Contributors: Walter Marsh, Journalist and Author of Young Rupert: The Making of the Murdoch Empire, South AustraliaDavid Folkenflik, Media Correspondent NPR News, Author of Murdoch’s World: The Last of the Old Media Empires, USAReid Weisbord, Distinguished Professor of Law, Rutgers Law School, Visiting Professor, Columbia University, USA Alice Enders, Chief Economist, Enders Analysis, UK
Presenter: Tanya Beckett Producers: Louise Clarke and Jill Collins Researcher: Matt Toulson Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Nicky Edwards Broadcast Co-ordinator: Jacqui Johnson
(Image: Reuters/Mike Segar)
-
With Lebanon, Gaza, and Israel all under fire and a death count running into tens of thousands, the Middle East has never been in a more dangerous position.
The United States has been a big diplomatic influence on attempts at peace negotiations in the Middle East.
The last major attempt at peace negotiations was in the spring of 2024 when the US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken visited the region to try and broker a ceasefire.
But despite the efforts of not just the US, but Egypt, Qatar and Europe, there has been no agreement to cease hostilities.
What would bring all the different parties to the negotiating table? And is there any country or organisation credible enough that will be listened to by all parties?
This episode of The Inquiry asks: Can anyone broker peace in the Middle East?
Contributors: Hugh Lovatt, Senior Policy Fellow at the European Council on Foreign RelationsBilal Y Saab, Head of the US-Middle East Practice and an Advisor in the Scientific and Academic Council of TRENDS Research and AdvisoryProfessor Christopher Phillips, Professor of International Relations at Queen Mary University of LondonDr Burcu Ozcelik, Senior Research Fellow in Middle East security at The Royal United Services Institute
Presenter: Victoria UwonkundaProducer: Louise ClarkeResearcher: Matt ToulsonEditor: Tara McDermottTechnical producer: James BradshawProduction support: Jacqui Johnson
(Image: Getty/FADEL ITANI)
-
In September Greek Tourism Minister Olga Kefalogianni announced the introduction of special fees for passengers disembarking from cruise ships at Mykonos, Santorini and some other ports. The fees are part of a broader strategy to manage the resurgence of mass tourism post-covid, reducing some of the negative impacts such as pressure on water supplies, waste management and overcrowding, while spreading the economic benefits more fairly across society. Greece is not alone in considering how to alleviate the tensions arising when exceptional numbers of tourists arrive during peak holiday times. Venice has limited the size of tour groups, charging visitors a daily entry fee and the mayor of Barcelona has pledged to eliminate short-term tourist lets in the city within five years, to ease housing pressures.
With revenues from international tourism reaching USD 1.8 trillion last year according to the United Nations World Tourism Organisation, many governments and experts are thinking carefully about how to strike a balance between the economic boost, the tourist experience and the welfare of local communities. Can tourists be enticed away from those Instagram hot spots and what potential solutions could Greece employ to deal with overtourism? ContributorsKaterina Kikilia, Head of Tourism Management, University of West Attica, AthensSandra Carvão, Director of Market Intelligence, Policies, and Competitiveness, UN World Travel OrganisationKumi Kato, Professor in Tourism Studies, Wakayama University, JapanCevat Tosun, Eisenhower chair and professor of Tourism Studies and management at George Washington University School of Business
Presenter: Charmaine CozierProduction: Diane Richardson and Matt ToulsonBroadcast Co-ordinator: Jacqui JohnsonEditor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Toby James
(Image: Oia, Thira, Greece / Getty Images: Fernando Vazquez Miras)
-
Just over three years ago the Taliban seized Kabul and stormed to power in Afghanistan. They soon declared a new government which is still not recognised by any other country.
The Taliban claim they have made improvements to the country. War is over and, they say, there is more peace and security than before they came to power.
But millions of people are struggling to survive in the country, there is a restrictive rule of law that is imposed by a very hierarchical government structure and half the population need aid.
This week on The Inquiry we’re asking ‘How are the Taliban governing Afghanistan?’
Presenter: Emily WitherProducers: Louise Clarke and Matt ToulsonEditor: Tara McDermottTechnical Producers: Nicky Edwards and Cameron Ward
Contributors: Dr Weeda Mehran, co-director for Advanced Internationalist studies at Exeter UniversityGraeme Smith, senior analyst for the International Crisis GroupDr Orzala Nemet, research associate at ODI Overseas Development InstituteJavid Ahmad, non-resident scholar at the Middle East Institute in Washington DC
(Photo by WAKIL KOHSAR/AFP via Getty Images)
-
At the beginning of September, the far-right party Alternative for Germany or AfD, won an election in the eastern state of Thuringia. The result marked the far right’s first win, in a state parliament election, since World War Two. In the more populous neighbouring state of Saxony the party came in a close second. Whilst in both states the party has been officially classed as ‘right-wing extremist’, the results nonetheless, signify a sharp rebuke from the voting public towards Germany’s established political forces, including the ruling coalition.
The Afd was founded in 2013 as an anti-euro party to challenge the government. It entered the German parliament for the first time in 2017 and now it’s focus has shifted to immigration and Islam. As the country faces federal elections next year, Germany’s Chancellor Olaf Scholz has urged mainstream parties to block the AfD from governing in Thuringia by maintaining a so-called firewall against it. But in terms of the voting public, the polls currently suggest the party could also take the most votes in Brandenburg state’s election coming up.
So, on this week’s Inquiry we’re asking, Can Germany’s far right win the country?
Contributors: Thomas König, Professor Dr. of Political Science, European Politics, University of Mannheim, Germany Dr. Michelle Lynn Kahn, Associate Professor, Modern European History, University of Richmond, VA, USA Christina Zuber, Professor Dr. of German Politics, Department of Politics and Public Administration, University of Konstanz, Germany Jörn Fleck, Senior Director of the Europe Centre, The Atlantic Council, Washington DC, USA
Presenter: Tanya Beckett Producer: Jill Collins Researcher: Matt Toulson Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Nicky Edwards Broadcast Co-ordinator: Jacqui Johnson
Image Credit: CLEMENS BILAN/EPA-EFE/REX/Shutterstock
-
In August this year, a US court in Washington DC ruled that Google acted illegally to crush its competition and maintain a monopoly on online search and related advertising. This is just one of a number of lawsuits that have been filed against the big tech companies, as US antitrust authorities attempt to strengthen competition in the industry.
Now Google is facing another legal case in Virginia, USA, over its advertising technology. Whilst in Europe it has been fined billions in monopoly cases. Google themselves dispute they are a ‘monopolist’ and presented evidence in the US court case in August to show that they face ‘fierce competition from a broad range of competitors’. The court did find Google’s search to be ‘superior’ to its competitors. And Google’s executives say consumers stick with them because they find Google ‘helpful’.
Google is everywhere in our online lives and it handles billions of search queries every day, so on this week’s Inquiry, we’re asking ‘Can we trust Google?’
Contributors: David Vise, Pulitzer Prize winning Journalist and Author of ‘The Google Story’, New York, USA Professor Douglas Melamed, Visiting Fellow, Stanford Law School, Washington, DC. USA Jonathan Stray, Senior Scientist, UC Berkeley Center for Human-Compatible AI, California, USA Cristina Caffarra, Independent Expert Economist, Honorary Professor, UCL, London, UK
Presenter: David Baker Producer: Jill Collins Researcher: Matt Toulson Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Nicky Edwards Broadcast Co-ordinator: Jacqui Johnson
Image Credit: Reuters/Steve Marcus
-
Hezbollah has both political and military wings both of which are designated by several countries as terror organisations. It emerged several decades ago in Lebanon.
Since Israel launched its war in Gaza in the wake of the Hamas attacks of October 7th, it has intensified its military activities along the border between Israel and Lebanon.
The persistent question has been what is it trying to achieve? Are the attacks intended as a show of support for the Palestinians in Gaza or an attempt to take advantage of Israel’s diverted military focus? And could this dangerous front lead to an all-out war in the Middle East?
This week on the Inquiry we are asking: What does Hezbollah want?
Contributors:Aurélie Daher, Associate Professor in political science at the University Paris-Dauphine Lina Khatib, Associate Fellow with the Middle East and North Africa program at Chatham HouseDr Bashir Saade, Lecturer of Politics and Religion at the University of Stirling in ScotlandMehran Kamrava, Professor of government at Georgetown University in Qatar
Presenter: Tanya BeckettProducer: Louise ClarkeResearcher: Matt ToulsonEditor: Tara McDermottTechnical Producer: Gareth JonesBroadcast Co-ordinator: Jacqui Johnson
Image: Hezbollah Fighters and Mourners Attend Funeral of Top Commander Fuad Shukr in Beirut / NurPhoto / Contributor via Getty Images
-
In 2018 an historic document known as the ‘Provisional Agreement’ was signed between the Catholic Church and the People’s Republic of China. So far this agreement has been renewed every two years and the expectation is that it will be renewed again this year.
The only detail that has been made public is that the Agreement allows the Pope final approval on Bishops appointed by the Chinese authorities, other than that it is cloaked in secrecy. But there have been occasions since its signing where the Communist Party have reneged on this Agreement, approving its own choice of Bishops.
There are an estimated 13 million Catholics in China, split between the official Chinese state recognised church and the underground church. And one of the Catholic Church’s most senior members, Cardinal Joseph Zen, the former Bishop of Hong Kong, has in the past, referred to this Provisional Agreement as betrayal of those in the underground church.
For the Pope, the Agreement is a pragmatic attempt to unify the church in China and make peace with the state, but the underground church see this Agreement as a sell-out by their spiritual father.
So on The Inquiry, we’re asking ‘Is Pope Francis ‘betraying’ China’s Catholics?’
Contributors: Martin Palmer, Theologian and Sinologist, UK Fr. Jeroom Heyndrickx, CICM (Scheut) Missionary, BelgiumSamuel Chu, President, Campaign for Hong Kong, USA John Allen, Editor of Crux, Italy Presenter: William Crawley Producer: Jill Collins Researcher: Matt Toulson Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Craig Boardman Broadcast Co-ordinator: Jacqui Johnson
Image Credit: A worshipper waves the flag of China, as Pope Francis leaves the weekly general audience at St Peter’s Square in the Vatican. Photo by Filippo MONTEFORTE/AFP via Getty Images.
-
Project 2025 is a blueprint for the next conservative president of the US. The think tank behind it, The Heritage Foundation, has published a book, ‘Mandate for Leadership’. It’s an anthology of ideas that suggest sweeping changes to federal government, presidential power and US involvement in global affairs.
Mandate for Leadership is a collection of policy ideas, written for any president to use once in office. Previous Republican administrations have implemented many of its action points.
Project 2025 is divisive. Many see it as a way to strengthen the US constitution, but others fear it will dismantle it and invest irreversible power in the president.
How might Project 2025 shape the US?
Presented by Charmaine CozierProduced by Louise ClarkeResearched by Matt ToulsonEditor Tara McDermott Technical producer Nicky Edwards
Contributors: Don Moynihan, Professor at the McCourt School of Public Policy at Georgetown University in Washington DC
Jeff Anderson, the President of the American Main Street Initiative
Beau Breslin, Professor of Political Science at Skidmore College in upstate New York
Heather Hurlburt, Associate Fellow at Chatham House
(Image credit: AP)
-
Last year the Canadian province of British Columbia, launched a landmark three-year pilot programme on drug decriminalisation. For a number of years now communities across Canada have been facing their own opioid crisis, as drugs like fentanyl become more easily available.
Vancouver in British Columbia, has always been at the forefront of drug policy change, yet it has seen an explosion in overdose deaths due to toxic drugs in recent years. So the city readily adopted the decriminalisation programme as a measure to try and help reduce the death rates. But now just over a year since its implementation, that pilot programme has been scaled back, and it now means that people found with drugs on their person in public places can be arrested again. Can Canada overcome its drug overdose crisis?’
Contributors: Dr. Alexander Caudarella, CEO Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction, Ottawa, CanadaKennedy Stewart, associate professor, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, Canada Aljona Kurbatova, head of Centre for Health Promotion, National Institute for Health Development, Tallinn, Estonia Gillian Kolla, assistant professor, Memorial University, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
Presenter: Charmaine Cozier Producer: Jill Collins Researcher: Matt Toulson Editor: Tara McDermott Technical producer: Richard Hannaford
(Photo: Supervised consumption sites in the DTES. Credit: Gary Coronado/Getty Images)
- Mostra di più
