Learn Language through the song - | English exercises

Translate:

The setting up of a national inquiry

into child grooming gangs in the UK has

descended into chaos. Lots of the

survivors who were involved in advising

the inquiry have withdrawn because

they're not happy about how it's shaping

up. And two of the people who were

touted as potential chairs have

withdrawn because of the criticism that

they've faced. We will discuss what is

going on and what it means on this

episode of the BBC's daily news podcast

newscast.

Well, we can catch up with Chris who's

at Westminster. Hello, Chris.

>> Hi.

>> And also our special correspondent,

Judith Morris. Hi, Judith.

>> Hi, Adam.

>> Where are you geographically? Judith.

>> Gloria Sulford.

>> Okay. Oh, inside in an office for once

rather than

>> indoors.

>> Yes, that's makes a change. Um um before

we dive into the politics of of today, I

just wonder Judith, where is a good

place to kind of go back to for this for

this story?

>> Good question. Um well look let's start

I guess by just reminding ourselves of

why we are in the place we are talking

about a national inquiry at all because

you you remember all the back and forth

about this at the start of this year.

>> The government resisted initially a

national inquiry. The plan at the

beginning of the year was for there to

be local inquiries, five local

inquiries, but there was a a review and

audit commissioned uh which was carried

out by Baroness Louise Casey and as part

of that she recommended that there

should be a national inquiry. Now I mean

this is complex um but what she said

very clearly at the time was she didn't

want it to look like other public

inquiries. You know, there have been a

raft of different inquiries in the past

which touch on this subject, not least,

of course, the longrunning Ixa, you

know, the independent inquiry into child

sexual abuse. But

>> there's been a feeling uh widely

accepted that no one's got to grips with

the specific issue of grooming gangs.

And when Louise Casey looked at this,

she was particularly looking at whether

or not enough local authorities and and

regional areas were likely to take up

the the idea of of local inquiries. Tony

Olden put its hand up and she said I

think it needs to be national but it

needs to be local in inquiries which

feed into a national umbrella not

something which takes on the same form

as uh not a judge-led inquiry

necessarily but something new and you

could say well maybe that now is why we

are where we are because it's being

fought over the terms of reference the

concept of who will chair this what

it'll look like how it will

run. That's up for grabs. That's what's

being debated and clearly people are

falling out over it.

>> And also Chris, just the politics

throughout this year, the way the

government was sort of justifying this

and saying it wasn't a U-turn was that

they put in place a process under Louise

Casey that could have led to this

outcome and they were just following the

process and Luis Casey changed her mind

about whether to have a national

inquiry. So therefore it's okay for the

prime minister to to change his mind.

And also as Judith was saying this

wasn't a repeat of the big child abuse

inquiry. This is a quite targeted thing.

And also I remember at the time Luis

Casey saying so much of it was just

about forcing different local agencies

and different bits of local government

to actually talk to each other in a way

that a local inquiry couldn't do.

>> Yeah. There's been a kind of arc to this

political argument going back to the the

beginning of the year and the prime

minister's trying to make the case that

he has followed a kind of logical

procedure if you like even if it has

taken some time with the work that

Baroness Casey did earlier in the year

and then that decision I remember I was

with the prime minister on a plane on

the way to the G7 summit in Canada when

he told us middle of a Saturday

afternoon I think it was that there

would be um this uh statutory uh inquiry

and that it I've just been looking back

at my notes actually from that day, 14th

of June. Setting it up will take a bit

of time, he said. Well, that's

definitely turned out to be the case and

and then now the politics around uh

around what it amounts to and who chairs

it. And I'm struck, Adam, and we can

talk about how it came up at Prime

Minister's questions because it was the

dominating exchanges between the prime

minister and Kemmy Badnockley,

Conservative leader. But taking half a

step back from it and just reflecting on

what Judith was saying, I'm struck that

at the heart of this that the government

is is having to wrestle and in public

with the reality of the utterly bleak

nature of this and the fact that at its

heart are victims who have been let down

in the most profound way by agencies of

the state. And you now have a government

attempting to grapple with this and set

up an infrastructure, an inquiry that

can attempt to get to some answers. But

in so doing, yeah, of course, is is

dealing with a a range of people who

have been persistently let down. Some of

whom are then now not happy with the

process that's underway. and and the

nature of that is then playing out in

real time whilst the government is still

trying to go about trying to find the

right per the right person to lead it

conscious that they'll want to ensure

that when a decision is taken firstly as

the prime minister acknowledges perhaps

not everyone will be happy but that also

that that person is is up for the

longevity of the challenge ahead so that

this isn't a recurring problem for

everyone involved in this where they

might have to come back and and find

somebody else. Yeah, and we'll talk

about the appointment of the chair in a

second and also how it played out at

Prime Minister's questions on Wednesday

lunchtime. But first, Judith, just in

terms of the the victims and survivors

who've been on the panel advising during

the setting up of this inquiry, we've

now got a situation where well, as we're

recording on Wednesday evening, four

people have withdrawn from that panel,

but equally a few people on the panel

have come forward saying they disagree

with some of the people who've

withdrawn.

Yeah, it's clear that there's a a

division of opinion that not everybody

uh has the same view that all survivors

have the same view. I think that's to be

expected. You know, whenever I've

covered stories in the past, very

different to this, but public inquiries

or legal processes involving survivors

and victims of of difficult situations,

attacks, tragedies, whatever, you will

find it's a mistake to take the the the

view that everyone has the same opinion.

and and I don't know whether that was

perhaps a naive assumption here uh

amongst officials who were looking at

this you know let's take a sounding

board of some views of different

survivors and we should then be able to

take that box and move on but certainly

I've been speaking to survivors of

grooming gangs over the last couple of

days particularly have heard of Fiona

Godard who's been very vocal she's waved

her right to anonymity and she was the

first person to resign uh others by the

way who haven't given up their right to

anonymity. And I think that is another

thing to just mention here is it makes

it difficult to get a sense of how many

survivors at the moment are are closely

plugged into this process because you

know there are people who are keeping

their anonymity. We don't know everybody

who's involved. Some of those have come

out vocally um have chosen to do that.

Others are quietly, you know, getting on

with it, either staying involved or

perhaps not or considering pulling out.

It's hard to get a a sense of the full

scale.

>> But the two issues that the sort of the

division seems to be around is first of

all the scope of the inquiry to use a

very civil servants word like how many

things and different issues this would

actually look at and then yeah the

personnel who's going to run it.

>> Yeah. And I think so the scope first of

all um you know if you ask me for my

take on that it's it's I think when when

I'm talking to these survivors they're

saying look we don't understand why this

is even a subject for debate because

when Louise Casey recommended it she

recommended it as a national inquiry

into grooming gangs full stop laser

focus this subject only we don't need a

broadbased inquiry they say that's what

I was we've been there and and there

wasn't enough focus on the specific

specifics of this subject. Now, why are

they worrying about this being too broad

brush? Well, I've seen notes that was

shown to me from the agenda of one of

the meetings that the survivors had as

part of the panel process before this

inquiry gets going, these consultation

process conversations happening. And one

of the questions they were being asked

was, should this inquiry have an

explicit focus on grooming gangs or

group based CSA or should it take a

broader approach? And the fact they were

even being asked that question offended

some of them. They felt that that was

something which had already been settled

by Louise Casey and her recommendation.

And even if the terms of reference for

this inquiry are still being hammered

out, they feel that shouldn't be one of

the things which is at issue. So that's

why they're saying it's too broad brush.

We're worrying about it. The identity of

the chairperson is a whole other

conversation. And there you'll know that

the two prospective candidates we know

about, both of whom have now withdrawn,

one a former police officer, the other a

former social worker. There's an an

argument that there are some survivors

saying that's too close to home. social

services, police forces are two of the

main uh agencies we know have failed.

They shouldn't be providing former

members of staff to chair an inquiry

like this. There's other survivors who

are very happy with that kind of

arrangement because they feel it's

relevant. It brings relevance to the

process. So there's a you know that

again is somewhere that people are are

disagreeing. And Judith, the former

police officer you referred to there was

Jim Gamble, uh, who was also previously

the boss of something called COP, the

Child Exploitation and Online Protection

Safety Center. Pops up on the news

talking about these issues quite often.

I've interviewed him loads of times and

he was on the the news channel today and

he actually had some quite harsh words

for the the political system as a whole.

All you have to do is is is to to scan

Twitter or to watch any of the

parliamentary debates on this to see the

level of adversarial

approaches that that that are being

taken. Rather than politicians think,

look, we've got the opportunity of a

generation um to do the right thing for

these children and young people, these

survivors of this awful abuse. People

are using it instead for party political

point scoring opportunities. That's just

not acceptable. And what it does is it

misinforms and misdirects so many people

and and I worry that victims and

survivors who watch this are are left

with a feeling that this is never going

to be resolved.

>> Yeah. So Chris, what's your take on just

the politics of this today, this week,

this year?

>> It's inevitable. I think you know I'm

I'm always conscious. You think of so

many issues where there will be a desire

perhaps that things don't become

political or the politics could be taken

out of it. And my instinct having kicked

around this post code at Westminster for

a long time is that is that the polit

politics is inevitable particularly when

issues are as fraught and uh inevitably

lead to uh strong feelings. PMQs today

dominated as I say by this issue at

least the main exchanges of prime

minister's questions between Kam Veno

and um and Kia Star K Bok accusing the

government of engaging in a briefing war

against survivors um which really

annoyed and I think upset some Labour

front um and backbenches the prime

minister acknowledging that these are

the hard yards in the context of getting

things up and running and you know an

acknowledgement of the bumps of the last

few days, but insisting that the scope

won't be diluted and the inquiry won't

shy away from cultural and uh religious

issues and then pushing back against the

claims that some have suggested that

it's a um that it's a a cover up. From

what I hear within government, they they

know as the prime minister acknowledged

publicly that this is difficult and that

these are the hard yards, but that in

their view getting the the casting right

the first time uh is absolutely key so

that this doesn't develop into something

that critics could suggest was a kind of

rolling mess really. uh and that if it

takes some bumps at the start, it might

be worth it in order to get something up

and running that is um that is sort of

believed and trusted and on on the

particular nature of who you get uh to

to run it to chair it. The prime

minister pushing back against the

argument that some have made including

the conservatives that it should be

judgeled. the prime minister uh pointing

back to what Dame Louise Casey said

which is that if you go down that route

uh the danger is that you can't run or

you're less likely to have

simultaneously running police inquiries

and the government I think very keen

that this gets up and running by the

relative speed of these things quite

quickly and that you can do that uh if

you have if it's not led by a judge in a

way that might not happen if it if it

were to be

>> and Judith in terms of speed and trying

to keep the ball rolling while they look

for a permanent chair. Guess who's come

back? Louise Casey. She's now going to

be involved in even more in setting this

thing up. So, it sort of feels like

there's still some momentum.

>> Yeah. Although not the suggestion that

she would chair it and actually from the

get-go when this recommendation when she

made that recommendation back in June

and I spoke to survivors then and said,

"Who would you like to get involved? Who

do you want to chair this?" They said,

"Louise Casey, please." Um so you know

yeah it is look there are some

uncomfortable reminders here uh of IXA

because you'll remember that that

inquiry went through three chairwomen

before the fourth professor Alexis J

took the reigns nobody wants to see

teething problems here of that ilk but

you know normally when I cover public

inquiries like the Manchester Arena

inquiry the Southport attack inquiry

which is running at the moment or the

Fill Wall inquiry uh into the the Lucy

Leppy um situation at the hospital in

Chester. Those follow the same kind of

path generally. You know, the inquiry is

announced, the chairperson's appointed,

the terms of reference is set and then

although there is consultation generally

with stakeholders with with victims and

survivors, things get going relatively

seamlessly because the parameters are

well established from the beginning.

They have to be before the hearings can

start. this was never going to be a

public inquiry in that mold. Louise

Casey said she didn't want that and and

so it was always I think we always

expected there to be challenges. Um the

question is going to be as Chris has

just said, you know, can they overcome

those in short order to be able to get

this going underway and crucially with

the confidence of the people who've been

calling for it for so many years. And

also Judith, just picking up on your

last point there about previous

inquiries. You've got to remember these

are usually quite timeconsuming,

painstaking things, and quite often that

conflicts with the strong emotions and

people's desire for for justice or a

solution or an answer because they've

been going through this for years,

decades even.

>> Yeah. Which is why actually uh the the

case management if you like the terms of

reference the structure of the thing is

so critical because even if it's going

to take a long time if there's focus and

purpose and people can understand the

rationale behind that and and see that

it is proceeding if you like in the

right direction you'll carry that

confidence of those involved along with

you. It's it's where things perhaps feel

amorphous, not quite set in stone yet.

Nobody quite knows how this is going to

work. I think

>> at this stage it feels that that

confidence is ebbing away, but it's

there to be regained. And I'm saying

that actually only of course in relation

to the survivors I've been speaking to

who've pulled out. We mustn't forget

there are others still very much on

board. And so you know where are we

going to net out ultimately? They need

to keep the confidence of as many of

those uh people as possible.

>> Judith, thank you very much.

>> Thanks.

>> And Chris, thanks to you too.

>> Cheers. Now, why we should all care

about the soaring price of orange juice,

although actually the signs that it

might stop soaring or has stopped

soaring in the last few months. Fisel

Islam BBC economics editor has written a

fantastic essay for the BBC in-depth

section of the website where he has

taken apart nay unpeeled all the reasons

why we should care about this breakfast

staple and fisel is on newscast down the

line right now. Hello Fisel

and Fisizel is here. Hello.

>> Hello Adam.

>> I actually read your long read on the

BBC news website over breakfast. No, I

don't mean I I wasn't suggesting I'd

actually read it. I meant I actually

read it over breakfast, but I'm not I'm

not really an orange juice consumer.

>> Okay.

>> So,

>> I only have it when I when I check into

a hotel and I've got breakfast included.

>> Okay. Well, that's good. Yeah. No, it's

it's it's it's the fact that it's such a

staple and that it's we all know what's

in it. Well, kind of up to a point, but

so simple that makes it quite a nice way

to track inflationary pressures

everywhere around the world. So, so

yeah, it was it was a it was a great

idea to just try and take the example of

one product.

>> And in terms of prices, what are we

looking at?

>> Oh, they've gone up hugely. I mean,

everyone does notice it. And it's the

sort of I don't they call it the sticker

shock in the shops, but it's kind of

cafe shock, the glass shock, but yeah,

if you're talking about kind of standard

carton, a fairly basic orange juice,

well below a pound, 7080p 5 years ago,

now 1.7182.

So that's kind of more on double the

more more sort of natural sound sort of

bit bit with bits in it pure 100%. It's

all different varieties and that's part

of the issue. They've gone up 30 40 50%

over 5 years. A lot of that has happened

over the past 12 months for you know for

reasons we can we will we will get into.

Um but yeah yeah it's um it slightly

depends on what type of orange juice but

there's some common factors. Well, let's

I mean there's loads of factors that we

can unpick um or unpeel see as we're

talking about oranges. First of all,

let's talk about just the the structure

of the global orange market. Why is that

important here?

>> Well, well, it really matters and it's

because

if you orange is such a simple product

and although obviously we can't grow

them here, there's a large belt of the

of the center of the world uh where they

can be grown because of the because of

the climate. You would expect that even

if it was problem problem in one

particular area they'd make up for it

somewhere else. Um that hasn't happened.

Orange production is hugely concentrated

on one country which is Brazil. That is

not an accident. If you look at the

history that's the result of the kind of

cultivation of Brazil by the US

multinationals that created the orange

juice market. It was America that

created, if you like, the and

commoditized orange juice. And that

stems back to World War II where they

were specifically looking, the US kind

of army scientists for ways to send out

vitamin C to the troops and didn't quite

make them make to them on time. But

actually older newscasters will may

remember or even have the kind of uh the

rations. Orange was a key part of what

was called welfare foods, the the

creation of the welfare state in the UK.

Uh but then eventually Minutemade um it

commercializes it on orange juice after

the war. It booms in America. It becomes

part of the American dream. It becomes a

health drink. It becomes particularly

fed to children. Uh and in particular

they cultivate Brazil. They develop

Brazil as the market to to as as as the

source to to essentially serve the

market in the US and it goes global. And

now though that started to reverse as

people question the health benefits in

terms of the amount of sugar. But in

areas of the developing world that are

becoming more middle class and having

breakfast and want to feel in their way

sophisticated with a bit of consumption

is going up. Whereas in areas of the

developed world where they're thinking

about sugar levels it's going down.

Actually in UK it's still going up. Um,

so that's so so so that's the that's the

broad structure of the market, but it's

very concentrated on Brazil, very

dependent on Brazil. And in Brazil,

there's been this disease called citrus

greening that's taken out in some parts,

twothirds, not taken out, it's kind of

greatly reduced the crop in two/irds of

the trees. And then on top of that,

you've had huracans and the effects of

climate change and production in

Florida, which is the home of this

stuff, uh, down at Great Depression

levels. And there's a bit of a Trump

trade tariff angle.

>> There is that has complicated matters

and it kind of goes in different

directions on different days. Uh clearly

the Canadians saw orange juice as a sort

of seinal toemic product that they could

hit back on. Justin Trudeau, the former

prime minister, said we're going to have

to get used to not drinking so much

Florida orange juice. They slapped a big

tariff on it. In any event, the tar even

maybe before the tariff, demand for

Florida orange juice went down in Canada

as a sort of patriotic kind of push. Um,

they also tried to use it against

Brazil. But this is interesting because

it shows the limits of this. Uh, they

were going to put 50% on everything from

Brazil because of some of the problems

that Donald Trump has with the Brazilian

government, the leftwing government in

Brazil. um but they couldn't do in the

end because it would have been so

femininal, so tomic on the American

breakfast table had this tariff been

passed through and it ended up being

10%. But that's also played havoc with

the price which has fed through

eventually into the supermarket shelf

prices that we discussed before.

>> And then there's just how the price

rises are passed on to us the consumer

because it's not a straight line from

the increasing cost of the raw materials

to increasing cost on the shelf.

>> Absolutely. Um and so and it raises

questions about the stickiness of

prices. So I described it run up hugely.

It has actually fallen back now as the

crop in Brazil does okay. That has not

filtered through into the shops. There's

two or three reasons for that. Firstly,

they uh it's just and you have to talk

to people actually buying the product at

this point. The graphs don't do it

justice. And they talk about the panic

of trying to buy this orange and get it

out of Brazil and there wasn't enough in

Brazil and they paid the top dollar.

Even though it went up to, you know, to

the equivalent of $5 per per kilo, uh,

which is normally one to two, they were

paying seven because they just needed

it. They can't not have it. And they

couldn't get it out of Florida. So you

have the So what did they do? They

stockpiled this frozen stuff because

they take the water out, they freeze it,

they send it around the world in big

green drums. Who knew? um and then uh

they couldn't take it and then they have

to use it. They have to use all that

stuff they paid seven bucks for. So So

that's a factor. Then then you have to

you know the the supermarkets maybe held

their prices when they were paying more

and now they maybe need to make some of

that back. Maybe the in general uh the

consumer has got used to paying two

pound and not one pound for basic orange

juice4 and not three pound for pure

orange juice. And if you're a producer,

you think maybe I should accommodate

this new price point rather than wind

things back to where they are. So what

you're seeing is uh different blends.

You're seeing different sizes. You're

seeing a sort of try a reinvigoration of

it as an attempted health drink. And in

particular, and I didn't notice this

until I noticed it really. I thought the

proliferation of like orange with apple,

orange with mandarin, orange with

clementine. I just thought that was like

being cool, like flavors, but it's like

totally economic. Oh, everything's

economic, Adam. But like this is even

more economic. It It's a cheaper way of

getting the same level of sweetness

because I think people might notice I'm

interested to know what you guys think

that the sort of average normal plain

orange juice is is less sweet than you

may have remembered three or four years

ago. And that's a direct result of some

of the factors that we that we've seen.

And also you hinted at this earlier in

the conversation that actually there's a

generation of people and also just

various groups of people who are a bit

more skeptical of the health benefits of

orange juice and so that changes the the

the the market as well.

>> Yeah. So back in the day around the

second world war when this was developed

they were trying to fight scurvy and it

was vitamin C and that was the that was

the genius sort of medicine that you

drank that was also fulfilling. Now, of

course, sugar, obesity, there's been a

backlash and in particular, uh, kids

that maybe 25 years ago would have

ordinarily had orange juice every

morning at breakfast aren't getting it

for health reasons and so are not

developing a habit.

>> It's so interesting though because I've

just made a note of all the factors that

contribute to the the price changes of

just one product. And you've and

basically you've gone through the

structure of the market for the

commodity globally. Then like external

biological factors like whether there's

a a disease or an earthquake or a flood

or a fire somewhere that affects the the

raw materials. Then you've got the trade

policy of individual countries

particularly America. Then you've got

the factors in the shop like how much

are they also having to pay on I don't

know increased national insurance

contributions for their staff and how

much product have they got. Then you've

got how the producers are dealing with

it and actually do they have stuff they

have to get rid of or stuff they have to

replace. And then you've just got the

fact that we're in a giant global market

now. And so the tastes of the middle

classes in India and China have an

impact on what products we have in the

shelves in the UK and how much those

products cost. That's kind of like six

things that then get boiled down to one

number which is the inflation in one

particular food item.

>> No, absolutely. And we see similar

things in other commodities. And I think

the general thing for me is is is like

why now that the global market price has

fallen not quite the pattern we're

seeing is we've seen a big run up in

commodities prices uh partly during the

pandemic and and after the lockdown

obviously during the energy crisis and

then a bit more over the past year and

in many cases that has fallen back.

We've seen that in things like cocoa.

We've seen that in other areas but the

prices are not adjusting. So people

quite rightly at home are thinking are

we going to get back to normal and I'm

trying to explain why some reasons why

they have not that said I think there's

a reasonable argument now are we getting

to the point now with retailers and with

the supermarkets where customers will

start to question well hang on you

should really be passing on some of

these price changes back to us so we can

feel it in our pockets. It may just be

and and as it happens, the food price

inflation numbers did come down a bit

more than expected this morning. They're

still they're still pretty high, but

they have come down.

>> Having just said like there are loads of

factors about why you shouldn't just

boil things down to one number. I mean,

we have boiled things down into one

number today in in the world of

journalism and politics which is the

inflation number which is 3.8% according

to the office for national statistics.

So, it's kind of lower than people were

expecting this month and there's

consequences of that. But I mean it is

means that prices are still going up by

on average 3.8%.

>> Yeah. So so that what place is it in

that's not great. It's double nearly

double the target. It's higher than the

G7 peers. It's not where you'd want it

to be. What but the markets factor all

that in already, right? And then you're

like what's the direction of travel now?

And so a surprise even what would appear

to be a modest surprise. So we thought

it would go to 4% or above. That was the

expectation and it stayed at 3.8%. 8%

has people questioning the dominant

narrative and the dominant narrative

that had emerged over the past couple of

weeks is the UK is starting to look like

an outlier on inflation and there's

maybe something pro problematic in the

stickiness of the economy is it that the

tax rises have been passed on is it you

know what is it there do we have to

treat Britain differently and I think

this starts to say well okay maybe we

don't maybe there was just a bit of a

bump maybe this is all going to be um

okay okay you know so a market is just a

bunch of opinions which fight against

each other and so that one today seems

to be a bit more dominant and the

expression of that I would say the proof

point here is that the markets are now

starting to think actually the inflation

outlook is going to go down from here

food prices they say may well have

peaked now food price inflation sorry

>> and therefore the bank of England now

having oomed and aed the markets over

whe this is going to happen might just

have the space for a further rate cut

this this year that Andrew Bailey might

attempted to dawn his Santa hat and give

a rate cut to the country in in

December. And that in turn, something

we've talked about loads, uh, Adam, has

led the market rates for government

borrowing to continue their their

downward fall in in a way that like, you

know, is is now notable.

>> Oh, and just before I let you go,

another food related news story today,

which is that penguin biscuits, they

can't call them chocolate covered

anymore.

>> Yeah. Well, this is

>> and I know you've been at the dentist

recently, so maybe this is not the most

appropriate orange juice to start and

then a chocolate chocolate flavored

biscuit to end, but

>> I have I have been at the dentist. This

is true. Um the um so this is if you

like inflation, hidden inflation

expresses itself in the size of the the

size of your goods, but also now in the

labeling of the goods. And in this case,

cocoa prices have spiraled. I think from

something like $3,000

up to 112,000 per or I've forgotten

which metric unit it is now, but like

anyway, uh the chart is extraordinary.

And I think it was more expensive than

copper and and crude oil at one point uh

per per gram. It's fallen back again.

It's halfved. It's still much higher

than than it was. And the net result is

how they respond to that the

manufacturers is they cook cut the cocoa

content and they've cut it below the

threshold for what counts as chocolate

which I think is 20 to 25% and it

depends Brexit whether we're in the UK

or the EU but like so yeah so it doesn't

count as chocolate and it's now

chocolate flavored. These conversations

always remind me of the time I bought a

jar of cinnamon in the corner shop and I

dropped it on the way home and I just

thought if I was a medieval spice

merchant, my entire business would have

been destroyed by this jar of cinnamon

falling on the floor and only half of it

fell out. And then I stopped in another

shop on the way home and bought a tiny

little jar to decant what was left into,

thinking that I've probably saved

millions per ton.

>> No, you're sounding like me in pine

nuts. Pine nuts. We were my my I was

trying to my my uh my other half was

trying to make some pesto and said we

need to buy some pine nuts and I

couldn't it was like it was I it didn't

make sense making the pesto. The pine

nuts are like they they're like little

golden nuggets. They're extremely

expensive. So anyway, there's a there's

a top cooking tip as well as an economic

tip.

>> I'm feeling a whole new newscast basket

of goods coming on. Pine nuts,

cinnamon,

uh, chocolate flavored drinks, biscuits,

>> chocolate orange,

>> uh, orange concentrate, orange not

concentrate. Anyway, Fisel, thank you

very much.

>> Great to see you.

>> And that's all for this episode of

Newscast. Thank you very much for

listening. We'll be back with another

one very soon. Bye-bye.

Please choose the correct answer for each question below: