Return to Transcripts main page
Quest Means Business
U.S. Adds 115,000 Jobs In April, Far Higher Than Expected; U.S. Military Says It Disabled Two Vessels In Gulf Of Oman; Russia And Ukraine Agree To Three-Day Truce, Prisoner Swap; Interview With Rep. Mike Quigley (D-IL); Cruise Ship At Center Of Hantavirus Outbreak Is Now Heading To Spain's Canary Islands; Reform U.K. Chips Away At Conservative And Labour Support; Starmer: I Will Not Walk From The Country's Challenges. Meloni Warns Of DeepFake Dangers After AI-Generated Photo Of Her Circulates. Aired 4-5p ET
Aired May 08, 2026 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[16:00:17]
RICHARD QUEST, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST, "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS": Closing bell is ringing on Wall Street. There you go. Nice robust one. If you look at
the markets, I am going to tell you, that does not tell the whole story of the day. Weve tootled around. It is the triple stack that really gives you
the full measure of the day.
And a one and a two and a one, two, three, four. Trading is over. The NASDAQ is at a record, and you can see with a strong gain there. I need to
check on the S&P. But I think it might also be a record as well, bearing in mind we had some losses, but of course after strong gains for the S&P. We
will confirm all of those details as the program moves on.
Those are the markets and the main events of the day. It is a strong U.S. Jobs Report and it shows American businesses are still hiring in the face
of spiraling energy costs. By the way, that feeds into the market and I will explain why in just a moment.
In the U.K., reforms surges. They may only be local elections. Even so, the Prime Minister, Keir Starmer says he has no plans to go.
And a backlash in Utah over a data center that would use twice as much electricity as the entire state currently uses.
It is Friday and we are together on May the 8th. I am Richard Quest and yes, I mean business.
Good evening.
It was a strength of force for the U.S. economy with the April Jobs Report soundly beating expectations. Employers added 115,000 jobs last month,
nearly double the amount. The employment rate held steady 4.3 percent.
Couple of softies, wages rose less than expected and labor force participation fell. Now the data, all right, so the data taken in its
stride by the way, the Dow did hit up again just as it ticked over at the end. The S&P and NASDAQ hitting new records.
If we wondered what the Iran War and other things was going to do, we haven't seen an effect yet. David Goldman is with me here in New York.
The thing I always know about the Jobs Market is, it is always -- it is always what is going on underneath it. You know what the headline number
shows versus the sectors? Were there special factors? Was it bad weather? Did somebody sneeze? All of those sort of things actually make a
difference.
So what is it? I see you've got the word resilient.
DAVID GOLDMAN, CNN BUSINESS SENIOR REPORTER: That's the word, resilient.
This jobs market is very resilient. It continues to surprise us. How long, Richard, have we been talking about a Jobs Market that just goes beyond our
expectations? It seems like almost every month over the past five years.
And one of the things that we need to be looking at, these are the big top line numbers as you mentioned, 115,000 new jobs and 4.3 percent
unemployment. This is important because that number has barely budged.
Remember, we are not growing in this country. Immigration has come to a standstill. Population growth is very small. And so we can have what looks
like on a normal year, relatively weak job growth and maintain this unemployment rate.
But as you mentioned, it is not just that it is the big top line number. We need to --
QUEST: Yes, this is what I was talking about. This is what I was talking about because with the jobs number, the devil is in the detail as to who
gained what, where, when and why.
GOLDMAN: That's right. Health care has been the big leader. Every single month that I have been following this jobs market, I think over the last
several years, 37,000. That's a really strong number. A.I. can't touch health care right now. This is something that continues to grow in this
country.
Look at this though. Leisure and hospitality, do you think that were going to have a weak summer holiday? I don't think so. This number would be down
if there were anticipated -- if they were anticipating that we are going to have a weak travel season. That's a really encouraging number.
Now manufacturing, we've been in a manufacturing recession in this country for years and years. That's a weak number. It is not a very weak number,
2,000 lost jobs. We've seen much, much worse. Finance information, there are some things going on in those particular sectors.
QUEST: Hang on.
Manufacturing. Manufacturing. That doesn't suggest we are seeing a rebound in manufacturing jobs as a result of tariffs and jobs coming back into the
United States.
GOLDMAN: We are not.
[16:05:07]
QUEST: And also, the revisions on previous months. Also bear up that the economy is withstanding. What we can't know, though, David, is how much
better it would be if we hadn't had the tariffs or we hadn't had the Iran War.
GOLDMAN: Yes, I mean, counterfactuals are not something that we can prove today, but it is very clear that tariffs are not having that desired effect
at boosting manufacturing. But we never -- we knew that. It is not something that happens immediately. Factories take years and years to
build.
Meanwhile, after the pandemic, we had that huge manufacturing boom. We are seeing the negative effects of the -- we are on the downswing from that.
Tariffs could ultimately be a good thing for manufacturing, but we need to let it take time. That's not something that anyone has any patience for.
QUEST: David, I am grateful for you. You have your touch screen, all modern. Look what I've got. I've got a pair of old fashioned scales here.
We are going to talk about scales and all things like that. Right?
So there you have the scales. Now for weeks, it was the fear that the war would knock the U.S. economy off course. Today's Job Report says not so
fast. Think of it like balanced scales.
On the one hand you have factors giving it a boost. On the other hand, you have factors. So you have, for example, on the one hand, the data center
with construction A.I., that's a big positive.
But on the other side, you've got the increasing energy crisis and the costs of energy. They balance each other out. You then have on the one
side, consumer spending, propping up the economy. But as David was talking about, you've got trade disruption from tariffs that's dragging it down.
Put them together and they balance each other out.
The stock market. We've got two records today. You've got, obviously the NASDAQ and the S&P and then you've got this instability at the Fed and what
is going to be happening there. Kevin Warsh, will it be monetary policy? They balance each other out.
When you put it all together, the economy is steady, growth not spectacular not crisis. Nicole Bachaud is the labor economist at ZipRecruiter with me
now.
It is a case of, on the one hand, on the other hand, but we see that jobless number holding steady at 4.3 percent, which suggests the economy is
barely -- I mean, it is sucking up every job it can and taking everybody it needs.
NICOLE BACHAUD, LABOR ECONOMIST, ZIPRECRUITER: You know, really what we are seeing is this stability in unemployment, but at the same time, labor
supply has been dropping.
We've seen the labor force participation rate falling for several months now, discouraged workers are exiting the market as they're not really able
to find new opportunities with low turnover. That could change as we see more jobs being added to the economy, we might see more people reactivating
into the labor market.
But with an aging population and that reduction in immigration, really, we are coming to a point where the labor market is structurally and
fundamentally different than it has been in the past, and what we measure and how we measure that health with the headline unemployment rate, that
could be changing, you know, what that number -- what the target of that number is and how we measure it.
QUEST: Right. But a lot of viewers will find it somewhat unusual that the headline number stays the same.
The headline number. You get these jobs created, you get the number of new jobs, but the headline number stays the same and doesn't come down. Why is
that?
BACHAUD: You know, some of it could also be we've seen a rise in the number of people who are working part time for economic reasons, meaning that
somebody wants to find a full time job, but they're only able to find part time work, and they might be stitching together, you know, multiple part
time jobs to make ends meet.
So when we are looking at the payroll employment numbers, that overall job growth of 115,000 jobs, that's not necessarily 115,000 new people in jobs.
That could be, you know, people picking up additional part time roles, or it could be some other allocation of that.
QUEST: When do we see wage inflation? Because prospective employers have to bid up wages to attract talent. At the end of the day, if there is not -- I
mean, as you say, you've got a shrinking labor force in terms of age. You've got no immigration, which would pick up the slack normally or
minimal immigration. Therefore, those employers who have got jobs on offer may have to pay more.
BACHAUD: You know, we are getting to a point where that very, very quickly could become the reality where we see the negotiating power shifting back
in the hands of workers who are able to negotiate for higher wages.
We've already started to see this morning in the Atlanta Fed's wage tracker, job switchers are once again really leading job stayers in terms
of job growth.
[16:10:09]
And so, those who are switching to new jobs are seeing a little bit more of that negotiation coming back into their hands, and we could see some upward
pressure on wages as a result.
That likely will take place, you know, in certain industries that are seeing a little bit more demand versus the overall market.
QUEST: So, if you're the Fed, you have been worried on your dual mandate with inflation and unemployment. You've got unemployment at 4.3 percent
slowing growth. So we've got a bit of -- we've got stagflation, maybe not quite stagflation, but you know what I mean.
At this point, do you think if you're the Fed, you are more concerned with the inflation side of the mandate rather than the jobs and demand side?
BACHAUD: Yes, I think that question, I don't think the question has really changed of which one is more important or which one is more at risk right
now. I study labor, and so I spend a lot of time really understanding what is feeding into that unemployment number.
And, you know, we are seeing some signs that the labor market, that that foundation is really shifting structurally, right? Fewer people in the
market we are seeing some movements, early signals of increase in unemployment for certain more vulnerable populations like youth and Black
workers, but really, you know, I'd say that the market overall is as you were saying, right, there is a balance on both sides, and I think that
there is not a ton of movement in either direction.
QUEST: I am grateful for you. Thank you. Have a lovely weekend. Thank you.
President Trump says a shaky ceasefire with Iran is holding despite new flare ups around the Strait of Hormuz. The U.S. military says it disabled
two Iran-flagged vessels in the Gulf of Oman that were trying to get around its blockade.
Donald Trump described yesterday's strikes as a love tap. His Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, says the U.S. is defending freedom of the seas.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARCO RUBIO, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: We've seen the reporting overnight that Iran has established or trying to establish some agency that's going
to control traffic in the Straits. That would be very problematic. That would actually be unacceptable.
I mean, we are -- the normalizing or their controlling of international waterway is both illegal and just something that's unacceptable and the
world should start asking itself what is it willing to do if Iran tries to normalize a control of an international waterway?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
QUEST: Iran's Foreign Minister is calling it reckless military adventurism at the expense of diplomacy.
Nic Robertson is in Islamabad.
Do you get the feeling, Nic, it is a knife-edge stuff that could tip it over or, you know, I mean, when you talk about love taps and disabling
vessels, this is -- this is very, very dangerous territory.
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: It is, and if you look at the range of things that the U.S. Navy, Air Force, military targeted
last night, when its three guided missile destroyers were attacked going through the Strait of Hormuz, it wasn't just the missiles, the missile
launch places, the drones, the drones' launch sites, but it was communications hubs, intelligence nodes, reconnoitering, lookout type
places.
It was a whole range, a whole package of things that were in that very key area. And when you get a range of, you know, targets like that, they don't
just snap out of the air just because a couple of boats are being targeted.
The boats were targeted, as was explained by CENTCOM, but CENTCOM had a target list that it wanted to go for in that area, not just defeating the
threat, clearly defeating the threat, but making it hard for the Iranians to use those same positions again in the Strait of Hormuz to target vessels
going through.
So what is that? That's a shaping operation. That's an operation that makes it easier next time you try to carve out and deny another chunk of the
Strait of Hormuz for Iranian control.
This could be a very slow process or a shaping process ahead of a much bigger military operation, although there is no indication The White House
is going for that. They are trying to give time for the talks, but eventually they may conclude that Iran actually isn't going to go for the
talks in the way they want.
So all of that will add up. So, yes, its knife-edge and dangerous, but it paints a picture of what may come.
QUEST: Do we know or what details do we know of the U.S. proposal?
ROBERTSON: We don't know all the details, but we know the ones that have been very, very important to President Trump, and that is that he wants to
have the nuclear dust. That's the highly enriched uranium. He wants Iran to say it is absolutely not going to build a nuclear weapon and give long term
commitments to that.
[16:15:00]
That's what he said publicly, the Strait of Hormuz to be opened. Clearly, that's part of it. The Iranians say they want that, too, but they want to
control it.
The Iranians say they want a long-term ceasefire, but what President Trump is asking for at the moment is exactly what the Iranians have said publicly
we haven't said we will do that, and we are not going to do that, and it is our right to enrich uranium.
So there is -- even before you get to the paperwork of what is in the memorandum of understanding, if that's there, there is a disconnect
already.
QUEST: Nic, I am grateful. Nic Robertson is in Islamabad. We go next to Moscow, where we find Fred Pleitgen. Good evening, Fred.
President Trump and Ukraine have agreed to a three-day ceasefire. The President said on Truth Social, "A stop in fighting is set to start on May
the 9th. It is coinciding with Russia's annual celebration of Victory Day." There will also be a prisoner exchange during the pause of a thousand
prisoners.
Fred Pleitgen is in Moscow.
Both sides have signed on because I am guessing for whatever reason, it is in both sides' interests.
FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I think both sides believe that it is in their interest, possibly for various
reasons. You're absolutely right that right now, all three sides have acknowledged that the ceasefire is going to take place.
The Ukrainians, the Russians, and of course, the United States as well and the Russian side, actually, there was a flurry of activity coming from the
spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, for the Kremlin, also from senior Kremlin aide, Yuri Ushakov, saying that this was very much an initiative by the Trump
administration and by President Trump, and that the Russians have signed on to it.
For the Russians, of course, very important to get that ceasefire around tomorrow, May 9th, the day of their big Victory Parade. For the Ukrainians,
they say for them, it was something different. They say that the most important thing for them was that prisoner exchange.
They say a parade -- and this comes from Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the Ukrainian President, to them is not as important as getting Ukrainians back out of
Russian captivity.
The deal, as far as we know from Ukrainian and the Russian side, is a thousand prisoners, each side being exchanged. So a thousand Ukrainians for
a thousand Russians.
The Ukrainians also saying that, look, they believe that they sort of have taps on whether or not the Russians can actually conduct a military parade,
because, of course, it was the concern about Ukrainian drone strikes that really was a big issue here for the Russians.
Dmitry Peskov, the spokesman for the Kremlin, coming out tonight and saying Russia does not need anyone's permission to conduct a parade. Obviously,
the Russians saying that they are defined at the same time, we do know and we've talked about, Richard, the fact that the security precautions the
Russians are taking very high and, of course, also no armored vehicles as part of this parade, for the first time in a very long time, out of those
concerns that the parade could be attacked -- Richard.
QUEST: Fred, one quick question. As the war rumbles on for five years, is there any hint of what the Russian people actually think?
PLEITGEN: Yes, it is very difficult to ascertain. But one of the things that we've sort of been picking up on a little bit is that, of course, also
for a lot of people here, they understand this has been going on for a very long time.
And I think one of the things that does get to at least some of the people, certainly some of the ones that we've been speaking to, is the fact that
right now, it is very much unclear how and when all of this could possibly end, because, of course, we have seen the initiative coming from the Trump
administration for a possible ceasefire, but at the same time, the line that were hearing from the kremlin is always the same saying that, as they
put it, they are going to achieve the goals of what they still call their special military operation, all of them and that really leaves open how
long they think that is going to take or what exactly those goals really are going to be in the end -- Richard.
QUEST: I am grateful, sir. It is late in Moscow. Thank you for staying up and talking to us. Have a good weekend.
Now, Virginia's Supreme Court dealt a blow to Democrats' hopes of recapturing the House of Representatives. When we return, I will speak to a
Democratic lawmaker fighting for his reelection in November.
There he is, the Representative will be with us after the break. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:21:55]
QUEST: Virginia's Supreme Court has dealt a blow to the Democrats' hope of recapturing the House of Representatives.
Last month, Virginia voters narrowly approved a new congressional district map. Today, the Supreme Court of Virginia ruled that the process used to
create the referendum violates the Constitution of the state. The new map could have created four additional Democrat-held seats.
Congressman Mike Quigley is a Democrat from Illinois. The Congressman, there you are, sir. Good to see you.
You join me from Chicago.
Can you still -- if you didn't have those extra four seats, can you still take the House, do you think in the midterms?
REP. MIKE QUIGLEY (D-IL): You know, I think we can. I think you first have to look at the President's approval ratings and where we are. I mean, gas
in Chicago is almost $6.00 a gallon. This is, as you know, always about the economy, stupid, as they said.
And right now, people are shell shocked with what is happening with inflation, much of it induced by Trump policies from tariffs, the ICE
raids, and you know, obviously the war in Iran shooting up energy prices.
QUEST: You see the -- you know, as an observer, the sort of redistricting that we've seen, whether it was in Texas first and then in California and
then Virginia, these are the sort of things you expect to see, pardon the phrase, in banana republics where they gerrymander the map, where they have
no -- not even bipartisan, I would say independent commissions to determine boundaries.
You don't expect to see this in mature democracies.
QUIGLEY: No. Theres a lot of things you don't expect to see in our country that's taking place. I mean, you know, I was in the room on January 6th.
Who would have thought that was possible? So, look, unfortunately, it is, as you suggest, a race to the bottom and you can't unilaterally surrender.
So, by all rights, this should be a federal law that mandates commissions, uniform voting patterns. Nothing done to minimize one group's ability to
vote. We think of this in one word. What's fair? What is equitable? What gives everyone the equal right in voting.
But when you gerrymander, in which what we've seen done, just to win political elections, you know, you really defeat the purpose. So we are in
this catch-all where we both feel like we need to do this and unfortunately, the voters suffer. But overall, I still see this country
swinging dramatically away from the Trump administration's policies and I think even in districts, that would seem to be pro-Trump right now, I think
you'll see Democrats being victorious.
I would like to think when one party controls all that will pass a law that says these districts have to be done more appropriately.
QUEST: But the issue is also not so much whether that people are moving away from Donald Trump and his policies, it is whether the Democrats are
tacking sufficiently towards the center so that they can -- I mean, you know, better than anybody, Congressman, you win elections in the center.
The center bit moves from one side to the other, and that's how you win.
Have the Democrats either got leadership or the policies to move back that towards the center?
[16:25:24]
QUIGLEY: You know, I believe we do and if it was going to be one issue, it is going to be affordability. So, you know, my tack is to talk about the
what is most important with affordability and those are obviously energy prices, food prices. But fundamentally, it is housing.
When you and I got out of college, the average age for someone buying their first home was 28 in this country. It is now 40.
Now, Chicago has lost a million people in population since the decade I was born. The only way we get that back, the only way Democrats, to your point,
show that we can govern is to address that issue head on and recognize we have to help remove those obstacles.
QUEST: So, let's talk about this. You are going for re-election in your district, but also you are standing to be mayor of Chicago. Now, I know
there is a long way before that comes along, but it is interesting because here in New York, where I am, we have an avowed, proud socialist Democrat
mayor who wants to soak and tax the rich.
Now that's just something that would have gone down quite nicely in Chicago in previous years, but you don't hold with that, do you?
QUIGLEY: Oh, look, I think the problem with going after this and just going after one group and not addressing your own financial issues is people can
move out of a city. So, you can say, we are going to soak all the millionaires and billionaires in the city of Chicago, and they have and can
move to other cities in the area, or they can move to Florida as we have seen.
So look, tax policy needs to be as equitable as possible. And I believe the Trump tax plan was just the opposite of that, right? It gave tax breaks to
billionaires by taking away everyday people's health care. It is much harder to try to do that redistribution within the city of Chicago, where
people within a city or a state where people can simply move out of there.
So I want that equitable policy, tax policy. It is fundamental in our democracy, but it is really hard to do within just a small area, like a
city of Chicago or New York or whatever.
And we also have to come to terms with our own fiscal responsibilities and operate government as efficiently as possible.
Not like Trump and DOGE because we hate government, but because it is so important.
QUEST: Well, you talk about this, but the Appropriations Committee, of which you're part of, I mean, you look at the deficit in the United States,
you look at the spending, you have the rescission spending, you have the seemingly never ending deficit.
It seems as if deficit reduction now, everybody talks about it in Washington, but nobody is actually doing anything about it.
QUIGLEY: Yes, look, I was part of Simpson-Bowles. Now, you remember that was President Trump's plan to address this. The only time it came to a vote
in the House was a bill called Cooper Latourette and I was one of 21 of 36 in the House that voted for it, Democrat or Republican.
You're right. People talk a big game. We can do both of those things and it is responsible and it is ironic you bring it up now because I am part of a
bipartisan group that is starting over the notion of what Simpson-Bowles tried to do.
How do we address this on a fair and equitable basis to make sure that we save programs like Social Security, and that we save and have the ability
to defend this country, but as you know, we've got to go after the sacred cows here and there are a lot of cows running around in D.C.
QUEST: Good luck! Good luck!
QUIGLEY: We will get there.
QUEST: Listen, Congressman, I've been covering this country for nearly 40 years, and I am telling you, good luck with the third rail of politics.
QUIGLEY: We will work on it.
QUEST: Good to see you, sir. I am grateful for you taking time to talk to us.
QUIGLEY: Anytime.
QUEST: Thank you very much.
QUIGLEY: Thank you, anytime.
QUEST: Thank you.
Now, the cruise ship at the center of the hantavirus outbreak is due to make port in a couple of days. A report from the Canary Islands on the
preps being made.
QUEST MEANS BUSINESS.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:32:52]
QUEST: Hello, I'm Richard Quest.
Together, we have a lot more QUEST MEANS BUSINESS. We are going to be in Tenerife, where authorities are preparing to receive the cruise ship at the
center of the hantavirus outbreak. And the possible end of two-party rule, or at least three-party politics in Britain, the U.K. economy.
And this is CNN, and here, the news always comes first.
A fragile ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran remains in place despite what the Iranian state media is calling a limited exchange of fire. The U.S.
military says it disabled two Iranian flag tankers in the Gulf of Oman that were trying to bypass the blockade.
Iran's foreign minister denounced the strikes, calling them a reckless military adventure.
Arriving populist party stands to be the big winner from last night's U.K. local elections. Initial results show Reform U.K. gained more than 600
local council seats. The ruling Labour Party is the loser, more than 450 seats, and the rival conservatives dropped 300. The results suggest their
two-party domination of British politics is weakening.
The Pentagon's released a batch of declassified government files on UFOs. The declassification has been done in the direction of Donald Trump. It
includes recent reports as well as files dating back to the 1940s. Some of the material has been released before by the FBI, but this newer version
has fewer reductions.
The plan is, say the World Health Organization, for everyone aboard, the ship docking at the Canary Islands will be screened for hantavirus before
returning home.
Now, from the ship, we know there have been five confirmed cases from passengers. Three of those have died. Health officials in nine other
countries are keeping watch on those who are either on the ship or exposed to passengers who left it. The WHO says hantavirus is not the next COVID,
the risk to the public is low.
[16:35:04]
President Trump says experts are working to contain the outbreak.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It's very much, we hope, under control. It was the ship, and I think we are going to make a full
report about it tomorrow. We have a lot of people -- a lot of great people are studying it. It should be fine. We hope.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Should Americans be concerned that it could spread? (INAUDIBLE)
(CROSSTALK)
TRUMP: I hope not. I mean, I hope not. We'll do the best we can.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
QUEST: Right now, the ship -- there is a live report, there is a live -- look, the ship is sailing off the Western Sahara. It's due to reach the
Canary Islands on Sunday.
A hundred passengers will be disembarked and sent to their home countries. Melissa is with me. Melissa is in Tenerife.
Melissa, I know you were telling me earlier that bad weather, right? In fact, getting a bit blustery now, but bad weather might mean, you know, a
very tight window for that ship to dock.
MELISSA BELL, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: That's right. It's expected to arrive here in Tenerife, Richard on Sunday at midday. And
essentially, they are going to have just over 24 hours until the end of play on Monday to get all of those people off that ship and safely onto the
planes that will then carry them on to their home destinations.
There are 23 nationalities on board. So, that's a pretty small window. You mentioned the screening, they are going to be taken from the ship by speed
boats to the airport, but only once the plane is ready to go to their home destination. So, it's quite a big, complicated logistical operation that
they are going to have to do in a fairly short space of time because of that turning of the weather.
Essentially, what authorities are saying here, Richard, is that if they don't get it done by Monday evening, they will then have -- the next time
it will be able to be done, because of the sea conditions and the wind conditions will be much later in the month of May.
So, clearly, for all of these people stuck on what had has become crews from hell, the end in sight, but everyone very keen that this
disembarkation should finally happen. Richard.
QUEST: OK. So, we have got the local residents who are against it. The central government in Madrid says it's going ahead, therefore, it is going
to go ahead, because they are the ruling authority here, and it's going to have to be very well coordinated in terms of disembarkation, ambulances,
airplanes, taking people home.
But this idea of everybody being tested beforehand, how is that going to work?
BELL: Well, very complicated. Already, you mentioned a moment ago the wrangling between local authorities here and Madrid, essentially, the
president of the Canary Islands declaring a victory just a couple of days ago because he managed to extract this concession that the ship would not
actually dock on Tenerife, it will be kept slightly away.
So, everything that will happen will happen on the ship.
And then, it is the speed boats that take the people directly to the airport, which is not very far from where the ship will dock. But clearly,
a very complicated operation. Everybody has to be screened, then, taken on to their planes.
What the local authorities are saying is that, look, for the time being, ever since the ship left grand -- Cape Verde, rather, everyone is
asymptomatic. So, they are working on a scenario where everyone is asymptomatic by the time they arrive. Even in that case, things are pretty
complicated. The screening operation that has to have take place on the ship, the speed boats to take them onto the airplanes that will be waiting
for them, their motors running, their doors open to get them off the island as quickly as possible, because of those concerns of the local population.
If any of them fall sick, then, of course, the procedures and the scenarios will change. So, it's an evolving situation, but clearly, really the
priority of everyone, from the World Health Organization to the Spanish authorities has been to reassure people, certainly in terms of what's about
to happen here in Tenerife, that there will be no contact possible with any of the local populations here. Richard.
QUEST: I'm grateful, Melissa and the blustery Tenerife in the Canaries. It's half past 9:00. Thank you.
Local elections in the U.K. suggest the country is on the brink of a political shift. A Century of two-party rule could come to an end. The
political future in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:41:37]
QUEST: Reform U.K. stands to be the big winner in Britain's local elections. The right-wing populist party looks to gain more than 600
council seats. The Tories in opposition, down 300, and the Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer's Labour Party off 450 at the moment.
Sir Keir is taking responsibility for the results. Even so, still rules out resigning. As for the winner of the seeming winner, the Reforms UK's
leader, Nigel Farage, he says the election marks a turning point.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NIGEL FARAGE, LEADER, REFORM U.K.: But I think, overall, what's happened is a truly historic shift in British politics. We have been so used to
thinking about politics in terms of left and right, and yet what Reform are able to do is to win in areas that have always been Conservative. But
equally, we are proving in a big way, we can win in areas that Labour have dominated, frankly, since the end of World War I.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
QUEST: Now, the British political field would appear to be wide open, a century of ping ponging between the two major parties, Labour and
Conservative, backwards and forwards, with occasional interruptions from the liberals and then the Liberal Democrats.
The potential shift is showing such uncertainty amongst fixed income investors. The 30 year -- look at that. 30-year gilts hit the highest level
in 28 years. That is a reflection of uncertainty, along with high borrowing costs, and certainly makes it very difficult for government running such
huge deficits as they are at the moment.
John Rentoul is The Independent's chief political commentator, visiting professor at King's College, London. John, always good to see you, sir. I'm
so grateful.
But, you know, you and I have been around a bit, and we've heard over -- well, we have heard over the years, this is the end of the duopoly. This
it's all over. Turn off the lights. And we saw the lib -- we saw the lib lab packed. We saw the Conservatives, all of these things. Do you believe
this is a fundamental change now?
JOHN RENTOUL, CHIEF POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, THE INDEPENDENT: It does feel a bit like it, doesn't it? I mean, in -- on previous occasions, there is
always been talk of a breakthrough from a third party, like the Social Democrats in the -- in the -- in the 1980s, and then, the Liberal Democrats
later on.
But we have never seen a five-party system like the one we have at the moment, with the two new parties, Reform, the big anti-immigration party.
And the Greens, coming in to challenge the two established parties who as, as you say, have been the duopoly for a hundred years.
QUEST: So, if we extrapolate out, which we all will love to do, even though every psephologist tells us that local elections are not indicative of what
would happen on the big day, in the big vote. But Farage would have the most seats, but maybe not a majority, and then, you are into who would sit
-- who would get into bed with him in government?
RENTOUL: Yes, I mean -- I mean, you know, although, there are five parties, there is -- there are still, really only two main blocks in in British
politics. And the assumption would be that the -- that the Conservatives and Reform would work together. And that Labor, the Greens, and the Lib
Dems would work together if -- you know, whichever grouping had a majority in Parliament.
So, maybe it wouldn't be that much of a revolution, but yes, as the psephologists say, Richard, you know, we have got three years to go to a
general election, and almost anything can happen.
[16:45:10]
QUEST: I know. And at that point, you and I roll our eyes and say, oh, please, let's have a good bar argue party. Now, look, of the two major
parties, Labour and Conservative, now, either can make an argument for saying it was bad, but not disastrous. But which party do you think is in
most trouble?
(CROSSTALK)
RENTOUL: Yes. Well, that is a very -- that is a tough question, because, I mean, Labour ought to -- ought to be in a lot of trouble, but they are in
government, and so, they do have power, and they do have some sort of sense of initiative. They can actually control what happens to a certain extent.
Whereas, the Conservatives, having got turfed out of power in 2024 are really at the mercy of Nigel Farage and Reform, who are establishing
themselves as the -- as the main party of the right in British politics.
So, I'd say that -- I'd say the Conservatives, although, you know Kemi Badenoch, their leader has acquitted herself well.
QUEST: Yes.
RENTOUL: As she is quite a -- she is quite a feisty performer. But I think her party is in deep trouble.
QUEST: This is a tricky one. Is Keir Starmer as bad as the critics would suggest, in terms of the way -- well, what I mean is in terms of the way he
is -- people say he is in government, but not leading. He is in power, but, you know, but not actually doing.
(CROSSTALK)
RENTOUL: Yes.
QUEST: Is he actually that bad?
RENTOUL: No, he isn't, obviously. But what is very striking, and you see it in -- particularly, in this kind of midterm protest elections, is how
personally unpopular he is. I find it a little bit baffling, because, I mean, he seems a bit -- he seems a bit dull to me, but perfectly well
meaning, and not as incompetent as he is portrayed.
But people have -- the people have taken against him. Right? They just don't like him. They think that he promised them the earth in the 2024
general election, and he hasn't delivered, and he's made a lot of mistakes. And I think he has more or less run out of road. I mean, you know,
politicians can be very unpopular and then, claw their way back.
But you have to -- you have to have some exceptional qualities like Margaret Thatcher did, to be able to do that. And I don't think Keir
Starmer has got those qualities.
So, the question is, you know, when is he going to be replaced and who by? And we didn't come any closer to answering those questions in those
elections yesterday.
QUEST: Gosh, very glad you were with us this evening to put that into perspective. Thank you, John. We'll talk more as things move on. Thank you.
Italy's prime minister's warning of the dangers of fake A.I. doctored images after a DeepFake of her circulated on social media this week. CNN's
Salma Abdelaziz reports.
SALMA ABDELAZIZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: What would you do if you found a sexualized A.I. generated image of yourself? Would you call it out, or
would you ignore it?
This is exactly what's happening to Italy's Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, after an A.I. generated lingerie image of her emerged. But she is actually
taking control of the narrative and using it as a moment to call out DeepFakes. Instead of ignoring the doctored photo, the prime minister
actually posted it on her X account, and even poked fun at her looks to show that she is not intimidated.
She then said that these types of sexualized, DeepFake images are a dangerous tool that can spread misinformation.
In the post, she also included a derogatory comment and said, "Verify before you believe and believe before you share."
She went on to say that these types of fake images can deceive, manipulate, or target anyone. Surprisingly, this is not an isolated incident for the
prime minister. She is already involved in a case against a DeepFake porn involving a father and son who stand accused of creating fake sexualized
videos of her and sharing them.
She is seeking 100,000 euros in damages in the civil case, and her lawyer tells us that if any money is awarded, it will go to an interior ministry
fund for victims of domestic violence.
Now, A.I. generated violence mostly targets women. One study found that 90 to 95 percent of DeepFakes are non-consensual porn, and 90 percent of those
feature women.
The Italian prime minister says she wants to use her platform to call out this issue. "This issue goes beyond me," she wrote. She emphasized, "I can
defend myself. Many others cannot."
Salma Abdelaziz, CNN, London.
[16:50:03]
QUEST: Opponents of a proposed data center in northern Utah say it will generate more heat than an atomic blast. The backers, including the
celebrity businessman Kevin O'Leary, say it can be powered with renewable energy. Who is right? Well, let's get to the arguments first. QUEST MEANS
BUSINESS.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
QUEST: The opponents are sounding the alarm over a proposed data center in the Western U.S. Utah officials voted this week to approve a 16,000 --
16,000-hectare facility outside Salt Lake City. The facility would use twice the amount of energy now consumed by the entire State of Utah.
The critics are worrying its operation would drain precious water resources and harm the Great Salt Lake. The environmental group, Grow the Flow says
energy usage at the site could raise nighttime temperatures in the area by as much as six degrees Celsius. The project is spearheaded by the celebrity
businessman, Kevin O'Leary from Shark Tank. He says it can all be done in an environmental friendly way.
Clare is with me, Clare Duffy.
Now, they're really shooting. Look, this is science, Clare. One is right, one is wrong. The only problem is we don't know which.
CLARE DUFFY, CNN TECH REPORTER: That's exactly right, Richard.
As I talked to residents in this area, their big concerns are twofold. One, those environmental worries that you talked about, as we have seen, data
centers in other areas generate significant heat, use a lot of energy, need a lot of water for cooling. Kevin O'Leary says he has got a solution for
that in this case. But residents say they didn't have a lot of time to look over this proposal and to understand the potential environmental impacts.
They would really like to see an independent environmental review of this project before it goes forward.
But I asked Kevin O'Leary about these concerns. I talked to him this morning. Take a listen to what he told me.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KEVIN O'LEARY, CHAIRMAN, O'LEARY VENTURES: No, we are not going to drain the Great Salt Lake. That's ridiculous. We are -- we are going to create
incremental jobs. This is not going to destroy air quality, because we don't have the option to do that. That's controlled both state and
federally, and we don't want to do that.
And we want it to be the shining example of how you do this. And I want the Chinese to see this. I want to -- I want them to see that we are not going
to stop, we are going to catch up in terms of incremental growth of power.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DUFFY: As you hear there, he is saying that this data center is going to have 2,000 permanent jobs once it's created. High tech, high paying jobs.
He is also framing this as a national security priority, saying that the U.S. needs more data center capacity to compete with China.
[16:55:03]
QUEST: The real problem I have with all these stories and these projects, you never know who is right. I mean, you know, choose that famous phrase,
you pay your money, it takes your choice.
Because the environmentalist say it's a disaster. He says he's going to do it all right. You are left with just who do you trust and hope?
DUFFY: I think that's right. I mean, I think, for the local community here, it's sort of a microcosm of this larger debate around artificial
intelligence, where you have big tech billionaires making lofty promises about how good this is all going to be for everyone. And individual is
saying, wait a second, can we slow down here? Because I don't totally understand the benefits of this. But it seems like there could be real
costs.
I talked with Robert Davies. He's a physics professor at Utah State University. This is how he put it to me. He said, "The question is: Will
the jobs be worth the cost? And the cost, of course, is multi-generational here. One needs to think about, what kind of community do I want my
children and grandchildren in 30 years from now, 50 years from now? Because this thing, as described, running it for 30 years, will utterly transform
this valley." And that is really the concern from community members here. Richard.
QUEST: Very glad you brought that story to us tonight. Thank you very much. Have a lovely weekend. Thank you.
DUFFY: Thank you.
QUEST: As for you and me, remember we had -- we had a record, I think, on the NASDAQ and the S&P today, they were both up sharply.
The Dow just tootled up into small, little gain. Overall, there you have the triple stack. We will take a "PROFITABLE MOMENT" after the break. It's
QUEST MEANS BUSINESS.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
QUEST: Tonight's "PROFITABLE MOMENT". The march towards populist politics would seem to be continuing tonight, with the local government elections
and reform doing pretty well out of it.
The problem is over the years, I've heard this idea that two-party politics in Britain is over. That it's all over for Labour and Conservatives. So,
what's the difference this time?
The difference seems to be that reform has tapped into something that we know is a political force elsewhere, whether.
In the United States, Donald Trump in Italy, with Meloni, and elsewhere.
And whilst that pendulum does come back every now and again, with say Merz in Germany, the truth is that the populist politics of Britain does suggest
that at the next general election, Reform is going to do rather well.
[16:59:56]
If for no other reason than single party politics and or single policy politics and Nigel Farage is a charismatic leader.
But let's not overhype it. When people go in the ballot box and they actually tick on whatever they do, it becomes a very different operation
when the general election actually happens.
END
