i got seven bob a day for that! laughter. just some of the stories from veterans of world war ii. time for a look at the weather. here's louise lear. i suspect it will be an atmospheric weekend, and the best of the weather is on saturday and a bit of a question over the rain on sunday pushing in from the south—west. we will take a look at that in just a moment and the most noticeable thing about tomorrow morning will be the feel of the weather. low single figures for many of us first thing in the morning so chilly start, thrust around and some fog patches. not particularly widespread and they should lift readily and the most important thing, it will be largely dry with some sunshine. light winds as well, just a few scattered

showers perhaps across the far north—east and temperatures will respond after the chilly start, eight to 11 degrees. the rain is gathering down to the channel isles by the end of the day and to the isles of scilly. that will bring wet weather overnight into the south—west and into south wales. it is this collection of weather fronts that will spill more moisture potentially on sunday, so there is a greater chance of widespread dense fog first thing in the morning. fingers crossed it will lift but it could be a drab and dreary remembrance sunday. more of a breeze in scotland so here it should lift and it will be a quite day. it will stay dry too much of the day. at 11 o'clock in the morning, hopefully dry weather into the north of england. northern ireland and across to wales and the midlands, showery outbreaks of rain. i suspect the cenotaph should stay dry but it will be murky first thing in the morning. the rain will move erotically north and east, turning showery in nature. in terms of the feel of things on sunday, still seven to ii in terms of the feel of things on sunday, still seven to 11 degrees.

it turns mild into next week but unfortunately, wet and windy with it. thanks, louise. and that's bbc news at ten. now on bbc one it's time to join the news where you are, but from the ten team it's goodnight. what do the next few days hold for the home secretary? an accommodation with the prime minister and the police, or pushing the pm to the limit and a headline grabbing sacking?

cabinet colleagues close ranks and leave the home secretary to protest against tomorrow's pro palestinian march, and make claims of police bias, all on her own. tonight we arejoined by political insiders to ask where this is all leading. also tonight. first minister, have you misled parliament? no, i made that point very, very clearly. miss—steps and mistakes, including over the covid inquiry. how is the snp—led government in scotland going to deal with a resurgent labour vote? and we have a report from the hawaiin island of maui on how decisions by the authorities may have led to the deaths of some of the 99 killed in wildfires there in august. i knew, like, once i saw the road

block, this is insane, _ like those people are on the road not because of a trafficjam, but because of one that is created by our authorities. will this be remembered as the week when suella braverman started to play her hand. will this be remembered as the week when suella braverman started to play her hand. if it is, will she shoot pontoon or bust? tonight according to the times, two members of the government threatened to resign if the home secretary is sacked. she has, this afternoon, had a meeting with met commissioner, sir mark rowley, expressing "her full backing for the police in what will be a complex and challenging situation." so how to interpret that move? suella braverman has been building her mood music for a while now. from talking about "a migration hurricane" to the "guardian reading tofu eating wokerati," supporting environmental protests, from "catching criminals not policing pronouns," to quipping that "the human rights act should be renamed the criminal rights act." and in a new poll of 2001 people for the daily telegraph, almost three quarters of the tory

voters agree with her stance on with her stance on banning the pro—palestinian march. on monday she used twitter, now called x, to welcome the met�*s request that the organisers postpone the march on armistice day, she called the protesters hate marchers, this immediately after her weekend pitch also on x to ban charities from giving tents to the homeless. she called living on the streets intense, a lifestyle choice. —— in tents. on tuesday, the king's speech was rolled out with no mention of tents. late that night the narrative switched to labour, when the opposition front bencher quit his job over keir starmer�*s refusal to back a ceasefire in gaza. but the focus wasn't on labour for long. the next morning, the pm was talking to the met making it clear he would be holding the commissioner accountable

for the march. holding the commissioner accountable forthe march-— for the march. my view is these marches are — for the march. my view is these marches are disrespectful- for the march. my view is these marches are disrespectful and l for the march. my view is these i marches are disrespectful and that is what i will be discussing with the police commissioner later today. but then positions seem to soften, until 10pm. at that moment, braverman�*s times article hit. not cleared by downing street. she doubled down on her hate marches narrative and accused the met of playing favourites are. by playing favourites are. by thursday, senior tories were divided. ,, ., �* ., ., , , ., divided. suella braverman seems to be increasing _ divided. suella braverman seems to be increasing the _ divided. suella braverman seems to be increasing the temperature. - divided. suella braverman seems to be increasing the temperature. we l be increasing the temperature. we have to focus on lowering it. i think— have to focus on lowering it. i think that _ have to focus on lowering it. i think that is what we have to focus on doing — think that is what we have to focus on doinu. ~ ., .,, ., ., ., on doing. the met have operational resnonsibility. _ on doing. the met have operational resnonsibility. i— on doing. the met have operational responsibility, i am _ on doing. the met have operational responsibility, i am not— on doing. the met have operational responsibility, i am not interferingl responsibility, i am not interfering in that— responsibility, i am not interfering in that but— responsibility, i am not interfering in that but i— responsibility, i am not interfering in that but i am _ responsibility, i am not interfering in that but i am begging _ responsibility, i am not interfering in that but i am begging think, - in that but i am begging think, think— in that but i am begging think, think again _ think again. so - think again. so where i think again. i so where are think again. - so where are we think again. _ so where are we today? think again. — so where are we today? is suella braverman going to survive this? joe is here. what is the latest.— is here. what is the latest. today kirs , it is here. what is the latest. today kirsty. it kick— is here. what is the latest. today kirsty, it kick confidence - is here. what is the latest. today kirsty, it kick confidence off - kirsty, it kick confidence off with

jeremy hunt, the next cabinet minister to distance himself from suella braverman�*s comments not a surprise, we had an update from the police as to their policing operation, double the number of officers on duet the, this exclusion zone round whitehall, 2a hours protection of the cenotaph and restrictions round the israeli embassy. finally significantly we had the meeting between suella braverman and the met commissioner mark rowley, a after that meeting one of her team gave us this source, the home secretary emphasised her full—backing for the police in what will be a complex and challenging situation and expressed confidence any criminality will be dealt with robustly, a source total me tonight this meeting was every detail and the home secretary's comments were not an issue with the met commissioner.— not an issue with the met commissioner. ,, ., ., ., commissioner. so, where are we, what was the situation _ commissioner. so, where are we, what was the situation now _ commissioner. so, where are we, what was the situation now do _ commissioner. so, where are we, what was the situation now do you _ commissioner. so, where are we, what was the situation now do you think? - was the situation now do you think? i think for the home secretary's future that is a decision deferred for rishi sunak. although there are

cabinet ministers who think the situation is unsustainable. with the met commissioner. 50. situation is unsustainable. with the met commissioner.— situation is unsustainable. with the met commissioner. so, where are we, what was the — met commissioner. so, where are we, what was the situation _ met commissioner. so, where are we, what was the situation now _ met commissioner. so, where are we, what was the situation now do - met commissioner. so, where are we, what was the situation now do you - what was the situation now do you think? i what was the situation now do you think? ~' what was the situation now do you think? ~ ., ., think? i think for the home secretary's _ think? i think for the home secretary's future - think? i think for the home secretary's future that - think? i think for the home secretary's future that is i think? i think for the home secretary's future that is a | secretary's future that is a decision deferred for rishi sunak. although there are cabinet ministers who think the situation is unsustainable. telling me "you can't keep defying number ten and get away with it. " a senior government source has told me she is going to get fired on monday, i am pretty confident of that, but we should say health warning that is not a view shared across government, there is no confirmation of any changes to the top team nec week. if this week has done anything, think it has revealed clarified, illuminated splits within the conservative party on this sort of issue and language, the big question how significant is support for suella braverman? there are 350 conservative mps, one i think pretty impartial source has total me she has the support of maybe 40, parliamentarians, allies, of the home secretary, i think that number is bigger, maybe 65 plus, we are nowhere near a leadership challenge, but there are those who think whatever the numbers now, those numbers could rise because people will take tory mps aside, point to the poll, point to the

prime minister, point kirsty to the clock ticking down to the general election and saying, well, isn't it worth a roll of the dice? jae. election and saying, well, isn't it worth a roll of the dice? joe, thank ou ve worth a roll of the dice? joe, thank you very much _ worth a roll of the dice? joe, thank you very much indeed. _ joining me in the studio, three political commentators — phillip blond, salma shah and sonia sodha. first of all, thank you for coming, this is big events coming up, with tomorrow's march and wednesday the judgement of the supreme court on rwanda, but right now, what do you make of this meeting, between mark rowley and suella braverman today? she is not resiling from wanting the march banned. salma. i she is not resiling from wanting the march banned. salma.— march banned. salma. ithink it is an inevitability _ march banned. salma. ithink it is an inevitability she _ march banned. salma. ithink it is an inevitability she will— march banned. salma. ithink it is an inevitability she will meet - an inevitability she will meet with the met commissioner, and talking through this because it has been so high profile, i think the fact they are had to brief it was a good meeting is interesting, because you would expect that to be quite a good meeting between the home secretary and the person who is leading the met. but clearly, this has been a very difficult episode because in

many ways she has challenged the operational independence of the met and that is something that you would have to be incredibly careful not to do, if you were doing thatjob effectively. do, if you were doing that 'ob effectively.�* do, if you were doing that 'ob effectively.- well, h do, if you were doing that job effectively.- well, i. do, if you were doing that job i effectively.- well, i think effectively. philip? well, ithink that the home _ effectively. philip? well, ithink that the home secretary's - effectively. philip? well, i think. that the home secretary's opinion effectively. philip? well, i think- that the home secretary's opinion as to the _ that the home secretary's opinion as to the police operation remains unchanged, i think it is supported by 75e80% of conservative voters. that he _ by 75e80% of conservative voters. that he is — by 75e80% of conservative voters. that he is partial.— that he is partial. yes, i think the evidence is _ that he is partial. yes, i think the evidence is kind _ that he is partial. yes, i think the evidence is kind of, _ that he is partial. yes, i think the evidence is kind of, is _ that he is partial. yes, i think the evidence is kind of, is there, - that he is partial. yes, i think the evidence is kind of, is there, you | evidence is kind of, is there, you can get— evidence is kind of, is there, you can get arrested at football matches forioining _ can get arrested at football matches forjoining in chants that question the opposed team's sexual preferences but you can't apparently -et preferences but you can't apparently get arrested for chanting anti—semitic clearly anti—semitic remarks — anti—semitic clearly anti—semitic remarks on _ anti—semitic clearly anti—semitic remarks on london's streets, and so ithink— remarks on london's streets, and so i think she _ remarks on london's streets, and so i think she has the majority support of the _ i think she has the majority support of the conservative voters that delivered — of the conservative voters that delivered the majority at the last

election — delivered the majority at the last election. and she's the only arguably— election. and she's the only arguably the only cabinet minister that does. — arguably the only cabinet minister that does, she plugs into the 2019 majority, — that does, she plugs into the 2019 majority, in a way nobody else in the cabinet — majority, in a way nobody else in the cabinet can. gn majority, in a way nobody else in the cabinet can.— majority, in a way nobody else in i the cabinet can._ also the cabinet can. on red wall? also be ond the cabinet can. on red wall? also beyond red — the cabinet can. on red wall? also beyond red wall, _ the cabinet can. on red wall? also beyond red wall, this _ the cabinet can. on red wall? also beyond red wall, this is _ the cabinet can. on red wall? also beyond red wall, this is the - the cabinet can. on red wall? also | beyond red wall, this is the working class _ beyond red wall, this is the working class vote, — beyond red wall, this is the working class vote, if you like, or the marginalised vote, that shifted from labour— marginalised vote, that shifted from labour to— marginalised vote, that shifted from labour to the conservatives, and i think— labour to the conservatives, and i think outside of that, the conservatives don't have an appeal to the _ conservatives don't have an appeal to the majority and they can't triangulate their way out of this. the only— triangulate their way out of this. the only path to prevent a decline which _ the only path to prevent a decline which the — the only path to prevent a decline which the government is heading towards. — which the government is heading towards, the government is heading towards _ towards, the government is heading towards a _ towards, the government is heading towards a defeat that looks of epic proportion, it like looks like they will be _ proportion, it like looks like they will be somewhere round 200 seats, thebe _ will be somewhere round 200 seats, thebe is _ will be somewhere round 200 seats, thebe is something it could take two, _ thebe is something it could take two, three elections to recover from and there _ two, three elections to recover from and there is— two, three elections to recover from and there is no sense the decline has been — and there is no sense the decline has been arrested by the king's speech. — has been arrested by the king's speech, by the party conference,

policy _ speech, by the party conference, policy mix. — speech, by the party conference, policy mix, so, of course, you know, as we _ policy mix, so, of course, you know, as we said _ policy mix, so, of course, you know, as we said earlier, this is a point where _ as we said earlier, this is a point where conservatives either have to accept _ where conservatives either have to accept their fate and go gently into the dark— accept their fate and go gently into the dark night, or decide actually, a new_ the dark night, or decide actually, a new vision— the dark night, or decide actually, a new vision is needed, we shouldn't, _ a new vision is needed, we shouldn't, we still have a year, and ithink— shouldn't, we still have a year, and i think many— shouldn't, we still have a year, and i think many mps are crying out for leadership— i think many mps are crying out for leadership and a vision, at the very least _ leadership and a vision, at the very least to— leadership and a vision, at the very least to rest — leadership and a vision, at the very least to rest the decline this is so clearly— least to rest the decline this is so clearly coming. least to rest the decline this is so clearly coming-— clearly coming. and the clock is tickina. clearly coming. and the clock is ticking- and _ clearly coming. and the clock is ticking. and the _ clearly coming. and the clock is ticking. and the clock— clearly coming. and the clock is ticking. and the clock is - clearly coming. and the clock is| ticking. and the clock is ticking, the oint ticking. and the clock is ticking, the point is. _ ticking. and the clock is ticking, the point is, labour— ticking. and the clock is ticking, the point is, labour have - ticking. and the clock is ticking, the point is, labour have been, | ticking. and the clock is ticking, - the point is, labour have been, you know. _ the point is, labour have been, you know, starmer, to starmer's credit he has _ know, starmer, to starmer's credit he has rid — know, starmer, to starmer's credit he has rid the labour party of the corbynite — he has rid the labour party of the corbynite element that poisoned then _ corbynite element that poisoned then. those who argue he hasn't won then. those who argue he hasn't won the hearts— then. those who argue he hasn't won the hearts of— then. those who argue he hasn't won the hearts of electorate are correct _ the hearts of electorate are correct. we have a visionless offer from _ correct. we have a visionless offer from both— correct. we have a visionless offer from both parties, and a vision can tip the _ from both parties, and a vision can tip the balance. i do from both parties, and a vision can tip the balance.— tip the balance. i do think that the idea that the _ tip the balance. i do think that the idea that the conservatives - tip the balance. i do think that the idea that the conservatives might | tip the balance. i do think that the i idea that the conservatives might be able idea that the conservatives might be abte to— idea that the conservatives might be abte to turn— idea that the conservatives might be able to turn round _ idea that the conservatives might be able to turn round their electoral-

able to turn round their electoral fortunes — able to turn round their electoral fortunes by— able to turn round their electoral fortunes by changing _ able to turn round their electoral fortunes by changing prime - able to turn round their electoral. fortunes by changing prime minister yet again— fortunes by changing prime minister yet again without _ fortunes by changing prime minister yet again without an _ fortunes by changing prime minister yet again without an election - fortunes by changing prime minister yet again without an election is for i yet again without an election is for the birds _ yet again without an election is for the birds though, _ yet again without an election is for the birds though, think— yet again without an election is for the birds though, think what - yet again without an election is for the birds though, think what is - the birds though, think what is interesting _ the birds though, think what is interesting when _ the birds though, think what is interesting when you _ the birds though, think what is interesting when you look- the birds though, think what is interesting when you look at. the birds though, think what is interesting when you look at o| interesting when you look at o suella — interesting when you look at o suella braverman _ interesting when you look at o suella braverman is— interesting when you look at o suella braverman is i- interesting when you look at o suella braverman is i think- suella braverman is i think she's playing _ suella braverman is i think she's playing a — suella braverman is i think she's playing a leadership _ suella braverman is i think she's playing a leadership election - playing a leadership election strategy. _ playing a leadership election strategy. on— playing a leadership election strategy, on the _ playing a leadership election strategy, on the basis - playing a leadership election strategy, on the basis that l playing a leadership election . strategy, on the basis that she expects — strategy, on the basis that she expects the _ strategy, on the basis that she expects the conservative - strategy, on the basis that she expects the conservative partyj strategy, on the basis that she . expects the conservative party to lose the — expects the conservative party to lose the next— expects the conservative party to lose the next election _ expects the conservative party to lose the next election and - expects the conservative party to lose the next election and there i expects the conservative party to i lose the next election and there to be a teadership— lose the next election and there to be a leadership election _ lose the next election and there to be a leadership election shortly . be a leadership election shortly after~ _ be a leadership election shortly after~ she — be a leadership election shortly after~ she is _ be a leadership election shortly after. she is tacking _ be a leadership election shortly after. she is tacking to - be a leadership election shortly after. she is tacking to the - after. she is tacking to the right of the _ after. she is tacking to the right of the conservative _ of the conservative party membership, _ of the conservative party membership, in- of the conservative party membership, in order. of the conservative party membership, in orderto| membership, in order to strategically— membership, in orderto strategically think- membership, in orderto strategically think about| membership, in order to- strategically think about getting their votes _ strategically think about getting their votes. but— strategically think about getting their votes. �* . . strategically think about getting their votes-— their votes. but that is her own heartiand- _ their votes. but that is her own heartland. yes, _ their votes. but that is her own heartland. yes, what _ their votes. but that is her own heartland. yes, what she - their votes. but that is her own heartland. yes, what she is - their votes. but that is her own j heartland. yes, what she is not doinu is heartland. yes, what she is not doing is proposing _ heartland. yes, what she is not doing is proposing a _ heartland. yes, what she is not doing is proposing a strategy i heartland. yes, what she is not| doing is proposing a strategy for the conservative _ doing is proposing a strategy for the conservative party— doing is proposing a strategy for the conservative party that - doing is proposing a strategy for the conservative party that is i doing is proposing a strategy for the conservative party that is a i the conservative party that is a general— the conservative party that is a general election winning - general election winning strategy potentially — general election winning strategy potentially. her— general election winning strategy potentially. her positions - general election winning strategy potentially. her positions on - potentially. her positions on homelessness _ potentially. her positions on homelessness for— potentially. her positions on homelessness for example, | potentially. her positions on i homelessness for example, the comments _ homelessness for example, the comments she _ homelessness for example, the comments she made _ homelessness for example, the comments she made about - homelessness for example, the _ comments she made about homelessness and being _ comments she made about homelessness and being on— comments she made about homelessness and being on the— comments she made about homelessness and being on the streets— comments she made about homelessness and being on the streets being _ comments she made about homelessness and being on the streets being a - and being on the streets being a tifestyte — and being on the streets being a lifestyle choice, _ and being on the streets being a lifestyle choice, i— and being on the streets being a lifestyle choice, ithink- and being on the streets being a lifestyle choice, i think swing. lifestyle choice, i think swing voters. — lifestyle choice, i think swing voters. you _ lifestyle choice, i think swing voters, you know, _ lifestyle choice, i think swing voters, you know, find - lifestyle choice, i think swing voters, you know, find that. lifestyle choice, i think swing - voters, you know, find that language intolerable. — voters, you know, find that language intolerable, and _ voters, you know, find that language intolerable, and it— voters, you know, find that language intolerable, and it goes— voters, you know, find that language intolerable, and it goes to _ voters, you know, find that language intolerable, and it goes to the - intolerable, and it goes to the heart — intolerable, and it goes to the heart of— intolerable, and it goes to the heart of what _ intolerable, and it goes to the heart of what is _ intolerable, and it goes to the heart of what is the _ intolerable, and it goes to the - heart of what is the conservative's brand? _ heart of what is the conservative's brand? that — heart of what is the conservative's brand? that is _ heart of what is the conservative's brand? that is associated - heart of what is the conservative's brand? that is associated with - heart of what is the conservative's brand? that is associated with a i brand? that is associated with a toxic _ brand? that is associated with a toxic brand _ brand? that is associated with a toxic brand of— brand? that is associated with a toxic brand of conservative - brand? that is associated with al toxic brand of conservative party politics. — toxic brand of conservative party politics. that _ toxic brand of conservative party politics, that doesn't _ toxic brand of conservative party politics, that doesn't really- toxic brand of conservative party. politics, that doesn't really appeal to swing _ politics, that doesn't really appeal to swing voters _ politics, that doesn't really appeal

to swing voters so _ politics, that doesn't really appeal to swing voters so suella - politics, that doesn't really appeal. to swing voters so suella braverman is playing _ to swing voters so suella braverman is playing the — to swing voters so suella braverman is playing the tory— to swing voters so suella braverman is playing the tory leadership - is playing the tory leadership strategy. _ is playing the tory leadership strategy. she _ is playing the tory leadership strategy, she is— is playing the tory leadership strategy, she is not- is playing the tory leadership strategy, she is not offering. is playing the tory leadership| strategy, she is not offering a vision — strategy, she is not offering a vision to— strategy, she is not offering a vision to the _ strategy, she is not offering a vision to the conservative - strategy, she is not offering a . vision to the conservative party, that might — vision to the conservative party, that might change _ vision to the conservative party, that might change their- vision to the conservative party, | that might change their electoral fortunes — that might change their electoral fortunes it— that might change their electoral fortunes. . that might change their electoral fortunes. , ., ., , fortunes. it is not about swing voters for _ fortunes. it is not about swing voters for the _ fortunes. it is not about swing voters for the conservative . fortunes. it is not about swing . voters for the conservative party, you are _ voters for the conservative party, you are quite right that nobody's arguing — you are quite right that nobody's arguing about victory, we are talking — arguing about victory, we are talking about the scale of defeat and what could arrest, what looks like a _ and what could arrest, what looks like a precipitous defeat and the point _ like a precipitous defeat and the point is — like a precipitous defeat and the point is 45% of those who voted for the conservatives in 2019 are still with them — the conservatives in 2019 are still with them there, is a lot of don't knows. _ with them there, is a lot of don't knows. and. _ with them there, is a lot of don't knows, and, the argument is lean into the _ knows, and, the argument is lean into the realignment. don't have some _ into the realignment. don't have some fictitious appeal to liberal democrats in surrey because that will not _ democrats in surrey because that will not appear. 50 democrats in surrey because that will not appear-— will not appear. so let's briefly talk salma _ will not appear. so let's briefly talk salma about _ will not appear. so let's briefly talk salma about tomorrow, i will not appear. so let's briefly i talk salma about tomorrow, what will not appear. so let's briefly - talk salma about tomorrow, what is the best outcome for suella braverman tomorrow? i the best outcome for suella braverman tomorrow? ~ , , braverman tomorrow? i think the best outcome is that _ braverman tomorrow? i think the best outcome is that she _ braverman tomorrow? i think the best outcome is that she remains _ braverman tomorrow? i think the best outcome is that she remains in - braverman tomorrow? i think the best outcome is that she remains in post, i outcome is that she remains in post, because the prime minister's basically too weak to fire her. in terms of the mar. . in _

basically too weak to fire her. in terms of the mar. . in terms - basically too weak to fire her. in terms of the mar. . in terms ofl terms of the mar. . in terms of the march yes- — terms of the mar. . in terms of the march yes- the _ terms of the mar. . in terms of the march yes. the bestout come - terms of the mar. . in terms of the march yes. the bestout come is i terms of the mar. . in terms of the. march yes. the bestout come is that it goes ahead and there is some difficulties on the march and she is in her mind proven correct. that difficulties on the march and she is in her mind proven correct.- in her mind proven correct. that is awful thick — in her mind proven correct. that is awful thick about _ in her mind proven correct. that is awful thick about it, _ in her mind proven correct. that is awful thick about it, if— in her mind proven correct. that is awful thick about it, if you - in her mind proven correct. that is awful thick about it, if you look i in her mind proven correct. that is awful thick about it, if you look at | awful thick about it, if you look at the piece — awful thick about it, if you look at the piece she _ awful thick about it, if you look at the piece she wrote in _ awful thick about it, if you look at the piece she wrote in the - awful thick about it, if you look at the piece she wrote in the time, i the piece she wrote in the time, one of the _ the piece she wrote in the time, one of the strong — the piece she wrote in the time, one of the strong criticism _ the piece she wrote in the time, one of the strong criticism is _ the piece she wrote in the time, one of the strong criticism is she - the piece she wrote in the time, one of the strong criticism is she is- of the strong criticism is she is stoking — of the strong criticism is she is stoking the _ of the strong criticism is she is stoking the potential- of the strong criticism is she is stoking the potential for - of the strong criticism is she is. stoking the potential for unrest, of the strong criticism is she is- stoking the potential for unrest, we have the _ stoking the potential for unrest, we have the far— stoking the potential for unrest, we have the far light _ stoking the potential for unrest, we have the far light now _ stoking the potential for unrest, we have the far light now attending i have the far light now attending protests — have the far light now attending protests tome _ have the far light now attending protests tome and _ have the far light now attending protests tome and you - have the far light now attending protests tome and you sort i have the far light now attending protests tome and you sort of i have the far light now attending i protests tome and you sort of get a horrible _ protests tome and you sort of get a horrible sense _ protests tome and you sort of get a horrible sense that _ protests tome and you sort of get a horrible sense that she _ protests tome and you sort of get a horrible sense that she wants - protests tome and you sort of get a horrible sense that she wants to i protests tome and you sort of get a horrible sense that she wants to be j horrible sense that she wants to be vindicated — horrible sense that she wants to be vindicated do _ horrible sense that she wants to be vindicated. , ., ~' horrible sense that she wants to be vindicated. , ., ~ ., ., ., vindicated. do you think that rwanda is on wednesday, _ vindicated. do you think that rwanda is on wednesday, we _ vindicated. do you think that rwanda is on wednesday, we don't _ vindicated. do you think that rwanda is on wednesday, we don't know- vindicated. do you think that rwanda | is on wednesday, we don't know what the supreme court is going to do, do you think she's safe until wednesday, at least? no, i don't think there _ wednesday, at least? no, i don't think there is _ wednesday, at least? no, i don't think there is any _ wednesday, at least? no, i don't think there is any sense. - wednesday, at least? no, i don't think there is any sense. does i wednesday, at least? no, i don't| think there is any sense. does she want to be — think there is any sense. does she want to be safe _ think there is any sense. does she want to be safe until— want to be safe until wednesday, thatis want to be safe until wednesday, that is a different question? the prime minister _ that is a different question? the prime minister has a difficult decision— prime minister has a difficult decision to make and he loses which ever way— decision to make and he loses which ever way he — decision to make and he loses which ever way he makes the decision, if he sacks _ ever way he makes the decision, if he sacks her, i think letters of no confidence — he sacks her, i think letters of no

confidence will go in, and i think the common—sense group are behind braverman. — the common—sense group are behind braverman, the new conservatives are behind _ braverman, the new conservatives are behind braverman. that is 65—70 mps. and, behind braverman. that is 65—70 mps. and. and _ behind braverman. that is 65—70 mps. and. and that — behind braverman. that is 65—70 mps. and, and that sacking her will generate _ and, and that sacking her will generate a leadership contest in my view _ generate a leadership contest in my view not— generate a leadership contest in my view. not sacking her, then passes the leadership. so, it is a kind of a no-win — the leadership. so, it is a kind of a no—win situation. the leadership. so, it is a kind of a no-win situation.— the leadership. so, it is a kind of a no-win situation. in that sense, salma, a no-win situation. in that sense, salma. is — a no-win situation. in that sense, salma, is rishi _ a no-win situation. in that sense, salma, is rishi sunak— a no-win situation. in that sense, | salma, is rishi sunak powerless in a no-win situation. in that sense, i salma, is rishi sunak powerless in a way, in the face of the support she has, if it go, if the scenario is as philip suggests that either way this is a massive moment? we philip suggests that either way this is a massive moment?— philip suggests that either way this is a massive moment? we don't know if the support — is a massive moment? we don't know if the support exists _ is a massive moment? we don't know if the support exists until _ is a massive moment? we don't know if the support exists until that - if the support exists until that trigger is pulled, so you know, we can say she has the support of x number of mps but until that is there, let us they have is a contest, we don't know who will be “p contest, we don't know who will be up against. i bet kennel my bad nothing would be up there. i think

the prime minister. he needs to decide what he is going to do with her. whether that is tacking her, if her. whether that is tacking her, if he wants to get rwanda through maybe it is in his interest to keep her in post. but, if he going to show strength he needs to deal with this with serious discipline. last strength he needs to deal with this with serious discipline.— with serious discipline. last night tim stanley _ with serious discipline. last night tim stanley reckoned _ with serious discipline. last night tim stanley reckoned she - with serious discipline. last night tim stanley reckoned she had i with serious discipline. last night i tim stanley reckoned she had about 60 name, what is your assessment to philip i 60 name, what is your assessment to phili -_ ~' 60 name, what is your assessment to phili -_ ~ , ., , 60 name, what is your assessment to phili_ ~ , ., philip i think she has at least that, probably _ philip i think she has at least that, probably more, - philip i think she has at least that, probably more, i- philip i think she has at least that, probably more, ithink| philip i think she has at least i that, probably more, i think that the support that she has in parliament, is the support that is at risk. _ parliament, is the support that is at risk. all— parliament, is the support that is at risk, all the red wall voting mps. _ at risk, all the red wall voting mps. so — at risk, all the red wall voting mps, so of course there are lots of unknown. — mps, so of course there are lots of unknown, but you can draw inferences, i suspect that if he sacks — inferences, i suspect that if he sacks her. _ inferences, i suspect that if he sacks her, there will be, there be enough _ sacks her, there will be, there be enough letters going in, they only have to _ enough letters going in, they only have to reach 53 letters, and because _ have to reach 53 letters, and because they, what have they got the loose? _

because they, what have they got the loose? they are facing aany lacing any way _ loose? they are facing aany lacing any way and it can't get much worse than that _ does she want to be in a position, in a way, if indeed the scenario as you suggest, she takes over and she has shot her bolt for the next five years...? has shot her bolt for the next five ears. . . ? ., . , has shot her bolt for the next five ears...? ., ., ,., years. . . ? politics is about acting when you _ years. . . ? politics is about acting when you should _ years. . . ? politics is about acting when you should act. _ years. . . ? politics is about acting when you should act. do - years. . . ? politics is about acting when you should act. do you i when you should act. do you think she is in a — when you should act. do you think she is in a position _ when you should act. do you think she is in a position where - when you should act. do you think she is in a position where she i she is in a position where she should act now? i she is in a position where she should act now?— she is in a position where she should act now? i mean, i totally takes on your's _ should act now? i mean, i totally takes on your's point. _ should act now? i mean, i totally takes on your's point. the - takes on your's point. the common—sense view is there's nothing that can _ common—sense view is there's nothing that can be _ common—sense view is there's nothing that can be done. i don't think that is true _ that can be done. i don't think that is true of— that can be done. i don't think that is true of any— that can be done. i don't think that is true of any political situation. -- .— is true of any political situation. -- itotally— is true of any political situation. —— i totally take sonia's point. it is a government without direction policy _ is a government without direction policy 0r— is a government without direction policy. or even having a vision that appeals _ policy. or even having a vision that appeals to— policy. or even having a vision that appeals to the vast majority, which is the _ appeals to the vast majority, which is the only— appeals to the vast majority, which is the only one they can hold ontom — is the only one they can hold ontom it _ is the only one they can hold ontom it is— is the only one they can hold onto... it is a better outcome than their current — onto... it is a better outcome than their current situation. and i think

that will— their current situation. and i think that will appeal to mp5, who face certain— that will appeal to mp5, who face certain loss if they continue to do nothing — certain loss if they continue to do nothinu. �* ,., certain loss if they continue to do nothinu. �* _, ,, ., ., certain loss if they continue to do nothinu. �* ,, ., ., nothing. about keir starmer, do you think in a sense _ nothing. about keir starmer, do you think in a sense he _ nothing. about keir starmer, do you think in a sense he is _ nothing. about keir starmer, do you think in a sense he is more - think in a sense he is more concerned about whether rishi sunak is the leader or a suella braverman leadership if she was to go, it is a big if, heading into an election? it's a very interesting hypothetical but quite unlikely, because i really don't buy that there are enough people who would put in letters. i think conservative mps are quite aware of how nuts it would look to the country changing prime minister yet again. i actually think suella braverman would maybe be even easier to beat than rishi sunak, because i think she is incredibly divisive. so, yes, maybe there is a small number of conservative party voters, existing voters, who her quite toxic brand of politics appeals to, but i

don't think she could be a threat to keir starmer. but don't think she could be a threat to keir stamen— keir starmer. but keir starmer has his own problems, _ keir starmer. but keir starmer has his own problems, not _ keir starmer. but keir starmer has his own problems, not least i keir starmer. but keir starmer has his own problems, not least on i keir starmer. but keir starmer hasj his own problems, not least on the question of the gaza ceasefire. anas sarwar, the labour leader in scotland, calling for a ceasefire. sadiq khan calling for a ceasefire. the party is not united on this key issue... if the party is not united on this key issue... , ., the party is not united on this key issue... ,, the party is not united on this key issue... i. ., ,., issue... if you look at the polling in the last _ issue... if you look at the polling in the last two _ issue... if you look at the polling in the last two or _ issue... if you look at the polling in the last two or three _ issue... if you look at the polling in the last two or three weeks, i in the last two or three weeks, labour has maintained the lead. yes, there are divisions in the party, although it is possible to make too much of them. sadiq khan saying things like, well, we can agree disagreeably on whether we are calling for an immediate ceasefire. but keir starmer said, we are all about the same endgame, which is peace in the middle east.— about the same endgame, which is peace in the middle east. we are all about peace- -- _ peace in the middle east. we are all about peace... well, exactly. i peace in the middle east. we are all about peace... well, exactly. but i. about peace... well, exactly. buti think it's wrong _ about peace... well, exactly. buti think it's wrong to _ about peace... well, exactly. buti think it's wrong to analyse - about peace... well, exactly. buti think it's wrong to analyse this i about peace... well, exactly. buti think it's wrong to analyse this in i think it's wrong to analyse this in terms of party divisions and the impact that house. i think there is something about keir starmer displaying leadership in the last

few weeks, and voters actually look at him and say he is so different to the stancejeremy at him and say he is so different to the stance jeremy corbyn would at him and say he is so different to the stancejeremy corbyn would have taken, it reinforces the fact keir starmer is thinking like a potential prime minister.— scotland's health secretary, michael mathieson, embroiled in a row over an £11,000 bill for data roaming on his ipad while he was on holiday in morocco, has this evening, finally agreed to pay the full cost back, after initially paying just £3,000. he had said he had run up the charges dealing with consituency business, and the first minister humza yousaf had originally said michael mathieson did not have to pay back the sum as it was a "legitimate expense." it's not been a great week for scotland's first minister. he and his depute shona robinson were accused of misleading the scottish parliament over requests to the scottish government from the covid inquiry. in response, humza yousaf told parliament that the government had interpreted the inquiry�*s requests

too narrowly, and subsequently supplied 14,000 messages to the inquiry, but rejected accusations that he had misled holyrood. this comes a little over a fortnight after the failed snp leadership candidate, the msp ash regan, resigned from the party to join alec salmond's alba, citing increasing dissillusionment with the snp's leadership. so is the snp losing its footing? first minister, do you need to refer yourself to the independent adviser... no, i don't. humza yousaf has had trouble shaking off the problems of the past. first minister, have you misled parliament? no, i made that point very, very clearly during the chamberjust now. what do you think is in those messages, and is there something you and your colleagues are embarrassed about? no, we have handed over 14,000 whatsapp's messages, i have handed over of course... the latest row claims that senior scottish government ministers and officials deleted pandemic whatsapp messages, and that they have not been entirely honest about their submissions to the uk covid inquiry. these challenges started soon after he did. notjust plunging poll

ratings after replacing a popular predecessor, but the arrests of nicola sturgeon and her husband, as part of a police investigation into snp finances. both were released without charge. the snp then lost the rutherglen and hampton by—election and hamilton west by—election to scottish labour. and in the last month, suffered two defections — one at westminster, and another at holyrood. thank you. i wouldn't call it a defection. if you actually look up the definition of defection, it's something along the lines of abandoning your cause. seven months ago, ash regan was running to lead the snp. now she has jumped to alex salmond's nationalist challenger party alba. the snp have lost focus on independence, it feels like it's drifted, feels like they have other priorities that i feel are not very popular with the scottish public, and that is affecting support for the snp, and there is now a bit of a gap opening up, actually, between those that would vote yes, and those that would vote snp.

while alba are better at defections than elections, and there is little evidence of much public support, their very existence is a sign of a shift in scotland's political landscape. support for the snp may be on the slide, according to opinion polls, but backing for independence has remained comparatively strong. humza yousaf wants to put that very issue at the heart of his general election campaign. that could prove to be a problem for one of the opposition parties here, and provide an opportunity for another. well, i think it is fairly clear in many seats across scotland, the scottish conservatives are the only party that can stop the snp. humza yousaf has been very clear he wants the next general election for the uk parliament to be a proxy referendum on independence. douglas ross knows his party does best when the union is in focus, even if he hasn't enjoyed this week's interventions from the home secretary. my wife is a serving police officer, within police scotland, but as i say i wouldn't use that language...

what does that do to policing? i would just say it's incumbent on all of us to be considerate and careful in the language that we use. we couldn't have hoped for this two years ago. scottish labour's optimism about gaining seats from the snp seems predicated on a plea across the constitutional divide. i say directly to people who support independence or who have supported independence in the past, or even have voted for other political parties in the past, we may disagree on the final destination for scotland, but a vast majority of us can agree that it is not working right now, that we need change across the uk, and the snp has lost its way. you are really a unionist party, you are basically saying you might want scottish independence, i'm not going to deliver it, but vote for me anyway. we say to people, i understand why you are so angry with this tory government, i understand why you want to run a million miles away from them, i understand why you are desperate for change, let's deliver that change by getting rid of this rotten tory government, and through that change let's

demonstrate to you we can make this work for scotland. for ian blackford, a veteran of the snp's ups and downs across almost 50 years, voters must give his leader a chance. i fully accept that we have a challenge today. we have to show we are worthy of the trust. i actually believe that people will recognise that humza yousaf is an inspirational leader. we need to show we are on the side of ordinary people in scotland. this is a man i know has what it takes to lead this party, to lead this government and to lead the country. but he may not have long. months after being elevated to the job of first minister, humza yousaf�*s political fortunes need a lift. fast. it was the most deadly fire in modern us history. the historic town of lahaina on the hawaiian island of maui was devastated by fire in august. at least 99 people died and thousands have been displaced. many witnesses said they tried to leave by car, but got stuck in gridlocked traffic, with roadblocks causing chaos during the evacuation. james clayton has been investigating why it was so hard

to escape from the town, and found a breakdown in communication between authorities. i had a neighbour, they're not there any more. i had an auntie, she's not there any more. so many things that should have happened that didn't happen. lahaina was the gem of maui in hawaii. it has been near totally destroyed. the fire was the most deadly in modern us history, but why? using first—hand accounts corroborated by video on the ground, we have built up a picture of what happened, and how a desperate situation was made worse still, by mistakes from authorities. the roofs are flying off. the trees are definitely breaking, the wind is just not dissipating, it's getting stronger. and within minutes, it turned into this big black ugly smoke, and then just started to move horizontally, not vertically.

so i'm out there with the garden hose, and that is ridiculous now that i say it out loud, but i'm trying to water the roof line and the trees that were around my partner's property. u'i decides she has the flee by car. her neighbours can't find their car keys, so she takes them with her. they're waving me and yelling at me and they're asking for help. oh, my god. it crossed. sat in traffic, she sees smoke engulfing cars. but in the back, in my rear view, i can see headlights disappear into the black smoke, and i'm thinking to myself, we're not moving fast enough, we got to get out of here, there's people back there, and... how many cars behind you? hundreds. the bbc has obtained police bodycam footage that shows even officers were exasperated about the traffic jams. why are the cars not moving? they've just stopped traffic on both side of the highway.

what is he doing down there? i don't know. we have guys in both lanes going down. it is burning next to cars up there. we have to help these guys down there because they don't know what they're doing. noah and his family thought they had managed to get out of a burning inferno. now we're out of it. we can see now. i can't believe that it was like black, that was crazy. but soon they realised the road they thought would take them to safety had been shut by police. the roads closed. we were all telling each other like it's going to be ok, we're going to get out of this, just trying to remain calm, and my absolute worst fear was to be just surrounded by fire, where there was no way to run. instead, they were directed into town, rather than out. they eventually had to abandon their car and get into the sea to survive. both sides to the right and left are on fire. white smoke starting to come

which means the fire is starting to die. it's scary. why the traffic was moving so slowly is something we have tried to find out. for sure, some roads were impassable because of fallen debris, but other roads were blocked by the police due to downed power lines and a fear of electrocution. this is the chief of police john pelletier. if there is a downed power line, we don't want — that was live, we want to make sure that you didn't go over a downed live power line. but hawaiian electric has told the bbc that it told the police several times during the day, that the power lines weren't energised. this is one recording of such a conversation given to the bbc by hawaiian electric. if you guys shut down all of the electric off lahainaluna. it's off right now. it's off? yes. — 0k, thank you. the police, however,

told the bbc that the company did not give clear and definitive confirmation that the lines