—— yes. -- yes. can properly? element yes. -- yes. can we 'ust properly? element yes. -- yes. can we just looked _ properly? element yes. -- yes. can we just looked pleased _ properly? element yes. -- yes. can we just looked pleased at _ properly? element yes. -- yes. can we just looked pleased at the - properly? element yes. -- yes. can| we just looked pleased at the e-mail we just looked pleased at the e—mail that you _ we just looked pleased at the e—mail that you refer to here in paragraph 110, if— that you refer to here in paragraph 110, if we — that you refer to here in paragraph 110, if we disco back? at the foot of the page you referto the eunatt— at the foot of the page you referto the e—mail on the 7th ofjanuary, to lowther— the e—mail on the 7th ofjanuary, to lowther was— the e—mail on the 7th ofjanuary, to lowther was notified via an e—mail. can we _ lowther was notified via an e—mail. can we look— lowther was notified via an e—mail. can we look at please f 00155 399? it is the wendy boreham e—mail at 10:466m —

it is the wendy boreham e—mail at 10:466m i— it is the wendy boreham e—mail at 10:46am. i have left you a voice mait _ 10:46am. i have left you a voice mait as — 10:46am. i have left you a voice mait as i — 10:46am. i have left you a voice mail. as i need to update you on a recent— mail. as i need to update you on a recent issue — mail. as i need to update you on a recent issue that has occurred and has been — recent issue that has occurred and has been resolved, but does have some _ has been resolved, but does have some short—term impacts. would you agree _ some short—term impacts. would you agree that _ some short—term impacts. would you agree that is — some short—term impacts. would you agree that is being presented by foods_ agree that is being presented by foods itchy as an issue that has already— foods itchy as an issue that has already been solved and fixed? it is only recently arisen? a recent issue? — only recently arisen? a recent issue? . . only recently arisen? a recent issue? . , , . issue? that is exactly what it says. whereas in — issue? that is exactly what it says. whereas in fact _ issue? that is exactly what it says. whereas in fact this _ issue? that is exactly what it says. whereas in fact this data _ issue? that is exactly what it says. whereas in fact this data from - whereas in fact this data from september 2007, whereas in fact this data from september2007, didn't whereas in fact this data from september 2007, didn't it? yes, it did. going back to your paragraph 111,

please _ going back to your paragraph 111, please. which is on page 50 of your witness _ please. which is on page 50 of your witness statement. you say miss thomas forwarded miss warrens— you say miss thomas forwarded miss warren's witness statement, attaching a proposed witness statement. can we just quickly look at that— statement. can we just quickly look at that witness statement please? it is f uj _ at that witness statement please? it is f u] 00122604. this is the draft witness _ is f u] 00122604. this is the draft witness statement that it is proposed by fujitsu is going to explain — proposed by fujitsu is going to explain in _ proposed by fujitsu is going to explain in any court proceedings the riposte _ explain in any court proceedings the

riposte lock events. can we look at page _ riposte lock events. can we look at page seven, — riposte lock events. can we look at page seven, please? at the top of the page, the top half. _ at the top of the page, the top half. in — at the top of the page, the top half, in december2007 at the top of the page, the top half, in december 2007 an occurrence was reported in one office. this led to a previously unseen database log where _ to a previously unseen database log where a _ to a previously unseen database log where a balance and transaction had failed _ where a balance and transaction had failed to— where a balance and transaction had failed to be — where a balance and transaction had failed to be reported to an unseen database — failed to be reported to an unseen database. a financial imbalance was evident _ database. a financial imbalance was evident and was subject to an infinite — evident and was subject to an infinite -- _ evident and was subject to an infinite —— subject to an investigation by fujitsu and the post office. the financial imbalance has been _ post office. the financial imbalance has been resolved. a software correction— has been resolved. a software correction was applied across the estate _ correction was applied across the estate in— correction was applied across the estate in early november to ensure

that any— estate in early november to ensure that any such event generated would be monitored. testing of the correction has established that the unmonitored error does not occur elsewhere — unmonitored error does not occur elsewhere in the system. it is pronosed _ elsewhere in the system. it is proposed by this witness statement, would _ proposed by this witness statement, would you _ proposed by this witness statement, would you agree, to summarise the issue _ would you agree, to summarise the issue by— would you agree, to summarise the issue by offering reassurance that testing _ issue by offering reassurance that testing confirmed that the issue did not occur— testing confirmed that the issue did not occur elsewhere in the system? yes, _ not occur elsewhere in the system? yes. that _ not occur elsewhere in the system? yes. that is— not occur elsewhere in the system? yes, that is what it is trying to do, yes. 50 yes, that is what it is trying to do, es. ' . , yes, that is what it is trying to do, es. , . , do, yes. so effectively reassuring the ost do, yes. so effectively reassuring the post office — do, yes. so effectively reassuring the post office that _ do, yes. so effectively reassuring the post office that this _ do, yes. so effectively reassuring the post office that this was - do, yes. so effectively reassuring the post office that this was an i the post office that this was an isolated — the post office that this was an isolated incident, not affecting any other— isolated incident, not affecting any other case — isolated incident, not affecting any other case in which arq data had been _ other case in which arq data had been supplied. that other case in which arq data had been supplied-— other case in which arq data had been supplied. that would be the inference from _ been supplied. that would be the inference from this, _ been supplied. that would be the inference from this, yes. - been supplied. that would be the inference from this, yes. that - been supplied. that would be the inference from this, yes. that is. inference from this, yes. that is not accurate, _ inference from this, yes. that is not accurate, is _ inference from this, yes. that is not accurate, is it, _ inference from this, yes. that is not accurate, is it, on _ inference from this, yes. that is not accurate, is it, on the - not accurate, is it, on the information you have been provided with? _ information you have been provided with? because it lasted longer? yes,

the fix _ with? because it lasted longer? yes, the fix in _ with? because it lasted longer? yes, the fix in november 2008 is about monitoring the events after that tinre _ monitoring the events after that time. what is overlooked is the operation — time. what is overlooked is the operation of the event from december 2007~ _ operation of the event from december 2007~ yes. _ operation of the event from december 2007~ yes. i_ operation of the event from december 2007. yes, iagree. in operation of the event from december 2007. yes, i agree.— 2007. yes, i agree. in paragraph 110, miss wareham _ 2007. yes, i agree. in paragraph 110, miss wareham laid - 2007. yes, i agree. in paragraph 110, miss wareham laid out - 2007. yes, i agree. in paragraph| 110, miss wareham laid out going back and check some other factors before. which i thought was .8. yes. before. which i thought was .8. yes, checkinu before. which i thought was .8. yes, checking aros _ before. which i thought was .8. yes, checking arqs to _ before. which i thought was .8. yes, checking arqs to convert data integrity — checking arqs to convert data integrity in the period may 2007 to november 2008. what integrity in the period may 2007 to november 2008.— integrity in the period may 2007 to november 2008. what i don't know is whethertook— november 2008. what i don't know is whether took place, _ november 2008. what i don't know is whether took place, which _ november 2008. what i don't know is whether took place, which is - november 2008. what i don't know is whether took place, which is what - november 2008. what i don't know is whether took place, which is what i i whether took place, which is what i think... �* think... and if it did, if it ever not think... and if it did, if it ever got reflected _

think... and if it did, if it ever got reflected in _ think... and if it did, if it ever got reflected in the _ think... and if it did, if it ever got reflected in the witness i got reflected in the witness statement. yes. because we know what happens _ statement. yes. because we know what happens is _ statement. yes. because we know what happens is that it was decided in the event — happens is that it was decided in the event not to reveal any of this in a witness — the event not to reveal any of this in a witness statement.— in a witness statement. incorrect. the advice — in a witness statement. incorrect. the advice was _ in a witness statement. incorrect. the advice was to _ in a witness statement. incorrect. the advice was to remove - in a witness statement. incorrect. the advice was to remove those l in a witness statement. incorrect. i the advice was to remove those two paragraphs. the the advice was to remove those two paragraphs— paragraphs. the post offers lower's few was that _ paragraphs. the post offers lower's few was that it _ paragraphs. the post offers lower's few was that it wasn't _ paragraphs. the post offers lower's few was that it wasn't necessary . paragraphs. the post offers lower's few was that it wasn't necessary to | few was that it wasn't necessary to - ive few was that it wasn't necessary to give disclosure of this incident, but he — give disclosure of this incident, but he said if we are sure that there — but he said if we are sure that there have _ but he said if we are sure that there have been no other incidents. do you _ there have been no other incidents. do you know what steps were taken to determine _ do you know what steps were taken to determine whether there had been any other incidents, as he called them? no, i_ other incidents, as he called them? no, i don't — are you aware overall of the provision _ are you aware overall of the provision by fujitsu of information

at the _ provision by fujitsu of information at the outcome of any investigation as to _ at the outcome of any investigation as to whether the 2008 data log had affected _ as to whether the 2008 data log had affected any other arqs? i as to whether the 2008 data log had affected any other arqs?_ affected any other arqs? i thought there was, affected any other arqs? i thought there was. it _ affected any other arqs? i thought there was, it may _ affected any other arqs? i thought there was, it may not _ affected any other arqs? i thought there was, it may not have - affected any other arqs? i thought there was, it may not have been i affected any other arqs? i thought. there was, it may not have been this particular problem, but there is something later on in our answers about having checked the number of arqs are problems had been presented or not. i think in the case of this 2,000 and 811 or not. i think in the case of this 2,000 and 8“ do not know whether previous arq material had been checked against that problem. band checked against that problem. and what about whether irrespective of arq data, weather data had been checked _ arq data, weather data had been checked in that period to see whether— checked in that period to see whether the repulsed log had affected the integrity of that data? i'm unaware of any other checks having taken place. we

i'm unaware of any other checks having taken place.— i'm unaware of any other checks having taken place. we do have an e-mail, f having taken place. we do have an e-mail. f u] _ having taken place. we do have an e-mail, f u] 80015. _ having taken place. we do have an e-mail, f u] 80015. if— having taken place. we do have an e-mail, f u] 80015. if we - having taken place. we do have an e-mail, f u] 80015. if we can - having taken place. we do have an e-mail, f u] 80015. if we can look| e—mail, f u] 80015. if we can look at that _ e—mail, f u] 80015. if we can look at that. 5421. fuj... f u]... thank you. this is february, the second — f u]... thank you. this is february, the second e—mail on the page, 2009, from penny— the second e—mail on the page, 2009, from penny thomas. would you scroll up from penny thomas. would you scroll up please? _ from penny thomas. would you scroll

up please? to the post office. analysis — up please? to the post office. analysis of the data covering may 2007 _ analysis of the data covering may 2007 to _ analysis of the data covering may 2007 to november 08 has been completed. 27 instances of concern were _ completed. 27 instances of concern were identified. they have been fully analysed and we can confirm that the _ fully analysed and we can confirm that the locking was caused by contention between the end of day process— contention between the end of day process and our riposte checkpoint being _ process and our riposte checkpoint being written. no transactions or balancing — being written. no transactions or balancing activities were affected. ithink— balancing activities were affected. i think that answers the first points— i think that answers the first points that we were looking at, whether— points that we were looking at, whether there had been a back check of the _ whether there had been a back check of the relevant period. but that is in relation — of the relevant period. but that is in relation to 195 arqs, not subject to data _ in relation to 195 arqs, not subject to data that had been in arq. and that was what _ to data that had been in arq. and that was what i _ to data that had been in arq. fific that was what i was referring to data that had been in arq. a"ic that was what i was referring to. to data that had been in arq. aic that was what i was referring to. i thought there had been some analysis

back then going back to the arqs that had been submitted. {guild back then going back to the arqs that had been submitted. could we turn to the duplicate _ that had been submitted. could we turn to the duplicate transactions l turn to the duplicate transactions issue. _ turn to the duplicate transactions issue, which is problem number four. this is— issue, which is problem number four. this is paragraph 118 of your witness _ this is paragraph 118 of your witness statement, which is on page 54. you tell us in 117 that the inquiry asked _ you tell us in 117 that the inquiry asked for— you tell us in 117 that the inquiry asked for details of the duplicate transactions incidents first identified in 2010 and recurrences of it in— identified in 2010 and recurrences of it in 2014 and 2016. you describe what _ of it in 2014 and 2016. you describe what the _ of it in 2014 and 2016. you describe what the incident was in paragraph 118 onwards. i'm not going to

rehearse _ 118 onwards. i'm not going to rehearse that, it is quite straightforward. if we go forwards to 131, _ straightforward. if we go forwards to 131, please, which is on page 61. you indicates in paragraph 131 that post office were informed about the incident _ post office were informed about the incident on — post office were informed about the incident on the 30th ofjune 2010. yes _ incident on the 30th ofjune 2010. yes in _ incident on the 30th ofjune 2010. yes. i'm going to summarise the relevant — yes. i'm going to summarise the relevant e—mail. it stated that fujitsu — relevant e—mail. it stated that fujitsu had identified the affected aros _ fujitsu had identified the affected aros it— fujitsu had identified the affected arqs. it had already developed a workarounds and the workaround would enable _ workarounds and the workaround would enable anyone looking at arq data to identify— enable anyone looking at arq data to identify the duplicate transactions and ensure that they weren't brought in to account. yes. and presumably

the idea _ in to account. yes. and presumably the idea of— in to account. yes. and presumably the idea of that is to reassure the post office — the idea of that is to reassure the post office that the day still has integrity — post office that the day still has integrity if you used to work you could _ integrity if you used to work you could still— integrity if you used to work you could still rely on the data. yes. if we go forwards to paragraph 137 of your— if we go forwards to paragraph 137 of your witness statement. paul patterson dared _ of your witness statement. paul patterson dared the _ of your witness statement. f—i i patterson dared the head of fujitsu in europe answering questions in the inquiry on the post office candle. he was talking about computer glitches and they are being quite painstakingly going through those computer glitches, what the obligation was a fujitsu to inform the post office, and to what extent those glitches may have caused the underlying problem that postmasters and post—mistresses were being

registered as having taken money is that they had not taken, and also to what extent that evidence was appearing in court and there do seem to be some inconsistencies there. this questioning is going to continue. it is essential to understanding what went wrong at the post office. let's now turn to another uk story, tata steel. you are life with bbc news. at the —— boeing 7478 cargo plane has had to make an emergency landing at miami international airport late on thursday. you can see this video posted online shows flames coming out of the left wing of the aircraft whilst in flight. it was on its way

to sanjuan in puerto rico from miami international airport. to sanjuan in puerto rico from miami internationalairport. no miami international airport. no injuries miami internationalairport. no injuries were reported. let's get more on tata steel, which has said it is to close both blast furnaces at its port talbot works in south wales with the loss of aroiund 3,000 jobs. of up to 2,800 jobs. the only other blast furnace in the uk is in the north east of england, in scunthorpe. that too is slated to close. tata says it will replace the blast furnaces with what's known as an 'electric arc furnace'. so what's the difference? well, blast furnaces use lumps of iron ore, dug from the ground, and then fed into the furnace. it emerges as liquid iron that can be turned into steel. but they're expensive to run, and burn vast quantities of coal, emitting large quantities of c02. whereas, electric arc furnaces recycle scrap metal into steel. because they use electricity, they're less polluting. one study says they could slash carbon dioxide emissions by 70%.

but, and here's the crucial bit for workers, because there's a lot more automation with electric furnaces they require fewer workers. we speak now to national officer for steel at community union, alun davies, who is in port talbot outside the steelworks. i really difficult day for 2800 workers and we know it is notjust about the workers, it is about the family and the community there, too. yes, that's family and the community there, too. yes, that'5100% correct. the workers are struggling this morning with this news. they were expecting things yesterday, but the calls and the messages i had last night as it was being drip fed out were horrendous. mental health affecting a lot of people. people not knowing how they are going to pay their

mortgages and the total uncertainty is wrecking the workforce, to be fair. ~ ~' ., is wrecking the workforce, to be fair. ~ ,, ., . . . ,, fair. we know that tata steel said somethin: fair. we know that tata steel said something had — fair. we know that tata steel said something had to _ fair. we know that tata steel said something had to change, - fair. we know that tata steel said something had to change, partlyl fair. we know that tata steel said i something had to change, partly as its move towards greener production, but also tata steel was using a day on its operations. this is a business decision, no matter how difficult it is for your members and staff there. it difficult it is for your members and staff there. . . difficult it is for your members and staff there-— staff there. it is a business decision. _ staff there. it is a business decision, but _ staff there. it is a business decision, but it _ staff there. it is a business decision, but it is - staff there. it is a business decision, but it is the - staff there. it is a businessl decision, but it is the wrong decision. as a multi—union group we put forward an alternative planwhichwascredible, but tata put forward an alternative planwhichwascredible,but tata didn't pla nwhichwascredible, but tata didn't wantto planwhichwascredible,but tata didn't wantto doit planwhichwascredible,but tata didn't we ntto doit cost planwhichwascredible,but tata didn't wantto doit cost abit more money. when i say a bit more, it was a few hundred million. now we are looking at tate and the government in westminster —— westminster to save these jobs. westminster —— westminster to save thesejobs. we westminster —— westminster to save these jobs. we want the company to look at our credible plan. we these jobs. we want the company to look at our credible plan.— look at our credible plan. we know the uk government _

look at our credible plan. we know the uk government is _ look at our credible plan. we know the uk government is putting - look at our credible plan. we know| the uk government is putting £500 million into the site last year. where did that money go? one assumes that did not, the condition that the jobs will be preserved. the that did not, the condition that the jobs will be preserved.— jobs will be preserved. the 500 billion hasn't _ jobs will be preserved. the 500 billion hasn't come _ jobs will be preserved. the 500 billion hasn't come into - jobs will be preserved. the 500 billion hasn't come into the - jobs will be preserved. the 500 - billion hasn't come into the company yet. it is going to be paid over a period of time. that was on the condition that two blast furnace is shut. going to electric arc is the wrong move at the moment is and if they went with our plan there would be a smaller electric arc and a blast furnace to allow a just transition going forward. what was the alternative _ transition going forward. what was the alternative plan _ transition going forward. what was the alternative plan that _ transition going forward. what was the alternative plan that you - transition going forward. what was the alternative plan that you put i the alternative plan that you put forward to the company that has been ultimately rejected? irate forward to the company that has been ultimately rejected?— ultimately re'ected? we put forward that there ultimately rejected? we put forward that there was _ ultimately rejected? we put forward that there was one _ ultimately rejected? we put forward that there was one blast _ ultimately rejected? we put forward that there was one blast furnace - that there was one blast furnace until 2027, and the other blast furnace would last until 2032. it would mean the closure of certain parts of the plants which would equate to around 700 job losses, but

we could manage that with people wanting to retire and still keep the volume is in place, so the plant would still produce over 3 million tonnes a year. would still produce over 3 million tonnes a year-— would still produce over 3 million tonnes a year. thank you for talking tonnes a year. thank you for talking to us. i'm tonnes a year. thank you for talking to us- i'm sure _ tonnes a year. thank you for talking to us. i'm sure we'll talk— tonnes a year. thank you for talking to us. i'm sure we'll talk again - tonnes a year. thank you for talking to us. i'm sure we'll talk again as i to us. i'm sure we'll talk again as more details emerge about what happens at the site in port talbot. thank you for now. live now to chaitanya kumar, head of environment and green transition at the think tank new economics foundation. thank you for having me. the most frustrating bit about this entire episode is how one or two firms can get to decide the entire future of an industry. back to 2008 and the financial crisis that set this decline of the steel industry, we have let that decline continued and

every politician since then has talked a good game about protecting the steel industry, protecting the workers, but what we have seen is essentially carving off of the sector by two firms really deciding the future. the companies have been given close to £1 billion if you look at tate given close to £1 billion if you look at tata steel and british steel, but it doesn't look like a good deal to me if it can stop the job losses. good deal to me if it can stop the job losses-— job losses. what does it tell us about the _ job losses. what does it tell us about the government - job losses. what does it tell us| about the government strategy, job losses. what does it tell us - about the government strategy, about what the uk should be doing as far as industry is concerned? we hear speeches from all sorts of politicians about it being about innovation, science, technology, design, and all those sorts ofjobs that require new skills and retraining. if you work in heavy manufacturing in the uk you might wonder if it is even a priority for government. wonder if it is even a priority for government-— wonder if it is even a priority for covernment. ., . , ., government. the net zero transition is not government. the net zero transition is rrot going — government. the net zero transition is rrot going to _ government. the net zero transition is not going to happen _ government. the net zero transition is not going to happen through - government. the net zero transition is not going to happen through our i is not going to happen through our

purely market—driven introversion. the state has to intervene. that is the reason why we have ambitious targets for 2,000 and 32,015. the transition of these industries is vital so the government is equally important. we have half £1 billion invested into tata steel without any conditions to protectjobs or having equity stakes in the firm. that would have been a good deal. but we are giving half £1 billion of public money but not taken a public stake in the farm. that doesn't look like a good deal, at all. we know that the future of electric arc furnaces is a good one. we are producing a lot of recycled steel. that is a good outcome. we need to see more of that and a bitter virgin still being produced well. at this halfway house deal that we have been stuck with with the firm gets to make lots of people redundant and still get half £1 billion is a very shoddy deal for us. ~ .

£1 billion is a very shoddy deal for us, ~ ., ., , , , , £1 billion is a very shoddy deal for us. ~ ., ., ,, , , ., £1 billion is a very shoddy deal for us. what happens in terms of heavy manufacturing _ us. what happens in terms of heavy manufacturing in _ us. what happens in terms of heavy manufacturing in this _ us. what happens in terms of heavy manufacturing in this country - manufacturing in this country because it feels like there is no joined up strategy, strategy that takes into account how long this takes. it is a decade, two decades for the uk to make that transition into a greener future when it comes to industry. as we know, politics is pretty volatile right now. i’m to industry. as we know, politics is pretty volatile right now.— pretty volatile right now. i'm old enouah to pretty volatile right now. i'm old enough to remember— pretty volatile right now. i'm old enough to remember when - pretty volatile right now. i'm old enough to remember when the i pretty volatile right now. i'm old - enough to remember when the phrase industrial strategy was being used by the conservative government. that phrase has been sold down the river and we are not really talking about industrial strategies. if we are serious about holding our manufacturing sector is... ensuring they are good for the future, then we need to have a genuine industrial strategy that requires more public investment but also public ownership alongside it. investment but also public ownership alonuside it. . , ., investment but also public ownership alonasideit. ., . alongside it. really good to have ou with alongside it. really good to have you with us- _ alongside it. really good to have you with us. thank— alongside it. really good to have you with us. thank you _ alongside it. really good to have you with us. thank you for - alongside it. really good to have you with us. thank you for being | you with us. thank you for being with us.

now, it's friday. if you're off for a drink after work or kicking back at home, what does the size of your glass say about you? a new study suggests removing large wine glasses in pubs could help cut how much we drink. in the trial, they removed this largest glass — 250ml — about a third of a bottle — and it meant they sold more of these —175ml. overall, people still ordered the same number of drinks, but consumed fewer units of alcohol overall, so while i put that to the test, here's our correspondent frances read to explain. dryjanuary for some, but for others it's been a case of drinking less without them even realising. cheers! at the three compasses pub in east london, the after—work crowd only have the option of a small or medium glass of wine — large has been taken off the menu

after the pub agreed to take part in a study with the university of cambridge. most of the drinkers didn't even realise. i don't think people would have really noticed between a medium and a large. i don't think i would really notice or, like, really tune into that. yeah, you don't really look at the quantity of the wine when you're drinking. i guess if you enjoy the taste, you willjust enjoy it no matter how much the quantity is. if the research has shown that it - does help, then why not, i suppose. but in this pub we didn't notice any difference. i i do quite like the choice for when you do come in. i suppose there's two of us and we'd like a large glass of wine, we're now more likely to go for a bottle. the impact on the pub? not much at all. the sales, it was a minimal difference. so it's not like we lost any trade. most customers just didn't really bat an eyelash, really. they just. .. i say, "oh, sorry, we're not selling large glasses at the minute," and they'll say,

"fine, i'll have a medium." some people were happy because it meant their round actually cost less! and so...yeah, so i think overall it was like... generally positive feedback, really, because they were spending less. this is just one of 21 places that have taken part in the trial, which previously had been selling small, medium and large. so if we look at what that means in real terms in the pub, it's 75 millilitres that's the difference between a medium glass of wine and a large glass of wine — and it's decreasing the volume by that much that researchers say makes all the difference. what we found was that, during the period when the largest serving size had been removed, volume sales on average each day were down by 7.6%. it's called the portion—size effect. so if you reduce the portion size that people are served,

it's a neat way of reducing how much we're eating and drinking, as i say, often without awareness. the researchers are now suggesting licensing authorities consider implementing the move more widely — a small change that they say could make a big difference to our overall health. frances read, bbc news, dalston. i don't know about but that is the contrast, look. 175 millilitres or 250 millilitres. there is a serious point in all of this, there is a suggestion that the cost of living crisis might mean people are trading down to a smaller class. a big glass normally cost less than two smaller classes, so take your pick. i know which one i am choosing! i know which one i am choosing! stay with us here on bbc news.

hello. i named storm is coming our way through the weekend. a quiet day of whether to date. it got down to —8 in part of oxfordshire this morning. we are swapping the cold wintry weather for something a lot milder. it will be wet and wendy's. store in esher with this on sunday night into monday morning. for the rest of todayit monday morning. for the rest of today it is starting to feel a little less cold with brisk westerly winds across the west of scotland churning more south—westerly. still winteriness on the top of the health but largely these showers not falling as rain. for most it will stay dry with a weak wintry sunshine. temperatures more widely up sunshine. temperatures more widely up to five or six, so not as has been over the last few days. there

will be downpours of rain overnight across western scotland. temperatures potentially dipping below freezing initially in eastern england but then rising again with that milder air as we head into saturday morning. a series of weather fronts as we head through the weekend. the is on a ship, a tight squeeze on the isobars. for saturday morning, more rain for western wales, across the north west of england and the pennines. showers in western scotland and northern ireland through the afternoon. south—eastern areas of england likely to stay largely dry. temperatures will rise to nine or 10 celsius. it will feel increasingly more windy on the western coast with heavy rain for western areas for saturday night and into sunday. here is storm a share. that will beast swinging through. the worst of the winds on sunday night and into monday morning. on sunday during the day we are likely to see heavy down

because of rain in western wales, northern ireland and southern scotland. temperatures between nine and 13 celsius. there are warnings across the whole of the uk for the strength of the winds, but for some amber warnings are strength of the winds, but for some amberwarnings are in strength of the winds, but for some amber warnings are in force. we will see gas of 50 and 60 miles an hour, up see gas of 50 and 60 miles an hour, up to 70 miles an hour on exposed coasts we could see 80 miles an hour. of course, that will have an impact on your monday morning travel.

also on the programme — i'm in port talbot, where workers are taking in the news that tata is set to cut nearly 3000 jobs from its uk workforce, most of them likely to be on the site. —— this site.

the sister of two—year—old bronson battersby tells the bbc