this is bbc news, the headlines... the united states national security adviser says the strikes against the houthis in yemen will reduce their military capabilities — as us and british forces launch fresh airstrikes. the number of lives lost in chile's deadliest wildfires jumps to 99. more than a thousand homes in the valparaiso region have been destroyed. parisians back the plan to triple parking gusts for suv vehicles. fiftyfive percent of voters approved the pollution control 55% of voters approved the pollution control scheme in the referendum. a woman killed in a dog attack in essex has been named as esther martin by herfamily. police say a man has been arrested following the attack in the village of jaywick. and facebook marks its 20th anniversary, having risen from a network for students

at a single university to one of the biggest internet platforms in the world today. hello, it's laura in the studio. paddy in the studio. and it's chris in belfast. i just think it's absolutely fabulous to see you on this — in a way, you two created the newscast. there were others involved. there were — katya and adam are dearfriends, yes. does it all come back to you? because brexit was one of the big dividing lines in the whole of northern ireland. that's why you're there, chris. yeah, true. yeah, no, absolutely. and actually, the last couple of days covering this story here and then in london before it did take me back, in fact, at one point i was talking to katya on the television and it really took me back to the brexit days of trying to, particularly as far

as the northern ireland element of the story is concerned, untangle — which is what all of this has been about — the complexities of northern ireland politics and the complexities of brexit. throw those two together and the spaghetti is not it. and the spaghetti is knotted. all those happy hours we spent talking about phytosanitary regulations, even if that is how you pronounce it now. and chris, we'll get to lots of that because lots of really interesting and historic things have played out at stormont this weekend, and we shouldn't understate the significance of what's happened. we had a long chinwag yesterday withjulian smith, the former northern ireland secretary, about the importance of that moment. and in a bit we'll hear from you about what it's really been like and what's been going on. yes. and also, it was a dominant part of our life on radio four this morning, listening to the archive, going back 50 years and reminding ourselves why we got to the belfast good friday agreement, what stormont was meant to do. so it's absolutely classic edition for chris to be here. and also this weekend there's been the most moving interview on bbc one

conducted by you laura, with the mum of brianna ghey. yeah, esther ghey is one of the most remarkable people i've ever met. she's so courageous. she's filled with compassion, and she's incredibly dignified and clear—minded and composed, despite having been through one of the worst things that anybody could ever endure — losing your child in a violent and horrific way. and i started our conversation by asking her, though, something happier — to tell us what brianna was really like. she was absolutely full of life. she was such a character. she was really, really outgoing. and she just she loved attention. she loved to be on tiktok. she loved having all of the likes that she used to receive. - and she wasjust... she was like, life and soul of the party, really. - and everybody knew brianna, -

and anybody who ever met brianna would would never forget her. and there's a horrible irony right from the start here, because brianna loved being online. she loved being on tiktok — i think she had 30,000 followers — and yet her killers planned her murder on messaging apps. scarlettjenkinson, one of them, researched videos of violence and torture on the dark web as a young teenager. and now esther is trying to turn something positive, in her view, out of her appalling ordeal. and she's starting a campaign as the petition has gone live today to ban social media apps for under—16s, to create what she described a child safe mobiles, and also to create a system where parents would get a flag if their child is looking for something, dangerous content online. we'd like a law introduced _ so that there are mobile phones that

are only suitable for that suitable for under—16s. l so if you're over 16, - you can have an adult phone, but then under the age of 16, you can have a children's - phone which will not have - all of the social media apps that are out there now. and also to have software that's automatically downloaded - on a parent's phone, _ which links to the children's phone and it can highlight keywords. so if a child is searching the kind of words that scarlett _ and eddie were searching, and it will then flag - upon the adults on the parent's - phone and there is software already upon the adults, on the parent's . phone and there is software already available. i know that schools are already. using this kind of software so that if students do type something in that's concern and then - in that's concerning it then flags up to the teachers. i feel like it's such a simple - solution and i don't understand why we haven't actually done something like this already. _

it's striking to me to listen because it's a year ago, it's only a year, and this esther ghey�*s on bbc one, controlling her emotion, talking to the nation. it's had a very big impact. i'll get to some of these. chris, i wonder if i could bring you in on something here. marcel�*s a viewer who says, "i don't understand why there's so much dithering about doing something about keeping children safe. in the netherlands, mobile phones are banned in schools, which would be a good start here. and parents should say �*no' to their children. that is their responsibility" — not talking specifically about the ghey family. chris, would the government say we're getting to this with our 0nline safety bill? despite the critics they wrote the 0nline safety bill took a long, despite the critics? the 0nline safety bill took a long, long, long, long time to work its way through its parliamentary processes. and i think there's a bigger picture point here, paddy, which is that politicians and it's notjust unique to the uk, of course, but politicians are racing to try and keep up and, frankly, failing to keep up with the waves of technological revolution and then indeed how the various apps are used. and then obviously, yes,

confront those big picture questions about the trade off between freedoms and regulation and the extent to which the state feels comfortable embarking on on on restrictions. embarking on restrictions. but i think the bottom line is that colossal gap between the march of technology and the sluggish pace of legislation, because by the time something works its way through all of the consultations and discussions and debates and about turns and tweaks and eventually reaches the statute — it becomes law — the technology has sped on another million miles an hour. could i ask you both, do you think that someone of the experience of esther ghey is someone who can influence the public opinion and the debate? is that how this campaign will work for her, do you think? well, it's how previous campaigns have worked. you know, we spoke yesterday, didn't we, about the bereaved families who've managed to get a change in the law so that they will get access to their children's profile and information online. it was interesting.

we asked gillian keegan, the education secretary, this morning, whether they were ready to consider that kind of radical action. and she basically said, well, no, not yet. we've got to wait and see how that huge new law chris was talking about pans out, because it is a major change having that law on the statute book — we shouldn't underplay that. it's a big deal. but i do believe very strongly there'd be lots of parents who've listened to us to this morning and who will have thought, "yeah. that's what it's like in my house. i fight with my kids about tech all the time. i do worry that i can't control what they're seeing and accessing. i don't think that i can properly be across what they're getting up to." how do we keep our children safe in the context of these incredibly powerful supercomputers that everybody�*s wandering around with in their pocket? and i do think sometimes you get a voice, an individual, who can use the incredible power of their own experience to to persuade.

to persuade. and, you know, think of the work already that was done by ian russell, wally russell's father. you know, would we have had the 0nline safety bill, although it takes ages? would we have had it in the format that we now have it if it hadn't been for his bravery and courage in speaking out? i'm not so sure. and the power of it, ithink, paddy and laura — listening to your interview this morning, of course, absolutely horrific and extreme and not therefore directly relatable to lots of parents, but so many elements of the story will be and that sense of a lack of power for parents to be able to know what their children, their teenagers are looking at, to have any idea of what might be going on. and i speak to some politicians at westminster who are grappling with this and wondering, you know, and ask themselves that sort of fundamental question what should be the role — of the state, and should it be — even if it might seem heavy handed to some — be willing to entertain entering a space where parents,

in this instance, can't or don't have the tools to be able to control. sojustine greening, the former education secretary, was on the show as well this morning and she made an interesting point. i mean, she sort of said, look, in the end, people ban cigarettes. in the end, we ban alcohol for children. in the end, we brought in film classifications for movies. right. now, i'm not, you know, to be completely clear, i'm not advocating for this. but the question is, is there a sort of is there is there a sort of...is there an appeal to millions of parents in this idea? and so, yes, is there — to be cynical from a political point of view — is there an opportunity for a politician who's willing to argue to go further, perhaps? and this morning, i think when gillian keegan said, "ah, yes, well, we're looking at banning phones in schools," i think, you know, they're consulting on that. she does want that to happen. but i think there have been a lot of people probably shouting at the telly and thinking, "well, that's not real life. that's not happening. the government actually is going

to have to force this to happen." and when a newscaster, laura, emailed us saying, "a question for gillian keegan — how is this compatible with a school day online? my daughter's i2. her timetables on an app. i manage her dinner money online. her homework is logged on another app that then directs you to several other websites or apps, depending on the subject. if they finish their work early in class, they're told to do their homework on one of these apps. however, school policy is if she should take her phone out on site at school, it will get confiscated and she will get demerits — like black marks — which i get to check on another app." laura says she's confused. i'm confused. well, exactly. so on the one hand, this is... in a sense, this is the dilemma. technology has massive opportunities and positives. technology also brings massive risks. and for many parents, massive dangers as they see it. and it's very difficult for politicians to grapple with it. but i think there are lots of families thinking they're not getting it right. well, so chris, it reminds me of events. we think we know how the political cycle in the election will play out

and then issues will come to grip us as voters that not everyone, even the clever people at the bbc, are going to be able to see what the issues are that will define public opinion this year. absolutely right. and i think what's so powerful about this particular issue is that it doesn't necessarily have to fall down particular party political tram tracks and the potential power of a campaign led with the... ..extraordinary testimony that we've heard today. i was pausing just to find an adequate word to describe it, really, so, so powerful was it. it does have the capacity to start shaping a campaign. and successful campaigns make make political waves. it's so interesting, isn't it? it's picking up on that strand of conversation about mobile phones in schools and the argument about whether that can actually practically happen. you know, is it realistic in 2024 that having a sort of offline

element to a teenager's life is even possible? and if the answer to that is, it probably isn't in most instances, you're then into a very complicated conversation, aren't you, about the whole business of regulation, about parental consent, about mirroring apps that parents conceive of what children are doing. and that is would be very difficult to make happen. it would be extremely difficult to make it happen. it is a really, really difficult issue. but gillian keegan, i think acknowledged she said, look, this is one of the massive challenges for this generation of parents. and, you know, we'll have to see whether or not that esther�*s campaign, which will be back in parliament this week, there's going to be a debate about this in parliament this week. one of her local warrington mps, charlotte nicholls, will be raising that debate. the petition is at change.org.uk if you want to go and take a look at it. but i also just think her compassion is something that you don't often see a glimpse of.

and for me, the most incredible moment of the interview was when she offered to go and meet the mother of scarlettjenkinson, who killed her daughter, to try to understand more about what was going on in that family, even while she's trying to cope with her own enormous grief. when i think of their emotions and how they're feeling, - itjust brings back how i felt- when all this happened in february. because, yeah, she does. she looks completely broken, really, and rightly so. - she's going through - an absolutely horrific time. is there anything that you would want to say to her? um... i think that i would like to say that... i if she did want to contact me and she does want to speak, | then i'm open to that. i'd like to understand

more how their life . was and what they went through. and i also want her to know that i don't blame her- for what her child's done. and i also want her to know that i understand how difficult - being a parent is in this current day and age with technology i and phones and the internet and how hard it is to actually monitor - what your child is on and so, yeah, if she ever wants to speak- to me, iam...|'m here. just picking up on what chris said, trying to find the words for this mother and whatjob she's doing by coming out on bbc one. so let's go to some viewers and newscasters. john says, "the tears were running down my cheeks, listening. the most amazing mum and most incredible person." thenjohn says, "it's another example of the government not getting to grips with an issue that's been around for years." and graham carter, chris,

to your point earlier, he says to me, "it's simple. take the laws relating to alcohol restrictions and substitute smartphone for alcohol and 18 years of age to 16. the bottom line is who buys the phones? the parents do. the buck stops with them." and isn't it interesting, paddy, if those campaigning can make an argument like that begin to gather some momentum? now, whether you could, in a societal sense, put that genie back in the bottle, given how normal the whole business of smartphones have been for this current generation, coupled with — as we were hearing from a newscaster a few minutes ago — the whole question of the extent to which they are actually an integral tool to day to day life, timetabling and dinner money and all the rest of it. but you can see the power of that parallel, can't you, with other now acknowledged societal harms for young people where it is accepted and beyond political debate that they are, there is an age restricted, an age—defined ban.

and there's meant to be an age restriction on lots of social media apps. chris, there's been a focus on northern ireland. you're there in belfast, you've been covering the stormont power sharing return. was there a hand of history on your shoulder? they laugh. the word "history" did crop up quite a bit. and yeah, of course, there's that tony blair famous soundbite that wasn't meant to be a soundbite, but it was absolutely a soundbite connected to northern ireland and the and the good friday agreement. yeah. and the h word did feature quite a bit, but it was one of those ones, despite the fact that as long as reporters perhaps lean on vocabulary like that a little too easily, it did have that sense, not just this two—year gap without devolved government. there have been these gaps throughout the history of devolution, devolution over the last 25 years, but also a first nationalist, first minister in michelle o'neill. for all of the first ministers there's been in the last quarter of a century, never one who aspires to see this

place, northern ireland, as part of the republic at some point. and to see that moment, to see her take that office, to address the assembly. and then i went to see her in her new office. she had her first minister blue ministerial box proudly on the table behind her. it was... yeah, it was quite a thing really to hear a first minister saying as she did that she'd like to see a referendum on and then a united ireland within ten years. she said that before, but she was saying it from the first minister's office. we've never heard that sort of thing by definition for many northern ireland first minister before. i believe we're in a - decade of opportunity. i think a lot of the old norms- are gone and i think that as we move further into the next decade, a lot of things are changing l in terms of our island. and i think that the opportunity to get towards a referendum i on irish unity is absolutely within touching distance. i within ten years then perhaps? yes, i believe so.

and i'm going to ask you a daft question first and then a serious one. all right. why are the boxes blue, not red? i did wonder that. did you ask her? no. when i was sitting last night afterwards editing a tv piece together, i did think, "i wonder if...| wonder why they're not red." i'm wondering, could the red thing — i don't know if i don't know i don't know if, i don't know what colour the boxes are that ministers in the irish republic use. would a nationalist in northern ireland regard a red box as somehow a symbol of sort of british statehood? i don't know. and does the blue box have the crown on it? no, it didn't seem to have... no, i meanjoking. no, i don't think it did. itjust said first minister. and it's so interesting that point about the crown, actually, because when i was reading up and reminding myself about the procedures that would be playing out yesterday, you know, if you are the first minister of scotland or wales in the same way that if you are a minister of the crown in the uk government, it is technically an appointment by the crown on the recommendation

of the prime minister or the devolved electorate. there is for obvious reasons in the context of northern ireland in the context of northern ireland and the huge negotiations around the good friday agreement, no role for the british monarch in the process of a first or deputy first minister assuming office, because obviously all of those questions were keenly discussed and debated in the most fine detail in the assembly of the very structures that we're talking about. i'm glad you managed to make an interesting and important substantial point after my shallow... it is a different colour, but i would like to know the answer to that. i don't think it's a shadow question. a shallow question. well, it represents something. why is it different, why is it different? yeah. and symbols matter. my goodness, they matter here. i feel that we should take advantage of chris mason and that ultimately... what do you mean? well, i'm going to explain that. the thing is that we do need you, chris, because you're so rarely here for us, to cast your eye over the thing that laura and i and henry have been wanging on about, which is the tax—cutting tories and the green—spending labour, where have the plans gone?

so on the whole labour question in £28 billion, this idea of this green prosperity plan, spending that amount of money by 2027 onwards, tail end of the next parliament, labourare in a mess on it at the moment. you've got keir starmer and rachel reeves, the shadow chancellor, in a different place publicly. it is as clear as that. there was an expectation from a lot of folk i speak to privately that they're trying to find a way of unhooking themselves from that number. that's quite hard to do without people being able to say that the entire policy kind of crumbles around them. lots of folk were saying to me until relatively recently, the opportunity to do that would probably come the other side of the budget, which is in about a month's time, because if there are the tax cuts that we hear — to a degree and then not to a degree — from the chancellor, then labour might be able to say, "well, actually the numbers don't quite work and maybe we're going to have to be a bit more careful,"

blah, blah, blah. the thing is though, paddy, i think that's not going to be sustainable for the next five weeks—ish, four and a half weeks, i think it is until the budget, because they're going to be chased around over and over again about 28 billion. because the contradiction, frankly, amongst some senior figures is transparent... because it's such a big number. and it's not like you can lose it down the back of the sofa. it's a huge number. it's a huge number in terms of the extent to which people see a number and see a billion attached and think, gosh, that must be a lot. now labour will make an argument that certain elements are already allocated, etc, etc, but it's a huge thing for the conservatives to be able to throw back at them and say, "how are you going to pay for it? is this more taxes, same old labour," that kind of political attack which is potentially very wounding for keir starmer. and it's become a huge totem. i mean that's the thing. theyjust dug themselves further and further and further and further and further into it. and somebody... how far have they dug themselves? further and further and further and further and further. but someone in the shadow minister was saying to me yesterday, actually, if you go back to the time

they were suggesting essentially we didn't really think this through at the time. think of the context when we announced this in 2021. keir starmer was struggling to get rule changes through the party. it was a sort of epic battle for him to finally grab control after the corbyn years and this kind of got through and maybe they didn't think about it quite clearly. and, you know, benefit of hindsight, announce a plan, don't ever announce a big number that you might not actually have to do anything about several years hence, because who knows what will happen? and here's another big number. this government, the conservative government, has has achieved the biggest tax take since the second world war. indeed so. they want to be seen as tax cutters, but actually in the true blue tory heartlands, they're seen as having a mahoosive — that's the correct term. and that's, the mahoosive fact is the tax burden is bigger than it's ever been. so, chris, i know we're almost starting to wend our way to the end of our wanging on. if you had to put a bet, would you put a fiver or a 50p on there being a national insurance cut in the budget? well, i'm a yorkshireman so it might be a tempeh.

or a penny off the basic rate. yeah, well, that would be really flat. i say so, so we've seen, haven't we, this sort of back and forth. a couple of weekends ago we had the prime minister and the chancellor writing pieces in the paper talking about tax cuts. then we had jeremy hunt scratching his chin to nick robinson and robert peston the other day. and you know, they'll still be seeing further projections from the office for budget responsibility in advance of the budget. come on, nail your colors! yeah, yeah. i think they will be and i think it's probably...probably national insurance. yeah. there'll be there's going to be a cut in tax on income i think. yeah. so another penny off nics that's somebody. do you want to make a prediction? well, you were right there was suggesting to me that that would be the place to look if they're going to do something, would be national insurance because it's immediate and everybody feels it. yeah. however, it's expensive and do the numbers add up, etc, etc, etc. but i think they've got themselves into a position where it is very, very hard for them not to do anything at all.

would it be the kind of dream scenario of tory backbenchers of taking, you know, 2p off income tax? it looks like that would be, you know, that looks like that at the moment. it's not on the cards, but who knows where we'll be by then because they've been on off, on, off, on, off, on, off. so who has a clue? chris, you're a marvellous man. please come often and improve our work. thank you. nice to chat to you both. cheers. great to have you. bye bye. hello. a change in the way this week. colder weather pushing down from the north. that change to colder conditions will not be quick or straightforward, as that cold air pushes south we will see some and we will see some rain and snow. at the moment most places in this mild air, cold air across the

north of scotland and on the boundary between these two air masses we have a weather front and this will continue to bring heavy, persistent rain across the north and west of scotland. the met office still has this yellow warning and forced, by the time all is said and done we might have seen up to 170 millimetres falling in the wettest locations, snow mixing in as it engages colder air and to the south of the weather front, extensive cloud cover, mist and murk, rain and drizzle for western coast and hills, i ken pisi again it will be breezy around 12 celsius, cold and northern scotland, just three cell c eventually that front will get kicked to the south so that rain pushing southwards across northern ireland and northern england, with wintry showers following into northern scotland. temperatures will drop close to freezing. further south are exceptionally mild to start tuesday morning,

to the south of that weather front. it will be slicing the country in two, on tuesday. rain across parts of northern ireland, southern scotland, into northern england, north wales. we may see something wintry mixing over higher ground as that cold air digs in to the north, snow shower scene to low levels across parts of scotland, still mild in the south, highs of 14. but with a front looks like it will clear southwards into wednesday, lingering across the channel islands, and elsewhere spells of sunshine, wintry showers across the northern half of the uk, temperatures lower, for just about all of us. as we get into thursday, lots of uncertainty about this aspect of the forecast. low pressure expected to spin in from the south—west with this front pushing northwards into the cold air, it may be that some of us see significant snow. uncertainty about what that might happen. likely to stay mild in the south, colder in the north.

welcome to newsday, reporting live from singapore, i'm steve lai. the headlines... the united states says air strikes against iranian—backed militias in the middle east have been effective, but officials insist more attacks are needed. as pakistan prepares to go to the polls this week — opposition parties turn to technology to get their message out to the voters. and we report on the buildup to the grammy awards — set to be dominated this year by female artists.

our top story this hour — the us says there will be more attacks