when temperatures have exceeded 1.5 degrees above preindustrial levels. that 1.5figure we hear a lot — it is an important boundary. in recent weeks and months, they've been going a little wibbly—wobbly about whether they were keeping the promise or not. and today, they have lobbed that number into a skip. what we're announcing today is that we won't be making . further investments, . and therefore we won't reach the 28 billion _ which is effectively stood down. guess, take a look in the skip. you'll see labour has dropped the pledge to spend £28 billion a year on green projects. £28 billion a year is now £24 billion over the whole parliament. it's been an agonising process for labour — we'll have analysis and reaction to the u—turn, and the way

it's been handled. ukraine's president zelensky has sacked the head of the armed forces — we'll bring you the latest on that. and we're still waiting for early results from pakistan. the votes are being counted at the end of a very tense few days. good evening. back in 2015, the world leaders gathered in paris to agree a target, to limit the global average temperature rise to 1.5 degrees celsius above pre—industrial levels. that target was seen as crucial in preventing the worst effects of global warming. today, the eu's climate service copernicus, revealed that last year that 1.5 degrees limit was met or exceeded every single month. in fact, these past eight months have been the hottest on record. and, what's more, the sea temperature, has been rising every single day since april — although that has been driven in part by the current el nino effect. here's our climate editorjustin rowlatt. this is where the electricity company sse plans a £2

billion water battery. the hydroelectric plant, the biggest engineering project in the highlands since the �*40s, will store excess renewable power. so, here is the plan. they are going to build a dam 92 metres high and 600 metres long, across the end of the glen to create a huge reservoir. but here is the really clever bit. the whole project is designed to exploit the key weakness of renewable energy sources like wind and solar. they are great when the sun is shining or the wind is blowing. then they often generate so much electricity that the price goes to zero. in fact, there are wind farms here in scotland that are sometimes paid not to supply electricity to the grid. at times like that, turbines will pump water up to the new reservoir. when it's dark or the wind isn't blowing and electricity is scarce,

the water can be released, spinning the turbines to generate enough electricity to power three million uk homes for 2h hours. the benefits are that the consumer, the uk consumers, are going to save money. we are going to use less oil and gas to match supply with demand, which is good for everyone and helps us achieve our climate goals. sse has already spent £100 million digging this tunnel. but heavy engineering like this does not come cheap. and the breakthrough has been finding a way to give investors confidence in the finances of a project that could still be running in 100 years�* time. now, the government doesn't want to put in any public cash, so the plan is to create a floor, a guarantee of minimum revenues. but, in return, it will also impose a cap on prices to make sure the project doesn't make too much profit.

and more projects like this will be needed as the switch to renewable power continues. sse says once the funding mechanism is finalised, it will press ahead with britain's biggest battery. justin rowlatt, bbc news, the scottish highlands. that sobering assessment comes on the same day that the opposition leader here in britain sir keir starmer confirmed that he is ditching a pledge to spend twenty eight billion pounds a year on the green transition if the party wins the general election. -- 20 £8 —— 20 £8 billion a year. environmental groups have called it short—sighted, and conservatives have described it as another starmer major u—turn on a key flagship policy. but speaking to the bbc�*s political editor chris mason, sir keir said the target had to be scaled back because the conservatives had crashed the economy. keir starmer, let's be clear. what are you binning today and what are you keeping?

since we've announced the green prosperity plan, we've made a number of very important commitments — like green steel, so we continue to make steel in this country, giga factories, so we can do the next generation of cars, a national wealth fund, so that we can have investment coming in for the jobs of the future, and green energy, which will be a publicly—owned company so that where we invest in energy in this country, we get the yield back for taxpayers. —— gb energy. all of that is staying, so every single commitment that we've made that is on the table is staying. the warm homes commitment is scaled down. that'll take a bit longer, but everything else is exactly as announced. what we're announcing today is that we won't be making further investments, and therefore we won't reach the 28 billion, which is effectively stood down. now the reason for that is because of the damage the tories have done to the economy. you know, the interest rates have gone through the roof. we have to adjust. they want to max out the credit card

at the first opportunity, so we've had to adjust to that. but the commitments we've made stay on the table. they will now find their way into our manifesto. why are you junking 28 billion given that quite a lot of the economic picture changed quite a while ago? and you make reference to liz truss�*s government, that was quite a while ago, and yet you were clinging to the 28 billion until now? well, the 28 billion commitment was made 2.5 years ago. obviously liz truss then crashed the economy. that sent interest rates through the roof. more recently, treasury insiders have been briefing that the government intends at the budget to max out the credit card, the government credit card, which is obviously reckless, but we have to, you know, anticipate the economy that we will actually inherit, not the one that we want to inherit if we're fortunate enough to win the next election. was it a mistake in the first place to talk about 28 billion, an arbitrary number that you've long acknowledged might be a struggle to get to anyway? well, the 28 billion was announced when interest rates were very low. now they're very high because of the damage has been done to the economy.

but maybe it was a silly promise in the first place? that means even the interest on the debt is measured in tens of millions of pounds, but what i'm interested in is not the money, the exact sum, but the outcomes. and with... you were interested in the exact sum until this morning. well, i've always been, and my mission is clean power by 2030. that's one of my five missions. that is absolutely committed to, and what i've made sure is that the commitments we've made under the green prosperity plan, that are vital underpinning for that, are all still in place so we have the certainty every member that i've made is staying in exactly the same way, save for the warm homes plan, which will have to take a little bit longer than i would've liked. i am joined by lord deben — former chair of the climate change committee, now chair of sancroft, an independent sustainability consultancy. good to have you with us. so keir

starmer they're assuring us that all his commitments will stay, bar the warmer homes policy which will take slightly longer — can it be done in one parliament with £24 billion? well, the real problem i think with it is there's not enough that's encouraging private investment. the climate change committee made it very clear that the vast majority of the change that we need must be funded by the private sector — and what we need is both government intervention and more than we are getting from the present government, but we also need to have policies which encourage investment in britain. and i want to see that from all the three major political parties — and at the moment, we are not seeing the kind of liveliness that we need. because the reality is that, unless we get that investment,

then the public will pay more and more for their energy. because of course, renewable energy is the cheapest way to produce energy — and i'm really angry that ordinary people are paying more for their energy because we haven't moved fast enough into renewals. if it energy because we haven't moved fast enough into renewals.— enough into renewals. if it is the rivate enough into renewals. if it is the private sector — enough into renewals. if it is the private sector that _ enough into renewals. if it is the private sector that is _ enough into renewals. if it is the private sector that is paying - enough into renewals. if it is the private sector that is paying the | private sector that is paying the bulk of the bill, then clearly you have to attract those investors to the contrary, given that the united states has a very large subsidy programme and the eu is thinking of creating a similar size package. companies look to the uk and think they are not really a good bet, because they keep you turning. weill. because they keep you turning. well, it's certainly — because they keep you turning. well, it's certainly true _ because they keep you turning. well, it's certainly true that _ because they keep you turning. well, it's certainly true that the _ because they keep you turning. -ii it's certainly true that the kinds of changes which have been made by the present government have not helped. but the truth is, we are a country that can do certain things better than anyone else, so we ought to be moving in that direction. and

in order to do that, one of the things we've got to do is to make sure that national grid reforms the grid system, that we actually encourage more offshore wind, that we do more onshore wind— we really need to move faster changing the planning arrangements for onshore wind — people will come to us if we have an attitude which we then stick to. and that's why the cross party agreements which, under the climate change act are so important, and it's really serious the way in which parties are now using climate as a competitive issue — but it's competitive issue — but it's competitive downwards, rather than upwards. competitive downwards, rather than uwards. . v . , competitive downwards, rather than uwards. . �*, . , upwards. that's an interesting point because one — upwards. that's an interesting point because one of _ upwards. that's an interesting point because one of the _ upwards. that's an interesting point because one of the arguments - upwards. that's an interesting point| because one of the arguments those who think labour were right to drop his pledge have made is that labour still has that problem of trying to convince the public that they are safe with your money — and this is the problem, it seems to me, when it

comes to the green transition as we are trying to fit into a five—year cycle, when actually some of this state spending will be massive and it'll need cross party commitment, won't do it? fit it'll need cross party commitment, won't do it?— won't do it? of course it is, and that's why _ won't do it? of course it is, and that's why we — won't do it? of course it is, and that's why we created _ won't do it? of course it is, and that's why we created the - won't do it? of course it is, and i that's why we created the climate change act in the first place, and that's why i was so critical, and continue to be critical, of the present government of using this issue as a kind of divisive issue, instead of it being something we do togetherfor instead of it being something we do together for the good of all of us. it's notjust a question of fighting climate change, which is very serious, on a day in which we now know we are permanently passing 1.5 degrees warmer than we were. but it's also crucial because of people's bills. unless we move fast enough, people will go on paying through the nose for energy — and through the nose for energy - and that's bad notjust through the nose for energy — and that's bad notjust for the ordinary person at home, but for every manufacturer, it makes very

difficult for people to invest in great britain because the energy costs too much. and we've been the leaders in offshore wind, we've got to get back into that position and very quickly. 50 to get back into that position and very quickly-— very quickly. so 'ust to be clear, are ou very quickly. so 'ust to be clear, you saying — very quickly. so just to be clear, are you saying he _ very quickly. so just to be clear, are you saying he should've - very quickly. so just to be clear, l are you saying he should've stuck very quickly. so just to be clear, - are you saying he should've stuck to this? i are you saying he should've stuck to this? ., are you saying he should've stuck to this? ~' ., , , are you saying he should've stuck to this? ~' . , , ., this? i think the reality is - and i won't argue the _ this? i think the reality is - and i won't argue the detail _ this? i think the reality is - and i won't argue the detail - - this? i think the reality is - and i won't argue the detail - actually| won't argue the detail — actually what labour is now proposing is very much in line with what the climate change committee has asked for. what i'm missing, and i'm still missing it from the conservatives as well, is the involvement of the private sector and trying to create the kind of society in which people want to invest here, particularly in those areas in which we are leaders. do ou areas in which we are leaders. do you think part of the problem here though is in the messaging, and the way this is being talked about politically? it's challenging, isn't it, to get people to change their boilers are to insulate their homes, or drive electric if you have

politicians who are making decisions which they think are politically expedient, but are effectively rolling back commitments they've made — why would the public decision to change? made - why would the public decision to chance? ~ ., �* , ., to change? well, i don't understand why politicians _ to change? well, i don't understand why politicians don't _ to change? well, i don't understand why politicians don't take _ to change? well, i don't understand why politicians don't take some - to change? well, i don't understand why politicians don't take some of i why politicians don't take some of the easy things — for example, we have more private aeroplane flights in britain then any other country in europe. now why on earth does this government not say, "we will ask people to fly planes but pay the full cost of the impact they make on the environment was back and we are going to take that money and come up with it, reduce the vat on the electricity you have to use to take your motorcar on the public system?" why don't you do that? that means the rich pay and the less well off get an advantage, and it makes it easierfor them to move get an advantage, and it makes it easier for them to move to an electric car. we are just missing out on all the very simple things that can be done in which you make

the transition fare and make people feel the government is really in charge and trying to do things for the whole nation. find charge and trying to do things for the whole nation.— the whole nation. and when you advised the _ the whole nation. and when you advised the government, - the whole nation. and when you advised the government, do - the whole nation. and when you | advised the government, do you the whole nation. and when you - advised the government, do you put the case that if you spend money, or borrow money to invest in the green transition, that does intern grow the economy? you look at the us where the has jumped well beyond expectations, perhaps due to what joe biden has put into the climate change policy — can you make the same argument to ministers here, and do they believe it?— do they believe it? well, you can make the same _ do they believe it? well, you can make the same argument - do they believe it? well, you can make the same argument and i do they believe it? well, you can l make the same argument and they ought to believe it because it's true. but it's also true in another way — and that's that, if you don't make that investment, your economy gets less and less competitive. because we've actually got to compete with the rest of europe, we have to compete with the united states — and if we aren't doing these things, people won't buy from our own industries, and we won't get

the jobs we need. our own industries, and we won't get thejobs we need. that's our own industries, and we won't get the jobs we need. that's the other thing that's so awful, there are many jobs that thing that's so awful, there are manyjobs that are there in the green economy, and the truth is that this government isn't moving fast enough and, although the opposition has backed down on a number of things — and i want to argue about some of those things — the fact still remains that they are asking for more than this government is doing. i want this government to move now, we haven't got time to wait — we have to do it now, and the 1.5 passing which we've had today just reminds us how close to the tipping point we are, a situation that would mean all of us would find life extremely disagreeable. you're not a scientist _ life extremely disagreeable. you're not a scientist but _ life extremely disagreeable. you're not a scientist but i _ life extremely disagreeable. you're not a scientist but i know— life extremely disagreeable. you're not a scientist but i know you - not a scientist but i know you consult widely with scientists — do you believe now, given the foot dragging going on notjust in this country but others as well, that actually this 1.5 target can't be maintained? i actually this 1.5 target can't be maintained?— maintained? i don't, ithink it can be maintained, _ maintained? i don't, ithink it can be maintained, and _ maintained? i don't, ithink it can

be maintained, and i _ maintained? i don't, ithink it can be maintained, and i think- be maintained, and i think scientists will tell you that it can be — but it means urgent action. the real thing that's missing is urgency. people seem to think they've got all the time in the world, and they we are on about how it'll take a bit longer — that is absolutely wrong for the people of britain, and the people of britain will exact their revenge if they find that climate change has made life so impossible for the next generation — well, notjust the next generation, but my generation, at my age it'll be worse and worse unless we take steps now.— age it'll be worse and worse unless we take steps now. always good to net our we take steps now. always good to get your thoughts, _ we take steps now. always good to get your thoughts, thanks - we take steps now. always good to get your thoughts, thanks for - we take steps now. always good to l get your thoughts, thanks for coming on the programme.— on the programme. thank you very much. around the world and across the uk, this is bbc news. let's look at some other stories making news. bbc news analysis reveals that cancer waiting times in england last year were the worst on record. only 64% of patients started treatment within 62 days of cancer being suspected, meaning nearly 100,000 people waited longer for life—saving care

than they should have. the waiting periods have worsened every year for the past 11 years. the co—op retail chain is urging mps to make assaulting or abusing a shop worker a specific criminal offence in england and wales. the company said there'd been a 44% increase in incidents of shoplifting and violence in its stores within the past year. it's already a criminal offence in scotland. the scottish government plans to increase the minimum price at which alcohol can be sold by 30%. this means shops in scotland would not be able to sell a bottle of wine for less than £6.09. the minimum price for vodka would increase by 4 pounds, to just over £17. the change must be approved by parliament, and would come into effect in september. you're live with bbc news. the votes are being counted in pakistan, after a general election that has been plagued by violence and intimidation.

mobile phone and internet services were suspended throughout the day — prompting an outcry from the opposition parties. the election comes almost two years after the previous prime minister, former cricketer imran khan, was ousted in a no—confidence vote. his rival, the three—times former prime minister, nawaz sharif, told the bbc he thought the elections were "absolutely fair". 0ur south asia correspondent samira hussain has more from islamabad. well, we've heard from the electoral commission. they've said that the election has gone off pretty well, but they did cite a few incidents where security personnel had died, but from their perspective by and large this was a pretty good election in terms of overall safety. they also were quick to mention that there were some issues at some polling stations and that those polling stations had been reported to them. but in general they are still reporting that this has been a pretty good election,

but remember that for the entire time that these polls were open, we saw that the mobile services were completely shut down. so internet service was complete shut down, and the government had assured people, saying that they weren't going to cut off any communication. but in the end they did, citing these security concerns, but critics of course were very quick to say this was just another attempt by the government to stifle the electoral process. joining me now is dr vali aslam — he's associate professor in the international relations of south asia at the university of bath. good to have you with us. we're still waiting, we thought would have it by now, and early results from the elections — why do you think there's been a delay? the elections - why do you think there's been a delay?— the elections - why do you think there's been a delay? well, given there's been a delay? well, given the far and _ there's been a delay? well, given the far and wide _ there's been a delay? well, given the far and wide locations - there's been a delay? well, given the far and wide locations of - the far and wide locations of different polling stations and the size of pakistan, which is four

times the size of this country, it's no surprise that we will need to wait until tomorrow morning to have some basic idea of who has one. the mobile internet was cut ahead of the vote, lots of complaints today — how much do you think that might influence the result? that was purposely _ influence the result? that was purposely done _ influence the result? that was purposely done to _ influence the result? that was purposely done to keep - influence the result? that was purposely done to keep one i influence the result? that wasj purposely done to keep one of influence the result? that was - purposely done to keep one of the parties's supporters away from polling stations as much as possible, which is the party of imran khan. and the party was to give more weight to the political party of nawaz sharif who, as you mentioned earlier, as been in parliament three times before to get more and more lead in the polls —— beenin more and more lead in the polls —— been in power three times. since the taliban took— been in power three times. since the taliban took over _ been in power three times. since the taliban took over in _ been in power three times. since the taliban took over in afghanistan, - taliban took over in afghanistan, the security situation has clearly worsened in the border regions, especially in baluchistan in the southwest — how intense is it now, and what role do you think the houston in military is playing in

that? , . , houston in military is playing in that? ,. _.,, , houston in military is playing in that? ,. ,,, that? the security problems is 'ust one of a that? the security problems is 'ust of a host �* that? the security problems is 'ust one of a host of i that? the security problems is 'ust one of a host of problems i that? the security problems is 'ust one of a host of problems at h that? the security problems isjust one of a host of problems at the i one of a host of problems at the country is facing. as well as a variety of internal problems, on the economic front, and other various issues, the biggest challenge that the incoming feminist or has, as he mentioned, is the pakistani military and how to deal with their influence in civilian affairs of the government —— incoming prime minister has. government -- incoming prime minister has.— government -- incoming prime minister has. are you saying they allow the chaos _ minister has. are you saying they allow the chaos on _ minister has. are you saying they allow the chaos on the _ minister has. are you saying they allow the chaos on the border- minister has. are you saying they l allow the chaos on the border to be maintained in some form, that they don't clamp down and enough —— down on it enough so that they create a feeling of insecurity that might influence the way people vote? since the 2008, pakistan _ influence the way people vote? since the 2008, pakistan has _ influence the way people vote? 5 “ice: the 2008, pakistan has originally emerged as a hybrid state in which the power lies in the hands of the military, but there is a facility in facade at the front and all the accountability goes towards that

civilian administration — which is very unlike many of our developing countries. so what happens in this scenario is that the military of course wants to maintain its role in its control of society and civilian affairs, and i can only bejustified if there is some level of controlled chaos on the borders with india, with afghanistan and iran, and that's what we are seeing for now. and thatjustifies the overbearing control which is ever—increasing of the military, and civilian matters, whereas the actual accountability lies in the hands of civilians. but that can backfire, and it did backfire badly in the recent conflict between iran and pakistan. of course, that's the big challenge of course, that's the big challenge that the military will have, as to how much chaos is controlled and when does it get out of control? and thatis when does it get out of control? and that is something that the future prime minister will have to deal with, which is basically how to

navigate the over dominant control of the military in civilian affairs, and still provide some sort of relief to the masses. and if it looks like nawaz sharif will be the next prime minister, he will be coming in after being expelled three times by the military — and for the fourth time, he's quite elderly now, it might be his last term before he passes on the power to his daughter most likely, and he would want to provide some relief. but that will be a big challenge for him because the military does not like the civilian leaders to get more popular thenit civilian leaders to get more popular then it certain level —— than a certain level. then it certain level -- than a certain level.— then it certain level -- than a certain level. , . ., , ., certain level. yes, imran khan is a very good — certain level. yes, imran khan is a very good example _ certain level. yes, imran khan is a very good example of _ certain level. yes, imran khan is a very good example of that, - certain level. yes, imran khan is a very good example of that, and i certain level. yes, imran khan is a| very good example of that, and his party's name did not appear on the ballot. a lot of the candidates who would've stood for the party stood as independence — so how difficult will it be in the initial days and

weeks to see what the scale of opposition is? it weeks to see what the scale of opposition is?— opposition is? it looks like the opposition _ opposition is? it looks like the opposition is _ opposition is? it looks like the opposition is already - opposition is? it looks like the l opposition is already decimated. opposition is? it looks like the - opposition is already decimated. so pakistan is quite used to what we call rigging, in which a host of tactics are used to deprive the parties that the security establishment does not want to see — they are marginalised from the very beginning, and such as, for example, forcing candidates to withdraw that are against the military — the actual on the day rigging and pakistan is not as massive as it happens with the pre—polling rigging, which already happens in pakistan. so we don't see much opposition to it nawaz sharif, it's likely he'll be the next prime minister. but what is likely to happen is that a couple years down the line, we will see things gradually worsening with the military establishment. doctor, good

to talk to you. _ military establishment. doctor, good to talk to you, fascinating _ military establishment. doctor, good to talk to you, fascinating the - to talk to you, fascinating the dynamics in pakistani politics at the moment. thank you for coming on the moment. thank you for coming on the programme. breaking news, that investment democrat investigation into the classified documents held byjoe biden has found that he did willfully retain them and disclose them, but has concluded that there was no need for any prosecution. this is one of the locations where those documents were found, a housing office complex in washington. the allegations date back to mr biden's time as vice president, he was one of the people interviewed during the special counsel's investigation. your member donald trump has been indicted in another investigation, the point is... we'll talk about it. hello. well, as predicted, the winter wonderland did arrive in the areas where it was forecast. so mostly the northern hills

of wales, northern england, some in northern ireland and scotland, too. here's a picture from wakefield, beautiful snowflakes there, but elsewhere rain, heavy rain. and these are the stratus and the nimbostratus rain—bearing clouds shrouding the tops of the skyscrapers in london. ok, let's have a look at the radar, then. where it's blue, it's raining. this was earlier on. where its white and grey, that's sleet and snow, so that weather front is moving northwards into scotland. now another clump of rain heading towards the south of england, and warnings from the met office for snow and ice are still valid across parts of the country. so you can check that online. so the forecast through the night, particularly heavy rain moving in from the south, moving northwards. could be 40—plus millimetres of rain in some areas. across the north and the north—east there, i think it's that mixture of sleet and snow, particularly across the higher ground. but that thaw is setting in, a rapid thaw from the south. you can see 11 degrees

in london in the morning, and further north about 4—5 celsius. so the weather map for friday shows the low pressure still close by. here's the weather front. north of the weather front, it's still pretty chilly. that easterly wind drawing in the colder air from scandinavia. here we have that west—south—westerly, so that mild air coming in. and i think again across the highlands and grampians, further snow to come on friday, again met office warnings for that. the rest of the country, it's a case of often cloudy weather, showers continuing through the day and into the evening hours as well. not a pleasant picture for some of us on friday and friday night. that takes us into saturday. the low pressure still with us. that weather front still there affecting the north—east of scotland, but already you can see turning milder. nine degrees in glasgow, seven in aberdeen. and the low is still with us on sunday, but this clump of rain i think raises the north—east of england and also eastern scotland for a time, but out towards the west and the south, i think the weather's going to be drier and brighter with just a scattering of showers.

now, the outlook through the weekend into next week, it looks as though things could settle down a little bit as we head into monday and eventually tuesday with high pressure building in, at least for a time. bye— bye.

hello, i'm christian fraser. you're watching the context on bbc news. president zelensky fires his army commander in chief —

and warns ukraine needs a �*realistic�* battle plan for the year ahead. it is all change in kyiv. president zelenskiy has today fired his top army commander in the biggest shake up of the armed forces since russia's full—scale invasion nearly two years ago. general zaluzhnyi was asked to resign monday, but refused to quit. so today, he was sacked. the president issued a photograph of the two men together, thanking zaluzhnyi for his service, but outlining the need for "renewal". but the ever—popular general has not gone without a fight, and before he was officially fired, he put out a statement that will raise some serious concerns within the armed forces. our partners' stocks of missiles, air defence interceptors and ammunition for artillery is becoming exhausted, he wrote. russia has taken note of how developments in the middle east have

distracted international attention, and will now seek, he says,