average of six to 8 degrees. -- the average of six to 8 degrees. —— 14 the average of six to 8 degrees. —— 1a in celsius. these daytime temperatures on friday will be lower than many we have been experiencing by night and that includes tonight in western scotland, northern ireland, eight in stornoway, nine belfast. a band of rain sweeping across scotland, northern ireland during the morning, sunshine afterwards and a mixture of sunshine and showers. that rain into northern england and wales and then later toward southern areas. much of daylight hours should stay dry, sunshine breaking through the cloud, 14 sunshine breaking through the cloud, 1a or 15 again. patchy rain pushing in here through the evening, clearer skies to the north of it, free frost potentially but mild air will surge back even more as we go into wednesday. these weather front tos will bring widespread rain wednesday

morning. wednesday morning the worst part of the day for most, brightens up part of the day for most, brightens up into the afternoon for most but stays wet in the shetlands and the rain never clears through the english channel. the winds from the south, gusting to gale force at times but those winds are still in from the south so temperatures again into the teens for some. but that moderna does get swept away later in the week, low pressure pushes eastwards and introduces cooler air from the mid atlantic that puts us back to where we should be. thanks, matt. and that's bbc news at ten. newsnight is just getting under way on bbc two, with kirsty wark. on bbc one, it's time tojoin our colleagues for the news where you are. goodnight. alexei navalny�*s widow yulia takes on his mantle as leader of the russian opposition — but is putin now unassailable in russia 7

the russian authorities are denying alexei navalny�*s family and lawyers access to his body in the remote arctic penal colony. did putin's people kill him with novichok, the poison of choice in russia, as his widow claimed? tonight we'll speak to those who knew him well, including an investigative journalist for insider and der spiegel, one of the founding members of pussy riot, and an expert in russian politics. also tonight: the business secretary kemi badenoch has hit back at claims made by the former chair of the post office. he's alleged she told him "someone has to take the rap for this" when she sacked him last month, which she's denied.

i would hope following dismissal. both sides came out fighting, but i've spoken to a senior whitehall figure who stands by one of henry staunton�*s claims. only a week since pakistan's election, but for manyjournalists there, the country doesn't feel like a democracy, with claims they've been assaulted or worse just for doing theirjobs. were you where you yes, i thought the were were you where you yes, i thought they were going — were you where you yes, i thought they were going to _ were you where you yes, i thought they were going to execute - were you where you yes, i thought they were going to execute me. i and the american author kiley reid, whose debut novel such a fun age captured the state of racism and class in america, is here to talk about her new campus novel, come and get it, a satire on money, insecurity and influence. good evening. alexei navalny�*s widow met eu leaders in brussels today,

and ahead of that meeting, she released a video voicing her determination to step up to lead the opposition to putin following her husband's death. in the video, she said she knows exactly why putin killed her husband three days ago and that it will be known soon, and she said that the russian authorities are blocking access to her husband's body until traces of the deadly agent novichok have disappeared. it was in january 2020 that navalny survived a novichok poisoning, infamously transferred through his underwear. then, as was his regular method of attack, he mocked putin. "we had alexander the liberator, yaroslav the wise, and we'll have vladimir, the underpants poisoner," hejoked. earlier i talked this over withjoe. so many people say that the black humour that alexei navalny employed was one of the reasons that president putin feared and hated him so much. you could see throughout his career as an activist and an anti—corruption campaigner, he quite often poked fun at the russian president. now, there was not any

of that humour in the video that his widow put out today. it was a really quite extraordinary few minutes of footage. she clearly looked emotional, but very controlled at the same time as she spoke about the loss of her husband. but also the fact that she wanted to take on her husband's legacy. translation: putin also took navalny from you, i somewhere in the colony in the far north, above the arctic circle, in the eternal winter. putin killed notjust the man alexei navalny, together with him he wanted to kill our hopes, our freedom, our future. to destroy and nullify the best proof that russia will be different. did she say anything about the manner of his death today? so, she said that they did know about it and they were going to release information about the way he died in the coming days. so they said, "watch this space," essentially. but what they also said, they pointed to the circumstantial evidence, the fact that the russian authorities have not released his body, with the idea, the suggestion being that

that is because if he was poisoned with something like novichok, it would need time to leave his system. so that's the suggestion there. and there have been discussions and debates after he died around exactly how it happened. i think few people question that the russian state is responsible for his death — apart from the russians themselves who have refused that. but the question is, was he deliberately killed on that day using a nerve agent, for example novichok? orwas he, did he die as a consequence of the harsh conditions in which he was kept? and president biden speaking afterwards did say there was some dispute around that, or some debate about that. and today we heard from josep borrell, the foreign policy spokesperson for the european union, and he said that the russians had murdered him slowly in prison. i think these are the words, i slowly murdered in a russian jail by putin's regime. to have a democratic system -

in russia, that's what alexei wanted and that is why he became a threati to the kremlin and that is why putin removed him from freedom, as a dangerous symbol. - and now i am joined by christo grozev, investigative journalist, formerly with bellingcat, now at insider and der spiegel, who exposed the operatives behind alexei navalny�*s poisoning in 2020 and is included in russian president vladimir putin's "most wanted" list, a founding member of the feminist group pussy riot, nadya tolokonnikova, and associate fellow of russian policy at rusi natia seskuria. nadya and christo both knew alexei navalny well. our condolences to you, first of all, nadya. how much of a surprise

was this in the sense that alexei navalny will surely endangered as soon as he went to the colony? it was a great surprise, because for a lot of us, alexei navalny was not just a human, lot of us, alexei navalny was not justa human, he lot of us, alexei navalny was not just a human, he was a hero, lot of us, alexei navalny was not justa human, he was a hero, and especially after he got away with almost being assassinated, but he survived. we felt like he is going to live forever, and goodness is going to overcome the evil. but christo, you are pretty sure it is not a natural death, but i wonder if there is any likelihood we will ever properly know the truth? history is the best forecaster of the future, and i think given what we have _ the future, and i think given what we have seen in russia, the truth will be _ we have seen in russia, the truth will be found out, and it will be sooner— will be found out, and it will be sooner rather than later, and as many— sooner rather than later, and as many political speakers in the last few days _ many political speakers in the last few days have said, it almost doesn't — few days have said, it almost doesn't matter exactly what the method — doesn't matter exactly what the method of killing was, because the russian _ method of killing was, because the russian state killed him, but the behaviour— russian state killed him, but the behaviour of the russian state just

in the _ behaviour of the russian state just in the test— behaviour of the russian state just in the last 72 hours after the death strongly— in the last 72 hours after the death strongly suggests that they are hiding — strongly suggests that they are hiding something that is embarrassing and that is related most _ embarrassing and that is related most likely to a kinetic assassination as opposed to a slow death _ death. so what sort of death. — so what sort of clues are you looking for, and what have you found so far? we have got again a couple of circumstantial pieces of evidence at the moment. one is the absence of a body _ the moment. one is the absence of a body if_ the moment. one is the absence of a body if it— the moment. one is the absence of a body. if it was a slow death, some genetic— body. if it was a slow death, some genetic or— body. if it was a slow death, some genetic or otherwise condition acquired — genetic or otherwise condition acquired through the harsh conditions in the permafrost jail, which, _ conditions in the permafrost jail, which, mind you, had daily walks of half an_ which, mind you, had daily walks of half an hour— which, mind you, had daily walks of half an hour at —20 celsius, which is definitely — half an hour at —20 celsius, which is definitely not conducive to good health. _ is definitely not conducive to good health, but if any of that was the reason _ health, but if any of that was the reason for— health, but if any of that was the reason for the deaf, very likely, the kremlin would have released the body and _ the kremlin would have released the body and would not have lied to the family— body and would not have lied to the family about where the body is. we also saw— family about where the body is. we also saw evidence of a convoy of police _ also saw evidence of a convoy of police and — also saw evidence of a convoy of police and fsp cars transporting something in the middle of the night

i’ilht something in the middle of the night right after— something in the middle of the night right after the death of navalny, to an undisclosed place, because again, the more _ an undisclosed place, because again, the more the family members were directed _ the more the family members were directed to — the more the family members were directed to in a nearby city tell them — directed to in a nearby city tell them that the body was not there. —— fsb. them that the body was not there. —— fsb~ if_ them that the body was not there. —— fsb~ if it— them that the body was not there. —— fsb~ if it is— them that the body was not there. —— fsb. if it is not in the mall, where is it? _ fsb. if it is not in the mall, where is it? the — fsb. if it is not in the mall, where is it? the most likely scenario is that, _ is it? the most likely scenario is that, like — is it? the most likely scenario is that, like in_ is it? the most likely scenario is that, like in 2020, the body has been _ that, like in 2020, the body has been moved to a high security medical— been moved to a high security medical establishment where members of the fsb _ medical establishment where members of the fsb forensic institute is simply— of the fsb forensic institute is simply cleaning up the body from evidence — simply cleaning up the body from evidence of what happened. but again. _ evidence of what happened. but again, this is a strong hypothesis. it is very— again, this is a strong hypothesis. it is very similar to what happened in 2020, _ it is very similar to what happened in 2020, except now it is a lethal outcome — in 2020, except now it is a lethal outcome. we will find out the next days or _ outcome. we will find out the next days or weeks what happened. nadya. — days or weeks what happened. nadya, why would killing navalny now make sense? no, i wasjust make sense? no, i was just asking make sense? no, i wasjust asking nadya, make sense? no, iwasjust asking nadya, thank you. no, i was 'ust asking nadya, thank ou. ., . no, i was 'ust asking nadya, thank ou. ., ., , ., . ., no, i was 'ust asking nadya, thank ou. ., ., you. from a political point of view, within the context _ you. from a political point of view, within the context of _ you. from a political point of view, within the context of elections, - within the context of elections, obviously navalny being

within the context of elections, obviously navalny being isolated in the arctic circle _ obviously navalny being isolated in the arctic circle under _ obviously navalny being isolated in the arctic circle under terrible - the arctic circle under terrible conditions _ the arctic circle under terrible conditions there, _ the arctic circle under terrible conditions there, he - the arctic circle under terrible conditions there, he was - the arctic circle under terrible conditions there, he was not i the arctic circle under terrible | conditions there, he was not a direct— conditions there, he was not a direct threat— conditions there, he was not a direct threat to _ conditions there, he was not a direct threat to putin's - conditions there, he was not a direct threat to putin's power, j conditions there, he was not a - direct threat to putin's power, but at the _ direct threat to putin's power, but at the same — direct threat to putin's power, but at the same time, _ direct threat to putin's power, but at the same time, he _ direct threat to putin's power, but at the same time, he was - direct threat to putin's power, but at the same time, he was his- direct threat to putin's power, buti at the same time, he was his most vocal— at the same time, he was his most vocal critic. — at the same time, he was his most vocal critic, still— at the same time, he was his most vocal critic, still able _ at the same time, he was his most vocal critic, still able to _ at the same time, he was his most vocal critic, still able to function i vocal critic, still able to function and to— vocal critic, still able to function and to communicate _ vocal critic, still able to function and to communicate with - vocal critic, still able to function and to communicate with the i vocal critic, still able to function - and to communicate with the audience of russians— and to communicate with the audience of russians as — and to communicate with the audience of russians as well. _ and to communicate with the audience of russians as well. that _ and to communicate with the audience of russians as well. that must - and to communicate with the audience of russians as well. that must have i of russians as well. that must have been _ of russians as well. that must have been frustrating _ of russians as well. that must have been frustrating for— of russians as well. that must have been frustrating for putin, - of russians as well. that must have been frustrating for putin, as - of russians as well. that must have been frustrating for putin, as muchl been frustrating for putin, as much as he _ been frustrating for putin, as much as he was— been frustrating for putin, as much as he was in— been frustrating for putin, as much as he was in the— been frustrating for putin, as much as he was in the short _ been frustrating for putin, as much as he was in the short term - been frustrating for putin, as much as he was in the short term a - been frustrating for putin, as muchl as he was in the short term a threat to his _ as he was in the short term a threat to his power. — as he was in the short term a threat to his power, navalny— as he was in the short term a threat to his power, navalny was - as he was in the short term a threat to his power, navalny was as - as he was in the short term a threat to his power, navalny was as long l as he was in the short term a threatl to his power, navalny was as long as he was _ to his power, navalny was as long as he was alive. — to his power, navalny was as long as he was alive. a — to his power, navalny was as long as he was alive, a danger— to his power, navalny was as long as he was alive, a danger for— to his power, navalny was as long as he was alive, a danger for putin - to his power, navalny was as long as he was alive, a danger for putin and i he was alive, a danger for putin and are deeply— he was alive, a danger for putin and are deeply frustrating _ he was alive, a danger for putin and are deeply frustrating figure - he was alive, a danger for putin and are deeply frustrating figure for- are deeply frustrating figure for him _ him. butl him. l but on him. - but on the him. — but on the same basis, then, if putin looks around and thinks, does it matter if people know how he died or what he died of really? doesn't really matter to putin, or is it not the case that goes, well, they can think what they like, it will not affect me? fist think what they like, it will not affect me?— think what they like, it will not affect me? �* , ., �* affect me? at this point, i don't think he is _ affect me? at this point, i don't think he is very _ affect me? at this point, i don't think he is very much _ affect me? at this point, i don't think he is very much worried i affect me? at this point, i don't - think he is very much worried about the image _ think he is very much worried about the image he — think he is very much worried about the image he has— think he is very much worried about the image he has internationally. . think he is very much worried abouti the image he has internationally. he is still— the image he has internationally. he is still concerned _ the image he has internationally. he is still concerned about _ the image he has internationally. he

is still concerned about the - is still concerned about the domestic— is still concerned about the domestic audience, - is still concerned about the . domestic audience, obviously, is still concerned about the - domestic audience, obviously, but i think— domestic audience, obviously, but i think at— domestic audience, obviously, but i think at this — domestic audience, obviously, but i think at this point _ domestic audience, obviously, but i think at this point everyone - domestic audience, obviously, but i think at this point everyone pretty i think at this point everyone pretty much _ think at this point everyone pretty much knows — think at this point everyone pretty much knows the _ think at this point everyone pretty much knows the ways _ think at this point everyone pretty much knows the ways in _ think at this point everyone pretty much knows the ways in which - think at this point everyone pretty much knows the ways in which hel think at this point everyone pretty i much knows the ways in which he is able to— much knows the ways in which he is able to deal— much knows the ways in which he is able to deal with _ much knows the ways in which he is able to deal with his— much knows the ways in which he is able to deal with his opponents, - much knows the ways in which he isi able to deal with his opponents, and in a way. _ able to deal with his opponents, and in a way, this— able to deal with his opponents, and in a way, this sends _ able to deal with his opponents, and in a way, this sends a _ able to deal with his opponents, and in a way, this sends a powerful- in a way, this sends a powerful message — in a way, this sends a powerful message to _ in a way, this sends a powerful message to anyone _ in a way, this sends a powerful message to anyone who - in a way, this sends a powerful message to anyone who might| in a way, this sends a powerful. message to anyone who might be willing _ message to anyone who might be willing to — message to anyone who might be willing to challenge _ message to anyone who might be willing to challenge his _ message to anyone who might be willing to challenge his power, i message to anyone who might be. willing to challenge his power, and this is— willing to challenge his power, and this is a _ willing to challenge his power, and this is a demonstration _ willing to challenge his power, and this is a demonstration that - willing to challenge his power, and this is a demonstration that this i willing to challenge his power, and this is a demonstration that this is| this is a demonstration that this is what _ this is a demonstration that this is what is _ this is a demonstration that this is what is going _ this is a demonstration that this is what is going to _ this is a demonstration that this is what is going to happen— this is a demonstration that this is what is going to happen to - this is a demonstration that this is what is going to happen to his- what is going to happen to his opponents _ opponents. nadya, - opponents. nadya, you opponents. - nadya, you had opponents - nadya, you had your opponents. — nadya, you had your own prison experience for standing up to putin. i wonder what you think the effect of this will be on the opposition inside and outside russia. i remember when i was injail, navalny called me and asked me, how are the conditions in prison? i said, well, it is not ideal, but it is not too bad. one can survive. members of his team recalled that he thought about it when he was going back to russia in 2020. i think ever since i was injail, that the situation is getting worse and

worse, and it is getting incredibly dangerous, especially for political prisoners. we need to apply all the pressure that we have, external and internal, to get them released, because it is getting real. i wonder if you feel more uneasy, more at risk now then you don't even before friday? i do more at risk now then you don't even before friday?— before friday? i do not think about risks, before friday? i do not think about risks. because _ before friday? i do not think about risks, because i _ before friday? i do not think about risks, because i feel— before friday? i do not think about risks, because i feel like _ before friday? i do not think about risks, because i feel like if- before friday? i do not think about risks, because i feel like if you - risks, because i feel like if you get in a fight with a powerful man like vladimir putin, you can think about risks, because otherwise, it can prevent you from action. i think if navalny�*s daughters alison, the first one is in order to get rid of fear. well, christo, in terms of the rationale for putin's actions, i wonder what you made of what nadya said, that it sends a powerful message to other people who might

throw their hats into the ring in some kind of opposition, because there are so many oppositional figures already injail. that figures already in jail. that is figures already injail. that is true, and my main concern is that they— that is true, and my main concern is that they are — that is true, and my main concern is that they are the next one is that we have — that they are the next one is that we have to — that they are the next one is that we have to fear for. i agree with nadya. — we have to fear for. i agree with nadya. we — we have to fear for. i agree with nadya, we shouldn't fear about our own lives, — nadya, we shouldn't fear about our own lives, but the people that are injail— own lives, but the people that are iniail in _ own lives, but the people that are injail in russia are really extremely vulnerable. i think what we saw, _ extremely vulnerable. i think what we saw, and part of the rationale, we saw, and part of the rationale, we will— we saw, and part of the rationale, we will find — we saw, and part of the rationale, we will find out in very granular detail, — we will find out in very granular detail, in— we will find out in very granular detail, in point of fact, yulia navalnaya announced there hinted she would _ navalnaya announced there hinted she would announce in the next few days, and i don't _ would announce in the next few days, and i don't want to pre—empt her from _ and i don't want to pre—empt her from speaking about it, but generally, it throws a gauntlet down on the _ generally, it throws a gauntlet down on the whole road. it shows there is no red _ on the whole road. it shows there is no red line — on the whole road. it shows there is no red line any more for him. it is essentially— no red line any more for him. it is essentially a — no red line any more for him. it is essentially a rule by terror in a very— essentially a rule by terror in a very similar way as stalin did in the 30s, — very similar way as stalin did in the 30s, so— very similar way as stalin did in the 30s, so i think that is the message, _ the 30s, so i think that is the message, and it is both preventive, hoping _ message, and it is both preventive, hoping that— message, and it is both preventive, hoping that others will not join in the footsteps of navalny, but it is also a _ the footsteps of navalny, but it is also a blocking message to the west,

saying _ also a blocking message to the west, saying here, this is what i can do. consider. — saying here, this is what i can do. consider, think twice before helping ukraine _ consider, think twice before helping ukraine with more weapons, because i am crazy. _ ukraine with more weapons, because i am crazy. i_ ukraine with more weapons, because i am crazy, i might even go with nuclear— am crazy, i might even go with nuclear weapons. so i think this is a dual— nuclear weapons. so i think this is a dual message that we have to be aware _ a dual message that we have to be aware of _ a dual message that we have to be aware of. �* ., ., ., ,~ a dual message that we have to be aware of. �* ., ., ., , ., aware of. and natia, i will ask you about that — aware of. and natia, i will ask you about that business _ aware of. and natia, i will ask you about that business of _ aware of. and natia, i will ask you about that business of no - aware of. and natia, i will ask you about that business of no redline i aware of. and natia, i will ask you | about that business of no redline in about that business of no redline in a moment, but worst of all, how effective do you think yulia navalnaya could be as a leader of the opposition from beyond the shores, beyond the boundaries of russia? it shores, beyond the boundaries of russia? , ., ., russia? it is hard to say, obviously- _ russia? it is hard to say, obviously. she _ russia? it is hard to say, obviously. she has - russia? it is hard to say, obviously. she has a - russia? it is hard to say, i obviously. she has a certain momentum _ obviously. she has a certain momentum due _ obviously. she has a certain momentum due to - obviously. she has a certain momentum due to this - obviously. she has a certain. momentum due to this tragic obviously. she has a certain- momentum due to this tragic event, but at _ momentum due to this tragic event, but at the _ momentum due to this tragic event, but at the same _ momentum due to this tragic event, but at the same time, _ momentum due to this tragic event, but at the same time, navalny - but at the same time, navalny himself— but at the same time, navalny himself was— but at the same time, navalny himself was a _ but at the same time, navalny himself was a very _ but at the same time, navalny himself was a very charismaticj himself was a very charismatic person. — himself was a very charismatic person. able _ himself was a very charismatic person, able to _ himself was a very charismatic person, able to mobilise - himself was a very charismatic person, able to mobilise the l himself was a very charismatic - person, able to mobilise the masses, able to— person, able to mobilise the masses, able to attract — person, able to mobilise the masses, able to attract the _ person, able to mobilise the masses, able to attract the younger— able to attract the younger generations _ able to attract the younger generations and _ able to attract the younger generations and older- able to attract the younger- generations and older generations, so filling _ generations and older generations, so filling in— generations and older generations, so filling in this _ generations and older generations, so filling in this gap _ generations and older generations, so filling in this gap would - generations and older generations, so filling in this gap would be - generations and older generations, so filling in this gap would be veryl so filling in this gap would be very difficult, _ so filling in this gap would be very difficult, and _ so filling in this gap would be very difficult, and i— so filling in this gap would be very difficult, and i suppose _ so filling in this gap would be very difficult, and i suppose another, l difficult, and i suppose another, and one — difficult, and i suppose another, and one of— difficult, and i suppose another, and one of the _ difficult, and i suppose another, and one of the main— difficult, and i suppose another, and one of the main point- difficult, and i suppose another, and one of the main point here. difficult, and i suppose another, l and one of the main point here is that she — and one of the main point here is that she is — and one of the main point here is that she is outside _ and one of the main point here is that she is outside of— and one of the main point here is that she is outside of russia. - that she is outside of russia. obviously. _ that she is outside of russia. obviously, coming _ that she is outside of russia. obviously, coming back- that she is outside of russia. obviously, coming back to i

that she is outside of russia. - obviously, coming back to russia would _ obviously, coming back to russia would bem — obviously, coming back to russia would bem i'm _ obviously, coming back to russia would be... i'm sure— obviously, coming back to russia would be... i'm sure that - would be... i'm sure that unfortunately— would be... i'm sure that unfortunately she - would be... i'm sure that unfortunately she won't i would be... i'm sure that - unfortunately she won't possibly share _ unfortunately she won't possibly share the — unfortunately she won't possibly share the same _ unfortunately she won't possibly share the same fate _ unfortunately she won't possibly share the same fate in— unfortunately she won't possibly share the same fate in terms- unfortunately she won't possibly share the same fate in terms ofl share the same fate in terms of ending — share the same fate in terms of ending up— share the same fate in terms of ending up in _ share the same fate in terms of ending up injail, _ share the same fate in terms of ending up injail, because - share the same fate in terms ofi ending up injail, because putin, share the same fate in terms of. ending up injail, because putin, as we already— ending up injail, because putin, as we already mentioned, _ ending up injail, because putin, as we already mentioned, he - ending up injail, because putin, as we already mentioned, he no - ending up injail, because putin, asi we already mentioned, he no longer has any— we already mentioned, he no longer has any red — we already mentioned, he no longer has any red lines _ we already mentioned, he no longer has any red lines when _ we already mentioned, he no longer has any red lines when it _ we already mentioned, he no longer has any red lines when it comes - we already mentioned, he no longer has any red lines when it comes to l has any red lines when it comes to the opposition _ has any red lines when it comes to the opposition. so _ has any red lines when it comes to the opposition. so navalny- has any red lines when it comes to. the opposition. so navalny himself, ithink— the opposition. so navalny himself, i think one — the opposition. so navalny himself, i think one of— the opposition. so navalny himself, i think one of the _ the opposition. so navalny himself, i think one of the reasons _ the opposition. so navalny himself, i think one of the reasons why - the opposition. so navalny himself, i think one of the reasons why he i i think one of the reasons why he returned — i think one of the reasons why he returned from _ i think one of the reasons why he returned from berlin _ i think one of the reasons why he returned from berlin to _ i think one of the reasons why he returned from berlin to moscow. i think one of the reasons why he i returned from berlin to moscow was that he _ returned from berlin to moscow was that he did — returned from berlin to moscow was that he did not — returned from berlin to moscow was that he did not believe _ returned from berlin to moscow was that he did not believe that- that he did not believe that opposition— that he did not believe that opposition could _ that he did not believe that opposition could be - that he did not believe that. opposition could be effective outside _ opposition could be effective outside of— opposition could be effective outside of russia, _ opposition could be effective outside of russia, and - opposition could be effective outside of russia, and i- opposition could be effectivel outside of russia, and i think that's— outside of russia, and i think that's why— outside of russia, and i think that's why he _ outside of russia, and i think that's why he managed - outside of russia, and i think that's why he managed to i outside of russia, and i think- that's why he managed to have a countrywide _ that's why he managed to have a countrywide profile _ that's why he managed to have a countrywide profile and - that's why he managed to have a countrywide profile and to - that's why he managed to have a countrywide profile and to get i that's why he managed to have a countrywide profile and to get so many _ countrywide profile and to get so many people _ countrywide profile and to get so many people on— countrywide profile and to get so many people on board, - countrywide profile and to get so many people on board, becausel countrywide profile and to get so . many people on board, because he countrywide profile and to get so - many people on board, because he was daring. _ many people on board, because he was daring. he _ many people on board, because he was daring. he took— many people on board, because he was daring, he took life—threatening - daring, he took life—threatening risks, _ daring, he took life—threatening risks, and — daring, he took life—threatening risks, and that's _ daring, he took life—threatening risks, and that's why— daring, he took life—threatening risks, and that's why people i daring, he took life—threateningj risks, and that's why people felt like he _ risks, and that's why people felt like he was _ risks, and that's why people felt like he was very— risks, and that's why people felt like he was very serious - risks, and that's why people felt like he was very serious about . risks, and that's why people felt. like he was very serious about his intentions — like he was very serious about his intentions ihie— like he was very serious about his intentions— intentions. we will talk about no red lines. _ intentions. we will talk about no red lines, but _ intentions. we will talk about no red lines, but right _ intentions. we will talk about no red lines, but right now, - intentions. we will talk about no red lines, but right now, do i intentions. we will talk about no red lines, but right now, do you| red lines, but right now, do you think vladimir putin is unassailable?

cani can ijust can i just get you can ijust get you on that? i would can i 'ust get you on that? i would ve can ijust get you on that? i would very much — can ijust get you on that? i would very much share _ can ijust get you on that? i would very much share what _ can ijust get you on that? i would very much share what was - can ijust get you on that? i would i very much share what was mentioned, this means _ very much share what was mentioned, this means that— very much share what was mentioned, this means that putin _ very much share what was mentioned, this means that putin is _ very much share what was mentioned, this means that putin is cutting - very much share what was mentioned, this means that putin is cutting any. this means that putin is cutting any sort of— this means that putin is cutting any sort of ties— this means that putin is cutting any sort of ties with _ this means that putin is cutting any sort of ties with the _ this means that putin is cutting any sort of ties with the west _ this means that putin is cutting any sort of ties with the west when i this means that putin is cutting any sort of ties with the west when it i sort of ties with the west when it comes— sort of ties with the west when it comes to — sort of ties with the west when it comes to to— sort of ties with the west when it comes to to being _ sort of ties with the west when it comes to to being rationale i sort of ties with the west when it comes to to being rationale at i sort of ties with the west when it. comes to to being rationale at this point _ comes to to being rationale at this point it— comes to to being rationale at this point it is— comes to to being rationale at this point it is a— comes to to being rationale at this point. it is a demonstration- comes to to being rationale at this point. it is a demonstration that i comes to to being rationale at thisi point. it is a demonstration that he is able _ point. it is a demonstration that he is able and — point. it is a demonstration that he is able and willing _ point. it is a demonstration that he is able and willing to _ point. it is a demonstration that he is able and willing to do _ point. it is a demonstration that he is able and willing to do anything i is able and willing to do anything that takes— is able and willing to do anything that takes to _ is able and willing to do anything that takes to achieve _ is able and willing to do anything that takes to achieve victory- is able and willing to do anything | that takes to achieve victory from his point— that takes to achieve victory from his point of— that takes to achieve victory from his point of view. _ that takes to achieve victory from his point of view. so _ that takes to achieve victory from his point of view. so this - that takes to achieve victory from his point of view. so this is- that takes to achieve victory from his point of view. so this is a i his point of view. so this is a certain— his point of view. so this is a certain warning _ his point of view. so this is a certain warning that - his point of view. so this is a certain warning that the i his point of view. so this is a| certain warning that the west his point of view. so this is a - certain warning that the west should not take _ certain warning that the west should not take this — certain warning that the west should not take this too _ certain warning that the west should not take this too far— certain warning that the west should not take this too far in _ certain warning that the west should not take this too far in terms - certain warning that the west should not take this too far in terms of- not take this too far in terms of helping — not take this too far in terms of helping ukraine. _ not take this too far in terms of helping ukraine.— helping ukraine. from your perspective. _ helping ukraine. from your perspective, do _ helping ukraine. from your perspective, do you - helping ukraine. from your perspective, do you think l helping ukraine. from your| perspective, do you think at helping ukraine. from your i perspective, do you think at the moment putin is the most dangerous he has ever been? i moment putin is the most dangerous he has ever been?—

he has ever been? i think he is full of envy to — he has ever been? i think he is full of envy to people _ he has ever been? i think he is full of envy to people who _ he has ever been? i think he is full of envy to people who have - he has ever been? i think he is full of envy to people who have gained| of envy to people who have gained courage and convictions. and it makes him extremely dangerous. a lot of people say putin feared navalny and there was a lot of i think that in his motivation to murder navalny. but he envied him. and it is applicable to a person like yulia. anyone who people love, he hates. because he is a leader who is not leading with charisma. he leads with fear and he recognises that navalny was loved by people. people wanted to be friends with him. who in their right mind would want to hang out with putin? and that makes him mad and that makes him dangerious. thank -- dangerous — and that makes him dangerious. thank -- dangerous. thank _ and that makes him dangerious. thank -- dangerous. thank you. _ the latest twist in the post office scandal is an intensifying

and vicious row between the business secretary kemi badenoch and the former chairman of the post office henry staunton, whom she sacked last month. it began, in public at least, with an interview in the sunday times yesterday in which he accused the government of wanting to stall compensation to victims of the horizon scandal until after the general election, and claimed that when kemi badenoch sacked hin she told him "someone has to take the rap for this". today in the commons, the business secretary hit back hard, claiming that when she fired henry staunton, he was under investigation for bullying. tonight in a statement, he retaliated. nick is here. so, a war of words between kemi badenoch and the man she sacked as post office chair henry staunton? well, both sides came out fighting today. so this was all sparked after henry staunton made a series of allegations in the sunday times, and two big claims stand out: first, that he was advised by a senior civil servant at the time of his appointment in december 2022 to go slow on horizon compensation payments to allow the government to "limp into the election" while keeping the level of payments down.

second, that the chief executive of the post office, nick read, wrote to the lord chancellor alex chalk after the itv drama with a legal opinion that many of the convictions of sub—postmasters were sound. the suggestion is that this was sent at the recommendation of the body which oversees the finances of publicly owned businesses, uk government investments. kemi badenoch flat out rejected the first of those, and on the nick read letter, she simply said that he had not been put under any pressure to make that intervention. and then she turned on mr staunton with two allegations: he failed to follow due process in appointing a new senior independent director to the post office board, and he was facing a bullying claim. this is what kemi badenoch told mps. i know members will agree such a

cavalier approach was the last thing we needed. i should also inform the house that while mr staunton was in post, a formal investigation was launched into allegations made regarding his conduct, including serious matters such as bullying. concerns were brought to my department's attention about mr staunton's willingness to co—operate with that investigation. and we have heard from henry staunton? yes, a point—by—point rebuttal which opens by saying he is "not in the habit of resorting to fabrication". and then he stood by his two big claims in the sunday times. on that claim that he has been advised to go slow on compensation payments, his statement said:

and on that letter from the post office chief executive pointing out that more than 300 convictions of sub—postmasters were based on evidence that went beyond the faulty horizon evidence, mr staunton saw this as putting a question mark over the mass exoneration planned by the government. well, mr staunton notes that kemi badenoch does not deny that the letter was sent. henry staunton then challenges kemi badenoch's two big claims about him. on the bullying, he says: and on the appointment of the board member, he said he could not have broken any rules because it was at an early stage. where does this leave us?

one white hall figure backed his claims, from nick read, i understand that letter was met with gulps at senior levels in whitehall and it was seen as wrongly taking the view that any conviction not based on the faulty horizon system was safe and the view was then and is now all convictions of postmasters are unsafe, because the prosecutors were seen as bent. that letter was seen at the most senior levels in whitehall as an attempt to bully the government. the government acknowledge the letter was sent after the drama, but before the announcement of a mass exoneration of postmasters and the postis supporting that.

jo hamilton was a former sub—postmistress accused of stealing £36,000 by the post office nearly two decades ago, and now, years later, she's finally received some compensation. and her story may sound familiar to some of you at home, as it was featured in itv�*s drama mr bates vs the post office. thank you forjoining us. can you tell me what do you make of this latest row?— tell me what do you make of this latest row? , , latest row? evening, kirsty. here we no aaain! latest row? evening, kirsty. here we go again! lt— latest row? evening, kirsty. here we go again! it is _ latest row? evening, kirsty. here we go again! it isiust— latest row? evening, kirsty. here we go again! it isjust a _ latest row? evening, kirsty. here we go again! it isjust a different - go again! it isjust a different subject, we are used to all of this kind of stuff coming out of the business department and the post office, it beggars belief sometimes. the fact is you know, i'm cynical about it, they extended the deadline for which postmasters would get paid compensation to august 2025. so they kind of part of what mr staunton said rings true, is that why their extended the deadline? yes. at the

end of the day, they're still not paying the postmasters. that he can shout at each other all they like, but they're still not paying people. the argument seems to centre around whether henry staunton was or wasn't asked to stall compensation, because kemi badenoch says in his appointment letter this was a priority to resolve the issues. what do you make of that?— do you make of that? well, i personally — do you make of that? well, i personally for _ do you make of that? well, i personally for if _ do you make of that? well, i personally for if first - do you make of that? well, i personally for if first time i do you make of that? well, i. personally for if first time ever i actually believe something that someone which an ex—post office employee would say. the deadline's been extended for a reason and that 2025 that will be after the election. so, iam 2025 that will be after the election. so, i am of the opinion that there probably is truth to this. ~ . . that there probably is truth to this. . ., . ., this. we have the chief executive of the post office, _ this. we have the chief executive of the post office, as _ this. we have the chief executive of the post office, as soon _ this. we have the chief executive of the post office, as soon as - this. we have the chief executive of the post office, as soon as the i the post office, as soon as the scandal comes out, after the drama,

writing to the lord chancellor and saying 300 convictions are fine and nothing to do with horizon, but the view of many in whitehall is everything, whether it was horizon was stamped on it was unsafe convictions.— was stamped on it was unsafe convictions. ., ., ., ., convictions. yeah. here we go again! the sa convictions. yeah. here we go again! they say one — convictions. yeah. here we go again! they say one thing. _ convictions. yeah. here we go again! they say one thing, do _ convictions. yeah. here we go again! they say one thing, do another i convictions. yeah. here we go again! they say one thing, do another and l they say one thing, do another and then there is an argument ensuing. it is madness. why can they notjust say something and stick to it? have commitment, because whatever deadlines they make, they break. we have been used to it now, two decades we have been listening to drivel. every deadli gets broken and it is time they put their money where their mouth was and sorted it out immediately. the where their mouth was and sorted it out immediately.— out immediately. the allegation of course is that _ out immediately. the allegation of course is that the _ out immediately. the allegation of course is that the post _ out immediately. the allegation of course is that the post office i course is that the post office prosecutors were bent as it were. do you think part of the problem for

people like yourselves were that the legal representation that you would have needed was hard to come by and was so expensive? melt have needed was hard to come by and was so expensive?— was so expensive? well i got legal aid for mine. _ was so expensive? well i got legal aid for mine, but _ was so expensive? well i got legal aid for mine, but you _ was so expensive? well i got legal aid for mine, but you know- was so expensive? well i got legal aid for mine, but you know i i was so expensive? well i got legal aid for mine, but you know i don'tl aid for mine, but you know i don't think that you would get away with it now. there is more scrutiny over it. but back in the day you know they had a free—for—all with us. and obviously these other postmasters, they're historic, so if they say they're historic, so if they say they're going to, if rishi stands in parliament and said there will be a ma exoneration then do it. mr bates onl 'ust ma exoneration then do it. mr bates only just last — ma exoneration then do it. mr bates only just last week _ ma exoneration then do it. mr bates only just last week or _ ma exoneration then do it. mr bates only just last week or the _ ma exoneration then do it. mr bates only just last week or the week i onlyjust last week or the week before said the level of compensation was almost laughable. so we are in a situation where a lot of people still haven't had what they deserve. i wonder when you talk to each other, because you're in a

big group, what is the morale like? well, i think everyone's really, really angry and they're all fed up. there's quite a few people now who are on the edge of sanity. and its just cruel. you have seen betty brown on television at 91. what the hell are they doing? instead of sitting in parliament squabbling, they should be sorting it out and stick ing to what i they say. i don't know what pace means in their world, they say all, we like to turn around in 140 days and then they give you the most pathetic offer. my first offer was below 20% and took nearly two and a half years to get up nearly two and a half years to get up to 88% of what i asked for. thank

ou. it's over a week since voters in pakistan went to the polls and its not yet clear what the exact composition of the country's new government will be. candidates aligned to imran khan unexpectedly won the most seats in the elections, but not enough to form a government and the country is now waiting to see if his two main rivals make good on plans to form a coalition. the country is a democracy, but for many of its journalists, it doesn't feel like it. they say they're under attack just for doing theirjob. here's mobeen azhar. in pakistan, journalists say they're being assaulted, abducted... ..and killed. just for doing theirjob. newscast: ashad sharif- met his death on sunday night. press freedom campaigners say that in 12 months 140 journalists were threatened or attacked. with some claiming that democracy itself is underfire.

asad ali toor is a youtuber who has been unrepentent in his critique of the military�*s grip on pakistani life. he believes his uncompromising analysis and huge online following have planted him firmly on the military�*s radar. in may 2021, asad ali toor was seriously assaulted in his own home. he says one of his attackers claimed to be an officer of the inter services intelligence, or isi, a powerful branch of the military — a claim we've been unable to verify. astonishingly the men asad ali toor says attacked him can be seen on cctv. this guy you say he identified himself as being from the isi? yes, this guy in the trousers and shirt. were you worried for your life?

yeah, i thought they're going to execute me. he come in front of me holding a pistol and he came here and i'm just lying here... at that time i thought, no, it's over. he immediately took out the magazine of his pistol and then he threatened me and then he started hitting on my elbows. it was like i never had such pain in my life. he was left bloodied, gagged and bound. feet were also tied, so ijust started walking like this and i came out. then i gathered some strength. when i started making a noise, people came. they untied me. after making a copy of the cctv footage on his phone, asad headed to the hospital. can you believe within half an hour 300 to 400 journalists were present in the hospital?

the community was so angry that now you're entering our houses, we are not safe inside our houses. that was the main reaction. despite asad's injury, his testimony and the cctv footage — now widely seen — two years after the attack, police have still not identified his attackers. there is a minister of information, he's called murtaza solangi. and he himself was a journalist. and in the past he has been an outspoken advocate for journalistic freedom. so, i have got a couple of numbers for him. and i'm going to try and set up an interview. here is murtaza solangi before he became a minister. he spoke out publicly in support of asad ali toor after the attack, demanding that those responsible be held to account.

we know he's not happy about a previous interaction with the the bbc, so it's unclear how this might go. ok, i'vejust had this, it took six minutes. "thank you, text me your questions, please." an interview with the minister was arranged, only for him to then pull out. over days of attempting to reschedule, it became clear there was an effort to stall. so, i've had a tip off about his schedule for the day and i know that he is going to be doing an interview at this station, it's called ptv. are you rolling? minister, i'm mobeen azharfrom the bbc. i have been trying to get hold of you for a few days now.

i have been busy. i'm sure you have been very, very busy. i want to ask you about press freedom in pakistan. are you worried about the state's interfering with journalists? if you want to have... ..if you want to force me for an interview. i'm not forcing you, as you know we have been corresponding for many days. i understand, but we have serious trust deficit with the bbc. because they have violated... i can assure you your interview will be treated fairly and accurately. do you think the military is putting pressure onjournalists in pakistan? i want to show you this picture of a journalist, who says that he was beaten by someone from the intelligence service. do not act like a paparazzi. i'm asking you if you can you look at this... act like a bbcjournalist. please don't grab my phone

why did you agree to an interview and then pull out? did i give you a time? yes, you did, 6 o'clock on wednesday. thank you, minister. we approached the pakistani government and the military about the allegation. they declined to provide an on the record reply, but a security source with the authority to comment told us:

whatever the outcome of the recent election, there is little optimism among public sector journalists about a shift in policy towards the press. government after government has curtailed press freedom, threatening the very idea that pakistan is a democratic nation. and the full our world documentary — pakistan: journalists under fire is available on the iplayer. the novel such a fun age opened 2020, with verve, a story of race and class set in philadelphia with an acutely drawn relationship between a young black woman and her white feminist employer. it was kiley reid's debut novel and it made the booker long list. fast forward four years and the author's second novel come and get it is just out. it's set at arkansas university and revolves around a small group of mainly female students in a dorm, with their own money obsessions, foibles, insecurities, and sometime weird personal habits, their sometimes casual racism,

and their relationship with the older student millie, who is paid to be a sort of residence administrator. millie in turn becomes entangled in an eavesdropping enterprise with agatha, an author and visiting professor with whom she embarks on a short—lived sexual relationship, and in whom she wisely or unwisely places her trust. no spoilers! kiley reid joins me now. thanks very much back very can wejust can we just go back very briefly to the story of the two? there was something in the story that was very tender and funny, but ultimately, it was benevolent racism. . , , ultimately, it was benevolent racism. ., , , ., ., racism. ultimately, there is a lot of racism going _ racism. ultimately, there is a lot of racism going on _ racism. ultimately, there is a lot of racism going on there. - racism. ultimately, there is a lot of racism going on there. what l racism. ultimately, there is a lot of racism going on there. what i | racism. ultimately, there is a lot i of racism going on there. what i was interested in with such a fun age was a relationship between an employer and employee, and a white woman who is obsessed with what her

baby—sitter thinks of her, and an interesting mirror on the other side was not what she thought of alex, it was not what she thought of alex, it was that she didn't really think of her that much. she was trying to survive and get health care, that's what took off the novel. essentially, there was an envy in the older white woman in the younger black woman's life.— black woman's life. there was. i think in a professional _ think in a professional relationship, that is just not going to make it through the entire duration of their work together, and also, she is not in the position of power that alex is in, and alex wields that a bit inappropriately. power comes into your new novel, and get it because you have agatha, this academic, the younger woman millie, who fall into this friendship and then relationship, but essentially i get merely and encourages her to snoop on one of the other young women and what they are saying, and the obsession now is about money? it is. it has been fun doing press tours, talking to journalist to say this is unethical what is going on

here?! those other kinds of things i love talking about. millie is a 24—year—old senior and wants to buy a house and have stability and she has this opportunity to have extra money and jumped at it. agatha is coming off a break—up with her wife robyn and she is to have a year of a kind of rump spring and do what she wants, but it gets in a bit of trouble. it wants, but it gets in a bit of trouble. , ., ., , , trouble. it gets are in trouble, but the key thing _ trouble. it gets are in trouble, but the key thing is — trouble. it gets are in trouble, but the key thing is here _ trouble. it gets are in trouble, but the key thing is here that - trouble. it gets are in trouble, but the key thing is here that this i trouble. it gets are in trouble, but the key thing is here that this is i the key thing is here that this is an author, in agatha, who is getting someone else and doing eavesdropping on conversations, and that's essentially what authors do in a way. essentially what authors do in a wa . . �* , essentially what authors do in a wa . ., �* , ., ., essentially what authors do in a wa. ., h ., way. that's what i do all the time! it is kind of— way. that's what i do all the time! it is kind of an _ way. that's what i do all the time! it is kind of an appropriation. i way. that's what i do all the time! it is kind of an appropriation. butl it is kind of an appropriation. but what about this kind of obsession with money, because it plays out in terms of dollars and cents, and everyone doing a bit of hustling, and is that a presence obsession, do you think? our more ever present obsession in the states?- you think? our more ever present obsession in the states? judging the interviews i did _ obsession in the states? judging the interviews i did for _ obsession in the states? judging the interviews i did for this _ obsession in the states? judging the interviews i did for this novel, i interviews i did for this novel, which i did quite a few, there is an obsession with talking about money and who does and does not have. i

don't think there is a big obsession with changing those situations, and i think the median income would reflect that well. everyone i interviewed for this novel, there were maybe 30—40, all told me, i know it is inappropriate and goes to talk about money, but i love talking about it. so i think that obsession is there right now.— is there right now. from what you know, is is there right now. from what you know. is it — is there right now. from what you know, is it different _ is there right now. from what you know, is it different from - is there right now. from what you know, is it different from here, i is there right now. from what you know, is it different from here, or do you think it is the same for that kind of age group now, this worry about money as well? i do think young people are worried about money. i don't think the idea of buying a house is available to people. millie's house is very inexpensive and small, but i don't think that is available to everyone. i think in the united states, the health care situation does present a huge problem. that is something young people are definitely worried about. �* ., ., ., , about. another thing i thought was ve funn about. another thing i thought was very funny was _ about. another thing i thought was very funny was the _ about. another thing i thought was very funny was the author - about. another thing i thought was very funny was the author who i about. another thing i thought was very funny was the author who is l very funny was the author who is also academic. she is taking this year, but in the end, her stuff is a kind of money diary in teen vogue, which is completely not on the radar of academics and authors. ida.

which is completely not on the radar of academics and authors.— of academics and authors. no, she does not need _ of academics and authors. no, she does not need to _ of academics and authors. no, she does not need to be _