this is bbc news, the headlines... for the first time, the un security council votes for an immediate ceasefire in gaza. benjamin netanyahu pulls a high level delegation which had been due to go to washington amid anger at the us decision not to veto the resolution. the british government accuses china of being behind a wave of cyber attacks amid calls for a tough response from british politicians. the cyber threat posed by china affiliated — the cyber threat posed by china affiliated actor is real and it is serious — affiliated actor is real and it is serious that it is more than equalled _ serious that it is more than equalled by our determination and resolve _ equalled by our determination and resolve to — equalled by our determination and resolve to resist it. a twin legal threat for donald trump

as he appears at court in new york — we'll get the latest from our correspondent. four gunmen accused of carrying out the moscow concert hall attack have been charged with terrorism. time for a look at the business news now. first up — it's all change at boeing — the plane—maker has revealed that its chief executive dave calhoun will leave by the end of this year. the company also said the boss of its commercial airlines division will retire immediately, while its chairman will not stand for re—election. the firm is under pressure after a door panel on a plane blew out in mid—air injanuary. no—one was injured during the incident, but the firm's safety record has come under renewed scrutiny.

let's get more now from john grant, who's an independent aviation analyst. change at the top often follows this sort of thing — but does it address the technical issues and safety? they have been these underlying issues with the technical they have been these underlying issues with the technical side they have been these underlying issues with the technical side of things. do you think this will convince people? it things. do you think this will convince people?— convince people? it marks a fundamental _ convince people? it marks a fundamental change. - convince people? it marks a fundamental change. we . convince people? it marks a | fundamental change. we are convince people? it marks a - fundamental change. we are talking about a timescale on the head of boeing commercial aeroplanes leaving immediately and the ceo was still in post until the end of the year. i'm not normally a person who would flippantly say regime change is necessary but i think this is very symbolic and critical to bowing's rehabilitation and to go back to a position where it was, a pre—eminent industry manufacturer known for

quality and safety. we have seen so much going on in the last couple of years since we've had the grounding of the max eight aircraft after toast fatal crashes without. we've had the door come out. i think what this does send a in every respect internally to the workforce that things are changing at the top and outwardly both the wailing customers many of whom have been critical of the business if not directly calling for the heads of the ceo and the head of commercial air planes. and of course to the travelling public as well and wall street. so it's going to take some months but we need to look to the future and make sure that now this is going to happen the right people are appointed who have the right skill set to provide experience to go forward and to get out of this very unfortunate period.—

unfortunate period. what do you think the impact _ unfortunate period. what do you think the impact might - unfortunate period. what do you think the impact might be - unfortunate period. what do you think the impact might be on - think the impact might be on passengers?— think the impact might be on ”asseners? , , ., , ., think the impact might be on ”asseners? , ., , . passengers? they should be no effect on production- — passengers? they should be no effect on production. it _ passengers? they should be no effect on production. it is _ passengers? they should be no effect on production. it is a _ passengers? they should be no effect on production. it is a technical - on production. it is a technical business and the focus is already on quality. the failures we've seen that have led to the most recent accident for example, that work has to continue, the current ceo has said he'll do everything to make sure that is put right. but those processes have to continue to be adhered to and strengthened. we have the regulators looking up for scrutiny findings in a mixed period when it is to come up with an action plan to put things right. deliveries

are still taking place till airlines. customers including ryanairfor airlines. customers including ryanair for example. airlines. customers including ryanairfor example. from airlines. customers including ryanair for example. from a airlines. customers including ryanairfor example. from a customer point of view it may be they could speak an impact on ticket prices because capacity is tight. boeing is not alone in having a craft with technical challenges. capacity is tight. but i think day—to—day the industry will perform within those constraints as it otherwise would. thank you very much for your time. we can get more reaction now from new york. our north america business correspondent is michelle fleury. the reaction on the stock market has been pretty good so far. will it be enough to convince shareholders? there is a sense that initially from our no assists and investors that

this will help their share price. in that they think it's a positive shake—up for boeing, that this is a step forward and an attempt to win back trust. that being said, it is just the first step. i wanted to redo a quote from somebody who is throwing a bit of scepticism saying, look, they could be some cultural change happening at boeing, we have long thought the issues that boeing have been seated and cultural challenges. that was cameron dawson who is a chief investment officer at new age wealth. a lot will depend on who the successor ultimately is and how far the company is able to show that it how far the company is able to show thatitis how far the company is able to show that it is changing the culture from the top. so that is going to be the kind of test here but obviously the company felt it had to do something, it was under increasing pressure not just from the financial sector but you also saw from government

officials and indeed from its customers and i think that's why you've got dave calhoun for example saying he's going to step down and he has fallen on his sword. normally we aet bi he has fallen on his sword. normally we get big changes _ he has fallen on his sword. normally we get big changes and _ he has fallen on his sword. normally we get big changes and do _ he has fallen on his sword. normally we get big changes and do feel- he has fallen on his sword. normally we get big changes and do feel the l we get big changes and do feel the trick is they have to show they are taking serious action but keeping business as normal? what taking serious action but keeping business as normal? what makes boeina business as normal? what makes boeing different _ business as normal? what makes boeing different from _ business as normal? what makes boeing different from certainly i boeing different from certainly other companies is that you are talking about two main players in this market, boeing is the american major player here, the european of player is a bus. essentially we are talking about a duopoly. when there are only two players ultimately the customers come in this case the airlines, don't really have much alternative in terms of where they can turn to the by their aircraft. they are already facing these long

delays and waiting for the little villages of planes. or else are they going to go to? airbus is already pretty much at full capacity. boeing has room to get it right but what we are seeing is the pressure on the company to say you need to go further and i think this is the attempt by management and the speed with which we are seeing the head of the commercial side of the company leaving immediately and not waiting, i think they are trying to send a message that they are trying to right the ship. but right now a once great american company are certainly struggling. let's look at big tech, because in the last few hours the european union has announced it's investigating some of the biggest tech firms in the world, including apple, alphabet, which owns google, and meta, the owner of facebook and instagram. it's over alleged "uncompetitive practices". regulators will look into potential breaches of the digital markets act, which was introduced in 2022.

if it's found they broke the rules, the companies could face huge fines of up to 10% of their annual turnover. the firms say the eu has rushed into the decision and they will defend themselves. let's hear from the eu's antitrust boss margrethe vestager. we will do our best to investigate with due process and all the necessary respect for the companies that we investigate as fast as possible. it is not that we will wait 12 months and only then. now, as soon as we have results, of course we will take decisions. chris stokel—walker is a technologyjournalist. he told me more details about the accusations. apple is accused of charging fees that would lock people into their app store. and obviously, apple takes a cut from that likewise. google parent company alphabet is accused of essentially doing the same sort of thing with their google play store, which is their equivalent of the app store and also

prioritising certain things within their search engine. so obviously, digital markets act was designed to try and stop so—called gatekeepers from exerting monopolistic power. obviously, the companies involved say that they don't do that, but european regulators have got pretty tough talking on these companies of late. now, i'm sure people will be thinking, i've heard of this crackdowns on big tech. we've seen it in america. the eu, of course, fining apple recently, and we are talking pretty eye watering fines here. i mean, tens of billions, if i'm correct, if they are found guilty. what's driving this crackdown? yeah, the european union has has long been keen to try and rein in big tech supremacy. but we have seen this happening worldwide. itjust so happens that european regulators have been quickest off the draw and have kind of gained a reputation, i suppose, for establishing global standards. this goes back some five years or more to the 2018 general data protection regulation, which was a set of data rules around the eu that affected the 450 odd million people within europe,

but also had a kind of halo effect worldwide. so i think we're starting to see the ramifications of maybe 20 years of big tech dominance and politicians realising that actually some good did come of that, but also some bad and as you say, with up to 10% fines, this is yeah, potentially billions with a b in terms of fines it could be levied here. and just briefly, what would this mean for consumers, do you think? no matter what happens here, are we talking more competition potentially? and will that drive prices down? yeah, that is the goal. and obviously, apple is one of the key people that are being targeted here. they take a decent chunk of any sales made through the app store. so the idea is you could see competitors taking less of a thing. obviously, one thing here is this is within a couple of weeks of this act coming in force. earlier this month, it happened first imposed in september 2023. so, yes, we're going to see action, i think. but do expect a fight from the companies to stop this?

around the world and across the uk, this is bbc news.

you are alive with bbc news. british farmers are set to take part in a tractor go—slow rally this afternoon in central london, ending up outside westminster. the protest — organised by campaign groups save british farming and fairness for farmers of kent — is the latest action by farmers across the globe, united in their anger at competition from cheaper imports and tighter environmental regulations. monday s rally is the latest action by farmers across the globe, united by an anger at competition from cheaper imports and tighter environmental regulations. let's speak to our reporter meghan owen. tell us more about the size of the protest and what those farmers actually want in terms of change. i actually want in terms of change. i don't think i've seen a single tractor in central london let alone the amount we are seeing here now.

already there are about 50 tractors gathered ready for the protest but are expecting over they 100 tractors to arrive. mostly from kent but also across the uk. some have come over from northern ireland and also wales as well. i have been speaking to farmers here today and what's interesting is the range of people here. there are farmers from all generations. i spoke to a young farmer who was worried about his future and many who worried about the current state of their livelihoods. we have a banner behind this thing back british farmers but there are other banners saying we can't afford to feed you any more and no farmers, no food. this is one of the latest protests in a number we have seen in many european countries. let's find out more about why british farmers are protesting today. liz webster is a founder of save british farmers. why are you here? ~ ., , , ., ,

here? we are here because farmers in britain have — here? we are here because farmers in britain have been _ here? we are here because farmers in britain have been taken _ here? we are here because farmers in britain have been taken for— here? we are here because farmers in britain have been taken for granted i britain have been taken for granted for too _ britain have been taken for granted for too long and in the last few years— for too long and in the last few years irr— for too long and in the last few years in particular so much has happened _ years in particular so much has happened that farmers are no longer unable _ happened that farmers are no longer unable to— happened that farmers are no longer unable to afford to feed the british people _ unable to afford to feed the british people. more and more inputs are coming _ people. more and more inputs are coming in — people. more and more inputs are coming in and these imports have been _ coming in and these imports have been produced using standards which are illegal— been produced using standards which are illegal here. they are putting us out _ are illegal here. they are putting us out of— are illegal here. they are putting us out of business and that is why we are _ us out of business and that is why we are here — us out of business and that is why we are here because we've had enough and we _ we are here because we've had enough and we are _ we are here because we've had enough and we are fighting back and sayingm _ and we are fighting back and sa in: . .. ~ and we are fighting back and sa inc... ~ . and we are fighting back and saying- - -_ and we are fighting back and sa in... . ., ., ., ., saying... we are going to go live straiaht saying... we are going to go live straight to _ saying... we are going to go live straight to the _ saying... we are going to go live straight to the house _ saying. .. we are going to go live straight to the house of- saying... we are going to go live i straight to the house of commons. saying... we are going to go live - straight to the house of commons. we are expecting a statement from the secretary of state for work and pensions, this is an update on a story you may have been following, the women against pension inequality. this is a statement in the house of commons, let's listen in. , ., ., , ., .,

in. the period of the investigation considers spans _ in. the period of the investigation considers spans of— in. the period of the investigation considers spans of around - in. the period of the investigation considers spans of around 30 - in. the period of the investigation l considers spans of around 30 years dating back to the decision parliament took in 1995 to equalise the state pension age for men and women gradually from 2010. since then, changes have been made through a series of acts of parliament by successive governments which resulted in the state pension age rising to 65 women by november 2018 and then to 66 by october 2020. the announcement in 1993 to equalise the state pension age addressed a long—standing inequality between men and women. these changes were about maintaining the right balance between the sustainability of the state pension, fairness between generations and ensuring a dignified retirement in later life. women retiring today can still expect to

receive the state pension for over 21 years on average over two years longer than for men. had the government not equalised for state pension age, women would have been retiring today at 60 and they could have spent on average over 40% of their adult lives in a state pension. this would have been unfair as by the 1990s life expectancy has significantly increased compared to 1948 significantly increased compared to 19118 when state pension age for women was set at 60. in turning to the investigation itself, i think it's important to be clear about what the ombudsman has not said, particularly following some of the inaccurate and misleading commentary since the report was published. the ombudsman has not looked at the decision to equalise the state

pension age but rather at how that decision was communicated by dwp. the report hinges on the department's decisions over a narrow period between 2005 and 2007 and the effect of those decisions on individual notifications. the ombudsman has not found that women have directly lost out financially as a result of dwp�*s actions with the report stating and i quote, we do not find that it resulted in them suffering direct financial loss. the final report has not said that all women born in the 1950s will have been adversely impacted as many women were away the state pension aid had changed. in a stage one report what the ombudsman did find

was that between 1995 and 2004 dwp plasma communication of to state pension age reflected the standards they would expect it to meet. that report also confirms that accurate information about changes to the state pension age was publicly available in leaflets through dwp pension education campaigns, three dwp's pension education campaigns, three dwp�*s agencies and on its website. however, when considering the dwp�*s actions between august 2005 in december 2007 the ombudsman came to the view that those actions resulted in 1950s born women receiving individual notice later than they might have different decisions being made. during the course of the ombudsman's investigation it is important to remember that the state

pension age exchanges were considered the courts. in 2019 and 2020 the high court and the court of appeal respectively found no fault with the actions of dwp. the courts made clear that in successive governments dating back to 1995 the action taken was entirely lawful and did not discriminate on any grounds. during these proceedings the court of appeal held that the high court was entitled to conclude as a fact that there has been and i quote, adequate and reasonable notification given by the publicity campaigns implemented by the department over a number of years. the ombudsman has taken five years to produce his final report. as the chief executive of the ombudsman as set out dwp has

fully cooperated with the ombudsman's investigation throughout this time and provided thousands of pages of detailed evidence. we continue to work and take the work of the ombudsman very seriously and it is only right that we now fully and properly consider the findings and properly consider the findings and the details of what is a substantial document. the ombudsman has noted in his report the challenges and the complexities of this issue. the ombudsman has brought matters to the attention of the house and we will provide a further update to the house once we have considered the report's findings. this government has a strong track record of supporting all pensioners. in 2023 and 2024 we will spend in support —— 5.5% of

gdp. that includes 140... we are committed to ensuring the state pension remains the foundation of income in retirement now and for future generations. that is why we are honouring the triple lock by increasing the basic and new state pensions by 8.5% from next month. this sees the full rate of the new state pension rise by £900 a year and of course follows last year's rise of 10.1%. we now have 200,000 fewer pensioners in absolute poverty after housing costs than they were in 2010. our sustained commitment to the triple lock demonstrates our determination to continue to combat pensioner poverty in the future. it is why we have reformed the state

pension as well as work placed pensions, improving the retirement outcomes for many women. our commitment to pensioners is why we introduced automatic the wrong which has seen millions more women saving into a workplace pension. this government is committed to supporting pensioners in a sustainable way, providing them with a dignified retirement whilst also being fair to them and to taxpayers. i have set out our strong track record of backing our pensions. i have also set out our commitment to the full and proper consideration of the full and proper consideration of the ombudsman's report. i note the ombudsman is ladies final report before parliament on this issue. of course i can assure the house the government will continue to engage fully and constructively with parliament as we have done with the ombudsman. i

parliament as we have done with the ombudsman-— parliament as we have done with the ombudsman. ., ,, ., ., ,, ombudsman. i would like to thank the secretary of — ombudsman. i would like to thank the secretary of state _ ombudsman. i would like to thank the secretary of state for _ ombudsman. i would like to thank the secretary of state for advanced - secretary of state for advanced sight _ secretary of state for advanced sight of — secretary of state for advanced sight of a — secretary of state for advanced sight of a statement and the ombudsman and his staff for all their— ombudsman and his staff for all their hard — ombudsman and his staff for all their hard work. this is a serious report— their hard work. this is a serious report that — their hard work. this is a serious report that requires serious consideration. the ombudsman has rightly— consideration. the ombudsman has rightly said — consideration. the ombudsman has rightly said it is for the government to respond but that parliament should also consider its findings _ parliament should also consider its findings. members on the side of the house _ findings. members on the side of the house will— findings. members on the side of the house will look carefully at the report — house will look carefully at the report and continue to listen respectfully to those involved as we have done _ respectfully to those involved as we have done from the start. the secretary _ have done from the start. the secretary of state says he will provide — secretary of state says he will provide a _ secretary of state says he will provide a further update on this matter— provide a further update on this matter to — provide a further update on this matter to the house. can i ask him when? _ matter to the house. can i ask him when? when — matter to the house. can i ask him when? when the house returns after the easter— when? when the house returns after the easter recess? because this has been going — the easter recess? because this has been going on for years. he rightly says been going on for years. he rightly savs issues— been going on for years. he rightly says issues around changes in the state _ says issues around changes in the state pension age have spanned rnultiple — state pension age have spanned multiple parliaments but those of us

who have _ multiple parliaments but those of us who have been around a little while will remember the turning point which _ will remember the turning point which sparked this campaign was the 2011 pensions act when the then chancellor and former member for tatton _ chancellor and former member for tatton decided to accelerate increases in the state pension age with very— increases in the state pension age with very little notice. his comment that this _ with very little notice. his comment that this and i quote, probably saved — that this and i quote, probably saved more money than anything else we've _ saved more money than anything else we've done, _ saved more money than anything else we've done, understandably angered many— we've done, understandably angered many women and at the time labour put forward — many women and at the time labour put forward amendments to the act which _ put forward amendments to the act which would have ensured proper notice _ which would have ensured proper notice was — which would have ensured proper notice was given to women so they could _ notice was given to women so they could plan— notice was given to women so they could plan for the retirement which would _ could plan for the retirement which would have gone some way to dealing with this _ would have gone some way to dealing with this problem. the ombudsman began _ with this problem. the ombudsman began investigating how changes in the state _ began investigating how changes in the state pension age were communicated in 2019 in the same year the _ communicated in 2019 in the same year the high court ruled the

ombudsman could not recommend changes— ombudsman could not recommend changes in— ombudsman could not recommend changes in the state pension age itself— changes in the state pension age itself or— changes in the state pension age itself or the reimbursement of lost pensions _ itself or the reimbursement of lost pensions because that had been decided — pensions because that had been decided by parliament. the ombudsman's final report published last week— ombudsman's final report published last week says in 2004 internal research — last week says in 2004 internal research from the department for work— research from the department for work and — research from the department for work and pensions found around 40% of the _ work and pensions found around 40% of the women affected knew about changes _ of the women affected knew about changes to the state pension age. does _ changes to the state pension age. does that— changes to the state pension age. does that remind the government's current— does that remind the government's current assessment? what is the government's assessment of the total number— government's assessment of the total number of— government's assessment of the total number of women who would receive compensation based on the ombudsman's different options? how many of— ombudsman's different options? how many of the poorest pensioners on pension— many of the poorest pensioners on pension credit? how many are already retired _ pension credit? how many are already retired or— pension credit? how many are already retired or who have sadly passed away? _ retired or who have sadly passed away? and when he rises can be secretarv — away? and when he rises can be secretary of state spell out why given _ secretary of state spell out why

given the department already knew there were problems communicating changes— there were problems communicating changes in— there were problems communicating changes in the state pension age, did his _ changes in the state pension age, did his government pressed ahead with changes in the 2011 pension act in the _ with changes in the 2011 pension act in the way— with changes in the 2011 pension act in the way that they did? and in the way that— in the way that they did? and in the way that sparked this campaign. the government is currently committed to providing _ government is currently committed to providing ten years' notice of future — providing ten years' notice of future changes to the state pension a-e future changes to the state pension age but _ future changes to the state pension age but labour's 2005 pension commission called for 15 years' notice — commission called for 15 years' notice as— commission called for 15 years' notice. as the government considered the merits— notice. as the government considered the merits of a longer timeframe and how they— the merits of a longer timeframe and how they would improve communications and feature? labour is fully— communications and feature? labour is fully committed to guaranteeing information about any future changes to the _ information about any future changes to the state pension age are provided _ to the state pension age are provided in a timely and targeted way and — provided in a timely and targeted way and wherever possible tailored to individual needs. will the governments now do the same? one crucial— governments now do the same? one crucial thing — governments now do the same? one crucial thing of the secretary of state _ crucial thing of the secretary of state admitted to say is that the

ombudsman says he has taken the ray decision— ombudsman says he has taken the ray decision to _ ombudsman says he has taken the ray decision to ask parliament to intervene _ decision to ask parliament to intervene on this issue because he strongly— intervene on this issue because he strongly doubts the department will provide _ strongly doubts the department will provide a _ strongly doubts the department will provide a remedy. in light of these concerns, — provide a remedy. in light of these concerns, and in order to aid parliament and its work, will the secretary — parliament and its work, will the secretary of state now committed to laving _ secretary of state now committed to laving all _ secretary of state now committed to laying all relevant information about — laying all relevant information about this issue in the house of commons — about this issue in the house of commons library including all impact assessments and related correspondence? so lessons can be learned _ correspondence? so lessons can be learned and — correspondence? so lessons can be learned and members from across this house _ learned and members from across this house can _ learned and members from across this house can properly do theirjob because — house can properly do theirjob because our current and future pensioners deserve nothing less. can i thank the right honourable lady for her response, not least on the points of agreement. there is complexity around these issues and

she is quite right to raise the point they must be given very serious consideration and that we should listen respectfully to all those around all the issues that this matter has raised. she asked when... this matter has raised. she asked when... we this matter has raised. she asked when... ~ ., .,, this matter has raised. she asked when... ~ ., ,. , when... we will leave those scenes in the house _ when... we will leave those scenes in the house of _ when... we will leave those scenes in the house of commons. - when... we will leave those scenes in the house of commons. that - when... we will leave those scenes| in the house of commons. that was liz kendall responding on the behalf of labour. that report from the parliamentary ombudsman saying that the government failed to adequately inform women born in the 1950s about the impact of changes to the pensions. plenty more coming up so stay with us on bbc news.

live from london, this is bbc news. for the first time, the un security council votes for an immediate ceasefire in gaza. the voting is as follows. 14 votes in favour. zero votes against. one abstention. the draught resolution has been adopted as resolution 27—28 2024. benjamin netanyahu pulls a high—level delegation which had been due to go to washington, amid anger at the us decision not to veto the resolution. a twin legal threat for donald trump — his hush—money trial is set for 15 april, and he has been given ten days shall and he has been given ten days be the first former

to face shall be the first former president to face a criminal trial.