and this moment makes you feel like we were wrong. inevitably, there will be headlines in the coming days and weeks, talking about what this means for the me too movement. we have seen this happen overnight again. a court case that happens, it cosby has been released and the me too movement is over, and another court case that says so—and—so has one and the me too movement is back. so, i want to be clear that this moment and decision means we have a movement. it means we have a movement. it means we have a movement. ten years ago we could get —— could not get a man like harvey weinstein into a courtroom, and you need to be clear about that. a man

as powerful and as far—reaching as harvey weinstein, is actuallyjust described, you could not get him into a courtroom, and we need to acknowledge that. we also need to understand the legal system has never served survivors. —— in this country. cautious solutions once a bus and we need to understand that. rape and sexual assault have the lowest arrest and conviction rates for a reason. we are clear that moments like this — why the movements are necessary, and we have a movement. this is why the work has to keep happening and why we keep going. almost seven years ago, because these brave women, in this case, broke their silence, because these brave women, in this case, broke theirsilence, millions and millions and millions of others found the strength to come forward and do the same. that would always be the victory. this doesn't change

that. and the people who abuse their power and privilege to violate and harm others would always be the villains. this doesn't change that. we have spent decades building a survivor — justice movement. whether for 2017 and before me too went viral. we've spent decades building this movement. seven years ago, we got big momentum when the hashtag went viral. there have always been ups and downs and changes and there have always been moments where we have always been moments where we have had the anita hill moment. we write the wave when we have big moments and when we have no moments, we get no, and we get dirty, and we do what we have to do. we get in the trances and we do all work and we

will continue to do that the outcome of this case does not change that. we also stand with resolve and resilience. we would always stand with resolve and resilience. i want to reiterate over and over again because i am preparing myself for the onslaught of what does this mean for the me too question?. i know those lessons will come regardless, so i want you to hear this. this is not a blow to the movement. it is a clarion call, and we are prepared to answer that call. thank you. that was tarana _ answer that call. thank you. that was tarana burke, _ answer that call. thank you. that was tarana burke, founder of the me too movement given reaction to the news today that harvey weinstein�*s

rape conviction from 2020 has been overturned by new york's top court. she was saying how devastated she is for the survivors who were connected to that case, and also the others that thought that case meant there would be change, but she did say that it shows white moments like this show why a movement like theirs is necessary. and before tarana burke, we heard from ashleyjudd, the actress as well. will go to a preference —— press conference being held by the scottish green party. this is after power—sharing with the s&p has broken. we have seen from westminster as well. the scottish greens are the progressive voice of the aggressive movement in scott mann and we will continue to be. i didn't hear the first part of the question. the

first minister made the decision today to end the cooperation agreement that had a majority government, a solid position we kept for 2.5 years, he decided to end that. redhead is surge from our practice today, per independence, progressive people who share our thoughts for a green future. you talk about _ thoughts for a green future. you talk about certain _ thoughts for a green future. you talk about certain leaning towards the right, — talk about certain leaning towards the right, how did that in composition go? i the right, how did that in composition go?- the right, how did that in composition go? the right, how did that in comosition no? ., �* ~ , composition go? i don't think is appmpriate _ composition go? i don't think is appmpriate to _ composition go? i don't think is appropriate to disclose - composition go? i don't think is appropriate to disclose privatel appropriate to disclose private conversation. it was a robust and frank conversation and not only from what we heard in person but from what we heard in person but from what everybody heard in the chamber today. i think it is clear that humza yousaf was not able to explain how within the space of 48 hours, he could go from saint the agreement

was worthless within gold and wanted to continue announcing it is run its course. there's legislation we have onlyjust introduced, for example on rent controls, one high priority for our members, and other legislation to protect the national —— natural environment, all of that at the right now because of the decision humza yousaf has made, and i think scotland would made the price. but what else can anyone think humza yousaf thought would happen? mas what else can anyone think humza yousaf thought would happen? was how difficult hesitance _ yousaf thought would happen? was how difficult hesitance they _ yousaf thought would happen? was how difficult hesitance they should _ difficult hesitance they should embed? ., ., ., . embed? the vote of no-confidence auestion embed? the vote of no-confidence question mark— embed? the vote of no-confidence question mark it _ embed? the vote of no-confidence question mark it has _ embed? the vote of no-confidence question mark it has been - embed? the vote of no-confidence question mark it has been a - embed? the vote of no-confidence question mark it has been a strong | question mark it has been a strong vote, we are clear that where the progressive party for scotland. we want to deliver what the programme has, it was a first minister who backed away. i has, it was a first minister who backed away-— has, it was a first minister who backed away. i think the decision was clear- _ backed away. i think the decision was clear. no _ backed away. i think the decision was clear. no one _ backed away. i think the decision was clear. no one would - backed away. i think the decision was clear. no one would pretend j backed away. i think the decision i was clear. no one would pretend it was clear. no one would pretend it was easy, — was clear. no one would pretend it was easy, a — was clear. no one would pretend it was easy, a difficult— was clear. no one would pretend it was easy, a difficult situation - was clear. no one would pretend it was easy, a difficult situation for. was easy, a difficult situation for all of— was easy, a difficult situation for all of us, — was easy, a difficult situation for all of us, but— was easy, a difficult situation for

all of us, but as _ was easy, a difficult situation for all of us, but as greens - was easy, a difficult situation for all of us, but as greens we - was easy, a difficult situation for. all of us, but as greens we believe in cooperation _ all of us, but as greens we believe in cooperation i_ all of us, but as greens we believe in cooperation i have _ all of us, but as greens we believe in cooperation i have been - all of us, but as greens we believe in cooperation i have been bustingj all of us, but as greens we believe i in cooperation i have been busting a -ut in cooperation i have been busting a out to— in cooperation i have been busting a out to try— in cooperation i have been busting a out to try to— in cooperation i have been busting a gut to try to achieve _ in cooperation i have been busting a gut to try to achieve and _ in cooperation i have been busting a gut to try to achieve and succeed . in cooperation i have been busting a gut to try to achieve and succeed inl gut to try to achieve and succeed in -- succeeding _ gut to try to achieve and succeed in -- succeeding at _ gut to try to achieve and succeed in —— succeeding at achieving - gut to try to achieve and succeed in —— succeeding at achieving the - gut to try to achieve and succeed in —— succeeding at achieving the last| —— succeeding at achieving the last few years — —— succeeding at achieving the last few years the — —— succeeding at achieving the last few years the cooperative - —— succeeding at achieving the last few years the cooperative spirit - —— succeeding at achieving the last few years the cooperative spirit inl few years the cooperative spirit in politics. _ few years the cooperative spirit in politics. and — few years the cooperative spirit in politics. and i_ few years the cooperative spirit in politics, and i think— few years the cooperative spirit in politics, and i think it's— few years the cooperative spirit in politics, and i think it's damagingj politics, and i think it's damaging that humza — politics, and i think it's damaging that humza yousaf _ politics, and i think it's damaging that humza yousaf has _ politics, and i think it's damaging that humza yousaf has decided . politics, and i think it's damaging| that humza yousaf has decided to politics, and i think it's damaging - that humza yousaf has decided to end that, but— that humza yousaf has decided to end that, but the _ that humza yousaf has decided to end that, but the situation _ that humza yousaf has decided to end that, but the situation is— that, but the situation is difficult _ that, but the situation is difficult. we _ that, but the situation is difficult. we do- that, but the situation is difficult. we do not- that, but the situation isl difficult. we do not relish that, but the situation is- difficult. we do not relish drama for drama — difficult. we do not relish drama for drama sake. _ difficult. we do not relish drama for drama sake. we _ difficult. we do not relish drama for drama sake. we have - difficult. we do not relish drama for drama sake. we have put- difficult. we do not relish drama for drama sake. we have put a l difficult. we do not relish drama - for drama sake. we have put a huge amount— for drama sake. we have put a huge amount of— for drama sake. we have put a huge amount of effort _ for drama sake. we have put a huge amount of effort into _ for drama sake. we have put a huge amount of effort into —— _ for drama sake. we have put a huge amount of effort into —— are what. amount of effort into —— are what party, _ amount of effort into —— are what party. into— amount of effort into —— are what party. into making _ amount of effort into —— are what party, into making the _ amount of effort into —— are whatl party, into making the agreement run. party, into making the agreement run it— party, into making the agreement run it has— party, into making the agreement run. it has already _ party, into making the agreement run. it has already achieved - party, into making the agreement run. it has already achieved muchj run. it has already achieved much and could — run. it has already achieved much and could achieve _ run. it has already achieved much and could achieve more _ run. it has already achieved much and could achieve more if- run. it has already achieved much and could achieve more if the - run. it has already achieved much| and could achieve more if the first minister— and could achieve more if the first minister i— and could achieve more if the first minister i noted _ and could achieve more if the first minister i noted to _ and could achieve more if the first minister i noted to continue. - and could achieve more if the first minister i noted to continue. wasl minister i noted to continue. was there any precision _ minister i noted to continue. there any precision to not back minister i noted to continue.“ there any precision to not back that vote? _ there any precision to not back that vote? ., ., ~ there any precision to not back that vote? ., ., ,, i. ., vote? not of the kind you mentioned. it is worth vote? not of the kind you mentioned. it is worth saying _ vote? not of the kind you mentioned. it is worth saying we _ vote? not of the kind you mentioned. it is worth saying we have _ vote? not of the kind you mentioned. it is worth saying we have had - vote? not of the kind you mentioned. it is worth saying we have had a - it is worth saying we have had a number— it is worth saying we have had a number of— it is worth saying we have had a number of warm— it is worth saying we have had a number of warm comments - it is worth saying we have had ai number of warm comments from it is worth saying we have had a - number of warm comments from snp members _ number of warm comments from snp members who— number of warm comments from snp members who also _ number of warm comments from snp members who also looked _ number of warm comments from snp members who also looked at - number of warm comments from snp members who also looked at the - members who also looked at the disconcerted _ members who also looked at the disconcerted by— members who also looked at the disconcerted by this _ members who also looked at the disconcerted by this shock - members who also looked at the . disconcerted by this shock decision from humza —

disconcerted by this shock decision from humza yousaf. _ disconcerted by this shock decision from humza yousaf. i've _ disconcerted by this shock decision from humza yousaf. i've spoken . disconcerted by this shock decisionj from humza yousaf. i've spoken to members _ from humza yousaf. i've spoken to members of— from humza yousaf. i've spoken to members of the _ from humza yousaf. i've spoken to members of the snp _ from humza yousaf. i've spoken to members of the snp who - from humza yousaf. i've spoken to members of the snp who did not l from humza yousaf. i've spoken to- members of the snp who did not quite -et members of the snp who did not quite get what _ members of the snp who did not quite get what you _ members of the snp who did not quite get what you thought _ members of the snp who did not quite get what you thought would _ members of the snp who did not quite get what you thought would happen. . get what you thought would happen. you would _ get what you thought would happen. you would have _ get what you thought would happen. you would have to _ get what you thought would happen. you would have to ask— get what you thought would happen. you would have to ask them. - get what you thought would happen. you would have to ask them. we - get what you thought would happen. you would have to ask them.- you would have to ask them. we are not ri you would have to ask them. we are not privy to — you would have to ask them. we are not privy to the _ you would have to ask them. we are not privy to the cabinet _ you would have to ask them. we are not privy to the cabinet discussions | not privy to the cabinet discussions this morning. d0 not privy to the cabinet discussions this morning-— not privy to the cabinet discussions this morning. do you feel any regret at all if the — this morning. do you feel any regret at all if the decision _ this morning. do you feel any regret at all if the decision leads _ this morning. do you feel any regret at all if the decision leads to - this morning. do you feel any regret at all if the decision leads to more i at all if the decision leads to more right—wing leader you don't want? this is— right—wing leader you don't want? this is already a step to the right. humza yousaf has made a choice between his more conservative backbenchers and working with us and he made that choice, the move has been made and the scottish greens will remain consistent and progressive and sick to our bodies. we still be willing to share a platform with humza yousaf regarding independence question mark i think the cause _ independence question mark i think the cause was that by having a progressive majority government. the progressive ma'ority government. the cause of progressive majority government. the cause of independence has not been was that— cause of independence has not been was that by— cause of independence has not been was that by having _ cause of independence has not been was that by having homes _ cause of independence has not been was that by having homes that - cause of independence has not been was that by having homes that use i cause of independence has not beenl was that by having homes that use of step the _ was that by having homes that use of step the agreement. _

was that by having homes that use of step the agreement.— step the agreement. would you back to the people — step the agreement. would you back to the people have _ step the agreement. would you back to the people have an _ step the agreement. would you back to the people have an election... - to the people have an election... question— to the people have an election... question mark there is a quite sguare — question mark there is a quite square look at ——? . question mark there is a quite square look at --?_ question mark there is a quite square look at --? . you have lots of drama — square look at --? . you have lots of drama to _ square look at --? . you have lots of drama to follow _ square look at --? . you have lots of drama to follow next _ square look at --? . you have lots of drama to follow next week - of drama to follow next week i'm sure _ of drama to follow next week i'm sure thanks— of drama to follow next week i'm sure. thanks everyone. - of drama to follow next week i'm sure. thanks everyone.— of drama to follow next week i'm sure. thanks everyone. there'll be lots of drama _ sure. thanks everyone. there'll be lots of drama next _ sure. thanks everyone. there'll be lots of drama next week _ sure. thanks everyone. there'll be lots of drama next week and - sure. thanks everyone. there'll be lots of drama next week and we i sure. thanks everyone. there'll be. lots of drama next week and we will cover it all here, though it were the co—leaders of the scottish greens given reaction to the collapse of power—sharing in scotland today, come. —— confirming they would vote against humza yousaf in a vote of no—confidence for him. 0fsted's single word judgments

are set to remain in place despite campaigners asking for them to be scrapped following the suicide of a primary school headteacher. ruth perry died after her school in reading was downgraded from �*outstanding' to �*inadequate'. her sister said she was disappointed with the decision. let's speak to sir michael wilshaw who was the chief inspector of schools in england in his role as head of 0fsted from 2012 until 2016. what do you make of the government and not spend saying it will keep these one—word judgements? i disappointed these one—wordjudgements? i disappointed they have made that decision. the government should really listen to the findings of the coroner and what the select committee has said, and most importantly listen to head teachers, most of whom that i speak to —— certainly the statistics show two thirds of teachers feel that change is absolutely necessary. notjust because of the tragic death but also because of the tragic death but also because they believe the judgements that are being made are erroneous,

they are too inconsistent, not secure, and they are being made by people who do not have the respect for the profession that particularly senior people in profession like teachers. ., ., ., ., , teachers. you are the head of 0fsted between 2012 — teachers. you are the head of 0fsted between 2012 and _ teachers. you are the head of 0fsted between 2012 and 2016, _ teachers. you are the head of 0fsted between 2012 and 2016, why - teachers. you are the head of 0fsted between 2012 and 2016, why did - teachers. you are the head of 0fsted between 2012 and 2016, why did you| between 2012 and 2016, why did you not get rid of them than? i between 2012 and 2016, why did you not get rid of them than?— not get rid of them than? i made a number of — not get rid of them than? i made a number of radical _ not get rid of them than? i made a number of radical changes - not get rid of them than? i made a j number of radical changes because when i challenge the system to do better, abolish the word satisfactory and replaced it with the judgment required satisfactory and replaced it with thejudgment required improvement, the judgment required improvement, head thejudgment required improvement, head teacher is said to look at your own organisation and the inconsistency there, look at the quality of the people you have inspected. and they were right. and for that reason, i got rid of the

outsource inspectors, brought inspection in—house, and improved the organisation, inconsistency still exists.— the organisation, inconsistency still exists. ., , still exists. the government says he wants to improve _ still exists. the government says he wants to improve the _ still exists. the government says he wants to improve the current - still exists. the government says he| wants to improve the current system rather than bring in an alternative. what do you think needs to be done westmark parents need a simple way of being able to understand what is being said about a school, so they can compare easily with other schools and understand it. parents need something _ schools and understand it. parents need something that tells - schools and understand it. parents i need something that tells them what is happening in a school and accurately reflects the weakness of the school and we emphasise the word simple when we talk about parents. they want something simple. parents want something rib —— reliable. which means the child is getting on in this particular school. i don't believe what we have at the moment does that. that inspectors have an

almost impossible job of collecting and collating different sorts of judgment. for example, i been across the country in the last three years and looked at a number of 0fsted reports and you see things like the curriculum is fine, but the results and the progress of children is poon and the progress of children is poor. the leadership is good, but the governance is weak. there are lots of those judgements being the governance is weak. there are lots of thosejudgements being made, and to try and get them altogether and to try and get them altogether and put them into one final judgment, i think is a mistaken, and lisa 0rel sorts of competitions. so what instead? so what instead? 50 what instead? so what instead? 50

what instead? so what instead? so what instead? i— what instead? so what instead? so what instead? i think _ what instead? so what instead? so what instead? i think the _ what instead? so what instead? so | what instead? i think the opposition articles for review _ what instead? i think the opposition articles for review that _ what instead? i think the opposition articles for review that sets - what instead? i think the opposition articles for review that sets up - articles for review that sets up much greater depth the strengths and weaknesses of the schools and i agree with that because not doing that would make the run judgements, and inspectors have a really tough job in getting all of those different thoughts together in one finaljudgment. and the whirring thing is to collect school good when it's not good. thing is to collect school good when it's not good-— it's not good. thank you for talking to us. labour says it will renationalise most passenger rail services if it wins the next general election. the party says its proposals, which include creating a new publicly—owned body which would be responsible for infrastructure, would be the industry's' biggest overhaul in a generation. the government says the plans are pointless and unfunded. more details from our transport correspondent katy austin.

what's the way ahead for britain's railway? today, labour outlined what it would do, arguing its plans would fix a broken model. 0ur railways have become a symbol of national decline. of a country that no longer works and a government with no plan to fix it. cancellations are at record highs. fares have risen almost twice as fast as wages since 2010 and strikes are costing us £25 million a day. when contracts held by private train companies expire, they would be brought into a new public body, great british railways, which would oversee both infrastructure and train services. but labour would not nationalise freight or rolling stock companies and private operators like lumo and hull trains, which run independently without government subsidy, could continue. other measures include automatic delay repay, digital season tickets and a best price guarantee making fares more transparent, although not necessarily cheaper. labour claims its new model would mean cost savings for the taxpayer.

the transport secretary disagrees. they've got no idea how to pay for it. there are going to be increased costs. if you nationalise all those companies, you are going to have to hire civil servants to manage it. they are setting up another quango. the lib dems want to freeze fares but haven't committed to nationalisation. the snp said it would work with labour. scotland and wales already have nationalised passenger rail services and several large england—based operators are publicly run after being brought into the government's operator of last resort. also, the government has a large degree of control over most private train companies because of the type of contract they are currently on. a group which speaks for private train companies say a structure used like the one by transport for london would be better. that alternative model gives you the best of both worlds, so greater public control through a governing body in the public sector like great british railways, but then harnessing that commercial

expertise of the private sector train company to deliver better outcomes for the passenger. even if it does gain power, labour admits it would take time for passengers to see change. katy austin, bbc news. sir keir starmer has been speaking to our political editor chris mason about labours vision. i want all railways to work properly with a focus on passengers. at the moment, anybody using the railways say they are pretty dysfunctional, record numbers of delays and cancellations. your prices on fears that do not match the quality of service, then you have the government stepping in with huge subsidies. the privatisation has not worked, it has deteriorated under this government. 0urjob if elected

into government is to pick it up and fix it, and that would require us as the ranchers and, to bring the franchises into public ownership, great british railways which would be a public entity, and publicly owned, and will give comprehensive strategic approach. what i want from thatis strategic approach. what i want from that is passenger focus, strategic approach. what i want from that is passengerfocus, affordable fares, safety and reliability, so that people can use the railways with confidence again. with me is sir philip rutnam, who for five years served as the most senior civil servant in the department for transport in his role as permanent secretary. thank you for coming in. he did not say he would make chicken —— tickets cheaper, he was pushing that but didn't say. in cheaper, he was pushing that but didn't sa . , . cheaper, he was pushing that but didn't sa . , , , didn't say. in truth, why this is that major _ didn't say. in truth, why this is that major political— didn't say. in truth, why this is that major political debate - didn't say. in truth, why this is i that major political debate about the structure of the industry which

is important, there are there issues which are not being discussed which are important to the future of the industry and quality of service to passengers. the level of peers is one of them, which deeply affects passenger pockets, but also the level of investment. if you look at the rail industry, the single biggest driver of the quality of service over time is the level of investment and the effectiveness in which renewals and maintenance and the other things that need to happen to railways is done.— to railways is done. interesting to hear from the _ to railways is done. interesting to hear from the camping _ to railways is done. interesting to hear from the camping for - to railways is done. interesting to hear from the camping for better| hear from the camping for better transport seen real nationalisation is not in the better interest for passengers because it would be incentivised the operators to invest and make major improvements. do you agree with that?— agree with that? looking at real industries around _ agree with that? looking at real industries around the _ agree with that? looking at real industries around the world, - agree with that? looking at real i industries around the world, there are lots of successful ways to stop plenty examples on the continent of the kind the labour party is proposing today, essentially with services being run by the public sector as well as the planning and

infrastructure run by the public sector. examples of that with very good railways. what i would say is the structural issue is important but not the only issue. the bigger issue,in but not the only issue. the bigger issue, in essence, is how effective this new public body would be, great british railways. wouldn't have level of independence he needs from the government to avoid public interference? would it have the funding needed to make sure it can upgrade the infrastructure and deliver transformative projects, and it wouldn't have the level of accountability needed to drive good performance? flan accountability needed to drive good performance?— performance? can you extend the difference between _ performance? can you extend the difference between what - performance? can you extend the difference between what is - performance? can you extend the difference between what is going | difference between what is going between scotland and widows and how the functions work westmark? in scotland and wales, the devolved governments are responsible for procuring the train services just like the department for transport is in relation to england but the

operator, the organisation for the services is part of the government as well. so, and widows there's transport for widows which runs the trains and planes them, so that is a difference and is essentially more of what the labour party is proposing for england the stock to be honest, it is important but not a huge change because even in the current structure, the structure of the government is proposing other moments, the government, as you heard in your package has a high level of control over the types of services provided. with the labour party is doing is taking a step further and want one integrated body, great british railways, which plans are trains and owns it infrastructure and runs the trains. it could take a while for the current contracts were not which could be five years' time, and by which time if they do get in in this election, they could be out again by then. i election, they could be out again by then. ~' , ., , , ., , then. i think five years should be time enough _ then. i think five years should be time enough to _ then. i think five years should be

time enough to implement - then. i think five years should be time enough to implement it. i then. i think five years should be l time enough to implement it. you often seem to have five—year parliaments now, so i think they would have time to implement it but i would say it is really important that there is enough momentum behind the programme to have not a dip in the programme to have not a dip in the level of services and fall in the level of services and fall in the love services. we need to that change to happen at some pace. thank ou for change to happen at some pace. thank you for coming — change to happen at some pace. thank you for coming to _ change to happen at some pace. thank you for coming to talk _ change to happen at some pace. thank you for coming to talk to _ change to happen at some pace. thank you for coming to talk to us _ change to happen at some pace. thank you for coming to talk to us sir- you for coming to talk to us sir phillip rutnam. meanwhile— israel's war cabinet is meeting to discuss a major military operation against hamas in the city in southern gaza. concerns continue to grow for more than a million refugees who are sheltering in the area. on friday the us secretary of state antony blinken said the us had not yet seen a plan for getting civilians out of harm's way and warned any military operation would have "terrible consequences". it would have "terrible consequences". comes as the northern it comes as the world programmes has northern gaza is hit into the famine and aid is needed. earlier in the programme i was joined in the studio by richard villar, a surgeon who returned from gaza

just seven days ago, where he worked at the al aqsa hospital. day before we were due to be inserted, a missile landed in the hospital courtyard and you still went there and we still went, 0k. so some people would say it would be very sort of reticent, i suppose. but that's not what you're about, you war surgeons. but tell me tell me what it was like when you got there and and how on earth you managed to operate there. well, look, i mean, imagine i mean, al—aqsa was largely maternity before we got there. it's now been converted over to trauma map. that's medical aid for palestinians for whom i worked, basically have had teams rotating through there since december. and so we happened to be the fifth team in. imagine a 200 bedded hospital with 700 patients. i mean, the analogy would be, let's say the london underground rush hour or an underground rush hour, you're getting off the train. and that sort of bargy feeling is the feeling you have in the hospital. you have 60 or 70 people in the emergency department at any one time. so it's a big problem.

and with the number of people come other problems to these pictures, and with the number of people come other problems too. these pictures, i think these are your pictures, aren't they, that we're showing on the screen now for people? are these these mothers or this is is all trauma patients? that's a corridor you're looking at there normally, but it's now become a ward. yeah. and so you put patients wherever you can. that's me looking stressed, i think, and a camp behind me. and how do you conduct operations in that sort of situation? just explain to us what you're using, what you're doing. well, look, you're lacking just about everything. the issue to think about, i think, is you're dealing with a very high infection rate. so let's imagine in london or any developed city, you would probably work on something like a quarter of a percent infection rate. and even that is too much. in gaza, it is 100%.

so everybody who's operated on has infection. just about. so infection means longer, stay longer. stay means basically further operations. and ultimately you're looking at a mass disablement of a population. so one surgeon said to me only the other day, when the war stops, our work starts and he could not be more correct. interesting to hear from a worse surgeon speaking to me earlier about his experience in gaza, just getting back seven days ago. here are some pictures of a world record being broken. this is a japanese 0lympic ski champion uriel kobayashi is, on a ski jump in iceland. the 27—year—old rural sword to italy world record ski jump, coming on the slope he read a top speed of a km an hour and was suspended in the air for eight seconds and jumped 291 metres,

shattering the ski flying and ski jump shattering the ski flying and ski jump record. thank you for watching. hello there. there were two different types of weather across the country for thursday, neither being warm. across england and wales, there was a lot of cloud around with some patches of rain and these grey skies, the rain, was all tied in with an area of low pressure out in the north sea. you can see the extent of the cloud here. further north, though, we had much brighter weather in scotland with some lengthy spells of sunshine. so if you wanted the sunnier weather, scotland was the place to be. however, we did see some of those brighter skies push in into northern ireland and northern england through the afternoon. now, overnight, we've got a few patches of rain to come and go across southern areas of england, perhaps south wales as well. away from that, most of the uk having clearing skies, especially during the second part of the night, becomes largely dry, and there will be quite a widespread frost in rural areas. so we are looking at a cold and a frosty start to the day for many on friday. but overall, it's a much brighter day with more

in the way of sunshine. the exception southern england, where there is the threat of some rain, especially in the southwest. and through the afternoon we'll see some showers break out. they'll become quite widespread, but especially across northern and eastern scotland and eastern areas of england. wherever you are, we're looking at another chilly day for the time of year, with temperatures well around about 8—14 degrees. now, this weekend will see an area of low pressure move up from the south. and this brings with it the threat of some rain. now, on saturday, the rain will be affecting southern england across parts of wales, the midlands and east anglia. there will be a chilly wind gusting into the 25 miles an hour, not desperately strong, but given those low temperatures, the wind, i think, will make it feel that bit colder. for northern ireland, scotland and northern england, after a cold and frosty start, again, we're looking at an afternoon of sunny spells and passing showers, some of the showers having a bit of hail mixed in and temperatures below average once again. the second part of the weekend, the same area of low pressure threatens some rain across eastern england. now, there is a chance this rain could be a bit more extensive across the midlands and slower to clear, but away from that area, again, after a cold and locally

frosty start, we're looking at some sunny spells and a number of showers, especially across the north and the west of the country. temperatures continue to run below average for the time of year. however, as we get into next week, if you're fed up with this chilly weather, it does look like we'll see something of a change to much milder weather conditions. however, it's not necessarily dry. there will be some rain and showers around next week.

at six: scotland's government is in turmoil tonight. scotland's first minister humza yousaf�*s future hangs in the balance after the power sharing deal with the green party collapses. humza yousaf has been in office for bare lay year, but he now faces a confidence vote in the coming days. the disgraced hollywood film producer harvey weinstein has one of his convictions for rape overturned. a former senior post office executive tells the public inquiry into the horizon it scandal she never "knowingly" did anything wrong. the army says two of four of the military horses that bolted through london have been operated on and are in a serious condition. and five euros a day — how daytrippers to venice are going to be charged a fee to go in. and coming up on bbc news — all eyes are on manchester city as the title