this programme continues on bbc one.

in the last few minutes, the us government has said israel may have breached humanitarian law in gaza using american weapons.

the biden administration presents a report to congress critical of the way israel's used american weapons. meanwhile, the israeli military is creating defensive positions in gaza in defiance of us wishes. we'll discuss what all that means with our expert panel. also tonight, labour unveils their own plans to deal with illegal migration. the shadow immigration minister tells us what he'd do with small boat arrivals. those who are rejected, where will they go? there are countries like pakistan, bangladesh, which are low grant rate countries, they are safe countries. and do look up — where you might see a spectacular northern lights show tonight.

good evening. in the last few moments, the us state department has said it has reasonable to assess beliefs that us supplied arms were used in ways inconsistent with israel's obligations. it follows news earlier this week that the us has halted delivery of heavy bombs that might be used in rafah. although israel says its operations there are limited, there are indications, for example from satellite photos, it is preparing for a longer stay in the area. as well as being home to hundreds of thousands of refugees, the border town is also a key aid and humanitarian route in and out of gaza. in a moment, we'll discuss what the effect of these israeli/us tensions might be, but first let's examine developments on the ground causing american unease. the units currently on the edge of rafah city have been consolidating and expanding their positions since heading there on monday night.

there's a new base near the vital crossing point with egypt and a road leading from the israeli border to that base — a route called the philadelphia road prior to israel's withdrawal of 19 years ago. taking control of this crossing runs counter to the expressed wishes of the us and egypt, suggesting an israeli desire to dominate the area for weeks or even months. the idf has also dug in on the so—called netzarim corridor, cutting the strip in two. and they have cleared a border security strip along the lines of the border with israel breached on 7th october. all of these steps — in rafah, netzarim and along the border run — counter to america's stated wishes about not taking any more territory for security purposes. outside those zones, israeli troops have withdrawn. so what's the aim?

they argue that pulling back from gaza or khan yunis city centres reduces the harm to palestinian civilians and their own casualties, while they remain able to move quickly to any zone they want. humanitarian agencies warn that closing the rafah crossing will exacerbate desperate shortages of food, and could hamper medical evacuations to hospitals in egypt. what these remaining deployments suggest is a military plan to contain hamas while bigger decisions about how to end the war remain stalled at the political level. but it could exacerbate tensions with the us and egypt. joining us to discuss this are anshel pfeffer, israel correspondent for the economist, and author of a biography of prime minister netanyahu, brigadier general amir avivi, who held a number of senior roles in the idf, and from washington, us diplomat gina abercrombie—winstanley.

can we start with you because the news just in that this long—awaited report from the administration to congress has landed and it suggests that israel, it is reasonable to assess that israel has used american supplied weapons in ways incompatible with international humanitarian law. what do you make of that? it humanitarian law. what do you make of that? , ., , humanitarian law. what do you make ofthat? , . i, , , of that? it is hardly surprising. i think many _ of that? it is hardly surprising. i think many anticipated - of that? it is hardly surprising. i think many anticipated that - of that? it is hardly surprising. i think many anticipated that that would be the result of the report. i have not seen it myself so i am not apprised of the details. but it certainly would be expected as we have watched the war unfold and as we have watched the use of american supplied weapons in the gaza strip. it does go to show the dedication and unbiased nest of those assembling the report to put down in

black and white what the reality is. so it would be good to see the entire report on the details. can i 'ust ask entire report on the details. can i just ask you _ entire report on the details. can i just ask you as — entire report on the details. can i just ask you as a _ entire report on the details. can i just ask you as a follow-up, - entire report on the details. can i just ask you as a follow—up, we have seen a distinct change in atmosphere this week from the biden administration with the statements by the president himself about holding back those bombs but how much influence do you think he has now over the israelis?— now over the israelis? well, every state is a sovereign _ now over the israelis? well, every state is a sovereign state - now over the israelis? well, every state is a sovereign state so - now over the israelis? well, every state is a sovereign state so we i state is a sovereign state so we have to start from there. how much influence on the one nation has over another is a matter of what leveraged is being used and what the calculations are for the leader of the second state, in this case prime minister netanyahu. at some point the prime minister is going to make a decision as to whether the relationship with the united states, with israel's standing internationally requires him to make policy changes or whether his domestic considerations and his

ability to maintain his position as prime minister takes primacy. so thatis prime minister takes primacy. so that is the decision that will fall to be leader of israel.— to be leader of israel. let's talk to be leader of israel. let's talk to our guests — to be leader of israel. let's talk to our guests in _ to be leader of israel. let's talk to our guests in israel - to be leader of israel. let's talk to our guests in israel and - to be leader of israel. let's talk l to our guests in israel and anshel pfeffer, what is your reaction to the news on this administration report to congress? had the news on this administration report to congress?— the news on this administration report to congress? had so far, what is interesting — report to congress? had so far, what is interesting about _ report to congress? had so far, what is interesting about it _ report to congress? had so far, what is interesting about it is _ report to congress? had so far, what is interesting about it is beyond - is interesting about it is beyond the headline, they assume american weapons _ the headline, they assume american weapons were used in contravention of international humanitarian law at the same _ of international humanitarian law at the same time they say they can reaiiy— the same time they say they can really work out specific strikes enriched — really work out specific strikes enriched in breach of humanitarian law -- _ enriched in breach of humanitarian law -- in— enriched in breach of humanitarian law —— in which they were used. so therefore there is no clear conclusion of something the us needs to do as _ conclusion of something the us needs to do as a _ conclusion of something the us needs to do as a result. there is a grey area _ to do as a result. there is a grey area or a — to do as a result. there is a grey area or a loophole that which the administration has continued to

supplying arms to israel if it chooses _ supplying arms to israel if it chooses to do so. we have also heard about _ chooses to do so. we have also heard about those _ chooses to do so. we have also heard about those mixed messages, we had the interview with president biting a couple _ the interview with president biting a couple of days ago which he said certain— a couple of days ago which he said certain types of bombs had been delayed — certain types of bombs had been delayed or held back —— president biden _ delayed or held back —— president biden and — delayed or held back —— president biden. and at the same time the administration have been saying we are still— administration have been saying we are still supplying israel with everything it needs, there is no embargo — everything it needs, there is no embargo. it looks like the americans are, on— embargo. it looks like the americans are, on the _ embargo. it looks like the americans are, on the one hand, creating some level_ are, on the one hand, creating some level of— are, on the one hand, creating some level of threat but they don't want it to seem — level of threat but they don't want it to seem as if they are cutting supplies— it to seem as if they are cutting supplies entirely, i think what they are 20 _ supplies entirely, i think what they are 20 give — supplies entirely, i think what they are 20 give is the netanyahu government a way down from this escalation— government a way down from this escalation in rafah and we are also seeing _ escalation in rafah and we are also seeing netanyahu's government not --oin seeing netanyahu's government not going all— seeing netanyahu's government not going all in two rafah. they are making — going all in two rafah. they are making the a point that they have captured — making the a point that they have captured the crossing outside the city, operating in some eastern suburbs. — city, operating in some eastern suburbs, but they have not gone in

with entire — suburbs, but they have not gone in with entire armoured units into the centre _ with entire armoured units into the centre of— with entire armoured units into the centre of rafah so they are also trying _ centre of rafah so they are also trying to — centre of rafah so they are also trying to create room for manoeuvre. let's _ trying to create room for manoeuvre. let's go _ trying to create room for manoeuvre. let's go to _ trying to create room for manoeuvre. let's go to agadir avivi. how concerning do you think it is for the israeli military, the possibility of weapons and supplies being limited? and do you feel the effect of that criticism of your operations? —— brigadieravivi. operations? —— brigadier avivi. mostly operations? —— brigadieravivi. mostly when facing such a big war, for this— mostly when facing such a big war, for this is— mostly when facing such a big war, for this is an — mostly when facing such a big war, for this is an accidental _ mostly when facing such a big war, for this is an accidental war. - mostly when facing such a big war, for this is an accidental war. we i for this is an accidental war. we are fighting _ for this is an accidental war. we are fighting in— for this is an accidental war. we are fighting in gaza _ for this is an accidental war. we are fighting in gaza but- for this is an accidental war. we are fighting in gaza but also - for this is an accidental war. we are fighting in gaza but also in. for this is an accidental war. we . are fighting in gaza but also in the north, _ are fighting in gaza but also in the north, israei— are fighting in gaza but also in the north, israel is— are fighting in gaza but also in the north, israel is facing _ are fighting in gaza but also in the north, israel is facing seven - north, israel is facing seven different— north, israel is facing seven different fronts, _ north, israel is facing seven different fronts, from - north, israel is facing seven different fronts, from iraq, i north, israel is facing seven - different fronts, from iraq, syria, yemen. _ different fronts, from iraq, syria, yemen. iran, _ different fronts, from iraq, syria, yemen, iran, lebanon, _ different fronts, from iraq, syria, yemen, iran, lebanon, in- different fronts, from iraq, syria, yemen, iran, lebanon, in gaza. different fronts, from iraq, syria, l yemen, iran, lebanon, in gaza and obviously— yemen, iran, lebanon, in gaza and obviously for — yemen, iran, lebanon, in gaza and obviously for us _ yemen, iran, lebanon, in gaza and obviously for us it _ yemen, iran, lebanon, in gaza and obviously for us it is _ yemen, iran, lebanon, in gaza and obviously for us it is very _ obviously for us it is very important _ obviously for us it is very important to— obviously for us it is very important to have - obviously for us it is very important to have the i obviously for us it is very i important to have the flow obviously for us it is very - important to have the flow of capabilities— important to have the flow of capabilities coming _ important to have the flow of capabilities coming in. - important to have the flow of capabilities coming in. i- important to have the flow of| capabilities coming in. i must important to have the flow of- capabilities coming in. i must say that the _ capabilities coming in. i must say that the eye _ capabilities coming in. i must say that the eye dear— capabilities coming in. i must say that the eye dear the _ capabilities coming in. i must say that the eye dear the israel- capabilities coming in. i must say. that the eye dear the israel defence forces— that the eye dear the israel defence forces always — that the eye dear the israel defence forces always adhere _ that the eye dear the israel defence forces always adhere to _ forces always adhere to international— forces always adhere to international law - forces always adhere to international law neverl forces always adhere to - international law never attack

intentionally _ international law never attack intentionally citizens. - international law never attack intentionally citizens. yes, i international law never attack intentionally citizens. yes, in| intentionally citizens. yes, in water— intentionally citizens. yes, in water is _ intentionally citizens. yes, in water is collateral— intentionally citizens. yes, in water is collateral damage i intentionally citizens. yes, in| water is collateral damage but intentionally citizens. yes, in i water is collateral damage but i must _ water is collateral damage but i must say — water is collateral damage but i must say the _ water is collateral damage but i must say the idf _ water is collateral damage but i must say the idf is— water is collateral damage but ll must say the idf is excelling the proportionality we _ must say the idf is excelling the proportionality we have - must say the idf is excelling the proportionality we have seen i must say the idf is excelling the proportionality we have seen in. must say the idf is excelling the i proportionality we have seen in such a complicated — proportionality we have seen in such a complicated urban _ proportionality we have seen in such a complicated urban war— proportionality we have seen in such a complicated urban war is- a complicated urban war is unprecedented. _ a complicated urban war is unprecedented. [it- a complicated urban war is unprecedented.— a complicated urban war is unrecedented. , unprecedented. it is a complicated battle but you _ unprecedented. it is a complicated battle but you surely _ unprecedented. it is a complicated battle but you surely understand i battle but you surely understand that millions of people around the world are not convinced of what you say, they point to those 3a,000 palestinian dead and they don't believe that you are using all the restraint you should. and this report tonight seems to back that up. report tonight seems to back that u -. ~ ., �* report tonight seems to back that u . _ . ., �* ~' ., , up. well, i don't know if it is because _ up. well, i don't know if it is because i— up. well, i don't know if it is because i don't _ up. well, i don't know if it is because i don't know - up. well, i don't know if it is because i don't know what i up. well, i don't know if it is i because i don't know what proof up. well, i don't know if it is - because i don't know what proof they are bringing — because i don't know what proof they are bringing. israel— because i don't know what proof they are bringing. israel started _ are bringing. israel started operating _ are bringing. israel started operating in _ are bringing. israel started operating in the _ are bringing. israel started operating in the north- are bringing. israel started operating in the north of. are bringing. israel started i operating in the north of gaza evacuated _ operating in the north of gaza evacuated i _ operating in the north of gaza evacuated 1 million _ operating in the north of gaza evacuated 1 million people i operating in the north of gaza l evacuated 1 million people from operating in the north of gaza - evacuated 1 million people from the north— evacuated 1 million people from the north to _ evacuated 1 million people from the north to really _ evacuated 1 million people from the north to really reduce _ evacuated 1 million people from the north to really reduce dramaticallyl north to really reduce dramatically collateral — north to really reduce dramatically collateral damage. _ north to really reduce dramatically collateral damage. it _ north to really reduce dramatically collateral damage. it is _ north to really reduce dramatically collateral damage. it is hamas- north to really reduce dramatically. collateral damage. it is hamas using them _ collateral damage. it is hamas using them as— collateral damage. it is hamas using them as human— collateral damage. it is hamas using them as human shields, _ collateral damage. it is hamas using them as human shields, trying - collateral damage. it is hamas using them as human shields, trying to- them as human shields, trying to prevent— them as human shields, trying to prevent them _ them as human shields, trying to prevent them from _ them as human shields, trying to prevent them from moving - them as human shields, trying to prevent them from moving from i them as human shields, trying to- prevent them from moving from areas where _ prevent them from moving from areas where the _ prevent them from moving from areas where the idf— prevent them from moving from areas where the w is— prevent them from moving from areas where the idf is operating. _ prevent them from moving from areas where the idf is operating. we - prevent them from moving from areas where the idf is operating. we did i where the idf is operating. we did the same — where the idf is operating. we did the same in — where the idf is operating. we did the same in khan _ where the idf is operating. we did the same in khan younis, - where the idf is operating. we did

the same in khan younis, and i where the idf is operating. we did the same in khan younis, and in. the same in khan younis, and in rafah— the same in khan younis, and in rafahwe— the same in khan younis, and in rafah we have _ the same in khan younis, and in rafah we have already— the same in khan younis, and in| rafah we have already evacuated 400.000 — rafah we have already evacuated 400,000 people. _ rafah we have already evacuated 400,000 people. israel- rafah we have already evacuated 400,000 people. israel is - rafah we have already evacuated 400,000 people. israel is really| 400,000 people. israel is really doing _ 400,000 people. israel is really doing everything _ 400,000 people. israel is really doing everything it _ 400,000 people. israel is really doing everything it can— 400,000 people. israel is really doing everything it can to - 400,000 people. israel is really. doing everything it can to minimise collateral— doing everything it can to minimise collateral damage _ doing everything it can to minimise collateral damage but— doing everything it can to minimise collateral damage but we're - doing everything it can to minimise collateral damage but we're not i collateral damage but we're not going _ collateral damage but we're not going to — collateral damage but we're not going to lose _ collateral damage but we're not going to lose the. _ collateral damage but we're not going to lose the. we _ collateral damage but we're not going to lose the. we need i collateral damage but we're not going to lose the. we need to. collateral damage but we're not . going to lose the. we need to win decisively — going to lose the. we need to win decisivel . �* , . ., going to lose the. we need to win decisivel . �*, _, . ,, going to lose the. we need to win decisivel . �*, . ,, ., decisively. let's come back to anshel pfeffer _ decisively. let's come back to anshel pfeffer on _ decisively. let's come back to anshel pfeffer on the - decisively. let's come back to anshel pfeffer on the last i decisively. let's come back to l anshel pfeffer on the last point made there, do you think benjamin netanyahu knows how to win this war? he seems to have been indecisive in recent weeks about whether or not to launch this rafah operation so does he see a way out or is he relying on the army to hold a ring in security terms while he tries to find one? i don't think netanyahu has a strategy for winning _ don't think netanyahu has a strategy for winning this war if it is at all winnabie — for winning this war if it is at all winnable. there is a disagreement between _ winnable. there is a disagreement between him and the senior military commanders over the lack of any strategic— commanders over the lack of any strategic arising from what israel, what _ strategic arising from what israel, what israel is even trying to achieve _ what israel is even trying to achieve with this war. there has been _

achieve with this war. there has been a — achieve with this war. there has been a lot— achieve with this war. there has been a lot of pushback both in the war cabinet and from the generals behind _ war cabinet and from the generals behind the scenes to netanyahu, urging _ behind the scenes to netanyahu, urging him to push forward the rafah operation _ urging him to push forward the rafah operation without any clear idea what _ operation without any clear idea what the — operation without any clear idea what the strategic outcome is supposed to be put at the war cabinet — supposed to be put at the war cabinet held that meeting this week on that— cabinet held that meeting this week on that but was inconclusive and they— on that but was inconclusive and they not — on that but was inconclusive and they not get very far. the feeling in israei— they not get very far. the feeling in israei is — they not get very far. the feeling in israel is that there is not a clear— in israel is that there is not a clear idea _ in israel is that there is not a clear idea come recent surveys showing — clear idea come recent surveys showing 60% of israelis do not believe — showing 60% of israelis do not believe that what netanyahu called a total victory is at all possible. and the — total victory is at all possible. and the grounds for calling for a ceasefire — and the grounds for calling for a ceasefire and hostage release. —— the groundswell. let ceasefire and hostage release. -- the groundswell.— ceasefire and hostage release. -- the groundswell. let me come back to gina in washington _ the groundswell. let me come back to gina in washington could interesting l gina in washington could interesting what anshel pfeffer said about the report apparently not giving specific instances where israel might have broken humanitarian law so i guess there is a way not to take this further if the administration does not want to but what about the reports about taking

territory, a bigot security strip, the commodore that cuts the gaza strip in two —— a bigger strip. what options does biden have to showed his displeasure at this point? certainly there have been discussions between the united states and israel since the beginning of this war about how best to conduct it, about ensuring that vengeance is not what is pursued, that there should be a strategic plan and that they should beat preparations for the day after. in recognition certainly on the american side that mere military action is not good to bring to israel what israel needs and deserves, which is long—term safety and security, and as long as the occupation continues, that cannot be. so there has to be a plan for the day after and as we know, the

prime minister has been extremely resistant to it. so what else can the president do? certainly following through, as he has made clear he intends to do, they have been the willingness of the united states to provide diplomatic cover again and again in the face of international lack of understanding of how we were taking particular positions but this comes down to the long—standing relationship and friendship that the united states and israel has, and the united states' belief that israel would make wise decisions, that the prime minister would make wise decisions. he continues to appear to be putting his continued role as prime minister ahead... , , _, ahead... sorry, let me 'ust come back to brigadier i ahead... sorry, let mejust come back to brigadier general - ahead... sorry, let mejust come back to brigadier general avivi i back to brigadier general avivi because you both made points i would like to put to him point i think you

would shaking your head when anshel pfeffer said there was not a strategic plan to conclude the war, maybe i was reading your mood wrong, but linking that to what gina abercrombie—winstanley just said about the lack of a morning after vision, a sense of what is going to be, who is going to run gaza? this presumably leaves the army holding the security situation there for an indefinite period and that's why they've created these bases and other facilities?— other facilities? israel set three very clear _ other facilities? israel set three very clear goals. _ other facilities? israel set three very clear goals, destroying i other facilities? israel set three i very clear goals, destroying hamas as a government and military entity, bringing _ as a government and military entity, bringing back all our hostages, 132 israeii _ bringing back all our hostages, 132 israeli hostages including women and children. _ israeli hostages including women and children, and elderly people that hamas— children, and elderly people that hamas is— children, and elderly people that hamas is holding, and preventing any future _ hamas is holding, and preventing any future build—up of a terror army in gaza _ future build—up of a terror army in gaza all— future build—up of a terror army in gaza. all three goals of war depend on it rafah — gaza. all three goals of war depend on it rafah opened the leadership of

hamas— on it rafah opened the leadership of hamas is— on it rafah opened the leadership of hamas is there, the hostages are in rafah _ hamas is there, the hostages are in rafah you — hamas is there, the hostages are in rafah. you have dozens of underground tunnels connecting between — underground tunnels connecting between egypt and gaza. through them, _ between egypt and gaza. through them, endless amount of weapons capabilities are flowing into the gaza _ capabilities are flowing into the gaza strip. so in order to achieve this goal. — gaza strip. so in order to achieve this goal, israel must take control of rafah— this goal, israel must take control of rafah city. this is what we need to do _ of rafah city. this is what we need to do what — of rafah city. this is what we need to do. what will be in the long—term, first, the day after it is only— long—term, first, the day after it is only the — long—term, first, the day after it is only the day after hamas, there is only the day after hamas, there is no _ is only the day after hamas, there is no day— is only the day after hamas, there is no day after without hamas being overthrown — is no day after without hamas being overthrown at governmental and military— overthrown at governmental and military entity and then we had to build _ military entity and then we had to build some local leadership because we cannot— build some local leadership because we cannot have hamas, not palestinian islamichhad and not palestinian islamichhad and not palestinian authority that is giving billions _ palestinian authority that is giving billions to terrorists inside... i�*m billions to terrorists inside... i'm sor , billions to terrorists inside... i'm sorry. we — billions to terrorists inside... i'm sorry. we are _ billions to terrorists inside... i“n sorry, we are almost out of time point anshel pfeffer, briefly, is that military logic that inevitably is the israeli army will be drawn

into the city of rafah across the american redline something that seems likely? i american redline something that seems likely?— american redline something that seems likel ? . ., , seems likely? i am hearing different thins in seems likely? i am hearing different things in the — seems likely? i am hearing different things in the israeli _ seems likely? i am hearing different things in the israeli military, - seems likely? i am hearing different things in the israeli military, and i things in the israeli military, and i'm things in the israeli military, and im also— things in the israeli military, and i'm also hearing _ things in the israeli military, and i'm also hearing many— things in the israeli military, and i'm also hearing many israeli i i'm also hearing many israeli officials _ i'm also hearing many israeli officials saying _ i'm also hearing many israeli officials saying the _ i'm also hearing many israeli officials saying the opposite i i'm also hearing many israeli i officials saying the opposite of what _ officials saying the opposite of what brigadier— officials saying the opposite of what brigadier amir avivi i officials saying the opposite of what brigadier amir avivi says| officials saying the opposite of - what brigadier amir avivi says about the palestinian _ what brigadier amir avivi says about the palestinian authority. _ what brigadier amir avivi says about the palestinian authority. most i i the palestinian authority. most i speak— the palestinian authority. most i speak to — the palestinian authority. most i speak to sink— the palestinian authority. most i speak to sink the _ the palestinian authority. most i speak to sink the palestinian i speak to sink the palestinian authority— speak to sink the palestinian authority is _ speak to sink the palestinian authority is the _ speak to sink the palestinian authority is the only - speak to sink the palestinian authority is the only viable . authority is the only viable authority— authority is the only viable authority to _ authority is the only viable authority to take _ authority is the only viable authority to take control i authority is the only viable i authority to take control over authority is the only viable - authority to take control over gaza. -- think _ authority to take control over gaza. -- think the — authority to take control over gaza. —— think. the israel— authority to take control over gaza. —— think. the israel strategy- authority to take control over gaza. —— think. the israel strategy now, i —— think. the israel strategy now, there _ —— think. the israel strategy now, there is— —— think. the israel strategy now, there is no— —— think. the israel strategy now, there is no agreement _ —— think. the israel strategy now, there is no agreement within i —— think. the israel strategy now, there is no agreement within thel there is no agreement within the israeii _ there is no agreement within the israeli leadership, _ there is no agreement within the israeli leadership, and _ there is no agreement within the israeli leadership, and it- there is no agreement within the israeli leadership, and it now- there is no agreement within the i israeli leadership, and it now seems to be running — israeli leadership, and it now seems to be running things _ israeli leadership, and it now seems to be running things mainly- israeli leadership, and it now seems to be running things mainly for- israeli leadership, and it now seems to be running things mainly for a i to be running things mainly for a view— to be running things mainly for a view of— to be running things mainly for a view of political— to be running things mainly for a view of political survival- to be running things mainly for a view of political survival rather. view of political survival rather than — view of political survival rather than... ~ ., ., view of political survival rather than... ., ., ., than... we have to leave it there i'm than... we have to leave it there i'm afraid- _ keir starmer confirmed today that he would, if elected, immediately scrap the government's policy of sending those who arrive on our shores on small boats straight to rwanda.

he'd use the money saved to hire specialist investigators and counter—terror powers to smash people smuggling gangs. latest figures show small boat arrivals up around a third on last year. i asked labour's shadow immigration minister, stephen kinnock, whether their plans were much different to measures already in place. well, it's going to be different in two ways. first, about the capacity and second, about the powers. on capacity, it's going to be a reorganisation of the national crime agency, mis, immigration enforcement and border force coming together into an elite unit that is exclusively focused on smashing these criminal smuggler gangs. now, in terms of those powers, keir starmer made the point today about there are certain aspects of the people smuggling business, threats to national security and therefore it's appropriate to use some of the counter—terrorist investigative powers. is that absolutely copper—bottomed?

because we heard the head of the oxford migration observatory on the world at one today saying that he's sceptical that those powers can make a difference in this context. we're very clear that by enhancing the powers that are in the terrorism act of 2000, you can allow the specialist investigators to enhance their ability to go after these criminal gangs pre—conviction, with things like enhanced stop and search powers on the border, enhanced powers to go after financial finances and property of these criminal smuggler gangs. the key point being that this is pre—conviction. it's based on having evidence that demonstrates strong suspicion of criminal activity and being able to intervene in a way that's far more proactive. if you didn't have these powers, you couldn't intervene in that way. this seems to be a clear sort

of turning point in terms of labour policy now on this. is that because you regard the rwanda scheme as immoral? that it wouldn't work? is the fundamental basis of your objection practical or ethical? the fundamental basis is that it is unaffordable, unworkable and unlawful. unaffordable, because it would cost £2 million per person to be sent to rwanda, once you've put all the different commitments to the rwandan government with british taxpayers' money. unworkable, because the rwandan government has said it can only take 300 asylum seekers from the uk. now, that's never going to be enough. a 1% chance of being sent to rwanda is never going to work as a deterrent. these are people who've risked life and limb and are prepared to take these life—threatening journeys across the channel. and unlawful, of course, because our own supreme court, with a unanimous ruling, concluded that this rwanda policy is not in line with britain's international legal obligations. so on all three of those counts,

it is not a policy that labour could or would ever support. where are they going to go? let's say it all works and you ramp up the process and you're getting the applications through faster. those who are rejected, where will they go? there are countries like pakistan, bangladesh, which are low grant rate countries. they are safe countries. under the conservatives, since 2010, returns to safe countries have plummeted by 44%. so there's something going seriously wrong in the system, where people are coming from safe countries, being stuck in this kind of constant backlog, never getting their claims assessed or being assessed as not having the right to be in our country, but not being returned to their countries of origin. so i think that our fast tracking of a returns unit is about focusing on those countries which have low grant rates. the conservative critique seems to be that labour is getting ready to just give an amnesty,

effectively, just fast track all of those people. well, of course we have a hotel—based amnesty right now under the conservatives because all they're doing is putting people into hotels. they're not going to be able to send them to rwanda because that scheme is not working and they're not processing their claims so they're not even able to remove people from the country who have no right to be here because they haven't processed their claims. so what we will do is... so, either way, they're probably effectively going to get an amnesty. well, no, because we will process the claims and a significant percentage of the people who apply for asylum in our country fail to meet the criteria, and should therefore be removed from the country. all right, look, finally, it's a week in which natalie elphicke crossed the floor. you've maybe had some time to think about that. some of your colleagues expressing disquiet because of her politics and some of her stances before she did that.

was it well handled, do you think, by the labour leadership? and are you fully comfortable with having her on the labour benches? fully comfortable, yes. i think it's a clear signal that the labour party under keir starmer is a changed party and we are a party that wants to reach out to anybody, whatever they voted in the past. anybody? whatever they've said in the past, who shares our conviction that this conservative government is broken and who shares our view that we have to take the country forward. of course, people have to share the values of the labour party. they have to be signed up to our policy platform and they have to be ready to come out and speak in favour of that platform. stephen kinnock, thank you very much. thank you. there's a storm warning out for this weekend, but it won't be ruining your family barbecue because it relates to the sun. america's national oceanic and atmospheric administration has

issued the first notification of this kind for nearly 20 years in the expectation that a geomagnetic storm produced by a series of recent solar flares will begin to hit earth this evening, with warnings of possible disruption to satellites and power grids. we can see now solar activity recorded yesterday by the agency. however, it is becoming apparent that there is a major upside, with some spectacular sightings of the northern lights already this evening and a good chance of sightings over the uk. this is from the swiss alps earlier this evening. ellie macdonald, astronomer and science communicator from the kielder observatory, joins us now from northumberland, where chances of seeing the lights this weekend should be good. what are people looking out for, ellie? we got a slave up from

switzerland there.— ellie? we got a slave up from switzerland there. people should definitely be _ switzerland there. people should definitely be looking _ switzerland there. people should definitely be looking out - switzerland there. people should definitely be looking out for i switzerland there. people should definitely be looking out for the i definitely be looking out for the aurora because we have already seen it. ., ., ., it. -- we got a view from switzerland _ it. -- we got a view from switzerland there. it's i it. -- we got a view from | switzerland there. it's not it. -- we got a view from i switzerland there. it's notjust it. -- we got a view from - switzerland there. it's notjust for switzerland there. it's not 'ust for --eole in switzerland there. it's not 'ust for people in the i switzerland there. it's not 'ust for people in the north, i switzerland there. it's notjust for people in the north, people i switzerland there. it's notjust for people in the north, people all. switzerland there. it's notjust for. people in the north, people all over the uk might be able to see it this weekend. the the uk might be able to see it this weekend. ., _, j weekend. the whole country? potentially. _ weekend. the whole country? potentially. it's _ weekend. the whole country? potentially. it's always - weekend. the whole country? | potentially. it's always difficult to forecast the aurora, it's notoriously a bit fickle, but already we have people saying they can see the aurora hits from quite far south, so hopefully everyone should get a view. i far south, so hopefully everyone should get a view.— far south, so hopefully everyone should get a view. i suppose it if it was visible _ should get a view. i suppose it if it was visible in _ should get a view. i suppose it if it was visible in switzerland, i should get a view. i suppose it if| it was visible in switzerland, well to the south of us here, people throughout the uk should get a go. in terms of the sort of atmospheric and other conditions that make for the best viewing, what sort of thing would you recommend? ii the best viewing, what sort of thing would you recommend?— would you recommend? if you are auoin out would you recommend? if you are going out and _ would you recommend? if you are going out and looking _ would you recommend? if you are going out and looking for - would you recommend? if you are going out and looking for the i going out and looking for the northern lights, looking for the aurora, you have to make sure you

have the clear northern horizon. make sure there are no clouds, but additionally there are no trees, buildings, hills and large cities that could give off light pollution. ideally you would be on a beach somewhere in a very remote area? yes. every time there is an aurora, people flock to the beaches particularly the east coast of northumberland, so i suspect it is busy there now. tell northumberland, so i suspect it is busy there now.— busy there now. tell us about the electromagnetic _ busy there now. tell us about the electromagnetic storm _ busy there now. tell us about the electromagnetic storm coming i busy there now. tell us about the | electromagnetic storm coming in. busy there now. tell us about the i electromagnetic storm coming in. we mention there are some concerns. how might it cause damage or disruption? the electromagnetic storm, the geomagnetic storm, it's a bit unusual. what has caused it is five corona mass ejection is from the sun, pockets that the sun has spat out and they start to hit us today. you can have a big pocket of

high—energy particles, and they can interfere with anything is electrical. satellites can experience outages, in particular. this has a major effect on gps and internet communications. on the ground as well, we can experience significant radio outages and the electrical grid can even be affected. i5 electrical grid can even be affected-— electrical grid can even be affected. . , electrical grid can even be affected. ., , affected. is any of that being sold et, from affected. is any of that being sold yet. from the _ affected. is any of that being sold yet, from the information - affected. is any of that being sold yet, from the information you i affected. is any of that being sold i yet, from the information you have? not on the information i have. i wouldn't be surprised if there were not minor radio outages already, but the lights are on, so presumably the electrical grid is still good! you used a phrase _ electrical grid is still good! you used a phrase there in the previous answer, corona mass injections. i said solar flares answer, corona mass injections. i said solarflares in my introduction, am i wrong? what is the difference?— the difference? solar flares and corona mass — the difference? solar flares and corona mass injections - the difference? solar flares and corona mass injections are i the difference? solar flares and i corona mass injections are slightly different. they can come together and be two sides of the same activity. solarflares

and be two sides of the same activity. solar flares are indications that the sun is giving things off. corona mass injections are pockets of protons and electrons, high energy particles injected from the sun with magnetic fields, and they travel through space. solarflares fields, and they travel through space. solar flares we see, after they erupt, travelling at the speed of light. corona mass injections need a couple of days to travel between the sun and asked, hence we only see the effects of the injections that might injections from wednesday tonight and tomorrow night. —— the effects of the ejections. night. -- the effects of the ejections-— night. -- the effects of the ejections. night. -- the effects of the e'ections. ~ . , , ., ., ejections. what is your plan for toniuht ejections. what is your plan for tonight and _ ejections. what is your plan for tonight and tomorrow- ejections. what is your plan for tonight and tomorrow night? . ejections. what is your plan for. tonight and tomorrow night? my ejections. what is your plan for i tonight and tomorrow night? my plan was to net tonight and tomorrow night? my plan was to get somewhere _ tonight and tomorrow night? my plan was to get somewhere a _ tonight and tomorrow night? my plan was to get somewhere a bit - tonight and tomorrow night? my plan was to get somewhere a bit darker i tonight and tomorrow night? my plan was to get somewhere a bit darker or higher, but if i am already seeing the aurora here, i mightjust stay put if i'm honest. i don't want to miss it, travel out and miss an hour of the best activity. i've never seen it like this, it almost

overhead at the moment. extraordinary. thank you very much indeed for that. we hope we can all witness it over the course of this weekend. thank you very much indeed, ellie macdonald, joining us from northumberland. so let's take a look at some of the front pages. in the telegraph, voters not in love with keir starmer. the former labour leader neil kinnock being quoted by the daily telegraph. in the times, testing time for private schools as belts tighten. they are talking about admissions falling after fears of labour planning to put vat on private school fees. in the guardian, israel isolated as the un backed palestine membership bid. also a story there about eurovision. we have time for one more. i

weekend, the treasury is working on a 2p