this is bbc news. the headlines — israel carries out fresh strikes on gaza, as it tells tens of thousands more palestinians to leave rafah, where military operations are intensifying. it comes as britain's foreign secretary, david cameron, says restricting arms deliveries to israel — because of the war would strengthen hamas. relief workers are struggling to deliver aid to those hit hard by devastating floods in northern afghanistan. the un's world food programme says more than 300 people have died and thousands more have been injured after rivers of water and mud swept away houses. and the best television programmes of 2023 will be honoured at tonight's bafta tv awards in london, as stars arrive at the red carpet. the bbc�*s police drama happy valley and sky atlantic's succesion

are leading the way with five nominations apiece, while netflix's the crown has four. now it's time for today's sunday episode of newscast, with laura kuenssberg, paddy o'connell, and henry zeffman. hello. did you watch eurovision? no. what, then? — hello. did you watch eurovision? no. what, then? meal— hello. did you watch eurovision? no. what, then? meal out. _ hello. did you watch eurovision? no. what, then? meal out. saw- hello. did you watch eurovision? no. what, then? meal out. saw some - what, then? meal out. saw some tweets. what, then? meal out. saw some tweets- who _ what, then? meal out. saw some tweets. who won? _ what, then? meal out. saw some tweets. who won? name - what, then? meal out. saw some tweets. who won? name the - what, then? meal out. saw some . tweets. who won? name the country what, then? meal out. saw some - tweets. who won? name the country an artist. switzerland. _

tweets. who won? name the country an artist. switzerland. congratulations - artist. switzerland. congratulations on the winning _ artist. switzerland. congratulations on the winning song. _ artist. switzerland. congratulations on the winning song. music. - paddy's toes started tapping. a good final sentence, _ paddy's toes started tapping. a good final sentence, going _ paddy's toes started tapping. a good final sentence, going back— paddy's toes started tapping. a good final sentence, going back to - final sentence, going back to switzerland where it all began, and a lot of— switzerland where it all began, and a lot of people will say go back to your roots — a lot of people will say go back to your roots in one way or another contest — your roots in one way or another contest get_ your roots in one way or another contest. get the innocence back. i was contest. get the innocence back. was very contest. get the innocence back. i was very disappointed it was abba voyage, the vr ai thing, amazing digital abba rather than the real abba. you had to be getter, an

excellent story that we talked about on yesterday's podcast. what is the story? on yesterday's podcast. what is the sto ? . . , on yesterday's podcast. what is the sto ? .. , story? natalie elphicke cross last week, and story? natalie elphicke cross last week. and the — story? natalie elphicke cross last week, and the paper _ story? natalie elphicke cross last week, and the paper reported - story? natalie elphicke cross last. week, and the paper reported that story? natalie elphicke cross last - week, and the paper reported that in 2020 _ week, and the paper reported that in 2020 she _ week, and the paper reported that in 2020 she had had a conversation with thenjustice _ 2020 she had had a conversation with thenjustice secretary 2020 she had had a conversation with then justice secretary robert buckland asking him to intervene with her— buckland asking him to intervene with her husband charlie elphick's sexual_ with her husband charlie elphick's sexual assault allegations he was then facing and has since been convicted _ then facing and has since been convicted of.— then facing and has since been convicted of. , ., , convicted of. number one, she said she did not — convicted of. number one, she said she did not think— convicted of. number one, she said she did not think it _ convicted of. number one, she said she did not think it was _ convicted of. number one, she said she did not think it was further - convicted of. number one, she said she did not think it was further to l she did not think it was further to those being held at the crown court, where it would get a lot of publicity, the first to be held at a lockdown, and she also felt that a very seniorjudge would throw the book at him, and she felt that, i am not sure i'm allowed to say these words... ., .. ., , not sure i'm allowed to say these words... ., ., , ., , not sure i'm allowed to say these words... ., ., , ., ., words... you cannot use words out of context,

words... you cannot use words out of context. but — words... you cannot use words out of context. but you _ words... you cannot use words out of context, but you can _ words... you cannot use words out of context, but you can use _ words... you cannot use words out of context, but you can use words... - context, but you can use words... she allegedly said that she thought thejudge would be hard—arse she allegedly said that she thought the judge would be hard—arse and would be unfair on her husband. henry, remind us why these allegations are actually so serious, we have a sitting mp who had gone to go and speak to the lord chancellor at the time, the justice go and speak to the lord chancellor at the time, thejustice secretary, to basically say, can you make things a bit easier for my husband? let's rewind a little further. if you have told me at the end of last week's podcast that we would this week's podcast that we would this week be discussing the defection of natalie elphicke to the labour party, i would have thought you off your rocker. what happened this week is completely extraordinary, i was sitting in the press gallery when keir starmer announced he was working the new labour mp for dover,

and everyone looked around, and nobody had to listen across the floor, you saw a ripple along the tory benches as they tried to work out what was going on. so that's first the question of the fact that natalie elphicke is pretty red wine, but then very quickly conversation moved onto the computed circumstances in which she became an mp. she became an mp succeeding her husband, now ex—husband, charlie elphick in the constituency of dover after he had been charged and later convicted of charges of sexual assault, and that is what this is all about, assault, and that is what this is allabout, it assault, and that is what this is all about, it is about claims that she denies, she lobbied the then justice secretary robert buckland about how her husband was being tried, and separate claims that she will be someone else about how he was later being treated in prison. obviously that is a massive no—no for any mp, interfering obviously that is a massive no—no

forany mp, interfering in obviously that is a massive no—no for any mp, interfering in the course ofjustice, and it is a very serious set of claims, is why on both of your programmes you talk about it so and it leaves keir starmer with a big problem. it gives the impression _ starmer with a big problem. it gives the impression the _ starmer with a big problem. it gives the impression the tories _ starmer with a big problem. it gives the impression the tories are - the impression the tories are jumping ship, labour is on the march, and that she was the mp for dover, talking about immigration, proof that the conservatives' plan on immigration is a disaster, except that 48 hours later, keir starmer is the one with awkward headlines about this, and only talked tojonathan ashworth this morning, she says it's nonsense, but it is really awkward. she says it is nonsense, it is not her interpretation of events, i don't understand why remote lord chancellor did not raise this and why he is raising it now, which she still does not in her

interpretation. should be investigated _ interpretation. should be investigated to _ interpretation. should be investigated to make - interpretation. should be| investigated to make sure interpretation. should be i investigated to make sure it interpretation. should be - investigated to make sure it is all absolutely above board, because either she has not come with truth or robert buckland who is akc and was the justice secretary and or robert buckland who is akc and was thejustice secretary and lord chancellor, is not telling the truth. ,, , , ., truth. she says it is not her interpretation, _ truth. she says it is not her interpretation, it _ truth. she says it is not her interpretation, it is - truth. she says it is not her i interpretation, it is nonsense. truth. she says it is not her - interpretation, it is nonsense. we were not there, if robert buckland has got more to say that, perhaps he should come out and offer his opinion and his reflections on it. if she was still a tory mp, i think a lot of our viewers might think the labour party would be shouting from the rooftops for an investigation, wouldn't you?— the rooftops for an investigation, wouldn't you? this didn't come out at the time. _ wouldn't you? this didn't come out at the time, the _ wouldn't you? this didn't come out at the time, the tories _ wouldn't you? this didn't come out at the time, the tories did - wouldn't you? this didn't come out at the time, the tories did not - wouldn't you? this didn't come out at the time, the tories did not say| at the time, the tories did not say anything about it.— anything about it. there lot of eo - le in anything about it. there lot of people in your _ anything about it. there lot of people in your party _ anything about it. there lot of people in your party are - anything about it. there lot of people in your party are not . anything about it. there lot of- people in your party are not happy she has been welcomed in to begin with, and don't these allegations actually starts to create a sense that maybe keir starmer and your labour leadership team have made an error ofjudgment? trio. labour leadership team have made an error ofjudgment?— error of 'udgment? no. her crossing the error ofjudgment? no. her crossing the floor reveals _ error ofjudgment? no. her crossing the floor reveals the _ error ofjudgment? no. her crossing the floor reveals the extent - error ofjudgment? no. her crossing the floor reveals the extent to - the floor reveals the extent to which we are witnessing a

disintegrating and decaying conservative government. it is tric for conservative government. it is tricky for them, _ conservative government. it is tricky for them, isn't _ conservative government. it is tricky for them, isn't it? - conservative government. it is tricky for them, isn't it? we i conservative government. it is i tricky for them, isn't it? we spoke to rosie duffield, _ tricky for them, isn't it? we spoke to rosie duffield, they _ tricky for them, isn't it? we spoke to rosie duffield, they would i tricky for them, isn't it? we spoke to rosie duffield, they would mp i tricky for them, isn't it? we spoke | to rosie duffield, they would mp in the neighbouring constituency. she said a _ the neighbouring constituency. she said a lot _ the neighbouring constituency. she said a lot of the mps are furious, and further— said a lot of the mps are furious, and further said that keir starmer needs— and further said that keir starmer needs to — and further said that keir starmer needs to listen more to his mps and less to _ needs to listen more to his mps and less to his— needs to listen more to his mps and less to his advisers, which of course — less to his advisers, which of course we _ less to his advisers, which of course we had over that and social keir starmer's former chief of staff on the _ keir starmer's former chief of staff on the saturday newscast. yes, we soke to on the saturday newscast. yes, we spoke to sam _ on the saturday newscast. yes, we spoke to sam white _ on the saturday newscast. yes, we spoke to sam white about - on the saturday newscast. yes, we spoke to sam white about it, i on the saturday newscast. yes, we l spoke to sam white about it, nothing of people were not lucky enough to yesterday's episode, which you can still download in bbc sounds, we have rental keir starmer's week the student was, brilliant, we have created this impression, we have got somebody across the floor, if we have run a few people on the left of the party in some of our mps are not happy about it, so what? we have got the story, the sensation, big tech, however it has a sense of driving into something a bit more conjugated, we had nadhim zahawi on

the programme this morning, former tory chair, and a left—wing labour mp, both of them agreed, they probably agree on almost nothing, but they both agreed that this is basically going to be a problem that won't go away quickly for keir starmer, david cameron said, not our problem and david cameron said, not our problem any more. that problem and david cameron said, not our problem any more.— our problem any more. that is kind ofthe our problem any more. that is kind of the point. _ our problem any more. that is kind of the point, isn't _ our problem any more. that is kind of the point, isn't it? _ our problem any more. that is kind of the point, isn't it? the _ our problem any more. that is kind of the point, isn't it? the fact i of the point, isn't it? the fact that david cameron said, when asked about all of the conservative party should have treated some of these allegations more seriously when she was a conservative mp, well, she is not our problem any more, it does speak to the mutual hypocrisy here, because as you said, jonathan ashworth, this story had come out a year or two ago, or even a week ago, the labour party would have been calling for an urgent investigation, an independent investigation, so conversely labour clearly do have a point, which is, whether all these can people with concerns about natalie elphicke when she was one of their colleagues? nowhere, and that

does notjust go for the set of claims, you had conservative mps queueing up to say how, basically how disgraceful it right when she was, that was basically what they were saying on wednesday, thursday, friday. but they didn't seem to mind when she was in there what's at grips. it doesn't show westminster in a great light, the circuit of hypocrisy. in a great light, the circuit of hypocrisy-— in a great light, the circuit of h ocris. . ., ., hypocrisy. and also when someone nets an hypocrisy. and also when someone gets an interview _ hypocrisy. and also when someone gets an interview with _ hypocrisy. and also when someone gets an interview with robert i gets an interview with robert buckland, the question will be, why did you _ buckland, the question will be, why did you not — buckland, the question will be, why did you not speak in 2020? exactly, if ou are did you not speak in 2020? exactly, if you are a — did you not speak in 2020? exactly, if you are a government _ did you not speak in 2020? exactly, if you are a government law - did you not speak in 2020? exactly, if you are a government law officer. j if you are a government law officer. i did put it to be done who broke the story. — i did put it to be done who broke the story, women asks for something which _ the story, women asks for something which she _ the story, women asks for something which she did not get, that is the system _ which she did not get, that is the system working. she is not meant to ask, system working. she is not meant to ask. but— system working. she is not meant to ask. but she — system working. she is not meant to ask, but she has got a mouth, she is allowed to— ask, but she has got a mouth, she is allowed to go into the room, she is opening her— allowed to go into the room, she is opening her mouth and she was told to push— opening her mouth and she was told to push off — opening her mouth and she was told to push off. 335 opening her mouth and she was told to ush off. �* . , opening her mouth and she was told to push off-— to push off. as henry says, it does not show any _ to push off. as henry says, it does not show any but _ to push off. as henry says, it does not show any but in _ to push off. as henry says, it does not show any but in a _ to push off. as henry says, it does not show any but in a good - not show any but in a good light, and it is one of his stories where people go, you are all at it, you are all at it, you're all dreadful, but ijust wonderfor are all at it, you're all dreadful, but ijust wonder for keir starmer's team, that this defection scoop, such as they have it, has maybe have the chain taken off at a bit. i

suspect, and i don't know, she says again these claims are nonsense, but i would bet at least iop that there might be more to come on this. i have not spoken to many people around keir starmer about this morning's stories, but my hunch would be that people around keir starmer still think that on balance, it was worth it. the headlines they got on wednesday, the things they are obsessed with, like commercial and radial music headlines, where you never get three sentence descriptions of a story. the three sentences on wednesday afternoon, mp for dover obsessed with small boats quits conservative party, since keir starmer is better at handling small boats than rishi sunak —— where you maybe get three sentence descriptions. they will be delighted with that, they will see other thing else is nice. however, i think they maybe thought that everything else would be a day's worth of labour mps quietly grumbling, and it actually turned out to be several days and

bled into more scrutiny of her ex—husband's case and how she handled that, and i think they probably did not quite anticipate that. all of this would be far more difficult for them if this defection had happened two years out from a general election, ora had happened two years out from a general election, or a shoe in to do it to stand again at a general election. —— if she intended to stand again. i think the fact that this has happened when we are close to an election, and the fact that she has said she does not intend to stand as a labour candidate, those sort of slightly limit the political indications for keir starmer within his party, but the skill of a fire at frustration among labour mps is pretty high —— of the scale of private frustration. you pull that elastic, that is yourjob as leader of the labour party to take mps to places where they might not be comfortable, but in some point, two months or two years or four years, when he is in difficulty, probably as prime minister, the elastic

snaps, and that is the concern for people around keir starmer, but this contributes to blowback that will come when keir starmer is in trouble, mps will remember things like this and decide they don't want to come to his aid. stand like this and decide they don't want to come to his aid.— to come to his aid. and as we were talkin: to come to his aid. and as we were talking this — to come to his aid. and as we were talking this morning, _ to come to his aid. and as we were talking this morning, it _ to come to his aid. and as we were talking this morning, it has - to come to his aid. and as we were talking this morning, it has also i talking this morning, it has also put the spotlight back on top labour mps who have been under investigation for ages and still have not been let back in, diane abbott for example, a lot of people wondering why that is taking so long to investigate while also welcoming and that these people, so i think the story has got further to run. not least because of the excellent scoop from the journalist who spoke to this morning. he scoop from the journalist who spoke to this morning.— to this morning. he was voted journalist _ to this morning. he was voted journalist of — to this morning. he was voted journalist of the _ to this morning. he was voted journalist of the year - to this morning. he was voted journalist of the year 2023, i to this morning. he was voted| journalist of the year 2023, he to this morning. he was voted i journalist of the year 2023, he told me that _ journalist of the year 2023, he told me that he — journalist of the year 2023, he told me that he has got a lot of track record _ me that he has got a lot of track record with _ me that he has got a lot of track record with the elphickes, so i wonder if you can lift the _ elphickes, so i wonder if you can lift the lid. — elphickes, so i wonder if you can lift the lid, because we know that newscast — lift the lid, because we know that newscast fans like it, when natalie

elphicke _ newscast fans like it, when natalie elphicke defected in the marmalade dropping _ elphicke defected in the marmalade dropping moment, do we think that is when he _ dropping moment, do we think that is when he picked up the phone up to robert _ when he picked up the phone up to robert buckland after she defected? how do _ robert buckland after she defected? how do you think the anatomy of this scoop _ how do you think the anatomy of this scoop was _ how do you think the anatomy of this scoop was revealed?— scoop was revealed? gabriel did a lot of brave _ scoop was revealed? gabriel did a lot of brave investigative - scoop was revealed? gabriel did a lot of brave investigative work i scoop was revealed? gabriel did a lot of brave investigative work a i lot of brave investigative work a couple of years ago, more than a couple of years ago, more than a couple of years ago, more than a couple of years ago, several years ago, on charlie elphick, and in fact charlie elphick unsuccessfully tried to sue the sunday times on the basis of some of gabriel's reporting. so i think one of the ways in which the labour party underestimated the potential fallout from this defection, i think they seemed to slightly not appreciate... they didn't really do enough of what in journalism is called a cut check on what had been written before about charlie elphick and sometimes bar association —— by association natalie elphicke, because google has done loads of stuff that is in the public domain about that case, and i

am sure the second she defected on wednesday, he dusted down his elphicke notebooks which will be passed on. he did not manage to... yes, that was what i was going to say, no work is ever wasted. recent work is not — say, no work is ever wasted. recent work is not ever. _ say, no work is ever wasted. recent work is not ever. it _ say, no work is ever wasted. recent work is not ever. it is _ say, no work is ever wasted. recent work is not ever. it is true, - say, no work is ever wasted. recent work is not ever. it is true, to i say, no work is ever wasted. recent work is not ever. it is true, to get i work is not ever. it is true, to get back to what _ work is not ever. it is true, to get back to what often _ work is not ever. it is true, to get back to what often in _ work is not ever. it is true, to get back to what often in journalism i work is not ever. it is true, to get. back to what often in journalism as part of hiding things away, sometimes it is not the moment to use things, and then further down the track, anotherjigsaw piece arrives, suddenly you can put a picture together. stand arrives, suddenly you can put a picture together. and sometimes eo - le picture together. and sometimes people change — picture together. and sometimes people change their _ picture together. and sometimes people change their minds i picture together. and sometimes people change their minds on i picture together. and sometimes i people change their minds on whether they want to talk, the mp who knows something, or has experienced something, or has experienced something, what are the kind of things that might change your mind about whether you want to talk? well, one of them might be if your colleague, who you are trying not to

embarrass before, suddenlyjoins the other political party, they might want to talk about it now. i have two thoughts — want to talk about it now. i have two thoughts in _ want to talk about it now. i have two thoughts in my _ want to talk about it now. i have two thoughts in my mind. i- want to talk about it now. i have two thoughts in my mind. i am | two thoughts in my mind. i am picturing — two thoughts in my mind. i am picturing one person who wants newscast — picturing one person who wants newscast to talk about cost of living. — newscast to talk about cost of living, policies, and the one who loves _ living, policies, and the one who loves process, and i'm thinking, in the interests of both, we are going to have _ the interests of both, we are going to have to— the interests of both, we are going to have to stop talking about this, but it _ to have to stop talking about this, but it was— to have to stop talking about this, but it was amazing, but are not going _ but it was amazing, but are not going to — but it was amazing, but are not going to keep going, we are going to change _ going to keep going, we are going to change the _ going to keep going, we are going to change the subject. | going to keep going, we are going to change the subject.— change the sub'ect. i think that is merciful for — change the subject. i think that is merciful for everybody. _ change the subject. i think that is merciful for everybody. the i change the subject. i think that is merciful for everybody. the other story this morning, no offence to be labour party's defection strategist or to natalie elphicke or robert buckland or gabriel, but there is a story of massive imports in its big picture, what has been happening in gaza and the middle east, but on the specifics of the moment of whether or not the israeli two going to go into rafah in a big way, they have been saying for ages they are going to do it, the allies have been telling them not to, and this week president biden went further, he

said if you go into rafah, i will stop giving you weapons. i paraphrased slightly but he spelt out almost that boldly. that then puts the uk in an interesting position, ally of israel, ally of america, what will we do? i asked foreign secretary david cameron that this morning. the foreign secretary david cameron that this morning-— this morning. the principle in our case is that _ this morning. the principle in our case is that we _ this morning. the principle in our case is that we have _ this morning. the principle in our case is that we have a _ this morning. the principle in our case is that we have a very i this morning. the principle in our case is that we have a very strict| case is that we have a very strict system — case is that we have a very strict system based on legal advice to the foreign— system based on legal advice to the foreign secretary, and ourjob is not to— foreign secretary, and ourjob is not to publish that legal advice or comment— not to publish that legal advice or comment on the legal advice, it is to act— comment on the legal advice, it is to act consistently with it, and that— to act consistently with it, and that is— to act consistently with it, and that is what we do, it is a rolling process— that is what we do, it is a rolling process that looks at what israel is doing. _ process that looks at what israel is doing, looks at humanitarian aid and the treatment of detainees, and crucially— the treatment of detainees, and crucially looks at the behaviour of the defence forces and asks the crucial— the defence forces and asks the crucial defence to that question, is there _ crucial defence to that question, is there a _ crucial defence to that question, is there a serious breach of international humanitarian law? —— looks— international humanitarian law? —— looks at— international humanitarian law? —— looks at the — international humanitarian law? —— looks at the behaviour of the israeli — looks at the behaviour of the israeli defence force. we work on the basis — israeli defence force. we work on the basis of— israeli defence force. we work on the basis of the advice. for

israeli defence force. we work on the basis of the advice.— israeli defence force. we work on the basis of the advice. for now, uk not auoin the basis of the advice. for now, uk not going as — the basis of the advice. for now, uk not going as far— the basis of the advice. for now, uk not going as far as _ the basis of the advice. for now, uk not going as far as the _ the basis of the advice. for now, uk not going as far as the americans i the basis of the advice. for now, uk not going as far as the americans in | not going as far as the americans in this. the government tried to use this. the government tried to use this as a defence, although i think a lot of our newscasters and think it was a matter of principle, but it is a different situation, the americans directly send arms, government to government command is a huge export of arms to israel. however, on the principle, i think you can see a really interesting chink here between the uk and the us position, they are also trying to manage different domestic political situations, so joe manage different domestic political situations, sojoe biden has a lot of trouble on this in an election year, a lot of problems with democrats, and i think that is at least part of the reason why he has started to model as languid here. but it is interesting, david cameron said the uk is going to carry on, labour has moved its position now and is saying that it shouldn't... here isjonathan ashworth. a full—scale offensive into rafah will

be a catastrophe beyond description, 600,000 children there, and if that full—scale offensive goes ahead, i do not want to see british made weapons, components that are parts of weapons, used in that offensive. we also know that the government is rolling _ we also know that the government is rolling out _ we also know that the government is rolling out the use of british ships taking _ rolling out the use of british ships taking it _ rolling out the use of british ships taking it on the american pontoon from _ taking it on the american pontoon from landing craft. henry, can you tell us— from landing craft. henry, can you tell us how— from landing craft. henry, can you tell us how much foreign policy is going _ tell us how much foreign policy is going to — tell us how much foreign policy is going to influence the general election? laura has told us it is influencing _ election? laura has told us it is influencing the presidential election in the united states, how much _ election in the united states, how much will— election in the united states, how much will gather influence the uk general— much will gather influence the uk general election? my much will gather influence the uk general election?— much will gather influence the uk general election? my hunch would be ve little, general election? my hunch would be very little. but _ general election? my hunch would be very little, but more _ general election? my hunch would be very little, but more than _ general election? my hunch would be very little, but more than usual. i- very little, but more than usual. i think in general when people are pulled in what is most important to them, foreign policy is way down the list. that is true in every election. perhaps some exceptions like when the strips were in action,

so perhaps 2005, a couple of years after the iraq war, it was a bit higher up the agenda than previously, but i don't think foreign policy will determine the uk election at all, with the caveat that we saw a bit of a trend at the local elections, and it is possible to overstate it, but in some specific areas, there is a problem for the labour party, with... both in areas of high number of progressives, basically, and young people and liberals, whatever phrase you want to use, but also areas with a high concentration of muslim voters, where they seem to lose some votes to the greens ought to local independence. in a general election, that will affect labour's voucher, but it doesn't look likely to affect their seat share. if you look at where those votes are, they are basically votes lost in the council election on that subject, or potentially on that subject, they are generally an error is a ward here or there, but they are in

parliamentary level, they are in a constituency where labour have a sky—high majority. i constituency where labour have a sky-high majority-— sky-high ma'ority. i agree on the likel sky-high majority. i agree on the likely impact _ sky-high majority. i agree on the likely impact of— sky-high majority. i agree on the likely impact of how _ sky-high majority. i agree on the likely impact of how overall- sky-high majority. i agree on the likely impact of how overall what| likely impact of how overall what the political picture ends up being, however i think we are already seeing that foreign policy and issues of our security and defence have been occupying the political debate, taking up a lot of oxygen, a lot of energy, in a lot of effort, a lot of energy, in a lot of effort, a lot of energy, in a lot of effort, a lot of focus, for our politicians. i don't think we are going to see an end to that, and i would not be at all surprised either if we see the tories quite soon and try to make that more of an issue. we tories quite soon and try to make that more of an issue.— that more of an issue. we have discussed _ that more of an issue. we have discussed it _ that more of an issue. we have discussed it a _ that more of an issue. we have discussed it a few _ that more of an issue. we have discussed it a few times - that more of an issue. we have discussed it a few times on i that more of an issue. we havej discussed it a few times on this podcast, that was david cameron on your programme, is that the second time since he has become foreign secretary? there definitely were, and i don't know if there still are, that were much earlier in his foreign secretary ship, as that is a word, there were frustrations and parts of government that he was not doing enough of that sort of thing, but he was doing or doing thejob of

travelling the world and presently diplomatic case, but not necessarily doing as much as some of the centre of government, the centre of the conservative party, would want it, being a communicator domestically for the government, so it was very striking that he was there on your programme this morning. fine striking that he was there on your programme this morning. one other erson, i programme this morning. one other person. i think _ programme this morning. one other person, i think we _ programme this morning. one other person, i think we are _ programme this morning. one other person, i think we are going - programme this morning. one other person, i think we are going to i person, i think we are going to bring to a close quickly, we have not got time to talk about it really, but we also had the the deans howie on this morning. people will remember he was sacked for not being transparent about his enormous amount of money he had to pay to the taxman as a penalty, he never admitted it, never talked about it, he announced this week he is standing down, and this morning he came on the show and said, yes, i did have to pay a penalty, i am sorry for how i handle that. he did not however say that he was sorry about using the word smear about journalists who first reported it, so ijust journalists who first reported it, so i just wanted journalists who first reported it, so ijust wanted to tell as journalists who first reported it, so i just wanted to tell as a journalists who first reported it, so ijust wanted to tell as a body that.

so i just wanted to tell as a body that. . �* . so i just wanted to tell as a body that. , . , ., that. yes, let's go further, let's see and hear— that. yes, let's go further, let's see and hear him. _ that. yes, let's go further, let's see and hear him. the - that. yes, let's go further, let's see and hear him. the total- that. yes, let's go further, let's i see and hear him. the total payments were 'ust see and hear him. the total payments were just shy — see and hear him. the total payments were just shy of _ see and hear him. the total payments were just shy of £5 — see and hear him. the total payments were just shy of £5 million. _ see and hear him. the total payments were just shy of £5 million. so - see and hear him. the total payments were just shy of £5 million. so that i were 'ust shy of £5 million. so that is were just shy of £5 million. so that is what you — were just shy of £5 million. so that is what you paid — were just shy of £5 million. so that is what you paid £5 _ were just shy of £5 million. so that is what you paid £5 million? - is what you paid £5 million? absolutely. is what you paid £5 million? absolutely-— is what you paid £5 million? absolutely. is what you paid £5 million? absolutel . ~ , , , ., ., absolutely. why did they get you to -a a absolutely. why did they get you to pay a penalty? _ absolutely. why did they get you to pay a penalty? because _ absolutely. why did they get you to pay a penalty? because it _ absolutely. why did they get you to pay a penalty? because it was i absolutely. why did they get you to | pay a penalty? because it was found to be non-deliberate, _ pay a penalty? because it was found to be non-deliberate, callous, i to be non—deliberate, callous, there's still penalty attached to that, which i accepted full —— careless. i accepted it because i was chancellor of the exchequer, evenif was chancellor of the exchequer, even if i wanted to push back on this, i think even if i wanted to push back on this, ithink it even if i wanted to push back on this, i think it would have been a total abuse of power if i hadn't done. ., ._ ., done. you regret saying that journalists — done. you regret saying that journalists were _ done. you regret saying that journalists were smearing i done. you regret saying that l journalists were smearing you done. you regret saying that - journalists were smearing you when reporting first that the taxman was looking at your affairs? ida. reporting first that the taxman was looking at your affairs? no, because the smears — looking at your affairs? no, because the smears were _ looking at your affairs? no, because the smears were so _ looking at your affairs? no, because the smears were so wide, _ looking at your affairs? no, because the smears were so wide, things i the smears were so wide, things like the smears were so wide, things like the national crime agency, which i have never had any dealings with ever, or any investigations from... but you are being investigated by the hmrc, that was reported a smear. no, it was linked to the national crime agency and the sfo, which i

have never had an investigation from. . ., ., ., ., , from. nadhim zahawi, former cabinet minister, from. nadhim zahawi, former cabinet minister. did — from. nadhim zahawi, former cabinet minister, did all— from. nadhim zahawi, former cabinet minister, did all sorts _ from. nadhim zahawi, former cabinet minister, did all sorts of— from. nadhim zahawi, former cabinet minister, did all sorts of different i minister, did all sorts of different jobs, is now standing down, and now he has decided to stand down, he has decided to be transparent about what really happened with him at the taxman. g0 really happened with him at the taxman. ,., . ,, really happened with him at the taxman. . ,, ., really happened with him at the taxman. . ~ ., ., taxman. go back on the iplayer and see the whole _ taxman. go back on the iplayer and see the whole interview _ taxman. go back on the iplayer and see the whole interview if - taxman. go back on the iplayer and see the whole interview if you i taxman. go back on the iplayer and | see the whole interview if you wish. thanks _ see the whole interview if you wish. thanks. ., , , ., thanks. here to serve. henry, we are auoin thanks. here to serve. henry, we are ttoin to thanks. here to serve. henry, we are going to leave — thanks. here to serve. henry, we are going to leave you. — thanks. here to serve. henry, we are going to leave you, but _ thanks. here to serve. henry, we are going to leave you, but thank - thanks. here to serve. henry, we are going to leave you, but thank you i going to leave you, but thank you forjoining — going to leave you, but thank you forjoining us. | going to leave you, but thank you forjoining us— forjoining us. i am off to watch eurovision on _ forjoining us. i am off to watch eurovision on iplayer. - forjoining us. i am off to watch eurovision on iplayer. you i forjoining us. i am off to watch eurovision on iplayer. you will. forjoining us. i am off to watch i eurovision on iplayer. you will see the national _ eurovision on iplayer. you will see the national treasure _ eurovision on iplayer. you will see the national treasure that - eurovision on iplayer. you will see the national treasure that is i eurovision on iplayer. you will see l the national treasure that is joanna the national treasure that isjoanna lumley, who sent us a little voice note. a, h, , lumley, who sent us a little voice note. ., , ., , lumley, who sent us a little voice note. , ., , , note. nobody does it better than ou, so note. nobody does it better than you. so cheers. _ note. nobody does it better than you, so cheers, sweeties, - note. nobody does it better than you, so cheers, sweeties, you're} you, so cheers, sweeties, you're absolutely— you, so cheers, sweeties, you're absolutely fabulous. _ you, so cheers, sweeties, you're absolutely fabulous. this - you, so cheers, sweeties, you're absolutely fabulous. this is - you, so cheers, sweeties, you're absolutely fabulous. this is me i absolutely fabulous. this is me letting — absolutely fabulous. this is me letting my— absolutely fabulous. this is me letting my head _ absolutely fabulous. this is me letting my head and _ absolutely fabulous. this is me letting my head and after - letting my head and after eurovision, _ letting my head and after eurovision, which- letting my head and after eurovision, which is- letting my head and after eurovision, which is quite extraordinary, _ eurovision, which is quite extraordinary, to- eurovision, which is quite extraordinary, to have i eurovision, which is quite . extraordinary, to have seen eurovision, which is quite - extraordinary, to have seen it from the announcer _ extraordinary, to have seen it from the announcer point _ extraordinary, to have seen it from the announcer point of _ extraordinary, to have seen it from the announcer point of view, - extraordinary, to have seen it from the announcer point of view, as - extraordinary, to have seen it from the announcer point of view, as it i the announcer point of view, as it were, _ the announcer point of view, as it were, is_ the announcer point of view, as it were, is quitem _ the announcer point of view, as it were. is quitem i_ the announcer point of view, as it were, is quite... i can't _ the announcer point of view, as it were, is quite... i can't tell- the announcer point of view, as it were, is quite... i can't tell you . were, is quite... ican't tell you how—

were, is quite... i can't tell you how complicated _ were, is quite... i can't tell you how complicated and _ were, is quite... ican't tell you how complicated and how- were, is quite... i can't tell you i how complicated and how extreme the preparations— how complicated and how extreme the preparations are — how complicated and how extreme the preparations are for— how complicated and how extreme the preparations are for this. _ how complicated and how extreme the preparations are for this. i _ how complicated and how extreme the preparations are for this. i came - how complicated and how extreme the preparations are for this. i came in- preparations are for this. i came in hour— preparations are for this. i came in hour the _ preparations are for this. i came in hour the saturn _ preparations are for this. i came in hour the saturn for— preparations are for this. i came in hour the saturn for a _ preparations are for this. i came in hour the saturn for a three - preparations are for this. i came in hour the saturn for a three hour. hour the saturn for a three hour rehearsat, — hour the saturn for a three hour rehearsal, because you - hour the saturn for a three hour rehearsal, because you have to| hour the saturn for a three hour. rehearsal, because you have to get everybody. — rehearsal, because you have to get everybody. you _ rehearsal, because you have to get everybody, you have _ rehearsal, because you have to get everybody, you have to _ rehearsal, because you have to get everybody, you have to link- rehearsal, because you have to get everybody, you have to link up - rehearsal, because you have to get everybody, you have to link up all. everybody, you have to link up all the countries, _ everybody, you have to link up all the countries, all— everybody, you have to link up all the countries, all the _ everybody, you have to link up all the countries, all the present- everybody, you have to link up all the countries, all the present is. everybody, you have to link up all| the countries, all the present is in place. _ the countries, all the present is in place. or— the countries, all the present is in place. or that, _ the countries, all the present is in place, orthat, and _ the countries, all the present is in place, or that, and then— the countries, all the present is in place, or that, and then on- the countries, all the present is in place, or that, and then on your. place, or that, and then on your block— place, or that, and then on your block and — place, or that, and then on your block and come _ place, or that, and then on your block and come back, _ place, or that, and then on your block and come back, then - place, or that, and then on your block and come back, then youl place, or that, and then on your- block and come back, then you have to do— block and come back, then you have to do an _ block and come back, then you have to do an afternoon _ block and come back, then you have to do an afternoon show, _ block and come back, then you have to do an afternoon show, so - block and come back, then you have to do an afternoon show, so the - to do an afternoon show, so the rehearsal— to do an afternoon show, so the rehearsal was _ to do an afternoon show, so the rehearsal was recorded, - to do an afternoon show, so the rehearsal was recorded, then i to do an afternoon show, so the i rehearsal was recorded, then you come _ rehearsal was recorded, then you come to— rehearsal was recorded, then you come to the — rehearsal was recorded, then you come to the evening, _ rehearsal was recorded, then you come to the evening, you - rehearsal was recorded, then you come to the evening, you must. rehearsal was recorded, then you i come to the evening, you must not drink— come to the evening, you must not drink a _ come to the evening, you must not drink a drop — come to the evening, you must not drink a drop because _ come to the evening, you must not drink a drop because you're - come to the evening, you must not drink a drop because you're going i come to the evening, you must notl drink a drop because you're going to be speaking — drink a drop because you're going to be speaking and _ drink a drop because you're going to be speaking and representing - drink a drop because you're going to be speaking and representing our. be speaking and representing our country — be speaking and representing our country it— be speaking and representing our country it has— be speaking and representing our country. it has been— be speaking and representing our country. it has been fascinating, i country. it has been fascinating, and to— country. it has been fascinating, and to see — country. it has been fascinating, and to see the _ country. it has been fascinating, and to see the love _ country. it has been fascinating, and to see the love and - country. it has been fascinating, and to see the love and the - country. it has been fascinating, | and to see the love and the work every— and to see the love and the work every detail— and to see the love and the work every detail of— and to see the love and the work every detail of all— and to see the love and the work every detail of all these - and to see the love and the work. every detail of all these performers going _ every detail of all these performers going into — every detail of all these performers going into it. — every detail of all these performers going into it. i_ every detail of all these performers going into it, i have _ every detail of all these performers going into it, i have loved - every detail of all these performers going into it, i have loved it. - every detail of all these performers going into it, i have loved it. we i going into it, i have loved it. we love _ going into it, i have loved it. we love and — going into it, i have loved it. we love and respect _ going into it, i have loved it. we love and respect you, _ going into it, i have loved it. we love and respect you, but - going into it, i have loved it. we love and respect you, but your. going into it, i have loved it. we - love and respect you, but your show is duti— love and respect you, but your show is dull compared _ love and respect you, but your show is dull compared to _ love and respect you, but your show is dull compared to eurovision. - love and respect you, but your show is dull compared to eurovision. topl is dull compared to eurovision. top that. is dull compared to eurovision. top that paddy. _ is dull compared to eurovision. that. paddy, when you're covering your vision, that you never have a drop? your vision, that you never have a dro - ? ., ., ,, , your vision, that you never have a dro? ., ., ,, , ., ,, drop? no, i drank frequently. iwork first with terry _ drop? no, i drank frequently. iwork first with terry wogan, _ drop? no, i drank frequently. iwork first with terry wogan, used - drop? no, i drank frequently. iwork first with terry wogan, used to - drop? no, i drank frequently. iwork first with terry wogan, used to help | first with terry wogan, used to help

carry his _ first with terry wogan, used to help carry his bottles of baileys for hint — carry his bottles of baileys for him. , , ., carry his bottles of baileys for him-- yes. _ carry his bottles of baileys for him.- yes, that - carry his bottles of baileys for him.- yes, that was l carry his bottles of baileys for| him.- yes, that was a him. did you? yes, that was a lovely thin to him. did you? yes, that was a lovely thing to hear. _ him. did you? yes, that was a lovely thing to hear, she _ him. did you? yes, that was a lovely thing to hear, she was _ him. did you? yes, that was a lovely thing to hear, she was bullied, - thing to hear, she was bullied, joanna — thing to hear, she was bullied, joanna lumley. nigella was blowing when she _ joanna lumley. nigella was blowing when she did it. last joanna lumley. nigella was blowing when she did it.— when she did it. last year we had catherine tate. _ when she did it. last year we had catherine tate. -- _ when she did it. last year we had catherine tate. -- she _ when she did it. last year we had catherine tate. -- she was - catherine tate. -- she was brilliant. — catherine tate. -- she was brilliant, nigella _ catherine tate. -- she was brilliant, nigella was - catherine tate. -- she was i brilliant, nigella was brilliant. catherine tate. -- she was - brilliant, nigella was brilliant. i want brilliant, nigella was brilliant. want to brilliant, nigella was brilliant. i want to hear more about you having baileys with terry wogan, did you have a set order to just make you carry them? have a set order to 'ust make you carry themvh carry them? of course, he was a generous — carry them? of course, he was a generous man- _ carry them? of course, he was a generous man. how— carry them? of course, he was a generous man. how many - carry them? of course, he was a i generous man. how many bottles? carry them? of course, he was a - generous man. how many bottles? i remember being _ generous man. how many bottles? i remember being burdened - generous man. how many bottles? i remember being burdened with - generous man. how many bottles? i | remember being burdened with many generous man. how many bottles? i i remember being burdened with many a document _ remember being burdened with many a document. this is the end of newscast— document. this is the end of newscast now, i will say goodbye... it is newscast now, i will say goodbye... it is only— newscast now, i will say goodbye... it is ontyiust — newscast now, i will say goodbye... it is onlyjust getting interesting. henry, goodbye, goodbye from us. goodbye _ henry, goodbye, goodbye from us. goodb e. , henry, goodbye, goodbye from us. goodb e. _ henry, goodbye, goodbye from us. goodb e. , ~ ., goodbye. goodbye, everybody. adam will be here tomorrow— goodbye. goodbye, everybody. adam will be here tomorrow with _ goodbye. goodbye, everybody. adam will be here tomorrow with perhaps i will be here tomorrow with perhaps more fallout from natalie elphicke, perhaps more anecdotes about

drinking baileys with terry wogan. i don't know. goodbye for now. storm is breaking out across western parts of the uk, which pretty much set the scene for the week ahead, going to be more unsettled and not quite as warm, and this ceiling on overnight, areas of low pressure approaching us, and that spells rain for some of us on monday. but recently, it has been about the storms come and hear of and the satellite image, you can see across northern ireland, south—western parts of the uk, some thunderstorms across western scotland as well. no storms further east or south, through this evening local downpours, flash flooding in places, moving northwards, and towards these midlands, some places we still have

clear skies tonight, and guess what? i know that last night was disappointed, but tonight, if you're inclined to have a look, there's a chance of seeing a faint raw outcome almost anywhere in the uk, dead late if you are inclined. here's monday's forecast, we start the day with some hazy sunshine, not rich in eastern parts of the country. hazy skies come in very one, 23 in norwich, hull, also newcastle, cleared towards the west, around 15 celsius. its women in weather front, one of the reasons that this low pressure has stalled here, not really moving anywhere, the weather front rotating around and back into the centre of the low, meaning that on tuesday, eastern areas are stuck underneath the cloud, and the bits of rain,

probably not as persistent by that stage, bigger gaps in the clouds i think by that stage, some sunny spells, but i think lower temperatures for all of us, this is more or less bang on the average. it was on the high side still for parts of scotland. that loader will eventually move itself out as we go through the week, the possibility of high pressure moving back in again. but i think overall, if you look at the weather icons, shower clouds most days, on average temperatures i think in the south typically in the high teens. bye.

live from london. this is bbc news. israel carries out fresh strikes on gaza, as it tells tens of thousands more palestinians to leave rafah, where military operations are intensifying. meanwhile, britain's foreign secretary says restricting arms supplies to israel would not be a wise move and would only play into hamas's hand. and the best television programmes of 2023 will be honoured at tonight's bafta tv awards in london. the bbc�*s police drama happy valley has five nominations. israel has told tens of thousands more palestinians to leave rafah and go to al—mawasi, a narrow coastal area which israel calls an "expanded humanitarian zone". it comes as the palestinian health ministry says that eight people have

been killed after houses in the central area