about going home to america. i'm having taiwanese passport. i'm not american yet! it's not my president! it's my kids‘ president! 0k. it's nerve—wracking, very uncomfortable. hello. well, we voted them in 2! months ago, and today, mps did the country's bidding, taking an historic step towards taking britain out of the european union, against, for most, their own judgement on the matter. we have been watching. 500 mp5. out of 650. it was quite 500 mps. out of 650. it was quite an emotional time. i spoke to the main minister. they said this is the worst vote cast in their life. and

then a leave minister said they had waited their life to do it. theresa may wants to get on and trigger article 50 well before her self—imposed deadline of the end of march. the possible date is the ninth or 10th of march. it has to be a formal letter from the uk. the reason why they want to get an early if they have been advised the european commission and the european council will be able to give their formal response before the first round of the presidential election on the 23rd of april, but only if they go early. obviously, if they do not go early, the second round of the french presidential election is made seventh. hugh knows. —— may. not a great day for labour.

divided, 47 mps defied a three line whip, three members of the shadow cabinet resigned, although between ten and 13 labour frontbenchers are still in place and as i understand itjeremy corbyn is in no rush to do the usual thing, to sack them, he's going to wait for next week and see if any of the amendments we see at the committee stage of the bill will be accepted by the government or voted on by mps. the significance of that is, if that happens and if the bill is amended, maybe some of those labour mps would be able to vote in favour of it. the amendment that seems to be getting cross—party support is by chris leslie, former labour shadow chancellor. and this would require the government to hold a parliamentary vote on whatever emerges at the end of the negotiations, deal or no deal, at the moment they will only be a vote

if there is a deal. and what former tory remained ministers are saying to the government is, you will be safe, it will be fine, how about a accepting this amendment? we will be talking to one the labour shadow cabinet who resigned in a few minutes. speech of the day george osborne? i think we'd have to say that. he did say that while he supports remain he will vote for triggering article 50 because it would be a constitutional outrage if he tried to thwart the will of the people. but then he made a pointed intervention by saying that the government has decided not to prioritise the economy and they are prioritising controls of immigration and taking the uk out of thejurisdiction of the european court ofjustice. that's quite a thing for a former chancellor to say who obviously he believes that elections are decided on the economy. then there will be battles over what form brexit will take and he ended with the words, i will be in those fights in the couple of years ahead.

nick, thank you. having given us the referendum most mps felt they could not ignore it. most mps voted in favour of the referendum and then 47 of them voted against invoking article 50 is a way of accepting the result. and some like ken clarke didn't want a referendum in the first place and voted against the result of all. none of us can remember an occasion like it. we know how the nation divides on brexit but the most striking gap is between mps and their electorate. here is the public vote, yellow for remain, blue for leave. this shows how different local authorities went in the referendum. and here is that the equivalent map for mps looks based on their declared positions in the referendum. there have often been gaps between rulers and ruled yet the historic norm is that the rulers to get their way. not this time.

the referendum outcome shows how very out of touch the house of commons is with the people. the only parties in favour of leaving were ukip, with one mp, and the democratic unionist party in northern ireland, that makes nine mps out of 650. the consequence is that for the first time in its history mps have to vote for a policy which the vast majority of them, around three quarters, oppose. that is an event without precedent in our long parliamentary history. other countries are familiar with direct democracy, the most famous case in recent decades proposition 13 in california, capping property taxes against the views of the political establishment. the death penalty was reimposed there by public demand. until recently in the uk,

we have tended to go for representative democracy, vote them in and vote them out again if you don't like them. then came the first europe vote in 1975. it's beginning to look as if we may not have a single no counting area in britain itself... but in that case, nation and commons have the same majority view. europe has driven a coach and horses through the british constitution. we would not have had the idea of a referendum in the first place if not for europe in 1975, when harold wilson used it to hold together a divided labour party, just as david cameron used it to hold together a divided conservative party but in this case, by contrast with 1975, the people have voted against the wishes of the government. the article 50 debate reflected the cognitive dissidents that our legislators feel. the point has been made to me that we are not delegates but when all your neighbours,

local business people, local pharmacists, health professionals, your political allies and indeed your political opponents make a point that you have to take a stand on an issue, ifeel this is the right course of action. i do accept that lambeth voted overwhelmingly for remain but as i have made it very clear this was a uk referendum, not constituency —based referendum... but out in the country how did remain voters feel the mp should have voted? now we've come to the process and had a referendum and a democratic process and people have decided to leave i believe we should follow that process. our mp is tim farron, the leader of the liberal democrats. he's going to the wire over the issue of a second referendum. although my party has a three—line whip in westminster it does not have a three—line whip on my views so i am very happy with my mp. we lost, that's the way of it,

we have to make the most of it and try to unite again as a country and deal with the situation as we find it. he's decided to abstain because he wants to reflect his voters. their beliefs. i don't believe he's reflecting them enough. i think he should have the courage of his convictions he should be representing us because it is hisjob. hisjob to represent us, his constituents. certainly some mixed views from remain voters. was today the day for them to fold behind the majority? earlier i spoke to two mps who have campaigned to remain yet to different decisions today, nicky morgan, the former education secretary, voted in favour of article 50, she said, to avoid a constitutional crisis. in rachael maskell who resigned as a member of the labour shadow

cabinet to read against article 50. i first asked nicky morgan if she had found it. i was quite clear from the autumn onwards, that we needed a short sharp bill to trigger article 50, that parliament really, if which we were going to avoid a crisis in our democracy, needed to respect the democratic results from the 23rd june. but of course, as many of us said, we'd really rather not have been in the situation of having this debate and having to pass this legislation. well, rachael maskell, you voted against triggering article 50 last year, before last year you voted for a referendum. i came here to make sure the people i represent in york had their voice in parliament. what we're trying to do is mesh together a referendum which is one process with a parliamentary democracy, another process, and through the referendum we saw clearly the way that our constituents voted, and therefore it is incumbent

on myself to bring that voice into westminster, which is what i did today. but you voted for a national referendum, you didn't vote for a referendum in york central, you voted for a national referendum, do you want to apologise to the public for voting for a national referendum, for which you were not willing to respect the national result? we got a question put before us today in a bill, to move forward into a process, where we will be coming out of the single market and out of the customs union. now i can't even remember that being on the ballot paper lastjune, and therefore we have an unelected prime minister, now moving forward to put forward her own position on how we should move forward. i think what is really important is we listen to where people in the country are at. because that question was not on the ballot paper. that question wasn't, but the brexit was, and there's only one model of brexit on the table and you're voting against it. we know right back last summer there are so many models of brexit and that's why the different brexit campaigns couldn't agree with each other. where we are moving

forward to is important. what we have been saying, a people's brexit is very different from a theresa may brexit, where she is going to take us out of the single market, out of the customs union and nobody voted for that. do you accept that point? you could vote against article 50 and say, until i get the kind of brexit i support, i'm not going to vote for article 50? you could have taken that position today. look, i think we all thought about that, but i don't agree, i respect what rachael has done. it is a difficult thing to stand down from a job, in the shadow front bench, everything else. i do think it was incumbent on parliament to understand how people voted and to pass the bill, and i think that's what hopefully we will see by the time we get to march. there is a separate debate to be had and that's why the publication of the white paper tomorrow is important, about the terms of brexit, and i think that many of us in parliament and many, many thousands, tens of thousands of people outside have very firm views on that, which i hope

the government will give us time to debate. but you're not going to get that debate. if you nod through article 50 you are going to get theresa may's brexit, so you, i mean that is going to be the one. i don't expect that. theresa may has set out the 12 pillars in her speech and they will be in the white paper, but there is a negotiation process starting. parliament needs to be involved in that, not in the process because she will negotiate and government will negotiate but keeping parliament updated, keeping an eye on what is happening in our economy, and what people are saying outside is going to be tremendously important, and that's where mps can really add value to this process. what do you hope happens now? we are moving forward into the grand committee stage. as we know there are hundred of amendments been put through to challenge this bill, which is only literally two clauses. but they're to block the bill, aren't they, or to restrict it massively isn't it, and tie the hands of government in a complicated negotiation?

it's not going to work. it's absolutely right that the government is accountable to parliament, and parliamentarians are accountable to the people in the country. if we heard anything last year from our divided country it was that the political institutions were apart from the people of the country. hang on, you havejust voted not to activate a referendum result. i voted according to the way the people who elected me asked me to. if an amendment comes up, for example, nicky morgan, that says yes, we will invoke article 50, but we negotiate our way as members of the single market. would you support something like that? you clearly believe it, it is consistent with what the public voted for, it is a brexit model, a different brexit model. you would struggle not to vote for that? i wouldn't, because i think that the bill is a process bill about the triggering of article 50. i do think that there are amendments down about parliamentary scrutiny and about the vote at the end and they will be debated next week. i think there is a separate white paper process

about the pillars that the prime minister has set out, and i do think, as i say, that parliament has a really important role in informing ministers about what's happening on the ground in our constituency, what people are saying about the effects on their economy, their businesses, regulations, i am getting lobbied all the time by people who are saying how is this going to work? can we make sure there is no cliff edge for example, in march 2019? those things are important ministers hear. rachael, do you think this indicates a computer collapse of discipline in the labour party? you voted what, threeways, for, against, in between, the party frontbenches, whips, everybody voting as they feel they want to do. what does that say about the state of labour at the moment? i think you'll find next week as we're talking through the amendments that we will be absolutely solid and making sure we have the process in place to call the government to account, what we've been trying to do today is to put referendum into a parliamentary democracy and we need to make sure that systems work as we move forward, because reality is there are two systems that clash, one which is about empowerment

and clearly that is what i was doing, empowering the people of my constituency today. you are empowering your constituency but ignoring the majority vote in the country that you voted to have. every single mp has the right to represent those that elect them to parliament and therefore that was absolutely right that mps chose to do that today, but as we move forward we clearly are going to have amendments which put the scrutiny process behind this bill, which is absolutely crucial. we have amendments in there, particularly at the end of the process to make sure that the negotiation strategy, we can have a look through. you are talking a brave talk here, rachael, but the truth is your party has been all over the shop, basically, hasn't it. it does come down to the fact that some of them believe you have to stick with the result of what the voters said, and some like you have said, i want to go my own way or the way of york central or whatever. we're really clear as a party that we do not want a hard brexit, a theresa may brexit, where she has gone and determined

the terms of that brexit. and what we have said, is that a people's brexit would be incredibly different from what she has set out. she hasn't followed the will of the people, she has set out her own terms and we saw, just over the weekend, how easy it is that she could give away that power, to other countries and if you're signing trade agreements i would have to say where is the parliamentary democracy in those processes? so there is much to discuss over the coming two years and we will certainly be at the table for that. rachael maskell, nicky morgan, thanks both. it seems more than twelve days since president trump's inauguration, and the new normal arrived in us politics. how's he going down? well, you can look at polls, the approval ratings are not spectacularly good. but even better than polls, you can talk to people. particularly those who voted for him. yalda hakim is in rural pennsylvania, trying to find out what the voters are making it all. pennsylvania, donald

trump's heartland. i think it's going fantastic. i was heartbroken. like i said, appalled. i can't believe that, i thought our country has progressed so much and we took like three steps back. if we stand up to other countries, we have to make america great again, this is our country first. it was counties like this facing a decline in manufacturing, shrinking population and rising immigration that moved heavily towards donald trump and his message of national restoration during the election. in his first week—and—a—half in office we have come here to ask people what they think now. the fourth street bar in hazelton. owned and run by marty. he resonated with the working class, i mean this is a blue collar town, you have a lot of industry here,

hard—working people, everybody who comes to this place, punches a time clock. that is pretty much the way it is. marty welcomes donald trump's tough stance on immigrants. it a privilege to come to the united states. i don't mean that in a way other than, that it is not a right to come to the united states. that's the price of what freedom is. the united states. if it takes a year, it takes two years, that is what the price of living in this country is. we have freedom here. it is a topic many people here feel strongly about. i am apprehensive. they are volatile countries, you have to be apprehensive. if we are letting you in, it is like, pay your dues like my ancestors did, like anybody else's did. they sat at ellis island for days because they wanted to be part of this country.

don't think you deserve the right, i mean i don't go over there. jessica who works at the bar is one of the few people in this town who didn't vote for donald trump. i am appalled by it, actually. i don't think it's right. i think it is unconstitutional. people have been becoming more and more outspoken about their racism. i have heard everything in this bar being said that — racial slurs that i haven't heard in, i have lived here many his whole life and i haven't heard ever. they are outspoken because they think it is ok to use hate speech and hate language and hate people. i am not about that, you know. on the face of it the new policy seems straightforward. immigrants from seven predominantly muslim countries have been restricted from entering the united states, for 90 days. some have viewed this as a ban on muslims. across the county, in the town, at the localjewellery shop we meet

glenn. a lot of people are saying that muslims are targeted, that this is a muslim ban. yes, once again i think you have to start somewhere and you look at 9/11, you look at bin laden, you look at the boston massacre, the terrorist attack on boston. they were all muslim. it is hard you have to categorise that specific, but i think that it is a start. do you think it is creating division in america? i think they have done that, not us. because there are a lot of muslims who live in this country. yes, there definitely is, i think that they have done that, we haven't done that, that's, that is their brand, the brand they are portraying. hi, nice to meet you. this woman is a syrian american,

and was born and raised in this town. she feels donald trump's stricter immigration policy is counter productive. i don't know how you could call it something, but worse than that, i feel it's, against every principle that the country was, our country was built on, when you divide you create mass confusion, more mistrust, maybe hatred, you know, between two different kind of people who were brought up differently. now, how is that going to prevent terrorism as opposed to create more? as donald trump attempts to shake things up, his hard line policies seem to be continuing, to resonate with many people.

the government says it is going to try far harder to recoup the cost of nhs healthcare given to foreigners in britain. the government says it is going to try far harder to recoup the cost of nhs healthcare given to foreigners in britain. the issue was in the public eye today partly because of the bbc 2 documentary, hospital, that revealed a rather unusual case of a nigerian woman and her quadruplets born prematurely. she had been refused entry to the us, and was taken ill on a plane but ended up costing the nhs £330,000. here's a clip. the thing is, priscilla, the hospital bill is going to be quite high. i didn't want to come here. no, i understand. you're going to be in england for a while, aren't you. you understand that. so, your husband, is your husband in nigeria? he is. will he be coming over at all,

under these circumstances? he won't. i will come and see you again. 0k? i do understand it's a very difficult time for you, you know, but we do need to talk about the charges for treatment. also today, the public accounts committee of mps has said the system for recouping costs is chaotic. the words "health tourism" are used a lot in this talk — but it can be misleading. it's not people coming here specifically to use the nhs that are the main issue, it is the cost of visitors who are in the uk anyway — students and others. our policy editor, chris cook is with me. give us the scale of it. the government commissioned research into the cost of people specifically coming to the uk just to use the nhs, the so—called health tourists and what they found was it is a relatively small part of the generalised cost of foreign people coming to the uk

and happening to be ill here, so, if we put up a graph, what we can show is that back in 2013, what the government estimated was around £200 million was spend on so—called health tourism, that was a bit less than if we look at the cost ofjust european people getting ill in the uk, so it is eu people, that is about 300 million, if you look at students who are not from the eu, that is about a50 million, and finally, if you look at people who have come to the uk from elsewhere, it is about! billion we spent on care for them, while they are here. we get some of that money back. that is right. these are gross numbers, we are basically, we are part of a scheme with other countries that means we are able to charge their state, we are not good at recouping that, if this was the 300 million we could have got, we only got about 50 million back, we can also charge patients from, we can't charge students but we can charge patients from elsewhere in the world for some of their care,

again we only charge about £25 million in that specific year, so that why the government is keen to clamp—down on this. the money they are going to get, is that going to make a big difference, small difference to nhs budgets? these are small numbers so the total was 2 billion. they are looking in their dream they are looking to recoup 5 million and that is coming from taxing students mainly. —— 500 million. fundamentally, they are giving the nhs hospitals incentives to find foreign people to charge and foreign people whose bills we can get for another state to pay, but it's counter—cultural for lots of people who work in hospitals to check the passports of people in their care. thank you. joining me now is the chair of the royal college of gps professor helen lampard stokes, and the cancer surgeon meirion thomas, who is a campaigner on health tourism. we saw in that clip, an nhs person saying to a mother

who had lost her child or two children i think, at that point, we need to talk about the bill. are you comfortable with that as a kind of ethos in the nhs? well, that case, is exceptional and there is some tragic elms —— elements, to that case, perhaps we can just set that aside for just a moment, but the fact about maternity tourism is it is very common, for example last year, at st george's hospital it was reported 1800 foreign ladies who had delivered babies there will be and in retrospect 870 of those approximately were ineligible for nhs care. what would you do in those cases, because those people, you are probably not going to be able to recoup a large amount. you can chase them. you won't get very much. what is the practical thing, you ask them to show their passport. the point about passports, it is just to do with non—urgent care, for elective cases.

it is very little you can do for maternity cases because the government is determined that anything to do with maternity is immediately necessary, and therefore they have to be treated. they are charged as you say, but, we know that only 16% of invoices that are issued are honoured. right. helen, why is it so difficult to just charge people at least the none elective, the non—emergency, the elective care. what is wrong with that? we don't have the infrastructure to do it. because our nhs, wonderful nhs is free at the point of need, we don't have a charging system set up, there is no universal way of finding out if a patient should or shouldn't pay, so when you walk into a hospital, you and i don't carry any id because we expect free treatment. when you see your gp you don't carry anything, there is no reason to. if we wanted to charge every body who would need to pay something, we would have to set up a huge infrastructure. you could have to ask me...

is that so difficult? well, 1.3 million patients see their gp every day, let us get this in perspective. in england we have 7,500 gp surgeries, that is a heap of infrastructure. not, let alone, would you issue id cards? would you use passports. that would be an idea. that would make it easier. it would. it happens in other country, other countries charge people. because from the the charging structure, they don't have a health system free at the part of need. this is small amounts of money if we want to put the infrastructure in and spend hundreds setting it up we could do it. it would be a long time to get the return on investment. it does take infrastructure, id cards, it is a huge change, and it is a really a relatively small amount.

it is not small amount, the whole point is, what these management companies were saying in their reports that they accepted only a tiny number of people identified, the problem is much bigger than the government thinks. what i have suggested is that for elective care in hospitals, i know it is not all of the patients and ifully understand it does not involve or doctors but i suggest the patient should present a passport and a utility bill in the name when they register. loads of people don't have utility bills in the name! every hospital has an overseas visitors offers. i am suggesting there is a screening tool, that is all. how does it work?

could your receptionist check on somebody‘s utility bill? do you know how difficult it is to identify a legitimate passport? there are subtle features. i am certainly not trained to do it. you need proper equipment to scan it and say it's legitimate. that is what we're dealing with, passports are not the answer. if i said you won't make this happen until you have id cards which have residents' entitlement in the uk would you go for that? it's going to have to happen in some form or other, there will have to be personal identification to prove that you are entitled to nhs care. that's what happens in any health system comparable to ours, sweden, holland, france, germany, wherever you go, we have to have it. 0k. helen, meirion, thank you both. time now for viewsnight. if you've missed it, the story so far is that all week we've been bringing you two—minute

opinionated monologues designed to stimulate and provoke. tonight, the author, lionel shriver, best known for her novel we need to talk about kevin. the term "populism" is dishonest. it's time to say what we really mean. left—leaning pundits decry both brexit and trump as the fatal results of populism. so, when the left wins it's a triumph of democracy. when the left loses, it's mob rule. a rabble brandishing pitchforks, barbarians at the gate. the oxford dictionary defines populism as "support for the concerns of ordinary people." yet, lately, populism seems a byword for voters not doing what they're told. to remainers who want to rerun the referendum until brexiteers get their minds right, populism means leaving important decisions to a bunch of idiots. of many ideological hues, populism classically urges common people to unseat an unjust governing class.

so, the american civil rights movement and occupy wall street were populist. so isjeremy corbyn. yet, especially since the eu referendum, commentators use one—size—fits—all populism to lazily lump together disperate movements in the us. italy, hungary, austria, holland, germany, denmark, sweden, finland and france. missing all the nuances, the american press makes no distinction between ukip and france's national front or the us alt—right. ukip is populist, period. it's this one word that makes brexit and trump seem, mistakenly, like the same thing. the term is troubling because it's loaded. since anyone who questions unfettered immigration is a suspect and backward, populist has become wink and nod for ignorant, for pig—thick. it's polite code for racist, xenophobic,

anti—semitic and anti—muslim. some trump voters may deserve these pejorative connotations but leave voters don't. so, before reaching for the euphemism "populist," let's try substituting "bigoted," because if that's what we mean, we should say it. lionel shriver there. film director ang lee made gay cowboys popular with brokeback mountain, he made life of pi where the action is all confined to a small boat, he took a taiwanese language film and made it mainstream, with crouching tiger hidden dragon. he is no stranger to taking risks, and for his next trick the three—time oscar winner has taken on the iraq war. he's cast a british unknown in the lead, and experimented with new high—speed cameras. billy lynn's long halftime walk is based on real events,

about a group of us soldiers who are given a heroes' welcome at home, but struggle with the memories of what had really occurred in the field. the film, out here this month, has been met with proverbial mixed reviews in the us. ang lee has been speaking to our culture correspondent, stephen smith. for the first time in my life i feel close to somebody. myself. in ang lee's new film, a platoon of us soldiers are flown back from the battlefields of iraq and paraded as heroes at a football game. but they are not prepared for all the attention or the deafening pyrotechnics. all these explosions catapult them back to being in combat, in theatre, don't they? indeed. i got that from talking to the soldiers, the veterans who work in the battle. the thing they talk most about is the sound, and they are very sensitive to noises. it makes them very nervous.

it makes them suffer. the other things, the celebration is a bother to them. when people thank them, so often when people come and thank the soldiers for their service, that's the line they hate the most. is that right? when people thank them, because they feel they don't have to do it. so to them it's humiliation. it is a bother. also what motivated me to make the movie is really the sympathy to the soldiers who are being misunderstood. that is such a poignant human story. that's what really moves me, more than timely or political issues. gunfire. ang lee has taken on a war unpopular with the american public, as he has discovered at the box office. he also gave himself the technical challenge of shooting

at 120 frames per second. it's going down. on the big screen, it gives greater definition, but also new problems. such as making gunfights look convincing. i had the idea to have them shoot real bullets! i wasn't allowed to do it. you're quite a risk taker. no, you're not doing it! it's sort of weird being honoured for the worst day of your life. the special effect person, they provided the armour, they were very smart, but this little spring, can imitate 90% of recoil. it's very exciting, a close—up of shooting, which we never do. there are a ton of ways you could get shipped home, or at least out of active duty. i mean, you're a decorated hero, billy, you've done your part. for stars, including

kristin stewart, there was no make—up on set, to suit the unforgiving high—speed cameras. so, no pressure then on the young british newcomerjoe alwyn, who was cast in the lead after producers had seen hundreds of other hopefuls. i'm going back. i have to. you don't have money men saying, get somebody famous in that part? sure! this movie's not expensive but it's not cheap either. there are some hesitations, there were, but i was so convinced, he is good news. it took a week or two to convince the studio, but he was good. and you have a few oscars on your shelf so that presumably helps. the extraordinary life of pi picked up four oscars but what about accusations of racism at the awards, when the director's earlier adaptation of a jane austen novel was winning prizes,

he was overlooked. when i did sense and sensibility it got seven nominations, and it won a lot including golden globes, best picture. but i wasn't nominated. so, what do directors do? it was uncomfortable for me when the producer called me, she was crying, we've got seven nominations. that's good news. you're not nominated! she was like, crying. but in the long run, i think they didn't know me. it is not like, i'm asian.

i just don't think they know me, i think it's that simple. ang lee was born in taiwan, so does he appreciate donald trump's overtures to taiwan, which seem to have upset the chinese? i'm afraid to think of it. by the way, i'm having taiwanese passport. i'm not american yet, it's not my president, it's my kids' president! it's nerve—wracking. very uncomfortable. and we are a minority, it's a very small place, not recognised as a country, but it has its own sovereignty, and i'm just afraid that it will be used as a chip, a bargaining element. i don't know who cares about us. either side! after reinventing the martial arts movie with crouching tiger,

could ang lee be persuaded to work his magic on the british equivalent, james bond? from childhood i always imagined a bond movie, it is teasing. but i think it's a brand you don't want to mess with, probably. you could rejuvenate it. again. don't seduce me any more, i mightjust want to do it! laughter the broccolis, if i've got that right, they watch this programme. so they will see that! hi! steven smith with the film director ang lee. that's it for tonight. goodnight.

good evening. the weather will be windy at times. something mild. also more wet at times as well. through the night, the breeze is enough to keep temperatures up. coming from a southerly direction. introducing longer spells of rain into the west and wales. going to north—west england as well. rain into the south—east north—east england through the night. much of northern scotla nd through the night. much of northern scotland stays dry. the biggest chill here tonight. a risk of frost. frost—free into thursday morning. the morning commute, dales around the southern and western coast. rough seas. that will spread erratically northwards and eastwards through the day. it will not rained all day long. some dryness. the

afternoon, southern and western wales will see sunny weather at times into northern ireland. by the end of the day, showers will push in two parts of south—west england and south—west wales. these are the temperature for the afternoon. double figures for the majority. it could change in southern parts through the week. the mild air also brings wet and windy weather. or lives have been on the atlantic and the potential for a lives have been on the atlantic and the potentialfor a developing storm on friday. —— all highs. there is a low pressure system in the bay of biscay going into the english channel. the worst of the winds will be in northern france. there will be an impact. the channel islands late on friday could have 70— 80 mile an hour winds. back could extend into east anglia and east england. —— that could. some disruption here and there. the details of course could

change. we will of course keep you up—to—date. more details on the potential developing storm on bbc news through the night. hello, everyone. our top hello, everyone. ourtop stories: the us senate votes to confirm former exxon chief rex tillerson as secretary of state as the government has a tougher stand on iran. concerns over north korea hayet on the agenda. -- high on the agenda. the ayes have it. british mps

celebrate after voting for a bill to end membership to the