the latest headlines from bbc news. i'm gavin grey. china says its economy will grow by around 6.5% this year. the figure, announced at the opening of the country's annual parliamentary session, represents a softening of last year's target — an indication of the major challenges facing the country. president trump has accused his predecessor, barack obama, of having the phones at trump tower tapped during the election campaign. in a series of messages on twitter, mr trump said it was "a new low" and suggested it might have been illegal. a spokesman for barack obama has issued a strong denial. the beleaguered candidate for the french presidency, francois fillon, has urged his supporters not to give in. he has defied calls from some within his centre—right republican party to stand down, amid a scandal about payments he made to members of his family. mr fillon denies any wrongdoing. coming up at six o clock breakfast with ben thompson

and katherine downes but first on bbc news, the week in parliament. hello and welcome to the week in parliament. a setback for the government, as the lords gives the brexit bill its first defeat. peers demand guarantees for eu nationals in britain. these people are not bargaining chips. when we say take your children out of the schools, we would say to the elderly, please go away from our care homes. these amendments are at the wrong time n the wrong bill, on the wrong subject. peers make their mark in a week when a tv documentary discloses what life is really like in the house of lords. complete with its rather odd ceremonies. visitors from overseas go to watch

the changing of the guard. people do like these quaintnesses. and if so, in whose interest is it to take them away? snappy dresser and long—serving parliamentarian, tributes are paid to the late sir gerald kaufman. he was an iconic figure in the labour party. he loved marmalade. so he was made marmalade ice cream. first, just doing theirjob or causing needless interference? peers made sure the untouched brexit bill got well and truly damaged and will have to return to the commons. on wednesday night, the lords voted by a majority of more than 100 for the inclusion of a guarantee of rights for european union nationals living and working in the uk. ministers don't want it in the bill, whose full title is the eu notification of withdrawal bill. the red benches of the lords

were packed for a three—hour debate. in the end, this is a matter of principle. this house can in fact, make decisions and give a unilateral guarantee. and my lords, that is what we should do. let us all remember how shocked we were when idi amin expelled the ugandans. so shocked, we offered them refuge in this country. as we've had over three million people live in this country who are european nationals. it's notjust them experiencing anguish, it is their family members, their employers, their neighbours. it is quite clear to everyone in this house that there is no chance that parliament would approve

the expulsion of eu citizens legally resident in this country. no way. this is understood by the government. this amendment has no place in this bill. whatever. these people need to know now, not in 12 months' time. they simply cannot put their lives on hold. some are planning schools for their children. they are moving jobs, renting or buying a home or acting as carers. i think that the government ought to accept that the weight of opinion is in favour of that unilateral guarantee which will trigger similar rights for britons abroad. what has changed is the prime minister has said it is our first priority. she's said that the fate of those people living in this country from europe will be determined by primary legislation and that no change will be made other than with the agreement of the other place and this house. that is good enough for me.

not to wish to amend a bill which prevents us, which allows us to get on with the process of making that happen. these people are not bargaining chips. if we say they are free to stay, that does give them moral high ground to our government in its negotiations. why is everybody here today so excited about an amendment which looks after the foreigners and not the british? it's true. quite right. i would like to point out to the noble lord the reason the amendment is structured as it is, is we are conscious of the powers of the british government and the british government is able to determine the lives of the eu citizens resident in this country, but we are not able to determine the lives of our own citizens abroad. of course we don't have the power to do, to look after our citizens overseas. not in these days when we don't have many gunboats. if, as i do, want to see

there is this decision that the government takes on behalf of all of us, citizenship should be given a guarantee to remain, the best way to do it is to call the bluff of angela merkel. this is a matter of principle. it is a simple matter of principle of being prepared to do the right thing because it is the right thing and being prepared to say so. and that is what i hope these benches and members on all sides of the house, not all members, but members on all sides of the house, including the bishop's bench, will be prepared to do when it comes to taking the vote. these amendments are at the wrong time, on the wrong bill, on the wrong subject and we should support the rights of british citizens living in europe. but at the end of the debate, peers voted for the labour—led amendment against the government. they have voted contents, 358.

no contents, 256. so the contents have it. and the brexit bill will see more debate in the lords in the next few days, with more upsets, a distinct possibility. well, with public interest in the upper house more than it usually it, there was a tv series showing what goes on in the lords. meet the lords on bbc two, monday evening, is the latest documentary to show life behind the scenes at the posh end of the palace of westminster. is it giving a fair picture? we will talk to two experts in a moment. first, let's get a brief reminder of last monday's initial instalment of meet the lords. lord palmer is doing some lobbying of his own. this used to be our television room,

which i had the most lovely comfortable chairs in it to watch big sporting events like wimbledon or cheltenham races or whatever. and i came in here the other day and was amazed to find it had been turned into an office, as you know, we are very, very short of space and a lot of the new members do want a desk. i have never, ever seen these desks occupied, which does seem really rather extraordinary and i actually put down a written question about this. why has the television room closed down? will there be an alternative venue? i was told, no there will not be an alternative venue. so, that was a clip from the first programme, in the meet the lords series. the second programme is coming up on monday. now, two years ago there was a similar tv documentary, a series of programmes all about the house of commons. it was called inside the commons.

here to talk about both documentaries we have two people who might well be called parliamentary insiders. sir david beamish has been chief of clerk in the house of lords. and we have the chief of the house of commons. what did you make of meet the lords? did you enjoy the programme? i enjoyed it. i wished it could have been more representative. behind the flummery, there was some good stories that did show the house doing itsjob, which at the moment, with brexit going on, is very much in the public eye. i was delighted the public have an opportunity to see that for themselves. did it convey the house of lords that you know? i don't think it was exactly a cross—section. for example, the clip we have just seen of lord palmer, i don't think you would find many peers who share his view about the tv room. it was a little—used facility.

as he said, we did need the space. other parts of it, absolutely. some of the characters you saw, the ones i know well and the kind of work that goes on particularly in relation to bills. two years ago, the documentary about the inside of the commons. there was a lot of resistance about that. the documentary maker had to apply many, many times for permission to get in with the cameras. were you in favour of it being made? once a good proposition came forward and we knew about the privacy stuff, then i was happy about it. when it went out, were you pleased? i think the general reaction of the membership of the house, but more importantly, because this was for who it was made, the public. it was positive. that pleased members.

because they felt there were bits in it that showed them in the light they would want to be seen. the work of individual members pursuing causes, sometimes with success, sometimes with not. so their constituents were saying to them, gosh, i had no idea this went on in the house of commons, or in the same token in the house of lords, presumably. and therefore it is educational. you have mentioned constituents, it is an interesting point. members of the house of lords don't have constituents and don't have any constituencies to go back to. that provides a different basis entirely. in a sense it is not so important what the public makes of the house of lords, on that basis. we've never thought of it that way. as the unelected second chamber, ensuring that they play a complementary role to the commons that is appreciated outsidem is a little bit of a balancing act and again brexit provides a good example. we know that the commons will be considering at least one amendment from the lords, if the commons reject it, the house will have to decide whether to take it further and plainly the house, to be useful, needs

to command respectability. people are not knowledgeable about the house of lords. what do you think they will feel at the end of the documentary — will it make them more informed or they might think this is a quirky, eccentric place? i am less placed to view than the viewers. i feel optimistic they will feel better informed. some of the work that is shown is not what members of the public normally get to see. they will have a better idea of the valuable work that's going on all the time, that's not front of house, so to speak. i suppose, in one sense you can take what you want, if you want to think of it an eccentric place — there were one or two aristocratic shots and there were shots trying to breathe a lot of fresh air in the place. in a sense you can see what you want? it would have given the public a more clearer view of the diversity of the lords, in terms of

the membership and the seriousness in which they approach their legislative tasks. you two are great specialists in your own houses. it is said in westminster there is a lack of knowledge about each other‘s houses? was it interesting to see how the other house lives? yes. i wouldn't say there were many surprises. i knew some of the characters being portrayed. some quite well. and i don't think anything came to me as a surprise. obviously, we know our own house better. we do share a building. we are not married, but we do co—habit. there is concern that members don't know enough about them. i think i would say at senior staff level that is not the case and david and i work closely together on all sorts of things. i don't think there are any

surprises, although i did find inside the commons very instructive. in meet the lords we saw the ceremony for introducing new peers, the procession at the start of each day and the garter king of arms. this would have struck the general public as being quite remarkable bits of flummery and tradition. do you think some of it could go? some should be dispensed with? or should we hang on to these little showpieces? i think it is really up to the public to express a view on that. it sometimes surprises me how popular these ancient traditions are. the state opening of parliament is the most striking example is widely covered. visitors from overseas go to watch the changing of the guard or the beefeaters. i think people do like these quaintnesses and if so, in whose interest is

it to take them away? does it sit well in a 21st century parliament? i think some of the ceremonies are fine. if the people taking part are happy and if there's no reason that it believes it does any harm, then there's no need to challenge them all. i think it is sometimes worth questioning them and then working out why we do them and whether they are in anyway detracting from, particularly in detracting from making either house more accessible to the public or less efficient. to wrap everything up, coming to the business of tv documentaries, is it better to let the cameras in, warts and all, or is it better to keep them out? i don't think there's any doubt about that. it would look very odd if we were not willing to let the taxpayers who enable us to operate to look inside. incidentally, meet the lords was not the first lords experience of this sort of thing.

over my career, the bbc have been involved in three different documentary series. so we have been looked at before. and indeed we were ahead of the commons by four years on allowing all our proceedings to be televised. i am clear, we ought to allow this sort of thing. absolutely. all the proceedings should be televised and available as they all are now. it is a fair question on warts and all. some of the warts may be, for example, staff, who i don't want to see exposed on television. that is not what theyjoined for. you have to be protective. in terms of documentaries, absolutely. and indeed we are in the middle now of a further documentary series on the elizabeth tower, known to many as big ben, which is being restored and rehabilitated. channel 4 will be doing a three—part programme on this and they will come out in the course of the year, showing about the clock tower and about the work that's done on it. it is being done with public money

in the name of the public. why not let them see that? thanks very much forjoining us on the programme. and the second edition of meet the lords, bbc two, on monday evening. well, worth watching. time for a round—up of debates in parliament. on wednesday, jeremy corbyn demanded to know why ministers were refusing to make benefits available to those with mental health conditions. theresa may said the government wasn't cutting benefits and said no—one would see a reduction from the benefit already awarded to them. but the labour leader said the decision of the government ignored a court judgment. the reality is this is a shameful decision that will affect people with dementia. those suffering disorders due to a stroke, military veterans with post—traumatic stress disorder and those with schizophrenia. can she look at the effects of her decision to override what an independent court has decided and think again?

what the court said was the regulations were unclear. that is why we are clarifying the regulations and we are ensuring that they respect that they reflect the original intention that was agreed by this parliament. as the doping investigation continues into british cycling, do some big representations in the sport lie in tatters? damning evidence is given to the culture and sport committee about the absence of any record—keeping into what was given to riders and when it was given. the extent of our investigation is confined to this particular race, for which there are zero records by dr freeman. what about this woeful lack of record—keeping? we haven't had an excuse from them. there is an acknowledgement there was no policy and no records. that is it.

and the sky team? they did have a policy. not everybody was adhering to it. could the cost of car insurance be about to soar? following changes by the lord chancellor to the size of personal injury payments? the transport committee finds motor unionists could be facing higher prices. as you pointed out, it will add significant cost to the cost of drivers. you have a petition of 180,000 people who indicated their concern at the cost of car insurance, i think all of the market estimates that have been put out over the last 2a hours would indicate that the lord chancellor's decision yesterday is going to make car insurance for young drivers sky rocket. so people paying £4,000. you say that could be £5,000? that was the estimate. so, yes.

how do get more of us to take the bus. the bus services bill gives the new directly—elected mayors in the city regions the responsibility to run services. look at the wards and in four of the last five years it has been won by a municipal bus operators. they are not the answer. i would not expect every local authority to set one up. why not let local authorities decide what is best for them? it is a point of difference between us. we do not want to go back to the situation where every labour council tries to set up its own bus company. it will absorb capital which could be wisely used elsewhere. after electoral success, it is on to westminster. the winners of the two february by—elections take their seats in the commons. firstly the new stoke labour mp gareth snell.

i will be faithful and bear allegiance... and then in the altogether louder atmosphere of the wednesday lunch time, the new copeland conservative, trudy harrison. reaching new heights was this mp out of order? a labour opponent thought jacob rees—mogg might have been guilty of size—ism. possibly. this week, the member for north east somerset was in my constituency. and to his credit he did inform me he was going there as a fundraiser. i offered to go with him. he rejected my advances. today, i opened the local paper to read he described the pygmy nature of the opposition, does the deputy speaker think does the deputy speaker think that the term pygmy is appropriate while standing in the constituency of the shortest mp? there will be a quiet

word in his ear. tributes were paid throughout the week to the father of the house, gerald kaufman, who has died at the age of 86. a former bbc sketchwriter and an adviser to harold wilson he was a labour mp since 1970. we look back on an eventful career. junior minister in the 1970s. gerald kaufman's book, how to be a minister, was reading for ambitious mps. he fought his party's move to the left. famously describing the 1983 manifesto as the longest suicide note in history. later, as a select committee chair, he challenged organisations like the royal opera house and the bbc. the figures attached to sirjohn birt are astounding, aren't they? if you add his salary of £276,000 and his annual bonus of £159,000 and his benefits of £21,000 and his

termination payment of £328,0400. we are arriving at... that's an extraordinary sum of money. well, if you add those figures up you are adding an approximate to an orange and a grape. it is all money. isn't it? he became a critic of the jewish state. it is time to remind sharon, the star of david belongs to alljews and not his repulsive government. known as a distinctive dresser, he became father of the house in 2015. i swear by almighty god i will be faithful and bear true allegiance to queen... tributes were paid to him at pmqs on wednesday. he was an outstanding parliamentarian. he was a committed mp,

who dedicated his life to the service of his constituents and as father of the house, his wisdom and experience will be very much missed across this house. i am sure our thoughts are with his friends and family. he was an iconic figure in the labour party and in british politics. he was a champion for peace in the middle east and around the world. i was talking to members of his family and his great nephews and nieces. i asked, how would you describe him? they said, he was an awesome uncle. we should remember gerald as that and convey our condolences to all of his family. remembering sir gerald kaufman and the new father of the house is kenneth clarke, who also first become an mp back in 1970. now, with a look at what has happened in the wider world of politics, here is our countdown, with ros ball. five, four, three, two, one...

bronze miniatures were on display in parliament. the winning design will be used for a statue in manchester. vive mr president. 40,000 people have signed an online petition calling for barack obama to stand for their elections. a by—election in the lords. 27 candidates are looking for a place among the 92 hereditary peers. the only members of the upper house. a bad week for crisps. prime minister, theresa may, is giving them up for lent. oh, yes! and they may have been defeated over the brexit bill this week, but mps did beat the lords in the annual pancake race. another successful pancake race.

so, quickly flipping. now to the week ahead, two significant events coming along. on wednesday, the chancellor will unveil the contents of his budget box. the final budget to be presented in the spring. before that, peers could be causing more embarrassment for ministers with another possible defeat on the brexit bill. dojoin me for the next week in parliament. until then, from me keith macdougall, goodbye. good evening. weatherfronts are

swinging back and forth across the pendulum. it means that no two days are alike. that is probably good news for many people. a different story across the midlands. beautiful skies and sunshine. the showers arrived and spoiled the end of the day bed they were heaviest and the most persistent rain has been across the far north and east, over an inch of rain in scotland. that area of low pressure will continue to move the rain north across the aisle through the night and then be by another weather front pushing into the south—west. this will bring wet and windy weather for a time. sandwiched between the two, clear skies and a light fast as possible but should start the day off with decent spells of sunshine. it is not expected to last. dell force winds and rain across the south—west will its way steadily north and east through the morning. the best of the sunshine is likely to be to the extreme north on sunday. a

scattering of showers through scotla nd scattering of showers through scotland but in comparison to the day, better. a decent day northern ireland down into the north of england. here is our rain sitting to the north wales. midlands and down into the south—east corner by nine o'clock in the morning. accompanied by some squally wind. following behind, sunny spells and scattered showers although some showers across the south—western western isles will merge togetherfor the south—western western isles will merge together for longer spells of rain through the day and the wind will still remain quite a picture. so for some will not be a pleasant afternoon, with clusters of showers being driven along further inland with this westerly wind. to the north against sunshine, certainly a better date through northern ireland, northern england and scotland. in terms of the feel of things, perhaps not quite as warm as today. 7— 10 degrees the overall high. into the early half of next week and it looks as if they've u nsettled week and it looks as if they've unsettled theme is set to continue. one area of low pressure moves away and another, glancing blow down the south—west fizzing on monday but a

relatively quiet and cloudy day monday for the system waits in the wings for tuesday. all of that tra nslates wings for tuesday. all of that translates monday into tuesday as being rather a cloudy day on monday, heavy rain into the south—west early on and more persistent rain for tuesday. citizens living in the uk. a committee of mps says the uncertainty over whether they'll be allowed to stay in britain after brexit is "unconscionable". good morning. it's sunday 5th march. the chancellor, phillip hammond, says there'll be no spending spree as he prepares the economy for life outside the eu. barack obama hits back at president trump. his spokesman strongly denies claims the obama administration tapped the phones in trump tower. remembering those who died on d—day.