of the country's president, park geun—hye. she will be removed from office. she was accused by parliament of 13 charges including bribery and abuse of power. she could face a criminal trial. the country must hold a presidential election within 60 days. there've been more legal challenges to president trump's second attempt to ban migrants from six mainly—muslim countries. a day after hawaii launched the first lawsuit, washington state is also filing its own motion — with the states of new york, massachusetts and oregon joining its suit. the new head of the us environmental protection agency has been criticised for saying he's not convinced carbon dioxide is a major cause of global warming. scott pruitt, a known climate change sceptic, has been accused of ignoring decades of evidence. he insists there should be more analysis. now it's time for a look back at the day in parliament. hello and welcome to thursday in parliament, our look at the best

of the day in the commons and the lords. on this programme: labour call on tory mps to rebel against the chancellor's decision to increase national insurance contributions for self—employed people. and no—one will ever believe a tory election promise ever again. opposition peers have advice for a work and pensions minister to make the introduction of universal credit fairer. it will transform their opportunity to get the money that that will help them back into the labour market as we all want, and not instead have a lifetime of debt hanging over them. and snp mps appeal for people to come to scotland. not to visit, but to stay. scotland's population has been getting a raw deal. scotland needs to get out from under that and create a welcoming,

entrepreneurial environment. but first, a key issue on the second day of the budget debate in the commons has been philip hammond's controversial changes to national insurance for those who're self—employed. the change, announced on wednesday, would mean 1.5 million self—employed people paying £240 more on average every year in ni contributions. the chancellor has faced claims that increase amounts to a breaking of a conservative election manifesto promise. and, yes, it is a manifesto betrayal. there was a promise in the manifesto and it read like this, it said this, this means that we can commit to no increases in vat, income tax or national insurance, taxes on working people. this would harm our economy, reduce living standards and costjobs. not me, not labour mps, tory manifesto. we're levelling the playing field between employees

and the self—employed and 60% of the self employed, that is the lowest earners, will gain from these reforms. we are continuing to reduce corporation tax on all profitable companies, large and small, so that hardworking entrepreneurs keep most of the fruits of their labours, and we are taking a number of steps to make business rates fairer. the headlines have not gone the way the chancellor would have planned. white van man gets battered by budget, that is just to name a view. it is a good example of when you do things in a hurry, you get things wrong. —— name a few. the chancellor got things wrong yesterday and if he takes anything away from the last 2a hours it is that he made the wrong choice at the wrong time in the wrong way.

we will be opposing the increase in national insurance for the self—employed. my thoughts did not turn to the city of glasgow, or the city of london and how the labour markets operate there. i was thinking about my friend in skye or some of my friends in the highlands and knowing their reliance and the type who are self—employed there who do not have a choice. they cannot choose to work for other corporations that might not exist. they are what might be called necessity entrepreneurs. they do not work in one sector either, they have to job around and they have long travelling at times to undertake. i do think we need to look at this very, very carefully because there was a a solemn promise in the manifesto not to increase national insurance. the reality is that i worry that the accusation could be made that it is a bit like signing a contract but failing to look at the fine print, the small print, that exists.

i do think we need to raise the issue of the lack of parity between the way employed and self—employed are treated. there are advantages and disadvantages to both status and it is right to make sure we have the right equitable treatment for both. i happen to say for myself, i do not want to see us penalising the entrepreneurial people in our society. at the same time, i want to make sure we have a system that is fair and we need to be extremly mindful that we do not just satisfy the letter of our manifesto commitments but also the spirit. the tax lock was torn up by the chancellor and he can dance on the head of a pin, he can claim that their lock did not apply to class four national insurance contributions all he likes. but, madam deputy speaker, that was not on the side of the bus. no—one will ever believe a tory election promise ever again.

people will think they cannot trust the government on anything in terms of their future economic security. i think the honourable lady is making a typical lucid points in her speech but is it not incumbent on her, given that there is consensus that we need to fund social care better, that extra 2 billion that the chancellor announced, that it is incumbent on her party to identify where that money would come from and if she does not want it to be raised by national insurance contributions, where else is it going to come from? that leads me very nicely to my next point, which is that the chancellor would claim that the government has no choice but to raise national

insurance contributions, but he somehow has managed to find £70 billion in tax cuts for the rich and corporations, including £1 billion for the government's pet concern, inheritance tax. i have always believed in low taxes as a spur to economic growth. when a government inherits a deficit of £100 billion, the greatest priority must be to return to sound finances and do so in a way that is fair. i believe that it is right that those benefit from public services make an appropriate contribution to paying for them. that is what this budget's changes to national insurance will do. the latest day of debate on the chancellor's budget. it's been a record breaking week in the house of lords: on tuesday evening the largest number of peers ever to take part in a division in the upper house took part in a vote on the so—called brexit bill. it resulted in a defeat for the government.

peers voted for parliament having a meaningful vote on the final eu exit deal and for that measure to be clearly written into the bill. it was a proposal led by the crossbench peer lord pannick and it was the government's second defeat on the brexit bill. in the commons, the leader of the house set out next week's timetable. monday 13th of march — consideration of lords amendments to the european notification of withdrawal bill, followed by a continuation of the budget debate. tuesday 14th march, if necessary, consideration of lords amendments. mr speaker, i note on the business paper there are three days set aside for consideration of lord's amendments if necessary, as this government attempts to ping that pong that is coming from those heroes who are continuing to stand up to the government. i note that this only goes on until wednesday. what happens if we still have these paddles out and we are are still at the table? is the government going to enforce the parliament act? how does this impact on the article 50 process and will he clarify what is going to go on? but can we encourage the people's aristocrats to battle for that remain cause? it's perfectly routine

for the government to announce provisional buisness in case there is a need to debate lord's amendments. the house of lords has a perfectly proper role as a revising chamber, but it also knows that it is an unelected house and i hope the house of lords will want to give very careful consideration to whatever views this house takes on its amendments next week and to accept that ultimately the view notjust of the elected house, but the view of the british people expressed in a referendum, should prevail. mr speaker, i note that the eu bill will be coming back to the commons on monday and once this bill goes through it will truly be the end of the thatcher legacy because the former prime minister signed up to, in 1981 eu enlargement accession with greece, 1983 declaration on more european integration, 1986 eu enlargement accession of spain and portugal, 1987 single european act to create the single internal market and yet

she was able to say, no, she could renegotiate the eu budget in 1984, say no to the 1985 schengen agreement, say no to the 1999 social charter, wrongly in my view. so we have margaret thatcher who was a remainer and a reformer, but you cannot say the same for this government. valerie vaz. well, earlier, the potential confrontation between mps and the lords over alterations to the brexit bill surfaced during question time to david davis, the secretary of state for exiting the european union. labour wanted to know why the government was determined to reject peers' alterations. the prime minister has said the approval of parliament would be required for the final terms of our withdrawal agreement with the eu. the prime minister has also promised this will occur before the withdrawal agreement is sent to the european parliament for its consent.

the house of lords has now voted by a large majority to amend the article 50 bill to reflect these commitments. all very straightforward. if the prime minister intends to keep her commitments, why would the government support this amendment when it returns to this house on monday? because they are unnecessary. clearly, the government wants to trigger article 50 next wednesday or next thursday. it will then have to set out its proposal in detail so that the eu can respond. for months it has hidden behind the bland phrases of frictionless borders, frictionless trade. this is the last opportunity before triggering to spell out what this actually means. i would have thought the honourable gentleman is a very erudite chap. i would have thought he would have known what frictionless meant, it means trade with the minimum of possible barriers, the minimum possible impediment. that is what we will seek to achieve. from recent discussions with senior members of the german parliament,

it is very clear we are not going to get barrier free access to the single market if we no longer operate free movement. do ministers yet recognise that reality? that is not the response i'm getting from the ministers i've spoken to around europe. what they have come back with is that they want to see a constructive outcome. the only way to a constructive outcome is a free trade arrangement. is not the case that at the end of the day when the united kingdom leaves the european union, we will be their largest export market? does he not agree with my favourite politician at the moment wolfgang schaeuble, the finance minister of germany, who says that if we, the german and all the european union were to cause any damage to the united kingdom it would be increased tenfold for the european union. i'm sure the financial minister in question will be uncontrollably excited to discover

that the honourable gentleman is such a staunch fan. my honourable friend, mr speaker, makes an extremely good point and that is that this market, the uk market, will be the biggest export market for the continuing european union after we leave. that is recognised notjust by herr schaeuble but by the belgian chamber of commerce, with whom i spoke earlier this week. the prime minister has said britain will not remain a full member of the custom union but the chancellor said it is clear we cannot stay in the custom union. which one should we believe? it is clear that if we are to seek free trade agreement around the world, we will not be able to remain in the customs union as it currently stands. having said that, what we do seek, that will be able to construct customs arrangements that are as frictionless as possible for the benefit of both the eu and the uk. david jones. you're watching our round—up of the day in the commons and the lords.

still to come: scotland welcomes you, say snp mps. peers have been told by a welfare minister that universal credit has been "deliberately" rolled out "slowly" to make sure there's time to eliminate problems. universal credit, or uc, will wrap together in a single monthly payment the different benefits people have claimed in the past. in the lords, lord henley responded to criticism about the way the new benefit had been managed. first, a labour peer spoke about one of the problems with the new benefit. in 2013 the government introduced a rule that when you first claim benefit you're not entitled to any money for the first seven days. the problem is when universal credit came in because it is paid monthly in arrears it means you get no money at all for six weeks. and although that doesn't sound very long, the typical family in social housing has only got £200 in savings and some people are in debt. social landlords are now saying

tenants are getting big arrears, they're seeing people turning to payday lenders, and even to loan sharks, even the noble lord, lord freud, recently told the work and pensions select committee that the seven—day waiting period should be dropped. there are safeguards in place and we introduced the universal credit advances for new claimants. claimants can apply for an advance immediately if they are in need and can received up to 50% of their ward soon afterwards. i go back to the original point, the important point is to make sure we are mirroring the world of work, where 75% of employees are paid monthly. my lords, in the last three months i've visited a large number of food banks across the dioceses of oxford, exceedingly affluent communities, building on my experience of food banks in the dioceses of sheffield. and all i've had underlined to me is the most common reason people interact with food banks is delay in accessing welfare payments. it is clear from the government's own figures that too few people are aware of or receiving the emergency payments intended for them. it's not just the architecture of universal credit that is creating

problems, but the administration of universal credit, as the select committee in the other place determined. i understand that when asked about the sometimes fractious relationship between the dwp and treasury over universal credit, the noble lord's predecessor said there were times when one's views of the treasury were totally unprintable. can i ask, does the current minister have any such inhibitions? laughter my lords, we have all on occasion had moments where we have doubts about what goes on in the treasury. but i won't go into that. most of us, i'm sure all of us in this house, want universal credit to work. it's not. lady hollis said three things needed to happen.

the first is to get rid of the seven—day waiting period. the second is to pay people for likely as well of a monthly in advance if they so wish. and thirdly is to pay housing benefit if tenants so wish direct to the landlord. all of those three things together would transform the ability of people who are not particularly sophisticated about the benefit system, why should they be? it would transform their opportunity to get the money that would help them back into the labour market as we all want and not instead have a lifetime of debt hanging overthem. i am very grateful that the noble baroness offers support for universal credit and, like her, we wish to see universal credit work. that is why, as my noble friend, lord freud, always made clear we want to see a very slow roll out of universal credit. and the noble baroness will be aware just how slow that roll out has been and how it will... deliberately so, before the noble

baroness giggles too much. deliberately so, so that we can learn as this goes along. the health secretaryjeremy hunt has said nhs hospitals in england must get back to meeting the target for seeing patients swiftly in a&e departments. 85% of patients were admitted, transferred or discharged within four hours injanuary, compared to a target of 95%. this week the chancellor announced an extra 2billion pounds for social this week the chancellor announced an extra £2 billion for social care and 100 million pounds to place more gps in a & e departments. the head of the nhs in england said the money would be used to "kick—start a turnaround", so that the nhs went into next winter in a better position. in order to do that, we've got to help at the front end of hospital a and e departments and we've got to help at the back end, in terms of delayed discharges forfrail, older patients. and this money's for

the front end, is it? the chancellor's announced that it is both. obviously the £100 million capital is to help ensure that a&e departments can make the space available to put in place gp streaming on the model that has been successfully adopted in places like luton and dunstable hospital, one of our top performing a&e departments in the country, and have those in place by next christmas. and then on the back end, obviously, the extra one billion pounds for adult social care, as the chancellor said yesterday, will be very important that councils... i was really asking about the, i was asking about the capital funding particularly because the social care bit, we won't want to get into that whole debate today. we'll see what the announcement says. can i just finished? on this a&e end of it, how many hospitals are going to get money to put in effectively a walk—in triage approach

at a&e? we want all hospitals to have comprehensive front door streaming with gps by next christmas. and have you costed what that would cost? so this is a contribution to that. this is going to be probably 50 to 100 hospitals that need a bit of remedial work or extra capacity creation. so this money will be for 50 to 100 of the hospitals that need it. so how much in total will it cost to deliver what you've outlined, and what percentage of that has been contributed in the budget? we are setting a requirement that all hospitals have gp streaming in place by this coming christmas, and our assessment of the incremental capital required to do that is consistent with the funding we've got from the chancellor yesterday. simon stevens was speaking to the commons public accounts committee — which is investigating access to gps — an inquiry which raises a number of issues.

we've got about 300 million consultations a year in gp‘s surgeries and we've got a differentiated group of reasons why patients are consulting with their gp. and it's tended to be seen as a one—size approach when looked at nationally, whereas we've got to differentiate the person with multiple chronic conditions who might require more first is the same—day appointments needed. the reason it is so important that the gp system is functioning well is notjust for the long—term condition management but also because of the availability of same—day urgent care because if you think about 23 million any attendances versus 85 million same—day gaap appointments is obvious that if you under source primary care and spills into other parts of the nhs. the fast fantastic efficiency that primary care represents 90% of patient contact in primary care — in primary care — it's worth reminding us of that a year's worth of gp care costs less than two a&e attendances.

simon stevens, with an interesting fact there on the importance of gp care. now, scotland is a different place from england. nothing like a statement of the obvious. but how different is the profile of the population between scotland and the rest of the uk? snp mps have used a debate in westminster hall to highlight how scotland has an older population than the rest of the uk and is keen to attract young people from europe and elsewhere to live and work north of the border. and they're asking for the scottish parliament to have greater powers over immigration. we'll always be fighting a losing battle, if we cannot

grow our population through immigration. and this report calls for the government to consider, give us a chance, give us a break, consider devolving some immigration powers to scotland, to let us grow our population. if the minister doesn't and the uk government doesn't it is holding scotland's hand behind its back, cause we know that population gap between us and the rest of the united kingdom will have massive implications for our economy and our ability to provide proper social services in scotland. the uk government's immigration policy in no way recognises scotland's needs or serves our economic and societal interests. they continue to exist resist pragmatic change which would not only support the impact of scotland's ageing demographic but also help scotland attract international students. what would really benefit scotland is the full devolvement of immigration power. so we can ensure scotland's prosperous future. if the uk government is unable to tailor its immigration needs to scotland then scotland's independence will be the only solution. so scotland's whole population,

as my honourable friend alluded to, has almost one fifth over retirement age and we need the supply of young, energetic workers from the eu that is now under threat from a brexit which might only mean brexit to the prime minister but means potentially a major economic threat to scotland. from the clearances, through margaret thatcher to brexit, scotland's population has been getting a raw deal. scotland needs to get out from under that and create a welcoming, entrepreneurial environment to grow our economy and provide a secure future. we need, as my honourable friend said, and open doorfor immigrants, and immigration policies which are clearly very unlike the policies touted in this place by this government. we can't be left subject to this frankly xenophobic regime if we are to build the population and the economy that scotland needs. there's one thing that driving this

government in terms of immigration, and that is to get the numbers down, to get the numbers down below an imaginary figure of 100,000. something they have failed to do, miserably, and still they are continuing to plough that furrow. we've got to accept the reality — the different nations, different regions, different countries and cities of the united kingdom have different immigration needs. the truth is this. people will migrate to scotland if the conditions are right and there are a good job opportunities. the scottish government now has significant policy levers to shape and secure its economy. it has the power to make scotland the most competitive part of the uk, to encourage and support more people to move to scotland from other parts of the uk or the eu or indeed the rest of the world. they have levers over economic development and support for enterprise, education

and workforce training, health and social care, digital connectivity and transport. in addition, the scottish parliament has recently taken on new tax—raising powers which have the potential to be used to make scotland more competitive and a more attractive place to live, or potentially the opposite, too. and that's it for this programme. do join me for the week in parliament, when we not only look back at the last few days in the commons and the lords but also assess how the current clash between the two houses over the brexit bill is likely to end. until then, from me, keith macdougall, goodbye. thanks to a ridge of high pressure, thursday turned out to be a glorious day for many. plenty of sunshine and a top temperature of 17 celsius reached across the south—east of england. during the course of the night, looks like central and eastern areas will hold on to the clear skies.

temperatures by friday morning, actually quite chilly here. but further south and west, increasing cloud, some light patchy rain, some hill fog, also a little bit of mist as well. a bit more of a breeze here, so it will be a mild start first thing across southern and western areas. but chilly further east. almost a touch of frost in north—eastern parts in the friday morning. sunshine will compensate for low temperatures. sunshine in north—east scotland and into the northern isles. chilly. outbreaks of rain. most of the rain in this area. in the south—west, hill fog. the midlands, and east, some sunshine, especially into the pennines and east anglia. single figure values. the south—west, cans and 11 is to begin the morning. through the day, the cloud will go east. the sunshine is diminishing. it will hold on into south—eastern areas in the east

anglia. decent temperatures after the chilly start. 13, 1a. mild in the chilly start. 13, 1a. mild in the south and west despite the cloud and rain and breezed. cloudy and mild into the evening as well for the wales versus ireland rugby 6—nation match. mild into the weekend as well. the weather bringing down my front from the atla ntic bringing down my front from the atlantic will bring a drop in temperature in the west. saturday, this band of rain wringing wet weather to central parts of the uk. sunshine behind it. it could be quite mild. 16, 17, 18 degrees. double figures everywhere. sunday, a messy picture. most places seeing cloud and outbreaks of rain. cooler pressure in western areas. in summary, saturday is looking mainly dry. a little bit of rain around. mild in the south—east. sunday.

cloudy skies for most. a little bit of sunshine. more chance of seeing rain. it will be cool and fresh, especially across the west. a very warm welcome to bbc news, broadcasting to our viewers in north america and around the globe. my name's mike embley. our top stories: pushed from power — south korea's highest court upholds the impeachment of president park over a corruption scandal. the ruling by the constitutional court mean she could now face criminal charges. there'll be new elections within 60 days. more american states join the legal action against president trump's new immigration ban on six mainly muslim countries. and freed as a result of a bbc investigation, but what happened next to the chimpanzee stolen by animal traffickers? hello.

for the first time in south korea's history as a democracy,