and the president of the european commission ahead of the brexit talks, have been laid bare. theresa may has told jean—claude juncker she will be a ‘bloody difficult woman‘ during the negotiations. he accused her, it's reported, of being deluded. ten years since madeleine mccann disappeared on holiday in portugal, one of the men questioned by scotland yard has been speaking for the first time. paulo ribeiro is no longer a suspect, but was questioned in connection with a theory that madeleine was taken during a burglary that went wrong. there's widespread international criticism of president maduro‘s plans to set up a new body which could rewrite venezuela's constitution, and get around the current parliament, dominated by the opposition. protesters have again been out in numbers with barricades limiting traffic in many cities. now on bbc news, hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk. i'm stephen sackur.

the war in yemen has killed more than 10,000 civilians. that is an appalling number. but it may soon be dwarfed by the numbers starving to death. yemen is experiencing a humanitarian catastrophe which the warring parties are making worse and which the outside world seems unwilling, or unable, to tackle. my guest is the un humanitarian coordinator in the country, jamie mcgoldrick. is he losing the struggle to save millions of lives? jamie mcgoldrick, welcome to hardtalk.

thank you. here you sit on a visit to the united kingdom. your base is in yemen. yeah. what is the right word to describe the situation in yemen today? is the right word "famine" the right one? well, famine will come if the current conditions continue. i think the war, the conflict, the insecurity, and the collapse of the economy, all of that is lending to a situation where there is no other choice but to slip into that. you know, there are 7 million people in the country already who are in a very fragile situation in terms of the security. if we cannot respond with medical support and support in food and nutrition, those people will turn to famine by the end of the year. 7 million? yeah. i always feel that when we start to talk about famine and we start to talk about these sorts of numbers, there is a danger people around the world will feel that perhaps you are exaggerating.

the idea of 7 million people facing the very immediate and real danger of starvation to death is almost unimaginable. yeah. but it doesn't happen overnight. i mean, it doesn't happen all at once. it happens incrementally. measures we have taken in communities in 59 districts through the country, both the north and the south, shows quite clearly the fragility of the communities, the families, and individuals. if we don't do something like give more money and response and humanitarian assistance to those populations, and at the same time they don't have the health support, 50% of medical services and clinics will no longer function. if all of that is in place and we can't do better in terms of response, those fragile people will slip in. is this a man—made catastrophe? completely. this has nothing to do with nature. this is completely to do with warring parties in the conflict they are not doing what they are supposed to do, which is to address the situation properly. the international community does not give us the resources we need. we have 50% funded of an appeal that

requires $2.1 billion. if that is the situation, those people who are the most vulnerable, those living hand to mouth and who don't know where the next meal is coming from and cannot feed their families, we cannot help them because we don't have the resources and sometimes the access. i want to unpick where the situation is happening and where the responsibility lies. the degree to which people care. but i just want to go to what caroline anning of save the children said the other day, "yemen is the forgotten conflict." " forgotten. " is that the way you feel about it when you sit in your office in yemen? i would not say "forgotten." i would say "purposefully forgotten. " people don't want to be reminded of it. yemen, you have other crises in the region which are overshadowing it. there is more involved. more is given to homs and aleppos and the mosuls because they capture that moment.

in yemen, there's silence. do you feel that you are not getting your message across? i know you are in hardtalk today, but you, not just you, the international humanitarian machinery, including the united nations and all those agencies, they've failed. we have failed because we do not have the resources. it is not that we are not telling the story properly, the parties don't want the story told. well, who doesn't want the story told? well tell the story about the suffering. the suffering is coming from the warring parties. let's name them. the houthis, sa na'a, and the saudi—led coalition. the two major parties of this conflict. it is because of that.

we need to do something to get that story out and alert the world to the magnitude of the suffering. 7 million people cannot feed theirfamilies. 500,000 children under five are those skeletal you see on tv in any crisis. you just gave a response to me about culpability which included three, that was the houthi rebels, the government, in sana'a, well, which now sits in aden because it had to quit sana'a. and the third element, the saudi—led coalition, they are the outsiders in the conflict. you are pointing the finger at the richest country in the middle east as being directly responsible for keeping this crisis outside public view. is that what you are saying? what we are saying is right now the parties involved in the conflict don't really care at all about the people they say they represent. so we have a situation where you have millions and millions of people, up to 19 million people, who need some form of assistance. we cannot get resources to them. we don't have the funds. because of that, people, at no fault of their own, represented by some of these groups, supposedly represented in political discussions by these groups, they are abandoned, they are abandoned to their own fate, which is starvation. if that is all true,

and you speak with great passionate about it, why did your ultimate boss, the secretary—general of the united nations, after a donors conference just a few days ago, aim to raise more than $2 billion to deal with the humanitarian crisis in yemen, why did he come away from it saying it was an outstanding success when the pledges you got only amount to half of what you wanted. it was an outstanding success because people came around the table for the first time to talk about the humanitarian catastrophe in yemen. that hasn't been done... hang on. the message delivered to the potential donors was these people are at risk of starvation and famine right now, and unless you make good on some financial pledges, they will die.

and you only got half of what you wanted, and you call that an outstanding success? if we can turn those pledges into real cash and deliver assistance to those people and start saving lives, that is a strong message for the second half of the year. it's a very big "if," isn't it? look at the reality. look at all the un—backed appeals for money. northern nigeria, south sudan, the horn of africa, let's not even talk about what's needed in syria because of the conflict there, and afghanistan too! what chance have you got, not even of getting to the $2 billion you say you need right now, let alone making good on the $1 billion you said you got the other day. what we hope is that we can deliver, which we are doing well, despite all the circumstances. and if we have more resources, we can save more lives. people are willing to invest in that message. we have things set up, the un and the international community. we are saving lives and are delivering food to 3 million people a month, water,

sanitation, and health, to millions every month. we have more opportunity to save lives and safeguard livelihoods. why would, frankly, international donors feel it is worth pouring resources into yemen, when one looks at the reports from the ground and it is clear that the warring parties, and you named the saudi—led coalition, so let's stick with them, are using aerial bombardment to hit civilian targets. now, they deny they do it deliberately, but the facts on the ground are clear, that hundreds and hundreds of civilians, including children and women in hospitals, have been killed by the saudi—led coalition. all parties in this conflict have a blatant disregard for anything to do with civilians and infrastructure. just as you mentioned. 1600 kids have been used for recruitments to military forces.

one of the actual motives of this crisis, i think, is completely disregarding the responsibilities of the geneva conventions. you want money! yes. you want money to rebuild hospitals and finance the saving of lives, and that, of course, means healthcare. if you look at what was said by the most recent un—sponsored watchlist report, what is happening on the ground, they say, quote, "the coalition is responsible for repeated attacks on medical facilities and staff." "they are leading these attacks to the closure of hospitals, compromising children's access to treatment, increasing, clearly rates of injury and disease. on that basis, are you really going to get more money from donors? we will get money. we will get money, because the response by the humanitarians, regardless of the impact of this conflict, is very solid. the more money we get,

the more we can delivery we do in terms of assistance. what happens on the military side of things, it's not my concern. my concern is the impact of that on the lives of people. it has to be your concern. i advocate for all parties of the conflict to understand obligations and honour them. is it time for you to speak out and say, "do you know what, there are things on the ground i have seen and which might have seen which are tantamount to war crimes." you have seen the reports. they are already there. i am asking you. i have seen the humanitarian impact of the airstrikes, shelling, all that. i have seen the impact. who was responsible? i would leave it up to the other parties, international communities. the secretary general in past called for investigations that have not taken place yet. let me ask you a question. this is what the saudi un ambassador said, "the accusation of these reports that we have attacked and bombarded civilian targets,

including healthcare facilities, are unfounded." "0ur coalition," he says, "have exercised maximum restraint and rigourous rules of engagement." what is your response to that? that is the response from the that side... is that true? facts on the ground and reports say there need to be more investigations and legally sound arguments to say this has happened. that has not happened because we don't have monitors and people the ground. i have no way of proving that. no one has that technicaljudgement and ability to make that. i absolutely understand your job is to co—ordinate humanitarian relief efforts. there is very little else you can do or say about the conflict in yemen. but the united states is, it seems, more keen than ever to back the saudis in this, and it is, a regional conflict. does that concern you? anything that contributes to the conflict continuing

is what i would worry about because of the impact it has on the lives of people. people that are completely powerless. anything that adds more fuel to that fire, more arms to that fight, would make the conflict exacerbated and make it difficult for us and make it difficult for a population to survive this and they are fragile anyway. paint me a picture of what you actually can do on the ground right now. sana'a is now occupied by houthi rebel forces. the government of yemen is now in aden. there are pockets of conflict all around the country. some territory is still held by al qaeda in the arabian peninsula. there is talk also of so—called islamic state having a presence in yemen today. realistically, what can you actually do and deliver? well, the un and its partners,

the ngos, red cross, and other, we have five offices, the north, south, east, west, and the centre part. we deliver assistance through those co—ordination response offices. we are present 80% geographically and physically. there is no problem getting to people. the problem is, sometimes there is interference, diversion, blockages, but the biggest issue apart from that is resources. if we don't have resources, it doesn't matter how many people around the ground if we cannot deliver them to be we need resources to save lives. is itjust about resources, though? for example, i know that the most important port facility that gets aid into the country is hudaydah. sure. the problem is that hudaydah has been bombed. five of the cranes that lift the goods out of the ships in the port are not in operation. so, you know, it isn't just about money. it's very much a topical issue right now. we need that port because of

the proximity to the population. the location and the fact that it has the capacity to offload both commercial and humanitarian goods. this is a country that relied on 90% of its imports to survive. if that doesn't work, then there is a problem for people to access humanitarian goods. the saudi coalition says, we cannot, at the moment, stand by and let the port do what it does, because we know that the houthi rebels are shipping significant amount of arms through that port. i think people know that the arms do notjust come through those ports, there are many ways they can get into the country. yemen is awash with weapons and ammunition, it has been for decades. everyone in the country has a gun, that is the kind of country it is.

what you have to think about is whether yourself and a significant un presence may be required inside the port to stop that. are you prepared to go in, monitor, inspect and manage the port so that it will be an easier route for the aid to reach the country? we want the port not to be hurt any further, we do not want a military intervention. at the conference in geneva, key member states all made this plea to say that the port should be protected because of the assistance it gives the population. anything that the un can do to prevent that, discussion for all parties involved, the authorities and the saudi coalition, a conversation would have to take place for us to be able to deliver humanitarian aid. you told us that there are 7 million

people who are on the brink of starvation, who don't know whether they will have enough to eat tomorrow. there is not enough time for a long winded negotiation. the port is still functioning, but in a diminished way. we are looking at other ways to bring food into the country. plans will be put in place in case the port gets embroiled in a military conflict. we just think it should not because it is so important. we know from saudi officials that they have gathered forces within military reach of the port. what is your message to them? the same message that angela merkel made the other day, there is no military solution. no one has won anything of great note as yet.

we have come to a situation where we are stymied. we are looking for that not to need to go any further, to come up with a solution for that port to remain a vector for us to deliver assistance to the population in need. i don't think a military campaign will make any difference. i don't think we can see a victory there. i don't think it will be the tipping point that will bring about a game change, it will be hard fought by all sides. negotiations tend to get somewhere when all sides come to a realisation that there is not going to be a military victory. do you think we have got there? i think that countries would look back and think, in two years, what have we gained? what we need to do is get the international community to put pressure on those parties to get back to negotiations. there is no military or humanitarian solution to this crisis.

we are just keeping people alive. parties must understand this is the only way forward. it takes them to start to say to themselves, you never hear political leaders saying anything about this human suffering. there is a regional political interest, and we are looking for an opportunity to get people back to the table, stop the war, silence the guns, give us a ceasefire and give us the resources. what you're saying is deeply depressing, that the parties to the conflict, notjust talking about the yemeni parties, but none of them really consider orfrankly, care, about the humanitarian suffering in the country. i would say that's true. would you say that's true of, talking about saudi arabia, one of the closest strategic partners of the saudi arabian government is the united states government, the uk government also backs the saudi arabian government... i think it is one of

the inconsistencies you find in conflicts in the middle east, you get different parts of governments supporting different aspects of the conflict. it is unfortunate, on one hand we are supported in the humanitarian point of view by the parties who keep the conflict moving. i am trying to imagine you sitting in your office, responsible for staff in five countries, people telling you that the situation is deteriorating and thousands are suffering. what kind of toll does it take on you? i think it galvanises you and makes you harder and stronger, trying to fix it. the un is the only international body inside the country, there is a lot of pressure on us and a lot of things we should be doing more of. what i would do is, i go out

to some of these areas. i went out two weeks ago to the enclave of the city which is closed. it took me nine and a half months to negotiate entry. there is some hope there, but you also see some negative elements. you see children dying of anaemia because there are no salaries for staff and no medicine. at the same time, you see expensive cars. that inconsistency is unfortunate and inhumane. it is myjob to wake up in the morning, bang on the doors and push on with the team that is there. i understand that desire just to push on, but there are some extraordinary figures. 462,000 babies and young children under the age of five are at a real threat of death because they are suffering from acute, severe malnutrition. that suggests that all of the work you are trying to do,

you are failing. we are failing because we are not getting to the people with the resources quickly enough. if you look at some of the figures and trends, while the severe malnutrition has not, it has not gone that greatly more than it was two years ago, we have still made a difference. we have an immense task ahead of us. there are children dying, one child every ten minutes. in this programme, children who have died through preventable diseases in a hospital, if they even get to the hospital, the hospital is not working. 0r, there is no medicine in the hospital. so, there are people dying in villages all around the country, and nobody is recording the deaths. not because of the conflict, but because of the consequences of the conflict and the economy not working. famine, water problems, health problems, they kill people

on a very regular basis. this cannot be properly tackled unless there is an end to the war? totally. there is no meaningful peace process right now. you would need to get some kind of peace process going, that has failed. how bleak, how depressed are you right now? i would be normally, but last week i was quite pleasantly surprised by the force of support that came to us. a better understanding and qualification of what is behind it. at the same time, quite a decent response to the appeal for $1.1 billion. the talk in the room, conversations that critical settlement is required... 0ne crucial moment in our exchange, you told me that you don't think any party in this conflict really cares

about the scale of suffering. so it will go on? no, what is happening is a tailspin of deterioration of the humanitarian population. the responsibility for that lies with all the parties involved in that. they have to say, enough is enough. the people in yemen have said that, they can't take this any more. they are at breaking point. they have sold their land, children get married much younger, people are suffering. i think we are at breaking point. if we don't stop that soon, nobody knows what will happen in yemen. political and otherwise. it could be damaged irreconcilably, nobody knows. jamie mcgoldrick, we have to end there, but thank you for being on hardtalk. thank you. hello there.

well, tuesday we saw a big contrast in weather conditions across the country. the further west you were, the better the sunshine. that's because you were sheltered from the easterly breeze. in fact, western scotland fared best with wall—to—wall sunshine and a top temperature of 21 degrees. it was cloudier further east, especially in the south—east. so it led to a bit of a disappointing afternoon, but it was still fairly warm. through the night, we will hold onto this contrast. breeze in the south—east.

in fact, patchy light rain moving in from the near continent because of a weather system there. further north and west, lengthy clear skies in the west. so a recipe for a chilly start on wednesday morning. a touch of frost in the western glens and a bit of mist and fog too. so we'll start the tour of scotland. plenty of sunshine through the morning. a bit of a chilly start. low cloud through the central belt — this will tend to burn away quickly. lots of sunshine for northern ireland and the north of england. the north midlands as well seeing some sunshine, as well as northern wales. some sunny spells into cornwall and devon. but elsewhere, a cloudy and disappointing start. some cloud big enough for light rain and drizzle in the south—east and maybe london as well. out on the breeze, it'll actually feel quite nippy. through the day, there will not be much change. cool and cloudy across the south—east with further patchy light rain. the further north and west, the better the sunshine. a little bit cooler than what we saw on tuesday. a top temperature of 17—18 degrees potentially across western scotland. it'll feel very pleasant in the strong early—may sunshine. but it'll be 12 or lower

on the east coast, especially when you have the cloud. the reason for the chill on the north coast is the temperatures in the ocean not more than 8—10. with the cloud, temperatures on the coast will feel disappointing for early may. so through the rest of wednesday evening, cloudy for a proportion of england and wales. light and patchy rain. for thursday, a similar picture. plenty of cloud for england and wales. patchy light rain. feeling a bit chilly. the best of the sunny spells in the north and the west of the uk. the top temperature of around 111—15 degrees. on friday, the breeze picks up even more, so it will feel nippier, particularly close to the coast. the best of the sunshine in northern and western areas. temperatures range from around 10—15 degrees. 0n into the weekend, a ridge of high pressure keeping the weather system that day. so it stays largely fine and dry. chilly on the coast. the best of the sunshine in the north and west. this is bbc news.

i'm chris rogers. our top stories: one of the men questioned by police speaks out for the first time. —— ten years after the disappearance of madeleine mccann, one of the men questioned by police speaks out for the first time. the starting gun is fired — britain's parliament is dissolved, the general election campaign gets under way. the last of their kind — why these killer whales are in danger and how man—made chemicals are to blame. hello, and in business: apple reports a surprise fall in iphone sales as customers wait for the ten year anniversary phone. we talk you through the tech giant's latest numbers. and as the french prepare to make their choice on sunday, we look at the contentious issue of immigration.