can labour be trusted with brexit? we need a different type of bill. i'm hoping the government are going to let us amend our lot of this bill and on that basis we might be able to support it. but we can't at the moment because it is so undemocratic. # i always flirt with death. # i could kill, but i don't care about it. and we catch up with the man who wrote this song. what have you been doing in the years when we haven't seen too much of you? hmm, i suppose it was like spiritual research, exploring the inner universe. good evening. grenfell is one of those events that changes attitudes and opens our eyes to subjects that before the horrific events of a month ago were the preserve of experts, bureaucrats and the people — often ignored — who were living every day with risk. tonight, newsnight has new evidence that building regulations were not fit for the job.

we reveal that the government is preparing a major review of those regulations, and show that honourable efforts to make buildings more energy efficient could have inadvertently added to the problem. chris cookjoins me. tell us what this review is going to look at. the big thing is to understand is the government has been looking at local authority housing and social housing and the cladding and what came up is the astounded to discover that the rule book they thought they had written is simply not is what is being practised on the ground, there is a gap between where they expect standards to be and where they are. this review is working out whether the rule book is a problem or implementation of the enforcement? all of these things are on the table. the big issue is, how long will this take? people are living in these flats all around the country. local authorities are dealing with

short—term issues but longer term the government will have to do something about this and this review will clash with the judicial enquiry and the police investigations and they will be asking the same questions so it will take a long time and we have made a film today that explains just how troubled and difficult rebuilding regulations now really are. the grenfell tower fire had a lot of causes, direct and indirect but the problems here and those discovered in other tower blocks reflect that building rules have not kept pace with construction methods. the government have prioritised insulation over fire safety and it is quite a tempting proposition because insulation affects every building, fires only affect a very small number. thermal efficiency is the part of the

building codes that have changed most in the last a0 years. after the oil shock in the 1970s and more recently because of concerns about climate change and fuel poverty. quite rightly, the rules have aimed for ever warmer homes. what do those changes over the last few decades mean in practice? here is a thought experiment that might help you get your head around this. suppose you have a bare brick wall adjective do something to get it past a building inspector concerned about thermal efficiency? in the 1960s all you needed to do was the equivalent of sticking a very thin sheet, just 15 millimetres of old—fashioned mineral bull insulation, and you would be fine but standards have risen and by the 1990s you would need to stick around 90 millimetres to the wall to get it past the inspector. these days, you need to stick around 120 millimetres to the wall to get it through that inspection. the thing is, builders

don't build to the minimum standards and at grenfell tower, the cladding introduced a level of insulation that was equivalent in our experiment did 200 millimetres of insulation to the wall. the grenfell planning application explained... there is another reason why developers have gone well beyond the basic requirements for energy efficiency. at grenfell tower, the renovation actually got funded in part by something called the energy company obligation, our public policy intervention by the government which forces energy companies to put money into making older buildings more energy efficient.

in the grenfell tower case, that money went into a new district heating system, not insulation. but if you go down the road, that is the ed woodward ‘s estate and in that case the eco—money went straight into a new noncombustible insulation on the outside of the towers. these policies, regulations and initiatives are sharpened up incentives for builders to try new insulators, like so—called pir plastic foams, the insulation at grenfell tower. it is a better insulator and therefore it is going to give better heat economy for the same thickness of material or the same weight of maternal. —— material. it's cheaper and it is lighter so it is going to require less

material to hold it in place and it is going to require less cost in terms of lifting it up to whenever you are going to install it. but it obviously has this big drawback in terms of fire safety, but the foams are organic based and therefore combustible. the rules advise that insulation in tall buildings should not be flammable, but a rule was introduced stating you can use such combustible materials on a tall building if it passes the test. you have to replicate the design you want to install and then set a fire under it. but here is a video produced by an insulation manufacturer for its customers. as an alternative to a full test, it highlights a route known as a desktop study. if an engineer believes something similar to your design has already been tested, you don't need to test yours. newsnight has already revealed how

some engineers really stretch the definition of what's similar in these desktop studies in order to avoid further tests. for example, we've shown how tests using ceramic tiles have been used to justify avoiding testing with aluminium panels. two different su bsta nces. we have also revealed how some building inspection agencies have been routinely signing off using combustible insulation and combustible exterior cladding without even so much as a desktop study. so there has been too little testing and the ones that have been done are confidential. the trouble is some manufacturers we know have an extensive library of the full—scale tests to prove their material. others, it's very difficult to discern whether they have or not, so we're reliant on the way they market the product to us. if you see a claim saying this product is suitable above 18 metres and then you read,

you know, governing authorities‘ literature that endorses that, then, yes, we will believe that is suitable. one company that ensures industrial buildings got worried about the tests themselves. we have seen several fires involving combustible insulation and we were concerned that the laboratory tests on this type of plastic insulation did not reflect the risk in the real world. normal lab test installation is installed to perfect standards but a few years ago the insurer commissioned tests on this widely made insulation type installed with real—world, normal workmanship. the traditional insulation held out for one hour. but the combustible pir insulation did not. the fire monitoring equipment was destroyed in about 70 minutes by the heat. a much worse performance than previous lab tests suggested. there is also a problem

with toxicity. the trouble with this material is that it has got a lot of nitrogen in it and when it burns it produces both carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide, and so the small amount of material, if it burned in a house or a flat, would fill the whole flat or house with toxic smoke, enough to stop you escaping and killed you. hospital discharge papers from one grenfell resident seen by newsnight showed they had cyanide poisoning. the british rigid urethane foam manufacturers‘ association said... they draw attention to... they also stated that the design of the insurer's fire test was flawed. the government has been shocked to learn this month how far far standards are from where

they had expected. that is why they believe a review is now necessary. chris cook, there. jonathan o'neill is managing director of the fire protection association. he joins us from worcester. thank you forjoining us. the testing regime is obviously flawed. you presumably welcomed this announcement that there will be this review and overhaul? well, we have been calling for a review for some time if a review is announced, yes, very welcome news. and very refreshing that actually your report has shown some of the problems there are with the testing regime. as the film rightly pointed out, the tests are done on perfect

insulation and we know that actually the insulation is not perfectly encapsulated all the time and the test does not include windows or penetrations in the cladding and we think we'd like to see a more realistic test, assuming we get a building regulations review as 50011 as we can. isn't the problem that you have raised these issues time and time again and does not seem to have been much action? why do you think that was? i think there has been a real difficulty. the fire and rescue service have been so successful in reducing the number of fire deaths and injuries over the last decade that i think there was a genuine belief by ministers and others that the fire problem had gone away. in reality, we knew there were more combustible materials being introduced to the building process and that required... it was likely to require a different fire dynamic and that is what we were concerned about and that is why we are asking for a building regulations reviews.

you say that more combustible materials were being added to the cladding. why? it's not just cladding, it is throughout the building process. as your report pointed out, there are different insulation requirements that have been introduced over recent years and the easy option is to be putting in the lighter, more combustible materials. the problem i think stems from a term called limited combustibility. in reality we have combustible and noncombustible and it should be that simple. but when you add terms like limited combustibility, it adds a grey area of interpretation and, as your report said, that is where problems can occur and that has been a real concern. for high occupancies, noncombustible materials must be the absolute priority. the question i asked chris before we saw his film

was about the issue of speed. obviously people are living in blocks with this type of material in them across the country. i mean, how quickly can a review of this type, with such complicated regulations, changing those regulations, how quickly and with what speed can any review take place and can changes be put in place so people are safer? well, building regulations are for new build and refurbishment and so we are where we are with building environment as it stands. there is a safety case and the government are doing all they can to understand how large this problem is with social housing. and the tests they have commissioned will go some way to solving that problem. the issue we have got is, what are the problem insulations and how to be fully encapsulated them so they don't cause a problem? as the tests have shown,

fully encapsulated insulation can perform very well in a test. i am assuming that these things could take years to study and analyse. is that the sort of time frame? typically, and i sat on a number of different reviews over the last couple of decades, it normally takes 18 months to around two years for a full review and so we have been very keen to urge the government to start that review immediately and things can be short cut quickly, tests can be commissioned, it depends on the resources the government are prepared to throw at this. and also, to be honest, what evidence we can make available. it is sometimes difficult to get hold of government statistics which can make a big difference to make the changes that are required. it's about trying to regain trust and faith in the regulations which have been so damaged by the events one month ago. without a doubt. we have been calling

for the government to review the basis of those regulations. at the moment they are life safety regulations, and quite likely serve. at the moment they are life safety regulations, and quite likely so. we don't have any building section within it. we had the local building act, which gave an element of building protection and resilience to the built environment. that was repealed under the last government. and so those types of protections, which are common throughout the world, just don't exist in uk government building regulations any more. jonathan o'neil, thank you very much forjoining us. we did ask the government for an interview, but they told us that nobody was available. today, it wasn'tjust brexit and the publication of that excitingly titled european union withdrawal bill that was the centre of attention —

what we used to know as the great repeal bill. the brexit effect on the economy also hoved into view as the office for budget responsibility — the obr, the government's official economic watchdog — published its first ever fiscal risks report. and it certainly said there were a few — high levels of debt, a continuing deficit, an economy now less able to deal with shocks than it was before the financial crisis. is this really the time to be ending austerity? the obr called for public finance "prudence", and i asked john mcdonnell, labour's shadow chancellor, if borrowing more now would really make for a strong and stable economy, and whether being prepared to vote against the brexit bill was really an attempt to derail the whole process. if you look at the underlying references that are coming from the obr, it's about seven years of austerity. it's about productivity stagnating from nearly a decade. low wages, wages falling back as well. business investment growth falling back. there's a sort of cocktail of desperate elements within the economy now.

that puts the economy at risk. one thing within the obr report which was interesting, they touch on the grenfell fire. do you think there is going to be a cost attached to putting in proper policies that can deal with things, the outcome of things like that? from what we have heard so far, it could be significant and we have to recognise that. the overall issue, how do we get our housing programme back in line? robert chote suggested, some would say, from his obr report, but actually the prudent management of the public finances, austerity, if you'd like, is actually a good thing to do when you have very high levels of debt. you still have a deficit all of these years after the financial crisis. actually it is time to fix the roof while the sun is shining. we are a whirlwind at the moment. lack of investment, austerity measures, which have largely hit people who need the money, who would spend and help grow, and consumer debt increasing.

it is just pure management. can we move on to the issue of brexit? we have had the publication of the european union (withdrawal) bill, as it is now called. you have immediately come so too will not support it. is there a danger for you that the public who voted to leave the european union will look at parliament on the, you're simply blocking the public will? the public is expecting us to take back control to europe and then give it to the executive, to the government. by henry viii powers. is that your big issues? if you hand to the executive, we have taken control from europe and given it to the government and there is no parliamentary discussion or control, that can't be right. we are saying that we need a different type of bill. i hope the government will hope us and a lot of this bill. we can't at the moment because it is so undemocratic. i think they should withdraw this and bring something forward. if not, we'll amend it as best we can.

what is more important to you, mr mcdonnell, getting rid of the prime minister or getting out of the european union? look, the most important thing for me is about the future of the country. at the moment, the problem that we've got is that the future of our country is being held back because we have a weak or no government in power at the moment. they are in office, but not in power. you can see my point that by frustrating the brexit... oh, no, we are not... theresa may has to resign and you get the election that you want. theresa may's dever registration is more important. you are wrong, missing type to get. the most important thing for us is the good governance of this country so quite we have had an election, a referendum. and you lot down here in westminster cannot get anything done. we have said time and time again that on the number of issues we can cooperate but we cannot support what they are doing at the moment because it is undermining our economy and ability to get this new relationship with europe that we need.

you're not going to get those kind of concessions, so brexit will not happen with any speed whatsoever. i think this government is falling apart rapidly on the conservative party is splitting about five different ways. on that basis, the only responsible thing for them to do in the interest of the country is to stand aside and let some deals form a government. you support being out of the single market when we leave the eu. we want tariff free access to the market itself and we want to negotiate that, we think we can. you agree with kier starmer when he says that leaving your item is not a good idea, the european union's nuclear safety agency would not be a good idea for the uk. there is a whole series of bodies like that that we've got to maintain either a membership or a relationship of. what people may not understand is that the article 50 process says, we would leave those agencies. you backed by article 50 treble. so surely you are changing your mind between triggering article 50 and think, actually, we want to stay in bits of it. there is a whole series of consequences that we need to examine. that includes these individual

agencies, and there are dozens of them that we have to go through. it might well be those individual agencies that we maintain a relationship of some sort or maintain a membership of. that would be part of the negotiations. why did you vote for article 51 and made it clear that we should why did you vote for article 50 whe nit made it clear that we should be leaving euratom. it started the negotiations of... that was more important? it is, we need some form of stability with these relationships because it will give stability to our economy. as the obr pointed out today, like stability will have a long—term impact on our economy. doesn't it seem to the public that you are trying to unravel brexit? not at all. we have accepted the outcome of the referendum and we are leaving the european union. ms mcdonnell, thank you. john mcdonnell there. what do labour's tactics, mean for its chances of progress? our political editor, nick watt, is here. mix, what exactly are her majesty

is opposition up to, do you think? at what level they are playing a game that is intended to an seat theresa may, but they would also say that they are not trying to block brexit but they are trying to fashion a different sort of brexit. but what is interesting about that labour announcement is that they are prepared to vote against this bill at its second reading in september and major changes are introduced, that has emboldened the so—called soft brexit conservatives. they now believe that they have the numbers in parliament to make very serious amendments to the bill when it is considered at committee stage in the autumn. and on top of that, they believe that they can exploit rule number one of the government chief whip gavin williams, and that is, never lose a vote in the house of commons. and what they think is that the mere prospect of defeat in parliament will persuade the government behind

the scenes to soften its stance in a number of areas. for example, they think the transitional phase after the uk immediately leaves eu, maybe we will get a softening there. and in the future relationship, the single market with the customs union and the european court ofjustice, maybe there will be a softening in those areas. does this really mean, i mean, that is interesting we get to the point that they cannot get through exit legislation? does it mean the government's position? they are potentially weak. it takes just seven conservative mps to vote against the government. if all the opposition parties vote one way, then the government will be defeated. also, the scottish and welsh government said today that they are prepared to block this legislation, although it is important to say that it is just by convention, they do not have a legal actual power of veto. but the government believe it has cards to play. to the soft brexit tories, you may think thatjeremy corbyn is a friend on this but he is a ben wright eurosceptic who is involved in a simple power

play to bring down theresa may. do you really want to be part of that? add to the labour party, ministers are saying, with your tactics you may get a nice reception on those areas, remain areas that voted in labour mps, but don't forget those traditional labour areas that voted lees. nick, thank you. liu xiaobo — chinese dissident and nobel peace prize winner — has died at the age of 61. in his life, the authorities tried to muzzle him. he was serving an 11—year prison term — one of many since the tiananmen square protests in 1989. in his death, leaders, friends, writers around the world, have joined in tribute. one of them is a chinese writer diane wei liang, who knew liu in person.

welcome, thank you forjoining us. take us back, diane, if you can, to the time of tiananmen square and the sort of figure that liu was for you? well, i knew liu xiaobo before tiananmen through his writing. he is a poet, and he's written about reflections, on china and the chinese system. and at tiananmen, the students were there since may of that year. and liu xiaobo came later and joint in the protests. at that time, we did not understand his wisdom. on thejune the 4th, when it was clear the government was going to crack down on the tiananmen protesters. the talk was, as you can understand, being very young, was to be ready to die for the country. and it was to the credit of liu xiaobo and the others, older, wiser individuals, that he negotiated a safe passage

for students to leave tiananmen square onjune 4. goodness, how many people, lives do you think could have been saved by his wise council, i assume is how you felt it? there were thousands of protesters who still remained in tiananmen square. and liu xiaobo and others negotiated safe passage. and most importantly, convinced the students to withdraw from tiananmen square. how do you think he was treated in his time in china? obviously famous around the world, but actually in china, maybe for very obvious reasons, not as well—known. how did the chinese authorities deal

with him, post—tiananmen square? after tiananmen, for a period, he was allowed to write, and although his job was taken away, he lost his lectureship at beijing university, he kept on writing. and his books, unfortunately, were banned in china. and most chinese do not know who he was. in a way, his impact in china was minimum. but his writing, in some ways, i think it should be one of his legacy is that they have been published. in the west, they are published. in the chinese language in taiwan. and they summarise his views of nonviolence, of reflection. liu xiaobo was a soft speaking intellectual. his work was very much on reflection. and his slogans, titles of books,

include, we have no enemies and we do not have hatred will stop and he has very much call for a rethink of what chinese society should be and what can be. do you think that receiving the nobel peace prize was something which then protected him against the authorities? i mean, how would something like that be viewed by the chinese authorities? many people who grew up in china during the communist time, winning the nobel prize was the time that sealed his fate. winning the prize petted him as an individual against the state and the state is always all—powerful. that is the struggle liu xiaobo had very little chance of winning. the chinese state got more aggressive against dissidents at the moment, is there a record getting worse?

for the past 30 years, the chinese state is extremely powerful and for individuals like liu xiaobo, whose work in writing books and criticisms and signing a petition, called chapter 08, signed by a few thousand people and was never published and the crackdown is very heavy—handed and this is something that always seems to me to be incompetent civil that the state would want to treat an individual as such. but this is what marks china is a different system, they do not tolerate dissident voices. thank you very much for coming on tonight. it's the world's biggest oil company, and it could be

worth £1.5 trillion. saudiarmaco is saudi arabia's national oil company, and it could be coming to london in what would be the biggest share sale of all time. but, controversially, we might need to change our regulations here to make such a lucrative deal possible. our business editor, helen thomas, is here. helen, this is a pretty heady mix of finance and politics — it might not be immediately obvious to viewers why this is important. tell us why this matters. this is the crown jewel of saudi arabia, generating 70% of government revenues and it is operated basically as an arm of the state. it's built schools, hospitals, sports arenas, very unusual, it's also enormous.

if they get the valuation we are talking about, it would be around 2.5 times the size of apple, the us tech company. london stock exchange is competing with new york to be the main international location for this listing and today the market regulators here proposed some rule changes that, as itjust so happens, would be very helpful if you were a large government—controlled company looking at london. do you think we're trying to — given brexit, given we're striking out for this new world, do you feel that london might be looking at loosening regulations to make it seem more attractive? that we're going to become the singapore of europe? what the regulator said today is they want to create this new category of listing, a premium listing, but without all the rules that used to be required. so basically for a company like saudi aramco you can get this premium prestige badge,

but without all of the rules attached. and remember, earlier this year theresa may did go to saudi arabia as part of london's lobbying efforts, but i will give you both sides of the argument. some would say that london is a very global market, it is in our interests to attract big, interesting companies. this would be lucrative, lots of fees on offer and investors don't have to buy the shares. they can look and see what the company says and make their own decision. but there is this worry that we've seen this movie before. london had a string of scandals involving foreign owned companies and tightened the rules as a direct result. and there is a feeling among some investors that it is just bad practice to tweak the rules so obviously to suit one particular company that itjust sends the wrong message about how london operates. fantastic, thank you very much. we'll certainly be watching how that develops. well, he was often gone

but never forgotten. you may not remember peter perrett — lead singer of 70s rock band the only ones and writer of what's been described as arguably the greatest rock single ever recorded. and there's much that he doesn't remember himself. it was thought he'd chosen drugs over everything else, but now he's back with his first solo album, and to critical acclaim. so, how did he resurrect himself and his career? our culture editor stephen smith went to meet him for his first tv interview since the 90s. is this your stage gear, by the way, or do you... umm, it's what i got up in, you know. right. well, peter, it's very nice see you. i suppose some people will be amazed to see you. yes, i like to be unpredictable. you know, i surprised myself by actually returning and making an album, yeah. # it's how the west was won.

# at the point of a gun. # like they've always done # accompanied by his sons, peter perrett is back, with perhaps the most unexpected solo album of the year. it has the political bite and dark sardonic humour that his patient fans will remember him for. # just like everybody else i'm in love with kim kardashian # she's taking over from jlo as my number one # if it provokes thought, then that's an added bonus. but really ijust wanted to make people laugh. because laughter is extremely therapeutic, especially in times that are seemingly bad. many rock fans adore perrett for another girl,

another planet, which he wrote and performed in the 70s with his then band, the only ones. it's been covered by many other acts. to some, it's the best rock song ever. # i could always flirt with death. # i could kill, but i don't care about it. # i can face your threats. # and stand up straight and tall and tell about it. # i think i'm on another world with you. # with you. # i'm on another planet with you. # with you #. you know, it's been described as an adrenaline rush from beginning to end. and, yeah, it's probably the most difficult song for me to perform, which is unfortunate, because it's like my most well—known song, but... # i think i'm on another world with you. # with you. you know, there's three minutes of classic rock music, and i'm thinking,

you know, it's perfect. i don't think it's the best song i've ever written, but it's probably the best record i've ever made. in an admittedly crowded field, perrett has been noticeable among rock musicians as a recluse and user of drugs. apart from brief forays into recording and performing, he's gone missing for much of the last four decades. where have you been, your fans will want to know. and what have you been doing in the years when we haven't seen too much of you? i suppose it was like spiritual research, exploring the inner universe. it's a very controlled environment. you know, there's certain security and comfort. one fairly lurid account described you as being sequestered in a crumbling gothic mansion in forest hill. it wasn't gothic, it was victorian. and there was a certain amount of drug dealing going on there? we, you know, it becomes...

you know, you live in the black economy. and you don't exist in... in society. you're disconnected from society. you know, drugs are the currency. but i guess it wasn't without cost, and you would know better with anybody. i believe you missed both your parents‘ funerals. yeah... yeah, it's not good, you know. obviously it's not good to look back and regret things, but obviously you can't help thinking about things. but all you can do is learn from that and appreciate the people that are around you in the present. and try to give them as much love as you can. # there's no peace for the wicked.

# they say no peace for the wicked. # no peace for the wicked. # the angels tell me #. let's talk about the vagaries of the rock life. one minute you're flying to rio on concorde. sometime later you're saying that your publishing rights subsidise your benefits. you weren't earning so much from publishing that you were ineligible for benefits. i'm not allowed to talk about benefits, you know, with this government, it's dangerous territory. you know what i mean? because that's the worst thing, when they try and stop your benefits, you know. i was on benefits, and we did thejools holland show in 2008. # the hands are busy everyday. # the promised land #. we got this whole investigation. and i tried to explain thatjust doing thejools holland show, you know, because we were unsigned at the time, they actually paid for the hire of the pa. but you don't actually

make any money. most people just go on there because they want to be on thejools holland show, because it's the only show. they didn't believe me, so there's this whole investigation. and it's a stressful thing, you know, i really identify with poor people, because they know what it's like to be part of the underclass, you know. # don't worry, babe. # i'll always be your man. # no one can love me the way that you can. perrett‘s new record includes this love song to his wife, xena, his companion of almost 50 years. he's been clean and sober for eight years now. so, how did he do it? we got to that... taking things to the extreme, where there was an imminent possibility of the end of our existence. especially my wife, who became a lot more damaged by it, you know, by the consumption, than i was. and i was... i realised that we owed it

to the people that cared about us do, you know, have one last attempt. # if i lived my whole life again i'd choose you. # only you #. you know, i feel like a total newcomer, so it's all new to me. and i'm enjoying it even more than i did in the 70s, because i'm taking it all in, there's no distractions. you know, fully focused onjust enjoying that moment, when i'm singing into a microphone. steven smith, there. before we go, the prime minister revealed today in an interview with the bbc‘s emma barnett that she cried when she saw the exit poll on election night last month. of course, the shedding of tears is not a new political phenomenon. over the years, whether from personal grief, reversals of fortune or moments of national celebration, many leaders have succumbed to emotion. in the end, we're all human.

goodnight. devastated enough to shed a tear? umm... to... yes, a little tear. # too many teardrops for one heart to be crying. # too many teardrops... i just don't want to see us fall backwards. no. # you're way on top now since you left me. # you're always laughing way down at me. good evening. the weekend is fast approaching. if you have plans,

don't make this the last forecast you see. one thing is fairly sure. not as hot as it was in court over. today, 47 celsius. —— chord over. dangerous temperatures that will continue into the day ahead, before just receding. it will be pretty warm through the day ahead, with sunshine coming 23 is the high. we have rain coming through, moving southwards. all the time the heavier rain is petering out. through the rest of evening and overnight will continue. then we get the brisk north—westerly wind behind. with more cloud that last night, although still co mforta ble more cloud that last night, although still comfortable for sleeping, not as chilly tomorrow morning as this morning. some good spells of sunshine as the showers clear that. there is a north—westerly breeze.

not bad day in northern ireland and scotland. further south we start in central and eastern areas with more cloud because of the weather front close by for top at no more than the odd shower here and there. and improving picture. once the strong sunshine gets to work it will break through the clouds and we will see the reverse of the day, with the best of the sunshine coming into the afternoon. for most mainland parts of britain. next weather front approaching northern ireland and western scotland late in the day. feeling pleasant, 19— 22. if you are heading off and lucky enough to be watching the men's semifinals it is set fair. the outside chance of a shower. even in continues with plenty of sunshine in england and wales for not a different picture in scotla nd wales for not a different picture in scotland and northern ireland. the rain moving southwards. we have another bump on the weather front enhancing the rain again. we start

with a lot of cloud and patchy rain and then things dry up. we have warmed to the sunshine in the south. we might see brighter weather east of the grampians later. on the whole, the better day looks like sunday, with more sunshine. still a few showers, but as the sun comes out 27 is on the cards. as ever, stay up—to—date on the website. welcome to newsday. the headlines: china's best—known political prisoner, liu xiaobo has died of cancer at the age of 61. the nobel committee has spoken out, saying china bears are heavy responsibility for his premature death, despite these pictures,. fellow activist pay tribute. chinese society certainly

lost a brave human rights defender. also in the programme, donald trump visits france and hinted he could change his position on