that's a summary of the news now it's time for newsnight with evan davies. boris? are you going to roar or bite, mrjohnson? are you a lion or a pussycat? is this your bid for number 10? a big blonde bundle of optimism barged its way into a somewhat glum tory conference today, and, in the process, stole the show. it is time to stop treating the referendum result as though it were a plague of boils or a rain on our cattle or an inexplicable abhoration by 17.4 million people. it is time to be bold, to seize the opportunities. but borisjohnson‘s speech sounded like that of a leader, so while he can charm a crowd, he can also exasperate his colleagues. we'll ask if he should he be optimistic about his own career. and...

what you've done to disabled people is absolutely disgusting. but wouldn't you like a debate and discussion about that? hello. good to see you. nice to see you again. if there is one man here who can rival borisjohnson in his ability to draw a crowd, it's jacob rees—mogg. our mogg—cam has been tracking his every move, as he appears at fringe after fringe. and to complete the brexit set, we hearfrom the international trade secretary, liam fox. also tonight, the king of spain picks sides in the catalan crisis. translation: these authorities, in a clear and definitive way, have put themselves outside the rule of law and democracy. in catalonia, the king's speech went down like this. what now? hello. it was boris johnson day at the conservative party conference —

always an event here, and a crowd—pleaser. and, boy, do the crowd here need pleasing. but mrjohnson is a little like a latin lover — he has the slickest lines and can woo an audience, but for some, the words are just too smooth. mrjohnson is inspirational — but inspires negative as well as positive reactions. one minister told me today he thought the conference was going well, precisely because he thought boris had overreached himself and would not be leader. so the conservative party at the moment is stuck. should it stay with theresa may, who gives her speech tomorrow, but who wasn't in the hall for boris today? or should it take a risk of a divisive fight for a new leader and a new direction that may leave many alienated ? boris johnson is important, as he is central to that dilemma. well, did he help resolve it today? in a speech entitled,

let the lion roar. here's our political editor, nick watt. after something of a flat start to tory conference, they were queueing round the block. today, it was the turn of the brexit chiefs. well, we're coming to see the brexiteers. culminating in the star billing. we have a growing space programme run by my brother, joejohnson, and i have a candidate, my friends, for the first man we gently blast into orbit! laughter. and that is the superannuated space cadet from islington. it is time to stop treating the referendum result as though it were a plague of boils or a murrain on our cattle or an inexplicable aberration by 17.4 million people. it is time to be bold! so there's borisjohnson in his favourite place, adored

by the conservative conference. this audience lapped up his jokes aboutjeremy corbyn, though it wasn't exactly gag a minute. but broisjohnson‘s central message was to challenge what he regards as the cabinet naysayers who are being far too gloomy about brexit. the question for borisjohnson, though, is does he still retain the support of mps who fear that his interventions have been a little disloyal? tory mps use code to express any frustrations they may have over boris johnson's recent interventions on brexit. one senior figure hopes we may now seek a more loyal foreign secretary. do you think borisjohnson is, to coin a phrase, trying to have his cake and eat it? or maybe, to coin another phrase, he's seen the light. seen the light of realising...? that we need a united party, we need to make sure we make the best of the brexit negotiations. i've listened to boris present a very strong sense of internal

recovery in terms of the cabinet and positions of colleagues there, but make a very clear statement about where he believes britain could and should be going. there is irritation with borisjohnson. this ranges from young backbenchers who tell me he has been self—indulgent in recent weeks, to weary cabinet ministers who complain about how the foreign secretary is completely loyal in cabinet meetings before scurrying off to brief against colleagues. despite all of that, borisjohnson does know how to tickle his party's tummy. far be it for me or indeed for boris ever to criticise any media commentary, but what it was was a series of fact bombs being dropped on the audience, and naturally, ifound it uplifting and exciting, because boris articulated what i know notjust what people in this hall feel, but more than 17 million people in this country feel, which is that having voted to leave the european union, brighter days lie ahead.

it was a wonderful speech as ever. his humour, his self—deprecating nature captured the most important message that i think all of us want to send away from this conference, which is that we must make sure that everyone understands the risks to our country and to the world if we allow jeremy corbyn and john mcdonnell to get hold of the levers of power. with our new super loyal foreign secretary, the thought of a future leadership bid was of course far from everyone's minds today. cum magna... apart from one fan, who is annoyed with all those pesky youngsters eyeing their chances. winston churchill did not become prime minister until his 65th birthday, so i don't think 53... actually i may have got boris‘s age wrong on this one. do we honestly want to have a whole lot of youngsters running this country? doubt it. like it or not, borisjohnson has painted himself into something of a corner when it comes to downing street. a move in that direction is some way

off but only a stellar performance by theresa may tomorrow would banish thoughts of borisjohnson and that the door. nick watt there. in a way, the brexit division — leave, remain — has re—emerged at the conference as one between optimists and pessimists — or realists, they'd style themsevles. optimists see the upside, realists warn of challenges ahead. the number one optimist here is the trade secretary, liam fox. he's not glass half full, he said, he wants a bigger glass. trade outside the eu will flourish, he told the conference. i spoke to him earlier this evening. i asked why we need to leave the eu for trade to flourish, given that germany does very well from inside the eu.

it sells three times more to china than we do. well, where does the eu have its trade agreements with? currently, not with the united states, the biggest economy, not with china, the second biggest economy. not with japan, the third biggest economy, not with the gulf. so the eu does not have a great track record on getting trade liberalisation. ok, let's take one example. michael gove, agriculture secretary, he said yesterday it will be easier to sell pigs‘ ears to china if we leave the eu because the regulations will make that easier. when you compare that example against, say, the threat to uk financial services being sold through to the eu... i would give you a different example — i would say the uk is an 80% service economy. there are tremendous service sector opportunities in china. the real gain of being able to do a trade agreement with china would be in that service sector, which is why, for example, next year, the uk is taking a major expo to hong kong to sell our service sector capabilities. it would be much better if we were able to do so with a trade agreement. germany sells more services to china than we do.

but we want to get liberalisation of the global services sector. the eu has so far been unable to do that. switzerland tried, has signed a trade deal with china that excludes lots of these things. there has to be a ownership by a chinese partner. switzerland, which is an economy not too dissimilar hours, it hasn't really cracked trade in china, has it? what you are effectively saying is that we have to trade from inside the european union. most of the world doesn't trade from inside the european union. most of the world does extremely well. we have a trade deficit with europe, we have a trade surplus with countries like the united states. the basic trade—off is, we are going to lose some trade with the eu to gain some trade outside the eu.

what we want is a free and open trade agreement with the european union. the that fta we will negotiate with in the european union is different from any we have ever negotiated before. normally, if we were negotiating a free trade agreement, we are at a different place and we are trying diminish the gap. in the european union, we are in complete coincidence, zero tariffs, complete regulatory equivalents. the question is, will we have divergences for reasons of political ideology driven by the prospect of ever closer union? that is what it is going to be all about. what is the plan if the eu chooses to play hardball? what are we going to do?! what weapons do you have up your sleeve, but negotiating tactics? first of all, that would not be wise. and let me tell you why that would be not wise for them — because i've just come back from the far east, and investors there are saying, there are lots of places in the world to put our money, not just europe. and if the european union is going to make it very difficult to access from europe, the uk, the world's fifth biggest

economy, we might think of moving our investment elsewhere. so europe cannot have this debate as though it is occurring in an economic and political vacuum. it is not. it is part of a very competitive global economy, and what you are in fact saying is that european politicians would sacrifice the prosperity of their own people to make a political point. they might, but that would be very dangerous. that it exactly what they think we have done. they have exactly the parallel thing. britain, for a political point, is sacrificing its economic prosperity. so they just take a different view from you. they may play hardball, what is your plan if they do? ,,121 is; e; 7:75.52: gar. 7.7. the interpretation i think no, no, no.

b2!t “222 2? "act 522'ifi2ie2 22' , 77 economic well—being. so i notice you are unable to say that you have a plan for if the eu did choose to play it hardball. and, for example, charge asked for access to their markets. that's not what i'm saying at all. we are conducting extensive reviews across whitehall on contingency if we don't reach a deal, but we are certainly not going to be telling those we are negotiating with, and certainly not on tv, what those contingencies might be. you mentioned the idea of free ports as one thing at a business event yesterday here. is that something you are thinking about? that would literally be saying, maybe southampton is outside the british customs union. is that a possibility? we will want to look at a whole range of issues, and it would not be wise for us to intimate to those we are negotiating with what they might be. so this brings us back to optimism, doesn't it?

because in a way, every time you are asked a difficult question, we are greeted by the optimism that says, it's going to be all right. ok, well, let's use the eu's arguments. 90% of the increase in global trade will be outside europe in the next ten to 15 years. it's where we're going to have to put most of our efforts to get increased market access. we need to see our exports rise. we also want to see both outward direct investment rise and inward direct investment rise. we are seeing optimistic trends at the present time. we want to see an open relationship with europe in terms of trade. you are the people who are actually threatening the well—being of the status quo? —— who are the people. it is those we are negotiating with in the european union. now what i hope is that, as we get closer to really discussing the end state, they will understand that if they want the prosperity of their people to be guaranteed as much as ours, we must maintain an open trade environment. you are hoping, every answer is you are hoping they will fall into line with your view rather than stick to the line they have been taking.

that's optimism. and maybe they will, but maybe they won't. and maybe elected governments who don't take the prosperity of their own people into account or who drive a political agenda in a direction their people don't want may not be the governments for all that very long. many people in this country, including many remainers, will have listened to what mrjuncker said last week, which is that we do want ever closer union, we do want a single european army, a single economic policy. a single president. i certainly feel totally validated in voting to leave when i heard that speech. i think many remainers may question their decision, too. liam fox, thank you very much indeed. tomorrow, the prime minister gives her speech, a moment to win or lose this venue and this party. our political editor, nick watt, is here. it is a really tough speech, what is she going to do? it is interesting, we will have a flavour of her frustration with the tory squabbling when she will tell the party, let us shape up and give the country the government it needs but she will show some agility. —— but she will show some humility. she will say she listens and got

the message of what happened injune and said she is responding and the front page of the sun newspaper says there will be a splurge in council house buildings of but it will also be very personal as she explains what motivates her. it is important to say that she did lose both her parents at a relatively young age and the prime minister will say, "it is when tested the most that we reach deep within ourselves and find that our capacity to rise to the challenge before us may well be limitless." thank you. boris johnson just can't help but get attention, at a fringe meeting this evening he has talked about part of libya as potentially becoming a new dubai just as soon as they clear the dead bodies, he said. that is causing quite a rumpus. more from here in manchester a little later in the programme, including an insight into conservative party conference through the eyes of the darling of the fringe — jacob rees—mogg.

but, for now, here's mark. thank you, now to the crisis in spain. in catalonia, pro—independence campaigners have stepped up strikes and called for the eu to mediate in their stand—off with spain's central government. for its part, the centre—right government of mariano rajoy is stressing that sunday's vote was illegal and telling outsiders this is an internal matter. it's deadlock then. so this evening, the king of spain addressed the nation, trying to calm passions, but offered little hope to catalans seeking independence. translation: for some time some of the catalonian authorities repeatedly, consciously and deliberately disregarded the constitution and their own autonomy statute which is the law that recognises and protects their historic institutions and their self—government. with their decisions they have systematically disregarded the rules which have been approved legally,

exhibiting disloyalty towards the state. those authorities in catalonia have disobeyed all democratic principles of the rule of law and they have undermined the harmony within catalan society itself, unfortunately managing to divide it. well, our very own gabriel gatehouse has been covering events in catalonia since the weekend, and joins us now. how have people there responded to the speech from the king? the extraordinary thing about this was that it made absolutely no mention of the extraordinary violence we saw at polling stations i was in some of the street just off the lured i was in some of the street

just off the ramblas, watching locals banging pots and pans to try to drown out his words. it was clear what they felt about what he said. it is incredibly unusual for the spanish king to make a direct address to the nation at a time like this and i think its intervention really elevates this stand—off to a full—blown constitutional crisis. the key point in his speech was where he said that the catalan authorities have placed themselves outside of the law and outside of democracy by attempting, as he put it, to appropriate the institutions of catalonia. i think that was a clear threat to impose direct rule from madrid. but at the same time the president of the regional administration here, carles puigdemont, told my colleague at the bbcjust a few hours before that speech that his government would declare independence either by the end of this week or very early next.

and briefly, how do the two sides get out of this? can they do de—escalate? it is clear they are trying to send a shot across the bows of the other in attempt to bring them to the negotiating table but it is hard to see how they can step back. in the history of spanish democracy since the transition in 1978 and if that happens i think we can be sure we will see more of the huge protests that we saw today but perhaps they will be slightly less good—natu red than they were when i was out and about in barcelona this afternoon. "the streets will always be ours", they chanted. teachers and students, shoppers and shopkeepers, commuters and public transport workers. tens of thousands of them took the day off work to claim the wide boulevards of barcelona.

well, the crowd here is just incredible. i mean, walking from block after block after block, and it's the same. thousands upon thousands of people. the atmosphere is pretty cheerful, as you can see. but there is also a lot of anger about the police violence at the polling stations. and i'm pretty sure that the crowd wouldn't be this big today if it hadn't been for what happened on sunday. catalans are divided over the issue of independence. but the scenes of police beating voters with truncheons has created a sense of solidarity, and of alienation from madrid. they're trying to pull us in a violent corner, so they can justify the violence against the population. spain has lost catalonia, on sunday. forever. emotionally and everything. there were chants of "out with the occupiers".

madrid's heavy—handed response on sunday has turned a referendum that had no constitutional legitimacy into something that feels like a historical moment. well, these days, some people, we feel like rosa parks or like the suffragettes or like the workers in the factories that they were just asking for working less hours. it was illegal to work less hours. it was illegal for a black person to sit in the white seats. and they did it. beneath the good—natu red holiday atmosphere, there are deep divisions. wounds that are still unhealed from this country's recent past. tell me why you are out here today. to fight against fascism. yeah. seriously? no, it has not been a democracy at all. it has been like a veil of democracy. so now it's time to take the masks off. and we are fighting fascism. the demonstrators have even resurrected an old anti—franco

song from the 1960s. fascism feels like too strong a word to describe the violence on sunday. but remember, spanish democracy is less than 40 years old. and some here will tell you it's still fragile. the spanish crisis is still unresolved. little by little, the horrific events in las vegas are gaining human form, as the names of the 59 victims are released. dana gardner, a 52—year—old mother—of—three, who was at sunday night's concert with her daughter. angela gomez, 20, a student nurse, shot down beside her boyfriend. and there was charleston hatfield, 3a, who, having survived a combat tour in the military and years as a policeman, was also killed. how has congress reacted

to this slaughter? well, a bill to legalise silencers has been shelved today. but the majority leader in the senate said it was premature to talk about any new gun control legislation in response to the tragedy. john sweeney is in las vegas for us, surveying a city in grief. this is the las vegas strip, one of america's most iconic streets, deserted in the shadow of the mandalay bay and the horror of sunday night. the american nightmare keeps getting blea ker. columbine, sandy hook, virginia tech, last year orlando. and now this. this is an agony that those in power in america seem unable to stop. gunfire. the latest numbers for the dead, 59. for the injured, more than 500. so what's the white house saying?

what happened in las vegas is, in many ways, a miracle. the police department has done such an incredible job and we will be talking about gun laws as time goes by. it doesn't feel like any kind of miracle on the ground. doctors briefed journalists on the latest news from las vegas university medical centre. the stories from across the city are beyond grim. my wife was a great person. she was very active in the church. proud of my three kids. i was with her for over 30 years. i can't believe she's gone. i have my two older kids with me. my eight—year—old daughter's at home right now. i don't know how i'm going to tell her. i have no idea. imean... she loved her mom so much that it's going to be just devastating. here are some of the dead, ordinary extraordinary people. christopher roybal, a veteran of the war in afghanistan.

rachael parker, an off—duty police officer from la. and sonny melton, a nurse celebrating his wedding anniversary. what kind of human being was the killer, stephen paddock? i would say he is not psychotic. there is something very unusual about this man. of all of the mass shootings we have seen over the last 30 years, it is relatively rare to have someone that is 64 years old. these are usually committed by people who are in their early to mid 20s, sometimes their late teens. this is someone who was able to hold a job, he was able to do things like gamble effectively. if a person is psychotic, if a person has lost touch with reality, if they have delusions and hallucinations, they are not able to function at that level. but how come dangerous people get access to such deadly weapons? there is a chasm in american politics over the right to bear arms. this argument is intensely ideological and blocks any rational

discussion of policy. for example, the conservative guru bill o'reilly said yesterday about mass shootings, this is the price of freedom. oh, really? every massacre is different. every massacre is the same. last night the candlelit vigils began. today those desperate for some movement on gun control voiced their frustration. senator elizabeth warren tweeted that thoughts and prayers were not enough. hillary clinton urged america to stand up to the national rifle association. and senator chris murphy accused his colleagues of cowardice on the issue of gun control. the killer punched out the class of his hotel room windows and began firing from the 32nd floor.

it was death from on high. united in a state of grief, disunited about how to stop it, america waits for the next massacre. joining us from las vegas is antonia okafor, a member of the national rifle association, who founded empowered, an organisation to promoted armed self defence in us colleges. antonia, a lot of people over here just don't get why americans want to have weapons in such numbers. why would you want to carry a handgun? first ijust want to offer my heart felt condolences to the victims and families affected by this horrific violence. second, i am from texas originally, born and raised and i came to las vegas last night to be a part of this.

it is very important that in this conversation that more people like me, which are responsible gun owners, are the face and voice of those gun owners who are law and good citizens but unfortunately have had this man who has made it very unfortunate for everyone. it is safe to say that we are nothing like them. that killer in the building behind you had something like 30 guns, 23 rifles, thousands of rounds of ammunition in the room. do you think there should be any limits? i think the important thing is that right now the conversation, which it usually is after incidents like this come mass shootings, it is abroad or in europe or in america, and that it is about the gun. but i'm a firm believer that it is not about the gun.

they could be one gun, as many as he had, but the person behind the gun is the real issue here. changing the conversation to be about the man behind the gun and the policies that can prevent men or women like that from owning guns, that is the important issue, not really about the actual amount of guns. in europe if you look at france, they had four mass shootings and all of them were fully automatic weapons, something they have already banned there a long time ago so it is not the gun control laws that will really affect these type of incidents, it will be the people behind them and their intent. what is the first thing that you think should be fixed legally in order to stop the wrong people getting the weapons? the thing is, the person thing that people have been touting

talking about the nra and what they are doing, people forget that the nra is the one that implemented this background check that a lot of people enjoy today and have used successfully. unfortunately we are still getting the details of this man and what has happened and the background and a lot of people think it is a little fishy that he has this clean record so to speak and something like this happens out of the blue. it is important to note that gun advocates like myself and the nra and other groups have always been on the side of "of course we should have background checks and some common—sense gun safety involved." the problem happens or comes about when people who say it will be about gun safety and they restrict a whole group of people for having a firearm in self protection like me on a college campus. no person should not have the right to self—defence if they have that same right off campus.

that is the problem here, that people will say it is ok for them people do have firearms but a whole group of people it is not ok for them. thank you forjoining us, sorry there was a bit of a delay on the sound. back to you in manchester. mark, thank you. welcome back to manchester. back at the tory party conference. a demoralised party, and this one is somewhat demoralised, craves any kind of sparkle it canfind. and this year, one man has been the beneficiary of that — jacob rees mogg. he definitely has something — is it authenticity, consistency, confidence or character? or is it that eton wit, which means you are never quite sure if he is being self—deprecating or he is really like that? well, he is a star of the fringe — traipsing around from meeting to meeting, attracting quite a following. so we thought we should do some traipsing and following, so we've been tracking him for the last two days. here's a sliver of his conference.

music: everybody‘s hero by the desert rose band. # they're building him up # you see his face on tv # he's turning up # in every magazine # got his sights set on you # he's a man of renown #. i can see the headline — it's going to say, who's the dummy?! laughter. hello, i'm jacob rees—mogg, the member of parliament for north east somerset. and newsnight are following me around for a day at conference. 0h, we're not doing that! i said conference — i dropped the definite article. that's one of the things socialists do. i think the people who are talking about me as prime minister are trying to compete with ken dodd in the comedian stakes, that i'm not a serious contender. i will not, there is no vacancy, and i'm fully supporting mrs may. it's very flattering, of course, and it's all good fun. but i'm not a serious contender. i haven't held any office. i'm a backbench member of parliament. no, i don't see it as being a serious possibility. i love being a member of parliament for north east somerset. do you know who it is, margaret?

of course not. but can you tell me where the hall is? 0h, great man, how are you doing?! applause. cheering to engage and discuss. if your ideas are good, put them forward. if they're bad, retreat. applause what you've done to disabled people is absolutely disgusting. ok, but wouldn't you like a debate and discussion about that? you're a despicable person. let's leave my despicability to one side. because what's important is to have the discussion.

how long should theresa may stay as a leader? for ever and ever, amen, halleluia. but what date? for ever! eternity! even eternity is too short to extol her! i'm sorry to say that i was young once! laughter. i wasn't very good at it, but i was at least technically... i was technically a youth at one point in my life. i'm a huge fan. thank you, thank you so much. how are you finding all of the attention? oh, it's great fun. it won't last. next year i will come and it'll be very quiet and i'll potter about as i have done in the past. # 0h, jacob rees—mogg!#. oh, please, not that! jacob rees—mogg.

is he the future? or boris johnson, ruth davidson or theresa may? the party is looking for one, and to help analyse its choices, i'm with matthew parris of the times. and dia chakravarti, brexit editor of the daily telegraph. good evening to you both. let's not talk about jacob, let's talk about borisjohnson, that's what most people are talking about. he has made a gaffe tonight, he taught about clearing away the dead bodies and then syria will be like dubai. is that a serious one or is that boris is boris? that is not boris is boris. if this is boris‘s optimism, if this is the way that boris looks on the bright side of things, then god help brexit! i mean, libya isjust not in the sort of frame in which he has placed it. firstly, he is wrong in the prophecy that he makes. secondly, does he not understand the tastelessness of the way that he put it? is he still feeling heady after his great conference success this afternoon? i simply don't know. dia, did you feel the same about this line? absolutely.

what was interesting to see today, boris still commands that sort of optimism that the brexiteers have been looking for. then he goes and does this sort of stuff. at its worst it shows bad taste and insensitivity. if you wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt, its immaturity. it doesn't help. talking about boris, he is the foreign secretary. if you said, the foreign secretary, it sounds worse than, boris said that. let's talk about the leadership. from the point of view of remainers, matthew, what should the party do? stick with theresa may, who is kind of holding the show together but probably not the most inspiring person in the party, or should the remainers risk on there being some sort of fight and letting theresa go? i think she deserves one last chance. what she has got to do is stop kidding herself that she can remain popular with both sides in this dispute.

she knows, i'm sure she knows, that the only brexit that's going to work for us economically is a fairly soft brexit. sooner or later, she's got to say so. if she would say so tomorrow, if she would pick the fight that has to be picked with the extremists in the party, then there would be a lot of people willing to come to her defence. she's not a bad person. and i think she knows the score. but she just needs to say so. dia, what happens if theresa may does that and just says, look, it's switzerland, guys, it's not going to be the kind of boris johnson redlines. boris, if you want to go, you can go, but you're not going to get your way. i'm not sure how politically viable that would be. i think now the appetite really is, despite what matthew wrote in his spectator article, i think the appetite is now to get the brexit that people feel, a lot of people at least... the hard brexit at least, the boris johnson brexit?

i never really bought the sort of hard or soft brexit. you either are within the european union and its controls, or not. you say the appetite, it's not a matter of what the appetite is or what people want, it's a matter of what's available, what it would be possible to get. it is becoming steadily clearer that we are at the cliffs edge and we might throw ourselves out into the world and hope for the best, which is the daily telegraph's view, or we try and reach an accommodation with the european union, which means crossing some of these redlines. some of the worries, you put yourself in a situation, which you yourself are a very eloquently in the spectator article, matthew, you end up in a situation where you are the rule taka,

you have no say in making up the rules. i don't think that would be the brexit which people voted. yellow i don't want to rehearse the whole brexit argument. the question for the conservative party, should they paper over this brexit argument, like i'm going to do now, or should they basically say, for this party to be viable, we have to make up our mind? matthew's view is that they have to make up their mind. do you think they have to make up their mind? there will be a lot of very angry people. the conservative party has made that bit clear, they do want to come out of... i think it is slightly clearer, it's all about perspective and it's all relative. compared to the position of labour, i think they are clearer. if the party is clearer that this is what is this going for, who do you think... the energy that boris brought into the hall was quite palpable. but then of course you have these issues with him where you don't know whether you can take him seriously. i thought it was interested how exciting priti patel got. she ended up getting a standing ovation. a new name in the arena. i studied biology at school.

what we had to do was experiment on anaesthetised frogs. the frog appeared to be dead to the world, but when you applied electric shock it would kick leg or push out a flipper or whatever it is frogs have. this conservative conference reminds me of an anaesthetised frog. when you get a bit of borisjohnson, priti patel, jacob rees—mogg, the party in its involuntary way sort of shoot out a flipper like that. but it's going nowhere, and it knows it's going nowhere. i couldn't agree with you more on the slightly strange dead frog analogy. i mean, coming into this hall, there was absolutely no energy. i read somewhere, 70% of the mp5 didn't bother turning up. and why would you spend such a lot of out of money to be depressed? because we're doomed!

theresa may's speech tomorrow will inject all that energy! that's it for tonight. and as our political parties once again debate whether capitalism or socialism is the way forward, it's fitting that tomorrow should be the 60th anniverary of the launch of sputnik i, the first spaceship. its chirruping satellite signal of communist devilry sent america into a bout of moral panic, and had the rest of the world questioning whether karl marx might have the edge on science. goodnight. music: spirit in the sky by norman greenbaum. until two days ago, that sound has never been heard on this earth. we should be the first ones to have it, if there's such a thing. it gives the american people alarm that a foreign country, especially an enemy country, can do this. we fear this. yes, it's quite possible that it's

transmitting a code. but we don't realise what the code is, of course. was it a surprise to you that they got there first? well, it was something of a surprise, and something gazing to the stars, in good shape tonight. especially across a large pa rt tonight. especially across a large part of england and wales. a few showers in north—west england, running into scotland overnight. as the night goes on, we will see a band of rain pushing south across scotland. still in the south—west this morning, north—west of ireland. showers and wind easing through the day. across the uk, with starting to pick up. the rain becomes more widespread, more persistent for

northern ireland, england, starting to fringe into north wales through the afternoon. this is an area of low pressure spreading across the uk as we go through wednesday night. parts of lancashire through the night. wins could cause some disruption on thursday begins. in iran quickly clearing away from southern england on thursday morning. one or two showers in north—west england, quite a strong westerly wind blowing down across the uk. a blustery, cool feeling day on thursday, but there will be least be some sunny spells. in the's your latest weather. —— and that's your latest weather. —— and that's your latest weather. i'm rico hizon in singapore, the headlines: a navy veteran and a special—needs teacher were amongst the 59 victims

killed in america's deadliest ever shooting. it's emerged the gunman set up cameras in the room where he launched the attack. catalonia will declare independence from spain in a matter of days according to the catalan president. the king of spain accuses political leaders in catalonia of being disloyal. translation: these authorities have placed themselves outside of the law and democracy. i'm kasia madera in london. also in the programme. the us defence secretary james mattis tries to play down