the headlines: the african union has said the takeover of power by zimbabwe's army and detention of president robert mugabe ‘seems like a coup'. many zimbabweans have grudgingly welcomed the move and there've been no reports of serious violence. mr mugabe's wife grace who was bidding to succeed him as president is reported to have fled to namibia. 50,000 children under the age of five are expected to die in yemen this year, according to the charity, save the children. the saudi—led coalition has been asked by the un to lift its blockade of yemen's sea ports immediately so vitalfood aid can get in. a painting of christ by leonardo da vinci has sold at auction in new york for $400 million. that's the highest price ever paid for a work of art. salvator mundi — or saviour of the world — has been dubbed the "male mona lisa". -- $400,000. now on bbc news, wednesday in parliament. hello, and welcome to our round—up

of the day at westminster. on this programme, jeremy corbyn warns thousands of families will spend christmas fearing eviction due to the introduction of universal credit. but theresa may defends the long term impact of the new benefit. citizens‘ rights come under the spotlight on the second day of detailed debate on the eu withdrawal bill. and the foreign secretary urges all sides in zimbabwe to refrain from violence. we, and i think in everybody this house, would want the people of zimbabwe to have the choice about their future in free and fair elections. but first to prime minister's questions wherejeremy corbyn renewed his call for the government to pause the roll out of the new welfare payment, universal credit.

it replaces six working age benefits, but many mps have expressed concern that claimants can have to wait up to six weeks before getting any money, leading to debt and rent arrears. jeremy corbyn kept up the pressure on the government to make a change. i was passed a letter, mr speaker, from a lettings agency in lincolnshire where universal credit is about to be rolled out. the agency, and i have the letter here... the agency is issuing all of its tenants with a pre—emptive notice of eviction because universal credit has driven up arrears where it's been rolled out, and the letter, and i quote, says... the letter says, and i quote, "gap property cannot sustain arrears at the potential levels universal credit could create." will the prime minister pause universal credit so it can be fixed? or does she think it is right to put

thousands of families through christmas in the trauma of knowing they're about to be evicted because they're in rent arrears because of universal credit? prime minister. can i say to the right honourable gentleman that there have been concerns raised in this house previously over the issue of people managing their budgets to pay rent, but what we actually see, what we see, is that... we see that over four months and number of people on universal credit in arrears has fallen by a third. now, it's important that we do look at the issues on this particular case. the right honourable gentleman might like to send the letter through. i know in an earlier prime minister's questions, he raised a specific constituent, a specific case of an individual who had written to him about her experience on universal credit, i think it was georgina, as far as i'm aware he's so far not

sent that letter to me despite the fact i asked for it. in truth this is a government that protects the super—rich while the rest of us pick up the bill through cuts, austerity, poverty, homelessness, low wages and slashing of local services all over the country. that is the reality of a tory government. labour have backtracked on brexit, they've gone back on their promise on student debt and they would cause and lose control of public finances. i say to the right honourable gentleman, he may have given momentum to his party but he brings stagnation to the country. earlier in the year the prime minister told the country that she was the only person that could offer strong and stable leadership in the national interest. with her cabinet crumbling before our eyes, can she tell us how it's going? laughter let me say to the right

honourable lady what we see this government delivering, i have spoken about some the things earlier. deficits down, unemployment down, we have seen more record sums going to our health service and our schools and a government determined with a clear plan, as set out in my florence speech, a clear plan to deliver the best brexit deal for this country. she is a member of a party that can't even decide what it wants from brexit, let alone set a plan for it. the brexit secretary gave a pledge in the city that freedom of movement would be preserved for bankers and other members of the financial services industry. why can't the same pledge be given to other key economic sectors like manufacturing and agriculture ? as we look towards the immigration rules about will be introduced once we leave the european union, we are clear about

the need to ensure we take into account the needs of our economy, that's precisely why my right honourable friend the home secretary has asked the independent migration advisory committee to make recommendations to the government. we are leaving the european union and as the eu withdrawal bill goes through the house of commons, does the prime minister agree with me that it's part of ourjob as members of parliament, some might even say it's our duty as members of parliament, to scrutinise that legislation. to debate considered amendments, which seek to improve the bill and which are constructive and which seek to ensure a smooth transition of our laws from the eu to the uk and importantly that we come together and deliver brexit for our country and for the british people. what we are doing as a government is listening to the contributions that are being made, listening carefully to those who wish to improve the bill, they help we can all come together to deliver on the decision that the country took that we should

leave the european union. now the second day of detailed debate on the eu withdrawal bill saw concerns that rights currently enjoyed by british citizens would not be protected after brexit. labour's spokesman said that after exit day, employment, equality and other important rights would be at risk. the bill seeks to transfer european law into british law. it‘s true that the government has promised to ensure that workers‘ rights are fully protected and maintained after the uk‘s departure from the eu, but in the absence of stronger legal safeguards, there are good reasons to be sceptical about that commitment. happy to give way. thank you. would my friends agree with me that given the political events of this year, who the government might be in the future has become ever more uncertain and that therefore all of us have a job to protect the process and institutions of our democracy because we never know what might happen in the future? i agree with that and i agree with her, which is her point that the public would expect these rights to continue to have the level

of protection they have enjoyed while being underpinned by eu law. they should not have a reduced level of protection going forward. the bill seeks to transfer european law into british law. but the conservative former attorney general, dominic grieve, warned that could mean laws were "brought to the lowest possible status". the question is how do we make sure bringing this law into our own law we preserve its essence because that's what the government says it wants to do until such time as we as a domestic parliament decide that we want to do something about it? and the problem which has arisen is that as presently drafted the importation of eu law means that legal protection and standards in areas such as equality and the environment will no longer enjoy the protection that eu membership gives them. indeed, they will then for the most part be repealable by statutory instrument. something which on the whole in this house we would not think

an appropriate thing to do with our own primary legislation and this legislation undoubtedly has the importance of primary status. does he envisage a time in the future where tariffs are imposed, economic circumstances are imposed, businesses demand reductions in cost and they would turn to the holiday pay, to the 48 hours directive, to anything that cuts their cost and that government will be tempted, then, to abolish these rights. at i don‘t think i‘m quite as apocalyptic as the honourable gentleman. i happen to think, as my right honourable friend said yesterday in his speech, that‘s the idea that the uk suddenly wishes to translate itself into a country of no regulation, no protection at all, is fanciful.

but he said he wanted the government to look at these matters. i don‘t wish to force the government‘s can, even though that might appear superficially attractive. i don‘t even intend to put this amendment to the vote, it has problems of its own. but i put the government on notice that we are going to have to draw together the issues that we are debating today and indeed i‘m convinced there will be similar issues next week, all of which derive from the same problem as to the way the government has approached this and drafted this legislation of the moment, and it must be remedied. the brexit process will in no way whatsoever be used to undermine or curtail the rights of workers that happening find both in domestic law and by virtue of the european union. i hope that today can in my remarks and indeed by demonstration reassure

the right honourable members that the government‘s policy here is clear, is deliberated and this is not some out—of—control grab power to use this bill, which is a framework though, it is very much a process bill, to somehow then use this as the basis to change policy. that is not the intention of this bill. mps heard from the recently—resigned international development secretary. i am speaking today in this debate following an intensive course, over the past week, i think it‘s fair to say, on how to stage an exit. laughter which was the focus of a degree of international attention. so for anyone who is still tracking my movements, it is fair to say that i can confirm that as i walked into the chamber this afternoon, a past studies and portraits commemorating some of our greatest statesman including margaret thatcher and winston churchill,

statesmen who stood up and defended democracy, freedom and sovereignty of our great nation. so, this bill paves way for a smoother withdrawal from the european union and it complements many of the discussions that have happened around article 50 and delivers on the will of the british people as exposed in the referendum. priti patel, and mps have six more days of detailed debate on the eu withdrawal bill still to come. you‘re watching wednesday in parliament with me, alicia mccarthy. armoured vehicles have been patrolling the zimbabwean capital, harare, where president mugabe has been placed under house arrest after the military declared it had ta ken temporary control of the country. mr mugabe, who is 93, has dominated the impoverished country‘s politics since independence from the uk in 1980. responding to an urgent question,

the foreign secretary urged all sides to refrain from violence. the events of the last 2a hours are the latest escalation of months of brutal infighting within the ruling zanu?pf party. including the sacking of a vice president, the purging of his followers and the apparent positioning of grace mugabe as a contender to replace her 93 rolled husband. of grace mugabe as a contender to replace her 93 year old husband. i will say frankly to the house that we cannot tell how developments in zimbabwe will play out in the days ahead and we do not know whether this marks the downfall of mugabe or not and we call for calm and restraint. while it is not a coup in a sense of the military wanting to run the country it is a coup to ensure the former vice president takes over. does the minister agree that changing from one ruthless leader to another ruthless leader does not

help to create the kind of conditions that could lead to a free and fair election in the coming year in zimbabwe, nor will it solve the dire economic situation where thousands of people are destitute and food is scarce. we, and i think everybody in this house, would want the people of zimbabwe to have the choice about their future in a free and fair elections and that is the consensus that we are building up with our friends and partners and i will be having a discussion with the vice president of south africa later today. the situation seems highly volatile. could i ask the foreign secretary for his assurances that the 20,000 british nationals in zimbabwe will be given all the assistance they need during this dangerous period and in the past in times of great tension, i understand there have been cobra plans for the evacuation of british nationals if necessary. i wonder if there will be such thought processes once more. there are about 20,000,

the crisis centre has been working overnight to ensure their welfare and to the best of our knowledge at present we have no reports of any injuries or suffering involving them and as i talked earlier on to our head of mission in harare and he said as far as he understood it uk nationals were very much staying where they were and avoiding trouble and i think that is exactly the right thing to do. if this does indeed presage a move to easier times, and i accept the caution of the honourable lady of course, will he acknowledge with me that the british government does have unfinished business with zimbabwe and will he assure me that the government will offer further assistance if we can to help that wonderful country and its remarkable people, both black and white, to hopefully transition to a better government and a more prosperous state. he knows that zimbabwe has

fantastic potential, this is a country with a very well—educated population, it has a great future if they can get the right to political system. there is reports that grace mugabe is out of the country possibly in namibia so building on, as he says, the important role the regional organisations have to play and the role of difid and the foreign office, what steps can he make to make sure instability that might be in place in zimbabwe does not spread into the wider region? i think it‘s a very acute question and i think the answer lies, as so often in matters of zimbabwean politics, the answer lies very much with our friends in south africa and it is to them we will be telling first. now, the chief minister of gibraltar knows all about handling tricky borders. so mps on the northern ireland committee were keen to hearfrom him as part of their work looking

at what happens to the irish border after brexit. fabien picardo offered some hi—tech suggestions about how to achieve frictionless trade across an eu border. gibraltar customs has led in terms of technological solutions. with the united nations conference on trade and development customs, they‘ve set up a centre of excellence at gibraltar university, it‘s their only centre of excellence in europe. and what they have created is something called asycuda, which is a system that allows trusted traders to pre—declare what they are importing into gibraltar and to have an account with the government through which they pay their duty in a frictionless way, in an entirely frictionless way. and that development of asycuda has been something where gibraltar technology is now being shared, technology developed in gibraltar is now being shared in 100 other countries. he issued a warning to those on both sides of the irish border.

i mean, yes, we must use border crossings for controls which relate to criminality not being allowed to run freely across continents, but we must not allow anyone to use a border crossing as a political choke point. look, nobody is going to accept something that looks like, feels like or smells like checkpoint charlie in europe in the future. and if the spanish authorities have not realised that, i think their citizens would wish that they did. the middle east is entering what many analysts see as a dangerous new phase. experts fear that, with the islamic state group on the brink of defeat, there‘s a danger of the long—held rivalry between saudi arabia and iran boiling over as they engage in proxy battles in the region. in yemen, the two countries are backing opposing sides, while the saudis are thought to be behind the recent resignation of the lebanese prime minister in an attempt to weaken iran‘s influence in the region. does the noble lord, the minister, accept that we have to adopt a much

more even handed stance between tehran and riyadh in order to resolve the toxic instability afflicting the entire gulf middle east region? and we are seen to be allies of saudi arabia, i don‘t dispute the need for that, but we are seen to take the side of saudi arabia and the sunni muslim faith, against iran and the shia muslim faith. and we need to be equally handed between the two, in order to end the proxy wars in yemen, lebanon increasingly, syria and also iraq. even allowing for the fact ofjihadist terrorism, is not the greatest threat to peace, from the middle east now the imminent danger of a conflict between the sunnis and the shias led by saudi arabia and tehran, in which the west are backing one side and russia is backing the other? in the light of this, is it not foolish for

the united kingdom government to be supporting tacitly and with arms saudi arabia while they are committing such clearly illegal acts in the yemen? first of all, as the noble lord knows, the uk is not directly involved with the saudi led coalition. he talks about alliances and of course, our alliance between the united kingdom and saudi arabia, as an ally, is an important one. but at the same time, as i have made the point clear already, we believe very strongly that for peace and stability in the region, it requires both iran and saudi arabia to resolve their differences and move forward in a positive vein, and the agenda is not about taking sort of one side over the other. we make sure that any representation we make, including those to the saudis, on concerns we have particularly in the conflict in yemen, are made clear and made at the highest level.

lord ahmad. there have been many lurid newspaper headlines of late with allegations of inappropriate behaviour, harassment and even assault going on at westminster. the women and equalities committee is holding an inquiry into women in the house of commons. its chair maria miller asked representatives of the four biggest westminster parties what was being done to make sure anyone with a complaint was more likely to come forward now than they had been in the past. i think there have been abuses of power, and i think this is something which goes right across the political parties. i‘m appalled that we haven‘t shown due leadership on this, historically. and i think the fact that it has been public pressure and the media that has brought this to the fore, we actually should be ashamed of ourselves that we haven‘t given proper leadership on it. we now know the scale of the problem and we must all work together to make sure that we get... but what's changed which would make somebody now come forward? i think the traditional complaints processes operated under a criminal standard of proof, which was very difficult to establish and inhibited

people coming forward. it‘s now done on the balance of probabilities, which means that cases are much more likely to be determined for the complainer. a labour committee member asked about the abuse directed at candidates during elections. what evidence does your party have about the effect of fear and abuse and harassment on the willingness of people to come forward as candidates to remain in public life once elected, and what do any of your political parties do to offer support to people, to candidates responding to such abuse? because we all have seen, quite widely, that it exists. if we‘re just about the kind of aggressive language that we encounter in politics, i mean, to some extent, we have to put up with it, men or women. do you think that it's worse for women? i think it probably is, sort of what you could call casual misogyny and the results of that... it... as somebody who suffers from it, it doesn't feel very casual. and what about abuse

directed at other people? if a candidate in an election from an opposing political party suffered from an abuse from somebody within your political party, if, say, that abuse was misogynistic, would... you would say that there be robust processes in the liberal democrats to stop a person in a candidate again or being an activist, being a memberof the liberal democrats? i think that would be a reasonable request. i shall test that. anybody else want to...? i would put the same question to everybody on the panel. this is a massive issue, let‘s be absolutely crystal clear about it. there is clear evidence that women candidates and women parliamentarians have suffered from far greater abuse than anyone else has. so what would you do about it? well... there‘s things we can do about it in terms of providing support to people. i think if anyone has crossed the line, that is a member of the political party, then they have got to be held account for that. and held to account means...? well, suspension, expulsion, if that‘s what it takes. we do that as well...

how many people have you expelled? i don‘t know that number, i don‘t have that... but you could tell us? there was a labour mp for harlington and hayes who asked, who was talking about lynching a conservative mp during an election campaign, repeating it, endorsing it, going around and talking about it. what did the labour party do? they made him the shadow chancellor. they promoted him to the shadow chancellor. so, if you‘re saying that, yes, we expel people for the kind i think going into individual cases can be difficult to... no, i don‘t think it is. there is a real—life case, we know exactly what he said, it was on the record, there is a recording of what he said.