g understandable reasons, is focused on brexit and seems to lack the bandwidth to be able to translate the rhetoric of promoting social justice into reality. the government sets out plans to make it easierfor children in england to get access to mental health services. schools and colleges will be encouraged to appoint staff who'll work with the nhs to provide specialist support. it's 50 years since the world's first successful heart transplant — the surgery revolutionised the way heart disease is treated. there is more from me at three o'clock. right now on bbc news, it is the week in parliament. hello and welcome to the week in parliament. and much of it was dominated by donald trump and his notorious retweets.

the home secretary was, to use one of the government's favourite words, clear. president donald trump was wrong to retweet videos posted by far—right group britain first. some called for the president's state visit to be cancelled. we cannot simply roll out a red carpet and give a platform for the president of the united states to also sow discord in our communities. and, brexit—wise, the knives were out for david davis. whether he is in contempt of parliament is to be debated, but he is certainly treating parliament with contempt. but first, at the end of prime minister's questions, there's always a bit of a scramble as mps head for the doors before the next debate starts. but on wednesday, many stayed in their seats as news reached them of the notorious donald trump retweets of three inflammatory anti—muslim videos.

a couple of labour mps asked the speaker for a statement from the home secretary. he said he wouldn't expect a response immediately. but the next day, amber rudd was called to the house, where she had to steer a tricky diplomatic course. president donald trump was wrong to retweet videos posted by far—right group, britain first. when we look at the wider picture, the relationship between the uk and america, i know how valuable the friendship is between our two nations. as home secretary, i can tell the house that the importance of the relationship between our countries — the unparalleled sharing of intelligence between our countries — is vital. it has undoubtedly saved british lives. that is the bigger picture here and i urge people to remember that. whilst on this side of the house we appreciate the importance of realpolitik, we would also call

on the government to make clear that, in no way and at no time, do they give any support whatsoever to the distasteful views of the 45th president on race, migration and muslim communities internationally. to do anything else would be an affront to voters in this country, whichever side of the house they support. one of the advantages of having such a special relationship with the united states is that when a friend tells us we have done something dreadfully wrong, we tend to listen. wouldn't the world be a better place if the prime minister could persuade the president of the united states to delete his twitter account? several mps felt strongly that the president's state visit should not go ahead.

is it not one of the key dangers of a state visit we have absolutely no idea what the president will say or tweet next and before he visits? what does he actually need to say or tweet before the idea of a state visit is ditched once and for all? mr speaker, an invitation for the visit has been extended and accepted, but the dates and the precise arrangements have yet to be agreed. no matter what diplomatic route we find to do this — we cannot simply roll out a red carpet and give the president of the united states a platform to also sow discord in our communities. putting aside the question of a state visit, should he even be allowed to enter our country? unprecedented actions require unprecedented responses. i point out to the honourable lady that the prime minister has robustly replied to the president and made her views absolutely clear. on the honourable lady's other

proposal, we do not routinely comment on individual exclusion cases. is the home secretary satisfied that president trump's behaviour — which is not an isolated incident — does not undermine our important security and co—operation relationship with the united states? may i also say that just because somebody stops using twitter, it does not mean that they cease to be a twit. my honourable friend puts his finger on it, if i may say so, in the first half of his comments, when he talks about the importance of that close relationship. however strongly honourable members feel about the president himself, we must protect that particular relationship. about a month ago, the most popular man in the world was a last day employee of twitter who unplugged the account of the president of the united states. was he not right? and if twitter is genuine in its commitment to fight hate

crime online, it should have no hesitancy in taking down the twitter account of the first citizen of the us as it would any other citizen of the world who pedals such hate crime. the prime minister said homophobes or racists who spread hate crime in this country will not be allowed. that's what everyone knows, just say it. i would say to the honourable gentleman there is no pretence here. we are clear in the action we will take against people who propagate hate. the home secretary. now, do we need all 650 of our mps? could we do without 50 of them? six years ago, an act of parliament was passed to reduce the number to 600 and they're still consulting on how this should be done. but a labour mp wants to reverse that change and hang on to all 650. afzal khan's bill has just started its journey through parliament. i asked him what he was aiming to do. i'm trying to get a consensus.

currently, with the review through, there isn't a consensus in parliament. what do the public think about this? i suspect some would say there are far too many mps and we could manage with fewer and it would be popular. have you canvassed public opinion? it's important that we do a good job. so the elected people are the voices of the people, unelected people are not, if we are getting more and more special advisers, how much does that cost? why don't they cut on that side? equally important is constituency—level work. as an mp, i spend half a week here doing the legislation side and the other half is working with the people in the constituency. what they are proposing, it will be bigger constituencies which means communities broken up, which doesn't have the same effect and accountability.

they want to do a review every five years, building this instability. and the cost, which i'm saying we could do in ten years which would give stability as well. we could do 7.5%, which gives us more flexibility to maintain the community link and a link with mp5. boundary changes would adversely affect the conservatives. is this notjust a party political issue and a good thing for the labour party to keep the number at 650? when we were in power, we went ahead with the boundary review even when it was against us. this overall is about levelling it, so levelling in principle isn't a bad idea. so, we are up for that. what parts of the job would suffer if there were 50 fewer mps? number one is the accountability and balance between the executive and parliament, because what you

will have is less backbench mps and more of them in ministerial posts and that balance is also important. second is the workload. it will have an impact. if there is more work with the bigger constituency and if you add in the brexit impact as well and if you add in the future of how we reach out to the world, and if you add to the point that 73 mep jobs will vanish, that work will be done, so you can see the workload will be much more. what chance do you think the bill has going through? i think there's a pretty good chance that we will have a huge support in the debate. thank you very much. thank you. and afzal khan opened the debate in the commons. the public already sees politicians as remote, self—interested and unaccountable, and the current boundary changes would make this worse. the bill would preserve

the mp—constituency link, the power to scrutinise the executive and the strength of our communities. we are probably the only people who drive around the country and see boundaries as we cross. when i drive down the m4, i go through the constituencies of the prime minister and my honourable friends, but let's be frank, that is a thing that only us involved in politics do. normal people, the constituents that we represent, don't see the country as a succession of local government boundaries. the government has stated the current boundary review is proceeding in accordance with legislation, but according to three senior sources quoted in the times, the plan is likely to be scrapped due to a lack of support from the conservative benches.

perhaps demonstrating that this is going to be the latest casualty following the prime minister's failure to win a majority in june. madam deputy speaker, if the review is going to be ditched, i say to the government, stop wasting public money! this is a charade! let's ditch the review now and start a fresh review based on the principles that we can all agree on. just as a parent loves all their children equally, i of course love all the areas i represent equally. i would be sad to lose any of them. i could no more choose between any of them than i could between my daughters. but my belief in democracy is stronger, ensuring fair representation and that a vote in north 0xfordshire counts the same as it does anywhere else.

it is extremely important to me. the bill passed a second reading but stands little chance of becoming law without support. well, let's take a look at some of the other news in brief. rail firms which operate passenger services would also manage the tracks their trains run on, under new government plans. and some routes lost under richard beeching in the 19605 could be restored. the closing of some 4,000 miles of track, mainly in rural areas, became known as the beeching cuts. chris grayling said rail lines would be re—opened if they eased congestion. and his plans also give us the chance to show you these lovely pictures. the move is part of a new government rail strategy. despite the improvements in the railway since privatisation, we are still some way away from a high—performance, customer focused industry that we all want to see. that is why we must continue to reform and invest in the railway and maximise the contribution that both public and private sectors make

to improve services. the health secretary has told the commons he wants to halve the number of baby deaths and injuries during childbirth. jeremy hunt said the nhs in england must do more to learn from mistakes because each year around 1,000 babies die unexpectedly or are left with severe brain injuries. mps welcomed the plans. it is easy to spot the woman who has a past history of difficult births. it is easy to spot the women with obesity and diabetes but anyone who has been involved in birth knows that even the healthiest pregnancy can go wrong at the last minute. mps have accused the government of sending mixed messages on the environment after a planned rise in fuel duty was scrapped in the budget. things got a bit tetchy in the committee room, when the treasury minister was challenged over whether his department had analysed how well pollution—reducing measures were working. you are the treasury minister and you don't know if there

is a cost benefit analysis inside government on the benefits of taking measures to tackle air pollution on public health. mr bradshaw, you are almost suggesting we would only want to take action on the basis of cost benefits. that is not the case. we recognise the public health challenge. that is why we have been working on it. we are revising the figures. we are seeing a downward projection in the medical statistics of avoidable deaths. but nevertheless, we are very keen to work on air quality because we know that poor air quality affects... the question was to the treasury minister. thank you, chairman. the commons' second debating chamber, westminster hall, made a little bit of parliamentary history on thursday afternoon. the moment was heralded by the labour mp, jim fitzpatrick, who chairs the all—party group on deafness and hearing loss. 0ur debate is being interpreted into sign language which i believe is a parliamentary first. so, we may be making history in this debate. it is great for all of us who are

here to participate in this event. well, prime minister's questions looked a little different on wednesday — no prime minister. theresa may was on a visit to the middle east, so the first secretary of state, damian green, was understudying. and taking the role ofjeremy corbyn was emily thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary. she opened with a fewjokes. see if you can get the references. and congratulating prince harry and meghan markle on their engagement. that is one anglo—american couple we on this side will be delighted to see holding hands. laughter. i'm sure that prince harry... i'm sure that prince harry, the patron of rugby football league will be joining all of us in supporting the england team in the world cup final on saturday. and i, for one, will be waving my st george's flag. laughter. that was a reference to the tweet she sent in 2014 about a terraced house flying three england flags for which she was sacked by ed miliband.

and the hand—holding was of course donald trump taking theresa may's hand at the white house. but it was her first question which raised eyebrows. damian green is currently being investigated by the cabinet office over allegations about his past behaviour. can i ask the first secretary a simple point of principle? is he happy to be held to the same standards in government that he required of others when he was in opposition? the secretary. yes, lam. i think all ministers should respect and obey the ministerial code and i absolutely think that that is a very important part of confidence in public life. i merely wondered if he remembered the question asked at prime minister's questions almost 17 years ago, whenjohn prescott stood in for tony blair, and whether he could answer that same question today. so, what is the question? the question is this, what percentage of new nurses recruited in the past 12 months are now working full—time? laughter. the secretary.

ican't remember... i can't remember asking the question then and i'd love to know what the then deputy prime minister answered then. what i am happy to assure the right honourable lady is that we have more nurses, more midwives, more doctors working... working in the health service now. the health service is performing more operations now, certainly than it was 17 years ago. and, in particular, in the budget last week, my right honourable friend the chancellor was able to announce more than £6 billion extra on health spending which will make the health service even stronger in the future than it is now. damian green. this week, there was no discussion of the eu withdrawal bill because mps were occupied with the budget. so were we brexit—free? no. there were two issues — the size of the exit bill and those controversial impact statements. you'll remember they're the papers setting out how brexit would affect

58 sectors of the economy. mps wanted those papers to be shown to the brexit committee, and voted accordingly. ministers said they'd hand them over. and they did. but not in their complete form. cue the shadow brexit secretary. it is simply not open to the secretary of state to choose to ignore it and to pass to the select committee the documents that he chooses. whether he's in contempt of parliament is a matter that we will come to at some later date. but he is certainly treating parliament with contempt. we have not edited or redacted reports. at the time the motion was passed, and subsequently we were clear that the documents did not exist in the form requested. we have collated information in a way that doesn't include some sensitive material but the documents which he freely admits he hasn't seen do not contain redactions. if the government wished to resist the publication of the papers it had, it should have voted against the motion, and if it wished to qualify or to edit the papers that it had, then it should have sought to amend the motion.

and we cannot allow post brexit to start reducing parliamentary sovereignty to a slightly ridiculous level. can i remind the minister that the question of what the government will provide to the select committee is not for the government or indeed for the select committee to decide. this parliament has decided. i made it very clear to the secretary of state what procedure the select committee would use to consider the reports. and if i may put it like this, i do object to any suggestion that the select committee, and i as chair, cannot be trusted to do ourjob. does the minister share my concerns as to how a letter sent by the secretary of state to the select committee managed to reach journalists at the daily mirror before it was considered by the committee? does that encourage him or discourage him when it comes to sharing confidential information?

to meet this motion, it is not at the discretion of the government to decide what to take out, it is now at the discretion of the select committee. and i would therefore urge the government either to meet the terms of the motion in full or to seek to put down a new motion. and after that debate, the speaker suggested in quite a forceful way that the brexit secretary should have a chat with the brexit committee "within days". in fact, it'll be on wednesday. the other talking point this week was the so—called divorce bill. and the talking got louder once it was reported that the bill might reach 50 billion euros. but it did produce an unlikely meeting of minds. 70% of the people that voted in bolsover voted to leave. but can i also say this to you? those same people in bolsover, i believe, would expect me to tell the honourable lady from the finance department that if they'd got £60 billion to spare, it should go

to the national health service and social care. for the first time in my parliamentary career, i'm going to agree with the honourable member for bolsover. he is absolutely right. the 60—odd percent of the people in wellingborough who voted to leave want to know what we were doing with £60 billion. they'd want it spent on the nhs, social care, and defence. they would not want it given to the european union. would the minister agree such a move would be betraying the trust of the british people? the money that we have been reading about in the press is speculation. these negotiations are ongoing, discussion is ongoing, and we want to secure value for money for the british taxpayer. now, the funeral has taken place of carl sargeant.

the labour welsh assembly member died last month after being sacked from the welsh government amid allegations over his conduct. on wednesday, labour members of the welsh assembly blocked conservative moves for an inquiry into bullying allegations against the government. the tory motion was backed by plaid cymru and ukip. it would've triggered an inquiry by the committee for the scrutiny of the first minister, carwynjones. there has been talk in recent weeks of delivering naturaljustice and an enquiry that is set in the government's own terms behind closed doors does not set that agenda. a public, transparent forum is one of the vehicles to deliver that and so it is entirely appropriate that this motion is allowed to pass. indeed, the assembly has always prided itself in being an open and transparent forum and it is crucial that we continue to operate in this manner. i would just like the government party to consider this.

do you think it is a good look to be seen to be looking as though you are avoiding full scrutiny? i would argue that it isn't. in two days' time, we are going to be burying our colleague and friend. and i think it is unseemly to be having this nature of debate while that still hasn't happened. ifind it reprehensible, the way people have used this tragedy to settle scores from their time in government. i think the first minister, to his credit, has set up two separate independent processes, which is unprecedented. those need to be given time to draw their conclusions. well, what's been happening in the wider world of politics? here's simon vaughan with our countdown. it's christmas time in washington. the white house turned into a winter wonderland, complete with tree made from green books. will anyone actually read them?

it is a game of two halves. ex lib dem leader tim farren gave a speech to the religious think tank theos. he put the ball to row z with an extended football metaphor. with the local elections results, you could say i had an impressive and morale boosting fa cup run. now is the winter of our discontent. made glorious summer by this son of york. jeremy corbyn went to edinburgh on monday to congratulate the new leader of scottish labour, richard leonard, from sunny yorkshire. labour mp fiona 0nasanya smuggled in a quote from big shaq's man's not hot comedy rap into her speech in the budget debate. it is not as simple as two plus two is four minus three is one, quick maths. 0ther mps were slow to spot the reference. in her 12th debate on the effects of state pension changes on women, since her election in only 2015, mhari black struggled to keep it clean.

my honourable member eloquently said, they've got a brass neck. now, iam happy to say, i'm happy to apply the brasso on that. honest to god, how shiny it is for the amount of rubbish that has been spoken in this chamber today by those members is appalling. other metal polishers are available. simon vaughan. this week saw the final days of the debate on the budget and the votes to approve it. but after four days of discussion, the excitement can wane slightly. 0rder! the question is as on the order paper. as many that are of the opinion say, "aye!" quietly: aye... laughter. you're not in very good form. well, they had another go and although the response was still a bit lacklustre, the speaker decided that it did amount to approval and the budget went through.

and that brings us to the end of this edition of the programme. but do join keith macdougall on monday night at 11 for a full roundup of the day at westminster. but for now, from me, mandy baker, goodbye. that was the week in parliament. the whee kim weather gets off to a mundane start but it will not stay that way. —— week in weather. today has been mostly dry although cloud in the south has produced spots of drizzle. the cloud has broken up to give sunshine in places. pretty decentin give sunshine in places. pretty decent in cardiff earlier. the satellite picture shows cloud has been reluctant to break up in the

south. misty, markey and risley with high cloud drizzling in across scotland. tonight, central and eastern areas senior scotland. tonight, central and eastern areas senior line's share of clear spells. that allows patchy frost and fog patches. some were cloud in the west, the odd spot of rain here and there. temperatures in western areas generally staying just above freezing. into tomorrow morning, bearing in mind across east anglia and the south—east we could see the or default patch, the odd spot of rain, many places dry, patchy cloud in the midlands as well. chilly start in eastern england, two celsius for hull. western scotland and northern ireland see more cloud and spots of rain. fairly large areas of cloud drifting from the north—west to the south—east. but essentially, save for the odd spot of rain, it is a dry day with some spells of

sunshine. debbie does not doing too badly at all for the time of year. eight celsius in aberdeen, ten in cardiff. tuesday, could be fog patches again in the south—east. things here should brighten up a little bit we start to feel the change in the north—west. stronger winds with outbreaks of rain in north—western scotland. on wednesday, winds in the west grow stronger still. could see gaels in places. rain and other western areas later in the day. could be a very mild day, 11 or 12 celsius. the mild day ahead of this area of low pressure, this is the main story in the middle of the week. very wet and windy weather, perhaps even disruptively so. we will keep you posted on that. as below —— the logos eastwards, we get plunged back into cold air. coming from the tactic across the british isles. —— arctic. then it turns windy and much

colder and some others at this stage at the end of the week will see snow. more details from where you are online. this is bbc news. i'm annita mcveigh. the headlines at 3.00pm: all four board members of the government's social mobility commission resign — the chairman says theresa may's rhetoric on healing social divisions is not matched by reality. the government, probably for understandable reasons, is focused on brexit and seems to lack the bandwidth to be able to translate the rhetoric of healing social division and promoting social justice into reality. a new scheme to make it easier for children in england to access mental health services is outlined by the government. it's 50 years since the world's first successful heart transplant — the surgery revolutionised the way heart disease is treated. i was a second—year medical student

in london, and it was of similar impact to people walking on the moon for the first time, or president