politicians in the united states and europe are summoning executives from facebook to answer questions about whether personal data was missed used to manipulate recent elections. facebook has said it was deceived by a british company, cambridge analytica, that worked by —— for president trump selection campaign. emergency services and texas said an ncd area device —— incendiary device that went off in the city of austin was not related to a series of explosions at this month. however the fbi has confirmed that two packages found at a separate fedex delivery office in the area on tuesday at our connected to earlier attacks. hello and welcome to the programme.

coming up, there's anger on the conservative benches over the government's brexit fishing deal. there is no way i can sell that we're still in a transitional period as anything like a success to fishing communities in murray, scotland or the uk. the environment secretary sympathises. i feel their disappointment. and, the bbc comes under fire for its treatment of some presenters. i feel like i've been hung out to dry. i feel betrayed and i asked this, where is their duty of care towards me? but first, for many mps it felt like a slap in the face with a wet fish. the european union will continue to set fishing quotas during the transition period following brexit.

that was what was decided on monday in an agreement the government hailed as a success, a step forward. but fisherfolk are furious that eu trawlers will still have access to uk waters until the end of that transition period in december 2020. a liberal democrat mp had an urgent question for the environment secretary. the mood in fishing communities is one of palpable anger. this is not what we were promised. and the basic question that the secretary of state has to answer today is this, if they can't let us down like this over the deal for a transitional period, how do we know they will not do it again when it comes to the final deal? when it comes to it, well they trade away access or water for access to markets, or anything else? the first thing i will happily acknowledge is that there is disappointment in the fishing communties. i know as somebody whose father was fish merchant and whose grandparents went to sea to fish. i understand how fishing communities feel about the situation.

i share that disappointment. i'm sure the secretary of state will understand that there is no way i can sell this still in the transitional period of them and think like a success to fishing communities in murray, scotland or the uk. but can the secretary of state confirm that when we leave the policy in 2020, we will have full control over this and vessel access because the fishing communities that feel let down and angered at this government at the moment the debt guarantee? i understand my honourable friend and it will be the case across the northeast of scotland and the united kingdom, people will be disappointed that the proposal that we sought to assure that would apply in 2019 apply for that year. it is also important to recognise that this is a 12 month additional extension to the maintenance of the eu belt and we accept that in order to secure the greater prize which he is quite the right to remind the house.

only available if we ensure that we leave the common fisheries policy, take back control and make absolutely clear to other countries that access and causes will be in our hands. but several conservatives weren't convinced that the government wouldn't use that control to allow eu fishing in uk waters once the transition period was over. going forward, what guarantees can you give the control of seas will not be sacrificed in the brexit? does my friend agree that we owe a debt to our fishing communities? and that we must not guarantee to the eu any level of access in favour of a longer—term trade deal? yes. but while many conservative mps were disappointed with the government's deal, they still reserved some anger for the snp.

i share the disappointment of northeast this submit and the transition to fall short with a hope for, so can the secretary of state guarantee that on the 1st ofjanuary, 2021, we will leave the common fisheries policy, take back control over our waters comes at our own fishery management policies, and hard quotas, and look at including that in the history built in if he should be concerned that i have in the scottish fishermen federation have that the snp scottish government will keep us in the policy and perpetuity and that would sell scotland's measurements out! for their part, the snp were up in arms. with concern, it's always somebody else‘s's fault for the conservatives. when we joined to the common fisheries policy, scotland's measurements were described as expendable. so there were use to scottish tourist sell—outs, given the matter of days out even scotland's measurement will be surprised at how quickly that one was turned around.

will the minister tell me at what point are fishermen became a bargaining chip or has that been the case all along and does he agree with me that there are now in the worst of all worlds that were in the common fisheries policy but no say, and will he also tell me why over the years, the snp has proposed changes to bring greater control over fishing policies, but they have been rejected and agree with me that that is because there's a big industry in scotland imported to the scottish government that means nothing to westminster? mr speaker, projection means discussing somebody else when you are really talking about yourself. it is interesting that the scottish national party spokesman to talk about always blaming somebody else. and always make it somebody else's fault. for a party that has raised grievance to an art form,

they have a damn cheek making a case. given the assurances i and others over the last year were given right friend the prime minister down that we would leave the common fisheries policy at the end of march 2019, who actually was negotiating debts and did they really care about fishing? the truth that the tories are treating this industry as expendable. the secretary of state talked about being viable. but industry cannot revive based on the status quo that the government has delivered on the cfp. does he understand that my constituents will see this as a total sell—out? and would not even a say at the table for the next two years? i'm slightly concerned by my honourable friend in relation to the negotiations that the european commission would not allow us something. surely, it is a question of what importance we put

on something as to whether we get it. therefore i ask my right honourable friend what did we get in return? the bid price that we have secured is an implementation period that allows us to prepare for the benefits. that's what the price that we got. but the lib dem who raised the question warned michael gove against taking fishermen for granted. it was reported that the government chief whip today or yesterday told his backbenches that it is not like the fishermen are going to vote labour. if that is true, every phrase a certain attitude in the secretary of state should not be complacent, he should not take it for granted in the future that they will be voting tory either. the draft deal about the transition period is expected to be signed off at an eu summit later this week. and the prime minister will make a statement to mps on monday. people with advanced dementia are being evicted by some care providers in england, on the basis it's too costly too

look after them, according to labour. the accusation came at health questions. we have a care system where the audit office says that is not sustainably funded, with the cqc says that one quarter of care facility in not say for now. and when providers cherry pick people with advanced dementia on the grounds of cost. can the care minister tell us what she is doing to address these issues and the sharp decline in which there has been an public satisfaction with the social care system? mr speaker, we know that this sector is under pressure because of the ageing population but the government has given councils accessed 291 £4 billion more dedicated funding over the three years. a conservative thought the answer might be working together. given that the arithmetic of this place is so tight, it's clear that they'll need be some form of consensus for cross party for reform. given that the opposition appeared to favour a wealth tax, and are on—site have mooted the idea

of individuals pay more for their own care,, surely cross party consensus is within reach. can i ask the secretary of state his view on cross party consensus? i think it is very important in your sixth earth 0ffaly on this matter but it is important to the social care issues are something that are going to continue. —— he always speaks truthfully on this matter. unless we find a solution of both parties will have to deal with this. in truth, both parties have made things worse by politicking in the past whether it was discussion about a death tax and 2009, or a dementia tax in 2017. a labour mp thought the problem was simple. not much sign of a cross—party consensus yet then. the problem is simply this, not enough money, or quality stuff and not in a place of. the government should be ashamed of itself. it's his party leaving us

with the financial crisis ten years ago. that's right it is his party that should be a shame to miss out. it has created pressure and health and social care system. not much sign of consensus yet. you're watching tuesday in parliament with me, mandy baker. the bbc has come under fire from some of its senior broadcasters. they believe they were forced into employment arrangements that could leave them facing huge and unexpected tax bills. the culture committee is investigating a decision to make some presenters use personal service companies or pscs. before the hearing, the mps released a dossier showing how some of those pursued for unpaid taxes suffered mental health problems and in some cases considered suicide.

the bbc has established a process which means the corporation could pay a share of bills. this is an incredibly serious issue and i think we've all been concerned to read about the personal predicament people have been placed in and the effect that has had on themselves on their families. this isn't the sort a well played presenters. training to companies to attack. this is the story of the bbc forcing asher evidence has shown hundreds of present is to form companies and treat them as freelancers because that gave the bbc plex ability. the effect of that meant the bbc plate last insurance contributions. except that was not its purpose and we accept that but it did have that effect. and save millions of pounds a year. the bbc have avoided other employment cost. sickness payments, secretary pay, pensions... so on.

it could get rid of any of us on a whim. no employment rights and assets. the price was paid by presenters who were exposed to the risk that when hmrc will come to them and decide it would not freelancers but were employed in claim that tax including employers national insurance. that risk has become real. the bbc ended the use of pscs because the law changed last year. it's done in such a candid way that many people have been faced to the financial. double taxation, no pay, direct of the work and that has led to that dossier of despair shall i call it, which was presented to you and it is sad to us that it took the publication of that to arouse the bbc to say what he said last night. mr lewis said he'd refused to set up a company. but others had. the bbc point of view was nobody was forced and the evidence you didn't do it, it didn't work. that was being forced in my view and people suddenly felt they had no choice to agree to that.

the mps then heard from presenters who felt they had been compelled to set up a psc. i think it is a tragedy that this mismanagement will lead to millions of pounds possibly being taken to the coffers, to rapidly compensate people who been taken into account its game or gone to hell, to the point of nearly taken her own life. or have been heavy with the tax bills. it is not something i want to be a poster girl. let's take the money off of the licence plate. i resent that. none of this is of our making. another said all her worst fears had come true. not long after i went freelance my stepdaughter died suddenly, i was unable to take bereavement leave and i went back into the show before her funeral because i had to get money. two years after that,

i was diagnosed with cancer. i had surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, i work the whole way through. i entered into this whole arrangement in good faith. i trusted the bbc and was proud to be part of the bbc. and i feel like i've been hung out to dry. i feel betrayed and i asked this, where is the duty of care towards me? the people in this situation and our people, not pounds of beans, which people seem to regard the mass, they are stacked to the local committee and stars, not being betrayed in some sections of the media. they trust the bbc because it is the bbc. they trusted to look after them in the bbc has done anything but that. 0n the eve of this meeting, where the bbc decided to take some sort of modifying action, and come out with very nice words, i'm sorry but nice words do not heal broken minds. they did not heal broken people

and that is with the bbc is dealt with and they must face up to it. the government's drawing up plans to make boardrooms more accountable when firms go under. ministers say the proposals will give regulators stronger powers to tackle those who make irresponsible decisions. we are determined to learn the lessons from things like really. we think we can do more teaching than the government's framework insolvency situations. he told mps the consultation would focus on three areas. firstly, the selling on of businesses that were near — or in — insolvency. secondly... the government will consult on measures to get insolvency practitioners the additional necessary powers to claw back for the benefit of creditors money which has been siphoned off through complex financing arrangements. thirdly, mr speaker, concerns have also been raised, including bya number of honourable members, about the difficulties raised when a company has been dissolved but is then found to have outstanding debts or allegations of directive misconduct. often these dissolved companies will reappear,

phoenix like in a slightly different form in a slightly different name and start operating again. at present, insolvency services to not have the powers necessary to investigate these cases. we are determined that they will. but labour argued many of these powers already existed and it wasn't clear what these proposals added — what was on offer was meaningless platitudes. the government is certainly not known for being proactive rather always mopping up after the event. the minute these problems are new. companies going insolvent and leaving pension deficits or assets strip are not novel. look at the case of a dhs. these are problems the government should have already anticipated. i ask the minister why hasn't taken the government till now to begin to act and only make tentative steps? the house can be reassured that this

is just the next step in a robust, detailed, fulsome review of our corporate government regime. these proposals are a range of options available to accompany becoming insolvent. the proactive approach can prevent this happening in the first place. would he agree that one way to ensure this would be for organisations to take profit warnings seriously and not continue to hand out contracts to firms who issue them? can ask the minister which currently can do and will in future be able do with respect to companies like toys "r" us where we had a management team led by a man who over a long period of time were able to loop the company with debt using complex is written tax havens and leaving behind the legacy of 580 million pension fund and 3000 redundancies? what can he do? in relation to toys "r" us,

of course he recognises, as i said previously, that that some businesses will always fail, but this government is very clear that these sets of measures, in particular the putting the emphasis on the responsibilities, notjust of directors, but also of shareholders, and i think this is a very important point, the shareholders, institutional shareholders, have a voice in the way these are run. andrew griffiths. a conservative mp has called for the introduction of new measures to make sure residents of high rise homes are given information about fire safety, following the horrific blaze at grenfell tower in london. maria miller said one of her constituents who lived in a privately—owned building wasn't able even to see the fire risk assessments. eventually, when i secured a copy of the fire risk assessments and sent to my constituent,

he was very concerned. he was concerned to find out that a number of fire risks had been raised within the report, including serious faults on defence control panel which the report identified as a hazard for escape routes and evacuations. maria miller said residents had a right to know what the fire risks were. my bill would make sure that the responsible person holds it a residence meeting to go to the fire risk assessment and review and report on the measures being taken to address any risks identified. she said that after the grenfell tower fire there was an urgent need to improve fire safety. everyone who lives in a high—rise building has the right to know if there are fire issues that have been identified, how they are being tackled and most important of all, what they should do

in the event of a fire. at the moment, there is no transparency. residents deserve better. the bill cleared its first parliamentary hurdle, but without government support, it's unlikely to become law. there were calls from across the commons for the restoration of power sharing at stormont. mps were debating a bill to give civil servants in northern ireland the legal authority to carry out day—to—day spending in the absence of a devolved government. power sharing collapsed 14 months ago. the northern ireland secretary said the bill represented the minimum intervention to ensure public services could function and it contained no new money. i take these measures with the greatest reluctance. i have deferred action here until it was clear it would not be possible for executive to take this legislation forward. as we approach the end of the financial year, it is important we proceed now to give certainty as the northern ireland civil service was to continue to protect and preserve the public services. all of this places northern ireland's servants

in a very invidious position. they're taking responsibly for providing services, making now increasingly autonomous decisions about services without really having a political master to serve for a political backstop to watch their back if there is a crisis in any of the services they're providing. of course we want devolution and of course average mice to continue to make sure there is devolution in northern ireland, but in the meantime, there are communities and people suffering from a lack of decision—making and as he has rightly said, in the meantime, we must ensure that decisions are made for the good of everyone. the dup's nigel dodds. the government's been defeated in the lords as peers insisted the uk should not withdraw from the european nuclear agreement, euratom, until a replacement deal was in place. the euratom arrangement covers issues such as the transport of radioactive materials, including those used in medical treatments, or in nuclear power stations. the government was defeated by 265 votes to 194,

a majority of 71 votes on the nuclear safeguards bill. earlier the topic exercising their lordships was rubbish — literally. 0ne conservative former minister thought it would be a good idea to add litter—picking to the national curriculum. and he wasn't mincing his words. the shocking and disgusting proliferation of litter in our towns and countryside frankly seems this nation. whilst my proposal might need some opposition and some people would understandably be very concerned about safety and some teachers might not like it very much, if it where enacted that all children spent a couple hours clearing litter, i believe it might have a gradual effect on attitudes are not only that, but it might, in the long term, have a positive educational impact. would my noble friend please go back and look, in a very serious matter, at this proposal or something similar and take radical action, so we no longer need to be shaved at the state of our highways? i agree with my noble friend

with the scourge of litter which is why the government washed it with your strategy last year. it sets out our aim to clean up the country and to deliver a substantial reduction within a generation. i'm wary of criticising the noble lord given his service. i'm sure there are many parents and not a few children who are quite relieved there are very few chimneys left in the country. i wonder if the noble lord is aware that it is extremely rare

for the curriculum to not have a balanced grade six curricula and to not include that is not a problem? given the high rate of illiteracy and many of our primary schools and the low rate of numerancy in many 11 yearolds, which really affects the subsequent education, does the noble lord not agree with me it would be far better to concentrate on the essentials of a good education and not expose our children to unnecessary danger doing foolish things which are not really part of the curriculum? in two weeks' time, today, it will become a penalty of £80 on the owner of any vehicle from which litter is thrown. this is a big advance because previously they could ever be prosecuted. we have now, the government has now made it a civil penalty.

will he equally except that the penalty for fly—tipping are completely inadequate and the enforcement against fly—tipping is also inadequate? i think it comes back to my earlier statement that it is about public responsibility and duty. i am delighted that the fines for littering from cars have been increased and also be aware that from january of this year, we banned the use of microbeads in cosmetic substances, so the whole thrust is to improve the protection of our environment and i applauded the most recent action you referred to. lord agnew. and that's all we've got time for. so from me, mandy baker, goodbye. hello again.

yesterday scotland and northern ireland had the best of the sunshine. that's where the best of the sunshine was, and what a beautiful end to the day it was as well. this was the scene in 0ban, argyll and bute, looking out over the scottish islands as the sun set in the west. some changes, though, working in for wednesday. got some thicker cloud working into the north—west of the country. so, for scotland and northern ireland, a cloudier start to the day. some rain on the charts edging into western scotland as well. so for some, it will be a damper start as well. whereas further south, for england and wales, clearer skies overnight. well, that means, for early—risers, we've got something like this. a widespread frost developing, even in the towns and cities. head into the countryside and a really a cold start to the day. temperatures could be down as low as —6 in the coldest spots wales. a cold start then, yes, but beautiful sunny skies in england and wales for most of the morning. into the afternoon, cloud thickening from the north and west. sunshine will make the sun hazy elsewhere, but probably the thicker cloud won't reach the south—east until the evening time. welcome to bbc news, broadcasting to viewers in north america

and around the globe. my name is nkem ifejika. our top stories: facebook‘s problems get worse. politicians in europe and the us demand answers about alleged misuse of personal data. an incendiary device in the texan city of austin, but police say it's not related to a spate of bombings. a bbc investigation finds rohingya girls who fled violence in myanmar now trafficked into prostitution in bangladesh. and six months after hurricane maria, we find life is definitely not back to normal in puerto rico.