the way we keep this country but the way we keep this country safe is to protect the rules —based border. we have not done this because president trump asked us to. today at 5 — theresa may insists she was right to approve military action against the assad regime in syria. three days after the british, french and us air strikes, in response to a chemical attack in syria , the prime minister said she had every right to sanction the action. let me be absolutely clear. we have acted because it is in our national interests. mr speaker, this serves to remind us that the prime minister is accountable to this parliament, not to the whims of the us president. live in the house of commons right now, mps are still asking questions on the chemical attack and the response, we'll have the latest. meanwhile russia has denied interfering with evidence at the site of the chemical weapons attack which led to the air strikes. the other main stories on bbc news at five. the government admits terrible mistakes, in the treatment

of caribbean migrants, threatened with deportation after decades in the uk. an £86,000 fine and a driving ban for 20 months, after the itv presenter ant mcpartlin pleads guilty to drink driving. high standards are expected of me, i expect them of myself. i let myself down and a lot of people down. i am true sorry. and the twinkling stars that can also sing. nasa's mission to turn their vibrations into sound. it's five o'clock. our main story is that the prime minister is addressing the house of commons , defending her decision to authorise

air strikes against syria , at the weekend , without first seeking parliamentary approval. labour has questioned the legality of the bombing raids. 0ur chief political correspondent vicky young is at westminster. the prime minister has been speaking for 45 minutes. let's go straight to westminster. your sense of how things have gone so your sense of how things have gone so far? theresa may going through the criticisms really. the questions she has had to face, explaining why the action was taken, saying it was right to try and stop the normalisation, as she called it, the use of chemical weapons. she talked about the evidence, saying any idea

that this had been put on or could not because of eid in this way on this scale. she said the british government were as confident as they could be that it was a sad who were responsible for this. she also took on the criticism she has faced from jeremy corbyn in the last few days, saying it was all very well talking about a political solution but russia was vetoing those attempts the un security council wasn't possible to go down that route alone. she then turned to this crucial question of why she decided not to recall parliament from its easter break to get mps to back what she was doing. let me be absolutely clear. we have acted because it is in our national interest. it is in our national interest. it is in our national interest to prevent further use of chemical weapons in syria and to uphold and defend the global consensus is that these weapons should not be used. mr speaker, the

speed with which we acted was essential in cooperating with our partners to alleviate further monetary and suffering and to maintain the vital security of our operations. this was a limited targeted strike on a legal basis that has been used before. it was a decision that required the evaluation of intelligence and information, much of which was of a nature that could not be shared with parliament. we have always been clear that the government has the right to act quickly in the national interest. i am absolutely clear, mr speaker, that it is parliament responsible easy to hold me to account for such decisions and parliament will do so. but it is my responsibility as prime minister to make these decisions and i will make them. jeremy corbyn completely disagreed with that, he is calling for a new more powers act which would mean that parliament and mp5 would always have to authorise military action u nless have to authorise military action unless it was an extreme emergency

and the country was being attacked itself. he also said that what happened last week had not been fully investigated and he said that really, britain and the other allies should have waited until more had been done. mr speaker, this statement serves as a reminderthat mr speaker, this statement serves as a reminder that the mr speaker, this statement serves as a reminderthat the prime mr speaker, this statement serves as a reminder that the prime minister is accountable to this parliament, not to the whims of the us president. we clearly need a war powers act in this country to transform a now broken convention into a legal obligation. her predecessor came to this house to seek authority for military action in libya and in syria in 2015 and the house had a vote over iraq in 2003. there is no more serious issue than the life and death matters of military action. it is right that parliament has the power to support

or stop the government from taking bland, military action. he urged theresa may to engage with all parties in order to get a ceasefire. sir michael fallon is on his feet. let usjoin him now. cani let usjoin him now. can i thank my right honourable friend for his comment and in fact, when i quoted from a written ministerial statement in 2016, it was written into your statement in my right honourable friend 's name where it was clear that it must ensure the ability of our armed forces to act quickly and quickly and decisively and maintain the security of their operations is not, might in observing the convention. it is important that we are able to do that and i absolutely agree with my right honourable friend.

this was clearly a vile attack by a sad —— assad on his own people and we have a responsibility to see how to respond while also not escalating global conflict but parliament has considered these kinds of complex issues before. we have voted for and against military action, we have got things right and got things wrong and so, too, as the executive. the prime minister and her cabinet appeared today to notjust be arguing about the circumstances of last week, but also to be rejecting the entire principle of consulting, debating and voting in parliament in advance of military action. given the importance of pioneering values across the world, can she clarify her position on this and see how important she thinks it is for parliament to decide issues of war and peace? cani

and peace? can i say to the right honourable lady, it is not a question of government rejecting that, it is, if ican government rejecting that, it is, if i can return again to the written ministerial statement which observed that the cabinet manual states that in 2011 the government acknowledged that a convention had developed in parliament that before troops were committed, the house of commons should have an opportunity to debate the matter and said that a proposed to observe that convention except where there was an emergency and such action would not be appropriate. it then goes on subsequently to refer the references after that but says, as i have just said in my response to my right honourable friend, the member for sevenoaks, honourable friend, the member for sevenoa ks, in observing honourable friend, the member for sevenoaks, in observing the convention we must ensure the ability of our armed forces to act quickly and decisively and contain the security of their operations is not, revised. where it is the case that the government takes the decision and acts without a debate in parliament as has happened in this occasion, it is right that i come to call parliament at the first opportunity to explain the decision

and give members of this house an opportunity to question that and you hold me and the government to account. ican account. i can only imagine the burden on the prime minister ‘s shoulders as she took the order is a decision that she took. i can only say that on the other side, receiving orders like thatis other side, receiving orders like that is about the most sobering thing you can ever get. may i congratulate her on having taken action but i believe to be not only legitimate but right and indeed urgent and i can modulate her and her colleagues and indeed our international parties in standing together on this. may i also ask however if she will reinforce the effo rts however if she will reinforce the efforts of the foreign office because few have been shouldering the burden is heavily as karen pearce in the united nations although others in our network of done so. which is not agree with me that the role of the foreign office is to promote the ins and interests of our government and our people who we are here to represent and not to wait for a veto and the order that

moscow says no. i absolutely agree with my honourable friend. it must be the uk government determines uk foreign policy we must not hand over our foreign policy to a russian veto. it is absolutely essential that we determine our foreign policy and that the foreign office of course is a key part of delivering that. there are many who support the principle of humanitarian protection. was it achieves in kosovo and sierra leone and what its absence cost in rwanda and indeed in syria and of course we must uphold the international prohibition on the use of chemical weapons but as someone use of chemical weapons but as someone who supported military action against by esh in syria in the boat in 2015, may i say gently to the prime minister that she should have come first to the house before emitting our forces to action

and therefore may i ask her to give us an assurance and therefore may i ask her to give us an assurance that in the event, heaven forbid, but resident assad chooses to use chemical weapons again against innocent civilians, that she will come to parliament first, that she will share such evidence as she can with us, as she has done today, and that she will trust parliament to decide what is to be done. asi to be done. as i have set out the basis on which we took this decision in the statement that i have just made, and i recognise that the importance of parliament and parliament being able to make its views known on these issues but it is also important that the government is able to act in the will always be circumstances in which it is important for the government to be able to act and for

the operational security of armed forces to be able to do so without that debate having taken place in parliament. there will be circumstances where that is the case, the government has consistently said that out and if those are the circumstances, then it is right that the government comes to parliament at the earliest opportunity but in relation to the referencing has made the potential future action, as i said, in response to the right honourable gentleman, the leader of the liberal democrats, this was a targeted attack, it was targeted on the degrading of the chemical weapons ability of the syrian regime and it was undertaken, we now look aside that, to undertake international work to ensure that we reinforce the international law of not using chemical weapons but no body should be in any doubt about our resolve that should be there to ensure we do not see a situation developing where the use of chemical weapons is

normalised. if the leader of the opposition persists on behalf of the labour party in changing its previous adherence to the previous rule of international law, justifying taking unilateral action in the event of there being a humanitarian necessity, does my right honourable friend agree with me the consequence of that is going to be that any tyrant, mega maniac, personally intent on carrying out genocide, if they have the support of an immoral state within the security council, would be able to conduct a genocide with total in trinity? even if it was within our power to act to prevent it. does she agree with me that in no circumstances, far from upholding the international system,

the reality is that it would be dead. cani dead. can i say to my right honourable and learned friend but i absolutely agree with him. he is absolutely right. if we were to say that we would only be prepared to act when we had the support of the united nations, given that there is, as we have seen in this circumstance, a memberof the un have seen in this circumstance, a member of the un security council who is willing repeatedly to veto the ability to investigate these issues, then anybody, any tyrant around the world could determine that actually they could act with impunity and produce these weapons with impunity and we must not allow that to happen. the use of these chemical weapons must be stopped. the prime ministers remarks on the passing of the officer and his courage and fathers, another example of the courage of all our service men as a codified in syria at the weekend. can i thank herfor her

call with me prior to the action on saturday morning and thank her for her statement today and well argued nature of that statement, addressing the challenges of these difficult times and star contrast to the contribution of the leader of the opposition in this house today. given the fact that this is limited and targeted action, given the fact that diplomacy was tried and was unable, sadly, to succeed, the prime minister is utterlyjustified in the action that she has taken and she should have the support of every right—thinking member of this house in upholding international law and defending the national interests of the united kingdom. cani the united kingdom. can i find the right honourable gentleman and he is publicly right. we undertook this action because we believed it was the right thing to do, it was in our national interest andi do, it was in our national interest and i believe it is important that all of us across this house recognise the need to uphold the international rules —based order and do what we can to ensure that we

maintain that rules —based order. i welcome the calm and measured assessment of the prime minister as i suspect a considerable number of honorourable members on the other side of the house. she mentioned the year 2011. bearing in side of the house. she mentioned the year2011. bearing in mind side of the house. she mentioned the year 2011. bearing in mind what happened in libya after the house retrospectively approved air action in 2011, namely the toppling of the regime, will she give us an absolute and unequivocal guarantee that the use ofair and unequivocal guarantee that the use of air strikes now specifically, as she says, to degrade and deter chemical atrocities, will absolutely not be allowed to lead to the royal air force coming into effect the error are of thejihadist air force coming into effect the error are of the jihadist led rebel forces in syria ? error are of the jihadist led rebel forces in syria? the two rules are,

and should be held, to be entirely separate. my separate. my honourable friend is utterly right. they are separate. this was about the degrading of chemical weapons give ability, it was not about regime change. it was not about regime change. it was not about an intervention in the civil war in surrey. it was about the use of chemical weapons and the prevention of future humanitarian suffering. there are no easy solutions to the appalling humanitarian crisis and civil war in syria but assad's repeated use of chemical weapons, against his own people, in violation of international law, cannot go unanswered. can the prime minister tell us what assessment is of assad's chemical weapons capability after these strikes and what further and urgent humanitarian action she is planning to protect syrian civilians?

cani civilians? can i say to the honourable lady, i thank her for her words and say that we are of course continuing to compete the assessment of the action but the assessment of the strikes that took place in the early hours of saturday morning are that those strikes were successful, that they will have degraded capability of the syrian regime. but we will continue to ensure that we are encouraging humanitarian access to those people in syria who require that access. again, there have been attempts through the united nations to encourage that access and so forth and sometimes those have not been successful but we will continue to press because we believe it is important that we can ensure that support is available to those people in syria that needed. asa in syria that needed. as a former secretary of state in international development, the harrowing stories i heard from refugees, men, women and children,

will stay with me for the rest of my life. does she agree with me that on their behalf, recently cannot turn a blind eye to this breach of international law, and it will be times when action is urgent and must be taken and she agree with me that we cannot also a countries like russia and syria to simply dictate ourforeign policy? i absolutely agree with my right honourable friend. as she has said in herformer honourable friend. as she has said in her former role, she would have had the opportunity to speak with and hear from syrian refugees about their experiences. i think no body who has seen the pictures or read the descriptions of what happened can think anything of and this was an absolutely barbaric act that took place and that it is right that we do act in response to that and the continued use of chemical weapons because this was about the continued

use of chemical weapons and the potential for those weapons to be used in future. the sight of children and adults suffering from the effects of chemical weapons cries out to all humanity for a humane response but planning for war without equally robust planning for peace is anything but humane. conventional and chemical weapons are indiscriminately horrific. in what way will this weekend ‘s strikes prevent children from monstrous attacks in the future? what we have undertaken is a limited and targeted set of strikes alongside our allies in united states and france. the purpose of those strikes, as i have just indicated in response to a previous question, or assessment is that they we re question, or assessment is that they were successful in the grading the capability of the surrey and regime to use chemical weapons and it is that degrading of their capability

but also those strikes were invented to deter their willingness to use chemical weapons and it is that degrading of their capability which we believe will have an impact and will help to alleviate and ensure that we do not see the same humanitarian suffering and future. will my right honourable friend agree with me that the use of chemical weapons by anyone, anywhere, under any circumstances, is illegal contrary to all the laws of and utterly reprehensible? which he therefore confirm that the government will at a later date seek the arraignment is an international court of those who instigate these vile acts, whoever they may be? cani vile acts, whoever they may be? can i say to my right honourable friend that he is absolutely right about the illegality of the use of chemical weapons and we believe that those who are responsible should be held to account.

pinpointing and degrading assad's chemical weapons was necessary and appropriate and that intervening to save civilians from the future gas attacks, while not without risk, was absolutely the right thing to do. with the prime minister also agree that a policy of inaction also have severe consequences and that those who would turn a blind eye, he would do nothing in pursuit of some moral high ground should also be held accountable for once today as well? cani accountable for once today as well? can i thank the right honourable gentleman for his comments and i agree with him. i think we have to look, focus on the impact of action but inaction would have given a message that these chemical weapons would continue to be used by the syrian regime and indeed by others

with impunity and we cannot allow that to happen. the use of these weapons must be stopped. there are no words to describe the appalling nature of the humanitarian disaster to be found in syria which is why i commend herfor the disaster to be found in syria which is why i commend her for the strong actions and the support she has given to the syrian people. will my right honourable friend give an assurance that in the face of the abuse of the syrian regime, that she will continue to be a strong voice for the international rules —based system and show that britain will not stand idly by when cruel weapons are used to murder innocent children and families? cani and families? can i say that i absolutely agree with her. we will ensure that our voice is heard. i think is absolutely right and this is the right thing to do and is in our national interest but it is also important that we are standing up about international rules —based order and continue to do so.

britain was absolutely right with france and america to take this long overdue action in response to assad's proven and repeated use of chemical weapons. his regime have lied and lied again since 2013 on his continued development of his chemical weapons programme and their continued use so will she reassure this house that if this does not prove to be a sufficient deterrent, she and our allies will not hesitate to act again but i do urge her in those circumstances to come to this house and seek parliament's consent first. cani first. can i say to the right honourable gentleman, he is absolute rewrite to refer to proven and repeated use of chemical weapons by the syrian regime and as i said earlier in response to a number of other questions, nobody should doubt a result, no body should be in any

doubt about our resolve to ensure that the alleviation of the military and suffering by dealing with this issue with use of chemical weapons but also our resolve to ensure the use of chemical weapons is not normalised. the prime minister was indeed heard in respectful silence because her moderate and determined and sensible attitude deserves respect from this house. but may i ask her a question on behalf of the persecuted christians of the middle east who will face further persecution if it is believed that their sponsors in the west are taking sides in the civil war? was assure us that not just in terms of this air strike but generally, we are no longer in favour of regime change, we do not ta ke favour of regime change, we do not take sides, we're only on the side of peace. can she looked me in the eye and say that whilst we backbenchers can of course not have access to intelligence, she does and

having had that access, she is absolutely clear in her own mind that beyond reasonable doubt, the regime was responsible for this attack? on the first point that the right honourable friend has raised, can i say that i recognise the concerns about persecuted christians in this region and indeed this is a matter with which we are discussing with the foreign office how we can look at this issue of persecuted christians but also other religious groups who find themselves persecuted wherever that might be and including in this region. i can give my honourable friend the absolute assurance that from the intelligence but i have seen, from the analysis i have seen, from the assessment i have heard, i the analysis i have seen, from the assessment i have heard, lam in no doubt that syrian regime is responsible for this attack. the prime minister has said that the legal basis relies on their having

been no practical alternative to these forces. further to that, can she confirm exactly when uk identified the area as a chemical weapons storage facility and also the research centre, when this information was reported to the opcw and whether the uk has asked the opcw to inspect further sites? i have to say that the honourable lady, we have been very clear that we would like to be possible for the opcw to investigate site in syria and for there to be proper accountability, proper and indication of the capital weapons and the accountability of those weapons. can i say to the honourable lady that last tuesday in the united nations security council me there was a proposal, a resolution that would have enabled the reintroduction of a proper investigative mechanism to look at

the use of chemical weapons and what weapons we re the use of chemical weapons and what weapons were available in syria and held by the regime applicability is and to be able to ascertain accountability for those chemical weapons. that draft resolution was vetoed by russia. would my right honourable friend agree that in the coming days, weeks and months, the image we must hold in our minds is of children coughing up in our minds is of children coughing up their lungs in our minds is of children coughing up theirlungs and in our minds is of children coughing up their lungs and which he understand that many of us want an executive when it is planning a limited operation like this, the act in the full knowledge that if it doesn't and tries to labour before the house at great length, we put at risk not only the operation, was a rigorous to our mm and the of working with our partners. cani working with our partners. can i say that i absolutely agree with my right honourable friend and i think he is absolutely right. when we think of this issue, we should

hold in our minds the horrific suffering of children and others as a result of these chemical weapons. the prime ministerjust said we should hold in our ayes the images of the suffering of those children, the human cost of the consequences of assad and their russian backers using chemical weapons against their people and are becoming normalised but we know this is not the first time so with that in mind, can i beg the prime minister to rethink her approach to those syrians who have fled to europe, because they are the same people fleeing this horror, they are the people who needed a safe haven and with 40% of those in the greek accounts, a third of them children, and only one home office official for the entirety of greece to do with the issue, with a not deserve more direct support from us, to? a home office has been looking

carefully at this issue. we have changed the arrangements we have in order to ensure it was a wider group of children that will be falling within the remit of the proposals we have for bringing refugee children into the uk. there are many ways in which we ensure we do accommodate and offer shelter and security to refugees from syria, including refugees from syria, including refugee children, as i said earlier, we also must recognise the many millions of people from syria who have been displaced from their country, both within their country and from their country. it's right we look to ensure we can provide as much support as possible for them, and that is best done by supporting them in region. can i offer my support to the prime minister, both for the action taken at the weekend and to her stance on parliament? she is absolutely right that members of

parliament are there to scrutinise the decisions of the executive, but it is the prime minister's right to make the difficult position she did with government. can i ask her about on line in her statement, she talks about continuing to work with international partners on tough economic action against those involved with the production or dissemination of chemical weapons. cani dissemination of chemical weapons. can i suggest that extends to those complicit in the use of chemical weapons, those who turn a blind eye to chemical weapons and those who veto resolutions at the un, and talk about much —— i am talking about much top sanctions on russia.|j thank her for those proposals. we will look carefully at what further letters can be used. i am pleased the foreign affairs council in the european foreign affairs council has today agreed it is willing to look at what further measures could be taken. i will certainly take on

board and snow the specific suggestions you have made. it's always good to be able to call a new and young member, particularly when that member is celebrating her birthday. thank you, mr speaker. all of us agree in this house that the appalling scenes we saw in the duma require a desperate need for medical relief to the city and those who remained as well as fled. can you tell us what action she is taking to that end? i wish the honourable lady a happy birthday first of all. as i said, we will be continuing to work with our international partners, both to look at what more we can be doing in terms of our humanitarian support but also impressing for humanitarian access, as the honourable lady and others will know, this has been one of the problems time and time again. there have been groups within serious suffering as a result of the

conflict, for whom it has not been possible to get that humanitarian access. we will continue to press at international level for that access. on sunday, the leader of the opposition said on the andrew marr show that our exports going to saudi arabia end up somewhere in bad times in syria and other places. the leader of the opposition has rightly called for evidence to support and for the government to be satisfied about this intervention. if you demand evidence and then repeat malicious gossip for which there is no evidence and which is contradicted by the ngos who are specialist in this area, you are guilty of very poor double standards. i absolutely agree with my honourable friend. on the subject of young new members only in their careers, let's hear from mr barry sherman. it's not my birthday but i was born on the week in london on the weekend of the worst weekend of

the weekend of the worst weekend of the blitz, and my next—door neighbour ‘s family were killed and their two children that night. when i hear of their two children that night. when ihearofa their two children that night. when i hear of a tyrant killing children i want action, i have no criticism of the prime minister. i have one problem, i am a passionate, pro—american, i have been all the time i'd been in this house. i see it as time i'd been in this house. i see itasa time i'd been in this house. i see it as a beacon of our democratic world. but i had to say, i was in united nations all last week when this happened, on different visits and the conversations that were quite chilling in the sense that many of us, passionate pro—americans, could not remember a time when we were seriously worried about american leadership and the american president at the same time as we did not trust putin and his horrible gang. we need a prime minister and european leaders to show the way in these troubled times, don't you agree with me? can

isay... times, don't you agree with me? can i say... heckling can i say, what he has seen from the fact the uk and france came together with the us in this action, actually there is leadership being shown in europe on this matter and we will continue to work with france on the international grouping that they have put together in relation to the prohibition of chemical weapons. i think it is clear that europe has takena think it is clear that europe has ta ken a stance think it is clear that europe has taken a stance on this and has shown the way and the importance of the international rules —based order. had she first sought our consent, with what detail might she have persuaded us without fundamentally compromising our intelligence gathering capability? my honourable

friend has put his finger on a particular aspect of this issue, it is not possible to bring all the intelligence through it to this house, it is not possible to make all of that intelligence public. sometimes, actually more information can be made available after the event than in advance of the event because we must maintain the operational security of our armed forces. i wasn't expecting you to call me, so thank you. for those of us call me, so thank you. for those of us who have been trying to follow president trump's tweets over the last week, i can't be the only person who has found it extremely difficult to keep track if he was for military action against it. i wondered, kammy prime minister tell us wondered, kammy prime minister tell us at what point the president instructed her that military action was to be taken? heckling the answer to the question is at no

point at all. i took this decision. itook point at all. i took this decision. i took this decision because i believed it was the right thing to do, it was in our national interest. and it is the decision that should be,| and it is the decision that should be, i believed supported by anybody who recognises the need to re—establish the international norms in relation to the use and the prohibition of the use of cannibal weapons. the prime minister is speaking in the house of commons, a forceful response to a forceful question about how military action was sanctioned three days ago in response to the chemical attack on syria. the live scene there in the house of commons, if you want to stay with the statement the prime minister made and questions, bbc parliament will give you all that live coverage so switch over to bbc

parliament now if you would like to watch the rest of that question and a nswer watch the rest of that question and answer session involving the prime minister in the house of commons which will probably go on till about 6pm. roughly about 20 minutes left. bbc parliament will be covering that in full. the time is 538 and while we we re in full. the time is 538 and while we were listening to the comments in the house of commons, quite a few of the house of commons, quite a few of the members getting up and making points about the way the russians themselves have deployed their own tactics, not least in the diplomatic forum of the united nations. during the day the russian foreign minister sergei lavrov said relations with the west in his view are at their worst state since the time of the cold war, the 50s and 605. in worst state since the time of the cold war, the 505 and 605. in an exclusive interview, mr lavrov 5aid saturday's missile strike exclusive interview, mr lavrov said saturday's missile strike on syria by britain and parts of the us had led to a loss of trust and should not have taken place until there had

been an investigation into the chemical weapons attack on duma. inspectors from the international chemical weapons watchdog have said they still have not been allowed access to the site and that has led to allegations that the russians themselves are impeding that investigation. tom burridge has more details. a us warship in the red sea early on saturday morning. new us defense department videos of the strikes on syria. this one shows tomahawk missiles being fired from an american submarine. and here, a b—i bomber. the pentagon said every bomb and missile hit syrian government buildings used to develop and store chemical weapons. it was this footage, provided by a syrian opposition group, of an apparent chemical attack in the syrian city of douma a week ago that caused america, britain and france to act. russia says it was staged. in a bbc interview,

the russian foreign minister said the west's desire to act fast damaged relations further. we lose, basically, the last remnants of trust to our western friends, who preferred to rate on the basis of very weird logic. proof is in the punishment. they've punished first, like they did in salisbury. then they wait for scotland yard to finalise the investigation. they punish first in douma in syria, then they wait for the inspectors of the opcw to inspect. the weapons inspectors tried to gather clues from the scene of the attack and from the victims. but today, at the headquarters of the world's chemical weapons watchdog, the us envoy to the opcw claimed russia may have tempered with the site in russia where the attack took place.

russia denies that. britain said there is evidence that chemical weapons had been used nearly 400 times in syria in the last four years. the french president also emphatic that syria is to blame. and on french tv last night, emmanuel macron also claimed that in recent days he had helped persuade president trump not to disengage from syria. this morning, he clarified what he meant. translation: yes, the white house is right to recall, the military engage with is against isis is finished the day that war against isis is completed. the syrian government buildings destroyed in the strikes, much of this country has been ruined by war. a war which has destabilised the middle east and south of relations between russia and the west. and you can see that exclusive hardtalk interview

with the russian foreign minister, sergei lavrov, at half past eight, on the bbc news channel. the television presenter ant mcpartlin has been fined £86,000 at wimbledon magistrates' court after admitting driving while more than twice over the legal alcohol limit. ant mcpartlin was involved in a collision with a mini and a bmw in west london last month. he's also been banned from driving for 20 months, he gave this statement outside court. ijust want i just want to say i'm truly sorry for what happened. i let myself down, i let a lot of people down. i'm really sorry. i would like to apologise to everybody involved in

the crash, and i'm thankful nobody was seriously hurt. thank you very much, cheers. our correspondent alison freeman is outside wimbledon magistrates court now. your impressions of what he said and your thoughts on the outcome of this case? well, as you heard him say, he described being very sorry indeed for what had happened, i think one of the key points was he pleaded guilty early on and the judge, districtjudge who was overseeing the case said that was the reason why he was fined the £86,000, it had initially been a higher sum but that was reduced due to the guilty plea. you have two bear in mind that ant mcpartlin owns a per week. he was also banned from driving for 30

months, which could be reduced to 15 months, which could be reduced to 15 months if he completes a drink—drive referral programme. one of the drivers said he actually thought we could have died, as a result of his reckless driving, the other said that mcpartland's cart came round a corner like a rocket. ant mcpartlin's representatives in the court said he was ashamed and mortified by what had happened and he was accepted full responsibility and that's the consequences could have been worse. he also appreciated someone in his position in public life should have set a standard which he fell far short of that day. many thanks. sir cliff richard has returned to court for the third day of his legal

battle against the bbc over its coverage of a police raid on his home in 2014. the singer, who's 77, claims footage of the raid carried out following an allegation of sexual assault was a ‘very serious invasion' of his privacy. he is suing the bbc in the high court for ‘substantial damages' as bbc bo55e5 dispute his claims. sir cliff richard was never arrested or charged. our correspondent helena lee reports. sir cliff richard arriving at court this morning, a worldwide star who has spent decades in the public eye, but there are parts of his life he thinks should be private. today the trial has heard from this man in the middle, matthew fenwick, former detective superintendent at south yorkshire police, the force, which was investigating sir cliff richard, in connection with the historical allegation of sexual abuse made by a boy under 16. the singer was never arrested or charged. the police were approached by a bbc reporter, dan johnson, before they searched sir cliff richard's

apartment in berkshire. they claim he went to them with information from a source and put pressure on them to release details. in his statement, matthew fenwick said he explained to us that he was ready to publish an exclusive story about the investigation and wanted a comment from us. we explained to him that we did not want him to publish a story because the investigation was at an early stage and we were not ready to take certain steps at this time. mr fenwick went on, saying he didn't think it would be possible to stop dan johnson from reporting the story altogether. i was very concerned, he said, that if he reported it now, then the investigation would be prejudiced. senior bbc news managers arriving at court have said the police volunteered the information about the investigation and that they had a public duty to report the story in the way that they did. this is bbc news

at five — the headlines: the prime minister insists she was right to approve military action —— against the assad regime in syria as she faces questions in the house of commons. the government admits terrible mistakes in the treatment of caribbean migrants threatened with deportation after decades in the uk. an 86 thousand—pound fine, and a driving ban for 20 months after the itv presenter ant mcpartlin pleads guilty to drink driving. an update on the market numbers for you — here's how london's and frankfurt ended the day. and in the the united states this is how the dow and the nasdaq are getting on. the government has admitted terrible mistakes

in the treatment of many caribbean migrants, the so—called windrush generation threatened with deportation after decades in the uk. the prime minister has sought to reassure them about their immigration status. thousands of people who came to the uk as child migrants between the late 19405 and the 19705 have no official documents, despite having lived and worked here most of their lives. downing street says theresa may will meet caribbean leaders this week to discuss their concerns, as our correspondent andy moore reports. newsreel: the empire windrush brings to britain 500 jamaicans. many are ex—servicemen who know england. they serve this country well. they came in their thousands, known as the windrush generation, the first wave of commonwealth immigration 70 years ago. but there's concern many now face deportation and are being denied access to public services, because of paperwork issues and problems proving they're in the uk legally.

their treatment is grotesque and immoral according to the mp5 who signed a letter drafted by the london mp david lammy. it is inhumane and cool for so many of that windrush generation to have suffered so long in this condition and for the secretary of state only to have made a statement today. —— inhumane and: the lam not i am not aware of any specific circumstances, that's why i have asked the high commissioner is that if they know of any they should bring it to me, and i ask anyone here if they know of any such circumstances, they should bring them to the home office. the government says people like grandfather michael braithwaite who lost hisjob as grandfather michael braithwaite who lost his job as a special needs

teacher and this man who was refused treatment on the nhs for his cancer will now get support. the government admitted terrible mistakes had been made. there are some heartbreaking stories and what is important to me is that we get this right going forward and that we work to make sure that those who have not got a biometric residence card be helped to apply, be able to talk to their story in the uk as opposed to being asked to produce four pieces of evidence per year. i want to say to them, we really value you and me wa nt to them, we really value you and me want to make this as easy as we possibly can. after initially refusing to meet the high commissioners of 12 caribbean nations, number ten says theresa may will now meet her counterparts at the commonwealth heads of government meeting tomorrow. london is the place for me... the government has apologised for its appalling treatment of the windrush generation, its task force will be expected to put things right quickly. lots of developments today and lots

of reaction. with me as director and co—founder of the windrush foundation, a charity which plays a leading role in the preservation of the arrival of waves of caribbean settlers. what strikes lots of us through the day and what has struck you probably more than anything else as the waves of anger in many parts of society, not just was as the waves of anger in many parts of society, notjust was part of as the waves of anger in many parts of society, not just was part of the community, about the situation. how has it struck you? there has been quite a number of incidents where people have lost theirjobs, not served on the nhs, or even benefits. in that sense, there is anger and frustration. people are impatient because they know that they have a right to be here but papers possibly, that's an issue. then

again, the government has a right to ta ke again, the government has a right to take action. lots of people asking the same question today, which is how could this situation arise? papers or the lack of them will have been a factorfor years papers or the lack of them will have been a factor for years for many people. what brought us to this situation. what is your assessment? the government has not consulted before they issued this regulation on law. if they have done that they would be able to see the problems, theissues would be able to see the problems, the issues of regulation and that it's affecting these windrush generation folk who perhaps had not been as media savvy and taken out a british passport, they might not even have travelled. so they did not need to? no, no need, this is their home. they came to britain to help rebuild after the war and that's what they have done. how many people are potentially affected, thousands?

it could be about 50,000. the scale of that is beyond what lots of people were imagining. with that in mind, you heard the home secretary today, it is a task force being set up, it's important to reflect that, the prime minister has now said she will meet caribbean leaders, there was some doubt about that. what is your thought about the response and does it allow people watching at home who may well be consigned to actually be more relaxed about it? the government has been slow, really, to react to this and to make things right and to assure the windrush generation that everything is ok. they have waited till today, they to spread light on the matter which may be too late for people suffering weeks before. what is the reaction to the people you have spoken to today that the government has at least said, and i quote, terrible mistakes have been made. it's not often the government uses phrases like that and it does reflect the fact they have realised

it's a complete hash. indeed, and we can put it down to the government and its way of doing things. but let's hope they can put this right quickly, and not give the impression that these people must wait. people are not able to wait if they are without benefits, they can't have nhs treatment, and they have lost theirjobs. in a sense, what the government has dodoo is to see a way in which they can compensate these people who have been suffering in that way. i will ask you a different angle, more of an emotional one. people who have been living here for so long, made a big contribution to society in all walks of life feel as british as anyone else, is there a sense of having been betrayed in some way of being let down badly? let down badly i would say, in the sense that they haven't checked with the community. when it affects people, you need to talk to people who have connections overseas etc,

thatis who have connections overseas etc, that is a failing without consulting with the community on this particular issue. great to talk to you and thanks for coming in. co—founder of the windrush foundation, there. they twinkle, and they shoot across the sky, well now apparently stars can sing too. tonight nasa is launching a mission to look for planets around the stars closest to us, and capture their vibrations which can be turned into sounds. this will help researchers identify their size and age. our science correspondent, pallab ghosh reports now from the kennedy space centre, in florida. the night sky is littered with stars. they shine and they also sing. whirring noise. these are the vibrations of a distant star similar to our sun converted into sound. humming noise. and this is another much bigger and older star. professor bill chaplin is analysing these sounds.

of course, there's no air in space, so the stars can't actually be heard, but they do vibrate, and so generate sound waves. humming noise. and professor bill chaplin has discovered that each star has its own song, depending on how big and hot it is. when we hear the sounds of the stars, first of all, it tells us that out of, if you like, this turbulence, this almost chaos, we get these ordered sounds, and it's incredible that stars resonate just like a musical instrument. and this gives us a way to actually study stars and see what their insides look like in a way that's just not possible by other means. this will be the first mission to scan nearly the entire sky, sector by sector. the sound a star makes will tell the scientists how big and how hot it is. many of them will have planets in orbit around them. some will be too close. those that are the right distance away will be the ones most capable of supporting life in what scientists call the goldilocks zone,

where the temperature is just right. george ricker is the mission's lead scientist. he believes that, one day, it might be possible to send probes to some of these distant worlds and see if there really is life out there. there are about a hundred stars that lie within 20 light years of earth, and if you were to send out an armada of probes to those, and you can basically get up to speeds of basically 20% of the speed of light, then under those circumstances, you could expect to reach these planets within a hundred years. in a few years' time, we'll know how each of the stars in the night sky sounds and whether the planets around them might harbour life. pallab ghosh, bbc news, at the kennedy space centre in florida. time for a look at the weather.

here's matt taylor. some starry skies in the east tonight but in the west it is turning increasingly windy and wet. brea ks turning increasingly windy and wet. breaks of rain in two parts of western scotland, north—west england and western wales at times. a breezy night elsewhere with the breeze coming from the south—west. a chilly night. early risers across northern ireland may see some wet weather but that will quickly move out of the way for sunshine and showers, thoroughly wet through dumfries & galloway and occasional rain across scotland. north—western parts of wales and cornwall staying cloudy, occasional rain or drizzle at times, some dry moments that further south and east, particularly towards east anglia, the sunniest conditions

throughout. highs of 19 degrees and the sunshine and warmth will develop more widely later this week bringing some of the warmest air we have seen since august last year. the full forecast coming up with fiona bruce on the bbc at six next. the government is forced to apologise for what it calls its appalling treatment of windrush immigrants. the home office admits some who arrived here from the caribbean from 1948 onwards have been wrongly threatened with deportation. frankly, some of the way they have been treated has been wrong, has been appalling and i am sorry. some who've been here most of their lives have already lost theirjobs, lost benefits and been detained. ijust think she was mixing me up. unfortunately they were mixing it up, it was not me there were after, but it was me they were locking up. and the government admits it doesn't

know if any of those targeted by the home office have been deported in error. also tonight... in the house of commons, mp5 are debating the missile strike