this is bbc news. the headlines at 11: the government admits terrible mistakes in the treatment of caribbean migrants threatened with deportation after decades in the uk. a home office task force will help those who can't prove their immigration status. the prime minister insists she was right to approve military action before consulting with parliament against the assad regime in syria. but in an emergency debate in the commons, opposition mps say the government must come up with a plan for peace. mps are still debating in the commons. they have been there all evening. the government says they need a comprehensive plan for peace in syria. and an £86,000 fine plus a driving ban for 20 months after the itv presenter ant mcpartlin pleads guilty to drink driving. 0n newsnight, how the scandinavian countries got their immigration

model right. nigel farage refered to malmo as the rape capital of europe. we ask whether liberal policies have led to a rise in crime. good evening, and welcome to bbc news. the government has admitted that "terrible mistakes" were made in the treatment of commonwealth migrants who've been threatened with deportation from the uk. the home secretary, amber rudd, has announced new measures to help members of the so—called windrush generation who came to britain as child migrants between the late 1940s and the 1970s. many say they've been threatened with deportation or refused access to healthcare despite having lived and worked here for decades. our community affairs correspondent, adina campbell, reports. london is the place for me. they

we re london is the place for me. they were invited by the government to rebuild post—war britain 70 years ago and marked the beginning of commonwealth immigration. but now, some of the children of these windrush generation have been detained and nearly deported for not having paperwork to prove their right to remain in the uk. children like decorator anthony brian came here when he was eight years old. last year he was held in a detention centre twice for nearly three weeks. it was a shock. i always thought i was legal, i was british. i did not give it another thought. i thought they were mixing me up. u nfortu nately, they were mixing me up. unfortunately, they were not. those who arrived before 1973 were legally

entitled to remain in the uk. but the home office did not keep records, and changes to immigration rules introduced six years ago when the may was the home secretary has led to some of this group finding it difficult to prove a legal right to stay —— theresa may. after weeks of intensifying pressure to intervene, today, the government apologised.” do not want any of the commonwealth's citizens who are here legally to be impacted in the way that they have. and frankly, some of the ways they have been treated have been robbed. it has been appalling. —— wrong. i am sorry. been robbed. it has been appalling. -- wrong. i am sorry. but there have been heated words from all sides. can see tell the house how many have been detained as prisoners in their owi'i been detained as prisoners in their own country? can see tell the house how many have been denied health under the national health service.

how many have been denied pensions? how many have been denied pensions? how many have lost theirjobs? this isa how many have lost theirjobs? this is a day of national shame! this is far too passive. this is not good enough. both sides of this house need to accept the need for a proper debate about immigration and open and honest debate about immigration, and honest debate about immigration, and if we did that, we might come to the proper conclusion it is notjust the proper conclusion it is notjust the windrush generation, but generations over centuries. tomorrow, the prime minister, theresa may, will hold a meeting with commonwealth leaders to discuss the issue. i hope i am somebody, not nobody. that is all. i am not asking for much. we deserve it. we support this country. it works both ways. he is still waiting for legal paperwork to confirm his right to stay in the

uk. adina campbell, bbc news. the prime minister has defended her decision to authorise military action against syria insisting it was needed to prevent more human suffering. mps have spent several hours debating the missile strikes which were approved without consultation with parliament. the labour leader, jeremy corbyn, questioned the legality of the action and accused the prime minister of acting at the whim of president trump, as our political editor, laura kuenssberg, reports. calm, as the morning shift in westminster begins, yet no political peace, either home or away. the prime minister and her entourage have to explain why she pushed the button on air strikes thousands of miles away. a big day for the labour leader's side, too, claiming the government's action might have broken the law.

statement, the prime minister. but time and again, the prime minister insisted the bombing in syria was legal, and the right thing to do for britain. let me be absolutely clear, we have acted because it is in our national interest to do so. it is in our national interest to prevent the further use of chemical weapons in syria and to uphold and defend the global consensus that these weapons should not be used. she defended her decision not to ask mps first, saying a wider principle is at stake. we cannot go back to a world where the use of chemical weapons becomes normalised. the way we protect our national interest is to stand up for the global rules and standards that keep us safe. that is what we have done, and what we will continue to do. but assurances these strikes were legal were not enough

for the labour leader, adamant parliament must always have a say, suspicious about the prime minister's motive. 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. it's deeply unlikely right now that labour's preferred option of using the un has any chance. but among those who might have backed the action, there are still nerves about not being asked first. it takes a real prime minister to actually face up to the grave responsibility... once president trump had announced to the world what he was proposing, a widespread debate was taking place everywhere, including many mps in the media, but no debate in parliament.

does the prime minister intend to order fresh strikes, or is it, in the words of president trump, a "one—off operation, " and "mission accomplished?" there is no military solution to the crisis. the solution must be political. i regret that there wasn't a parliamentary vote on this issue, but i wish to tell the prime minister and the house that she would have had my vote, had i been asked to give it. #calling all the world to say... songs of protest outside while hours of talking inside, but no sign yet on a vote that will determine whether the prime minister was right or wrong. well, that was our political editor, laura kuenssberg, reporting. and this evening, despite three

hours of statements from prime minister theresa may, the speaker allowed a motion from mcgovern calling for a comprehensive strategy in syria to protect civilian life. what you are seeing is parliament looking somewhat empty because a vote is under way. the end ofa because a vote is under way. the end of a further three hours of debate, the emergency debate called by alison mcgovern, following on from the three hours of the parliamentary statement from the prime minister, theresa may. alison mcgovern then called for a vote. she said in her speech that what was needed was not airstrikes, but a comprehensive strategy. she talked about the need to bring the warring parties together. and earlier, as we were

discussing, there was a load of criticism of the prime ministerfor failing to consult parliament before taking part in those airstrikes. and we will bring you a little more on that shortly. the itv presenter, ant mcpartlin, has been fined £86,000 and banned from driving for 20 months after admitting a charge of drink driving. his car struck two other cars at a roundabout in west london last month while he was twice the legal alcohol limit, as our entertainment correspondent, inzo mzimba, reports. the intense media interest in the case of ant mcpartlin‘s status as one of television's biggest stars. in line with recent changes to guidelines, he was fined two thirds of his £130,000 weekly income, having to pay £86,000 after admitting being more than twice the drink—driving limit. the court was

told the mini he was driving collided with two other cars in quick successionjust collided with two other cars in quick succession just over a month ago. ina quick succession just over a month ago. in a statement in court, one of the drivers said his car came around the drivers said his car came around the corner like a rocket. the driver of the other car he hit said he and his wife could have been killed as a result of the reckless driving of ant mcpartlin. i am sorry for what happened. i have standards of myself andi happened. i have standards of myself and i expect them off myself. i want to apologise to everyone involved in the crash and i am just thankful nobody seems to be heard. can you open the door for me, please? after the hearing today, it is believed he the hearing toda" it is believed he ~ , the heerihe toda" it is hetievee he ~ , 16 treatment. when has gone back to treatment. whehhis. . . ,. to live television might return to live television might happen, it is more unclear. bbc news. the parents of terminally ill baby alfie evans have lost their latest court case to prevent doctors withdrawing his life support at alder hey hospital in liverpool. at alder hey hospital in liverpool. the 23—month—old has a degenerative brain condition and his parents want to take him to italy for treatment.

at a hearing today the judge said doctors had agreed there was "no hope" for alfie but that doctors should continue treating him pending a possible supreme court decision. getting back to westminster. after many hours of parliamentary debate on the airstrikes in syria, there is 110w on the airstrikes in syria, there is now a vote under way in parliament. bulic forsyth is at westminster for us. “— bulic forsyth is at westminster for us. —— alex. tell us about this vote and what it will mean. it is a symbolic vote. to be totally clear, it is not a vote that whether or not the uk should have taken part in those strikes. it will simply say parliament has discussed the uk's approach to syria during the debate tonight. it is a symbolic vote. some mps may choose to use the vote to express frustration. there was some

anger during the many hours today for the fact theresa may did not consult parliament before taking pa rt consult parliament before taking part in military action. we may see symbolism in the numbers, some voting against the government. but it is not a binding vote and will not have any lasting consequences. it is symbolic. the prime minister faced questions about why she did not consult parliament first and that will continue despite six hours of debate or so this afternoon and tonight. we will have yet another debate on that tomorrow. what did the opposition hope to achieve by this? i thinkjeremy corbyn's position is clear, he thinks parliament should always be consulted with military action and wa nts consulted with military action and wants the government to be put on the back foot on this. interestingly, we heard from some on the conservative backbenchers talking about supporting the prime minister while wanting the same thing. some labour mps criticised

jeremy corbyn's approach. as ever with something as divisive as this, it is divisive. what does labour do? if it keeps pushing this issue to try to damage the government, it could backfire and have consequences forjeremy corbyn as well. as yet, we do not know how it will play out tomorrow, the debate. we the differences between the two by the leaders on this issue. alex, thank you very much for the latest on westminster. that is the news. newsnight is up now with emily make this. this is a day of national shame and it has come about because of a hostile environment policy that was begun under her prime minister. let us call it as it is. if you lay down with dogs, you get fleas. the home secretary is forced to apologise for putting policy before people, as thousands from the windrush generation come forward with stories

of humiliation and cruelty. we'll ask how long the government has known this policy was wrong and why nothing changed. "the right thing to do", declares the prime minister as she brings mps into the debate on air strikes over syria. do they agree with her? we ask whether she was right to put urgent action before democracy. also tonight... look at what was happening last night in sweden. sweden? who would believe this, sweden! sweden struggles with a grenade problem. we ask what the effects are of its open door immigration policy. the grenade exploded at the fourth lamp post over there. and he was killed? yes, he was killed. a grenade attack in sweden, that seems very unusual? it's not unusual unfortunately, but it's here now.