and missile tests — saying it had completed the weaponising of nuclear arms. state media said the suspension was aimed at pursuing economic growth and peace on the korean peninsula. relations between the two koreas have thawed recently. british pm theresa may has said members of the so—called windrush generation who have been treated unfairly by the home office will be given compensation. her comments came after it emerged that some people who came to the uk from the caribbean before 1971, have had their immigration status wrongly challenged. one of the world's biggest dance music stars, the swedish dj avicii, has died in oman at the age of 28. avicii, whose real name was tim bergling, stopped touring in 2016 because of ill health including acute pancreatitis. now on bbc news, its the week in parliament. hello and welcome to

the week in parliament. on this programme: the government suffers its first defeats in the lords on its flagship brexit bill. this amendment and the other amendments are part of a campaign which is putting peers against the people. this amendment isn't about us playing politics. this amendment is not about unscrambling brexit. it is about how we leave the eu. you i'll be asking two peers what that row and those defeats mean for the government's eu withdrawal bill. also on this programme: as the home secretary apologises for the treatment of the windrush generation, one mp blames the rhetoric of the far right. if you lay down with dogs, you get fleas. and that is what has happened with this far—right rhetoric in this country.

and there's a defiant response from one mp in the face of anti—semitic abuse. we will not be bullied out of political engagement. we are going nowhere. we stand and we'll keep fighting until the evils of anti—semitism have been removed from our society. but first, on wednesday, there was a setback for ministers when the government suffered two defeats on the eu withdrawal bill. it stops a legislative black hole opening up after brexit by moving eu law into uk law. the bill has already taken up hundreds of hours of debating time in the lords as peers have pored over its details. but the first votes on wednesday brought the first defeats. peers began by backing an amendment requiring the government to report back on what steps it had taken to negotiate a continued eu—uk customs union. if in the end we do leave, it should be in a way that limits the damage to the country's well—being and the future our children.

and that's why i believe it makes sense for the government to be asked to explore the customs union. but while the amendment has support across the house, there was strong opposition too. this is a political argument dressed up as a trade argument. and the trade argument bares no substance whatsoever. and therefore, i urge the house to reject what is in a sense, in essence, a wrecking amendment. have a care with what we are doing. we are an unelected house. we are not an elected house and this amendment and the other amendments are part of a campaign which is putting peers against the people. the people... yes, it is. the people set out very clearly that they wish to leave the european union which meant leaving the customs union as well.

as my noble friend has pointed out, it was central to the whole campaign. so, what is going on here is an exercise by remainers in this house who are the majority who refuse to accept the verdict of the british people. and i believe they are playing with fire. this amendment isn't about us playing politics. this amendment is not about unscrambling brexit. it is about how we leave the eu and it is about our future relationship once we are outside. and all it asks is for the government to seek to negotiate our participation in a customs union with the eu. by leaving the customs union, by establishing a new and ambitious customs arrangement with the eu, we would be able to forge new trade relationships with our partners around the world and maintain as frictionless trade as possible in goods between the uk and the eu providing a powerful and positive voice for free trade across the globe.

lord calla nan. but when it came to the vote, the government was defeated by a majority of 123. and later there was a second defeat on protecting rights that exist under eu law. so what does all that mean for the government? and with more defeats predicted, what does it mean for the bill? earlier, i spoke to two peers who voted for that amendment on a customs union, the conservative and former minister, lady altmann and the labour peer and passionate remainer lord foulkes. i began by asking what the mood was in the house about the bill. i think there is extreme concern that the bill has come over to us is not adequate to protect the national interest, in the context of what we are trying to do. in leaving the european union and the government's arrangements for that.

there is a significant amount of interest across all benches. in improving the bill and sending it back so that mps have a chance to reconsider things they may not have debated thoroughly or reconsidering in light of new information or consider things they did not actually look at in the bill debate in the first place. your suggested that that there is a number who have considered mps defeat the amendment. most of us in the lords are remainers and want us to stay in the eu. but we have a job to do to make this bill fit for us. the job of the house of lords is not to contradict and overrule how the house of commons, but to revise the bill. and send it back to the house of commons. on these issues, we would like you to think again. and that is the real role of the house of lords and very important.

but he made the point that you are the unelected house and that you need to tread very carefully. i am in favour of reforming the house of lords and that will come eventually. but we are part of the constitution. but you are unelected, no one voted for you. no, but it is accepted that the house of lords as it exists has a statutory role to revise legislation and send it back to the house of commons and asked them to think again. we have done that when there've been conservative governments, when there are labour governments they have objected. it is part of our constitution and our statutory responsibility. we must exercise that. the problem for you is that leaving the customs union was in the conservative manifesto just a year ago. so the government says we want to leave. how can you object? it is not a question of trying to overturn any kind of democratic vote or being anti—democratic.

actually, this is just about asking mps to think again. we are not elected. alternately, the final say is with the elected house. but things have moved on quite a lot since the election. things have changed both in the economy and in the results and the opportunities that the government is finding when it is trying to proceed with the brexit negotiations. the fact we had an opportunity to ask the government not to role out scenarios that might actually be in the national interest seems to be exactly what we are there to do. we are not there to make the final decision. but we all know the government is on the deadline and has to get the bill through. so the more times you object to things in this bill and send it backwards and forwards, the more pressure there

is on the government. they created it. they didn't need to. and they have a lot more legislation to get through. they are on a difficult path to get this through. there is the trade bill, but bill on agriculture, the bill on fishing and the bill on approval. and what we want to do in the house of lords ironically is to say there ought to be a meaningful vote at the end of this. give power to the house of commons. perhaps even give power to the people to decide on a final say. it would be ironic, wouldn't it, if it was the unelected house that gave the power back to the people to make the final decision. how far are you prepared to push this bill given that the government is on a deadline and has to have something in place by the time we leave? the timetable for the bill is clear. we will have a third reading in the house of lords on the 16th of may and then it will go back to the comments. the commons will reconsider and send it back to us.

and at that point, the house of lords will have to once again think well, is this bill in a format that we think is in the national interest? isn't that what happens in the end? yes, that is what happens. there is no question in my view that there is any mood in the house or any mood among colleagues that i speak to to actually have a standoff and say if the house of commons sends it back to where three ties and said we thought about it again ——two or three times and said we thought about it again and we disagree with you, they are supreme. and another thing. if we send aspects of the bill back to the house of commons, the government has changed their minds. that is the great power of argument and the expertise and house of lords we have been able to convince the governments to think again. and we want to think about that again.

thank you both very much indeed for coming in to the programme. what's been happening in the wider world of politics this week? with a look at some of the lighter moments, here's duncan smith. five. when you are training for the marathon one moment and have a tv interview the next. the welsh secretary alun cairns proved a champion at the quick change. four. the president of the republic of the gambia. what's a collective term for a gathering of commonwealth leaders in london? a pageant? the prime minister of the republic of fiji. three. in the house of lords as we saw, you can take madam speaker lady boothroyd out of the commons. we mention in passing... you are not in the commons, and you know that. two. mps and peers returning from the easter break had to get used to time standing still. whilst they were away, the hands were removed from the elizabeth tower clock face for repair. they will be replaced alternative temporary ones.

one. and as the mayor of london welcome the prime ministers of canada and new zealand, it was the case of anything uk could do, new zealand could do better. congratulations on celebrating 100 years of woman's suffrage. in new zealand, we are celebrating 125 years. show off. laughter. jacinda ardern, the prime minister of new zealand ending duncan smith's countdown of the week. the big row over the past few days has been over the treatment of people who were part of the windrush generation. the children of commonwealth citizens who arrived in the uk with their parents between 19118 and 1971 were automatically granted leave to remain. but some have recently lost theirjobs and access to nhs services, or been detained in immigration removal centres because a change in the law means they have to prove they have been living in the uk, even though

they have been in the country legally for decades. at the start of the week, the home secretary came to the commons to answer an urgent question and apologise. i recognise the concern from some people in the windrush generation, and i wouldn't want anyone who has made their life in the uk to feel unwelcome or be in any doubt of their right to remain here. as the prime minister has made clear, there is absolutely no question about their right to remain and i am very sorry for any confusion or anxiety felt. amber rudd promised to set up a task force. but a labourmp was furious. if you lay down with dogs, you get fleas, and that is what has happened with this far right rhetoric in this country. can she apologise properly? can she explain how quickly the team will act to ensure

the thousands of british men and women denied their rights in this country are satisfied? i am concerned that the home office has become too concerned with policy and strategy and sometimes loses sight of the individual. and this is about... this is about individuals. the home secretary is wrong, it is notjust about individuals, it is about a systemic policy put out why her department and it is symptomatic of the politically driven hostile environment policy, and it is a sign that it has to stop. jeremy corbyn raised the row at pmqs where theresa may also apologised for what had happened. and for those who have mistakenly received letters challenging them, i want to apologise to them and i want to say sorry

to anyone who has been caused, who has had confusion or anxiety felt as a result of this. yesterday, we learned that in 2010, the home office destroyed landing cards for a generation of commonwealth citizens and so have told people, "we can't find you in our system." did the prime minister, the then home secretary, sign off that decision? no, the decision to destroy the landing cards was taken in 2009 under a labour government. isn't the truth, mr speaker, that under the home office became heartless, hopeless, and doesn't she now run a government that is both callous and incompetent? can i say to the right honourable gentleman, he talks about being callous, i will not take that, following a debate last night... where powerful contributions

were made, particular by the members from stoke—on—trent north, from barking, and liverpool way victory, i will not take an accusation of colours from a man who allows anti—semitism to run rife in his party. —— liverpool wavertree. well, those comments from theresa may referred to a debate on anti—semitism that had been held in the commons the previous day. reports from private meetings of labour mps in recent months have recounted stormy scenes, with demands for the party leadership to do more to tackle the problem in some sectors of the party and that anger boiled over into the commons. several mps set out the abuse they or theirfamilies had received. one explained that four people had been convicted since 2013 for anti—semitic abuse or harrassment directed at her. and a us far right group had also targetted her. and its us far right group also... i was sent violent, pornographic,

anti—semitic messages in one day alone. we have a duty to the next generation game. denial is not an option. being a bystander who turns the other way is not an option. the time for action is now. is enough is enough. i want to conclude with the words by drjonathan sacks who said, an assault upon jews is an assault upon difference. another labour mp directed his fire at former london mayor ken livingstone. ken livingstone comparing, claiming that hitler was a zionist, this is anti—semitism pure and simple.

it happened more than two years ago, there has been ample time to deal with it. kick him out immediately. he should stand at the dispatch box and he should tell the leader of the labour party that livingstone should be booted out, booted out. the honourable gentleman makes his views very clearly. there is no place for anti—semitism in the labour party, in the left of british politics, in british society at all. end of. and another labour mp read out some of the graphic abuse she'd received online. what is so heartbreaking is the concerted effort in some quarters to downplay the problem. but every comment like those you have just heard, you can find ten people to dismiss it, to cry smear, to say that we are ‘weaponinsing' anti—semitism. my family came to this country

fleeing 19th century porgroms. of our relatives who stayed in europe, none of them survived. we know what anti—semitism is. we know where it leads. how dare these people suggest that we would try to do this with something so dangerous, so toxic. how dare they seek to dismiss something so heinous, to reduce it to the realm of political point scoring. i stand here to say that we will not be bullied out of political engagement, we are going nowhere, we will stand and keep fighting until the evils of anti—semitism are removed from our society. a rare round of applause in the commons for that speech by ruth smeeth. now the week started with the prime minister defending her decision to order british airstrikes against targets in syria. raf tornado jets joined french and us forces to target three areas in damascus and homs. the target areas included science

sites, military facilities, and equipment storage spaces. the military action was in response to the chemical attack alleged to have been carried out by the regime of the syrian president assad on citizens in douma on 7th april. the prime minister had been heavily criticised for authorising the action without the approval of mps. theresa may said the douma attack had killed 75 people. the images of this suffering are utterly haunting. innocent families, seeking shelter in underground bunkers, found dead with phone in their mouths, —— phone in their mouth and their body surrounded by a chlorine like odour. children are spring for life as chemicals joked their lungs. the fact that such an atrocity can take place is a stain on our humanity. the leader of the opposition says he can only countenance involvement in syria is there is un involvement in it. that would mean a russian veto on our foreign policy.

jeremy corbyn said he believed the action was legally questionable. acting through the un, the prime minister should now take a diplomatic lead to negotiate a pause in this barend conflict. this means engaging with all parties that are involved in the conflict, including iran, israel, russia, saudi arabia, turkey, and the us, to ensure there is an immediate ceasefire. 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 piste is not humane. —— planning for peace. given this is limited action, diplomacy was tried and unable to succeed, the prime minister is utterlyjustified in the action that she has taken.

well, the question and answer session with theresa may carried on for over three hours and later that evening there was a further debate on syria. the next day, jeremy corbyn led an emergency debate on the government's failure to ask for parliamentary approval before the military action. i'm clear that parliament should have, as an absolute minimum, enshrined in law, the opportunity to ask questions before the government can order planned military action. the question, is it necessary, is it legal, what will it achieve, and what is the long—term strategy? it is difficult to argue that requiring government to answer those questions over matters of life and death would be anything other than a positive step. the timeline of events last week show our prime minister chasing the president's timetable, rather than planning a recall. parliament should authorise military

action, it is a disgrace that the prime minister appeared beholden to the us president instead of to the uk parliament. what is the threshold on which we once again intervene? is it any use? is it the number of deaths? is it the president of the united states being indignant because he had seen something on television? what is the threshold for continuing involvement in the struggle? that is all the more reason why we need to have parliamentary authorisation for continuing action. the only way to reassure the house would have been to set out in advance, as i did after the event, the limited, targeted and proportionate nature of our proposed action. i would have faced question about aircraft and weapons, when the operation would take place, how long they would last, and what we were going to do. all of this would have provided invaluable information that would have put our armed forces are at greater risk and greatly increase the likelihood

of a regime being able to shoot down our missiles and get their chemical weapons at the way from our targets. —— away from our targets. now, let's take a look at some other parliamentary news in brief. the attorney—general has defended the uk government's decision to launch a legal challenge to the scottish and welsh governments' brexit bills. the two devolved parliaments passed legislation last month known as continuity bills designed to act as alternatives to westminster‘s eu withdrawal bill. the uk government has asked the supreme court to rule on whether the legislation is constitutional and within devolved powers. the speaker gave a warm welcome to former mp tessa jowell who'd come back to the chamber to listen to a debate on cancer treatment. lady jowell was diagnosed with a brain tumour last year, and since then she's spoken powerfully about her illness and the need for better treatment. can i say to you, and i say it on behalf of all colleagues, i'm sure, i hope you will feel fortified and inspired by the warm

embrace of parliamentary love which you are about to experience. fly—tipping of rubbish and household items is on the rise in large parts of the uk. both rural and urban areas are affected. but can anything be done to stop it? mps have been looking at the options. if councils were to scrap the charges, and reduce charges for waste disposal, it would encourage people to do the right way. the online retailer amazon has been questioned by mps over the sale of products containing real instead of fake fur. several items being sold were found to be made of animalfur despite being labelled as fake. the products were being sold in markets and on the high street, as well as online. most sellers don't want to lose

the opportunity to sell, and they will lose that if they do not comply with our policy. we understand mistakes can be made but if you are consistently not complied with our policy, you will not be able to sell on amazon. lesley smith from amazon. and that's it from me for now, but do join mandy baker on monday night at 11pm for a full roundup of the day here at westminster, as peers return to that debate and further votes on the eu withdrawal bill. but for now, from me, alicia mccarthy, goodbye. hello again. it was another glorious day of weather yesterday, wasn't it? for most of us, we had the sunshine, and the hot spot was in kent, 27 degrees celsius recorded

underneath skies like these. and just as we were getting used to all that heat, it looks like temperatures are going to come crashing down as we look at the forecast into next week. so take a look at london this weekend — about 26 celsius. we'll come down to about 17 degrees on monday, the weather turning much more unsettled as well. before we get there, a few mist patches to watch out for this morning. quite chilly air in the north. not too cold further south. and this is what the weather has got in store for us this weekend. we'll all see spells of warm sunshine but temperatures will be easing through the weekend and we will start to see thunderstorms breaking out. now, the initial batch of storms will be with us this afternoon and will continue to rumble away as we head through the this evening and overnight as well. so, here's the forecast. a dry start to the day for most of us. a few mist patches towards south—east england, around the chilterns, there are a few for sussex and kent as well, but these should tend will clear away. most of us will then get some sunny spells.

it will feel warm in the sunshine as well with temperatures climbing to 26 degrees towards south—east england but we will start to see showers developing later in the day. now, initially, the showers might not have too much in the way of heavy rain, but big raindrops. but later on, as those showers continue to move in across parts of eastern england, maybe the midlands too, well, the showers will turn increasingly heavy with a greater risk of thunder overnight. so there are those thunderstorms, clearing the way eastwards through saturday night. temperature wise, still into double figures for much of inland wales, we've still got that slightly cooler air further north for scotland and for northern ireland as well. further changes in the weather picture as we head through sunday. this cold front is going to be sweeping its way eastwards and it is this that will be bringing a cooler, fresher feel to the weather across north—western areas. outbreaks of rain to start the day as well in scotland

and northern ireland, swinging eastwards. and as our cold front reaches parts of east anglia, south—east england, it will tend to turn more showery, so there could be further heavy, thundery showers dotted along as that front moves through. a cooler, fresher feel to the weather for the north—west. temperatures 22—23 degrees across parts of eastern england but, of course, that will make it pretty uncomfortable for the runners running the london marathon. it will get quite warm with temperatures pushing on into the low 20s for the finishers during the afternoon. it will turn cooler, then, as we head towards next week. welcome to bbc news, broadcasting to viewers in north america and around the globe. our top stories: kim jong—un announces the immediate suspension of north korea's nuclear and missile tests and closes down a test site. remembering columbine. thousands of american students walk out of classes on the anniversary of the high school massacre. north korea has announced

the immediate suspension of nuclear and missile tests and a shutdown of its nuclear test site. the announcement comes ahead of planned summits with the leaders of south korea and the united states. president trump welcomed it as very good news,