at a restaurant in the us state of tennessee has shrugged off praise that he was a hero. james shaw said he simply decided to wrestle the gun off the assailant to save his own life. a big manhunt is underway for the suspect — 29—year—old travis reinking. as the french president, emmanuel macron, prepares for a state visit to the us, he has called on donald trump not to pull out of the iran nuclear deal. speaking to fox news, mr macron accepted the agreement wasn't perfect, but that he couldn't see a better option. president trump has consistently threatened to scrap the 2015 deal. at least 57 people are known to have been killed in a suicide bomb attack outside a voter registration centre in the afghan capital, kabul. so—called islamic state says it was behind the bombing. a government spokesman says terrorist groups won't stop elections going ahead. now on bbc news: 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. 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 there is a number two have considered mps defeat the amendment. most of us are remainers and want us to stay in the union. 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. but it is accepted that the house of lords as it exists as 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 rejected. it is part of our constitution. 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. 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 exact to 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. 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 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 genera and i wouldn't want anyone who has made their life in the uk to mate feel unwelcome or be in any doubt of their right to remain here. 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. 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 they will act to ensure the thousands of richard schmidt

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 is received editors 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 of that decision? no, the decision to destroy the landing cards was taken in 2009 under a labour government. (shrieks) 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. —— callous. 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. denial is not an option. being a bystander who turns the other way is not an option. the time for action is now. enough reall 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 compared ring, 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 were weaponsing anti—semitism. my family came to this country and the 19th—century,

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 foam in their mouths, and their body surrounded by a chlorine like odour. children gasping for life as chemicals joked their lungs. —— choked. 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 if there is un authority behind 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 abhorrent 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 peace is not humane. 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 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 with 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. good morning.

yesterday was the last time we will see anywhere in the uk get above 20 degrees in the week ahead. the kink in the jetstream to the north helped to drag in that unusual warmth through last week is now out of the way, and through the week ahead we will see it piling up on the atlantic and move to the south of the uk, putting us on the colder side. what does that mean? back to more typical weather for the time being, nothing untoward, nice enough when the sun's out, the sun has a bit of strength but it does mean we will see cooler conditions especially when the rains are around. cooler conditions to start your monday morning commute, temperatures into single figures uk—wide, compensated with a bit of sunshine in the south and east of the uk. a bit more cloud and overnight showers continuing. some of those will fade for a while, but cloud amounts increasing from the west, sunny spells to the east, turning grey. northern ireland, occasional rain through the afternoon, spreading into western scotland, the isle of man and western parts of wales too. like sunday, temperatures around 10—14 degrees. further east than what we are

seeing, but 15—18 celsius still pleasant enough with sunny spells overhead, and that for late april. sunshine quickly dissipates during the evening as cloud increases from the west, occasional rain spreading across most parts of the uk, linked into this weather system, the bulk of which would have gotten out of the way on tuesday, but leaving a trailing front of the north of scotland and across southern counties of england. these are the two zones, start the day on tuesday cloudy, brighter for northern ireland and england, showers developing through the day but whilst we will see a few breaks in the cloud in the south, later on, it rethickens and turns grey, misty and damp. wales and southwest england, in particular. your temperatures for tuesday, roughly around the teens. could see 17 degrees, cloud breaks towards the south—east corner but even that milder air will be pushed out on tuesday night, the weather front bringing rain for some, that edges out the rain into wednesday and puts us into west to north—westerly winds. wednesday, a typical april showers day, most places starting with. some sunshine, showers in the west, but developing more widely with hail and thunder, gusty wind as well and as the showers come through, getting rather cool.

temperatures much lower than you've been used to, especially in the east, 11—15 degrees your high. wednesday into the north—westerly, they will dominate. low pressure to the north of us, a showery airflow. cool by day and a mixture of sunshine and showers, showers most dominant to the north, turning rather chilly by night too. take care. welcome to bbc news, broadcasting to viewers in north america and around the globe. my name is nkem ifejika. our top stories: a search is underway in tennessee after a shooting at a restaurant in nashville left four dead. one diner is hailed a hero for wrestling the rifle from the gunman. i figured, if i was going to die, he was going to have to work for it. so i rushed him, and it actually worked out to my favour. on the eve of his us visit, president macron urges donald trump not to pull out of

the iran nuclear deal. grief and rage in the afghan capital, kabul, after a suicide bombing kills at least 57 people. and nicaragua's president scraps controversial changes to social security, following five days of violent protests.