johnnyjohnson hopes his film will draw fresh audiences into the story of the dambusters, and of the 52 crew members who didn't come home. really hit the people on the squadron. were you heroes? no, that's a word i object to. we were aircrew with a job to do. it'sjust a question of being the lucky one. that is a summary of the news. now it's time for newsnight, with emily maitlis. i think we are looking at the libya model of 2003—2004... no wonder north korea's getting cold feet on the us deal — who wants to be the next libya? isjohn bolton trying to warn his own boss to be a little bit more hardline when dealing with a rogue state? we get the perspective of the white house, the state department and korea.

what exactly is the technology they hope could solve the northern irish border question? we bring you the bluffers‘ guide to max fac. and this. why is american tv bent on cancelling all the best shows? we talk to tom ellis, the star of lucifer, live. good evening. all politics, they say, is personal. and the north korean leadership has just illustrated the point rather keenly. kim jong—un has warned they are now reconsidering their meeting with president trump next month, and pointed the finger in no

unwavering terms at trump's national security advisor, john bolton. in a statement, they took aim at bolton, known for his hardline stance on foreign policy, and admitted they could not hide theirfeeling of repugnance towards him. at the heart of this fallout lies trump's insistence the korean peninsula must denuclearise. tonight, the us president has stayed uncharacteristically quiet. no furious tweets, but an admission he will have to wait and see what happens next. so is the foreign policy coup of the year still going ahead? and what will these two larger—than—life characters do next? a graphic novel like no other. back in the day in gotham city, there arose from the wrong side of the tracks a superhero who became the most powerful man on earth. the trumpster. he had lots of enemies, but the most feared of all was rocket man. his nuclear bombs got bigger, his missiles kept on getting closer and closer to the mainland usa. last year, the trumpster hit out. we will have no choice but to totally destroy north korea. but rocket man wasn't backing down,

telling the trumpster, " rather than frightening or stopping me, that the path i chose is correct and that is the one i have to follow to the last." the trumpster retaliated: "sick puppy — obviously a madman." the rocket man fired back that the trumpster was a "mentally deranged us dotard". suddenly this year, hopes for peace started to grow. rocket man met his counterpart on the korean peninsula from across the dmz. there was talk of a powwow between the two superheroes. now rocket man doesn't want to give up his nukes or his rockets. tonight, the trumpster risks looking like he's been played for a fool. the driver for north korea's change of direction were comments made by trump's box—fresh national security adviser, john bolton.

i think we are looking at the libyan model of 2003—2004. we're also looking at what north korea itself has committed to previously. what bolton did not spell out is how the libyan model ended up for its ruler. but the north koreans are all too well aware of gaddafi's end. in an angry statement, north korea's vice foreign minister said, "it is absolutely absurd to dare compare the democratic people's republic of korea, a nuclear weapons state, to libya." on mr bolton, he did not hold back. john bolton was being the opposite of diplomatic. he wasn't trying to be diplomatic, he was trying to ensure that the summit would fail. as you would expect from the world's most totalitarian state, the north koreans are much better at message discipline. but they have conflicting goals, too. i think it is really hard to predict these things.

but i do think that there are some big benefits in getting rid of nuclear weapons for north korea. there will be sanctions being lifted, there will be a new relationship with the united states, a new relationship with south korea. it'll be much easier china. there are some big wins for them, if they can pull it off. war in the next six months is probably in the area of 25%. i still think there is a probability that the summit will get back on track. mike pompeo, the secretary of state, wants it. president trump wants it, too. bolton, i don't think does. so probably it will get back on track, but we are in a dangerous situation. michael d'antonio has written a biography of donald trump. i think donald trump's view of the world was formed in the 1950s, during his childhood.

and shaped in many ways by comic books and superheroes. in his mind he is a primary character in moving world history. kim would be rocket man, the president would consider himself to be a kind of superman. in a way, this dynamic may work out for both of them. there is some black comedy in the clash between donald trump and kim jong—un. two characters who could have been drawn for each other. but the ending could get so much darker. john sweeney there. we were hoping to bejoined by a guest with insight into the trump camp in washington tonight, but technology has let us down. we can speak now, though, to balbina hwang. she served as a senior adviser to us ambassador christopher hill during his negotiations with north korea, and shejoins us from seoul. balbina hwang, great to have you on newsnight, take us inside the north korean mindset now, watched you think has provoked this? well, i don't think it is even really provocation, i think this is quite a clear and actually very

calculated statement. we should understand that first of all this was a very dumb ickes series of statements this morning. the official spokesperson for the north korean government first came out and stated that it was going to cancel the first meeting is scheduled for the south korean government. now, this was in reaction tojoint exercises being staged between the united states and south korea. these were scheduled in advance, and it was something that north korea had not objected to. in fact, it had agreed that it would accept this as part of the recent agreement. this was clearly meant to provoke south korea, and to sort of upset what president moon had clearly been riding on as a wave of popular optimism in south korea. and again meant to sort of destabilise, i think, south korea. it was then quickly followed by a statement from the foreign

minister. now, it is important to understand this is a gentleman who has been involved for the last several decades indirectly negotiating with the previous four presidents of the united states regarding specifically the nuclear programmes. and so this is a man, by the way, in the foreign ministry, which is the diplomatic corps of the north korean government. he is not the man who will meet president trump or is scheduled to meet him. and he is the man who was directly involved withjohn bolton during the president bush years. remember, this is president bush and john bolton of the neocons. this is the axis of evil. so they bear a grudge, presumably, towards john bolton, we know that from the statement.

is it your sense that president trump overplayed his hand macro here? well, no, i don't think so, and i think it is important to understand that president trump is one of the most unusual presidents that the world has ever seen in the united states. when we say the trump administration, there really is no trump administration. he is a load wolf, in the sense that he is now acting alone, and i think there is an administration, it is more disciplined now, the trump administration 2.0, mike pompeo, john bolton — these are a little bit more disciplined than the previous. but president trump is much more comfortable acting alone, and i think we just saw that, what, two days ago, when he... i'm just going to bring in a conservative commentator, scottie hughes — do you feel that john bolton has knocked this off

course a little bit for donald trump? was it deliberate or a mistake? whether deliberate or a mistake, it has happened, but i think this is a normal reaction from north korea, part of the playbook. they did it back in 1980 before the talks them. this isjust about gaining leverage going into the summit. but does it make you think that they are not going to denuclearise? he is talking about libya, they saw what happened there, that will not be a very tempting offer for somebody thinking about negotiating with your president. i think this is north korea making much ado about nothing, trying to gain leverage, because all of a sudden they are making these big deal of it. then again, we are dealing with kim jong—un, as your previous guests stated, this is donald trump, president trump, so you can never expect the traditional things to be happening. but i don't think it knocks things of course, it isjust part of the north korean playbook that they have done in the past, the talks

will continue. balbina hwang, would you put the money on the summit going ahead? yes and no. it is not necessarily much ado about nothing. north korea is making very clear that the libya model itself is off the table. that doesn't mean necessarily that denuclearisation is not, and i think what north korea is making clear is that they are willing to deal with president trump, and i think president trump, again, is separate from bolton. now, bolton has a very specific idea about processes, but president trump, i think, would be happy with, for example, just taking five nuclear bombs, loading them on air force one and saying, here, i got denuclearisation. that is very different. was thisjohn bolton speaking to donald trump through the television, if you like, and saying, hang on, don't go too soft,

we have to have a pretty hardline approach, whether president trump agrees with that or not? this is howjohn bolton exists, he does take a hardline approach to things, butjust like north korea has done this in the past and they have a history of trying to gain leverage by doing this and manoeuvres like this, this is what president trump and his administration is. you can't count on anything. iagree, once again, this is what we would expect going into this chaos, and having these talks at the summit shows a bigger advance than we have had from past administrations. but people are saying this is about bragging rights, and donald trump probably overplayed his hand, he went a bit too confident into this, and north korea is coming out on top at the moment. either way, we have got farther with donald trump than the previous administrations, so he has

the upper hand in bragging, but it is not about bragging, it is about making people safe on the korean peninsula, as well a stabilising the area for the rest of the international marketplace. right now, it is not about bragging rights, it is getting to the table, and both are trying to show who is the bigger person, so what john bolton did today was just another move to show north korea we are the ones that have the bigger power right now. really great to speak to you, thank you forjoining us. sometimes there are challenges in the commons that no—one is expecting. particulary not the transport secretary. like this one today, from the labour mpjenny chapman. look behind him perhaps and say, "my name is chris grayling, and i've just nationalised a rail line." chris grayling, you understand, had just told mps that the virgin trains east coast would be brought back under public control and the operator had been stripped of its franchise to operate rail services between london and edinburgh. the measure is only a short—term one. but the corbyn cabinet are hoping the move is catching. they want to see the railways renationalised. is this a one—off by the government,

or the beginning of an acceptance that private companies don't always do things best? here's helen thomas. join us on a journey back in time. first stop, 2009. and the last time the government assumed control of the east coast line from london to edinburgh. today's events do not represent the failure of the system but the failure of one company. we won't stop here. another east coast franchise failure because today's rail policy is reaching back further. to the 1920s, the london and north eastern railway was one of the big four operators created that decade and is a name chosen for the east coast in its latest spell of public ownership. so what happens next? back in february, a company registered here changed its name

from dftolr i, or 0perator of last resort, to london north eastern railway. 0njune the 24th it will take over the running of the east coast line. the staff will stay the same, albeit under new management, and it will effectively still have a franchise agreement with its government owner. but it reignites the argument over whether the way we organise our railways is working. the system is broken and it's not just franchising, it's the whole model of privatisation. it's an ideology that hasn't worked, it hasn't worked for the past 30 years. and we really need to move beyond it because we have got extremely high fares, we have got overpacked carriages and passengers and the public are really sick of it. i think there is a sea change. i think the government is really feeling the pressure on this one. so is national ownership back in fashion? why won't the government call this what it is, which is the east coast line being renationalised again? well, it is not renationalisation because we don't intend to keep this

in public ownership for any longer than necessary. we're taking it into temporary public control. of course, there are always lessons to be learned from failure and the department is learning them. but we shouldn't see the use of the pperator of last resort as an indictment of the franchise system because it's not, it's always been in the franchise system right from the start as an important mechanism within it. the private sector even has a hand in this temporary period of public ownership. a private consortium is contracted to help run the 0perator of last resort. acknowledgement, perhaps, that the department for transport doesn't have all the expertise needed in—house. so could there be more trouble ahead for rail franchising? well, one reason stagecoach got its numbers wrong on the east coast is that rail passenger numbers, after decades of growth, have started to fall. there are rumours of revenue shortfalls at other operators. the government and the system

could ill—afford another operator getting into trouble. were these the glory days? or did private capital bring more investment and more passengers to britain's tired, inefficient railways? if, and when, the east coast returns to private hands, it will be a question of hoping fourth time lucky. andy mcdonald is the shadow transport secretary, and hejoins me now. you would presumably see this as a good move by chris grayling? it is a step in the right direction, taking the railway back into public control but it is merely a temporary measure and the intention is to pass that franchise with control of the track itself and put that out to a partnership and that could well mean stagecoach virgin entering the fray and becoming the controlling party, which a lot of people would find outrageous. you heard joe johnson and the minister saying, don't start thinking of this as the beginning of rationalisation, it isn't and the government

is sticking to its plans to carry on these franchises that labour is committed to renationalisation? we have seen that the government is committed to this failed system and the evidence is it is broken and finished, we are absolutely committed to bringing the railway back into public ownership with the guiding mind of an integrated railway in public ownership and a devolved railway from the regions and nations of great britain. it is attractive to the public and it is a bold move, when you look at the numbers. there is so much passenger satisfaction, with the safest railway system in europe and an increase in passenger numbers since privatisation and investment is up so you are staring at these facts and saying, we know better and we are scrapping that? we are saying we have great faith in the people who work on the railways and aired live satisfaction but what we are

observing is a system that is predicated on extracting value out of the system. but investment is in. his investment going to be ninefold of where we are today, because that is the rate they are on! we want to see all of the investment into the railway and at the moment you have companies taking this profits out of the system and quite rightly and understandably, investing that in germany and holland and in france and in italy, all of these european state—owned monopolies who are here extracting value out of our system. we have lost the opportunity. you are looking at france. if any of our viewers look towards france and sncf, which has huge industrial action and 60 billion euros debt and fares are pretty much the same as here, if not more, why would that we attractive? i would question the issue of expense, we have the most

expensive railway system in the world. we have not, we have been looking at comparisons and london to glasgow or paris to marseille were excited at the same price and they have quicker trains that go a further distance. we want that. they have done that under a state owned a system which is just as expensive passengers and which, as we know, is embroiled in industrial action and huge debt, why copy that? we don't want to have industrial action, we want to work in partnership with the people who work in the railways to take that out of the system. 0ur railway is characterised by appalling industrial relations at the moment and we see that on southern railways and elsewhere throughout the network and that is totally and utterly unavoidable and it is a question of dogma dictating these outcomes. you talk about dogma and one of your big pledges is this fair freeze and commuters will save under that,

are you wrong? commuters will save, i thought it was £1000 over the next parliament? it is not a freeze, we are going to substitute the rate of increase by taking away rpi and substituting that with cpi, and lower rate of increase, it is a prudent, sensible and managed approach. £1000? which is great if you are a fairly well—to—do commuter, but people on lower incomes don't get those trains regularly in and out of the major cities or conurbations and will then not look and say, why are you subsidising trains for fairly well off people who are committing? the many and not the few? the person who has to turn up at the railway station for a funeral at the last minute, maybe as not a regular user, and has to pay through the nose, with a complex ticketing system that needs to be addressed. it is the most ridiculously complex

and fractured system that anybody could imagine, with millions of products out there for a simple method of going from a to be. if you can take away the multiplicity of providers and have responsibility from one point to the next, we can make a much more simple and streamlined system that delivers greater value for the travelling public. great to have you here, thank you very much. the speaker of the commons, john bercow, has found himself under pressure in recent weeks after newsnight broadcast allegations he had bullied staff in his office. there had been calls for a full investigation into the claims — but there has been a development tonight, and our policy editor, chris cook, is here. what's the significance of this? we published allegations a few weeks ago relating to two of the former private secretaries of the speaker and one of those says allegations relate to alan sinclair, from 2009—10, who says he was bullied and paid £86,000 to sign a nondisclosure agreement

to reveal conditions in the office and john bercow denies ever bullying people. andrew bridgen, a conservative critic of the speaker, ask the parliamentary standards commissioner to look into this case and because the case is more than seven years old it has to go to the standards committee, which is unusual because half of that is not mps but yesterday it turns out that the standards committee voted not to pursue the investigation againstjohn bercow. only the mps on that committee are allowed to vote and we know that the non—mps, had they been able to vote, would absolutely have voted for mr bercow to be investigated. that sounds undemocratic. what happens? the significance is there is a problem at the moment with industrial relations within the houses of parliament which is the clerks do not trust the mps to open an investigation into any other mp.

we spoke earlier today to the general secretary of the first division association, the union representing senior members of staff at the house of commons. well, i think it's proper evidence that the mp5 cannot be trusted to be arbiters of their own conduct. so we have the committee for standards refusing to undertake an investigation. the mp5 set up an independent inquiry, but they have not allowed that to deal with individual cases. the current policy that applies to staff if they want to make a complaint against mps, they have no trust and confidence in, no—one has used that policy since 2014. and it cannot deal with historical cases. so staff in the house of commons have nowhere to go when it comes to raising complaints against mps. we are at something of an impasse with the story but it feels as though the pressure is building onjohn bercow, he has got through this hope but it is not clear how many more

of these obstacles he will manage to climb over. thank you very much indeed. thank you. the government today promised to deliver a detailed, ambitious and precise explanation next month of its position on brexit. the announcement comes after another stalemate — the prime minister's brexit war cabinet ended without reaching agreement. two options were on the table — both, we should point out, already rejected by the eu. 0ne comes by the name of "maximum facilitation" — or max fac — which is not a solution in its own right, but a way of developing a whole new technology as a way around the northern irish border question. we've been focusing all this week on brexit and the border, and david grossman has been examining how max fac might work. this is what a low—tech border looks like. five miles north of londonderry babbles a tiny stream, too small to name, but too important to ignore. the left bank is in the uk,

the right bank in the republic. in less than a mile, the contents will empty into lough foyle and the atlantic, but for now this is politically charged water. at the moment, of course, it's possible to wander across the irish border without really even noticing. the republic there, the uk there. you just cross a bridge like this, across an insignificant little stream, and you've done the job. now, the government says it can use technology to make sure it's as easy as this in the future. in the endless jargon of brexit, this option is known as maximum facilitation, or max fac. what it means in substantive terms is relying on existing trade facilitations, customs simplifications to make it easier for goods to cross borders. so when looking at things like trusted—trader schemes, things that lower your risk profile

that would otherwise make it more likely that, you know, a truck would be pulled aside for customs checks, electronic pre—notification. all these things are designed to reduce times for crossing borders, rather than absolutely replacing the border itself. you can still find old border posts rotting away. all that stops the cars now are other cars — certainly not border guards with uniforms and questions. the uk government has promised that any new hi—tech max fac solution won't require any physical infrastructure at all. is this even possible? well, according to the expert appointed by the european parliament to look at the matter, it is. from a strictly customs perspective, my estimation, and i'm still saying that this is very possible within the international standards, you could use best practices — that is elevate them to a level where it's closer to 100% than what is possible today,

which is not the case in any border around the world — and using very little friction or no friction at all. one of the core technologies that will form the backbone of any solution are cameras that can read numberplates. i've come to mav systems in kent, one of the uk's leading makers of automatic number plate recognition systems. ok, so this is one of our intelligent anpr cameras, which has everything on board to be able to work night and day, infrared illumination... managing director steve walker says hi—tech frictionless borders are very possible. there's a whole combination of things that are available and in use around the world, so on the american borders, the norway and sweden border, the main one has to be the anpr up front so that that actually captures every vehicle as it comes down the road towards the border.

and then linked into that, you can have associated technologies such as weight and motion, which will determine the vehicle's weight as it goes past the number plate recognition camera, and also some radar and laser technology which can measure the shape of the vehicle, so you can classify the vehicles and check that they actually match the expected profile of that vehicle. although the government today reiterated its commitment to having no new cameras on the border, previously the brexit secretary, david davis, has said that there are already enough in enough locations to do the job. this is where the trucks travelling between belfast and dublin used to stop to clear customs. actually, customs and excise is comparatively straightforward for technology to streamline. far harder is enforcing regulations like food standards or animal health. mats persson was europe adviser to david cameron when he was prime minister.

the really tricky part is about regulatory standards and making sure that something that enters into a territory complies, where do you check for that? if you don't check on the border, if you don't have spot checks on the border, where do you do that? that is much more difficult to make virtual, and i think that issue, that whole debate around regulatory compliance and regulatory divergence, potentially, between the uk and the eu, is what makes the whole issue around the irish border so difficult. far simpler to have the border for regulations post—brexit not between north and south, but in the irish sea, between great britain and the island of ireland. but would the unionist community tolerate what many would interpret as a loosening of northern ireland's place in the uk? graham gudgin used to be the political adviser to david trimble when he was first minister of northern ireland. he says such an arrangement could be sellable if packaged correctly. commodities which affect

human health, i think, could be checked at the irish sea, because most of these are going to be on a lorry waiting at stranraer in scotland, or wherever, you know, for an hour or two to get on the ferry, and then they're going to be on the ferry for an hour or two hours, plenty of time to check them, to make sure that they have all the paperwork to say this is safe. from my own contacts with dup mps, they would think about this, you know, as long as there were no constitutional implications, it's ok. now, obviously, we'd love to have interviewed a minister or talked to an official off the record about exactly how this border and its new technology was going to function. but, unfortunately, and you probably know what i'm going to say next, no—one was available to talk to us.

perhaps the reason ministers are not keen to address detailed technical questions is, according to press reports earlier this month, government officials say the max fac solution would not be ready until at least 2023. we're certainly not surprised by that. you also have to remember that we're not even into the substantive negotiating stage yet on the detail of future trade arrangements with the eu. and to some extent, you need to know what the shape of that's going to be before you know exactly what kind of customs arrangements and therefore technology you have to have. even though much of the front—end technology is mature and available, stitching it all together in a working system businesses are prepared for is a huge task. david davis once criticised labour ministers for relying on fantastical, unproven technology to get them out of difficult political situations. writing in the guardian in 2008 about id cards, he said, "faced with intractable problems with political pressure for a solution, the government

reaches for a headline grabbing hi—tech solution." "rather than spend the resources, time and thought necessary to get a real answer, they naively grasp solutions that to technologically illiterate ministers look like magic." "and most ministers are very illiterate about any series technology." david davis is now, of course, the biggest cabinet supporter of the technological border solution. the best technology in the world will not be enough absent a negotiated agreement with the eu under which the eu also decides to go for some of these matched trade facilitation measures and the technological solutions that are needed to make trade close to frictionless. borders all over the world are getting more hi—tech, but, and this is the key point, technology can only eliminate physical infrastructure

where there is agreement and trust between the countries on either side. david grossman. it's cancellation season at the american tv networks as the autumn schedules are prepared, and this year has been a particularly brutal one for fans. dozens of shows have been axed, and the rise of international streaming means more of them are familiar to uk viewers than ever before. but there has been a new trend — social media has been ablaze with campaigns to save fan favourites, with one in particular, fox's fantasy cop show lucifer, making the most enormous din online. amazon and netflix take note. here's the problem. three shows sum up the state of the industry. number one, brooklyn nine—nine — a police comedy, critically popular, the audience figures were soft but not awful. but fox wanted to make room for live sport, something that people actually watch with adverts, not on a box set six months later. but happy ending — after a short but vociferous celebrity fan campaign,

another network, nbc, snapped up the show. number two, the expanse — this science—fiction space opera has an incredible 100% rating on rotten tomatoes, with both audiences and critics. but again, the channel putting it out, syfy, didn't own the streaming rights — they weren't making enough money on the deal, so they scrapped their best show. today fans hired a plane with a banner to fly over amazon h0. number three — lucifer. neil gaiman's comic—book version of the biblical devil, who retires from hell and moves to la to fight crime. again, the viewing figures were dropping, and the last series had been received poorly by some fans as too slow—paced, too formulaic. deep down, you know you're a monster. but the very last episode was thrilling and ended on a massive

cliffhanger, almost daring the network, fox again, to cancel them. which they did. football once again getting the blame, plus again rights, this time owned by dc comics and warner. disney, the incoming owners of fox, own marvel, their superhero rivals. well, the campaign to save lucifer has been growing, and the charge is being led by the show‘s welsh superstar, tom ellis, who more traditional viewers may remember in his bbc days from the sitcom miranda. and hejoins us now from los angeles. and in response to his huge fan base in america, we are welcoming for the first—time viewers watching this live streamed through youtube, thank you forjoining us too! talk this through the response from fanatics, it sounds overwhelming. —— fans. hi, emily. yeah. i am back in la now, i was a bit sort of crushed when i heard the news,

i didn't really know what to do with it, and then when the news broke, i was absolutely bowled over by the response, and it has continued, it has not been a one—off thing. so it has kind of encouraged not only myself but the people who make the show, warner brothers, to try to find a home for it, because people are upset because it finished so abruptly. do you sense that fox are listening to this power? it is a difficult one, emily. at the core of all of these decisions, it is business, and if they show is not doing the right business for a network, they have every right to cancel it, and i think it is very easy for people to turn their attention towards fox and have a go at them, but i'd like to thank them for three

years of having a great opportunity to do the show. it obviously didn't make sense for them to continue doing it for whatever reason, but the people who get left out in that equation are the fans. why do you think the network is out of sync with what fans and viewers are saying? well, like you said in the opening vt, you know, tv has changed a lot, and network tv over here is very much locked into what it was, and they rely on the nielsen ratings to let them know who is watching and when so that they can create advertising space, and that is ultimately the business model. what's that doesn't encompass in the ratings is passion. and, you know, social media has now become this platform for fans, because of streaming, because lucifer lives way outside of the fox domain now, we sort of knew that all along, but the response is just kind of like, you know, solidified that feeling. so as an actor, let me just ask you, you thanked fox for their devotion so far, but do feel that

you would prefer to leave on mainstream tv with all the complications about sport and adverts and all the rest of it, and go straight on netflix, amazon, so avoiding all that? would you talk to the streamers? i mean, listen, iam not in a place to talk about conversations that may or may not be happening, but a conversation has been sparked by this, and we are trying to find a place. i think the obvious place would be somewhere like that. the brooklyn nine—nine situation is a bit different, because the studio that made brooklyn nine—nine is encompassed in the same network of nbc, where it has now gone too, that is more of a clear decision to make. this, because warner brothers are an independent studio without a network, it means that there are other places we can take it.

and those are potentially exciting places. but who knows? watch this space is all i can say! and do you think, you know, in brutal terms, there is a risk that social media amplifies, if you like, the sound of the fan base when, as you say, at the end of the day it comes back to the hard business facts of what makes the money? i think so, but i think it is worth letting the fans know why decisions are made, because they often feel cheated. and that is the case here, because they only know the programme, they don't know everything else behind it. great to have you on newsnight, tom ellis, thanks forjoining us. cheers. let's look at the papers, may outguns brexiteers with plans for custom ties after 2021, a story about a university chief in a scientific fraud scandal. that is at birkbeck. headline in the times,

plan to arm rural police, chief constables consider guns for officers outside cities, they think the isis terror threat is behind the increase in the use of routine fire arms. more railfirms could be stripped of lines. and the guardian has black female starts campaign in cannes. that's all we have time for. luckily for me and my voice! kirsty is here tomorrow. before we go, we thought we'd take a minute to enjoy this moment of tv gold from kent local television station kmtv, and to admire the composure of reporter cameron tucker. goodnight. welcome back to kent tonight, live on kmtv. a couple who ran a cannabis factory

out of their home near herne bay have avoided prison time. well, cameron tucker is in hove for us now, so, cameron, what's the latest? well, last august, when it was found that neil and yvette hartley had been growing almost 90 cannabis plants, little did their neighbours know that in this quiet corner, this quiet, pretty little corner in the kent countryside and at the cottage just over my shoulder is where they had been growing cannabis. the weather is looking pretty good over the next few days. no surprises there. we've been forecasting fire conditions for quite sometime now. that is going to take us into the weekend. thursday, find a bit chilly

start. clear skies across the country right now and the temperatures are dropping. the limegreen here, slightly less colder air. really chilly air across northern england, northern ireland scotland. newcastle first thing, around two degrees. thursday is looking absolutely fine. maybe a bit of fairweather cloud building during the course of the morning and afternoon but that is pretty much it on the temperatures will struggle a little bit in some areas after a chilly morning. many 13 in newcastle. london getting up to 18 celsius. still looking fine, maybe starting fairly fresh with nine degrees but belfast, london getting up degrees but belfast, london getting up to around 18 celsius. a big day windsor. maybe starting off... i'm rico hizon in singapore. the headlines: a night raid on the home

of the ousted malaysian prime minister as he is investigated over a multibillion—dollar scandal, as the man he once jailed hails a new dawn. of of intimidation! no more! —— enough of intimidation! no more! —— enough of intimidation! no more! —— enough of intimidation! we have entered a new era. the us president remains hopeful that his summit with kim jong—un will go ahead, after north korea threatens to cancel the talks. i'm babita sharma in london. also in the programme: taiwan's original settlers struggle to keep their language and culture alive.