hawaii's most active volcano. it has been spewing ash more than 5.5 into the sky, forcing residents to seek shelter. officials said they would also hand out masks to stop residents from breathing in toxic gas. a year into robert mueller‘s investigation into the us election and russian interference, president trump has called the inquiry a witch hunt. the special counsel has requested an interview with mr trump, but the terms and date for that have not been agreed. president trump has rejected claims that a peace deal with north korea could be modelled on the agreement which brought an end to libya's nuclear programme. the idea, suggested by his national security advisor, had alarmed pyongyang, which threatened to pull out of the summit planned forjune. now on bbc news, thursday in parliament. hello and welcome to

thursday in parliament. on this programme: mps welcome government plans to slash the maximum stake on some gambling machines to just £2. these machines have destroyed their lives or the lives of those people that they love, have taken away their homes, their dignity, their self—respect. there are demands for better building safety following the grenfell fire. for the people in grenfell to have confidence in any new system, all combustible materials on external cladding and insulation must be banned. during a debate on equality., a conservative mp accepts he made a mistake. i voted against the equal marriage act and i was wrong. i was wrong, because i've seen the joy it's given so many people. but first, government plans to cut the maximum stake on fixed odds betting terminals was met

with near universal approval by mps and peers. the proposals will see the upper limit reduced from £100 to just £2. it is clear that there remains consistently high rates of problem gamblers among players of these machines. despite action by industry and the regulator, a high proportion of those seeking treatment for gambling addiction identified these machines as their main form of gambling. only by reducing the maximum state from £100 to £2 will we substantially impact on harm to the player and wider communities. we are absolutely delighted that the government has decided to deliver a labour party manifesto pledge. today we've had fobts, yesterday we had the railways taken back into public ownership. it'sjust a shame we couldn't make it three with the leveson inquiry earlier in the week. we've seen how some parts of the gambling industry have stood

in defiance of ministers, civil servants, parliamentarians, clinicians and other professionals and have sought to delay at every turn common sense decisions that would have given comfort to those who've been afflicted by these machines. a very heartfelt thank you from the very, very many thousands of people who have contacted me to say that these machines have destroyed their lives or the lives of those people they love, they have taken away their homes, their dignity, their self—respect. the gambling industry had warned that cutting the maximum stake could close betting shops and lead to job losses. that concerned one mp. it's come to something, mr speaker, where this house cheers and in particular the labour benches cheer when a decision is made that's going to port to 20,000 decent, working class people out of theirjob. if outlets do close, it is because they were open

specifically to house these machines. and the real danger to jobs and the bookmaking industry is the deployment of self—service betting terminals. the government will pay for the drop in tax take caused by this change by increasing the rates for online gambling firms. but some members called for new taxes. my particular concern relates to the impact on people's mental health, and indeed the number of people who lose their lives as a result of gambling addiction. would she think again about the case for statutory levy on the basis of the principle that the polluter should pay. the cause of the damage is so significant that it seems to be there is a very powerful case for the industry contributing to the cost of treatment. in the lords, many peers also welcome the changes. but one was concerned about the future of the gambling industry. 0ne mustn't be too harsh about the bookmakers, because the history of this of course is that betting on horses

and greyhounds, the traditional betting in betting shops, has declined enormously. and people tend now to bet more and more online. so this is going to be a sad day for bookmakers. others for the government to go further. many people in both houses are deeply concerned about the normalization of gambling at a very formative time for children, not least because of the wall to wall adverts that are being shown via various forms of media but especially online. and also because of the development of games which in themselves are not gambling, but are which are designed to encourage people to undertake these sorts of activities, and normalize them for later in life. many tributes have been paid to the late baroness tessa jowell. i support all the tributes to her that have been made. but can i make just one further one, because it was the noble baroness

who, as secretary of state in 2005, introduced the legislation that allowed the establishment of fixed odds betting terminals. it's to her enormous credit that she showed enormous bravery and courage, when two years ago, she publicly acknowledged that she and her government at the time had got it wrong. é sensultatign snégrmifes " ' ' " eiiff’ienél? éééééi'nflhébaffifqe would accept nothing less than a ban. communities secretary james brokenshire announced the consultation following the publication of a report by dame judith hackitt into building regulations. her review was commissioned after last june's grenfell fire, in which 71 people died. an inquiry is being held to find out exactly what went wrong and why the fire spread so quickly through the building.

james brokenshire explained what the government was doing. the cladding believed to be on grenfell tower was unlawful under existing building regulations. it should not have been used. but i will ensure there is no room for doubt over what materials can be used safely in cladding of high rise residential buildings. having listened carefully to concerns, the government will consult on banning the use of combustible materials in cladding systems on high—rise residential buildings. why no ban on combustible cladding and insulation? it really beggars belief that this report continues to give a green light to combustible materials on high rise blocks. i say to the secretary of state, don't consult on it. do it. 72 people died in grenfell tower. in australia they had a high rise fire in 2014. they now have a ban.

in dubai, they had a high rise fire in 2015. they have a ban. we must do the same. this is a technical report by a leading technician, but it has a glaring omission. for the public, indeed for the people in grenfell to have confidence in any new system, all combustible materials on external cladding and insulation must be banned. anything less will not do. i think the hackitt review is strong in its critique of regulatory failure, but is disappointing, profoundly disappointing, in the strength of the recommendations that it makes. will he take this opportunity to mark early enough the anniversary of grenfell by making clear that there will be an unambiguous ban? i welcome the fact that the secretary of state will consult about banning combustible materials. could i ask him, will the consultation about a ban apply to regulations in terms

of new buildings, or refurbishment of existing buildings, or does he intend to retrospectively apply regulations to all existing buildings? so if that consultation goes in a certain direction, combustible material will be taken off all existing buildings to make people safe. i certainly recognise the important contribution that the select committee has made in relation to these issues and the points that the honourable gentleman has made. obviously i note that damejudith is providing further evidence this afternoon. i look forward to hearing from the committee on the recommendations that they make. well, a short time later, damejudith appeared in front of the housing, communities and local government committee, who asked about her recommendations. why didn't you advocate a ban on combustible materials? because, as i said in my opening remarks, my remit was to look at the regulatory framework,

at the regulatory system. i made it very clear in the early meetings that i had with many people that my role was to look at that system, and that i would not be going into the detail of individual regulations or the specifics of the guidance. but creating a framework that would enable others to do that. having said that, i have made remarks this morning, as i'm sure you know, i have seen examples of where people are continuing to do things even where the current prescription says they should not be done. you're watching thursday in parliament with me, alicia mccarthy. now, the television program blue planet 2 caught the public imagination when it showed how plastic is killing sea creatures, fish and birds. following the programme, all sorts of organizations,

from schools to the houses of parliament declared war on plastic, banning single—use water bottles and introducing a so—called latte levy on throw away coffee cups. a senior labour mp says we're facing a plastic pandemic. 0ur planet has only one ocean, wrapped around it like a cloak and plastic bottles make up one third of all plastic pollution in the sea. they break down into micro plastics, which harm marine wildlife who eat them. and after my committee's groundbreaking work on rinse off microbeads, which led the government to ban their manufacture and sale, we decided to examine single—use plastics, focusing on bottles and coffee cups. single use plastics take five seconds to make, five minutes to use, and 500 years to biodegrade, so when we throw them away there is no such place as away. recently i went to bangladesh, and along the whole of the beach there is litter, plastic

litter this high. it's huge. wouldn't it be a good idea, and i have spoken to my right honourable friend the secretary of state for dfid, if we spent some of our aid money paying people, as the lady said, to clear up this mess, because it is going to the same ocean that we use and everybody else use? and that way we would help them clean up their environment, help their tourism, because people would go to a clean beach but they won't go to the filthy beach. i can remember when i worked injapan in the early 1990s, there was a great debate taking place there on disposable chopsticks. the school children of japan basically took matters into their own hands. pretty much every school then decided that the young ofjapan would bring in plastic, would bring in permanent chopsticks that they would carry in little cases to school and they would use them every day. the idea caught on.

it caught on in companies and it caught on more widely. and i do wonder if it's time that we did similar, by buying bottles where we actually refill them with water. because i see absolutely no reason why we should having... the honourable lady has taken us a slight distance away from the subject at hand but i have to say i'm always willing to listen to any discussion about disposable japanese chopsticks. but on the point about water fountains, does she not look around the chamber and is she not horrified, as i am, to see these carafes and these glasses of water? would it not be an excellent idea to have a water fountain adjacent to the speaker's chair? perhaps one opposite the two front benches with disposable, biodegradable cups. let's start as we mean to go on and let this place be an example to the nation. i think we'll carry on with using glasses, which is absolutely environmentally friendly.

glasses and glass carafes are very environmentally friendly but the honourable gentleman, my honourable friend's comments are, of course, very interesting as ever. as many members will be aware, we now have a progressive program to remove the single use plastics. it's going to take us about 12 months. i wrote a letter explaining to every member, which means about a tenth of them have read it, and i expect complaints etc. if i can ask members here who are irritated the right way, if they receive complaints, can they put them down and save me having to respond ? 0n point of single use plastics, all the usual culprits will go. water will be provided from taps, i can assure the honourable member, instead of water in plastic bottles. those are going to stop. there will be a tarrif on single use coffee cups. this, of course, is to bully coffee and tea drinkers into use

of reusable mugs. disposable paper items that remain for a while at least will be replaced, and they'll be replaced with compostable materials. sir paul beresford. now, peers used the international day against homophobia, transphobia and biphobia to press the government over the time it was taking to implement pardons for people convicted in the past of homosexual activities which are no longer crimes. i want to congratulate the government on flying the lgbt rainbow flag from government buildings on the international day against homophobia, biphobia and transphobia. but i am extremely frustrated that 17 months ago this house passed provisions to enable the protections of freedoms act 2012 to be amended so as to extend the disregard scheme in england and wales. but these provisions have not been used and as a consequence, gay and bisexual men continue to live with convictions and criminal records which blight their lives, their futures and for which there is a human cost. so therefore will the government use

the power it has to end the misery still inflicted by old homophobic laws and set up a task force to address these provisions, and will the minister commit to return to the house with a timetable to implement the provisions? well, as the noble lord knows, i totally share his frustration and i'll also note that he spotted the flags that are flying on government buildings today, which is what's very strangely known idahobit day, which is the international day against homophobia, transphobia and biphobia. and in terms of, and i also share the anxiety really that there are still people today who are being discriminated against, and losing jobs actually because of it. we, as he knows, abhor discrimination of any kind. he knows that i am pressing

for parliamentary timetable. and also i want to continue to work with him in terms of looking at those laws, some of which are more complex than others, and trying to disaggregate and deal with some of those outstanding matters. but what's the hold up? who or what is the impediment to early commencement of these provisions? the hold up is a combination of actually establishing some of the sort of framework for some of the more complex legislation in this area. 0n the face of it, it doesn't look complex but some of the laws are complex. the other thing, of course, in this brexit world that we live in in parliament is actually seeking some of the parliamentary time. but is there is no lack of will on my part. i'm trying to progress this as quickly as possible. decriminalization has taken 50

years in this country and i would like to ask the noble baroness, the minister, whether the government could put together some recommendations which would enable countries which are starting out on the process of decriminalization, which will help them to bring about the change in a much lesser time? decriminalization is now 50 years old. in fact the idahobit day is recognised today because it is 28 years ago today that the who sought to remove homosexuality from the international classification of diseases. my lords, 28 years on, it is almost inconceivable that it could ever even be classified as a disease. a little later, mps also marked the day. reflecting on the royal wedding this weekend, a conservative had a strong message for the church of england. a billion people will be tuning in to watch that happy event.

i'll certainly watch it. but whilst i am watching that happy event, one thing will flash through my mind, and that is that i am a christian. clearly a second class christian but a first class gay. why? because i wouldn't be allowed to walk down the aisle with somebody that i loved and get married in a church in england. and my message tojustin welby is, i understand why, because of the church in africa and some other countries where they're not as progressive as we are, but he needs to show leadership, he really does in this, in our country, to ensure that gay, christian people can get married and enjoy a big dayjust as harry and meghan are going to do on saturday. of course i'll give way. thank you, mr deputy speaker. i voted against the equal marriage act and i was wrong.

i was wrong because i've seen the joy it's given so many people. and i was wrong. but i do think the established church of our country should follow what this house has decided. and that actually gay people should be allowed to marry in church. thank you, mr speaker. breaking news. absolutely superb. my honourable and gallant friend has just spoken about how his views were in the past and what his views are today. i have to say, if my honourable and gallant friend can make that progression, i do rather hope that the archbishop of canterbury is listening, and he too can make that sort of progression in order that christians in this country are able to enjoy a big dayjust us harry and meghan will do on saturday. nigel evans. the new minister for women and equalities, penny morduant, who's also the international development secretary,

made her debut at the dispatch box. but her labour opposite number feared the arrival of yet another new face on the job meant the subject was slipping down the government's agenda. in the last 12 months, i've congratulated no less than three secretary of states to the role. women get used to it, i hear from the sedentary position, and that's exactly the problem. women and equalities have been passed from the home office to the department of culture, media and sport, to the education department, then back to the home office and now to the department of international development. and to add insult to injury the government's equalities 0ffice will see its funding cut by almost half. this does not really scream a commitment to women and equalities. will the minister agree with me that the equalities office needs a stable department with proper funding? we have done some tremendous things in recent years and i think we need to build on that if we are really going to want to address inequalities, notjust

in my direct responsibilities but across government, in disability and age discrimination and elsewhere. since i have taken this post i have given this a lot of thought and i will be making some announcements in the coming weeks. an snp mp asked about ways to help women who suffer domestic abuse. while the governments say that victims of domestic abuse can apply for split payments of universal credit, a survey by women's aid showed that 85% of survivors say they wouldn't dare apply as an exceptional measure as it would attract further abuse. would the secretary of state be willing to meet with me to discuss the importance of delivering split payments as default to protect the financial independence of women? the honourable lady and i have met already to discuss this and i know she is she's greatly concerned about it. this is something that i am discussing with my colleagues in the department for work and pensions and of course the secretary of state would meet her to discuss it further. but we're very clear that the dwp and job,

those who work in job centres, again are a gateway to potentially offering support and help to women who present with those symptoms. in 2016, the minister ofjustice closed the courts in halifax. i hear from west yorkshire police that it's now routinely taking up to 12 months for domestic victims to have their cases heard in the neighbouring courts in leeds, bradford and huddersfield. how have we allowed this to happen? victims are withdrawing from that process and what are we doing to put it right? minister. i am concerned to hear that. if i may, i'll take that away and discuss that with my colleague in the ministry ofjustice. there is a scheme in west london, it's called the tri—borough scheme, whereby there are specific specialist domestic courts, domestic abuse courts, which i'm looking into at the moment because i think there may be more that we can do across the country in this regard.

half of all girls in the uk suffer online abuse and are bullied on social media. girls are being told what to wear, to shut up about their opinions, how they look. isn't it about time that this government take a serious look at this awful sexism and seek to regulate social media platforms? minister. i very much share the honourable lady's strong opinions and also based on the facts, girls are intimidated, bullied, disproportionately online for all the reasons she says. and i would urge her to wait a very short time indeed for our response to the internet safety consultation, which i trust will be robust. finally, for now, the speaker has granted an emergency debate on the governments's decision not to provide money for a bill put forward by a backbench mp. labour's afzal khan is putting forward legislation effectively stopping a conservative plan to cut the number of mps from 650 to 600. now, usually, a backbench bill

would automatically get what's known as a money resolution after its first big debate in the commons. but so far mr khan's bill hasn't been given one, leaving it stalled. private members' bills are one of the few legislative powers open to backbenchers. the government is making a mockery of the private members bill process, refusing to bring the money resolution for my bill amounts to an abuse of parliament. i believe members should urgently have the chance to debate it. the speakerjohn bercow replied and asked mps if they supported the call for a debate. i've listened carefully to the application from the honourable member. i am satisfied that the matter raised is proper to be discussed, under standing order number 24. has the honourable member the leave of the house? instead of formally voting,

mps on all sides of the commons stood up to show that they backed mr khan's calls for an emergency debate, and so the speaker granted it. the debate will be held on monday afternoon and could last up for up to three hours. that's it for me for now. dojoin me on friday night at 11:00. when among other things i'll be speaking to two parliamentarians about the future of the government's for flagship eu withdrawal bill. but for now, from me, alicia mccarthy, good bye. hello there. much of the country saw lots of

sunshine on thursday. there was a chill in the air. the sunshine compensated for that. weather watchers were out in force snapping the sunset. like the last few mornings, quite chilly. temperatures will again fall away. friday starts ona will again fall away. friday starts on a cool note with a touch of frost in rural locations. it promises to be another fine day for east of scotland, england, and wales. more in the way for cloud for scotland and northern ireland. we're looking at highs of 19 degrees across the south—east. for saturday, it is the big day, the royal wedding in winds are, looks to be another fine day, lots sunshine after a chilly start. this is the picture for saturday. much of the country will see sunshine, apart from some fair weather cloud through the afternoon. the far north—west of the country may see some thicker cloud. most places dry and warm.

welcome to bbc news, broadcasting to viewers in north america and around the globe. my name is mike embley. our top stories: explosive eruptions at hawaii's mount kilauea. the volcano spews more ash and toxic gas. thousands of residents are told to find shelter. 0ngoing investigation or partisan witch hunt? one year into robert mueller‘s investigation, the white house questions its purpose. it's gone on for over a year. they've found no evidence of collusion, and still strongly believe that it's a witch hunt. we have a special report on the refugees selling their eu passports and travel documents, prompting fears of a security risk. and meghan markle confirms her father won't be attending the royal wedding, to focus on his health.