hello. it's wednesday, it's 9am, i'm joanna gosling. welcome to the programme. theresa may's facing yet another difficult day. after seeing off a bid by conservative rebels over brexit, the tories are facing the wrath of a lib dem mp who's on maternity leave with her four—week old baby and is accusing the conservative party chairman of breaking an agreement with her not to vote on brexit. we'll be speaking to two mps who have recently had babies about how it works when you're on maternity leave and there's an urgent vote. a high courtjudge will rule this morning on the privacy case brought by sir cliff richard against the bbc for the way it covered a police raid at his home in berkshire. sir cliff, who denied a claim of historical sexual assault, was questioned but never arrested or charged. we'll bring you that ruling when it comes. sexting and not drinking alcohol — does this explain why teenage pregnancy rates are at an all—time low? 16 to 18—year—olds spend more time on social media and are more family—orientated, according to a report out today. and i meet finn the police dog,

who was stabbed through the chest and the head with a ten inch knife while chasing a suspect. finn and his owner are pushing through a change in law that will see police dogs and horses given the same status as serving police officers. to see him go through that, being laid on the vet's floor, watching him fade away and then for his offender to be charged with criminal damage, as if he was an inanimate object, was very hard. hello, welcome to the programme. we're live until 11:00 this morning. are you a teenager? maybe you're pregnant or a teenage mum. what do you think is behind the sharp fall in the numbers of teenage pregnancies? is it due to spending more time with families, less drinking and more time online? do get in touch on all the stories we're talking about. use the hashtag victoria live.

our top story today — theresa may will address conservative mps later, following two days that have shown up divisions in the party over the issue of brexit. andrew plant now reports. the ayes to the right, 301. it was yet another close contest that theresa may's government needed to win, and it did, byjust six votes, sidestepping a push by pro—eu mps who are calling for a customs union with the eu in the event of a no—deal. in the brexit contract. so, the noes have it. the noes have it. if that was a tuesday

of turmoil for theresa may. next will surely come a worrisome wednesday. first, she will face last prime minister's questions before parliament breaks for the summer after two tumultuous days that will have provided opposition mps with ample ammunition. her brexit strategy has already cost her two cabinet ministers. boris johnson, the ex—cabinet secretary, could break his silence in a speech many expect would be seriously critical of the prime minister's plans. and that is just the am. in the pm, the pm must face the commons liaison committee, where senior mps of all parties will grill her on her brexit strategy. all that before perhaps the toughest test of all, a meeting with the 1922 committee of backbench tory mps, with the ever present possibility of outright internal mutiny. theresa may will be all too ready for next week's summer recess, but must survive one of the toughest days of her premiership yet. 0ur political correspondent, iain watson is at westminster for us. what is the atmosphere like? it has

been an incredible week. an astonishing week and it is not over yet. the prime minister has a packed programme today. she have to talk to sceptical backbenchers to resell her brexit plan. she facesjeremy corbyn at pmqs, and there are litres of bad blood flowing around westminster today for a number of reasons. some labour mps today for a number of reasons. some labourmps are unhappy today for a number of reasons. some labour mps are unhappy with the four labour mps are unhappy with the four labour mps are unhappy with the four labour mps who helped the government out last night by voting with the government on that crucial customs amendment allowing the government off the hook. there is bad blood between conservative rebels and the government because they say some of their number backed off, threatened with the prospect of an early general election which they think was way over the top and they think the government's whipping operation was intimidator ref. there is also bad blood between the liberal democrats and the government because their deputy leaderjoe swinson is on maternity leave at the moment and the way parliament works, she was

paired with a conservative. in other words, if she couldn't vote, somebody on the other side guaranteed that they wouldn't vote either to cancel out. that is work none other than the conservative party chairman, but he did vote. he voted in that crucial customs amendment. imagine the few raw, had the government got through with just a majority of one. he says it was an honest mistake and he has apologised on twitter, but she says this was cheating and there are fears that these kind of arrangements to help people who are on maternity leave might be undermined. interestingly, i have been speaking to some conservative mps this morning who are casting doubt on whether that was a mistake. they are also angry about it. wow, thank you very much. we will be talking more about that situation with jo we will be talking more about that situation withjo swinson with two mps who have babies and they know how the system works. we will hear what they think about it later. julian worricker is in the bbc newsroom with a summary of the rest of the day's news. in a sharp u—turn, president trump

says he "misspoke" earlier in the week at his summit with vladimir putin. president trump had supported mr putin's assertion that the russians did not interfere in the 2016 us election, despite american intelligence saying they had. president trump says he got his words mixed up and had meant to say he saw no reason why it was not russia. here's our washington correspondent chris buckler. with president trump, nothing comes without a little drama, even what some might regard as an apology. i have a full faith in our intelligence agencies. 0ops, theyjust turned off the light. that must be the intelligence agencies. after so much outrage, he had little choice but to shed some new light on what he said in helsinki, as he appeared to support vladimir putin's claim that russia didn't meddle in america's presidential election. i would like to clarifyjust in case it wasn't obvious. in a key sentence in my remarks, i said the word "would" instead of "wouldn't".

president putin, hejust said it's not russia. i will say this, i don't see any reason why it would be. the sentence should have been, "i don't see any reason why i wouldn't", or "why it wouldn't be russia" what mrtrump did yesterday was to betray the women and men of the fbi, the cia, nsa and others. former intelligence chiefs, political opponents and even several senior members of his own republican party had lined up to criticise the president. i understand the desire and the need to have good relations, that's perfectly reasonable, but russia is a menacing government that does not share our interests or our values. and i think that should be made clear. so should president trump be rebuked? i just... that was a question he didn't answer. germany is a captive of russia... but republicans were embarrassed by the stark contrast of the combative trump who angrily challenged old allies at the nato summit, compared to the president

who appeared all too cosy with the old enemy and sided with vladimir putin over america's own intelligence agencies. chris buckler, bbc news, washington. a high courtjudge will rule this morning in the case brought by sir cliff richard against the bbc for breach of privacy following coverage of a police investigation and raid of the star s home in 2014. the ruling is expected to give guidance on the contentious issue of whether a suspect who has not been charged can be lawfully named by the media. 0ur legal correspondent, clive coleman reports: when south yorkshire police raided sir cliff richard's gated home in 2014, he was in portugal, but the bbc was outside with a helicopter. it broadcast pictures and named sir cliff as a suspect in an alleged historical sexual assault. its correspondent dan johnson had arranged the bbc‘s attendance in advance with south yorkshire police. sir cliff denied the allegation.

he was questioned, but never arrested or charged. he sued south yorkshire police and the bbc for breach of privacy. the force settled its case for substantial damages and apologised to the star for the distress and humiliation caused by disclosing his private information to the bbc. the corporation denies sir cliff had a reasonable expectation of privacy in relation to the material it broadcast. and that if he did, there was an overriding public interest in its coverage of the investigation and search. the judgement is likely to give clear guidance on whether any suspect can lawfully be identified by the media before they are charged, and so has massive implications for the coverage of police investigations. clive coleman, bbc news. changing attitudes towards alcohol, education and family time have

contributed towards a sharp decline in the number of teenagers becoming pregnant — that's according to a new report. research by the british pregnancy advisory service suggests teen pregnancies have dropped by 55% since 2008. two—thirds of the 16 to 18—year—olds surveyed said they had never had sex. and 24% said they had never drunk alcohol. researchers say there is virtually no evidence to suggest taking omega—3 fish oil supplements prevents heart disease or strokes. the cochrane review which examined trial data from more than 100,000 people, concluded the chance of getting any meaningful health benefit from the supplements was one in 1000. the number of teenagers taking risks on railway tracks hasjumped by 80% in the last five years, new figures suggest. in the past 12 months, seven under—18s were killed on the tracks and a further 48 suffered life—changing injuries. network rail has launched a campaign, aiming to highlight the dangers of trespassing

on the railways. it tells the story of tom hubbard, who suffered life—changing injuries after being struck by 25,000 volts of electricity when he came into contact with the overhead wires which power some trains. video streaming services such as netflix and amazon now have more subscribers in the uk than traditional pay tv services, like sky and virgin, according to new data from 0fcom. the media regulator says british tv will have to change the way it operates to compete with the internet giants. 0ur arts correspondent david sillito reports. this was far from scientific, but the results do reflect something of today's research. we asked people to pick a favourite. one or two plumped for sky and the bbc, more went for youtube. i watch that every single day. but the clear winner — especially with the young — was netflix. i'm netflix too.

subscriptions for online video streaming services such as netflix and amazon prime now exceed those for traditional pay—tv operators such as sky and virgin. viewing of traditional tv services has dropped by more than 40% amongst the young and the media regulator 0fcom says british broadcasters need to work together if they are going to compete. we'd love to see british broadcasters, so the bbc, working collaboratively with itv, channel 4 and channel 5, so that they have got that scale to compete globally, making shows together, co—producing great shows that all of us can watch. creating a british netflix — a british amazon? i think it would be great to see a british netflix. the average twentysomething now watches an hour a day of youtube. the one group whose habits haven't changed much are people over the age of 65, who still watch an average of more than five and a half hours of traditional tv a day.

the average age of viewers to bbc one, two and itv is now over 60. that's a summary of the latest bbc news — more at 9.30. do get in touch with us throughout the morning. use the hashtag victoria live and if you text, you will be charged at the standard network rate. we are particularly interested in hearing from you if you are a teenager and you agree with the research out today that the reason for the teen pregnancy rate dropping is because teenagers are more interested in family time and being on social media. we would love to hear your thoughts on that. let's get some sport. chris mitchell is at the bbc sport centre. 0ur england's cricketers looking ready for the world cup? yes. there

we re ready for the world cup? yes. there were doubts not long ago when they lost to scotland at the beginning of the summer. then at the first game against india, they were thrashed and people were beginning to doubt whether they were rightly the world number ones, but in the end they have won there one day series against india, and in some style. it was a great performance in the third one day at headingley. england were brilliant. watch this from adil rashid to remove the indian captain, virat kohli. look at his face! shades of shane warne and mike gatting. england in great form, the home world cup now less than a year away. we want to keep learning and keep developing as a side. we still have some young guys within this team that can do special things for a numberof years, team that can do special things for a number of years, notjust going into the world cup. and it is

important to keep driving that ford and worry get the opportunity to be ruthless like we were today, we have got to drive it home. it'sjust nice to get to put all that thinking into practice and to do the stuff we say we want to do. wayne rooney's been talking about why he upped sticks and moved to america? yeah, he has been talking to us exclusively. some have been wondering why he doesn't stay on at the premier league and others like ryan giggs have played on until they we re ryan giggs have played on until they were a0. he is only 32 but he has done 500 games in the premier league for manchester united, five titles with united. but i think wayne rooney is showing a lot of self—awareness. he has done in the premier league. he can't run as fast, so he has moved to america because things there are a little easier. he said to us that he didn't wa nt to easier. he said to us that he didn't want to hang around and be a dead weight at everton. he made his debut for dc united this week. he signed a three and a half year contract there with the major league soccer club. they are one of the worst in the

mls. speaking exclusively to us, the former england captain says that his family played a big part in his move. i just family played a big part in his move. ijust felt family played a big part in his move. i just felt the time was right for us to have a new challenge. obviously in this league, i have said before, iwouldn't obviously in this league, i have said before, i wouldn't have come out if my family didn't want to come over because obviously they are my priority, so it was important they come over with me. showing a lot of self—awareness and moving to a league that will be easier for him and doing it to suit his family as well, perhaps? how much is he getting paid? it won't be as much as he was getting paid at manchester united and everton, you will take a pay cut but he is following in the path of david beckham and frank

lampard. the open golf starts tomorrow does tiger woods really have a chance, isn't he too old now? yes he does come he isn't too old, ernie els was in his a0s when he won recently. tiger woods looks happy as well and back at the open for the first time in a while and the chronic back pain seems to have been healed. he hasn't won a major in over a decade, has played the open since 2050 because of his bad back but i think this course will suit his game and so does he. look what tom did at turnberry aged 59, i think he was. greg was at birkdale around 53, 50 four. it can be done. you get to places like augusta

national, it outgrows you, but links style golf, you can roll the ball. links style golf, no trees, the ball will run and run, you have got to have a good touch with putting. but who has the best touch in gulf, it has to be phil mickelson. if you are the other guy in what i have got to show you, you have got to be a bit stupid or confidence in phil mickelson's skills. look back, it is ha rd mickelson's skills. look back, it is hard golf ball. look at that. standing foot in front of phil mickelson, he is hitting a golf ball at the guy and itjust goes over his head. i was wondering if you would let me do that? stand in front of me, and we will get a plastic set?|j don't me, and we will get a plastic set?” don't think so. did he have a

blindfold on because he didn't flinch. he didn't have a blindfold, but with other angles, he does flinch. it is when he feels the wind from the golf ball coming up under his nose. thank you very much, we will see you later. an inquest has criticised the met police for a series of failings over the killing of a renowned engineer who was stabbed just yards from his home by a student who was suffering from psychosis. drjeroen ensink was out posting cards about the birth of his daughter when he was murdered by femi timchang nandap in december 2015. prosecutors dropped knife charges against femi six days before he stabbed dr ensink to death. nadja, his wife had to crowdfund £25,000 in order to get legal representation at the inquest after she was refused legal aid, something she was determined to do in order to getjustice for her husband. nadja is talking to us in herfirst national tv

interview since the inquest. thank you for coming in and talking to us, you have obviously been through a dreadful time, tell us about your husband, a well—known academic, your husband and father to your newborn baby? he was amazing. the moment i met him, i knew he was the one. by that point, we had both given up hope we would meet anyone that special. you don't believe in the goodness of the world but that is what drew me to him in the first instance. the twinkle in his eye, his love, his unwavering belief in the goodness of the world and actually making a change in the world by his profession. he was a dedicated humanitarian and he... it

is really difficult to talk. just sitting here, it just is really difficult to talk. just sitting here, itjust gets so real all of the sudden. of course it does. all i all of the sudden. of course it does. alll can all of the sudden. of course it does. all i can say is he was amazing, he was my absolute soulmate, he was everybody‘s friend, but he was mine. that terrible moment when it was a happy day, he went out to postcards about the birth of your daughter and he crossed path with someone who had such a horrific impact on your lives, how did you learn what had happened? it was 1:50pm when he went out and we had a friend coming over for two out and we had a friend coming over fortwo p:m.. i remembersaying, don't do it now, we can do it later together but he was so adamant to postcards so they were sent out before the new year. i had already

done everything so it was the last tiny thing he could do. i was sat with fluer, nursing her and i noticed his cellphone on the table. i gave his friend a call, and he saidi i gave his friend a call, and he said i cannot come now because something has happened. i walked down the stairs and i opened the front doors. i saw the homicide tent to the left. i approached the police officer and i said, to the left. i approached the police officerand i said, can i to the left. i approached the police officer and i said, can ijust go looking for my husband, he went out and he is probablyjust stuck in the crowd. i had fluer with me but they wouldn't let me go any further and they were cordoning off the road even further so she said, why don't you go in and give me a description

of your husband ? you go in and give me a description of your husband? so i did but i think deep down i knew. i was shaking going upstairs. i went back into the flat. i am just fluer and there was a knock at the door. i opened the door and i knew. ijust knew. and as time went on and you heard, you were told what had happened, how quickly did you know that this was a total stranger with mental health issues?” that this was a total stranger with mental health issues? i knew it was a total stranger from the beginning. i think it was early in the new year that i was informed he was known to the police, but charges against him we re the police, but charges against him were dropped six days before. those questions, how could he have been free? how could this have happened? that was with me from the very

beginning onwards. obviously losing somebody in any circumstances is awful, having to deal with the grief, but you were contending with all of these questions and i presume, a lot of what ifs? raising and 11—day—old baby on my own. i hadn't even started motherhood. how did you manage it? how did i manage it? i went on autopilot. after a year and it? i went on autopilot. after a yearand a it? i went on autopilot. after a year and a half i have moved out of autopilot mode. you say autopilot mode, but you went into a fight, i suppose you could call it, because you wanted answers to the questions you wanted answers to the questions you had and the inquest came along and you wanted to be actively involved in that. you had to raise money to be able to do that? the fa ct we

money to be able to do that? the fact we had been refused legal aid, i still find that really difficult to diejust. i still find that really difficult to die just. yesterday when it came to die just. yesterday when it came to the verdict, i could never have done it without legal representation and the fact the had to raise £75,000... crikey so you had to raise £75,000? we raised £60,000, andi raise £75,000? we raised £60,000, and i am grateful to anyone who donated. i couldn't have done it without the public backing me. why did you get refused legal aid? they didn't think it was an article two inquest, you would have to ask them, the fact that the police were represented, the crown prosecution service represented funded by the taxpayer's money and me, as the

victim and i am expected to sit on my own... unbelievable! i don't even think you have to apply for legal aid,i think you have to apply for legal aid, iam think you have to apply for legal aid, i am the victim, i should get legal aid. so without the public, without anyone who donated, i couldn't have done it. he managed to raise a lot of money to get the support he needed to go through that inquest. what was it like going through the inquest? nothing prepares you for it. my legal team did their absolute best to do that, on the first day it is a summary of what happened. with every gruesome, little detail. listening to their forensic report, how he was stabbed to death, how he died. it is hard, it is hard beyond words and in the process of the two weeks when it

came to the cross—examining of the witnesses and there is one failing after the other. the attitude i had to face. so you did yesterday, here are verdict of unlawful killing was recorded and the coroner said failures by the met police after the previous arrest ofjeroen's killer when femi timchang nandap didn't get any mental health care monitoring, could have had an impact on what happened to your husband. the previous arrest, he was carrying a knife and procedures were not followed and his mental health issues were not pinpointed and that was very much picked up on in this inquest. how did you feel when you heard all of that and you came to the end of that process? the jury did excellentjob, the end of that process? the jury did excellent job, summarising the end of that process? the jury did excellentjob, summarising all the failings and if this didn't

happen, that wouldn't have happened. it brought home the fact what i knew all along and to have an independent jury all along and to have an independent jury come firm what i felt, what i knew all along, meant a lot to me. it was really emotional in court yesterday. i broke down, which i wasn't expecting at all. i thought i had it all together, i would go there and listen to the verdict and i would go. but it was nothing like it. the metropolitan police service haveissued it. the metropolitan police service have issued a statement. they said their thoughts and sympathies are with you. they have acknowledged m ista kes with you. they have acknowledged mistakes were made in not following processes after the first arrest. they said they have made changes and they will examine the verdict to see if they need to do anything more. how do you respond to that? they had two one half years to do that, they

knew about the inquest all along. we have been sat in court for two weeks, they could have cross—examined their witnesses better. they have had plenty of time, they were waiting for another tragedy to happen. i don't think the statement is satisfactory, i have not received an apology. how much do you want an apology? very much, part of the reason for going into the inquest was to receive an apology, not only for me, but for fluer. this whole process was to prevent it from happening again and a—3 do have all of the answers. it is like opening a book and fluer can have the information at her fingertips. and at the end to have an apology from both the cps and the police, means a lot to me. if you do get an apology, you won't have an end?”

lot to me. if you do get an apology, you won't have an end? i am raising fluer to say sorry, that is how i am raising her. to stand up for her m ista kes raising her. to stand up for her mistakes and be responsible for what she is doing. if i am raising her that way and the authorities are not standing upfor that way and the authorities are not standing up for that, that is the wayjeroen was living his life by as well. so i would very much like to receive that apology. it might seem really minor to some people, but to me it isa really minor to some people, but to me it is a big thing. what do you tell fluer about her dad? that he loved her, that he will always be with us. daddy is living in her heart. he's very much part of our daily life she knows she has a father. thank you very much for coming in. thank you.

still to come... a courageous canine — we'll hear why one police dog's heroic actions have sparked a change in the law. and i mutter royal courts of justice, where sir cliff richard has arrived. in the next 15 minutes, he will hear thejudgment arrived. in the next 15 minutes, he will hear the judgment in arrived. in the next 15 minutes, he will hear thejudgment in his privacy case against the bbc. for the latest news — here'sjulian. theresa may faces another gruelling day of questioning over her plans for brexit. last night, ministers saw off a bid by tory rebels to create a customs union with the eu if a trade deal failed. the amendment was defeated by just six votes. today, she will meet with cross party mps and the 1922 committee of backbenchers to try and heal the divisions in the party before next week's summer recess. in a sharp u—turn, president trump says he "misspoke" earlier

in the week at his summit with vladimir putin. president trump had supported mr putin's assertion that the russians did not interfere in the 2016 us election, despite american intelligence saying they had. president trump says he got his words mixed up and had meant to say he saw no reason why it was not russia. a high courtjudge will rule this morning on the case brought by sir cliff richard against the bbc, for the way it covered a police raid at his home in berkshire in 201a. sir cliff, who denied a claim of historical sexual assault, was questioned but never arrested or charged. the judgement is likely to have major implications for the way the media is allowed to report the early stages of a criminal investigation. researchers say there is virtually no evidence to suggest taking omega—3 fish oil supplements prevents heart disease or strokes. the cochrane review, which examined trial data from more than 100,000 people, concluded that the chance of getting any

meaningful health benefit from the supplements was one in a thousand. the number of teenagers taking risks on railway tracks hasjumped by 80% in the last five years, new figures suggest. in the past 12 months, seven under—18s were killed on the tracks and a further a8 suffered life—changing injuries. network rail has launched a campaign, aiming to highlight the dangers of trespassing on the railways. it tells the story of tom hubbard, who suffered life—changing injuries after being struck by 25,000 volts of electricity when he came into contact with the overhead wires which power some trains. that's a summary of the latest bbc news. here's some sport now with chris. england looked very good as they beat india in the final and decisive one—dayer against india, joe root hitting the winning runs and setting a new trend, perhaps...

you've heard of the mic drop... now it is dropping the bat. wayne rooney says he moved to america because he "didn't want to hang around like a dead weight". he's spoken to the bbc for the first time since making his move to dc united in washington and says the timing was right to take his family stateside. tiger woods says he's confident he can win another major — and that he can do so at the open championship at carnoustie this week. he hasn't won one in 10 years, but reckons his game is now suited to links golf. no trees, lots of grass. it is all down to the touch. britain's geraint thomas and chris froome remain in contention at the tour de france after stage 10. but they're still behind race leader gregg van avermaet, who's almost two and a half minutes ahead...

he has got the yellowjersey. that's all the sport for now. in october 2016, pc dave wardell and his police dog finn pursued a suspect with a knife. during the attempted arrest, the suspect turned on them with a ten inch knife. he stabbed finn, both through his chest, via his armpit and then, with the knife bound for dave, through the top of his head. despite the injuries, finn continued to protect dave, clinging onto the man until reinforcements arrived. afterwards, the arrested man was charged with abh for stabbing pc wardell in the hand, but the only options over the injuries to finn were causing unnecessary suffering to an animal or criminal damage. last year, dave and finn won a mirror animal hero award for their extraordinary story and dave used his increased profile to push through a change in the law that will now see both police dogs and horses given the same status as serving police officers.

i met this police partnership earlier and dave told me just how close and unique his relationship with finn is. it's like no other relationship i've got. nobody understands me as much as finn does and nobody understands him as much as i do. when we were working, i spent more time with finn than with any of my family and friends. so you have a relationship with finn from when he was nine months old. yeah, he was given to me asa months old. yeah, he was given to me as a boisterous, bouncy puppy and our relationship grew from there. what happened on the day you were attacked? finn what happened on the day you were attacked? firm and i were called to what was called a suspicious incident, and that was as much information as we got. we arrived and all hell broke loose at the back ofan and all hell broke loose at the back of an address. finn was still in a van at that point near the back of the address. i ran to the van, got him outand the address. i ran to the van, got him out and headed to where i thought people might appear from and sure enough, someone

thought people might appear from and sure enough, someone appeared. we we re sure enough, someone appeared. we were not sure what we were dealing with. i shouted at this person to stop. i identified myself as a policeman with a dog, and he carried on running. finn can run at 30 miles an hour when he is not attached to me. he had met the criteria for me to let finn. stop him. as he went to climba to let finn. stop him. as he went to climb a fence, finn grabbed him and pulled him down. as ijoined them, this person thrust forward towards finn andi this person thrust forward towards finn and i didn't know what he was doing until he pulled the largest knife i have ever seen out of finn's chest. and what were the injuries that finn and you had? chest. and what were the injuries that firm and you had? after pulling it out of finn's chest, he went for me, but finn got in the way. as a result, he was stabbed through the chest. he had four holes in his lungs and as a result of getting in the way of the night heading for me, he had the top of his head sliced open as well and i was stabbed in the hand. and you think he's saved your life? undoubtedly, and he still didn't let go. so we had to disarm

him and detain him. luckily for me, finn carried on doing hisjob and he would have done it until his last breath. we disarmed him, because he had made his intent very clear, and then back—up arrived and i was able to scoop finn up and get him to the vet. do you think he understood what was going on? dogs are masters of body language. so he understood what was about to happen once the knife had come out of him much quicker than me. i was still thinking, what have i just seem? than me. i was still thinking, what have ijust seem? but luckily than me. i was still thinking, what have i just seem? but luckily for me, finn was quick and got in the way very quickly. no doubt he was in an awful lot of pain and he knew that, but he still had a job to do in his mind and he was prepared to do it. after that, your attacker was charged with criminal damage in relation to what had happened to finn. how did that make you feel? that was heartbreaking, to think of

finn being thought of the same as you watch or your pen. having worked together at that point for six and a half years with the things we had gone through and the amazing results he had had, and then to see him go through that and be laid on the vet's floor with him, watching him fade away, and then for his offender to be charged with criminal damage as if he was an inanimate object was very hard. and the public agreed. they were outraged. so what happened only you started campaigning for a change in the law? a colleague of mine is started a petition calling for better protection for service animals. in 11 days, we had 127,000 signatures. that made the government have a debate on it, and there was cross— party have a debate on it, and there was cross—party support and it snowballed from there. there has

been huge work from my mp and two people who run the campaign, called finn's law. and the use of social media has made this grow. so what would finn's law mean now if the same thing happened again? what would the punishment be?m same thing happened again? what would the punishment be? it would fit under the animal welfare act. the government are looking at increasing the sentences for the animal welfare act as it stands, because it is only six months and a fine, but they are looking to increase that to five years and a much largerfine. we know service animals slipped through a loophole which means that if they are working and if we use them for intimidation, which we do in policing, they are not protected. so we are not only asking for them to have parity with pet dogs, so the maximum would be five years. finn went back to work after this. how was he after he went

back? amazing. he went from being my police doctor being my therapy dog and he helped me through my mental recovery. how did that work? i suffered with flashbacks and ptsd, and he was always there. he could sense when it was coming on and he would come and interrupt that and give me something to do, which is what therapy dogs do, which is why they are so wonderful at helping with that. when we returned to work, our first job with that. when we returned to work, ourfirstjob was a with that. when we returned to work, our firstjob was a stolen car that had been abandoned. we tracked through the streets and we got to an area where we have to go through a thick hedge. he went through first andi thick hedge. he went through first and i was very reluctant, having flashbacks. he was like, come on, we've got a job to do! did you expect him to be fearless going back? obviously, it happens that police dogs get affected in the line

of duty. are they always fearless going back or do they get affected like us? knowing how passionate he is about his work and how driven he was to go back to work, i guess i am not really surprised. he is my best friend, so i am always looking out for him and he looks out for me. i wa nt for him and he looks out for me. i want him to be happy and healthy. and we found the car thief. his drive to get the job done is huge. that is all dogs, but certainly service dogs are fantastic. you are now judging service dogs are fantastic. you are nowjudging the award that you got last year for what you have both gone through. what do you look for when you are looking for heroic actions in animals? something that tugs at the heartstrings is always going to get you. if you think of finn's story and some of the stories we we re finn's story and some of the stories we were up finn's story and some of the stories we were up against last year and some of the stories we have seen for this year, it is that triumph over adversity, the desire to get back,

the relationship between human and animal. those are the things we are looking for. we always try to get as many positives from our one negative as we can. do you think he knows he isa as we can. do you think he knows he is a hero? he gets to meet lots of lovely people nowadays, very different from his previous job. lovely people nowadays, very different from his previousjob. but he just takes everything in his stride. to get a dog like this, totally obedient and as brave as he was in the line of duty, what does that take? can all dogs be taught like that or how much of it is the personality of the dog? it depends how young you get them. it depends a lot on breeding and this breed are very famous for it. there is a famous picture online of a german shepherd at the end of a lead snarling and it says "i'm not doing this because i hate you, i'm doing

this because i hate you, i'm doing this because i love the person behind me". that is what it is. when you have an amazing bond with a dog like this, you will do anything to protect each other. and he is retired now? he is come he is having a busy retirement. he hasjust come back from florida. he has been to scotla nd back from florida. he has been to scotland to speak to the scottish parliament. he has spoken to children in schools, so is having an amazing retirement, surfing and paddle boarding. he surfs! i wish we had pictures of that. it's lovely to meet you both. thank you for coming we're expecting a high courtjudge to rule any minute now on the privacy case brought by sir cliff richard against the bbc for the way it covered a police raid at his home in berkshire. sir cliff, who denied a claim of historical sexual assault, was questioned but never arrested or charged. our correspondent helena lee is at the high court for us now.

we are expecting a ruling imminently, bringing us up today? yes, mrjustice mann oversaw the case earlier this year and he is expected about now, to start reading a summary expected about now, to start reading a summary of his judgment. expected about now, to start reading a summary of hisjudgment. it is expected to take about ten minutes. thejudgment itself expected to take about ten minutes. the judgment itself is about 200 pages long, we understand. so he will not be reading all of that but we will hear a summary and the judgment in sir cliff richard's privity case. the singer arrived in the last ten minutes or so. you can probably make out a large number of reporters and cameras waiting for him. he got out of the taxi, he smiled and he went over to thank some of his fans. some of whom have travelled all the way from scotland. he is now inside court, his friend,

the television presenter, gloria honeyford, arrived as well and she smiled for the cameras. we're waiting now for thejudge smiled for the cameras. we're waiting now for the judge to deliver hisjudgment. in waiting now for the judge to deliver his judgment. in court waiting now for the judge to deliver hisjudgment. in court as waiting now for the judge to deliver his judgment. in court as well, some senior bbc news managers as well. thank you very much, we will be straight back as soon as any news comes through. let's now talk with christopher hutchings, a solicitor specialising in media law and a partner at hamlyns solicitors. and jenny afia, a lawyer and privacy specialist at schillings. thank you both for being with us, 200 pagejudgment, jenny, thank you both for being with us, 200 page judgment, jenny, what thank you both for being with us, 200 pagejudgment, jenny, what will you be looking out for? you normally go straight to the back page and see the conclusion. i am hoping go straight to the back page and see the conclusion. iam hoping he go straight to the back page and see the conclusion. i am hoping he will win his case because it was a massive violation of his privacy and i think should be a pretty clear case. christopher, how do you see it? this will set new boundaries in

terms of privacy law. most cases settle and there are frequent injunctions granted and cases do not tend to get to trial. this is undoubtedly going to set new boundaries for how the media can and cannot report, particularly criminal investigations. in terms of appealing, both sides can appeal, whichever way it goes? yes, but remember how expensive litigation is and this is one man who has had to spend a fortune on this. i imagine if he loses he will fight on and good for him if he does. but not everybody has that option. he attended court throughout. he has made it absolutely clear how personal this is for him? it is extremely personal because privity cases by definition, always are. it

is rare to get to trial because it ta kes a is rare to get to trial because it takes a huge amount of courage to stand up to your bully, in effect, challenge them. his barrister made the point at the end of the trial, the point at the end of the trial, the questioning had been intrusive, going over material they didn't need to cover. the whole process is a massive ordeal. christopher, in terms of the change in boundaries potentially as a result of the outcome, obviously we are still waiting to see what it will be and you say it is read these cases go to court, how great an area have these cases privity being? it is an issue because since the human rights act there is not a codified privacy law. the boundaries have two developed through caselaw. i will interrupt you because we have heard the verdict has gone in favour of cliff richard. helena has the details, what can you tell us? the judge, mr

justice mann went into court and he asked for silence in court. he has told the court to avoid suspense. he says that cliff richard succeeds in his claim, against the bbc and will receive substantial damages. so that front court number 15 here at the royal courts ofjustice, sir cliff richard has won his privity case against the bbc and the judge has said he will receive substantial damages. now, sir cliff richard came to court of course, arguing his privity had been breached after the bbc reported on the raid in 2015 on his property in sunningdale in berkshire. he gave evidence during the case here at court and he went

into the witness box and he described to the court room how the cove rage by described to the court room how the coverage by the bbc had an immense impact on his life. notjust commercially, but he also said that mentally, it had a huge impact as well. he described to the court how the day after the coverage, he collapsed in his kitchen and began sobbing he said, for the following nine months or so. he didn't sleep very much and he said he felt like he would have a heart attack or a stroke. we now know sir cliff richard has succeeded in his claim against the bbc here in court. he will receive substantial damages and the judge is now going back over the case itself and how the trial took place. so, he will be relieved at the judgment here in court today. what we don't know is what

substantial damages mean, in terms of how much that is going to be. we know he came to court asking, to his barristers, for the very top end in terms of damages, but all we know at this stage is the bbc is going to to pay substantial damages to sir cliff richard for a breach of his privity. we are still awaiting further details from the court room as the judge continues to go through that summary judge continues to go through that summary but he has given us that information. he didn't want to keep him or the bbc in suspense and he has said he has now won his claim about the bbc. the judge rejected the bbc's defends that they did it for the freedom of press. what we have to look out for now in the judge's summary is what he has won the case on. has sir cliff richard won the case on the bbc naming him

in their reports? or, has sir cliff richard won it on the coverage? his barristers, during the case, had argued the bbc's coverage was excessive. he may remember the corporation used a helicopter to get some footage from the police raid taking place and his lawyers argued in court that was inappropriate, it was a breach of his privacy and it was a breach of his privacy and it was excessive. we are expecting to hear after the summary is read out, from sir cliff richard's solicitor. cameras are waiting outside court at the moment bought a statement from him. we don't know whether sir cliff himself of a anything, but he has won his privity case against the bbc and the corporation is going to have to pay substantial damages, whether the bbc is going to appeal against thisjudgment, the bbc is going to appeal against this judgment, we do the bbc is going to appeal against thisjudgment, we do not know at thisjudgment, we do not know at this stage. helena, please stay with

us. we know thejudge is reading out his summary of his 200 page judgment and it should take about ten minutes or so and it should take about ten minutes orso and we and it should take about ten minutes or so and we will come back to you for more thoughts there. let's get the thoughts from the lawyers in the studio. jennie, you said you wanted sir cliff to win and it is a big win for sir cliff richard? it is, and com pletely for sir cliff richard? it is, and completely the right decision. u nfortu nately, completely the right decision. unfortunately, the bbc prioritised its reputation, which had taken a huge battering following thejimmy savile scandal and they prior to rise their own reputation over an innocent man's reputation. the damages have been said that £210,000. how do you quantify the impact on someone in financial terms? you can't, unless you showed they have lost a contract as a

result of it, you can't quantify. the issue with damages for privity, you can never undo the harm. we will never not see the images of the police storming into sir cliff's house. thejudge has said the damages at the highest level to send a clear message this was completely wrong. so that is the most that could have been awarded, is it? wrong. so that is the most that could have been awarded, is mm is the upper level. christopher, we we re is the upper level. christopher, we were hearing from helena that we will hear the detail as to how sir cliff richard want it, is it because the bbc named him or is it the level of the coverage and his lawyers said the coverage was excessive because of the use of the helicopter and everything else that came with it. what are your thoughts on that? every privity case is very fact specific. the facts and the way the judge assesses them and the way the

police interacted with the bbc to the extent to which they tipped them off, the extent to which the helicopter played a significant factor, all of that will be important. i couldn't agree more, this is the right decision and i think this will set a new boundary in terms to the extent of which, in terms of a criminal investigation where somebody has not been arrested or charged, whether they have a right to remain effectively, innocent until proved guilty. so in other words, not named at all until charged? there is a strong argument for that, people have been exposed on social media. the fact the bbc cove rage was on social media. the fact the bbc coverage was picked up and on twitter hundreds and thousands of people were accusing him of the most horrific criminal offences and he was effectively convicted by many before he was even charged. was effectively convicted by many before he was even chargedm was effectively convicted by many before he was even charged. if the

judge's ruling doesn't specify he shouldn't have been named without having been charged, will that necessarily flow from this verdict? we have to see what the judge found, obviously. i also think there is a strong prospect this will be appealed. it doesn't mean this is not the right decision. we can go back to helena at the court because she is hearing a bit more about the damages. helena, £210,000, how was that figure arrived at? it is a huge amount in terms of damages. the judge said general damages the bbc has to pay, £190,000. that is for a serious infringement of sir cliff richard's privacy rights, substantial damage. also £20,000 for aggravated damages. that is because the bbc put their story of the raid

on his house in for a scoop of the year award. the judge said that is £20,000 so in total, £210,000 in terms of damages. if you look at a previous privity case, max mosley, for example, he was awarded £60,000. so this is substantial for the bbc. helena, cliff richard had already got compensation from the police, tell us more about the different interactions in this particular case? yes, that is another issue. south yorkshire police, the force who were investigating sir cliff richard at the time of the raid, they already paid sir cliff richard, after he sued them. they paid him £400,000 in damages and they also said sorry. but what the judge has said sorry. but what the judge has said in court today is, he has found the bbc more responsible than south

yorkshire police and their actions. again, to repeat those figures, £190,000 in general damages and £20,000 in aggravated damages and we are waiting of course, to hear from sir cliff richard, his reaction to this, probably through his solicitor shortly. the judge has now finished reading his summary out to the court. we will be straight back and we will not miss a moment from there. thank you, helena. interesting in the damages, helena was saying the bbc was found more responsible for the damage caused to sir cliff richard, but the amount of money the police paid sir cliff richard was almost double what the bbc has been ordered to pay in court. what is your reading of that? that is because the police settled, they didn't go to trial and they took a punt on what damages to pay

rather than have the court awarded. they paid more damages but they will have spared the expense of a trial. the bbc will have to pay the cost of a three—week trial and the bulk of sir cliff's cost. how much will it cost? it is going to be in the millions. and if it goes to an appeal? an appeal will not be as expensive because it doesn't go back over the facts, it just expensive because it doesn't go back over the facts, itjust goes to the points of law. but it is a huge amount of money. right now, we are going to pause for a weather update with simon king. there will be plenty of dry weather, sunny intervals and the chance of sunny intervals and the chance of sun showers, particularly across scotland, northern ireland. showers cropping up across wales and the midlands this afternoon as well. otherwise, it is going to be fairly

fine and pleasant with the sunshine, temperatures about 19 to 21 degrees in the north and up to about 26 celsius further south and east. this evening and overnight, showers will disappear and we evening and overnight, showers will disappearand we are evening and overnight, showers will disappear and we are left with clear spells into thursday morning and temperatures similar to last night, ten to 13 degrees in the north and 12 to 15 celsius further south. 0n thursday there will be lots of sunshine particularly for england and wales with temperatures in the mid to high 20s. cloudy with rain moving into the far north—west of scotland. goodbye. hello. it's wednesday, it's 10 o'clock, i'm joanna gosling. sir cliff richard has won his high court privacy case against the bbc over its coverage of a police raid on his home. he was teary and hugged his legal team in court when he heard. the singer has been awarded £210,000 in damages. we're live at the court —

and will be assessing what this could mean for privacy law, celebrities and the media. also. . .. the met police is criticised after a man is stabbed to death just yards from his home by a stranger suffering from psychosis. his wife has been speaking to us. those questions, how could he have been free? how could this have happened? been free? how could this have happened ? that was been free? how could this have happened? that was with me from the very beginning onwards. you can watch that full interview online at our programme page. julian is in the bbc newsroom with a summary of the day's news. sir cliff richard has won his high court privacy case against the bbc over its coverage of a police raid on his home. it's understood the broadcaster will have to pay substantial damages. that has been confirmed as £210,000.

sir cliff, who denied a claim of historical sexual assault, was questioned but never arrested or charged. the judgement is likely to have major implications for the way the media is allowed to report the early stages of a criminal investigation. theresa may faces another gruelling day of questioning over her plans for brexit. last night, ministers saw off a bid by tory rebels to create a customs union with the eu if a trade deal failed. the amendment was defeated by just six votes. today, she will meet with cross—party mps and the 1922 committee of backbenchers to try and heal the divisions in the party before next week's summer recess: in a sharp u—turn, president trump says he "misspoke" earlier in the week at his summit with vladimir putin. president trump had supported mr putin's assertion that the russians did not interfere in the 2016 us election, despite american intelligence saying they had. president trump says he got his words mixed up and had meant to say he saw no reason why it was not russia. changing attitudes towards alcohol, education and family time have

contributed towards a sharp decline in the number of teenagers becoming pregnant, that's according to a new report. research by the british pregnancy advisory service suggests teen pregnancies have dropped by 55% since 2008. two—thirds of the 16 to 18—year—olds surveyed said they had never had sex. and 24% said they had never drunk alcohol. researchers say there is virtually no evidence to suggest taking omega—3 fish oil supplements prevents heart disease or strokes. the cochrane review which examined trial data from more than 100,000 people, concluded the chance of getting any meaningful health benefit from the supplements was one in a thousand. the number of teenagers taking risks on railway tracks hasjumped by 80% in the last five years, new figures suggest. in the past 12 months, seven under—18s were killed on the tracks and a further 48 suffered life—changing injuries. network rail has launched a campaign, aiming to highlight

the dangers of trespassing on the railways. it tells the story of tom hubbard, who suffered life—changing injuries after being struck by 25,000 volts of electricity when he came into contact with the overhead wires which power some trains. that's a summary of the latest bbc news — more at 10.30. let's go straight back to the court and joined helena for the latest on that ruling that sir cliff richard had his privacy breached by the bbc when the bbc covered the police investigation at his home using a helicopter in the process. helena, what is the latest? we are waiting for sir cliff richard to come out of court. thejudge has completed

reading his summary of the judgment. thatjudgment is reading his summary of the judgment. that judgment is around reading his summary of the judgment. thatjudgment is around 200 pages long, but he has read that summary. to repeat the news from the court, sir cliff richard has won his privacy case against the bbc and he will be awarded substantial damages. we now know the figures. general damages, thejudge we now know the figures. general damages, the judge said, we now know the figures. general damages, thejudge said, for a serious infringement of sir cliff richard's privacy rights, it is a substantial damage and the judge awarded him £190,000 for that. he also says for aggravated damages, £20,000. that is because the bbc put the story forward for a scoop of the year award, that story being the coverage of the police raid on sir cliff richard's apartment at sunningdale in berkshire in 2014. sir cliff richard brought the case

to the court. he said the bbc breached his privacy when they reported that he was being investigated in connection with ahistorical allegation of a sexual assault which he was ever arrested for. he was never charged and the campus edition service dropped the case. we now know sir cliff richard has won his privacy case against the bbc. -- the has won his privacy case against the bbc. —— the crown prosecution service dropped the case. some of his supporters sang congratulations in the hallway in court after he heard thejudgment, in the hallway in court after he heard the judgment, and in the hallway in court after he heard thejudgment, and sir cliff richard was said to be tearful when thejudge gave his richard was said to be tearful when the judge gave his judgment. richard was said to be tearful when thejudge gave hisjudgment. we will of course bring you the statement. we understand that sir cliff richard himself is not going to be talking, but he will be coming out with his solicitor, who he sat next to throw out the case which took place earlier this year. we are waiting to

hear reaction from them. what we don't know at this stage is whether the bbc is planning to appeal against thisjudgment. the bbc is planning to appeal against this judgment. we the bbc is planning to appeal against thisjudgment. we may hear from some of the senior bbc news managers who have come to court today. as soon as they come out, we will bring that to you. thank you, helena. it is a 200 page ruling and the reason for that is that we are seeing all the boxes behind you going into the court, not necessarily related to this case, but there is so much paperwork involved in these cases and we will keep an eye on what is going on behind you so that we don't miss the lawyers when they appear. now let's catch up with the sport. good morning. england are favourites for next year's world cup,

doubts about their form gone after a brilliant comeback series win over india. they won the final and decisive one—dayer and in some style to win the series 2—1 england brilliant with the ball — look at this absolute beauty from adil rashid to remove the indian captain virat kohli. the look says it all. the batting was excellent too. the winning runs came from joe root, who completed his century in the process. england in great form with a home world cup now less than a year away... wayne rooney says he moved to america because he didn't want to "hang around and be a dead weight" at everton. he made his debut for dc united, where he'll earn £300,000 a week. the former england captain told bbc sport that his priority is to play. everton made it clear that if there we re everton made it clear that if there were offers for me, they were happy for me to go. i understand,

obviously. they have brought a new manager in an new staff and they wa nt to manager in an new staff and they want to build players but the manager wants. i am sure it released a lot of money for the new players who have come in. so i'm sure that was in their thinking. yeah, who have come in. so i'm sure that was in theirthinking. yeah, i who have come in. so i'm sure that was in their thinking. yeah, i said to them, if that's what you want, i am not going to hang around and be a dead weight. sounds excited. the fa is hoping to convince government later today that selling wembley stadium is a good idea. they say it'll benefit grassroots football. something they say needs urgent attention. sports minister tracey crouch and the fa chief executive martin glenn will speak at a digital, culture, media and sport parliamentary hearing to try and get approvalfor the sale of the national stadium. the fa has received an offer of £600 million for the national stadium from fulham owner, shahid khan. and the fa want to invest that money into projects that will hopefully end scenes like this.

in the evidence they'll set out today, they say that one in six matches are called off due to poor pitch quality and 33 of 50 county fas are without their own 3g pitch. and tiger woods says he's confident he's got a chance at this week's open championship. he hasn't won a major in a decade, and hasn't even played at the open since 2015 because of injury. but the 42—year—old reckons the links at carnoustie will suit his game, and says there's no reason why he can't follow other 0pen champions like tom watson and greg norman and continue playing into his fifties. that's all the sport for now. some of you have been getting in touch about the ruling on cliff richard. neil says the fine should

be by the people responsible for this, not the taxpayer, £210,000 that the bbc has been ordered to pay in damages to sir cliff richard. mark says cliff richard had to win his case. it was ridiculous tabloid journalism by bbc news. dan says well done, sir cliff richard for exposing the awfuljournalism at the bbc. who is paying over a quarter of £1 million? the licence payer, of course. disgraceful. get rid of the licence fee. christopher hutchins, a solicitor specialising in media law, is with us in the studio, as well as a privacy specialist. we still don't have a clear breakdown of where the judge specifically criticised the bbc and whether he found in favour or against. what are your thoughts on what we know so far? i think sir cliff has been vindicated for his

decision to stand up to the bbc and try to protect his privacy rights. this isn't just about try to protect his privacy rights. this isn'tjust about sir cliff. the president that he is helping establish here will trickle down to help all of us when we have issues trying to protect our privacy. imagine if it was a local newspaper for sporting on someone being investigated by the police. the decision today will help them protect their rights. christopher, thatis protect their rights. christopher, that is what you were saying, that new boundaries are being drawn as a result of what is happening. precisely. there hasn't been a case ofjust this going to trial, so this does set a precedent, particularly in the context of reporting criminal investigations and the rights to privacy as against any public interest, even where you have such a popular public figure. the judge has found that his right to privacy greatly outweighed any public interest in broadcasting. will that mean that an appeal is more likely,

because this will have ramifications not just for the because this will have ramifications notjust for the bbc, but for all of the media? i would be surprised if the media? i would be surprised if the bbc doesn't try to appeal. they have to get permission, but because this does set new ground, it's a novel decision and i think the court of appeal is likely to hear this. that doesn't mean the court of appeal will disagree with the findings. let go back to the court. helena lee is there. yes, we are still waiting for sir cliff richard to come out with his solicitor to say a few words. we don't think he will speak, but his solicitor will give his reaction to the judgment we had in the last half—hour. 0ur give his reaction to the judgment we had in the last half—hour. our legal affairs correspondent clive coleman is with me now. how significant or how damaging is this for the bbc? let me put in one caveat first. this was an incredibly long judgment, 200

pages. it is so big that the court didn't even print out copies. it would have demolished a set of trees around the world. by the judge has given an executive summary of his judgment. he makes it clear that thatis judgment. he makes it clear that that is not the judgment proper, but from that executive summary, this is a devastating defeat for the bbc and it isa a devastating defeat for the bbc and it is a significant win for sir cliff richard. the judge found that the bbc infringed sir cliff's privacy rights without legal justification, in other words unlawfully, and it did so in a505 sensationalist way. he rejected the bbc argument that publication of the fa ct bbc argument that publication of the fact that sir cliff richard was at that point a suspect in a police investigation was in the public interest. that was the bbc's main argument. the damages are significant. put that into context for us, £210,000 in damages. compare

that to a previous privacy case? for many years, the highest award in a privacy case was the award to max mosley in his action against the news of the world. it was reported that he had taken part in georgia with prostitutes. he sued for breach of privacy and won £60,000. until the phone hacking case, that was the highest award. £210,000 is a significant amount of damages and the judge awarded £190,000 in what he called basic and general damages. but he threw in another £20,000 in what he said were aggravated damages. these are damages that are awarded when you look at the behaviour of the party at fault. the reason he did that was that the bbc nominated its coverage of the raid on sir cliff richard's home in 2014 for scoop of the year at the rts awards, and the judge saw that as an aggravating factor. therefore, that brings the £190,000 to £210,000 in

total. that is a very significant award of damages. soa so a significant blow to the bbc. sir clifford winning his privity case and still waiting for him and his solicitor to come out of court. as soon as they do, we will bring it to you live. we will be straight back with you, helena. christopher hutchings and jenny afia, thank you to you both as well. teenage pregnancy levels are the lowest they've ever been, and over the last ten years, the number of teenage parents has more than halved. that's according to reserach by the british pregnancy advisory service. they say it's because teenagers are spending less time socialising and drinking and more studying or spending time with family. in the studio this morning is clare murphy from the british pregnancy advisory service which carried out the research. and 15 year—old beliz, who is studying for her gcses and is a girl guide. thank you very much for coming in.

clare murphy, it is extraordinary that the number of teenage pregnancies has halved. it is a huge drop and! pregnancies has halved. it is a huge drop and i remember the days it was a policy issue that would be talked a policy issue that would be talked a lot, what has changed? it is one of these issues public perception needs to catch up with. we think of ourselves as a nation of having a high teenage pregnancy rate and polls show the british public overestimate the number of teenagers who give birth every year. it is a phenomenal success story and it is a total phenomena. it has got a huge amount to do with better access to contraceptive services, better sexual relationship education, but i think there is more we can do on that front. but it does speak to

changes in the way young people live their lives. it is one of the things that comes out in our report, this appears to be a generation of young people who don't drink in the same way and are focused on steady career goals, and they are ambitious and feel with hard work they can achieve something in life. how does such a marked shift happen in such quick time? you said there is better access to different services that have made a difference so policy decisions have been taken, but in terms of a society approach, what has happened ? terms of a society approach, what has happened? policy decisions have been important and we have seen an increase in social media and new technologies which paradoxically we worry about in terms of, you know, potentially paving the way to u nwa nted potentially paving the way to unwanted sexual encounters. but sometimes what it shows is when

teenagers are spending more time socialising online with their friends and less time face—to—face, the opportunities for those sexual encounters are minimised and you know, social media provides a platform to engage with friends at home and socialising outside of the houseis home and socialising outside of the house is perhaps less of a thing now for this generation. we are grateful to you beliz, for coming in to talk on behalf of a generation of teenagers, what are your experiences? i agree, my generation are more focused on education and our careers are more focused on education and ourcareers in the are more focused on education and our careers in the future. and the sexual relationship education thing, teachers have explained a lot and we have had a lot of lessons and insight to the whole sexual activities and things like that. our social time, we have a lot less social time, we have a lot less social time. i am

social time, we have a lot less socialtime. i am sorry social time, we have a lot less social time. i am sorry ladies i have this stop you because sir cliff richard is appearing at the high court. good morning everyone. sir cliff is of course very pleased with thejudgment today cliff is of course very pleased with the judgment today in which the judge concluded that," the bbc went inforan judge concluded that," the bbc went in for an invasion of sir cliff's privity rides in a big way". mr justice mann's ruling is the bbc was unlawful. the case confirms individuals, including high profile ones have a reasonable expectation of privacy in relation to police investigations. what transpired in august 2014 resulted from decisions taken by only a small number of people at the bbc. however, it was asa people at the bbc. however, it was as a direct result of those decisions the impact on sir cliff over the last four years was so profound. he never expected after 60 yea rs profound. he never expected after 60 years in the public eye his privity and reputation would be tarnished in

this way and he would need to fight such a battle. although he felt it necessary to pursue this case, and the sum awarded in damages is one of the sum awarded in damages is one of the highest ever in this area of law, his motivation wasn't for personal gain. he knew all along he would be substantially out of pocket. his aim has to be trying to right a wrong and to make sure as best he could, no other innocent person had to ensure what he went through. what sir cliff wanted was the bbc to acknowledge what it had done to him was unlawful. before litigation commenced we asked the bbc to apologise. sir cliff had been reasonable in relation to damages had they done so. they refused to do so but they were defined, repeatedly telling the world this was public interest journal, when telling the world this was public interestjournal, when as we know now, it was not. the even submitted the story for an award, which the judge found to be an aggravating

factor. thejudge judge found to be an aggravating factor. the judge came to the conclusion that did not exist, public interest in identifying him. serious questions ought to be asked about the bbc's focus in preserving their story at the expense of secular‘s rights, as well as how the bbc came to advance such a factual case, including to the home affairs select committee in 2014. additionally, whether senior executives scrutinised effective decision—making in signing the bbc's defence. we welcome this judgment and sir cliff would like to thank eve ryo ne and sir cliff would like to thank everyone who supported him throughout, his family, friends and his fans. it has meant a huge deal to him, thank you very much. >> reporter—macro: how are you feeling? i can answer to many

questions at the moment, i have to get over the emotional factor, so please forgive me. i will talk to you at another time. thank you very much. studio: sir cliff richard, very emotional at the end of what has been a difficult time for him. we heard from his lawyer saying the motivation for sir cliff richard in bringing this case was not for personal gain, he wanted to right a wrong and to ensure no other innocent person would have to go through what he went through. clive coleman, our legal affairs analyst is there at the high court. clive, it is clear how much it means to sir cliff richard he has won this case? yes, absolutely. he always said this was never about the damages. although the damages he has been awarded, it is a significant amount, if you look at the awards for breach of privacy, it is very much towards the top end of the scale. but for him, it wasn't about that. it was

about the intrusion into his privity. when he gave evidence early on in this case, he told the court how devastating that had been for him. he was on holiday in portugal when he became aware of the coverage. it had a devastating effect upon him and he said, for the next four years he wondered, whenever he met somebody, whether the first thing they would be thinking would be relating to the coverage of the police investigation and that the bbc had broadcast. but this is an interesting case legally, as well as in terms of sir cliff richard's individual action. what it marks is the rise and rise of the law of privacy. a little bit of a back story on that. we had no statutory right to privacy protection in this country until the human rights act. people remember gorden kaye, the actor who was

involved in a terrible car accident and in the 90s took a case to the court of appeal arguing privacy, and was told he had no right to bring a privity case. that changed with the human rights act. article eight gives everyone the right to a private and family life. it gives privacy and protection. to receive is of cases, case with naomi campbell which established that health and addiction issues where private matters. the case of max mosley, who sued the news of the world of the stories about his private life, established any sexual act between consenting adults is private. people have a reasonable expectation of privity, it won't be published or put in the press. this case moves that law on, it is judge made law and it is advancing decision, by decision. also suspects in police investigations, we have to

drill down into the detail of this very long judgment, but the implication from the summary the judge has given, is being a suspect ina judge has given, is being a suspect in a police investigation prior to arrest and charge, is a private matter. and for the media to publish details that you are a suspect, there has to be an overriding public interest. in this instance, clearly mrjustice mann found there was no overriding public interest. we have to look as to whether we can extend this as a general rule but it is a significant advance in the law of privity, i think. clive, significant advance in the law of privity, ithink. clive, in terms of that there will be still a grey area because it is not an absolute, from what i understand, the public interest defence when reporting can still be mounted? we have got to drill down into the detail of this very long, 200 page judgment.

drill down into the detail of this very long, 200 pagejudgment. so long, printed copies were not even provided. we have to get them online. but the implication is, at the very lowest, senior editors in news organisations are going to have to bea news organisations are going to have to be a lot more cautious. what they are going to have to do is bear in mind, the individual they wish to name has rights to privacy under article eight. they have to be balanced against the media's right of freedom of expression for publication under article ten. there will have to apply, as the judge applies in all of these cases, an intense focus to that balance. editors will have to be satisfied they have really made that, weighed up they have really made that, weighed up the competing interests and they have a rock—solid case on publication. i think this ruling is likely to make editors much more cautious in naming suspects in the early stages of police investigations. another interesting point, for many people, there has been a case for the criminal lord to

effectively and non—eyes suspects, particularly in rape cases, a debate which has gone on for some years now. one could argue this ruling, could be doing to the civil law, if you like, through the back door, what many people wanted the criminal law to do for a long time, to give anonymity to suspects, i stress, suspects in the precharge stages of a police investigation. that would bea a police investigation. that would be a major shift if that is the case for the way in which the media is able to publish details when they become aware someone able to publish details when they become aware someone is a suspect, as journalists, we like to get the story out. but the law of privacy has caught up with journalism in this ruling. it meansjournalists really have to pay very, very careful heed to the article eight rights, right to privacy and family life suspects in police investigations and that is likely to bea investigations and that is likely to be a significant development

in our fast—growing, but still young law of privacy. clive, thank you very much. let me read you a statement we have got to from south yorkshire police, the police force that was coordinating the investigation. it has previously apologised to cliff richard and giving him more than 400,000 pounds in damages. "steve constable stephen watson says, i noticed the comprehensivejudgment watson says, i noticed the comprehensive judgment handed down today, i accept his findings and i welcome the finding that all south yorkshire police officers and staff we re yorkshire police officers and staff were found to have acted entirely honestly and credible and reliable witnesses. at a very early stage of these proceedings, we accept it and apologise to sir cliff richard for the mistakes we made our attempts we made to protect the integrity of the

police investigation and the integrity of the claimant against sir cliff richard's right. i take this opportunity again to offer our sincere apologies for the distress sir cliff richard has suffered". that is a statement from the police. i don't think there will be speaking outside the court. more than a hundred childcare providers will meet in parliament today to lobby mps for more funding of the government s flagship 30—hours childcare policy. the lobby day is being organised by the cross—party appg for childcare and early education, with attendees all seeking meetings with their local mp to set out how the underfunded policy is impacting their organisation, and threatening their long—term financial sustainability. joining us now, cheryl hadland is the managing director of tops day nurseries,

who says the current policy is not fit for purpose. vanessa lott is the co—owner of farm work play nursery and as her business is a year old, she has incorporated the 30—hours policy into the business plan. and tulip siddiq mp is the chair of the all party parliamentary group for childcare and early education. tulip, why have you organised this lobby day? because there is an opportunity for childcare providers to meet their local mps and meet mps from the government. this isn'tjust about meeting mps from the opposition, it is about communicating how difficult it is to deliver this policy of 30 hours of free childcare at a time when nursery providers are already facing expenses like increasing business

rates. a lot of the time, the onus is on nursery providers to make up the shortfall of funding. don't get me wrong, it's a very good policy. it is very beneficial for parents at a time when childcare is so expensive, but i don't think it has been properly costed and brief we wa nt to been properly costed and brief we want to deliver it, it has to be properly funded. £65 million shortfall is what the amount is put at. you think the government should stump up? it is also about communicating to nurseries. if they can't provide the money, are they in a position where they shouldn't be providing the childcare? from the survey we did, one in five nurseries has said they are making a loss, which is huge. the treasury select committee, chaired by nicky morgan, who is a conservative mp, has said that the funding is not adequate from the government for this policy. terrell, how is it affecting your business? i have a group of 20 nurseries across the south coast. whether government has announced

that we should have average funding of £495 an hour, are averages closer “ we of £495 an hour, are averages closer —— we should have average funding of £4.90 an hour, our average is closer to £4. what effect does that shortfall have? it means that all of the nurseries are not covering their costs for that age group, the three to four—year—old age group, for those 30 hours, if we provide those hours for free. so the impact is that we can only offer a few places for free and we have two top up the charge by charging for anything outside early years curriculum. so that might be lunch, it might be yoga... everything else has got more expensive to compensate. having said that, it is a wonderful opportunity for parents to have some support with their fees, which i totally support. all the parties think it is a good idea. itjust needs to be a bit more so that the books balance.

britain is right at the bottom of the league in terms of supporting early years. vanessa, how are you making it work? the difference for us is that we opened last year and we already knew the 30 hour funding was coming in, so we were able to incorporate that into our business model. we have 30 places for three to four—year—olds and we have committed to have all of those fully funded. but we had to decide how to do that, so we decided to open year round rather than term time only. we are open early in the morning at seven until seven at night. we also looked at other services we can provide on top of that to give us other revenue streams. we do a holiday club for older children, or siblings of children in the nursery. we do parent meet ups for local community. so you have worked out ways to make it a viable business. if you can do it, why can't everyone else? because we had the opportunity

to look at that upfront. some of the challenges for existing nurseries is that they had a loss of money coming in from places that would have been full before. they would have been having revenue coming from that, but with the change and the additional hours that the government are providing, which is a brilliant initiative for parents, it means they are not getting the same level of funds and they are having to find ways of making those savings and cutting costs to be able to do that, which is not the position we were in. tulip, we all know how tight government budgets are. it is not likely that the money is going to be found to cover the shortfall, is it? what other ways are there around it? should be scared be means tested?- be honest, if you don't have the money for a policy which you have made yourflagship money for a policy which you have made your flagship childcare policy, maybe you shouldn't have announced that policy and put that pressure on childcare providers. in the election, a lot was talked about 30

hours of free childcare. it was something that got conservative mps over the mark in some marginal constituencies, and i know that from speaking to voters. it is a good policy, but you can't announce a policy, but you can't announce a policy like this without working out the sums. so politically, could they wrote back and say, we will means test it? that would have a huge impact on the childcare providers. i know what a brilliant job our nurseries do and it would have a huge impact on them. but if they genuinely don't have the means to fund this policy, then yes, they should be honest about it so that the nursery is facing the threat of closure can open their doors and say 0k, we don't have to plan for this, but we can still provide the hours that we are able. i would also say that we are able. i would also say that vanessa's site is very big, so you have an advantage in terms of incorporating activities. the nursery that my child goes to doesn't have that opportunity because the site isn't that big. so it has to be a policy that works for

nurseries of all sizes, notjust it has to be a policy that works for nurseries of all sizes, not just the ones that are lucky enough to have a huge site. actually, to invest in our children is the best investment we can make. if we invest in the children who are currently deprived ofa children who are currently deprived of a good education, we are reducing their opportunities to do well at school, to be prosperous and feed into the pensions of the previous generations. so the world bank and various other people have put evidence forward to say this is the best investment we can make in our country, to invest in our small children. we should find the money. let me bring in a couple of comments. lee on e—mail has said there are two points i would like to make. when you decide to have children, you should be able to afford them, not rely on the state. childcare providers need to be more cost efficient and not charge so much. there are forcing costs up. as a taxpayer, i don't think we should be propping up people who choose to

have children. i can't get your reaction to that because we have to go back to the courts! even if there had been no footage of the search and the story had less prominence, the very naming of sir cliff would have been unlawful. this creates a significant shift. this means police investigations and searches of people's homes could go unreported and unscrutinised. it will put decision—making about naming individuals in the hands of the police over the public‘s right to know. we don't believe this is compatible with liberty and press freedoms. for all of these reasons, there is an important principle at sta ke. there is an important principle at stake. that is why the bbc is looking at an appeal. thank you. it's a very long judgment. we need to absorb the details. there are 200 pages. we need to consider what lessons there are to learn out of

it. as i say, it's a very long judgment which we need to go away and look at. all of ourjournalists and look at. all of ourjournalists and all of the bbc witnesses acted in good faith. do you want to apologise to sir cliff richard? fan u nsworth apologise to sir cliff richard? fan unsworth of bbc news, making a statement on for half of the bbc lost that oversee case brought by cliff richards. fran unsworth said the bbc is now looking at an appeal. let's bring in clive coleman, our legal eagle. we were wondering whether the bbc would be looking at an appealand we whether the bbc would be looking at an appeal and we have just heard from fran unsworth? yeah. fran u nsworth from fran unsworth? yeah. fran unsworth makes the point, and many people will have sympathy with this, that from a journalistic point of view, if you have a ruling which

says essentially, as this ruling does, that if you are a suspect in a police investigation, that is a private fact, and the suspect has a reasonable expectation of privacy, it puts it alongside the naomi campbell case. health and addiction issues are private. the max mosley case, a sexual relationship is a private matter. this case is establishing that if you are a suspect in a police investigation, thatis suspect in a police investigation, that is essentially a private matter. fran unsworth says that ta kes matter. fran unsworth says that takes the sunlight away from journalism in being able to cover police investigations at that early stage. there are many in the media who believe it is correct that that should be a private matter, but there are many in the media who

consider that that is a legitimate matter for the media to consider that that is a legitimate matterfor the media to report upon. so the stakes in this case go far beyond cliff richard. they are much higher and they will affect the way the media goes about reporting the early stages of a police investigation. i have spoken to many privacy lawyers as this case was progressing. they are very much on the side of the individual and the article eight right to privacy, because we live in an age where if a suspect is named, the reputational damage can be instantaneous worldwide and catastrophic. journalists take a different view. they think the story should be got out and that it is important in the public interest. thank you, clive. if you've had a relative orfriend in a care home, you'll know one of the most important things is to make sure they have access

to the outside world. but residents in one care home for dementia sufferers in oxford have been stranded on the upper floor for almost three weeks because their lift is broken. 0ur reporter anna adams has been looking into this. what has happened here?” what has happened here? i have been speaking to relatives of family members inside the haddington care home. they say they have been stranded on one of the flaws for almost three weeks, unable to get into the outside world, which is important if you have dementia. they say this is in breach of some of their human rights. i spoke to one relative this morning, peter harris. he has bowel cancer and his wife beryl has been there for a number of yea rs. beryl has been there for a number of years. he is unable to get up the stairs without taking a chair. he can't get in there and he broke down on the phone, saying it was impossible to get to see his wife. meanwhile, we have heard other reports that another relative passed

away without being able to get inside to see his wife one last time and say goodbye because he couldn't make the journey up the stairs. the problem is twofold. not only are the people inside the home unable to get up people inside the home unable to get up and down, but often, some of their elderly relatives are also unable to make the visits. why did taking so long to fix the live? the company that runs the home says it is dependent on outside contractors and they are doing everything they can. they have also said they are now waiting for a part come from europe. they say they have laid on additional activities for the residents so that they can get their hair done residents so that they can get their hairdone and residents so that they can get their hair done and have pampering sessions. they can even see a doctor. but for lots of the relatives, this isn't enough. when i called the company to ask for a response, they did apologise, but said they were unsure why bbc was covering a story like this when it was only affecting a handful of people. but you can see that it is causing a lot of problems. we can now speak tojohn evans — his wife is one of those stranded. he says her human rights are being breached by the care home. also here is gavin terry

from the alzheimer's society and nadra ahmed — chairman of the national care association. john, what impact has this had on you and your wife? a terrible impact in so faras you and your wife? a terrible impact in so far as she is confined to her bedroom all day. i visit daily in the late afternoon and i always take her out, either into the garden or around the ground for, to give her a change of scene. if you can imagine the communal area is very small. it's a lounge diner, so there are two dining tables and about four armchairs. it is pokey, so it's either that or her bedroom. there are only three windows in the room and a lookout on the same aspect as her bedroom, so she doesn't get a of scene by taking the floor. so it's quite restrictive. what about other ways of getting people up and down?

what have the care home done? nothing. it's not so much the care home as the home owner, which is four seasons. this unit is isolated. it has a staircase at either end with a security door and at one end, it has a lift which can take two people. if you can't walk, you have to go in the lift. that is it. how important is it for people to be able to have access to the outside, what do you think about what is going on here? this is an unfortunate state of affairs. obviously this is a substantive item of equipment which enables people to have that freedom. with the loss of the use of that, we have got to know why people are not being enabled to come down in a different manner in order to fit that. a stairlift or

something else? i believe they are going to put a stairlift in so that isa going to put a stairlift in so that is a methodology but you have might have somebody who is a mobile in a wheelchair then you have to get them to the top of the stairs, get them in the chairlift and bring them down. it happens in services all over the country that there is a failure of equipment. it is important the provider is aware of what would happen if there is a failure of that equipment. what if there was a fire? the fire brigade would be there and they would carry people down in chairs, but not all services are geared up to look at that. we need to mitigate those circumstances in such a way that we are not isolating the people as has been described. we have some footage

you filmed inside the care home. you can talk us through what we seem. that is the main staircase. this is the staircase they will install a sta i rlift. the staircase they will install a stairlift. this is the stairlift peter harris pulls himself up on and carries his chair. quite a lot of steps ? carries his chair. quite a lot of steps? 20 steps. that is a manual door to open in the lift. that is looking down the lift. interesting thing with this lift, the upper floor door and the lower floor door are on different sides of the lift so are on different sides of the lift so it is difficult to get wheelchairs in. you have to reverse in and turned the chair. the quick pointjoanna, on this stairlift. if they install the stairlift it will not get the hot food trolley up to feed people. you have got to have a second lift. there is no resilience in this building. when i spoke to

gary reid, the estates director of four seasons, i said you need to put resilience in this building, a second look. this lift in the last five years, it was out for five weeks last time. the company has form in not maintaining the building. in 2015 the hot water boiler caught fire and there was no hot water for three weeks. let's bring in gavin from alzheimer's society, what do you think about this? 70% of people in care homes are living with some form of dementia. what this highlights is it is absolutely essential their individual needs and their condition is brought into account. you need detailed plans built around their individual needs and in events like this those needs can be met effectively. in terms of the fact this has happened before, it is essential they put plans in place to rectify the issues but have a

contingency to make sure it doesn't happen again. they learned the lessons and they can still carry out the duty of care they have got to people living there. thank you all very much. when do you think the lift will be fixed? the latest date we have is this coming friday but they keep chaining it so i will not hold my breath. —— changing it. they keep chaining it so i will not hold my breath. -- changing it. we appreciate you all coming in and talking to others. thank you very much. we are going to go back to the courts because in the last hour, we have heard that sir cliff richard is one his high court privity case against the bbc over the way it covered a police raid on his home in berkshire. i cannot answer too many questions at the moment. it will ta ke questions at the moment. it will take a little while for me to get over the whole emotional factor, so i hope you will forgive me. i will talk to use some of the time, thank

you very much. he has been awarded £210,000 in damages. sir cliff, who denied a historical charge of indecent assault, was arrested but never charged. the bbc a few moments ago, said it would look at appealing against thejudgment. ago, said it would look at appealing against the judgment. we can talk to paul gambaccini, a friend of sir cliff richard is, what is your reaction to the ruling?” cliff richard is, what is your reaction to the ruling? i am delighted. sir cliff richard was one of the great english gentleman of the 20th century and his persecution was one of the great scandals of the zist. was one of the great scandals of the 21st. thejudge said his privity rights had been invaded in a serious and sensationalist way, awarding him £190,000 in general damages and then £20,000 because the bbc submitted the broadcast of the raid as scoop of the year at the royal television society awards, where it lost and it

was booed. you are obviously a friend of sir cliff and you have seen friend of sir cliff and you have seen him close up throughout, how has he been, how has he coped? there was a curve with ups and downs. when he was found at his home in portugal and told to turn on the tv because his house was being raided. he fell to the floor weeping. a friend said get up, we will fight this. he has fought it for three years, 11 months and four days and now he has been vindicated. i have to say, in the room upstairs after the judgment was read out, he was very happy indeed. i would have to say, so relieved that the court side of his ordeal is com pletely that the court side of his ordeal is completely over. he said this is one for our side, meaning the cause of

anonymity before charge. you said the court side is over for anonymity before charge. you said the court side is overfor him. you have had your own personal experience of allegations being made and charges being dropped but having to go through it all in the public eye. i have to correct you, i was never charged with anything.” apologise, charges never been brought but enduring that in the public eye in the same way sir cliff richard has, the investigation, but as you correctly say, absolutely no charges. how do you think he will go forward from this point? you said the court part of it is over but when something has affected you so deeply, it is very hard to leave it behind? you are very perceptive. you can never forget what has occurred. and you can only move forward with

with new priorities and a new emphasis on the family and friends who stood beside even so many organisations shunned you. you come to realise there are more places in the world you enjoyed, just rather than merely england. where u nfortu nately we still than merely england. where unfortunately we still have a need for law reform. paul gambaccini, thank you for talking to others. ok. thousands of women every year lose theirjobs thanks to pregnancy and maternity discrimination. is it time parliament moved with the times and pregnant mps in the oldest parliamentary democracy were looked after better? we can talk to tulip siddiq, who was pregnant as an mp and joining us via webcam is the conservative mp, vicky ford, chair of the all—party parliamentary group for women in parliament. thank you

be joining for women in parliament. thank you bejoining us for women in parliament. thank you be joining us and for women in parliament. thank you bejoining us and tulip, thank you for staying on, we talk to you earlier. you off on maternity leave and the way it works, you don't have to worry about the vote because someone to worry about the vote because someone who would vote in a different way from you agrees not to vote, so your votes cancel each other out? just to clarify there is no maternity leave in parliament, no official maternity leave. after i had my child double mcrae ‘s ago, i wasn't told when i should come back, whether i should come back what would happen with votes. i had an emergency c section sofa six weeks i didn't go to parliament and i was paired with someone in formally but i went back to work after six weeks because there was no formal maternity leave. when you return to vote because you have not voted because you are maternity, itjust says you are absent. people might be

staggered to think this is how it has been in parliament? we talk about pregnancy discrimination all the time and i could hardly contain my laughter at a westminster hall debate when they were talking about how about maternity leave is, and it is and here we are talking aboutjo swinson not being able to spend time with her newborn baby. the mp she was paired with, went and voted. i was paired with, went and voted. i was shocked when i saw her tweet yesterday and my heart goes out to her because i know brexit is an important topic for her and the european union is something she spoke passionately about and yet brandon lewis went and voted. vicky ford, how do you see it? it is important we support women in parliament and that means having the

ability to take time off when you have your baby, before you have your baby and make sure your constituents are still represented. that is why the pairing system is so important. i have spoken to many women who have had babies whilst being mps, who told me the pairing system works very well. we are short on time and i wanted to say, you are saying how important the pairing system is, after what happened yesterday, would any female mp going off after the birth of a baby have any trust in it? we need to look at it again and icame to it? we need to look at it again and i came to thisjob it? we need to look at it again and i came to this job from the it? we need to look at it again and i came to thisjob from the european parliament, where there was no pairing system at all. we need to make sure it is robust. i was paired la st make sure it is robust. i was paired last night with somebody from labour who needed time off. sometimes

people need time off if they are sick or if someone in their family is sick. the pairing system needs to be robust. the fact it failed in this instance last night in such a tied vote, people are saying it is deliberate, what did you say about that? it didn't make a difference la st that? it didn't make a difference last night. brandon lewis has apologise. how do you respond to the people who said it was deliberate? he apologise, it didn't make a difference on the vote, the pairing syste m difference on the vote, the pairing system is important and it must be robust. tulip has made an important point. we are out of time. thank you for your company. bbc newsroom live coming up and all the latest from the high court on sir cliff richard. see you tomorrow, goodbye. we have similar conditions to yesterday for many parts of the uk.

a mixture of sunny intervals and the chance of a few showers here and there. but this is the scene in kent. a bit of cloud but equally blue skies. we will continue with this theme of sunny spells into the afternoon. a few showers, as i mentioned, particularly south—western areas of scotland. you may encounter a few showers across wales and the south—west of england as well. temperatures 19 to 23 degrees, temperatures about 20 60 trees in the south—east. do this evening and tonight any showers clearing away and we're looking at lengthy clear spells to take us into thursday morning and those are your overnight riches. but with this clear spells in england and wales, it means during thursday it will be a sunny day. it will be hot as well. temperatures up to 28 celsius in london. more cloud further north. 0n friday rain spreads in scotland and northern ireland. a few showers elsewhere on friday otherwise it is dry and temperatures remaining

pretty high. goodbye. this is bbc news. i'm julian worricker. these are the top stories developing at 11.00 — sir cliff richard wins thousands of pounds in damages over bbc coverage of a police raid on his home. thejudge said his privacy rights were infringed in a "serious and somewhat sensationalist way". it's going to take a little while for me to get over the whole emotionalfactor, and so i hope you'll forgive me. i'll talk to you some other time. thank you very much. the case clearly confirms that individuals, including high—profile ones, have a reasonable expectation of privacy in relation to police investigations. the bbc said itsjournalists had acted in good faith and is now considering an appeal. we don't believe this is compatible

with liberty and press freedoms. for all of these reasons, there is an important principle at stake. that is why the bbc is looking at an appeal.