to prominent critics of donald trump were posted from florida. they're concentrating their inquiry on a sorting office near miami. another two suspicious packages were identified on thursday, saudi arabia has admited for the first time the murder of the journalist jamal khashoggi was pre—meditated. mr khashoggi's eldest son salah has arrived in the united states after being allowed to leave saudi arabia. he had previously been subject to a travel ban because of his father's criticism of the kingdom's leadership. google says it's sacked nearly 50 employees over sexual harassment allegations in the past two years. the statement was issued in response to a newspaper report that one executive received $90 million when he left the company four years ago, despite credible claims of sexual harassment against him. now on bbc news, thursday in parliament. hello, and welcome to

thursday in parliament. the home secretary says sorry after some immigrants are forced to give dna samples. in particular, i would like to extend my apologies to those gurkhas and afghans that have been affected. the idea of another brexit referendum gets a mixed response. there's no polite way of putting this. you lost, get over it. and calls for a shake—up in the way westminster is run. that means no more honourable gentleman, that means no more spying strangers. all that to come and more. but first, the home secretary sajid javid has apologized to people who were wrongly compelled to take an immigration dna test to check whether they had the right to settle in the uk. the families of gurkhas who fought for the british army

are among those affected. in a statement, sajid javid said if someone does not have enough evidence to show that they are related to someone in the uk, they sometimes choose to do a dna test to prove that relationship. but it must be entirely voluntary. at the end ofjune, it was brought to our attention that there was some immigration cases where the provision of dna evidence had been made a requirement for the issuance of a visa or to grant leave to remain and it was not simply a request. such demands are unacceptable. today, i want to take this opportunity to apologize to those who have been affected by this practice. the law in this context is that the provision of dna evidence should always be voluntary, and never mandatory. let me be clear, madam deputy speaker, across our immigration system, no one should have faced a demand to supply dna evidence and no one should have been penalized for not providing it. in particular, i would

like to extend my apologies to those gurkhas and afghans that have been affected. the two schemes i've described were put in place to help the families of those who have served to keep country safe. and i'm sorry that demands were made of them which should never have been. the visa and immigration service faces possibly the biggest single influx of application in its history where eu nationals living in the uk think to set their status post brexit. it is a matter of urgency that we put in place processes and structures that can guarantee going forward, a resolution of cases which is speedy, efficient, and fair. we now know, from madam secretary's statement, that the mandatory provision of dna was neither legal or fair. the home secretary states that the law of dna evidence must always be provided

on a voluntary basis. can the home secretary clarify therefore, that the demand for dna evidence was in itself illegal and, if so what legal consequences will follow from this? we have seen children who already have british passports being asked for dna even trying to renew them, we have seen other kids being asked for a new test even though one had already been provided and then the root of today's statement when people were being demanded dna even though guidance said the alternative proof was perfectly acceptable, it's another example of the home office being out of control and a result of the migration target that they are still completely obsessed with and more evidence that the hostile environment lives on. the contents of the home secretary's

statement are shocking and may have had a devastating impact on the lives of families, it would be helpful to know whether everyone affected has been contacted. i welcome the home secretary's approach, but given that this comes after the windrush crisis, he will recognize this means things have gone badly wrong in the home office. can i thank the home secretary for his statement and particularly his tone and apology. but isn't it the case that this dna scandal suggests that it was the home offices's hostile environment policy that pushed officials to break the law? so will his structure review consider a root and branch form of this nasty culture and consider giving processing of immigration and asylum applications to new independent units from the home office? a unit that could ignore political pressures and simply work efficiently, fairly, and lawfully. madam deputy speaker,

i think what the right honourable gentleman meant to do is refer to it compliant environment, where we make sure on behalf of british citizens that we have a robust immigration policy that is both fair to people but also those that set out to abuse our immigration system and enter our country or settle in our country illegally in fraudulent cases for example, that we are strong on those, not least to be fair to those who use legal routes for migration or settlement into the uk. unlike the vast majority of colleagues in this chamber, i am actually an immigrant to this country, very proud to be the first polish—born british member of parliament. when i came in 1978, if the state had asked me for a dna

sample i would have had no problems doing that whatsoever. i disagree fundamentally with the secretary of state. i don't understand why he is apologising. does he have the full support of the cabinet for this statement? and what is the matter with the united kingdom asking for a dna sample when somebody is coming to this country seeking to be a british citizen? madam deputy speaker, let me take my honourable friend's question in two parts. first of all, he pointed out that he is an immigrant, and i say to him i love immigrants that have settled in our country and that includes him, too. and secondly, on the point about apologizing, i'm apologizing because whether he thinks and he's entitled to his own view whether you should mandate or not, the law does not allow you to mandate it and that's what i'm apologizing for. sajid javid. the brexit secretary dominic raab has warned that the french authorities could introduce a "go slow" approach approach at the port of calais if there is no deal on the uk leaving the eu.

there's been widespread concern particularly in the automotive industry and food sectors about the impact of longer border checks if no agreement is reached. in the commons, the snp raised a warning by the spending watchdog about the state of preparedness of revenue and customs. the national office warned that not a single one of the preparations was anything other than a red amber status of lack of preparedness. that is on top of the 80,000 scottishjobs, £2300 out the pockets of every scottish household and 9% have turned economy that no—deal brexit is likely to bring. as the secretary of state is telling us, it's possible for the prime minister to bring back a bad deal that's worse than that. yes, and he's right to point to the risks of 'no deal' but the point is to have the planning of the preparations in place to make sure that we can avoid or mitigate those risks and in addition to the remarks i made earlier there's £8 million of funding

announced to customs intermediaries and we also need to prepare for the worst—case scenario where the authorities at calais are deliberately directing a go—slow approach by supporting a digression of the flow to more menial ports in the country. mr speaker, hmrc are not going at capacity to cope, they're not going at capacity but at least we know the government's capacity for incompetence is utterly unbounded. the secretary of state is criticizing others for so—called intransigence — isn't it time for the government to drop its own stance to go back to the beginning to defeat the stupided lines and start again? i would say to the honourable gentleman if he thinks this late stage in the negotiation we can go back to the beginning, then i am afraid it's a rather delusional approach to these negotiations. but we have made good progress, we are close to bringing a deal and i think what is the responsible things to do for members on all sides, regardless

of their views on brexit, is to get behind the government so it can clinch that good deal for all parts of the uk. has the brexit secretary made republic of ireland aware that if the french start mucking about with calais and the go slow in the event of no deal, the biggest impact won't be on uk trade, it will be on the trade on republic of ireland passes through this country? i thank my honourable friend, i'm confident that the authorities in dublin are well aware of the indications of no deal, what we want to all of us on all sides notjust in this house but actually in the eu is to make sure that we lock horns, close the outstanding issues and seal the good deal that would serve everyone's interest. labour said the government had published 106 technical notices, pieces of guidance to better prepare for a no—deal brexit. analysis by the institute of government shows that taken together, his own technical notices commit the government before next march to the creation or expansion of 15, further legislation in 51 areas, the negotiation 01:14 new international agreements either with the eu or other countries, on the introduction of 55 new systems and processes. that's a huge legislative

task for any government, let alone this troubled government. that is an analysis. on a scale of one to ten, can the secretary of state indicate how confident he is that this can all be done in the next 22 weeks? i thank the shadow brexit secretary, what he said of course is the concerted plans and preparations that we are rightly undertaking to make sure that regardless of the outcome of the negotiations and we want a good deal, we will be ready to deal with the short—term risk which they will undoubtedly be and make it a success for brexit. the truth is it's already too late to plan for no deal, this is bluff, not planning. so can i ask a very simple question? why wasn't this legislation introduced months ago? actually, there's been a variety of legislation including the eu withdrawal act which is already been in place. irresponsible thing to do is the position of the shadow chancellor who said he would make no financial position for no deal,

that is deeply responsible and would leave us at the hostage of negotiations and did the uk overexposed in the unlikely and regrettable outcome that we don't get a deal with our eu partners. the brexit secretary, dominic raab. a retail billionaire, sir philip green, has been named in parliament as the businessman facing newspaper allegations of sexual harassment and bullying. the labour peer lord hain used parliamentary privilege which protects him from legal action to make certain up‘s name public. lord hain said he had been contacted by... someone intimately involved in the case of a powerful businessman using nondisclosure agreements and substantial payments to conceal the truth about serious and repeated sexual harassment, racist abuse, and bullying which is compulsively continuing. i feel it's my duty under parliamentary privilege to name philip green as the individual in question given that the media had been subject to and injunction preventing publication of the full details of the story which is clearly in the public interest. in a statement, sir philip said he was not commenting on anything

that has happened in court or her was set in parliament today. he added: "to the extent that it is suggested that i have "been guilty of unlawful sexual or racist behavior, i categorically "and wholly deny these allegations." earlier on, the commons discussed the recent stinging report into bullying and harassment in parliament. the speakerjon bercow said he was delighted that the main recommendations of dame cox's report are to be adopted in full. the commons commission which oversees the house has accepted her suggestion that a new complaint system should be set up, one that could investigate historical allegations. the speaker has himself faced accusations of bullying, which he has denied. he made a brief statement to mp5. i believe that this is an important first step in our root and branch reform of the culture of this house. we need to create an internal movement which looks at everything and everyone and ensures that we all treat each

other with respect. we know that more than 200 people came forward to give their testimonies, to help dame laura form her opinions and we owe it to each and every one of them to get this right. john bercow said he wanted to see an independent body to adjudicate on claims of bullying, harassment, and sexual misconduct as soon as possible. knowing that there is a safe place, a haven for staff and members of parliament to approach when things go badly wrong, should send out the strongest signal yet, that we are listening, we have heard, and we are willing to change. 0rder. mps will debate the report next month, some say the changes don't go far enough. but i now thoroughly believe

it is time to challenge the culture and the power relationships in this house. and i believe that an easy start this would be to tackle the difference, that means no more "honourable gentleman", that means no more spying strangers or segregated areas in this house and for goodness' sake it should really mean the end of people calling themselves lords on the parliamentary state, surely if we are serious about changing the workplace culture and environment we have to challenge this type of power relationship. andrea ledsom said she wanted changes that were more structural than procedural but others wanted new laws. i appreciate the leader has scheduled some time for debate on this in a week or two but it seems to me if we will have a truly

independent arbitration process that has the confidence of both parties it's seemed to be robust and the may well need legislation and would the leader of the house committ to securing enough time to implement that legislation in this session? the honourable gentleman i think will surely appreciate that i can't stand here and determine right now legislation from the dispatch box with no thought of either what the house wants to do, what those who we want to consult ie the victims would like to happen and so on. but what i can absolutely show him is i am determined to grasp this awful problem and to stamp out bullying and harassment once and for all wherever we see it in this place. you are watching thursday in parliament with me david cornock. don't forget that if you miss a programme where you want to watch one again, you can do so by the bbc iplayer. last weekend, an estimated 700,000 people marched through london in support of a referendum on a final brexit deal, a so—called people's vote. it's an option that theresa may has firmly ruled out,

but in a debate on the march, the house of lords was split over whether or not there should be a further vote. they were even calls for leading brexiteers to be prosecuted. the people were given to believe that their government would conduct the necessary negotiations and in an effective and unified way. in all of these expectations, they have been failed. they have been failed by incoherence and incompetence. the people of britain have a right to be allowed to pass judgment on any deal forced in such circumstances. they should be given that opportunity. people are already feeling that they have great disillusionment with our system, disdain for the system is widespread, i believe that a second referendum would be a disaster of the first order for democracy. it would undermine the very basis of democracy, because it would suggest that a decision by a majority is insufficient to make that decision legitimate. the star of tv‘s the apprentice said

the public have been misled, businesses he said were bound by tight rules. in some cases, misleading shareholders has resulted in prosecution, imprisonment, applying a public company principal, it should follow that those people who will be responsible for putting this country into five to ten years of post brexit turmoil based on lies, should be imprisoned or at least prosecuted. such as borisjohnson and michael gove, for the £350 million lie they put on the red bus. i say as a lifelong stoke city supporter, it would be wonderful if whenever we lost a match, we can demand an instant replay. and i say to the hard—line remainers in this, and there's no

polite way of putting this, you lost, get over it. but if the reason governing those who oppose a further referendum is their fear that the people may change their minds, and vote to stay, i have to say that that is not responsible or even an honourable position. the people should not be strong—armed into doing something which it turned out that once informed of the terms, they do not want to do. the former cabinet secretary, lord butler. a foreign office minister has called on russia to comply with a key cold war nuclear treaty with the united states, after the us president donald trump said he intended to terminate the agreement. he accused russia of not complying with its terms. mark fields said russia's aggressive actions undermine security and international order and the country was in violation of the inf or intermediate—range nuclear forces treaty. in the interests of preserving the treaty, to which we in the uk

and all of our allies i think in europe remain fully committed, we urge russia to address these concerns in a substantial and transparent way and to come back into full compliance with the treaty. the situation in which only one side in other words the united states adheres to the treaty and russia remains in noncompliance is i'm sure the honourable gentleman would agree, not sustainable. it's also important to recognize that the us have not yet withdrawn from this treaty, while the treaty remains in force, we shall continue to support it and in particular, to press russia to return to full and verifiable compliance. in 1987 it was europe that was at the epicenter of the cold war, and the arms race between russia and america, today events in places such as the ukraine, and even here at home in salisbury, have shown that europe is at the forefront

of a new conflict between east and west. withdrawal from the inf brings back the specter of purging missiles stationed in europe and here in the united kingdom, something that i remember vividly from the 1980s and if that nuclear conflict with the happened between the two major nuclear powers, the uk and our european allies would probably be the first to be hit. it cannot be the case that we can bring russia into compliance, as the united states threats to depart from the treaty, it therefore falls that we can't be the cheerleaders for the united states departing from the treaty and there were somewhat mixed messages cleared up partly by himself this morning coming from the defense secretary when he was in new york at the tail end of last week, stating that we were with the united states, should we choose to leave the inf treaty. that's not the kind of position and i hope we will confirm that when he gets to his feet, that the british government should pursue. i would hope that britain will knock heads together, he will have our support

if he chooses to do that, because it is the integrity of this treaty is unraveled, by president trump which i have to say i'm mindful of the fact that this is all during an election campaign, we'll all be the worse off. peers havejoined mps in calling on the government to do much more to tackle the rising drug resistant infections amid warnings that without action, deaths worldwide could rise to more than 10 million. antibiotic or antimicrobial resistant infections currently claim at least 50,000 lives each year across europe and the united states alone. at question time in the house of lords, ministers were warned that drug—resista nt infections posed a grave threat. quite simply, if action is not taken to address this threat by 2050, it's estimated that it will kill 10 million people a year, more than cancer and diabetes combined. this week, we saw the publication of the commons health select

committee report which outlines the gravity of this issue. and my lords, i think it is of concern when the chief medical officer says to that committee, and i quote, "we need more visible and active government leadership on the issue of amr," so i think i need to press the noble lord the minister to say that when will we see more visible activity and what form isn't to take to deal with what is a huge threat to our nations health? —— nation's. i do agree with the noble lady about the grave threat and long—term threat this poses, but it also poses a threat in the short—term, and estimates vary between 2,500 and 5,000 people have been killed a year in england because of amr. in terms of the seriousness with which the uk takes it, i mention the new strategy which will be published shortly, i should point out two things which i think have been a success.

firstly, the uk has taken a very important global leadership role in making it a priority for the 620. secondly, as a consequence of our action plan, we have seen reductions in prescribing of antibiotics at gp level, which means we are starting to get... to drill down on the overprescribing and inappropriately prescribing which is happening and driving amr. the mps were also called for the development of new drugs and further cuts to the use of antibiotics in livestock farming. in the european council, we're voting to ban all prophylactic use of antibiotics in farming, which means you can no longerjust routinely feed it to groups. while britain and france have done magnificently in reducing antibiotics, i gather that that the uk's director does not mind it to adopt this ban. can i have reassurance that the government in any new legislation now and post—brexit a total ban on the prophylactic use will be installed, and also that food standards will be maintained if we ever start taking american meat imports, we will not accept them

because of their unacceptable use of antibiotics? i willjoin the noble lady in congratulating the farmers for fantastic action on reducing the use of antibiotics. the specific issue she asked about it in the context of defra, so i have to speak to my colleagues in the department about their opinion on the prophylactic use of antibiotics. in terms of her question on food standards, i have some of the highest food standards in the world as she knows and we have no intentions of lowering these in any trade deal. the issue about bacterial infections will remain with us, so in the new strategy between the noble lord minister i hope that he will address the issue of how we might tackle bacterial infections in the future, this could be brought by developing new antibiotics and developing drugs that deal with infections but do not produce resistance. i reassure the noble lord on that front, we have made really good

progress actually in dealing with mrsa and c difficile in hospital acquired infections and the success unfortunately with e coli but there's a big part of driving down infections completely. the other part is about drug discovery and that's a big global action part of the 620 work we are taking forward to make sure we do have new classes of antibiotics to deal with these problems. and that debate in the lords brings us to the end of thursday in parliament, thank you for watching i do hope you canjoin me again on bbc parliament at 11pm on friday for the week in parliament. goodbye for now. hello there. the weather is dishing up something significantly colder than we've been used to of late as we head towards the weekend. the winds switching round to northerlies. we'll see some sunshine, yes, but there'll be some showers as well and some of those showers over hills in the north will be a little bit wintry. the cold air is going to be coming from a long way north. the winds bringing that air down from the arctic behind this cold front.

the fronts through friday morning bringing a band of cloud and some patchy rain across central and southern parts of england, the south of wales. behind that, the skies will brighten. yes, we'll see some sunshine, but some showers will start to pack in on the brisk northerly wind, particularly across northern scotland, down the east coast of england, some for northern ireland, into parts of wales and maybe the far south—west as well. the showers over the hills in the north will be wintry, and temperatures at best between six and 12 degrees. so, we spend friday night, all of us, in that cold air. some showers most likely around the coast, but perhaps further inland for a time. snow levels across scotland coming down to around 350 metres. so a few hills in the northern half of scotland could see a little bit of snow, and temperatures through the night into the first part of saturday morning dropping very close to freezing, and there could be some icy stretches. so a similar sort of day on saturday. a bright day for many. lots of sunshine around, but those showers most plentiful

in parts of northern and western scotland. some at this stage starting to spill into eastern england, perhaps moving inland into the midlands and a few for west wales, the south—west and also for northern ireland. the winds will be noticeable, a risk northerly wind. so, while the thermometer will read 6—11 degrees, not particularly impressive, if you add on the strength of the wind and it will feel like this. in aberdeen, it'll feel like it is just a degree above freezing. maybe five feels—like temperature in cardiff. on sunday, the wind direction shifts subtly more to a north—easterly, so that will confine most of the showers to eastern areas. further west, it should be largely dry i suspect, with some spells of sunshine, but still not particularly warm with those temperatures between eight and 12 degrees. a bit of a change on the way as we head into next week. a frontal system which could bring rain into the west, but more likely we'll see rain from this area of low pressure, which is going to spin its way up from the near continent. so there's the potential for some wet and windy weather at times as we head on into next week, but slowly but surely it should turn a little bit less chilly.

welcome to bbc news, broadcasting to viewers in north america and around the globe. my name is lewis vaughanjones. our top stories: federal agents search a mail sorting office in florida, as the us steps up the hunt for whoever is behind the bombs, sent to prominent critics of donald trump. saudi arabia admits for the first time, the murder of the journalist jamal khashoggi in istanbul, was pre—meditated. it's one of the worst public health emergenies in us history, we hear from some of the addicts ravaged by opioids. i am addicted to heroin. i want to stop, but i can't. the french spiderman scales one of london's tallest buildings before being caught in a police web.