it's about the future for their children and grandchildren. the chairman of the 1922 committee graham brady indicates to the bbc that the threshold of 48 letters for a no confidence vote in the prime minister has not yet been reached. president trump visits northern california following the most devastating wildfires in the state's history. at least 76 people are now known to have died and more than 1200 are unaccounted for. one step closer to accelerated degrees — as the government confirms plans to allow universties to offer two year courses in order to the reduce the cost of higher education. it was a big week in parliament, catch up on all the details now on bbc news. hello and welcome to

the week in parliament — as theresa may faces opposition from all sides to her brexit plan. the government must now withdraw this half—baked deal. i plead with you to accept the political reality of the situation you now face. she clearly doesn't listen. but in a marathon commons session, mrs may stands fast on her eu divorce plans. voting against a deal would take us all back to square one. it would mean more uncertainty, more division and a failure to deliver on the decision of the british people that we should leave the eu. also on this programme, we delve back into the history of parliamentary crises and ask — would changing the prime minister make a difference? changing the leader does not alter the problem. unless you change the policy. it was the week of a breakthrough and a breakdown. the brea kthroughnews

on tuesday that uk and eu officials had agreed the draft text of a brexit withdrawal agreement — running to 500 pages — coupled with a much shorter document on the future relationship. the breakdown came on thursday with the collapse of a fragile cabinet consensus. theresa may had set out what was in the documents to her senior ministers in a five—hour meeting on wednesday, at the end of which she stepped out onto a darkened downing street to announce it had been agreed. but it was to turn out to be a brief and fragile calm. the next day, the brexit secretary, dominic raab, threw a spanner in the works, by announcing his resignation. he was swiftly followed by the work and pensions secretary, esther mcvey — and a clutch ofjunior aides and ministers. the withdrawal agreement is all about how the uk leaves the european union — not the permanent future relationship. it covers things like the divorce bill, eu citizens‘ rights and crucially, the northern irish border during what's known as the transition period immediately after brexit.

parliament had, one way or another, spent much of the week talking about brexit, but it was her three hour statement to parliament on thursday that saw the tension peak — and the prime minster forced — again and again — to defend the agreement. i know it has been a frustrating process and forces to confront very difficult issues. but a good brexit, a brexit which is in the national interest is possible. we have persevered and have made a decisive breakthrough. once a final deal is agreed i will bring it to parliament and i will ask mps to consider the national interest and give it their backing. voting against a deal would take us all back to square one. the withdrawal agreement and outlined political declaration represent a huge and damaging failure. after two years of bundled negotiations, the government has produced

a botched deal that breaches the prime minister's own red lines and does not meet our six tests. the prime minister comes before us today to trying to sell us a deal that is already dead in the water. not even her own brexit secretary could stand over it. i could today stand here and take the prime minister through the list of promises and pledges that she made to this house and to us privately about the future of northern ireland and the future relationship with the eu. i fear it would be a waste of time since she clearly does not listen. the prime minister rightly asserts that there are two alternatives to her plan — no deal and no brexit. the government is investing considerably in contingency planning for no deal. what contingency is she doing for no brexit? we are making no

plans for no brexit. because this government is going to deliver on the vote of the british people. we risk chaos, job losses, environmental rules torn up and the nhs in crisis. that was never the will of the people. they did not vote for that. this is not a parlor game, it's real peoples‘ real lives. will she at least undertake not to rule out taking this back to the british people and having a people's vote? it's quite clear she cannot command the house of commons on these proposals. i'm almost tempted to ask if the honourable members opposite would put their hands up if they actually do support the prime minister on this set of proposals. not one. as my right honourable friend says and what my right honourable friend does no longer match should i not right to my honourable friend for altringham and sale west? that's graham brady — the mp who chairs a backbench group of tory mps and would tell the prime

minster if 48 of them had called for her to go — triggering a leadership contest. in the chamber, it took nearly an hour before an mp stood up to offer support. i want to pay tribute to the fact that the prime minister did get agreement in cabinet and can she reassure us that regardless of how many resignations there are between now and the vote that the agreement will come to parliament and parliament will have its say and that she is clear that voting for that agreement is in the national interest? can i say to my right honourable friend i can give her the assurance that obviously we have the step of the european union council in finalising the deal but a deal, when finalised, will indeed be brought to parliament and as i suggested earlier, it would be for every member of this house to determine their vote in the national interest. it is therefore mathematically impossible to get this deal through the house of commons. the stark reality, prime minister,

is that it was dead on arrival before you stood up. so i plead with you, i plead with you to accept the political reality of the situation that you now face. will she not accept that at this stage, not only are we all being collectively sold out but the people of northern ireland are being sold out absolutely? and it was a similar story in the house of lords. let's be clear, what's most important is that the prime minister is failing the people of our country. this agreement document bares all the hallmarks of monty python's dead parrot. it is bereft of life. the prime minister in her statement speaks of bringing the country back together. does the minister believe that this is a credible and achievable aim and if so, how would it be brought about? i do believe it is a credible

and achievable and something the prime minister has been focused on. she is delivering brexit and we have a deal. we will be bringing a deal to parliament and parliament we hope will support it and we will bring the country back together in a strong relationship with the eu going forward. ireland has now been pushed onto the ledge and into no man's land. this is hardly acceptable and not an acceptable way to protect the precious union. a former brexit minister spoke out. i fear my misgivings about what would happen in this process have been proven all too true. namely, the political declaration is meaningless waffle, worse still, it is laced with the cyanide of the backstop. how can the government possibly contemplate trying to take this through parliament in the absolute opposite of what the people voted for, rather than put it back to the people and let them decide? the views in the commons and the lords on theresa may's draft brexit agreement.

it's all left those of us who've been around westminster for a while trying to think of another time when parliament has been quite so divided. so i called in an expert — professor vernon bogdanor who's a professor of both politics and contemporary british history. i asked him if this was the most divided parliament he could ever think of. europe is a uniquely divisive issue in british politics because it splits both parties right down the middle. when we first thought of the european engagement in 1950, labour's foreign secretary warned against, saying once you open that box a lot of trojan horses will fly out. these trojan horses fly out from both parties. the conservatives are very obviously divided, but labour is not so obviously, but is too. they covered that division in the election campaign and they cover it in kier starmer‘s six principles by saying we want managed

migration but we also want all the benefits of the customs union and the internal market. now, the european union has never given those benefits unless you accept free movement and so labour is trying to finesse the issue to hold the party together in that way. and the conservatives did that until recently but now of course they face the moment of truth. so it's europe particularly which divides parties within parliament you think? absolutely. you can think of all sorts of historical crises that divided one party. jacob rees—mogg mentioned the repeal of the corn laws in 1846 which divided the conservatives and kept them in opposition for 27 years. then you can look at the home rule crisis of 1886 which divided liberals and kept them in opposition for most of 20 years. europe divides both parties and the last comparable occasion when he tried to enter the european community in 1972 with the second reading of the bill was passed byjust eight votes. and that emboldened labour people voting with

the conservative government and third reading was passed byjust 17 votes. so europe is as, i said a moment ago, a deeply divisive issue in british politics for both parties. looking back then to the last time europe was in crisis in parliament, how did parliament deal with it that time around? is there anything this government could learn? well in one sense, parliament is weaker now than it was when we had the maastricht debate in 1993. because thenjohn major lost a vote and he immediately returned the next day to make it a matter of confidence he said any if you don't support me i will dissolve parliament and there will be a general election. that of course brought the dissidents into line. you can't do that anymore because of the fixed term parliament act which means that a confidence vote can't be tacked on to some other motion.

you have to have a specific vote of no—confidence the government. is that still an option for theresa may? could she press the nuclear button and say it's my deal or general election? no. because under the fixed term parliament act you could only have an election if two thirds of the commons vote for it. that's what happened in 2017. the conservatives are not going to vote for an election again because of what happened last year — they were 20% ahead in the polls and look what happened. they lost the majority they're not going to risk that again. they won't vote for an election. the only other way you could get it is if there was a vote of no—confidence in the government which was passed and no alternative government could be formed within14 days. that too is unlikely and the conservatives i believe would not allow that to happen. what about changing the leader? does that fix the problem or is that just a by—product of having to change the policy?

changing the leader does not alter the problem, unless you change the policy. the problem is that those opposed to theresa may are a collection of incompatibles. some of the people oppose or because they want a much harder brexit. looser ties with the european union but most scope for an independent trade policy. 0thers oppose her because they want a much softer brexit or even a remain or even a people's vote. there's no way those two groups are going to agree on anything else and i suspect that neither of these two lines of policy have a majority for them in the house of commons. you may argue the only way out of it is a further referendum or a people's vote but as i said there may be no majority for that either in the house of commons. there are plenty of commons historians, is there anywhere in history where you would point to them that might offer them a way out of this particular crisis? i think there isn't, because of the fixed term

parliament act that was founded on 2011, to lead to quite different circumstance, namely the problems involved in a hung parliament and coalition government. wehave a hung parliament but not a coalition, and this is a different sort of situation than that envisaged in 2011, but it does cause difficulties that the prime minister can no longer threaten a general election if she does not get her way, giving her a much more difficult position than prime ministers before 2011. mps will have to break new ground then. professor vernon bogdanor, thank you very much for coming onto the programme. now let's go to the house of lords, where peers voted against the immediate suspension of lord lester after an inquiry found he'd groped a woman and offered her a peerage in exchange for sex. lord lester said the allegations were completely untrue but the lords privileges committee recommended that the veteran human rights lawyer should be suspended for three—and—a—half years —

which would have been the longest suspension in modern times. the deputy lords speaker defended the report by the conduct committee, and the work of the commissioner for standards. she applied the processes that this house has set down for enforcement of our code of conduct. she should not be criticised for doing exactly what the house tasked her with doing, and the committe for priveleges and conduct found she had done properly. but the leading lawyer, lord pannick, proposed that the case be sent back and examined again, arguing the process had been unfair. if you're going to assess the credibility of competing contentions over what happened 12 years ago, if you're going to apply a very serious sanction against someone, and if you're going to destroy their hitherto and unblemished reputation, you have to allow them through their council

to cross—examine the person who is making those allegations, which turn on credibility. at the end of that debate, peers voted by 101 to 78 to support lord pannick‘s amendment, so lord lester's case will be reconsidered. lord mcfall said he was "deeply disappointed" by that decision — lord lester meanwhile, said he looked forward to restoring his reputation. now let's take a look at some news from around westminster in brief. the government's making clear it's got no immediate plans to change the rules on "stop and search". some police forces have been pressing for the scrapping of the requirement that "reasonable grounds" are needed before a person can be searched, following the spate of recent fatal stabbings and the rise in knife crime. i was first stopped and search at age 12 and i wet myself, it was that scary.

we have got to a place where the home officer did a review for found there was no discernible significant increase in crime using stop and search and the current prime minister reached a cross party consensus on the issue in this house. can i caution him against his party moving to a place where we break that consensus? outside stratford in january, one—week operation, 27 people arrested, ten highly offensive, dangerous, scary weapons seized. it has its place. a conservative has called for unauthorised traveller sites to be made illegal. andrew selous also wants councils to convert caravan sites into housing, to provide temporary stopping sites, and schooling for traveller children. he highlighted the fears of local residents, levels of crime and the travellers‘ own living conditions. in a large number of traveller sites, there is no proper sewage

system with human excrement flows into local ditches. some don‘t even have proper water supplies, and in some cases, residents have lost their supply of water when it has been illegally tapped into. there was a call for supermarkets to offer customers packaging free — or eco friendly packaging — for all fruit and veg. the debate came after 125,000 people signed a petition on the subject. an mp called plastic pollution one of the great environmental challenges of our time. every piece of plastic can take decades or longer to degrade and will simply just break down into smaller and smaller particles. we then find plastic entering the ecosystem and it has the potential of killing, sea birds, fish, and mammals through ingestion and releasing their harmful toxins as the plastic breaks up. there was victory for campaigners who‘ve been fighting

to lower the maximum stakes on high street gambling machines, known as fobts. the chancellor announced in his budget that the maximum bet would be reduced from £100 to just £2 — but not until october next year. that prompted the sports minister, tracey crouch, to resign and provoked the threat of a backbench rebellion. on wednesday, ministers announced in a written statement that the change would come in earlier — in april next year. there was a call for recognition for the fastest man you‘ve probably never heard of. steve jones was an raf aircraft technician from south wales who held the british marathon record for 33 years until sir mo farah beat it earlier this year. he won marathons in london, new york and chicago. we have got this great man who accomplished incredible things and inspires people to follow in his footsteps, but who simply is nowhere near as widely recognised as he should be.

nick smith on sporting hero steve jones. now we all know names can be tricky, hard to pronounce, tough to remember and all too easy to get wrong. well there‘s a bit of row going on in cardiff over the new name for the welsh assembly. the ruccus is over whether it should be know as the senedd or the parliament. i asked bbc wales political correspondent eckew gwowr to explain. well, a consultation was held to see what the name should be. the assembly has powers now to change the name if they wish. the consultation decided it should be welsh parliament. however the presiding officer has recently said that she‘s decided it should be called a senedd. now that is locally what people call the assembly anyway, what the building is called, so in terms of simplicity, maybe they want to call it one name, but others say, maybe english speakers won‘t quite understand what it is and they‘ll still call it the assembly, there‘s also been some concerns that if it was called the welsh parliament,

the members would be called members of the welsh parliament — mups — which could be interpreted as the beginning of muppets, or sounds like the word for stupid in welsh, so there are little complications involved there. but also, if it is a senedd, assembly members will be called members of the senedd, mss, which is fine in english. but, in welsh, the abbreviation would be what we already call mps in welsh, and there could be some confusion either way. so there is not a simple way out of this. but this is only part of a bigger bill, isn‘t it? what else is in this, so the votes for the assembly, the senedd, whatever you want to call it. the big ticket item in that bill

is lowering the voting age to 16 for assembly elections, something the government is really pushing for and this is a small part of that bill and if that bill is passed, the name will change and 16—year—olds and 17 year—olds will be able to vote in elections. there is a pretty big majority for them to ammend, so how likely do you think this will come through? what happens if it does not pass? a0 out of 60, quite a big proportion, but i think it is quite likely that this will happen, it has the backing of the labour party and plaid cymru as well. so it‘s quite likely that this will be pushed in eventually. we will wait to see, for now, thank you for coming onto the programme. now for a look at what‘s been going on in the wider world of politics, here‘s alex partridge with our countdown. at five, westminster

marks parliament week with a visit from a life sized toy brick suffragette. the results of a public contest to name our sister, are due later this month. at four, tempers fray in the sri lankan parliament as mps veto the nomination of a new prime minister. an awkward moment for angela merkel in france, as an admirer mistakes her for madame macron. and two, a sign language interpreter on the bbc news channel reacts to the developing brexit story. notjust because his departure may embolden others to... and at one, hugh bonneville on what brexit might mean for bbc parliament. alex partridge.

westminster hall is hosting an art installation as part of celebrations to mark the centenary of some women gaining the right to vote — and to stand for parliament. as simon vaughan reports, "house of doors" was partly inspired by the paving stones of the hall itself. when you put this in a space like this, what you have is people approaching it, unsure if they‘ve got a real person there or not, but the softness of the cloak, until you get to about level with the threshold, you do not know if there is someone that were not. so there is a disconcerting element that engages people a little bit more as a result. this painting, of the little girl in the door. it was painted in 1910 that there are all sorts of issues surrounding women‘s rights, access to public life, that is what really got me thinking about it. another inspiration was the floor

of westminster hall. at i took rubbungs from the floor, you begin to see just how they are really quite mesmerising, you got this incredible texture, you get indicators of where other people have worn them down over time and those footprints on the steps that have gone through and up the steps leading onto play different active roles in shaping society, and the reality that 100 years ago, it was the very fabric of this institution that was preventing women from being able to move forward. so by placing this here in the hall, you have this incredible juxtaposition of what the reality was for women then and how that has changed, so you get this amazing situation where female mps are walking beyond this now and they have their active roles here and i really think that it makes it much clearer in people‘s minds how much is changed in that time. and house of doors

is in westminster hall until december 3rd. that‘s it from me for now, but dojoin us on bbc parliament on monday night at 11 for another round up of the day here at westminster. and don‘t forget you can always find the programme by searching for parliament on the bbc iplayer. but for now from me, goodbye. this week on weather is shaping up to be much colder than the weekjust gone. the colt will be enhanced by a stronger easterly wind as well. we are enjoying the sunshine that we

still have out there, and a short time before sunset, it has been a lovely day so far today. still some cloud freeze to scotland, part of the sin bin, but even that has been singing with what we had earlier. temperatures have been nudging into the mid—teens in the one parts of north—west scotland, most of us around ten or 12 degrees. there is a fresh easterly wind, and this gets stronger over the next few days. 16 degrees in iceland, five in germany, and as the stronger air kicks in, we will get lower temperatures. this is the effective as even, clear skies initially, but that the cloud to the east of the north sea, that will filter its way in. increasing cloud, the clear sky to the west of britain into monday morning, northern ireland and scotland will be clearest longest, and there will be frost in places. there will also be showers from this cloud, parts of

eastern scotland and england throughout the day, and some in eastern and south—eastern england through monday evening. western parts will see some sunny spells. most of us will be cloudier compared with the weekend, colder, too, especially with the strong easterly wind. into tuesday, it will get stronger. still showers coming in, pushing further westwards, because it is stronger. some sleet and snow to the highest ground, but some will just be cold rain and limited brightness. this is the strength of the wind on tuesday, could be up to 50 mph for some in the east. wind chill becomes more of a factor at this stage, so temperatures have come down, many of us around six or 7 degrees. in the wind, it will feel, for some, as if it is not far from freezing. it is turning much colder, wetter for from freezing. it is turning much colder, wetterfor a time from freezing. it is turning much colder, wetter for a time as well midweek. we will see some wetter weather on wednesday, some rain, sleet and snow in the high ground.

it is very different to what we have had, wind—chill is a factor in the easterly wind, as i mentioned, some wet weather. by the end of the week, it‘ll be turning a little less cold, as the wind turns to south—easterly once again. that is how the week is shaping up, as always, you can look online for your regional forecast and check out the details on the act. weather update every half an hour on the bbc news channel. this is bbc news, i‘m carole walker. the headlines at three o‘clock. theresa may fights back saying replacing her as conservative leader wouldn‘t make the brexit negotiations any easier, and warning of a crucial week ahead. the next seven days are going to be critical. they are about the future of this country. it‘s about people‘s jobs, it‘s about their livelihoods, it‘s about the future for their children and grandchildren. safe for now — the chairman of the 1922 committee graham brady indicates to the bbc that the threshold of 48 letters for a no confidence vote

in the prime minister has not yet been reached. the rules are very clear that if the threshold were to be reached i would have to consult with the leader the party... immediately, graham? immediately? i think the whole thing is written with the intention that it should be an expeditious process. president trump visits northern california following the most devastating wildfires in the state‘s history.