our top story: the british government has suffered two significa nt defeats in parliament over brexit. mps found the government in contempt of parliament for refusing to publish the full legal advice on the draft agreement. mps then voted to give themselves a greater say on the next move if they reject mrs may's deal next tuesday. two senior us republican senators have spoken of their certainty that the saudi crown prince, mohammed bin salman, is guilty of the murder of the jamal khashoggi. it follows a briefing by the cia chief, gina haspel. and this video is trending on bbc.com. a handwritten letter by albert einstein has sold at auction in new york for nearly $2.9 million. the famous scientist wrote the word "god" is nothing but the expression and product of human weaknesses. that's all. stay with bbc world news. now on bbc news: stephen sackur speaks to conservative mp owen paterson on hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk. i'm stephen sackur.

britain's prime minister, theresa may, is facing a mutiny inside her own conservative party, which threatens to scupper her brexit deal, quite possibly her premiership as well. if she loses the key parliamentary vote in just a few days time, the uk will plunge headlong into political chaos. the stakes could hardly be higher for my guest today, owen paterson, a conservative mp and former minister intent on rejecting mrs may's brexit. is it too late to avert a damaging national crisis? owen paterson, welcome to hardtalk. thank you very much for inviting me. these are the most extraordinary febrile days in british politics and every day there is a new effort by theresa may and her key cabinet colleagues to persuade people like you to rally behind her and support her deal with the eu 27. are you seeing or hearing anything

that is persuading you? to vote for this deal? yeah, that's changing your mind. because we've know when for a long time that you're agin the deal. absolutely not. i've read every page of it. it is completely appalling. it completely and totally fails to deliver the promise made to the british people in the referendum that we would leave. and the promise made to the british people in the general election that leave meant leaving the single market, leaving the customs union, and leaving the remit of the european court ofjustice, which wasn'tjust a conservative party manifesto, it was also endorsed by the labour party. so 85% of voters at the last election endorsed that. and this does not begin to go near it. in fact, it goes backwards. you use that tone and these grand phrases, it doesn't come close, as clear as day it can't be acceptable, and how is it then that colleagues of yours in the brexit movement, if i can put it that way, who have remained in the cabinet,

see this deal in such very different terms? totally incomprehensible to me. i really genuinely don't understand it. i was a minister, i was in charge of the cap reforms... the common agricultural reforms. common agricultural reforms. i went along with 27 other countries, we have allies, we stopped some of the really stupider things happening, it wasn't a great reform in the end because we were outvoted on many things. from now on, it's hard for your view is to imagine this, law will be imposed on the united kingdom where we will not have been present. and don't forget, up to now, we've the pebble in the issue, we have been pushing for exciting new technologies, for freer trade around the world, so we won't be holding the protectionist europeans back, they will make this protectionist law, it will come to us, we will have no means of amending it, no means of repealing it, if we don't obey it we get clobbered by the european court ofjustice with a huge fine. it is completely unacceptable. you see, there's something extraordinary happening in british politics.

you say that to me. i'm looking at the words of prime minister theresa may, let us not forget, your prime minister, the leader of your political party who wrote this letter to the nation just a few days ago saying we will take back control of our borders, ending free movement, we will take back control of our money, putting an end to the vast annual payments to the eu, and will take back control of our laws by ending thejurisdiction of the european court ofjustice. either she's living in cloud cuckoo land or you are. or you wonder has she really read every page of an agreement? i have talked to is a very senior lawyers about this. i am not a lawyer. and their interpretation is emphatically that that statement is wrong. we'll be shelling out 39 billion and probably more if you get into the next financial round if it drags on, but we'll absolutely be under the... are you impugning her integrity? because when you say that is flat out wrong either you are saying that she is utterly incompetent or she's a liar. no... good question. i find it extraordinary her public statements are not in tune with my understanding and with lawyers‘ understanding of what is proposed.

you take this issue with trade deals. i was in the states two weeks ago. they were absolutely clear at ustr, there were senior members of the democrat party, senior members of the republican party, and they were completely clear that the united states cannot do a deal with a country that does not decide its own tariffs and does not decide its own regulation. it is quite clear in this 585 page document we will not be deciding our tariffs and we will not be deciding our regulations... for as long as britain stays inside the customs union, which we know will be until december 2020 as a result of the transition, and then could be longer because we do not know whether there will be success in reaching a long—term trade agreement with the eu by that date, and if there isn't then of course britain has agreed, according to the deal, to stay inside the customs union. one of the real horrors of this document, that there's no way out, unilaterally, for the uk. in five or ten years time, the uk says you have been messing us around, we are going to leave, you cannot do that without the agreement of the european union.

it is the most extraordinary legally binding treaty we could get ourselves into. let's take another individual, michael gove, who i think you would agree was very important to the brexit campaign during the referendum, was one of the key players in getting you to the 52% vote that won you that a referendum. michael gove in the last 2a hours has spoken directly to people like you say, look, we must not make the perfect the good, and this deal is good, it gives britain lots of very important things, including tariff—free access to the eu market place without having to pay for that access. and he says the europeans actually don't like that. it's something we should appreciate and that theresa may has delivered for us. i'm afraid i don't agree with michael either. we pay, what, 39 billion and we will be putting in, we are paying about 12 billion sterling a year into the eu... that's a payment for obligations

and dues that are owing. are you suggesting we walk away without paying our bills? at the moment it's only 12% of our gdp. this whole thing is all about a small part of our trade and sadly a dwindling part of our trade. we've gone from 60% of our trade to the eu to about 45% now and about 35% in a few years time. we know according the eu itself that 90% of the world of that growth will be outside the eu. we know that our trade to 100 countries on wto terms, growing three times faster than our trade into the eu, from within it, where we are now. so this huge hoo—ha about the smaller dwindling part of our trade... it is small. it's not small. 40% of our trade is with the european union. it is 12% of our gdp. when you're talking about trade you have to compare what the eu offers with what other countries offer. our trade with the eu dwarfs our trade with the united states, which you've been banging on about since the beginning of this interview.

yep, but we don't pay to trade with the united states or china or india or anywhere else. that is the future. that is where the growth is in the world. you don't know that, but what we do know... i do because ijust told you... what we do know, what we do know is that if the british government can't make a deal with the eu and march 29, the deadline comes along, and we crash out without a deal, it will have an extraordinarily deleterious damaging effect on the uk economy. well, i have to say why. we trade with the rest of the world on world trade organization terms. there'si61i countries, 98% of the world's trade is on world trade organization terms, that is a legal framework designed specifically for orderly trade. the european union is a legal entity, it obeys laws. it signed up to the wto's rulings on trade facilitation, on sanitary and phytosanitary rulings. it signed up to the kyoto deal on the world customs organization, why are they arbitrarily going to suddenly go delinquent and break the law? they would not be going delinquent.

why? imean, for example, tariffs would be imposed. you know that. why? what do you mean why? we would be in charge of... well, because the eu would treat the uk as a third party. just as it treats other countries as third party traders and therefore tariffs would be imposed. 10% on vehicles, up to 35% on some agri products. you know that. it's just true. there are still time to negotiate that. we could do... could you just acknowledge that what i have said is true and that therefore all these people from the cbi onward to individual industrial sectors who are talking about the disaster of a no deal brexit they have a fundamental point, if the tariffs come in their business model is going to be destroyed. no, there is time for us to take up the deal offered by president tusk on of march 7, a wide—ranging free—trade agreement, which foundered the issue of the northern ireland border. there are still time, if we get rid of this appalling draft document next tuesday, we can move to that very rapidly...

crosstalk. i won't speak on behalf of the european union... jean—claude juncker has said, quite clearly, after this deal was made with theresa may, to quote his words, "this is the best deal, this is the only deal". as president trump said, it ' the best deal for the european union, quite right. we will go to hope to get rid of it next week. we then have a chance to go back and i went to see michel barnier to discuss the norther ireland border, and it is very clear this free—trade deal is still on offer. and you could go into that... sorry, when was this meeting? ah, it was probably october... before theresa may signed the deal with the eu 27. so the eu 27 have made a decision. things have moved on. they have made a decision. this is the deal as far

as they are concerned. happily, we are still a sovereign country and if our parliament rejects it resoundingly, as it looks as if it's going to, as we count today the mps have declared publicly they will vote against it, the eu will have to think again. the obvious answer is to go back to what they originally offered us, a comprehensive free—trade deal with add—ons like aviation and security and other important matters... the. . .the. .. ..as a side deal. there is still time to do that. the... hang on, hang on. let me finish. you can then move onto the world trade organization terms, having triggered article 2a of the gatt treaty, which says that if you started a free—trade agreement you can carry on on the current basis, which is zero tariffs, so we could do that with the eu if we've got their agreement to go ahead with a free trade deal. you have ten years to complete it. so that... to pick how it is in your vision of how things should be. and i am mindful that people have said, for the last two years on your side of the argument, that doing a deal with the eu would be easy.

that was not true. we know it is not true. here we sit today in the middle of this crisis. the problems with your vision are manifold. if the eu was interested in renegotiating this deal, making it some sort of super canada plus trade agreement you wouldn't have acknowledged or addressed the problem of the irish border, which is central to the eu's position. well, i have done. because i helped write the paper with the european research group which we sent to the government and sent to michel barnier back in september. that shows very clearly that with the existing techniques and existing processes under existing eu law, and this is advised by people who really do understand customs, so an organisation that represents 19,000 customs organisations... i recollect all of this. i also recollect the irish foreign minister saying that there is absolutely no way the irish government agrees with your position on what could be achieved with technical facilities at the border. as for as he's concerned it is nonsense.

and if you would go down as canada free—trade like there would be a hard border. there will never be a hard border, because the uk government won't build one, the irish government won't build one, and the eu won't buy one. so can we just forget the hard border? it is a complete paper tiger. it won't happen. let's be realistic, look at what happens in the rest of the world, all borders are moving towards more automation, preclearance, the systems all exist now. there is nothing new, nothing alarming... why do you think... existing techniques, existing processors within existing law. that is how you sort the irish border. and of course the turnover, very important locally, is tiny. it's 4.9% of all northern ireland sales go south of the border. 0.2% or uk gdp. regular shipments on milk, of livestock, ithink 16,000 border crossings of guinness, these are very regular repetitive shipments of materials, which are well... the ulster farmer's union says that

a no deal outcome would be a, quote, "catastrophe for northern ireland's farmers". you aren't persuading anybody. i wonder whether you will acknowledge to me that your view of what must happen next is the most enormous gamble, given everything that the bank of england is saying what would come with a no—deal brexit, the office of budget responsibility, the institute for fiscal studies, you may laugh, but these are all... this is project fear absolutely mark, what are we up to, six or seven? we had these ludicrous forecasts that if the british people were stupid enough to vote to leave the european union, we would have this catastophic fall in economic activity. a huge rise in unemployment, collapse foreign direct investment. what happened was that they were wrong by over 100 billion sterling. the economy grew... we haven't left yet.

no, no, that is what they said would happen if we were stupid enough to vote. no, no, they said it would happen after the vote, the george osborne nonsense, the £9 million leaflet going around to every house and they were completely wrong. with respect, i hardly believe you are in a position to lecture about people being wrong when your this side of the argument from the very beginning said that a — that brexit would be easy, b — that britain held the cards in negotiations with the eu, c — that tehre would be a massive brexit dividend of some £350 million a week that could then be ploughed into the nhs. these things were all falsehoods that your side peddled. to criticise others for getting some economic forecast wrong, seems to me, that absurd. not some economic forecast. there was a very clear prediction by the treasury at the time of the referendum that should people vote in the referendum, there will be an economic collapse.

an emergency budget, we were told. those were clear forecasts that were proved to be totally wrong and they have come up with more ludicrous forecasts. we found out today, if we did free—trade agreements around the world, you would see a 0.2% increase in gdp. that is simply not credible that such a tiny increase in economic activity... we have aired the position that you still take on why, in your view, i'm not speaking for you, i would like to hear it from your lips, you think no deal is clearly better than theresa may's deal. yes or no? there is no such thing as no deal. there will be world trade organisation terms, with side deals like aviation and things, which have already been done. let's call it the disorderly brexit. it is not disorderly. the world trade organization has imposed order on world trade. there is 164 countries... the eu, if it doesn't do

what you are convinced it is going to do, which is apparentlyjust bow down to britain's interest, it will go into dispute, disputes at the wto take years and years to resolve, so it will be at disorderly brexit. i just want to know whether that, in your view, with all the potential disorder, is better than theresa may's deal? there is an establishment narrative peddling exactly like project fear mark about seven or 8, that the wto is a disaster, leaping off a cliff. it's not. it's working within the framework of world trade, which covers 98% of world trade. the eu is building up to 100 billion surplus, why on earth are they going to jeopardise that? very importantly, all of our standards are the same. one of the real blocks in the wto is that you cannot hide behind standard as an excuse for stopping trade. the customs organisation have made the same point, they will have no grounds for stopping trade.

it is fair to say i got the message, unyielding when it comes to the arguments about the economics of brexit, the implications of brexit... emphatically better than this deal. now i've got that answer. absolutely, no question, we are far better rejecting this deal, which i intend to do that next week when i vote, speak against tomorrow... clearly you do. ..get rid of that and move straight back to a proper discussion back with tusk that he offered on 7 march, a comprehensive free—trade deal. that is the way to go. you believe you are going to win, that theresa may's deal is toast when it comes to this big parliamentary vote on december 11, yes? i very much hope so. what happens then? what will you do next, in political terms? will you call for her to quit, others have put their letters demanding a vote for a new conservative party leader already in, will you put one in do you think the conservative party will see a challenge to theresa may's leadership

if she loses that vote? what we want the leadership to do is to go back to the manifesto on which we fought the election and go back to the lancaster house speech and deliver that. leave the single market, leave the customs union and leave the european court ofjustice and that means going back to tusk straightaway and saying we take up your offer of march because we now have a solution to the irish border. i want to discuss real politic with you. we don't have much time. will you, or will you not, put in a letter as others have done and force a leadership challenge in the conservative party if she loses that vote? everyones wants to go to personalities, i want to get to policy. this is about practical politics. the labour party has made it clear that if she loses that vote they are going to force a vote of confidence in the government. what would you do? of course, vote for a vote of confidence. the idea of having a crazy marxist regime run by corbyn

would be catastophic. here is whatjacob rees mogg, a close of yours says, "we now have a government led by remainers who want to keep us tied to the eu as tightly as possible." if he believes that and i believe you believe something similar, how can you possibly think that theresa may is go to deliver you the brexit you want? well, she said the right things in the elections and at lancaster house. why don't we go back to that? you are not prepared to engage with the real world today, you will hark back to what she said many months ago, rather than where she is today with her deal, committed to it with a cabinet that supports it. if it goes down, i struggle to see how would you, with any credibility, can still regard her as the leader of your party. sorry about that, but i see myself as a mainstream conservatives who wants to see the manifesto delivered. you go around associations, you get people initially coming up to me saying that you are going to do this, you're not going to let us down. it happens the whole time. 17.4 million expected

to be delivered. she promised in the election, it was an election manifesto, she got the second largest number of vote is sincejohn major. endorsed by the labour party. if we don't embrace this it will be the most catastrophic... really bad, you say. a party colleague, joejohnson, who quit the government as a result of his deep dislike of this theresa may brexit deal from a very different perspective from yours, he was a remainer and wanted britain to have a referendum. he says that there must now be, because there is no parliamentary majority if anything else, there must be a parliamentary vote to order another referendum. that does look increasingly likely, doesn't it? no, because i don't think it will get through the commons. mps who say that should remember what happened. david cameron said give me a majority, i will promise you an in out referendum.

he won, we had a referendum, 17.4 million people voted to leave against huge wall of propaganda bombarded by the treasury, the £9 million leaflet, all of it. that was interpreted to me, leave the single market, leave the customs union, leave the ec], in our manifesto. those are three huge democratic statements by the british people — please leave the european union. so you are a democrat who is tried to tell me that a referendum, now we know what the real alternatives are when it comes to brexit and what brexit exactly means, you are a democrat who is claiming to me that putting it back to the british people with this new knowledge, is antidemocratic? bizarrely, it is. you are right, it is bizarre. what you just said is very bizarre, do you acknowledge that? it's it the williams final at will be at wimbledon, is it the best of three or the mens final, the best of five? oh come on,. the argument has

substantially changed. you've acnoeldged it. the british people now, as they did not know in 2016, they now know what brexit will mean and surely any democrat would then say that british people have a right to decide, now it is clear what it means, whether they want it. no, because sadly the government, having been elected on a manifesto which was very clear and the pm make statements at lancaster house, has made a complete botch. what is being offered is a mile from brexit. people want to leave. they voted to leave. that is not being offered at the moment. a final thought, if i may. we are out of time. i have heard several mps in recent days talking very openly and honestly about how difficult they find the current decision that faces them. they are losing sleep, they feel an enormous burden of responsibility and they frankly are not entirely sure what the right thing to do is. i don't get any sense that you are weighing this decision with that sense of a burden upon you in any way at all. i have been working on this stuff probably since i first became an mp

when i was president of a european trade association and saw which way the european community at that time was going. what we are looking at is a continent which only has one other with a slower rate of growth, and that is antarctica. the rest of the world is really growing, the rest of the world is mad keen to trade with us and there is a most wonderful opportunity. we have to end it there, but owen paterson, thank you very much for being on hardtalk. 0k! thank you. hello there.

yesterday was a lot colder for many of us and in fact temperatures dipped below freezing quite readily after dark across scotland, so we awake to a hard frost with freezing fog. for many, the cloud has rolled in over the last 12 hours, introducing a milder theme in southern areas but when that mild air comes into cold air we have seen some wintry issues over the hills of wales. they will move into the hills of northern england the midlands, southern scotland for the rush. a hard frost in the north. that is where we got that area of transition where we could have icy conditions and some snow over the hills. further south it will be quite grey hill fog because we have a lot of low cloud. low—level fog will clear eventually in the north and then it is bright and dry for many of us, much more cloud through the day ahead with outbreaks of rain, hill snow for scotland in the afternoon because we hang on to that cold air. further south it is milder. that mild air will continue with us

through wednesday night with yet more atlantic weather systems running in. this time they are dragging the mild air right across scotland as well so temporarily we lose that cold air here through the course of thursday but we pick up the cloud. outbreaks of rain and that may ease for a time but there is more to come from the west later. there will be leaden skies for many. brighter perhaps in northern and eastern areas and it a mild day for scotland included northern ireland. however, the rain is the next developing area of low pressure and that could turn out to be a deep area of low pressure was potentially disruptive wind and it will pull in some cold air to northern scotland as well. a lot to think about for friday. there is more heavy rain, the potential for blizzards in the north of scotland and the risk of severe gales. gusts reaching 70 or 80 miles an hour. that is through the course of friday. from the start of friday through to the end it looks like a windy

day across the board. that area of cloud and rain in the north turns to snow in the hills and possibly wintry across the pennines as well and a windy day throughout. there will be peaks in those gusts of wind and we could have more rain waiting for saturday. on friday it starts relatively mild but as we get the north—westerly wind in temperatures will tumble once again. and this is the weekend. as we go through the weekend we have further areas of low pressure to come in so it remains unsettled times and a windy picture. welcome to newsday. i'm babita sharma in london. the headlines: the ayes to the right, 311, the noes to the left, 293. extraordinary scenes in the british parliament — theresa may's goverment suffers two significant defeats over her brexit deal with the eu. just hours into the first of five days of a crucial debate on the deal, the prime minister is now fighting for her political life. the choice before parliament is clear — this deal,

no deal, or the risk of no brexit. and i'm rico hizon in singapore. also in the programme: two senior us republicans senators say they're now certain the saudi crown prince is guilty of the murder ofjamal khashoggi. india faces a explosion in the number of lung cancer cases.