george bush sr. he was remembered as a patriot, a statesman, and a loving father, in a service attended by all surviving us presidents. he will be buried on thursday in his home state of texas, alongside his wife, barbara. the chief financial officer of the chinese tech giant huawei has been arrested in canada at the request of the us. the canadian justice department said wanzhou meng would face an extradition hearing on friday. there are unconfirmed reports that her arrest is related to violations of us sanctions. protests have reignited across spain after a court upheld a controversial verdict against five men accused of gang—raping a woman. the group known as the wolf pack were convicted of sexual abuse rather than rape. now on bbc news, wednesday in parliament. hello there and welcome

to wednesday in parliament, where mps keep the pressure on theresa may over her brexit plans and her deal to stop a physical border in northern ireland. i'm continuing to listen to colleagues on that and considering the way forward. meanwhile, as mps continue to debate the uk's eu divorce, the shadow home secretary worries about what it might mean for security. at best, you can say it is a blindfold brexit on security. but at worst, it may be leading us off a cliff on security matters. also on this programme, praise for a rape victim who's waived her right to anonymity to speak out. and calls for a crackdown on shisha bars. it often affects communities in a very deep, profound way. but first, just a few minutes before theresa may arrived in the commons for the last session of prime minister's questions before

mps vote on her brexit deal next week, the government published its legal advice about the plan. the release of the material came after ministers were found to be in contempt of parliament. the leader of the snp at westminster, ian blackford, said the government was in crisis. this morning, we have seen the detail of the legal advice. we have seen the facts that the government tried to hide. mr speaker, this government is giving northern ireland permanent membership of the single market and the customs union. he said the legal advice was clear, and he broke parliamentary protocol by suggesting the government had "misled" parliament — a phrase that's not allowed in the chamber. since the prime minister returned from brussels with her deal, the prime minister has been misleading the house, inadvertently or otherwise. the prime minister must explain... order!

there can be no suggestion of otherwise. the right honourable gentleman must make it clear that there is no suggestion that the government is misleading the house deliberately. there can be no question of that. after a bit of toing and froing with the speaker, ian blackford rephrased his comments. i say again, inadvertently. mr speaker, the prime minister must explain... the prime minister must explain why she continues to deny scotland the rights and opportunities that her deal offers to other parts of the united kingdom. theresa may said, she and the government had been clear, the uk couldn't pull out of the northern ireland backstop unilaterally. the backstop is the insurance policy to stop any physical border being built between northern ireland and the republic if no trade agreement is reached by the end of 2020. as to scotland... we are leaving the european union as the whole united kingdom.

we will negotiate as the whole united kingdom. for the interests of scotland... for the interests of scotland, remaining in the internal market of united kingdom is the most important economic interest. and for the interests of scotland, coming out of the common fisheries policy, which is in our deal and our policy and not his. but the northern ireland border was taken up by a dup mp. this morning's legal advice refers to the backstop as permanent arrangement and will endure indefinitely, a repeat of previous assertions that were made. does the prime minister agree, at this last moment, that the entire premise of the backstop has been based on a false assertion? it is a practical, physical, political impossibility under any circumstances for a hard border to emerge on the island of ireland. why has she allowed that to be used as a negotiating ploy by the eu

against the united kingdom? this is not a negotiating ploy by the european union against the uk. what it is is our commitment, as a uk government, to the people of northern ireland. he says that the political assertion that there will be no hard border is sufficient to give people reassurance for the future. i say no. what people want to know is that arrangements will be in place. it doesn't have to be the backstop. the future relationship will deal with this. the extension of the implementation period could deal with the temporary period. alternative arrangements could deal with it. but people need to know, people need to know it is beyond a political assertion, that there is that commitment there to the people of northern ireland to ensure that we have no hard border. a conservative turned to what would happen if mps voted against theresa may's withdrawal agreement. should the withdrawal agreement not secure the support of parliament, can my friend, the prime minister,

assure this house and my constituents that her majesty's government will seek early dialogue with negotiators in brussels to seek to address the genuine concerns of mps across the house? i believe that the deal we have negotiated is a good deal. i recognise that concerns that have been raised, particularly around the backstop, and that is an issue which, as i said yesterday in my speech in the debate, i'm continuing to listen to colleagues on that and considering the way forward. theresa may. well, shortly after those exchanges, it was on to day two of the five—day debate on the withdrawal agreement, and the separate shorter document setting out the framework for the uk's future relationship with the eu. the day's debate was on the theme of immigration and security, so it was the home secretary who began by defending what was in theresa may's deal. whilst i accept that the security arrangements with this deal will be different — they will be different — we will be a third country

outside the eu. what we have here, i think we can safely say, is the most comprehensive of security agreement the eu has with any third country. he turned to immigration, where the government had promised a policy — or white paper — in december, setting out plans for a new immigration system after brexit. does he think it's acceptable that this house should vote on the withdrawal deal without the information in the white paper? i'd say two things to my honourable friend. it's a very fair point that he raises. i mean, the first is that he asks what's happened, and it'sjust worth reminding him and the house that this is the most significant change in our immigration system in 45 years. and rather than rush the white paper, it is important that we focus on the detail and we get it right and we get it out as soon as possible. and the second point i'd make is that this white paper... of course, we should think of our new immigration system as part of our deal as we exit from the european union, but it is also clear

that if we have no deal, there will also still be a new immigration system. at best, you can say it is a blindfold brexit on security. but at worst, it may be leading us off a cliff on security matters. ministers insist that the deal that has been put before this house will offer us better arrangements than any other third country. i put it to ministers, that is not the point. the point is not, "are they better arrangement than other countries? " the point is, "will they give us the same assurances on security and fighting crime that we currently have?" and i think if you go through this deal, you will see that there would appear to be a trade—off between security and the government's deal. the former universities minister

spoke for the first time since his resignation. as i consider the deal in front of us very carefully, mr speaker. the deal that has been described as having a remain flavour, even as a remainer, it became quite clear to me that this deal is not politically or practically deliverable, that it will make us poorer and it will also risk the union. he didn't rule out the prospect of a second referendum, even though some people said it would be highly divisive. voting for this withdrawal agreement, giving the public the impression that this is the best compromise and there are no problems further down the line — this is brexit done — when they wake up and see that britain is being hobbled and crippled in those negotiations, that would also disappoint voters and that would also be corrosive of our politics. yvette cooper chairs

the home affairs committee. she was worried about access to crucial eu security databases. these tools are used to catch criminals, to stop terrorists, to monitor sex offenders, to find dangerous weapons, to stop serious criminals entering the country. and without these measures, the police have been very clear that our country is less safe. and i do not think this house should be voting for things that could make our country less safe. justine greening wants a second referendum. and she turned her attention to the political agreement, the framework for the uk's future relationship with the eu. it's the political equivalent of being asked to jump out of a plane without knowing if your parachute is there and attached. it's like agreeing to move out of your house without knowing where you're going to live next, or not even having agreed the sales price, but selling out and signing the contract anyway. none of us would do

this in our own life. yet, this withdrawal agreement and political declaration asks us to do it on behalf of our country. in this parliament, we are told that we can't get to a decision that everybody will agree with. we have to accept that during the referendum, a vast majority of parliament campaigned for remain. we are in a remain parliament, which happens to reside in a leave country. and i think it's wholly dangerous for us to turn to the people now and say, "you let us down. you got it wrong." do you know what else is said about the people who voted leave? that they were a bit thick, that they didn't know what they were voting for. and we've had intimations of, "maybe they were racist." well, no, they weren't. they weren't racist. immigration was on the part of it, but the sovereignty of making decisions in this parliament is what it was all about, immigration being part of that.

it's not very good, the backstop... you'll be in the backstop for donkeys. i mean, you think the european union is going to let you out of the backstop? of course they're not. and as for the negotiators in europe, on the other matters, matters that haven't been negotiated, i wouldn't trust them as far as i can throw them. if we did accept this deal, they would just throw it all away and say, "there you are. we've got them." meanwhile, the house of lords has begun its own three—day debate on the brexit deal. unlike mps, peers won't have a "meaningful vote" on the issue — but more than 180 of them hope to take part in the debate. one of the early speakers was the archbishop of canterbury. he said he'd voted to remain in the eu, but the referendum result had to be delivered. but the risk we face now is not a decision to leave without an agreement, it is an accidental leaving without a agreement.

we may drift into something that no single person chooses as their ideal. and if that happens, or even with some of the other options we have, there is a significant danger of adverse economic effect, with a falling government revenue, rise in unemployment and greater property. some will argue that is only going to be temporary, but we need to remember that for those in poverty, temporary is an eternity. but a former deputy prime minister warned that any brexit would simply make people poorer. and if this house is solemnly going to vote knowingly, as we have heard here today, for a slower economy, for lower tax revenues, for lower, for lower, lower public expenditure, then those who will suffer most are those least able to bear the strain. and when the election comes,

it will have been a tory that led the referendum campaign. it will have been a tory government that perpetuated the frozen living standards. it will be a tory government that is blamed for what we are talking about today. i will have no part in it. but no deal certainly need not be a disaster or a catastrophe, as so many noble lords insist. no deal need not mean a crashing out or a cliff edge. there will be no need for aeroplanes to stop flying, for kent to become a lorry park, for supply chains to seize up, for medicines to be unobtainable and food to be rationed — as the litany goes. the liberal democrats‘ leader wanted another referendum. the second option, my lords, is to have a general election.

but given this would be fought by three conservative parties and at least two labour parties, i cannot see how this could possibly bring any clarity to the position. others were worried about the impact on the irish border. i understand some people get bored with this, and they say, "we've got to do this. it's on the table." it may be on the table, but i fear that it is not the right deal for this country at this time, and it certainly breaks the red lines that the prime minister gave us assurances about ‘ both in december last year and in march this year — that we would be... there will be no barriers, there would be no border off the irish sea. my lords, there will. lord empey. and peers will continue that debate on thursday. you're watching wednesday in parliament with me, alicia mccarthy. the international trade secretary

has given a warning that there is a "real danger" mps might try to "steal" brexit from the british people. appearing before the international trade committee, liam fox, was repeatedly pressed to say what the government's plan b was should mrs may's proposed eu withdrawal agreement be voted down next week. is brexit going as well as you imagined? ask me next tuesday. and what will that be dependent on next tuesday? what we vote in the house of commons. and which vote do you want? i want the government government deal to go through. you said in the first of... the reason... just to clarify the answer... i think that there is, as i have written recently, a real danger that the house of commons which is a natural remain majority may attempt to steal brexit from the british people — which i think would be a democratic affront. on that, you said in february

2017 to this committee, "we expect to get a good deal". is the deal a good deal? it wasn't a good deal i wouldn't be voting for it, chairman. so your order of preference is: the deal, no deal under status quo... my preference is the deal. yeah, and after that... no deal or the status quo? i'm not going into the menu. that is very interesting because you might have to go into the menu. and if you do go into the menu, i think you should be sharing with the committee what you prefer — a no deal or no brexit — as donald tusk said. i prefer brexit, i voted for brexit, i campaigned for brexit, but i hope we do it in an orderly and transitional way. at the moment we can leave the european union unilaterally. once we sign the withdrawal agreement, we cannot. so you understand that... i've got more chance of winning bbc bake—off than the prime minister has of winning this vote on tuesday, with the colleagues i have spoken to.

what would you recommend the prime minister to do on tuesday if she allows it to go to a vote and it goes as everybody is predicting? what would your advice to her... my advice to colleagues is too vote for the agreement. yet, but you've got to advise the prime minister... what advice i have for the prime minister would be done in private. but you will be talking to her in private, though? my view is, quite frankly, when you're in prison and someone offers you a key, you take it. the sad thing is we are being offered a prison cell, secretary of state, that is the problem. and the eu are the ones with the key. a reference to the back—stop, the mechanism that keeps the uk in the customs union — if a longterm trade deal hasn't been sorted out in time — to prevent the need for customs posts along the irish border. as the attorney—general said, there is a calculated risk to be taken. if the risk is not taken, the chances are following last night's vote in the house of commons, we'll end up not having brexit. you said that the uk must have the ability to end backstop or else we would be subcontracting our power to the european union, and needs to be an issue

for a sovereign british government. so what changed ? having talked to colleagues across europe, their dislike for the concept of the backstop is stronger even than i had anticipated. therefore i think there was a double incentive on both sides to never get there. from great matters of state to a niche issue in westminster hall where mps were debating the problems caused by shisha lounges. the venues provide pipes — known as hookahs — where tobacco is mixed with other flavours, burnt and passed through a water basin before being inhaled. when things go wrong, they face the absolute misery of noise nuisance, crime, anti—social behaviour and all the things that goal with that. and all the things that go with that. so for them, this is definitely not a niche issue and it often affects communities in a very deep, profound way. she said some shisha bars were causing problems

for local communities. it takes a disproportionate amount of time, from the powers that are currently available and the resources that are available, in order to take action. so i do think that the time has come to enhance the legislative framework surrounding shisha premises. i believe the time has come for us to have a licensing regime specifically for shisha. the minister didn't think there was a silver bullet. i would suggest that a new licensing regime — where you licence places for shisha rather than for alcohol, or you may do itjointly — would still require days and days of work to prove that the licence had been breached. because these businesses, as you quite rightly... asked the honourable lady from birmingham... i will in a moment... ..points out, a lot of them are relying on them for their living. now, let's go back to prime minister's questions, where the labour leader jeremy corbyn used his six questions not to ask theresa may about the defeats inflicted on her government by mps on tuesday or about the impending

brexit votes. instead he raised the goverment‘s policies on benefits which he says are causing real hardship across the uk. theresa may defended her government's record. he started off this comments by referencing the last decade. yes, the last decade have meant that difficult decisions have had to be taken. but why did those difficult decisions have to be taken? they were taken because of the labour party's mismanagement of the economy. hear, hear! remember, remember the letter from the right honourable member for birmingham hodge hill — under labour, there is no money left. hear, hear! when i hear a prime minister talking about difficult decisions, what always happens afterwards in these contexts is the poorest lose out in our society. 4.3... 4.3 million disabled people are now in poverty.

50,000 were hit by appalling cuts to the employment support allowance benefit alone last year. this government labelled disabled people scroungers, it called those unable to work skivers... shouting. it created... order, order! order. i don't need any advice from the home secretary. he should seek to discharge his own obligations in his office to the best of his ability. i require no advice from the right honourable gentleman on the discharge of mine. child poverty is rising. homelessness, rising. destitution, rising. household debt, rising. when will the prime minister turn her warm words into action? end the benefit freeze.

repeal the bedroom tax. scrap the two—child cut. and halt the roll—out of universal credit. hear, hear! prime minister! the right honourable gentleman referred to the poorest losing out. i will tell him with the poorest lose out — is when the labour government comes in... shouting. that provoked more shouting and jeering from mps, the speaker stepped in again before theresa may resumed her point. what this government has done — we've introduced the national living wage. conservatives, not labour. we've taken millions of people out of paying tax altogether. hear, hear! conservatives, not labour. under this government, 3.3 millionjobs have been created. hear, hear! every labour government leaves office with unemployment higher than when it went into office. so what do we see under this government? our economy is growing, employment is rising, investment is up, we're giving

the nhs the biggest single cash boost in its history, taxes are being cut, wages are rising — labour would destroy all that. it's this conservative government that is building a brighterfuture for our country. hear, hear! theresa may. nowjust before the start of this week's prime minister's questions, the speaker, john bercow, welcomed a survivor of the rotherham child sexual abuse scandal to the commons. sammy woodhouse is campaigning for a change in the law so that her attacker can't play a role in her child's life. the speaker told mps she'd waived her right to annonymity. in order to campaign not merely for her rights — very important though those rights are — but for the rights of all women similarly violated. i am referring of course to sammy woodhouse. welcome to the house of commons, sammy. applause.

later a labour mp took up her case with the prime minsiter. i know the whole house is inspired by the bravery of sammy woodhouse in speaking out so that we can drive real change, and horrified by the news that the man who raped sammy and is serving a 35—year prison sentence was encouraged to seek access to the child through the family courts. does the prime minister agree that no man who has fathered a child through rape should have parental rights? yes. and will she seek to amend the regulation through the court and tribunal bill when it comes back to this house, so that men who have fathered children through rape cannot what denies the courts to access children and not traumatize their victims all over again? hear, hear! this is obviously a very distressing case. i am sure, as hasjust been heard, the concerns of the whole house rests with sammy woodhouse and rest with what has happened in this case. as the facts are being reported, i'm sure all of us consider it

absolutely extraordinary that they should have happened in the first place. what is important is that the ministry ofjustice and other departments are urgently looking and working with local authorities on the issues that are raised in this case, to ensure that there is a process in place in future that does protect children... the child and mothers from harm. theresa may. and that's it from me for now, but dojoin me on bbc parliament on thursday night at 11 for another round up of the day at westminster as mps and peers continue their brexit debates. but for now from me, alicia mccarthy, goodbye. hello.

whilst wednesday brought a mild day to the southern half of the uk, across scotland it did remain very chilly. today we're going to even out the temperatures somewhat, but along with that change we will bring in quite a few showers for a time and a blustery wind to boot. the reason for the change, this area of low pressure approaching from the atlantic. and by the end of the night it will already be starting to try and push some milder airfurther north into scotland. there mayjust be a few icy patches in the far north—east. so for first thing, out temperatures to the south in double figures already and the milder air will continue to work its way further north as the morning goes on. it will though be a blustery rush hour. and as you can see, underneath this rain here behind me is scotland. many areas seeing a pretty wet picture at 8am. some heavier downpours pushing through the borders. quite a wet story across northern ireland too. ahead of that rain, well, a dry but cloudy picture for northern england, the midlands, east anglia and the south—east. but the showers already starting

to approach the south—west of england and wales. in the white arrows there we saw your sustained windspeed but the gusts will be higher and overall we're shaping up for a blustery day from top to tail across the uk. scotland should see skies clearing for the afternoon. some sunshine possible here. and certainly a milder day than we had on wednesday, temperatures into double figures for glasgow and edingburgh. to the south more clouds and showers and highs of 13 or 11! degrees. so very much on the mild side once again. through thursday evening, most of the rain subsides but then we tip over into the early hours of friday and things start to get very lively once again. 0vernight thursday into friday, this beast starts to swing in from the atlantic. it wil bring a spell of heavy rain. but that is not the biggest problem. the rain actually for many will clip out of the way very quickly first thing friday. aside from scotland, where you, unfortunately, get the worst of both worlds. you will still have the heavy rain first thing on friday but you will also though have some very strong winds,

gusting 60 to 70 miles per hour. perhaps in the odd spot of exposure up to 80 miles per hour. that will be enough to cause some disruption. and the rian keeps pushing in here during the day and, yes, white on the chart across the mountains, we are likely to see some snow. further south, some scattered showers towards the west, but many eastern areas windy, yes, but mild and perhaps more in the way of sunshine than we will do on thursday. 0nto the weekend, and the prospects are for things to gradually become drier for all. the winds will start to ease a little too and change direction. thing turning chillier by the time we get into next week. welcome to bbc news, broadcasting to viewers in north america and around the globe. my name is mike embley. our top stories: trouble for chinese tech giant huawei. its chief financial officer is arrested in canada and faces extradition to the us. a state funeral in washington for former president george hw bush. the world war ii pilot who helped end the cold war is remembered as statesman and loving father. he valued character over pedigree, and he was no cynic.

he looked for the good in each person, and he usually found it. mass protests across spain, as appealjudges uphold a decision to clear five men known as the wolf pack of gang rape. and a blueprint for better health. british scientists complete the biggest gene—sequencing project