a chinese technology executive, whose detention in canada has caused protests from beijing, has asked to be granted bail. the chief financial officer of huawei, meng wanzhou, was arrested at the request of the united states, which has accused her of fraud in violating american sanctions on iran. britain's prime minister theresa may has spoken to her counterpart and the president of the european council, ahead of a planned parliamentary vote on her government's brexit deal. many mps from her own party have called for a delay, but she insists the vote will take place on tuesday. 26a man 26 a man has been remanded in custody in new zealand, charged with killing british backed packer. grace millane, who has 22, went missing more than a week ago. yesterday, police found the body they believe to be hers inwards on the outskirts of the city of auckland. —— in woods. now on bbc news, the week in parliament.

hello there and welcome to the week in parliament. with the crucial vote on her eu withdrawal deal looming, theresa may appeals to mps to support her plan. i ask you to back it in the best interest of our constituents and our country. and with my whole heart, i commend this motion to the house. but labour is clear they will not accept the deal. the prime minister has seen these negotiations only as an exercise in the internal management of the conservative party. also on this programme, jeremy corbyn and theresa may clash over the state of the welfare state, and peers reckon the public will be angry if they don't get a vote on theresa may's brexit deal. why did you deny me the chance to become familiar with those facts and then express my opinion again?

why did you take that from me and deny it to me? but first, it was a another week of drama at westminster. the ayes to the right, 307. the noes to left 311. a week of dismay for ministers. the ayes to the right 311. the noes to the left 293. and a week of defeat for the government. the ayes to the right 321. the noes to the left 299. so the ayes have it, the ayes have it. on tuesday in the space ofjust over an hour, theresa may suffered three defeats in the commons. the first two came as mps debated, then agreed a labour move, accusing ministers of being in contempt or frustrating parliament by failing

to publish in full the legal opinion on the brexit deal. an snp mp made clear why the opposition wouldn't be placated by the version the government had given them instead. they are placing themselves above parliament. they are placing themselves in contempt of parliament. and as for the legal position document published yesterday that was going to fix it all, that could hardly be more patronising if they had pictures to colour in and wee join—the—dots puzzles every so often just to keep us interested. and then just moments before theresa may was due to speak came the third defeat, as a cross—party group of mps spearheaded by the conservative former attorney general dominic grieve, succeeded in giving the commons the right to say what should happen next if her brexit deal is voted down on tuesday. it is contrary to all sensible practice and, i have to say, slightly disrespectful of the role of this house that we should end up with a situation in which we have unamendable motions for consideration at a time

when parliament ought to be fully focused on trying to find means of resolving outstanding issues. and he had support from the labour mp who chairs the brexit committee. it is essential that the house of commons has the opportunity if the deal is voted down next tuesday, to give itself a voice to express a view about what happens next, and what the right honourable and learned gentleman's amendment does, as we've just heard, is to remove the obstacle to that, and i hope the whole of the house votes for it. and, sure enough, the government was defeated by 22 votes. the third defeat for the government in just one day. it all made for an uncomfortable backdrop for the prime minister, who less than a minute later got up to make one of the most crucial speeches of her career, as she tried to persuade mps to back her deal in the vote on tuesday. to all sides of the debate, to every member in every party, i say that this deal deserves your support for what it

achieves for all of our people and our whole united kingdom. one union of four nations, now and in the future, and this is a debate about our future. it's not about whether we could have taken a different road in the past, but which road we should take from here. if we put aside our differences and remember what unites us, if we broker an honourable compromise in the interest, not of ourselves, but of those who were sent here to serve, if we come together and do our duty to our constituents, then we will pass the test that history has set for us today. it's not easy when the passions run so deep, but looking around this chamber, i know we can meet this moment. so i promise you today, this is the very best deal for the british people, i ask you to back it in the best interests of our constituents and our country. and with my whole heart, i commend this motion to the house. the prime minister has seen these negotiations only as an exercise

in the internal management of the conservative party, and that did not work out very well at all. when the two previous brexit secretaries, who theoretically at least led the negotiations, well, they did, theoretically, say they cannot support the deal, how can she expect anyone else in this house or in this country to have faith in a deal that has been rejected by two of the people that were involved in negotiation of it? throughout the entire negotiating period, the uk government have treated scotland with contempt. scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain, yet the will of the scottish people means nothing, absolutely nothing to this prime minister. instead of engaging meaningfully with scotland during this critical time, the prime minister chose last—minute photo calls and stage—managed events in scotland.

all smoke and mirrors to dress up the fact that her government cannot care less about scotland, and we can see it tonight. to enter into this arrangement that has been put forward, first through the transition period as proposed, and then the backstop divisions, means we enter into a twilight world where the eu is given unprecedented powers of the uk, certainly in the transition period, and massive leverage in the negotiations on the future trade relationship, and we have to rely on the goodwill of others to let us ever leave these arrangements. so under these terms, in my view, the uk's future as a strong and independent trading nation, standing together, is in realjeopardy. the brutal truth is that the country is bitterly divided and it will be bitterly divided if we leave under the terms that the government has negotiated, we will be entering into a set of conditions in which the economy will deteriorate relative to what it would have been in the

european union, a younger generation are coming through who will bear the brunt of the costs, most of whom voted to remain in the european union, an estimated 80% of 18—year—olds wishes to remain, there will be great bitterness and resentment about what the older generation has imposed on them. this issue will not go away. and when the debate went over to the back benches, the divisions within parties and across the commins became all too clear. i really can't believe that there is a single member of this house who sincerely believes that this deal we have before us is a good deal. i sincerely believe it. i've got no stake in this government anymore, but i still think it is the right thing to do. the right honourable member was a senior member of vote leave, he was foreign secretary for two years. we are in this mess because of him.

does he take no responsibility? i was not able to continue to support this process for precisely for that reason. the deal on offer, as the prime minister says, the only deal on offer, does not recover our sovereignty. it leaves us rule takers from the european union, without any voice in shaping those rules. the former universities minister spoke for the first time since his resignation. because 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 has been hobbled and crippled in those negotiations, that would also disappoint voters and that would also be corrosive of our politics. theresa may did have backing from some, one conservative praised her courage and dogged pursuit of a deal. i'm sure that there are many right honourable

and honourable members on both sides of this house who remember lewis carroll's wonderful poem, the hunting of the snark, which includes the following lines, which i believe are appropriate. "the principal failing occurred in the sailing, and the bellman, perplexed and distressed, said he had hoped, at least, when the wind blew due east, that the ship would not travel due west! " mr speaker, to coin a phrase from a greater, kinder and more resolute period in our national life, come, let us go forward together and settle this now. the lords also began a debate in the eu withdrawal deal and our proposed relationship with the eu. one of the early speakers was the archbishop of canterbury, who warned that the uk could drift into no deal. there is a significant danger of adverse economic effect,

with a fall in government revenue, a rise in unemployment and greater poverty. some will argue that is only going to be temporary, but we need to remember that for those in poverty, temporary is an eternity. no deal is completely unacceptable, the may deal is completely unacceptable. and when people turn around and say look, the british public are weary of brexit, theyjust want it over, that might be true for this minute, but i tell you, when they face the consequences of brexit and see the impact on their lives, that will be forgotten in a flash. and there will be huge anger, and they will turn to people in this house and the other and say when the facts were on the table, why did you deny me the chance to become familiar with those facts and then express my opinion again? why did you take that from me and deny it to me? i am concerned as to what might happen if we had

a second referendum. what could the result be? if the result were to be 52—48 remain, would the leavers be content? if the result is the same as last time, on what grounds are we remaining? this deal or another deal? and if we've got three questions on the ballot paper, what happens if all are rejected? lady taylor. so the big vote is due on tuesday night at 7pm. earlier i spoke to sir david beamish, a former clerk of the parliament. one of parliament's top experts on procedure. i began by asking him about the significance of that dominic grieve amendment, the third of those defeats suffered by theresa may, which gives mps more say if the eu withdrawal deal is voted down on tuesday. this allows amendments to be tabled, which means that the members of the house of commons will have the opportunity to put alternative proposals and have them voted on,

which would not have been the case without that amendment. so this really could be an example of parliament taking back control, to some extent? i would say so, yes. you have be careful about the word control, as parliament can't be, so to speak, in the driving seat holding the steering wheel, but it can be holding the government to account and it'll be much better able to do that with the amendment having been agreed to. there has been endless chatter about how the numbers will stack up and whether the government will win or lose. do you think the government might decide to go down the line of actually pulling the vote altogether on tuesday? i see discussion of that, but it seems to be quite difficult to do. the debate has begun and they would have to have an alternative plan for not going ahead with and i cannot see what the might look like.

so if you're tuning on tuesday night at seven o'clock, how are you going to know what's going on? let's start by talking about the amendments — who decides which amendments are voted on? mr speaker can select those amendments which will be voted on. it won't happen until the last day. at least half a dozen amendments have been tabled, one by mr corbyn, another by hillary benn, who chairs the select committee on exiting the european union. i imagine both of those will be selected. just to make life more confusing for those viewing, the amendments are taken before the main motion, so the house first decides if it wants to amend the motion and then votes on the main motion, either amended or unamended. there will be several votes, and if you are watching these votes, what should you be looking out for to give a clue of what is going on? again, it is quite hard for the outsider. at the end, the tellers on each side appoint two members to count the votes, one counts their own votes and the other goes into the other lobbied to count the opposing votes,

so one from each side in each lobby. and they come back in and one of the tellers for the winning side reads out the numbers. so if you recognise the people concerned you can get a clue and obviously the members can when one of the tellers step forward to read out the score. there will be lots of cheering and waving of order papers before get the actual numbers. indeed. now, if theresa may loses there are lots of different options of what could happen next. are there parliamentary constraints on what she can do after that vote result? the immediate constraint is that she has to present within 21 days a statement of what the government are going to do next in relation to the eu withdrawal. politically, yes, all sorts of things could happen and i think that the labour opposition have talked about tabling a motion of no—confidence in the government and traditionally time should be found for such a motion to be debated. in terms of options from the government side,

it is hard to see what else they could do unless she wants to dissolve parliament herself, but that might be tricky given that the reason she lost would be not all memebers of her own from party were aligned with her own point of view, so she has probably not got that many options. we have been talking about the commons, and all eyes have really been on the commons in the last few days, but there has been a parallel debate going on in the house of lords. now, it's slightly different, it's not as significant for the government, depending on how the lords votes. but do you think theresa may really does need to pay attention to what's been going on in the lords? yes, she does need to pay attention more because in the whole brexit process there has been quite a significant role for the lords and indeed in opening the debate, the leader of the house of lords recalled there have been 68 reports

since the referendum on elements of brexit and many hours spent debating and amending the eu withdrawal bill and the lords has been very involved in all this, but everybody in the lords accepts the meaningful vote itself is a matter for the elected house. if you do want someone to explain what's going while those votes are being held, tune into bbc parliament on tuesday. there will be full coverage of the proceedings in the commons plus live analysis of any and every vote from our parliamentary correspondent mark darcy. now, let's take a look at some other news from around westminster in brief. at prime minister's questions, the labour leaderjeremy corbyn used his six questions not to ask may about defeat inflicted on her government on tuessay or about the impending brexit vote, instead he raised changes to the welfare system. child poverty is rising, homelessness rising! destitution writing!

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 cap, and halt the roll—out of universal credit. what do we see under this government, the economy is growing, employment is rising, investment is up, we are giving the nhs the biggest single cash boost in its history, taxes are being cut and wages are rising, labour would destroy all that. it's this conservative government that is building up a brighter future for our country. the former foreign secretary boris johnson has made a full and unreserved apology to mps for failing to declare more than £52,000 in income. he was ordered to apologise by the committee on standards over his late declaration of book royalty payments. i fully accept the delay was a breach of the house's rules

and i'm grateful to the committee for recognising that there was no intention to mislead the house and that i've been completely transparent, i therefore offer the house of full and unreserved apology. labour peers havejoined mps in calling on the transport secretary chris grayling to take a share of a blame for the timetable chaos suffered by rail travelers earlier this year. the transport committee said he should have done more to prevent the problems. one peer spotted another ommission. some of the railway companies appear to have removed the word "cancelation" from their vocabulary. so you arrive at the station for a train, look at the board, and discover it is no more. it never existed. it is not there. an mp called for tighter regulation of shisha lounges, where tobacco is mixed with other flavours, burned and passed through water before being inhaled in hookah pipes. it's estimated an evening

spent smoking shisha is the equivalent of 100 cigarettes. the mp behind the debate said local communities could face noise, anti—social behavior and crime. the scottish parliament and welsh assembly both gave their verdicts on theresa may's brexit deal this week. let us hear from bbc scotland's political editor brian taylor. firstly, let's start with scotland's potentially direct impact upon brexit. you will know article 50 was the mechanism whereby the uk signaled their determination to leave the eu. it was the process of brexit. the question arises whether the uk alone can reverse the implementation of article 50 or whether that would require the consent of all the other european union countries. a group of scottish politicians decided to put that to the test with, of course significant legal backing. the case started in the scottish court and wound its way to the european court ofjustice, who are due to give their ruling

on this on monday. the day before the meaningful vote in the house of commons. an advocate general for the ecj has already said, yes, article 50 can be reversed unilaterally by the uk, and that is expected to be the outcome on monday. the prime minister has already said she has no intention of reversing article 50, however she may not be entirely in charge of events, and at very least it clarifies the potential outcome were there to be a second further referendum on brexit, which was a topic raised in this very parliament this week, when msps were debating the brexit deal advanced by the prime minister. the liberal democrat advocating a second vote, the snp also in favour of that. their ultimate aim is to reverse it entirely and to remain in the eu. labour prefer a general election, bringing down the conservative government. no obvious common ground

for the parties who oppose the conservatives, but they certainly are opposed to the deal of the conservatives and opposed to any concept of a briton leaving without a deal. that was the outcome by 92 votes to nine, only the conservatives voting against. i was struck by a throwaway line from adam tomkins, constitutional affairs spokesperson for the conservatives, who said the only deal that was seriously able to be contemplated was the prime minister's deal or something very close to it, which suggested to me that the tories are very definitely looking for ways to tweak their approach to this, perhaps the idea of giving the house of commons a greater role in the question of the backstop, anything that might persuade their decidedly reluctant backbenchers to get on board. there was further bad news for the prime minister from the debate from wales. ahead of the debate here

in the welsh assembly on theresa may's brexit deal, the welsh conservatives had called the symbolic discussion a pantomime. by the end of play it had turned into a bit of a farce for the welsh government. for months the welsh first minister carwynjones said it was important for the assembly to send a clear statement of its position ahead of the meaningful vote in the house of commons. so it came as a bit of a surprise when the welsh government tabled a motion that did not explicitly reject or accept theresa may's brexit deal. much to the annoyance of plaid cymru and the pro—eu campaigne group. as well as discussing the substantive details of the uk and eu agreement there was also discussion as to how the welsh government tableed such a dog's breakfast of a motion. i'm told it was a clear when first drafted and became less clear after a special meeting, and less clear again after the welsh labour group got its hands on the motion.

in a tacit admission it had messed things up in terms of this debate, the welsh labour group and welsh government ended up backing the plaid cymru amendment to the debate that called on the uk government to continue with membership of the eu's single market and customs union, called for an extension of the article 50 negotiating process, and by 36 votes to 1a, the welsh assembly explicitly rejected theresa may's brexit deal. mark drakeford has been named as the new leader of welsh labour and is set to become the next first minister of wheels. and is set to become the next first minister of wales. mr drakeford, currently finance secretary, won the leadership election to succeed carwynjones. let's have a look at some of the other stories making the political news. conservative mpjohn howell told mps

that at one dinner party he went to, if guests mentioned the word brexit, they had to drink a neat rum as punishment. while i would love that to be a case here i suspect it will not occur. labour peer martha osamor, mother of mp kate, joins the lords, bringing the total in the house to 793 and counting. if you were worrying about how to do the perfect flounce, watch the leader of the house of commons andrea leadsom, as she knows exactly what to do. it's something like that. mike ashley reassures the committee he is in fact a mere mortal. before anybody says it, i'm not comparing myself to god. debating until the early hours of the morning did not dampen

the spirits of ministers who were still able to crack a few jokes at each other‘s expense. the first brexit secretary lasted 24 months, the second five months, so i'm hoping that the new occupant of the post can at least make it through to oral questions on thursday. that's it from me for now, butjoin keith mcdougall on bbc parliament on monday night at 11pm for the start of what promises to be a truly historic week at westminster. for me, goodbye. hello.

monday is looking pretty quiet for most of us on the weather front and, in fact, if you're wondering about the week ahead, it is not looking bad at all. it is going to turn progressively colder through the week but nothing dramatic happening on the weather front. so let's see what's happening then on monday. for many of us it is actually going to start off fairly bright, if not sunny. a touch of frost is on the way. certainly for scotland and northern parts of england. so here's the forecast then. through the early hours of monday morning, chilly north—westerly winds blowing in. not much cloud out there. just a couple of showers maybe here and there. here's that frost again across scotland and northern england. down into yorkshire as well, —1, —2 degrees but to the south of that it's closer to plus five for cardiff and for london. so it starts of bright if not sunny. sunny particularly in the east but very quickly this cloud you can see out west will be brought in by an increasing south—westerly breeze, so it will end up pretty cloudy if not grey across many of these western areas.

the milder spot will be plymouth, 12 degrees. pretty balmy here compared to newcastle, only around 5 degrees celsius. then on tuesday, slightly less cold air. even quite mild air heads our way. you can see the south—westerly wind and the sort of tunnel of warmth all the way up into the north. with that also a couple of weather fronts. one here which is actually not going to bring as much rain, even though you can see rain here. this is another weather front here which is basicallyjust a fair bit of cloud. so tuesday, across much of scotland, england and wales, probably staying fairly cloudy, with some sunshine poking through. here's the other weather front. it's not making much progress so it'll stay to the west of us, i think, so belfast should be dry on tuesday. and 12 degrees here. 12 for plymouth as well. then, on wednesday, we start to see a little bit of a change. the winds die down and, in fact, we start to develop an ever so slightly more easterly wind, that also means that the temperatures will start to dip. so i think for most of us it is down to single figures. sixes and sevens,

that sort of thing. maybe just about scraping a 10 there in plymouth. the bigger picture shows where colder air is coming from on thursday. in fact, all the way from russia, across the baltic, southern scandinavia, the north sea. you can see that colder air ends up right across the uk. not desperately cold, but you will feel those temperatures dipping away as we go through the week. in fact, let's take a look at london. you can see on monday it's 10 degrees, by wednesday, it's eight, and on thursday and friday around five or six degrees. and at times pretty cloudy too so it will feel cold. bye— bye. welcome to bbc news — broadcasting to viewers in north america and around the globe. i'm reged ahmad. our top stories: the top executive in the huawei fraud case, meng wanzhou, seeks bail, saying she's innocent, unwell, and won't run away. britain's prime minister insists there will be a brexit vote in parliament on tuesday, despite her own supporters calling for a delay. a 26—year—old man appears in court in new zealand, charged with murdering

a british backpacker on a round—the—world trip. and a special report from the us—mexican border, where cuts in legal migration have caused a surge in the illegal variety. it's here that the poverty of developing nations clashes with the wealth of the united states.