this is bbc news. the headlines: zimbabwe's human rights commission has accused soldiers and police heads would roll if he finds any wrongdoing by security forces. the partial us government shutdown has gone into a second month with no signs of republicans and democrats breaking the deadlock. hundreds of thousands of federal workers are facing another week without pay with some forced to turn to foodbanks. sir david attenborough has warned business leaders in davos that it was difficult to overstate the threat facing the environment. human beings, he said, were so powerful, they could exterminate whole ecosystems without noticing it, and he urged people to not only to care for the natural world, but also treat it with respect. now on bbc news, tuesday in parliament. hello there and welcome

to tuesday in parliament. on this programme, labour says it's shameful that people are still living in high—rise blocks with grenfell—style cladding. as one of the grenfell survivors said, grenfell 2 is in the post. the foreign secretary is put on the spot about whether he thinks there should be a second brexit referendum. i will happily take criticisms of our brexit policy on the chin, the moment labour actually has the courage to have its own brexit policy in the first place. and easyjet revealing the cost of the gatwick drone shutdown, peers want to know what is being done to stop it happening again. can the minister tell us whose responsibility it will be the next time it happens?

but first, grenfell 2 is in the post and the government must do more to keep people safe in their beds. that was the message from the mp who represents grenfell tower. 72 people died when the west london tower block caught fire in june 2017. renovation and improvements to the building a few years earlier had seen cladding added to the external walls to improve insulation. residents had raised concerns about fire safety. labour asked an urgent question after the daily mirror reported that hundreds of people in manchester were living in a tower block wrapped in combustible cladding. the newspaper reported that people living in the flats weren't told for weeks that the cladding had failed a fire safety test. we have repeatedly called on private building owners not to pass costs on to leaseholders who find themselves in these position through no fault of their own. we have also warned private building owners that unless they remove and replace unsafe acm cladding from their high—rise residential

buildings now, local authorities have the power to complete the works and recover the costs from the owner. as a result of our interventions, we've secured commitments from owners of 268 privately owned buildings, 212 have either started, completed or have commitments in place to remediate. there remain 42 private residential buildings where the owners‘ plans are unclear. on this, we are maintaining pressure and we rule out no solutions. this should be a cause for national shame, that over 19 months after the grenfell tower fire, i'm having to drag ministers to the house because there are still buildings in this country cloaked in the grenfell—style cladding with residents who don't know if their homes are safe, just as the daily mail has revealed today. it's shocking, mr speaker, shocking that the government's own figures show there were 437 high—rise blocks with the same gre nfell—style cladding

and 370 are yet to have this removed and replaced. it's shocking that the minister knows every one of these blocks, but won't name the landlords and won't tell the residents. he is correct that we will get to a point where there are a small number, and we are now down to a small number of owners or contractors who put this cladding on buildings, where we will need to consider more assertive measures, and those are under active consideration of the moment. the local mp to up the case of the manchester tower block. if the minister was one of my constituents in the x1 block in manchester, i'm sure like them, he would've woken up this morning, not only feeling worried and scared, but actually furious — furious at the way this has come to light and furious that there is still, after all this time, no accountability, no transparency and no recourse for them in this situation.

we urgently need legislation, and that legislation must also cover leaseholders who can't at the moment in many blocks in my constituency, sell their homes for fear that they are going to have to pay the cost of re—cladding. it's got to stop. well, the honourable lady is quite right that given the story on the front of the paper, if you lived in that block concerned, you would be worried. we have reassured ourselves that the fire and rescue service are satisfied, that everyone is safe at the moment tonight. but there has been sufficient and adequate engagement by the owners to make sure that the temporary measures that are in place are adequate to keep them safe, we understand there is work under way to — i think work has been contracted, but it is yet to be clear who will pay, and we'll be putting pressure on the owners and managers that building

and all of them to make sure that it is not the leaseholders who pay, we are not ruling out at this stage, any particular measure to make sure that that is the case. where there is no obvious freeholder with responsibility to replace the cladding, would he consider that the central government should step in and fund the cost of replacement until the responsibility can be established about who should pay for that cost and then reclaim it? local authorities do have the power to enter the premises, do the work, and we have offered financial support to make sure that it gets done. the government is ignoring warnings, our constituents are going to bed afraid, current measures are not working. as one of the grenfell survivors said, grenfell 2 is in the post. how many more must die before the government takes positive action to keep people safe in their beds? the primary concern for us is that every resident is safe tonight. that whatever measures are required,

whether it's waking watch or retrofitting, heat sensors or smoke alarms or new doors or whatever it may be, that every local fire rescue service can guarantee to the department that everyone in the building in a residential building over 18 metres is safe tonight. that's our primary concern. the secondary concern of importance is getting the remediation done and we are making significant progress on that, and we will be accelerating that progress in the next few months. now, should the public have a second say on whether or not the uk leaves the eu? it's a controversial idea and one theresa may has rejected. labour, however, has not ruled the option out altogether. at foreign office questions, the shadow foreign secretary emily thornberry challenged jeremy hunt over comments he'd made about the idea in the past. can i take the foreign secretary back to our last debate on brexit, where he gave me an answer that wasn't exactly convincing.

so, i thought i'd give him another chance. four days after the referendum, i have nothing but kindness, it is my new year's resolution. four days after the referendum, the foreign secretary said, "we need to negotiate a deal and put it to the british people, either in a referendum or through a fresh general election. we will trust the british people to decide whether or not it is a good deal." so can i ask him again why he no longer believes in trusting the british people to decide whether they want the prime minister's deal? i do and we've had a general election, and over 80% of voters supported parties that wanted to leave the eu and free movement, but, look, i will happily take criticisms of our brexit policy on the chin, the moment labour actually has the courage to have its own brexit policy in the first place. and this morning, the shadow business secretary could not even say on the today programme, if labour supported the second referendum or not.

and that's not policy, it's politics. and i simply say to her that to play politics the brexit in a hung parliament is a total betrayal of ordinary voters. well, mr speaker, that's not a very convincing answer, is it? it's same sort of unconvincing answer he got last time. we always know when government ministers are getting a bit desperate when they decide they need to answer your position of what the policy is. instead, the foreign secretary said in the first paragraph of the article that i'm quoting, this — "we did not vote on the terms of our departure. so his entire argument was that we should trust the people to decide the terms of which we would leave." but let me also remind him that in the same article, he warned of the danger and i quote, "we could be thrown out with no deal at all." so, even if he no longer believes that the public should have a say on the final terms of the deal, does he still at least believe

that they should have his say if we are risking leaving with no deal at all? if she is worried about no deal, there's a very easy way to stop it, and that is to talk to the prime minister. the leader of the opposition talks about preconditions, but not to the british prime minister. the reason is because their objective is not to have a deal, but to have a crisis. and what a betrayal of ordinary families that is. can he at least take a no deal off the table, which will undermine our diplomatic... the best way to avoid no deal is to find a deal that can pass through this house. if you take no deal off the table, you remove any incentive from the eu to help us do that, which is why it would be a big mistake and actually make no deal more likely. jeremy hunt. mps have been told that more than 30 child refugees eligible to come

to the uk are still in northern france. the charity that works with the refugees told the home affairs committee that one child has been waiting more than a year and blamed bureaucracy for the delay. the committee has been investigating a recent increase in the number of migrants attempting to cross the english channel, which the home secretary, sajid javid, described as a major incident. the mps were told that the children met what are known as the dubs criteria to come to the uk. we know there have been beds that are waiting in the uk for children in calais, and somewhere along the way, there's bureaucracy that is meaning that that child is not allowed in that bed and that everything associated with that for children, not accessing education, don't have access to social workers, psychosocial support and counselling to get over the trauma that they've experienced of theirjourneys. so, what stage have some of those children got to? passed the criteria.

they are currently... applications have gone in, evidence has gone and on their behalf? they're eligible and passed the criteria at the moment. they are in child protection. and they are not making it into the uk. and the british government has agreed that they have passed the criteria ? yes. and can you just give me an idea of some of the stories, can you give a couple of examples of what they've been through? what their situation is? there are around 80 beds there in huge dormitories, people have to eat on their beds, we've had reports of very — blood on the mattresses, stained sheets, no education system, so people are being held in these spaces and being denied the settlement and security

and support that they could have if they were transferred into the system in the uk. the mps wanted to know why iranians risked their lives to get to the uk. the answer — family ties. if you have gone through conflicts, or war or persecution and you have family, it's a really strong tie, it's what people need to get to. if you are thousands of miles away from home in a culture that is foreign to you, where the language, the smells, the sites, the written signs, everything is foreign to you and you have a family member you're desperate to get to them and that is repeatedly the single factor that we get told the most of what drives people to get to the uk. that's why they take these risks even though they are so desperate and so scary that they are risking their lives in the boats for it. didn't you give the information about how dangerous it is for them to try and get across the channel, how reckless it is for them to spend their family money,

get them in debt if they do not have the money. effectively in hoc to the people smugglers. do you not give them any advice at all on any of these? you're completely neutral, are you, in all this? we provide information about how dangerous the crossing is across the channel and... in the same way that it's dangerous to get in the lorry, and the risks associated with that, this sort of people to make those choices and he romance with them. what's behind these dangerous boats? it's incredibly dangerous in such a busy shipping channel. what is your assessment of the crossing of those small, dangerous boats? it's clear there is a high price attached to crossing by boat and, therefore, only available sort of to the higher socioeconomic group of the iranian population and there continues to be other —

people are still continuing to use other forms of getting into the uk. on lorries and other routes of passage, there is more and more barbed wire in calais every day, more fences coming up around lorry parks, the securitization has increased dramatically through 2018 and as other routes to be able to across the uk, become more difficult and on a sunny day, you can see it in that crossing that we know is incredibly dangerous, it seems like it's what they reach. you are watching tuesday and parliament. you can follow me on twitter. the government has adjusted plans to introduce a ban on citizens travelling to certain parts of the world to fight alongside the islamic state group. the changes made in the house of lords last week to ensure that aid workers, journalists and others are exempt from entering these areas. there are legitimate reasons

for people to enter war zones, aid workers and members of the crowd that are working for us, the uk government or indeed for the united nations for example. they have a legitimate reason, we do not want to shut that off to people, but we want to make sure that they have a reasonable excuse for going. they said the band will still send a clear message. there are areas which i want people to go to. —— don't want people to go to. we are all struggling in the west to deal with foreign fighters which are an emerging threat because the allstate safe areas

are becoming the routine and members on all sides of the house get angry when these foreign fighters come back and we are unable to prosecute them because gathering evidence for more complex offences is very challenging. seminar is a completely legitimate reason for doing something will inevitably end up in being stopped and only able to raise the excuse the line, so it is much better in principle that they did not commit the offence in the first place and secondly, the last thing i think anyone in this house wants to do is to deter people with a perfectly reasonable motive. from going to be —— going to what are going to be general —— genuine areas of conflict. had a' is she satirical fear areas of conflict. had a' is she satiricalfear —— areas of conflict. had a' is she satirical fear —— film four lines. —— add—in if you have seen the film. it recounts for people from my home

city of sheffield who are determined to wagejihad. the city of sheffield who are determined to wage jihad. the film opens with them, with one of them getting an invitation to a tend a wedding in pakistan which he knows full well is, there is no such wedding. in fa ct, is, there is no such wedding. in fact, he, he and his friend at going tojoin, to be part of a jihad each training camp in the pakistani mountains. although it is a satire, it isa mountains. although it is a satire, it is a commonly used excuse by people who are overwhelmingly going over to areas where there are is high levels of jihad over to areas where there are is high levels ofjihad each activity to train as a foreign fighters with the potential that they will bring back at training and knowledge and extremism, back to british shores once they have been there. the

airline easyjet at a week cost £50 million in compensation and lost reve nu es million in compensation and lost revenues and hit 82,000 customers. drone sightings caused cancellations over a number of days and mass passenger disruption. many flights were cancelled and they want to know what was being done to stop it from happening again. the gatwick incident demonstrated that no—one really knew who was in charge. is it the department of transport, the home office or the mod? the police, the army, the caa or the airport itself? that's one reason why took so long to deal with it. can the minister tell us who is responsibility it will be, the next time it happens? abbey gives fair to say that many lessons were learned in that incident —— i think it is there to say. and the police in the airport had a response but i'm sure for the noble lady that across the ministry of defence, the home office and transport

will make sure that we act rapidly to future incidents. today we are told by easyjet because the £50 million due to the disruption at gatwick. other airlines would have had the same cost, the operators would have had similar cost and of course the public and business will have had similar cost. what is the estimate made by the department for transport of the cost associated with these slightly less than perfect technological solutions? what would have cost the airport similarto what would have cost the airport similar to the losses incurred? one peer said 82,000 easyjet passengers, let alone those of other airlines, had been affected. meanwhile, the airline was planning to fly at more passengers this summer than last. brexit is likely to cause less disruption, listen, listen. listen, my lords. alyssum, my lords! —— listen.

that brexit is likely to cause less disruption than even one nonexistent drone and the only thing falling out of the skies of the predictions of those who prefer to embrace anxiety rather than rational analysis. but the lady didn't answer that. a short time later the defense secretary appeared in front of the mps that scrutinises his department. and he was asked about the get drone strike in the potential for wider disruption. why are we only focusing on airports? how much are we building into risk assessments where there are large gatherings of the public, be they sporting events, whatever. concerts... a risk assessment that would utilise an awareness of potential risks for drones. the challenge in terms of drones and

the use of drones has increased significantly since the olympics. that is why the dft had been leading on this in terms of actually putting more guidance forward in terms of dealing with this, but we are very conscious of the fact that more is going to have to be done and more investment will have to be made, both in the public sector but also in the private sector to deal with this. why is the government response being led by the department for transport? because they have a department that leads on civil airspace. this on 2017, has been put in place, protective measures to reduce the vulnerability of our military bases, airfields and our ships. now, are they appropriate protected now? yes, we have.

finally did decide next week on whether the he will allow them to nominate another mp devote on their behalf. the move to introduce proxy voting follows repeated complaints from female mps by the current system. a labour mp tulip sadeeq was wheeled into the last brexit vote after delaying a caesarean section because she refused a pair with the conservative meaning they would not vote. i am truly delighted to be able to confirm to the house today, that a substantiative motion on proxy leave in case of maternity, paternity and adoption has been tabled today for the houses agreement on monday the 20th of january. if approved there'd be a one—year trial of proxy voting, that news came with an urgent question from a liberal democrat who while on maternity leave had to be paired with a tory mp that went on to vote

twice in her absence. it is the governments own fault that we are in the situation where pairing is entirely discredited as a mechanism for pregnant mps and new parents to discharge their responsibilities. because i was nursing my two—week—old baby, injuly, when i find out that the person i was paired with had voted anyway and not voted all day, no, no, he had voted injust the two divisions that happened to be very close, we had waited long enough for this change, modernising the house of commons is a slow and labourious process, quite like childbirth, so let's get on with that. i hope that on monday night, i'll be walk through the lobbies for the leader of the house and many modernising mps from all to get this done. i can assure colleagues that if and when the house agrees, i will ensure that all have a schema ready to be activated so that members can rapidly indeed, instantly apply for a proxy vote and a nominated proxy can cast that vote the next day. to come and vote.

i lost count of how many times i was called last minute to come and vote. i remember i got back in yorkshire and then received a call saying i needed to be back the next day. my reputation was questioned in a newspaper explaining why had the second worst voting record in his parliament and so, i want to just say to the leader, the reason why what she's doing on monday by laying the motion, i hope we can get on with us on tuesday is so important, is that honourable members of this house should be able to have babies and have their vote registered and that's why proxy voting is such a step in the right direction. it is unacceptable that one male member of this house can override overwhelming will of everybody else in this place. just to get their own way on an issue that wouldn't even

affect them, so can i ask her to take this into serious consideration and what she's going to do to make sure that these members don't play silly games on monday night. i sincerely hope that all honourable members will support this motion on monday, it is clear that there is huge cross—house support, in the in the event if someone does tried to object to it, i will look in short order to see how we can bring it back into reconsider. and that is it for now, but i will be back with you at the same time tomorrow with another round—up of the day here at westminster, including the latest era on brexit bye for me. goodbye. hello there.

some of us got to see some sleet and snow during tuesday, particularly during the second half of the day. some of the snow was pretty heavy like this weather watcher picture suggests. across some of the chilterns, we saw a good covering of snow on into the evening. that has left a legacy of ice and further wintry showers to take us into wednesday. disruption could be likely on some untreated surfaces. keep tuned to your bbc local radio and take extra care if you're heading out. it is a cold start to this morning, widespread subzero temperatures with some ice and we could be looking at temperatures below minus five celsius in northern areas. also a few wintry showers across the far south—east of england which could amount to another couple of centimetres in places, something to bear in mind. there will also be freezing fog patches around. widespread ice and further wintry showers pushing through the cheshire gap in towards the midlands.

could see further ice as well across northern ireland and into scotland with some sunshiny showers from the word go across western areas. could be looking at temperatures down to —12 celsius in one or two sheltered glens of eastern scotland. but, on the plus side, there could be plenty of sunshine around once the mist and fog tend to clear away. we should start to see showers easing away from the south—east corner and just a few others dotted around western areas. temperatures really will struggle after that — very cold start. no higher than 3—5 degrees. as we look into thursday, a weather front approaches this north—west corner. ahead of it, some showery bursts of rain which will continue to move southwards. it might turn into sleet and snow in cold air into the south—east, something to keep an eye on. further west, the clouds will build up with outbreaks of showery rain and more of a breeze. much of the country except for a few showery burst of rain, should be dry with some good spells of sunshine but still on the chilly side. on into friday, the warm front, as the name suggests, will introduce something a little less cold to many parts of the country. we start to pick up some milder air off the atlantic but it will be short—lived because on into the weekend, it turns colder once again.

but this front will bring quite a lot of cloud around through friday, showery bursts of rain which should tend to clear off into the north sea although further showers will pile into scotland and northern ireland. more of a breeze as well so less sunshine around but milder temperatures in the upper single digits, maybe ten or 11 across western areas. it is short—lived, it will turn cold again on into the weekend. it looks like a sunday will be the drier and brighter day. welcome to bbc news, broadcasting to viewers in north america and around the globe. my name is mike embley. our top stories: zimba bwe's brutal crackdown on protesters continues. the president promises to investigate claims people were systematically tortured. the us government shutdown enters its second month. with no end in sight, some unpaid federal workers are forced to turn to food banks. sir david attenborough takes to the stage in davos

with a plea to businesses and the wider world. every breath of air we take, every mouthful of food that we take comes from the natural world, and that if we damage the natural world, we damage ourselves. did you just look at me? how dare you? close your eyes! and the favourite and roma lead the charge for this year's oscars with ten nominations apiece.