welcome to bbc news, broadcasting to viewers in north america and around the globe. my name is mike embley. one of the most high—ranking our top stories: officials in the catholic church, the australian cardinal, the australian cardinal and former vatican treasurer george pell, george pell, has been convicted of sexually is found guilty of child abuse, abusing two choirboys in melbourne cathedral. the most senior catholic he was found guilty on five cleric to be convicted. charges in december north korea's leader kim jong—un but reporting restrictions arrives in vietnam have only now been lifted. for his second summit he plans to appeal the verdict. with president trump. the north korean leader kimjong—un in a surprise move, iran's foreign has arrived in vietnam ahead minister announces his resignation of his summit with president trump. on social media his train pulled in to dong dang station on the border with china 2.5 and apologises for his shortcomings. days after leaving pyongyang. there's tight security in vietnam the old man and the snow — the colorado hermit who's produced ahead of the meeting. decades of data to help iran's foreign minister, mohammad javad zarif, combat climate change. has unexpectedly said that he's resigning, apologising for what he called his shortcomings during more than five years in the post. he negotiated the 2015 nuclear deal that restricted iran's nuclear ambitions in return for an easing of international sanctions. now on bbc news, it's monday in parliament.

hello and welcome to monday in parliament. the main news from westminster — new guidance for the internet age on teaching sex and relationships education gets a mixed reception. children have their first — delay the first sexual experience, take fewer risks when they do so and end up being better, more rounded, more fruitful, happier children. so, hu—bloody—rah. even the likely effect of this going to be in some cases instead of children getting necessary sex education in schools, and there —— more parents are going to keep those children out of school.

also on the programme, the government promises to fix mistakes made on welfare payments. but labour says many people will never benefit. 20,000 people have died before receiving social security to which they were entitled to. that is 20,000 people who will never be repaid that they were owed by the department for work and pensions. but first, the last time the government issued guidance on sex and relationships education in english schools was 19 years ago, before the explosion in the use of the internet and social media by children. ministers have modernised the guidelines to make relationship education compulsory instead of optional for children from the age of four. and there will be compulsory lessons for mental health. parents will still have the right to withdraw children from sex education lessons, except in exceptional circumstances, and 16—year—olds will have the right to decide whether they attend those classes. the new system will begin

in september 2020. 0ur guiding principles have been that these compulsory subjects should help to keep the children safe, should help prepare them for the world in which they are growing up, including the laws as they relate to the relationship can affect and help. and respect for others and for difference. we made a small number of changes that we felt were important and would further strengthen the intent of the guidance. for example, we have made on the ready to reflect changes in puberty, that menstruation and menstrual well—being should be taught in primary and secondary school. giving the lack of distinction young people see between on and offline contexts, we've expanded teaching about internet safety and harms to include content on the potential risks of excessive screen time and how to be able to discerning, discriminate consummation down that consuming of information online.

can he assure us that he doesn't intend to shift the burden of diagnosis on to teachers and that there will always be, also be greater provision of professional health services available. for example, has to consider matching our commitments to ensure that access to a counselling service is in every secondary scale? —— school. whilst i respect the right of parents to withdraw their children from these lessons, i would make an appeal to the parents and say that talk. wouldn't it be better that children and young people were trained by trained professionals in a safe environment where questions can be answered accurately and with sensitivity, rather than getting half stories and uncensored chat and a playground. i think he has made a very strong case for the three terms before the age 16 exception. but he keeps adding these words that unless there are exceptional

circumstances, why have those words been added? under what circumstance would a head teacher overrule a parent, and isn't the likely effect of this going to be that in some cases, instead of children getting necessary sex education at schools, more parents are going to keep those children out of those schools? the intention is to say the long—standing right to withdraw children from sex education, it doesn't apply to relationships education, it doesn't apply to human reproduction in the science group, and in sex education, there is that right. it is a right to request. you put that request to the head teacher and the guidance says very clearly, this is the guide as we issue to head teachers that says up to the three terms before the child reaches 16, they should comply with that request. why, because 16 is the age of consent. i am absolutely proud of

what the government is doing because i introduced a private members bill in september2010 and i introduced a private members bill in september 2010 and it is a shame they have ta ken in september 2010 and it is a shame they have taken such a long time to get around to it. i am delighted not least because if you look at what parties on poverty in so many cases around the country, it is teenage pregnancy, where a young girl having a child before she is 15 or 16, apart from the legality of the situation, will end up having a child who grows up to be a teenage itiuiti as child who grows up to be a teenage mum as well. all the evidence is that good sex education, makes sure that good sex education, makes sure that children have their first, delay their first sexual risk —— and of being better, more rounded, fruitful happier children. so, hoo— bloody— rah! there was a simultaneous debate on sex education going on in westminster hall. mps were considering a petition, calling for parents to have the right to opt their children out of relationship and sex education.

the petition says it's a parent's fundamental right to decide when and how they're taught those topics. it was signed by over 107,000 people. the debate was opened by the labour mp, helenjones, a former teacher, who said there was a lot of misinformation about how schools teach sex and relationships. schools do not use books about a penguin with two daddies. the first penguin in the zoo with two daddies. with all children, they use them with children asking questions, or some that might have two parents of the same sex as they would use a book about a single—parent family, the child who came from a single—parent family. i will, certainly. she is making some excellent points. i remember my mum telling me how frustrating it was when she was a single parent growing up, and she would go to the book store to find some books

about single parents. and there was only one book, and i was born in 1983, and it was about a little boy quit his single mum and we have come a long way, but is she not agree with me that inclusive education on sexuality and on all kinds of families is absolutely vital? i do, and i will come to that later in my remarks, but all of that seems to me, those of us long in the tooth will remember the controversy about a book in the ‘80s that was available to teachers to use if necessary, it wasn't used routinely in schools. the issue of sex education raises an interesting point for me. in fact, two interesting points for me. the first is the issue faith scores. i am not one of those people who thinks that we should simply abolish all faith schools, i think the schools play a crucial role in our society.

and he supported the right for parents to opt children out of sex education. i'm sure that many of us remember the times where we had to have those conversations with our own children about sex education, and however embarrassing they might have been, it was for us, it was for me as a parent to be able to take them forward. the government's been answering an urgent question about the underpayment of benefits to thousands of disabled people. between 2011 and 2014, some people who were transferred from the old incapacity benefit to unemployment and support allowance had their payments miscalculated. last week, ministers published figures, showing that the numbers caught up in the error had grown. so far, nearly 60,000 people have been identified as having been underpaid, and the numbers are still growing.

the work and pensions minister sarah newton insisted the government was getting on top of the problem. the department is correcting some past underpayment that moving on to esa. we realise how important it is to get this matter fixed and, clearly, the mistakes should never have happened. but we know it's vital it's sorted as quickly as possible. the department has already paid out £328 million, and estimates that by next april, it will have spent £1 billion more. but many people will not benefit. thus far 20,000 people have died before receiving social security to which they were entitled to. that's 20,000 people who will never be repaid what they were owed by the department for work and pensions. the department estimates that more than £1 billion will be spent

to rectify this catastrophic error, and we have now learned that it will employ up to 1,200 staff to do so. so i asked the minister — how many people have been pushed into rent arrears, counter tax arrears, debt and destitution? sarah newton said more time is needed to work out exactly who had been affected. we don't know as yet the total numbers of people who have deceased, but having reviewed their case, would have been eligible for additional payments. but where we do review the cases of deceased people and, of course, we are reviewing all of the cases, we make those payments to their families. we are extremely disappointed that the minister that has had to be forced to come to the house by an urgent question rather than doing what she should have done and made this announcement via an oral statement. on thursday, we discovered that the dwp had identified nearly double the number of cases to be re—examined, and that the errors we were believed

to have ended in 2014 have actually continued through to 2015. these kind of adhoc discoveries are extremely concerning and it begs the question — what other errors has the dwp missed? labour feared that staff diverted to working on the errors would mean other welfare issues being left unattended. on friday, an e—mail from the honourable member revealing the department's presenting officers have not attended 80% of the tribunals, they force these disabled people to undergo to access this and other entitlement, being reassigned to address this back to my back—up, and what the department be better off not wasting billions or millions of pounds on avoidable assessments, presenting offices and unnecessary tribunals and overhaul the whole process? i can assure him that we are absolutely focused on making the right decision the first time,

but we do not force anyone to an appeal, it's up to them to consider this or go to an appeal. in terms of the presenting officers, we never, ever intended to send a presenting officer to every tribunal, we send them to a sample so that we can learn and so... i am very happy to answer questions, but i would appreciate it if you would did not chant from these positions, because it makes it very difficult for me to listen and respond to them in the way that i am sure thta you would like me to. so those presenting officers are there to make sure you are watching monday in parliament with me, kristiina cooper. the international trade secretary liam fox has said the uk will drop eu trade sanctions against 66 products brussels says have been unfairly subsidized.

dr fox announced that punitive tariffs would be dropped on sweetcorn from thailand, as well as tinned mandarins and solar glass from china. but he said higher tariffs would be kept on 43 imports, including tires and ceramics from china. the so—called trade remedies will also be maintained against steel products from several countries. of 190 existing eu measures, we will maintain 43 of these measures where they are directly applicable to the uk and have met the criteria to be maintained. ironing boards to aluminium foil, to protection for unknown trading partners for important industries such as steel and ceramics. where measures are not transitioned, this will reduce costs for uk users of these products and lead to lower prices for uk consumers and benefit related industries, such as food and construction,

to provide just a couple of examples across different sectors, the final findings will see the removal of a 34% tariff on imports of solar glass from china. the trade bill which establishes the trade remedies authority, it's still stuck in the other place due to the government's refusal to set out a transparent and democratic approach to trade agreements. the secretary of state confirmed that the manufacturing trade remedies alliance suggesting is correct, that it would have been possible to maintain the existing eu remedies until they came up for review? and be happy except at my party's proposal for a customs union, he would ensure the continuity of the trade remedies and ensure the eu safeguard measures would not apply to british exports. however he has proceeded as he wants, to fast—track the uk into the sort of less regulated economy he has always favoured. of course i want a less regulated economy, mr deputy speaker. it is against that the rules

of the wto to impose regulations and trade remedies where there is no uk production, or we don't meet the threshold. if he suggesting we maintain remedies where there is no uk business and industry to actually protect? to the detriment of our consumers who pay higher prices without protecting anything in the uk itself? an excellent statement, with a good balance protecting our industries against dumping where needed, for giving our customers more choice and lower prices where we don't have an industrial interest. will my right honourable friend promise me that tells same excellent principles will be implied —— applied when he sets out our full tariff schedule, where i hope we will have zero tariffs on imported components to give a big boost to british industry? this is about our economic security. for those businesses that are potentially at threat from being undercut by unfair subsidies, from china or elsewhere, putting our workforce and their livelihoods on the line. kandi secretary of state give us an absolute guarantee our economic

security is not going to be weakened after the 29th of march? it is clear that the haphazard way in which he has not managed to get the trade remedies authority a proper legal basis yet, makes it look as though it is all held together by a box of matches and sticky back plastic. we need strong defences for our country, and surely that has to include strong economic defences as well. will the secretary of state given guaranteed this afternoon, measures to be terminated likely to steve jobs being terminated in wales? mr deputy speaker, i am encouraged by the reaction of uk steel, to those who very much welcome the government's measures. as i said in the small number such as the rebar, we have maintained the remedy where the industry itself has said that it wants to end it meets the threshold. we have not done so where there is no production in the uk or that has been no representation

from any uk producer. that we should carry forward such a remedy. the home secretary sajid javid has been criticised by labour mps for stripping shamima begum of her british citizenship. the 19—year—old who left uk to join the islamic state group four years ago is currently living in a refugee camp in syria with her newborn son. she told a journalist that she wants to come back to the uk, but the home office desk she is eligible for citizenship of bangladesh, through her mother who is a bangladeshi citizen. at question time, diane abbott suggested that empty space of two days, the home secretary had changed tack. last monday, the home secretary said "we must, of course, observe international law. and we cannot strip someone of their british citizenship if doing so would leave them stateless. individuals who manage to return will be questioned, investigated and potentially prosecuted. " on the side of the house we think that letter would be the correct course of action.

but by wednesday, the home secretary had in fact strip shamima begum of her citizenship rights. can be home secretary share with the house whether he contacts eight, the bangladeshi high commissioner or the bangladeshi government before taking this decision —— whether he contacted the bangladeshi high commissioner or bangladeshi government before taking this decision? the right honourable lady will know i cannot comment on any individual case. she will know that in order to protect our national security, home secretaries do have the power to strip british citizenship from someone, where it does not render them stateless. so whilst i cannot talk about an individual case, it should be quite obvious that if that is the power as it set out

in the 1981 british nationality act, the power cannot be used if someone is rendered stateless as a result of using the power. and that power has only been used by successive home secretaries and successive governments, based on expert advice from the officials, including legal advisers to make sure that it is entirely lawful when it is being deployed at all times. the right honourable lady should reflect that it is the job of the home secretary, and she is the shadow home secretary and she wants to be home secretary and she should reflect that ultimately it is the responsibility of the home secretary to use whatever tools are available to keep this country safe. hear, hear! the home secretary quite rightly says he cannot comment on the individual case of shamima begum. however it does raise a more general issue. in that case citizenship was removed after the birth of the latest child. who therefore presumably has a right

to british citizenship or excel. —— herself. what, if anything, are the responsibilities of the british state to that child in this event? again, my right honourable friend will know i cannot talk about a particular case. he will know that if there were any children born in that conflict zone, they are children that deserve our utmost sympathy. the right honourable gentlemen will know that fco travel advice has been very clear when it comes to syria for a number of years, that we have no consular presence so we cannot provide any consular assistance at all. should a child be able to reach a location outside of syria, where we do have a consular presence, then it is possible potentially to provide support with the consent of parents. i should emphasise to the house that the case is not sub judice

as things stand. if the secretary of state for the home department wishes to apply a self—denying ordinance which decrees that he won't comment on individual cases, that is perfectly within his ambit, i say to the honourable and learned lady and others. it is a politicaljudgement but not a procedural requirement. it is quite important to be clear about that, that is his choice and i respect that. but it's nothing to do with the rules of the house. thank you, mr speaker. i am very proud of my irish heritage on my mother's side and my nigerian heritage on my father's side. born in tyneside, i have never held or sought any citizenship other than british. under what circumstances does the secretary of state believe he could strip me of that citizenship, and where would he suggest that i went? mr speaker, a little

like the honourable lady, i am very proud of the heritage of my parents from pakistan, i'm very proud of it, just as much as she is probably proud of her heritage. and she should be. her question is about the law, and what does the law allowed in terms of deprivation of british citizenship. it is set out very clearly in the 1981 british nationality act, it was also debated in this house in 2014 in the immigration act, when the powers were further extended and on a regular basis successive governments have used that power and they have made transparency reports to this house on the use of that power. to mark eating disorder awareness week, campaigners have published some research on stereotypes about the kind of people who acquire eating disorders. the charity, eat, sets preconceived ideas about eating disorders are stopping some people from seeking treatment. and in the lords, peers raised concerns about the adequacy of treatment. hospital admissions in the last six years have more than doubled.

whilst outpatient services for adults are under resourced, and they are unable to support people to be treated in the community. so what is the government intending to do, to improve adult eating disorder services, to get at the minister rightly says and treat these life—threatening severe mental illnesses? the noble baroness is absolutely right. while we have made a lot of progress with children's eating disorder services, we must not forget adult services. that is why the nhs long—term plan has committed to test waiting times for adults and older adult community and have mental health teams. we haven't exactly pinned down what the scope of this would be, but we expect those areas in receipt of new funding will which will expand and health services. i think it is to be welcomed that the proportion of children with an eating disorder starting urgent treatment, within a week or so, remains quite high in london. but it is much higher

than the rest of the country. according to the data analysed by the royal accord of psychiatry. my question to the noble lady and minister is what will government do to address what looks like a postcode lottery, if your child needs support and help with an eating disorder? i'm grateful for her raising the issue and ensuring that we did this across the country. we do not have a postcode lottery. since july opening up 126 dates for children and young people in areas of the greatest problems. elected chance for the former surgeon to make an issue close to his heart. by far and away the most serious eating disorder is the obesity epidemic. which is now impinging on the armed forces. detective seats and fighter planes

are having to be modified because of this. no doubt be noble lord less will be interesting because we may have to enlarge the escape hatches of submarines to allow. laughter i thank my noble friend for that question. while i don't feel able to comment on ejector seats or submarine hatches, we might have to look to lord west for the advice on that matter. i do believe obesity is a serious issue and that is why we introduced the children's obesity plan. time to press the ejector button on monday in parliament. alicia mccarthy will be in the hot seat for the rest of the week, but for me, kristiina cooper, goodbye.

hello there. on monday, the temperature reached 20.6 celsius in western parts of wales. and today, the temperatures are going to be very similar. basically, the record warmth is going to continue for one more day. and it's all due to this static weather pattern. it's been unusually warm for quite some time, this blocking weather pattern, there's the undulations in the jet stream. there's always winners and losers, of course. and on the warm side of the jet, it was 20 degrees on monday in london. on the cold side of the jet, for example, in athens, it was only 7. the average temperatures at this time of the year in london is 10 degrees. the average temperature in athens is 15. and as you can see, over the week ahead, things are going to get a little bit back to normal, if you like. it's going to turn cooler in london and warmer in athens as the jet stream changes. we will look at that in a moment. while it is warm in sunshine in the day, it's cold at night and into rural parts across the south, temperatures could be down to —3 once again. some mist and fog patches in the valleys to lift

in the morning. plenty of sunshine on the way again on tuesday. away from the far north of scotland, where we have a band of cloud. it will feel warm and the sunshine and 19, 20 with western parts of wales and around the london area too. we've still got our blocking area of high pressure close to our shores, that's feeding warmer air around that towards the uk. pushing down colder airfor eastern europe and into the eastern med. wednesday we start to see some changes, more mist and fog around the southern parts of england and wales slowly lifting. a lot more low cloud coming into the south—west approaches through the irish sea into northern ireland in western scotland. sunshine elsewhere, well above average. not as warm as they have been. on thursday, the changes are more significant. because we've got a lot more cloud around on thursday. some weather systems to bring some showery rain. perhaps getting as far north as north—west england or northern ireland. even some bursts of rain in the south—east. brightening up in the south—west later but on the whole, much more cloud in temperatures will be quite a bit lower as well. we saw the position

of the jet stream earlier on. this is how it looks toward the end of the week. a much strongerjet coming right the way across the atlantic. more of a westerly influence. we are losing the warmer air that is coming in from the south, so temperatures are lower, 11 or 12 degrees. more cloud around, a bit of sunshine at times, but we're likely to see some rain coming in from the west.