this is bbc news, the headlines: british mps have, for a second time, overwhelmingly rejected the brexit deal negotiated with the eu. it's despite theresa may securing last—minute changes on the issue of the irish border. cardinal george pell has been sentenced to six years in jail for child sexual offences. the former vatican treasurer is the most senior clergyman ever to be convicted. he was told that he may not live to be released from prison because of his age and health issues. the boeing 737 max is temporarily banned from european airspace, and many other countries, after 2 fatal accidents in 5 months. the us federal aviation authority has said it will not suspend the aircraft. that is it for the headlines at half

past two. time now for a big day in parliament. hello and welcome to tuesday in parliament. as mps reject the prime minister's brexit plan... again. to the right, 242. to the left, 391. deal or no deal. theresa may offers mps a vote is. we will table a motion for debate tomorrow to test whether the house supports leaving the eu without a deal on march 29. at labour called time on mrs may. the prime minister has run down the clock and the clock has been run out on her. this is the

moment the prime minister told mps that this is the time. when it came to her meaningful vote, mps saw things differently. 242 to the right. to the left, 391. the ayes to the right — 242. the noes to the left — 391. so the noes have it, the noes have it. the result was not a surprise, the defeat was smaller than last time, but for the prime minister, it was just as humiliating. mps have been asked to approve five documents, including the withdrawal agreement and the political declaration on the future relationship. the uk is due to leave on 29 march, but the deal would create a 21—month transition period, during which britain would still follow eu rules.

the most controversial part of the deal, for conservative mps at least, is the so—called backstop, an insurance policy to avoid a hard border on the island of ireland. some brexiteers feared the eu would use the backstop to force the uk to follow eu rules indefinitely — one of the reasons why her deal was overwhelmingly rejected by mps in january. on monday night, theresa may flew to strasbourg for last—ditch talks with the european commission president, jean—claude juncker. she claimed to have won legally binding changes to her deal. both sides would explore alternatives to the backstop. but those changes were rejected by a key group of eurosceptic conservative mps, jacob rees—mogg's european research group, and by the dup, whose mps keep theresa may's government in power. that left the prime minister vulnerable to another heavy defeat. struggling with her voice, theresa may delivered a prepared response to the result immediately.

i profoundly regret the decision that this house has taken tonight. i continue to believe that by far the best outcome is that the united kingdom leaves the european union in an orderly fashion, with a deal, and that the deal we've negotiated is the best and indeed the only deal available. she said she would stick to her commitment about what she would do if she lost the meaningful vote. therefore, tonight we will table a motion for debate tomorrow to test whether the house supports leaving the european union without a deal on 29 march. the leader of the house will shortly make an emergency business statement confirming the change to tomorrow's business. this is an issue of grave importance for the future of our country. just like the referendum, there are strongly held and equally legitimate views on both sides. for that reason, i can confirm that this will be a free vote

on this side of the house. that means conservative mps won't be told how to vote. and i have peronally struggled with this choice, as i'm sure many other honourable members will. i am passionate about delivering the results of the referendum, but i equally passionately believe that the best way to do that is to leave in an orderly way, with a deal. if mps reject leaving without a deal, then they will vote again on thursday on whether to ask the eu to delay brexit. but let me be clear. voting against leaving without a deal, and for an extension, does not solve the problems we face. the eu... the eu will want to know what use we mean to make of such an extension, and that house will have to answer that question. does it wish to revoke article 50? does it want to hold a second referendum?

or does it want to leave with a deal, but not this deal? these are unenviable choices, but thanks to the decision that the house has made this evening, they are choices that must now be faced. the government has been defeated again, by an enormous majority, and they must now accept their deal, their proposal, the one the prime minister has put, is clearly dead and does not have the support of this house. and, quite clearly, no—deal must be taken off the table. we've said that before, and we'll say it again. but it does mean the house has got to come together with a proposal that could be negotiated. the labour party has put that proposal, and we will put that proposal again, because the dangers of what the prime minister is proposing are basically that if she carries on threatening us all with the danger of no—deal,

the danger of that, knowing full well the damage that will do to the british economy. the prime minister has run down the clock, and the clock has been run out on her. maybe it's time, instead, we had a general election, and the people can choose who their government should be. the snp said the prime minister should vote to rule out leaving without a deal. as prime minister, it is the duty of the government to act in all our national interests, and that means rolling out no deal. and then we in the scottish national party will be prepared to engage in discussion with the government on securing an extension to article 50 that is long enough to enable the issue to be put back to the people. a glimpse of some of the arguments we will be hearing in the days to come. you are watching

tuesday in parliament. still to come on this programme: more drama from another extraordinary day at westminster. so how did the day unfold? well, let's go back to lunchtime when the attorney general, geoffrey cox, stood up in the commons to give his legal opinion on the latest changes to theresa may's deal. the key question was whether there was still a risk that the uk would be tied to eu rules after brexit in the event the two sides couldn't reach an agreement on a future relationship. such an event, in my opinion, is highly unlikely to occur, and it is both in the interests of the uk and the eu to agree a future relationship as quickly as possible. were such a situation to occur, however, let me make it clear, the legal risk, as i set it out in my letter of 13 november, remains unchanged.

the question for the house is whether, in the light of these improvements, as a political judgment, the house should now enter into those arrangements. paragraphs 15 to 19 of his advice constitute seven sentences that destroy the government strategy of recent weeks, that sink the government's case that it had any chance of securing a right under an international law to unilaterally exit the protocol's arrangements. we've gone, mr speaker, from having an nothing—has—changed prime minister to having a nothing—has—changed attorney general. the role of the law officer is not an easy one, particularly when he or she is a party political appointment, but must nevertheless, from time to time, burst his party's political bubble in the interest of professional integrity and independence of advice.

and make no mistake, that is what the attorney general has done today. because, mr speaker, today the emperor has no clothes. none at all, not even a codpiece. does he therefore appreciate on his own terms that this fundamental legal impediment trumps political considerations, and that therefore, there would be insufficient protection for northern ireland to continue as part of the united kingdom? it is not possible to unilaterally stop a hard border, but it is possible, single—handedly, for the attorney general to admit that all that he's done today is amplify, not amend, the original deal that parliament voted down. to say anything else really is a matter of bad faith. any practical lawyer will know that legal risk can seldom be totally eliminated from any agreement of any kind, but what the parties must look

at is the practical risk of that occurring. and does he not agree that what has been achieved markedly diminishes the practical risk, and that is the key consideration we need to bear in mind when looking at the broader context that what is at stake here. a lawyer i know characterised paragraph 19 of his letter as a minimal legal risk, unlikely to be crystallised. would my right honourable friend agree with that opinion? i simply do not believe that we will be unable to reach any agreement with them. because it is perfectly possible to approach this in stages. to agree several agreements. we will be able to agree something over the next two or three years. the highly unlikely might come to pass, and i have a sneaking memory of a conversation he and i had once in the lobby, when i asked him one day if it would be a good idea,

this was about three years ago, would it be a good idea if he should become attorney general? and he said, oh, no, that is highly unlikely. and so it was, under that particular prime minister, mr speaker. i was telling him the complete truth, as i'm telling you it now. mr speaker, i think i've forgotten what the other question was. i was so taken aback, that was a betrayal of robing room talk. i'm so taken aback by that question, i think i better sit down. then it was on to the debate itself, which was opened by the prime minister, watched from the gallery by her husband, philip. theresa may told mps, if they didn't vote for her deal, they risked britain leaving the eu. not for the first time at a big political occasion, she was suffering from a sore throat — a misfortune that prompted some cheers from the labour benches.

mr speaker, i beg to move. you may say that, but you should hearjean—claude juncker‘s voice, as a result of our conversation. it has been eight weeks since this house held a meaningful vote on the brexit deal. on that day, parliament sent a message. the deal needed to change. in response, the government has worked hard to secure an improved deal that responded to the concerns of this house. i took the concerns of this house about the backstop to the eu, sat down with presidentjuncker and president tusk. i spoke to multiple leaders to make clear to them what needed to change. isn't one of the problem is the house faced in the previous session with the attorney general that we were seeking legal answers to what were essentially political questions? and the political question

that we now face is that if we don't pass this motion, we stand to lose brexit in its entirety. the honourable gentleman makes a very important point. a lot of focus has been put onto legal changes, and i'll come onto the fact that there are legally binding changes since the vote on 29 january. i'lljust complete this. but the right honourable gentleman is absolutely correct. the danger for those of us who want to deliver, to have faith with the british public and deliver on their vote for brexit, is that if this vote is not passed tonight, if this deal is not passed, then brexit could be lost. that argument did win over one previous rebel. she will know that i did not withdraw the withdrawal agreement at the last vote, and today i will support it. forgive me, prime minister — unenthusiastically, but i will support it, because i agree there is the danger brexit will be lost.

there doesn't appear to be the votes in this house for no deal, but there certainly could be votes in this house for the extension of article 50. none of those would deliver brexit. they would frustrate and delay it, and possibly stop it altogether. but the prime minister had less success with other mps. the dup have announced they are not supporting the deal. the erg have announced they are not happy with the deal. does she think she should have reached out across party from the beginning, to seek a proper consensus from this country to give us a chance of moving forwards? will she admit her strategy has comprehensively failed ? there have been alternative approaches to the deal that is on the table that have been proposed. they were proposed at the other week by the opposition and that was comprehensively rejected by this house. i fear this is too little, too late. the prime minister talked about compromise. would she agree and confirm that two

years ago, i and others who sit behind her, told her that there was a majority, a compromise across this house for the single market and the customs union that would have delivered on the referendum, secured the problem with the border, and done the right thing for business? would she confirm that she rejected all of that and the difficulty has been her inability to move away from her red lines? the right honourable lady, the point is we have to look at what is was that the british people were voting for when they voted in the referendum in 2016. we also have to look at the manifesto, that at the time of the last general election she and i both stood on, which was very clear in relation

to those matters in relation to the customs union and the single market. theresa may said she tried to address fears about the backstop. i fought hard to address every avenue of these concerns but the house knows how complex negotiations work and ultimately, you have to practice the art of the possible and i am certain we have secured the best changes which were available. and as the honourable lady made clear earlier, it has been absolutely clear that this is the deal. the british people have been clear, they want us to implement the decision they made nearly three years ago. so let us show what this house can achieve when we come together. let's demonstrate what politics is for. let us prove beyond all doubt that we believe democracy comes before party faction or personal ambition. the time has come to deliver

on the instruction we were given. the time has come to back this deal and i commend this motion to the house. the labour leader, jeremy corbyn, said after three months of running down the clock, theresa may had achieved not one single change to the withdrawal agreement. there is no unilateral exit mechanism, there is no time limit, there are no alternative arrangements. does he not recognise there are millions of citizens out there who are looking to his party, cross party, to deliver the certainty that they are crying out for? can't he compromise, can't he compromise like many colleagues have done so, to deliver the results of the referendum?

jeremy corbyn said labour had put forward clear proposals. about a customs union, access to the market and protection of rights. theresa may intervened. when the deal the government negotiated was rejected house, the right honourable gentleman said that we should listen. we have listened. the other week, the other week, his proposals were rejected overwhelmingly by this house. why is he not listening? mr speaker, i've spent a great deal of time listening to people. people working on the shop floor in factories, people in small businesses, people worried about the future of their families. they want some degree of certainty. her deal does not offer that degree of certainty at all and she very well knows it. does he not agree with me that when we voted on the deal injanuary, what we didn't have was an assurance that in moving forward in this house,

we would have the opportunity in the future, by law, to ensure that if the european union raise standards in terms of health and safety and employment rights, that we would have an amendable motion brought to this house in which we could vote to support that increase and not only that, go further than the european union. that is different to what we had in january, isn't it? well, having a vote in parliament on a potential improvement of rights is obviously a chance we would have to improve those rights. but it is not legally binding. i think he's making a very unconvincing case. perhaps because for most of his political life, which i respect, he was a brexiteer. he's still a brexiteer but he has mostly remain party behind him. is this not the worst example today of pure politics, the pursuit of power, the pursuit of power

and putting his party's interests, and dare i say possibly his self interest ahead of the national interest? what we put forward in the referendum campaign was a principle of remain in the european union and reform. the snp leader said his party would vote against the deal and said the eu had always been about partnership. we have worked to protect our values of human dignity, of freedom, of democracy, of equality, of the rule of law and of human rights. our endeavour to building a society in which inclusion, tolerance, justice, solidarity and non—discrimination prevail. ian blackford. then it was time for rank and file mps to have their say. there were a few voices in support of the prime minister's deal and one supportive former minister was among the first to speak. it is time to move on, it is time to withdraw the withdrawal phase of this eu exit to a conclusion. there are many other political issues that the country desperately needs us to be talking

about and to be focusing on. and yet here we are, time and time again, debating the same issues. this deal has now reached the end of the road and if it is rejected tonight, i hope that it will be put to bed and then we can all face up to the reality of the position and the opportunity that we have. if the eu is unwilling to accept minor changes we propose, then we'll leave without a deal. and yes, i accept that that is, in the short term, the more difficult road, but in the end it is the only safe route out of the abyss. a deal that has delivered instability, it will entrench a loss of opportunity, and it's not progress, it is going backward. further proof today, what have nissan announced? that production of the infiniti car

in sunderland will end. one of the most fundamental principles of economics, going back to adam smith and indeed before, was that if you put up barriers to trade, you make yourself poorer off. that's now going to be compounded many, many times over. plaid cymru will never support a withdrawal agreement that takes wales out of the single market and customs union. harming welsh businesses and workers as it would do. we will not support any attempt to remove welsh people's rights to work, live and study as my daughter has done in paris, in other european countries. let me be clear, it is this prime minister and tory government that has left us in such a state, because it is their austerity that is driving bradford into the ground, not the eu. now is the time to stand up for our constituents and do the right thing for their livelihoods and jobs and we must

support this week, a public vote and put this issue back to the public so they can decide. alongside events in the commons, brexit was causing problems for the government in the house of lords. opposition peers combined to inflict an embarrassing defeat for ministers on one of the so—called brexit bills, intended to adjust uk legislation in readiness for britain's eu departure. the health care international arrangements bill paves the way for the uk to have reciprocal health agreements with countries overseas. but opposition peers didn't see why the bill should cover the whole world. we do not need an international health care arrangements bill. we need a european union eea healthcare bill to deal with reciprocal arrangements. this is the sort of large change that requires considerable consultation with the public prior to green papers, white papers, and then bringing it through the house. rather than rushing it

through as one of the brexit bills, which it is, regardless of what happens over the next few days. this is one of the bills that we were told had to be passed by the 29th of march. increasing the scope of the bill means that we're moving into another area that the country, let alone this house, has not had a chance to consider. a former health minister thought there attacks were unfair. this government is constantly being accused of not doing anything other than brexit. here it is doing something other than brexit, so surely that is a welcome opportunity to do something beyond the thing we are tired of talking about. so, my lords, if not now to extend the scope of our powers to strike these arrangements on a global basis, if not now, then when? because we cannot assume that another opportunity will come this way soon and what will the human consequences of that be? the government said the bill presented an excellent opportunity. as the uk considers its relationship with the rest of the world, it is appropriate that we take this opportunity to consider strengthening our existing agreements, while also exploring possible agreements

with other countries. the powers under this bill allow us to fund health care overseas, to support uk nationals who live in, work, study, and who want to give birth in other countries, while also ensuring we also have appropriate scrutiny powers within this bill. but a few minutes later, peers voted to support the labour proposal, restricting the reciprocal arrangements to europe in a government defeat by 36 votes. awkward for theresa may, but as we've seen, not the worst moment of her day by far. and that brings us to the end of tuesday in parliament. and what a tuesday in parliament. thanks for watching and i do hope you can enjoyjoin me at the same time tomorrow as mps decide whether the uk should leave the eu without a deal and there'll be highlights of the chancellor's spring statement. bye for now.

hello there. very windy overnight. it's still going to be very windy during the day on wednesday. sunshine and blustery showers. we're still feeling the effects of storm gareth. this was earlier on, that belt of cloud brought the rain. behind that, we're seeing frequent showers around the centre of the storm, and just on the southern flank of that curl of cloud, this is where the strongest swathe of winds has been, affecting western scotland, northern ireland, increasingly now running over the irish sea. by the time we get to the early morning, into the rush—hour time, the winds still very strong in western scotland and northern ireland. not as strong, though — 50—60mph. strongest winds over the irish sea into north—west england, into pennine areas, leeds and sheffield, 65 mph. there'll be some continued disruption. it will be windy everywhere early in the morning, and gales widely. we'll also have streams of showers, one in north—eastern scotland,

one into western scotland, over the irish sea into the midlands. for much of the day, southern parts of england and wales and eastern england will be dry with some sunshine. the winds gradually easing down through the afternoon. eventually, some cloud and some rain arrives in northern ireland. shouldn't be quite as chilly — temperatures 11 or 12 degrees on wednesday afternoon. the winds continue to ease through the evening, but we introduce more cloud, we introduce rain to many parts of the country overnight, and the main concern is the amount of rain. the continued rain in upland areas of north—west england, over the pennines and the cumbrian fells, could lead to some flooding issues over the next few days. mild enough, temperatures 5—7 degrees, ‘cause it's windy and it's wet. now, the worst of the rain will probably be overnight and first thing in the morning. that weather front will take the heaviest of the rain away, and then we've got this secondary cold front that's moving its way southwards and taking patchy rain across wales and into southern england. then still a strong to gale—force north—westerly wind will bring down sunshine and showers, most

of the showers in the north—west of scotland, where it's a little bit chillier, temperatures 8 or 9 degrees. further south, could get up as high as 11 or 12. now, as one band of rain moves through, as we look to the atlantic again. this is where everything is coming from. very mobile situation, another set of weather fronts arriving overnight, the winds picking up in time for friday. so some more strong—to—gale—force mainly westerly winds. most of the rain will be across scotland and northern ireland. as that rain pushes down into england and wales, it tends to peter out. south—east may well be dry, and quite warm, actually — temperatures of 14 or 15 degrees. chillierfurther north, increasingly wintry showers in scotland.

welcome to bbc news — broadcasting to viewers in north america and around the globe. my name is mike embley. our top stories. by a huge margin, for a second time, the british parliament rejects the prime minister's brexit deal. the australian cleric, cardinal george pell, has been sentenced to 6 years in jail for child sex offences — the most senior clergyman ever to be convicted of such a crime. it was a clear relationship of trust with the victims and you breached that trust and abused your position to facilitate this offending. the boeing 737 max is temporarily banned from european airspace, and many other countries, after 2 fatal accidents in 5 months. actress felicity huffman is among 40 people charged in a scam to help wealthy americans cheat their way into