at least a0 people have been killed in the crash of a russian jet at moscow's main airport, after an aeroflot plane burst into flames as it made an emergency landing. 37 people are said to have survived. early reports suggest the aircraft may have been struck by lightning. more than 20 palestinians and four israelis have been killed after escalating cross—border violence on the gaza strip. the israeli army says more than 600 rockets have been fired into israeli territory since saturday, while it's hit 320 targets in response. the venezuelan opposition leader, juan guaido, has insisted he's gaining support — despite apparently failing to attract military backing. he'd urged supporters to rally in large numbers outside army barracks to demonstrate against president maduro.

now on bbc news, the week in parliament. hello there and welcome to the week in parliament. coming up: questions from all sides about the shock sacking of former defence secretary, gavin williamson, over a national security council leak. in his defiant challenge, the former defence secretary has put the prime minister's integrity and judgment in the spotlight. could itjust be possible that a kangaroo court has made a mistake? a senior labour mp tells the prime minister it's time to give ground if she wants a cross party brexit deal to get through parliament. you did talk about compromises, but it sounds like your version of compromise just means telling everybody else that you were right all along.

i will be learning about an all party parliamentary group on snooker. but first. conservative and labour mps are still busy absorbing the results of local elections in parts of england. both lost councils and councillors, whilst the liberal democrats, independents and greens all increased their seats. there were elections too in northern ireland, and all the parties will be trying to work out exactly what this means for them with european elections looming later this month. back at westminster, the week's drama had come in the form of a shock announcement on wednesday evening, with the news that theresa may had sacked her defence secretary, gavin williamson. her decision followed an investigation into leaks from a meeting of the national security council. mr williamson strongly denies he was the source of a newspaper story about a decision to allow the chinese tech firm, huawei, to help build the uk's new 5g mobile phone network. well, downing street says the matter is now closed, but opposition mps reckoned

there were still plenty of questions to answer, and asked for a minister to come to the house. this matter cannot be, as the prime minister says, closed. the essential point here is that the prime minister sacked the secretary of state for defence because she believes there is compelling evidence that he has committed a crime. but despite that she does not believe he should face a criminal investigation. where is the justice in that? the problem about this particular case was not so much the question of the material that was disclosed but the forum from which the leak came. does the right honourable member who has been sacked have a future in the conservative party? will he be suspended from the conservative party? will he be eligible for future candidacy within the conservative party? and will he have his cbe removed

by the government as well? and finally — finally — can the secretary stand at the dispatch box and answer a very clear question, has the official secrets act been broken, yes or no? minister. in the terms of the honourable gentleman's final question to me, that is not a judgment which i or any other minister in any government can make. whether a criminal offence has been committed is a matter for independent prosecution authorities and ultimately for the courts. many people believe that this really does mark the complete disintegration of this government, where some — and i emphasise some members — just have completely swept aside any scraps of decency and honour in the pursuit of blatant personal ambition. is the deputy prime minister

absolutely sure, without any reasonable doubt, that the former secretary of state is guilty or could itjust be possible that a kangaroo court has made a mistake? but david lidington defended the prime minister's actions. she took into account, as she said in her letter to my right honourable friend yesterday, that there was a difference in the findings of the investigation between the conduct surrounding the investigation of my right honourable friend and his team, compared with the conduct of other ministers and their teams. that is why she came to the conclusions she did. but i repeat, mr speaker, that this comes back to the question of ministers serving in office so long as they retain the confidence of the prime minister. a short time later, peers had their say. the former liberal democrat leader, ming, now lord campbell, thought the government was being over—optimistic in thinking this was

the end of the matter. the truth is that whoever is responsible for this leak, it is an illustration of the continuing and corrosive effect of the breakdown in cabinet responsibility in this government. gavin williamson represents the seat of south staffordshire, a constituency he took over from patrick, now lord cormack. would he accept that it would be sensible, in view of the continued protestations of mr williamson, to reconsider the matter of referring this to the police? he himself has indicated he would welcome that. i think it would be to the satisfaction of all if that were done. the cabinet secretary hasjudged it not necessary to refer the matter to the police. the cabinet secretary will have course have read the comments of my noble friend. my lords, there is a danger of double standards. 3a years ago today i dropped some papers when i was rescuing a dog from the river. they were classified papers. i was court—martialed for that.

and i was punished for it. there is a danger of double standards here, where there is no clarity of exactly what the offence court is. and are senior people in cabinet being treated differently from all those below them in their organisations? any minister who accepts office knows that he or she goes when the prime minister so decides. i speak as someone who has left the government four times. but i am glad that the noble lord has recovered from the incident and his career appears to have been unimpeded. lord young. well, the prime minister had faced questions about the huawei decision when she appeared in front of the liaison committee, made up of senior mps. do you accept that the telecommunications firm, huawei, is intimately linked with the chinese communist government and its deeply hostile intelligence agency? if i may expand my answer

to this question... you will be aware that huawei is officially owned by its employees, and is a private chinese company. however we have robust procedures in place, to manage risks to national security today and are committed to mitigating future risks. i don't think you can describe me as somebody who has been lax in relation to national security. if you look at my record i have been... the decisions i take are decisions that are taken in the interests of national security. you are not contradicting me when i am suggesting that huawei is intimately linked with the chinese communist government and its deeply hostile intelligence agency, are you? i said, huawei is officially owned by its employees and is a private chinese company. well the main focus of that meeting between the prime minister and senior mps was brexit. mrs may was pressed over whether or not she'd agree some kind of customs union or trade tax arrangement with labour

in an attempt to make progress on brexit. the uk had been due to leave the eu at the end of march but, unable to get a deal through parliament, the prime minister was forced to ask for an extension to that timetable, with the european union setting a new exit date of october the 31st. a labour mp reckoned there'd have to be more movement from the pm to get any deal through. you did talk about compromises. but it sounds like your version of compromise just means telling everybody else that you were right all along. what's the evidence that you are actually going to shift position? resilience is a strength but stubbornness is a weakness. you accused me of not being willing to compromise. i have pointed out that we have shown a willingness to compromise. on this particular issue of customs what is important is that we are able to sit down and, if you like, tease out what the different

elements of this is. it is not sufficient simply to say there is one thing, that's it and that's not. we are sititng down and talking through with the official opposition what are the different elements of this and what is it we are trying to achieve. a conservative brexiteer questioned whether the government should have changed the date of departure from the eu? whatever the political pressures that may have been on you on the 29th of march, you were under no legally binding obligation of any kind to accept the extension, were you? the implication of your question is this, we said we were going to ask for an extension until the 30th of june. the house had confirmed that. if i had asked for an extension until the 30th of june and the european council had come back with an extension to the 30th of june, the implication of your question is, i should have said, "no, sorry, i know we asked for that but we don't want it any longer." i don't think that's quite how one behaves in international... is it your position that you would, if possible, like to get the withdrawal agreement through and resolve that uncertainty as soon as possible? that is, not to wait until the 31st

of october but to do it much sooner than that? aboslutely. definitely. that's why the element of fungibility or terminability — whichever term you wish to use — of the date was very important to me. that is, as soon as we ratified their withdrawal agreement, the agreement is that, as soonest we ratified the withdrawal agreement, then we leave at the end of the month in which that deal is ratified. do you have a date in mind that you are able to share with the committee, you are targeting — another go? i'm tempted to say, after the challenge i received earlier in relation to dates i have given in the past, and given the approach that the house has taken so far, i am reluctant to put an actual date on it, except to say i want to do this as soon as possible. theresa may. now let's take a look at some other westminster news in brief. the police minister says forces are open to improving a controversial new consent form aimed at gleaning evidence from the mobile phones of victims of crime, including rape. in england and wales, complainants are being asked to allow access, including to their social media,

or risk seeing prosecutions abandoned. the new consent forms are a reaction to a spate of rape cases which collapsed after crucial evidence from phones was revealed. but there are fears that a blanket demand for access will stop victims coming forward. a senior labour mp quoted from an e—mail she'd been sent by a victim of a sexual assault. "six months ago i was seriously sexually assaulted by a complete stranger. two months after the assault, the police demanded full access to my phone, including my facebook and instagram passwords, my photos, stretching back to 2011, notes, texts, e—mails, and the full history of 128 whatsapp groups and individuals' conversations stretching back over five years. i had no prior or subsequent contact with my attacker. i lie awake at night worrying about the details of private

conversations with friends, boyfriends, business contacts, family, that are now in the hands of the police. it is a gross intrusion into my privacy and theirs. i feel completely as if i am the one on trial." a friend of mine was wrongly accused of rape. it made his life a misery for months and months. bursting into tears and all the rest of it because of the stress. and it was only through telephone evidence that emerged that it was shown that his accuser had been sexting him. former labour mp, fiona 0nasanya — seen here in the black coat — has been stripped of her commons seat after more than a quarter of registered voters in her peterborough constituency signed a recall petition demanding her removal. ms 0nasa nya was jailed for perverting the course ofjustice after lying about a speeding offence. she's the first mp to be removed by the recall process, introduced in 2015. the recall petition process

for the constituency of peterborough established under the recall of mps act of 2015, closed today at 5pm, as more than 10% of those eligible to sign the petition have done so. i advise the house that the petition was successful. fiona 0nasanya is no longer the member for peterborough and the seat is accordingly vacant. she can therefore no longer participate in any parliamentary proceedings as a member of parliament. mps debated the abuse of disabled people online. it followed a petiton started by the model, katie price, whose disabled son harvey has been the victim of trolling. the petition calling for online abuse to be made a criminal offence was signed by more than 220,000 people. those with visible disabilities are often mocked for how they look. those with learning difficulties are targeted for sexual or financial exploitation. and some of the terms used —

and i'm going to repeat them here only to show how vile they are — terms like "moan", "regard", "past—it" — are as vile as the worst terms of racist abuse and yet they are not often treated in the same way. the transport secretary has once again faced cross—party calls for him to resign. his department has been forced to pay £33 million to eurotunnel to settle a court case and is now facing legal action from p&0 ferries. the cases stem from his handling of ferry contracts intended to provide extra cross—channel capacity in the event of a no—deal brexit, contracts that have now been cancelled at a cost of more than £a3 million. it would have been irresponsible for the government not to act, as no deal was and remains the legal default. this was an insurance policy, and insurance policies are a prudent investment, whether or not

they are actually used. each ferry contract overall is going to cost probably up to £120 million, depending on the p80 settlement. so, when does somebody become accountable for this waste of money? it's not negligible money, it's a lot of money. every other week, mps must debate the transport secretary's latest costly blunder. i'm afraid this will continue so long as the secretary of state remains in post. mr speaker, this country can no longer afford this secretary of state. we wouldn't have had to spend the money if the honourable gentlemen‘s party opposite had voted for the agreement. mps marked world immunisation week. it's widely recognised that inoculation is one of the world's most successful and cost—effective health measures. but there are still 20 million unvaccinated and under vaccinated children in the world. i was lucky enough to travel to ethiopia with results, visiting vaccination projects there. and we pulled in to get petrol,

and there was a young man about 30 with obvious flaccid paralysis from polio. and itjust hit me between the eyes, thinking that we don't see that. if you saw the results of polio, you would never think of withholding that vaccine from your children. now, peers have approved a proposed new system for dealing with allegations of bullying and harassment. it follows a row over how accusations against a former liberal democrat peer, lord lester, were handled. he was accused of offering a woman "corrupt inducements" to sleep with him — charges he denied. and when the vote to suspend him was put to the lords, peers blocked it, arguing the process hadn't been fair. the new system would put in place a conduct committee, with a mixture of peers and laypeople, which would act as an appeal body after an investigation by the commissioner for standards. there is a clear need for specific and appropriate processes for reporting and investigating complaints of bullying, harassment or sexual misconduct. those processes must work fairly

and effectively for both members and complainants. there'd also be a change to the code of conduct, adding explicit provisions on bullying, harassment and sexual misconduct. but some worried that peers would still have a role on the new conduct committee. i'm afraid that the report, although well—intentioned, is actually going in the wrong direction. the committee should have at least a majority of laymembers, preferably it should be 100% non—peer. i support this report of the privileges and conduct committee. this is a positive step to what we have already. i disagree with the noble baroness that we can't agree to this, because we can't leave the status quo as it is. we simply can't. it's not acceptable. we've all agreed it's not acceptable. we need to move forward, and this is going in the right direction. the liberal democrats's equalities spokesperson,

lady hussein—ece, there. i caught up with her after that debate and asked her what she thought of the new rules and the planned conduct committee. i see this as a staging post. i think it's a great improvement into what we had before, but by having laymembers there as well, who will, you know, by virtue will be independent, they will have the same voting powers as peers on the committee and be able to consider the same information or the evidence that is put before them. so i think it's a much better system. it's taking it away from a purely members—led inquiry. because at the end of the day, as i said at the time, i don't believe we should be marking our own homework. we can't do that. it doesn't work. we've got to be independent, and we've got to be fair on complainants and on members of the house of lords and the staff. do you think this will satisfy those peers who didn't think that the system last time, as far as lord lester was concerned, operated very fairly? well, i hope it will. i hope they will see that this is moving away from the system we had before. and there's been consultation, peers have been asked to give their views

and their comments. it's been... i think the house authorities have tried very hard to ensure to be very inclusive, to hear the views, and we've had long debates, hours and hours of debate on this, so all of the views have been heard. an independent qc has been appointed now to conduct an inquiry into this. raising all these points and she's spoken to over 100 members as i understand it. report back injuly and those will be incorporated. so the new conduct committee will incorporate all these views, and it will come back to the house of lords. how bad do you think this problem actually is? is there a real issue with bullying and harassment in the house of lords? i can't say how prevalent it is. all i can point you to is the 7a members of staff who were so alarmed by last year's debate that they wrote a letter publicly, sent it out to the media, saying that this was very prevalent and it needs to be dealt with and they didn't have the confidence that we were dealing with it. so we must listen to people who work

in the house of lords and the palace of westminster and to ensure that they feel protected, they feel they are able to report bullying, harassment and other wrongdoing. so that's why it's really important that they have the confidence. it must be... if they are saying, if 7a members of staff are saying it is prevalent, it is wide—ranging, then we must take that very seriously. but have you seen behaviour that you think is unacceptable? i have. particularly on a couple of overseas visits i went on, i did see some behaviourfrom mps and peers i thought was more sort of reminiscent of going on a stag night, you know? which i thought was inappropriate at the time. i can understand after a day of meetings and meeting and greeting foreign dignitaries, people like to let their hair down and maybe have a drink, which is fine, but i thought it went a bit beyond that. so i think, you know, the code of conduct needs to be, you know... don't forget that when you're

outside the palace, and when you're representing parliament, you are still there by virtue of being a member of parliament and you need to conduct yourself in a way that is acceptable. so i have seen that, not a lot, i can't say i've seen lots of it, i haven't really, but one or two examples i have been concerned that there was no sort of curtailment of that kind of behaviour. lady hussein—ece. now, what's been happening in the wider world of politics? with our countdown, here's alex partridge. music at five, 16 mps completed the london marathon last weekend. the quickest home was conservative andrew bowie in three hours and a0 minutes. at four, hello to labour's ruth jones, new mp for newport west, who delivered her maiden speech this week. the labour mp won a byelection last month to replace the late paul flynn. at three, pete wishart became the fourth mp to announce their candidacy for speaker of the house, amid speculation john bercow will stand down. the snp mp is promising to bring

in electronic voting and to hold debates around the country. hejoins edward leigh, chris bryant, and deputy speaker eleanor laing as declared candidates. at two, change uk's mike gapes couldn't resist a really, really bad pun while mps discussed gavin williamson leaking, and that chinese telecommunications company. his way or the huawei. at one, thursday saw local elections across much of england and all of northern ireland, and also meant the return of the bizarre but much—loved tradition of people taking photos of their dogs at polling stations. alex partridge there. now, watching reports from westminster, you might think that mps and peers spend all their time arguing with their political opponents. but there's one area of parliamentary activity notable for its cross—party harmony. we sent duncan smith to investigate. they exist for everything from cuba

to cats, from shipbuilding to scotch whisky, and involve politicians of all political colours. hence the name all party parliamentary groups. but what do they actually do? well, to find out, i swapped the hustle and bustle of westminster for the more subdued atmosphere of a local sports bar, to speak to a member of the all party group on snooker. and to stage my own vintage—style tribute. neil gray says the cross—party aspect of these groups is important. it's a comfortable, more comfortable atmosphere to do that type of cross—party working than the more adversarial environments of select committees or the parliamentary chambers. also key, the dialogue between the politicians and the industry. that will allow the sport to flourish, the participation to continue to improve, the benefits to the economy to be realised, and for the recognition that women's involvement in snooker

is improving and developing and something that we should be supporting. the group's chairman says that like many appgs, this one has a specific aim. there is an exercise element, there is a social element in playing the game, there is a mental stimulation in the calculation of the numbers or the different computations of potting balls. there are enormous benefits for snooker, and it's one of the great participatory sports. and all we want is a recognition, from government and from those governing bodies, that this is a sport. and snooker gets a voice at westminster. it's an official public body, so it's an all party, so it's cross—party support, all party parliamentary group, and really that is in support of snooker. so, it's really about... it's a communication channel, it's an opportunity for us to get our message across, and it's also an opportunity for us to make sure that we arm politicians with the information when important decisions are being made. meanwhile, i better

work on my potting. duncan smith trying out for the snooker world championship. and that's it from me for now. mps and peers are away from westminster for the bank holiday weekend, but if you're still keen to get your political fix, we've a special treat for you on bbc parliament on bank holiday monday. to mark the 40th anniversary of the 1979 general election, which saw margaret thatcher sweep to power, the channel is running the bbc election results programme decision 79 in full, with coverage starting at 9am on monday morning. we'll be back when parliament returns on tuesday, but for now, from me, goodbye.

hello. thankfully very little in the way of weather this bank holiday monday. it it will be a chilly day though, that theme certainly continues. we start our day with frost most likely top and tail of the country. some showers in southern scotland too, this is linked to a cold front, they will be there for the morning with sunshine in the afternoon. then turning across northern ireland, northern england and across parts of the midlands and into parts of east anglia during the afternoon. a lot of dry weather around, cloudy after a sunny start in the south. somewhat chilly here at around 1013 degrees. even colder further north, we could hit around 12 celsius. some heavy slow—moving showers to end the day in northern scotland. as a going to monday night, we still have this weather front here. some further showers times. weather front here. some further showers ti mes. wettest weather front here. some further showers times. wettest will be mid week with the strongest of the winds and overall, the week ahead stays

fairly chilly too. goodbye for now.

welcome to bbc news, broadcasting to viewers in north america and around the globe. my name is duncan golestani. our top stories: more than a0 dead as a russian plane makes a forced landing in flames. survivors say the aircraft may have been struck by lightning. israel's prime minister threatens massive strikes on gaza — after two days of violence and more than 20 deaths. has venezuela's popular uprising petered out? the opposition leader defends his strategy — despite a seeming lack of support. plus, facebook, fake news and the future of democracy. calls for changes to the law ahead of the european elections.