the supreme court is told that borisjohnson's suspension of parliament is not a matter for its judges to rule on. the court is considering whether the prime minister acted legally when he suspended parliament. his lawyers say it's not for the courts to decide. it would not be constitutionally appropriate for the courts to seek to do so. that is because the exercise of the particular power is appropriate for political, notjudicial resolution and control. but one supreme courtjudge questioned whether the queen should have been involved in the process. if there are constitutional principles that require to be

policed, in our constitution isn't it more appropriate for the court to do it rather than for the queen to have to be sucked into what may be decisions with political ramifications? we'll have all the latest from here at the supreme court. and the other main stories this lunchtime. inflation falls to 1.7%, its lowest level for almost three years. relatives of those killed on bloody sunday 47 years ago arrive in court for the prosecution of a former soldier, charged with murder and attempted murder. israel's leader benjamin netanyahu is again left hanging, with no clear result in the country's second general election this year. and how would you feel about having your face scanned in the street? we report on the debate raging over this new surveillance technology. and coming up on bbc news: manchester city get their champions league campaign under way tonight but have a defensive crisis ahead

of their trip to ukraine. good afternoon and welcome to the bbc news at one from the supreme court, where the government's lawyer has been arguing that borisjohnson did act lawfully when he advised the queen to suspend parliament for five weeks. the government claims proroguing parliament is a matter of politics that the courts can't rule on. the 11 judges are hearing appeals on two contradictory rulings. one from a scottish court that borisjohnson did act unlawfully and tried to stymie or frustrate parliament in the brexit debate. the other ruling is from an english

court and says that this is a matter of politics, not law. whatever the judges here decide will have profound constitutional and political implications. richard lister reports. the queue outside the supreme court began just after dawn for day two of this constitutional showdown. the legal team for the business woman gina miller argued yesterday that boris johnson's gina miller argued yesterday that borisjohnson‘s suspension of parliament was unlawful, intended to deny mps a voice on brexit. today, it was the term of the government's lawyer. good morning, sirjames. non—just to see ability. put simply, an issue on which the courts have no right to intervene, including the prime minister's ability to suspend parliament. it is a prerogative power that has been expressly reserved by parliament. sirjames said borisjohnson

reserved by parliament. sirjames said boris johnson had reserved by parliament. sirjames said borisjohnson had broken no laws in having parliament prorogued, but that raised questions from the court. would you argue that the prorogation has the effect to undermine the ability of parliament to carry out its constitutional function of holding the executive to account? by definition, prorogation, asa account? by definition, prorogation, as a point i would come back too, has the effect that it has. sir james accepted its meant mps couldn't ask questions and legislation would be blocked, but that, he said, was all entirely legal. despite those features, this isa legal. despite those features, this is a well established constitutional function, exerciseable and to be exercised by the executive. the high court in london has backed the government's view but the scotland's highest court unanimously rejected it, saying... the advice given by the government to her majesty the queen to prorogued parliament from the 9th of september to the 14th of october was unlawful and that therefore the prorogation itself is

unlawful. the murky line between politics and the law is what the supreme court is now trying to judge, ina supreme court is now trying to judge, in a way which also protects the monarch. if there are constitutional principles that require this, isn't it more appropriate for the court to do it rather than for the queen to be sucked into what may be decisions with political ramifications? my lords, i think you may well be right andl lords, i think you may well be right and i may well be in a position of happily accepting that proposition... the decision to put cameras in the supreme court ten years ago was dismissed by some as iplayer for law students. the streaming service usually attracts around 20,000 hits a month. yesterday though, for a million people logged in to watch —— over 4 million people. the outcome of this courtroom drama will affect us all. richard lister, bbc news. and plenty of demonstrators here outside the supreme court but let's get the latest from our legal correspondent

clive coleman. richard talking about the murky line between politics and the murky line between politics and the law. what did you make of the government's case this morning? sir james eadie's submission was absolutely shot through with this idea that this isn't a matter for the court. our occasion is essentially a political process, it is shot through with political considerations. you know, when you talk about prorogued parliament, how long should it be prorogued for? this is not an answer the court can answer, he said it was an u na nswera ble answer, he said it was an una nswerable question answer, he said it was an unanswerable question for answer, he said it was an una nswerable question for the unanswerable question for the court and he said it was right that a court should design a timetable for parliamentary sittings and parliamentary sessions. parliament can do that, it has done it in the past, so this really was strictly a matter not for the courts, but a couple of really interesting interventions. lord wilson towards the end asked sirjames eadie why there was no witness statement from anyone in government setting out that what the government has said we re that what the government has said were the reasons for prorogation was true? that seemed to rather take sir

james back but he said you have the documents that you have. another awkward question, lord kerr said to sirjames, do you agree that the five—week prorogation gave the government a political advantage? sirjames again slightly taken aback said, well, perhaps it did but that is not unlawful. it is difficult to read judges, sometimes they stress test arguments but those were two tough questions for the government. clive, thank you very much. meanwhile, the european parliament has voted in favour of a resolution calling for the uk to leave the eu with a deal. the vote is non—binding but meps insisted any agreement has to include protections for the irish border and economy, equivalent to the so—called backstop in the existing deal. adam fleming reports from strasbourg. this is one ofjean—claudejuncker‘s last trips to the european parliament before he retires next month and he wants his legacy to be

solidarity with ireland, not ditching them to side with britain. the european union has shown great unity of purpose, with solidarity with the member states most affected. this unity is almost pushed to its resources but it will continue to guide me over the next few weeks and i'm sure it will continue to guide this house also in the future. senior eu figures also used this as an opportunity to give a thumbs down to one of boris johnson's big ideas, which is to give more power to the northern ireland assembly at stormont before and after brexit. the backstop can also not be unilaterally taken by stormont because that is not a safety net, yet a permanent instrument for blackmailing during the coming negotiations. translation: it is up to the uk government to ensure the support of

the northern ireland institutions to the northern ireland institutions to the withdrawal agreement and it would be signed on behalf of all of the uk. we are open to any uk proposal and are willing to work day and night towards progress. and the prime minister's chaotic trick to luxembourg earlier this week, where his luxembourg dish counterpart gave a press conference without him, continues to reverberate. i would suggest that events that we have seen across europe this week do not indicate that good faith exists. i am of course referring to the pipsqueak prime minister of luxembourg. course referring to the pipsqueak prime minister of luxembourglj thought we should go and we should speak to the people and tell them to have respect, to prime minister johnson, and this was really my goal. when i see that people said i wa nted goal. when i see that people said i wanted to blame, i wanted to humiliate, i have to say this was really not what we wanted. i think

the uk are our partners, our friends. but look how few meps came to the chamber to listen to this update this morning. there may be brexit fireworks at home and abroad, but there is boredom here. and let's speak to adam in strasbourg. assess for us they significance, then, of what has been said and decided there? well, when it comes to the discussions between the uk and the eu about a revised brexit deal and whether any tweaks are possible, there has been good news and bad news. good news for the uk in the sense that michel barnier seemed to be giving a cautious welcome to the british idea that northern ireland would have the same rules as ireland when it comes to plant and animal health and agriculture, that that is seen as a step in the right direction. however, michel barnier seemed to be pooh—poohing the other big idea from the uk, that you could make the backstop or what replaces it more democratic by giving the northern

ireland assembly at stormont a greater say. the eu thinks that could work a bit in some areas but isn't the solution and they might not be able to live with that, but i think the really significant thing came from jean—claude juncker, speaking there in english. he is leaving office in a few weeks' time. lots of people in the uk are wondering, does mr deal maker extraordinaire wants his legacy to bea extraordinaire wants his legacy to be a deal with the uk rather than onodi or brexit? which means he will put pressure on ireland to get an agreement —— mac or a node or brexit. today, he was hinting strongly that he will not do that and he wants his legacy to be sticking up for one of the countries that will be most affected by brexit. adam fleming, thank you. we'll have more coverage of the supreme court on the bbc news channel. but, for now, back to reeta in the studio. thanks, ben. borisjohnson has been heckled during a visit to a hospital in north—east london. the parent of a child there said the nhs was being destroyed and that the situation

was "not acceptable". here's what happened. there are not enough people on this ward. doctors, there are not enough nurses, it is not well—organised enough. the nhs is being destroyed. it is being destroyed. it is being destroyed and now you have come here for a press opportunity. actually, there are no press here. what do you mean there are no press here? who are those people? sir, could you please stop raising your voice? i'm actually here to find out what we can do... (indistinct) that's not going to fix things now. it's a bit late, isn't it? i mean, years and years and years of the nhs being destroyed. and you are telling me there are no press here? there are no press here? as faras i'm as far as i'm aware, this is not... this is a press opportunity. you didn't invite the press here?

you didn't ask them to come? you don't have a press handler back there? (indistinct) well, fine. in your la—la land, believe whatever you want. thank you. the prime minister a little earlier there, and encounter at a hospital with the parent of a child. inflation fell to its lowest level for almost three years last month. the rise in the cost of living, as measured by the consumer prices index, was 1.7% in august — that's compared with 2.1% injuly. our economics correspondent, andy verity, joins me now. this is something of a surprise. what's led to it? economists were only expecting about i.9%, so down a little bit from last time. the ostensible reason was computer games getting cheaper between july and august, they were cut by 5%, those prices. but, actually, also, the cost of living has been given a helping hand by the global economic slowdown, so if you look at inflation coming down the

pipeline, the producer prices, those prices actually dropped, they didn't rise. the prices that they are paying for their goods, their raw materials, that they need for the supplies to make their goods. you will see that figure there of —0.8%, and that is because raw materials worldwide are getting cheaper, in particular the cost of fuel. because there is less economic activity and it is not growing as fast around the world, the upward pressure on petrol prices is less. if you look at the prices is less. if you look at the price of brent crude, it is down by i9%. so that is one of the reasons there has been relief on the cost of living. and then if you strip out volatile market —— volatile things like food and fuel, you can get the core inflation figure, which is well below target which means there is very little pressure on the bank of england to raise interest rates to contain the cost of living. on the markets now, traders are betting that the next move in interest rates

will be down and nothing at all is likely to happen to interest rates in the meantime, according to them, for the next year. 0k, andy, thank you. a nursery worker who abused toddlers in her care at a nursery in plymouth and was jailed in 2009 has been released from prison. the parole board ruled earlier this month that vanessa george no longer posed a significant risk to the public. she has been banned from entering two counties, devon and cornwall, and is under strict licence conditions. the first hearing has taken place in a controversial criminal case against a former british soldier over the events of bloody sunday in londonderry 47 years ago. the man — known as soldier f — is facing two charges of murder and five of attempted murder. soldier f did not make an appearance at court, but 28 relatives of people killed on bloody sunday watched proceedings from the public gallery. our ireland correspondent emma vardy reports. a moment of reflection in the bogside, a place forever

synonymous with one of the darkest days of the troubles. families of the victims of bloody sunday have campaigned for four and half decades. for a long time, the possibility any soldier could face prosecution seemed extremely remote. today, families retraced part of the bloody sunday civil rights march before making their way to the courthouse. it was a very significant event for us on a journey towards achieving the third and final demand of a bloody sunday justice campaign. a prosecution of a soldier for murder and attempted murder on bloody sunday. what does it mean to you to be here today? it's a day where we have campaigned for 47 or 48 years to make somebody accountable for what happened to our relatives. this is the moment it starts. what do you say to those who argue that veterans from the troubles

should not be brought back to court? people are responsible for their actions. it took us 47, 48 years to arrive here because of the system and the society we lived in. they are no less answerable to the law than i am. in 1972 this civil rights march had began peacefully, but after rioting broke out the parachute regiment opened fire. soldier f is facing charges for the murders ofjames wray and william mckinney and four charges of attempted murder and attempted murder against people unknown. he was not required to come to court today. it was a short procedural hearing and the case has now been adjourned until december. today was a very symbolic one for families but it may take many months to reach a full trial. and there are calls for soldier f's

identity to be made public. at present, soldier f retains his anonymity on an interim basis. we intend to make submissions to the public prosecution service that soldier f is prosecuted in a transparent manner. the prosecution of veterans remains extremely divisive and the british government is funding soldier f's defence. but the families hope their fight forjustice is moving forward. our top story this lunchtime. the supreme court is told that borisjohnson‘s suspension of parliament is not a matter for its judges to rule on. the court is considering whether the prime minister acted legally when he suspended parliament. coming up on bbc news,

former rangers player fernando ricksen has died at the age of 43, after suffering from motor neurone disease. for the second time this year, a general election in israel appears to have produced no clear winner. the country is heading for more political deadlock, with exit polls suggesting a result is too close to call, and that no party has won enough seats to form a government. benjamin neta nyahu, israel's longest—serving leader, has said he'll annex territory in the occupied west bank if he is returned to power. barbara plett usher reports. the veteran survivor of israeli politics has suffered a blow. benjamin netanyahu wasn't able to muster the majority to form a government. if the exit polls are right, his likud party may even have lost seats to the opposition. that leaves him fewer options to defend against possible indictments on corruption charges, but he's nowhere close

to admitting defeat. translation: we are still awaiting the final results, but one thing is clear. the state of israel is at an historicjuncture in time. we are facing immense opportunities and immense challenges. security and diplomatic challenges, headed by the existential threat that israel faces from iran and its proxies. and we are fighting them tirelessly and fearlessly. a sense of victory at the headquarters of the main opposition blue and white party. its leader benny gantz is hoping the results will give him leverage to form a broad unity government, with likud, but without neta nyahu. those would be the opening terms, anyway. translation: we await the final results. we will see how things develop. for a long time, we have been busy.

now it's time to really run. we'll wait another day or two days. we wish the people of israel a good and desirable unity government. when things calm down a bit, we will start our path. a lot hinges on this man, avigdor lieberman, netanyahu's one—time ally, who has won enough seats to serve as kingmaker. neither side can form a government without him. translation: there is one and only option, a national unity government, broad, liberal government. we say this again this time that we won't need any other option. in fact, israel's arab citizens put in a strong showing despite — or perhaps because of — netanyahu's harsh campaign rhetoric against them. they've increased their power to influence the government, if notjoin it. the election has left israelis confused and uncertain, racing for fractious coalition talks that will test neta nyahu's

political instincts, and wondering what it will mean for the direction of their country. the use of live facial recognition technology — that's using a camera to scan your face in the street — is controversial. a group of more than 60 politicians, academics, lawyers and campaigners are urging police forces and private companies to stop using it for public surveillance. supporters say it can help to find terror suspects and protect the public. but for critics, the technology is inaccurate and intrusive. catrin nye reports. many of us have already used facial recognition technology. so this phone registers my face and then it can unlock using it. automatic passport gates also use it, and around the world, police forces and private companies are adopting this technology.

now it's live facial recognition tech, where your face can be checked against a watchlist in real time, that's really concerning privacy campaigners. in the uk there have been trials of this check by police in london and south wales. this new statement calls on uk police and on private companies to immediately stop using it for public surveillance. it's been coordinated by the group big brother watch. what we're doing is putting this to government and parliament to say, please can we open this debate and have this conversation? but, for goodness' sake, while that conversation is going on, there is now a crisis, a surveillance crisis, on our hands, and it needs to be stopped urgently. i've come to a private company providing this check i've come to a private company providing this tech to see how it works. digital barriers mainly supplies law enforcement organisations worldwide. so let's think about some real—world use cases. so i'm in the counterterrorism business and i know there are five

individuals that want to do harm on a massive scale to the public. would you have public support to use facial recognition to try to intercept that group of individuals before they can do harm? i would suggest almost categorically you would. i'll give you the opposite example. an individual has been kicked out of the pub, the pub has taken a photo of that individual. should that individual then be prevented from getting into that establishment and other establishments because of that incident? i think you'll have very little public concern for that example. unfortunately there's no clarity or regulation that governs either use case. tony porter is the uk's surveillance camera commissioner. he thinks there must be a set of strict standards in place governing how this technology's used before it spreads and has any formal adoption by police forces. i think there should be a single standard that incorporates the type of equipment, so type approval. there should be a standard around its sighting. there should be standards on its efficiency and effectiveness. just last week, a group of musicians added their voices to calls for restrictions on facial recognition.

in this case, at gigs. this is a debate that's only getting louder. catrin nye, bbc news. the government has told the bbc that it may not stick to european union standards for home appliances, such as washing machines and vacuum cleaners after brexit. if that happens, it will affect our energy use, which has declined since the eu standards came into force, helping the uk to meet its climate change targets. our environment analyst roger harrabin has more. vacuum cleaners whir. welcome to derbyshire's vacuum cleaner museum. some machines here use lots of energy. others use very little. recent eu standards on efficiency banned the energy—guzzlers. this model, for instance, uses a whopping 1800 watts of electricity. but how hard does it suck? so put it on there and lift it on and off and you

can feel the suction. can you feel the suction? quite strong, yeah. but this model gives more suction... from less electricity. that's fantastic! that's a quarter of the electricity used of the other machine and far, far more suction. yeah, it's all about better design and better planning rather than increasing the wattage to compensate for bad design. the government told the bbc that it may stick with eu energy efficiency standards like these after brexit. or it may not. the bbc‘s online energy briefing, published today, shows the recent effect of eu rules. energy use going steadily down. other factors are at play. like the drive by firms such as the mining company cemex to reduce their energy bills and carbon emissions. all of the electrical gear on this

site has energy sensors fitted. and those sensors send readings to this kit here, which transfers information to our mobile phones and to our laptops. with the data that gives us, we've been able to make a number of energy savings on this site. taxes and grants on things like cars are another way of nudging people to use less energy. this is a nissan duke, petrol, and clearly if you fill this up at the pump, roughly 60% of the cost of that fuel will actually be taxation. as an alternative, roger, this zero—emission nissan leaf is completely exempt from vehicle excise duty, saving you that £145 per year. and secondly, when you fill this up at home from your electricity supply, you are paying just 5% tax. yet another related factor is the way we behave. the fashion industry is a massive user of energy. with concern for the environment at a high, more people are reported to be buying used clothes.

people are getting the message increasingly and caring more that fast fashion does immense harm to the environment and the world's poorest people. all these things together won't solve the uk's energy problems but they will help a bit. roger harrabin, bbc news. does my carbon footprint look big in this? and for more, you can visit our website bbc.co.uk/energy. you'll find special reports, features and analysis there. you can also download our energy briefing document. if you want to share the guide with friends, family and colleagues, do remember to use the hashtag bbcenergybriefing. in the last few minutes, and 80—year—old woman has been found not guilty of murdering her husband, who had terminal bowel cancer. our correspondent sian lloyd is at the crown court. tell us what happened.

the not guilty verdicts on manslaughter and murder were returned. dennis ecclestone was in the advanced stages of bowel cancer. he had refused any treatment. relatives had found the couple both in conscious that the family home last year. they had taken an overdose of prescription medicine. mrs ecclestone survived following hospital treatment and the court had heard she had later told a mental health nurse questioning her that her husband didn't know there was a potentially lethal dose in the drink. she was later arrested and charged with murder but when she was questioned by police, she said she had been confused and didn't know what she was saying, and she said they had always been tended to go together —— they had always intended together —— they had always intended to go together and take their own lives, and on the night of the 18th of debris, mr ecclestone simply said he could not go on, which is when

they had ta ken he could not go on, which is when they had taken the overdose of medicine. —— the 18th of february. the family members also told the jury the family members also told the jury that they had heard both their pa rents jury that they had heard both their parents discussing taking their own lives. now, the family have been in court during this three week trial. there were gasps from the public gallery and we are expecting the family and mrs ecclestone to come out and speak to us shortly outside the court with a family statement. thank you. time for a look at the weather. thank you. a quiet few days and plenty of sunshine as well. that is certainly the picture at the moment. to the south of the uk, almost faultless blue skies but there are exceptions to the rule, and as we cast our eye further north, scotland, more cloud around with quite persistent drizzling rain for some of us as well. that is the biggest talking point for