order, order! the right honourable lady also talked about, i think, a us congressional committee has correct me if i wrong, received details of a whistleblower if the uk would be sending troops to saudi arabia. complaint against president trump, there has been no suggestion at all. which led to impeachment proceedings whatever the strength and intensity against him. it is simply wrong of feeling in the passions it comes after the white house released partial details for her to say it. of a conversation donald trump had to which these matters give rise, with the leader of ukraine. we must hear what is being said what has been said is that the us the us president says in the chamber and i wish he's done nothing wrong is sending troops to saudi arabia, and called the move a witchhunt. to hear the prime minister. to make sure that saudi can protect itself from further attacks there have been angry scenes the court was wrong to answer or repeats of the attacks. a political question at a time in the british parliament, we have said we would the day after the supreme court of great national controversy. support with air defences. ruled its suspension it is absolutely clear by the prime minister was unlawful. so we have opposition mps that block borisjohnson has dismissed repeated calls to resign. and this video is and delay everything, that our overarching strategic trending on bbc.com running to the courts to block the creator of the first ever labradoodle, and delay even more. he offered opposition mps has said creating the breed a chance to force him out is his "life's regret". in a vote of no confidence. objective is de—escalation, it is a very popular breed of dog, reducing tensions, and we want to see iran come from out but these labrador—poodle crossovers they have until the house of the international cold, often suffer serious health problems. rises to a motion of no but we have to be absolutely unwavering and clear in our resolve confidence in the government. that's all. that the only way that will happen stay with bbc world news. is if iran steps up and starts come on, then! to meet its responsibilities, whether it is on dual nationals, whether it's on the basic rules of international law, not attacking your neighbours. and we can have that vote tomorrow.

now on bbc news, or if any of the other parties, it's wednesday in parliament the smaller parties fancy a go, does he agree that western policy towards iran they can table the motion is unfortunately basically failing? and we will give you failing to stop the activities the time for a vote. we saw, failing to stop i think the people of this country renuclearization, failing to stop hostagetaking, which has... a ladder for iran to climb down have had enough of it. this parliament must either stand aside and let this so we can get out of this entirely government get brexit done, or bring a vote of confidence and finally face the day dangerous situation. of reckoning with the voters and i commend this 2a hours after the supreme court ruled that permanent suspension was unlawful, mps were back at work statement to the house. and giving their own verdict. i agree with the basic ingredients my right honourable friend has set out. the labour leader declined to take it is no disrespect to the judiciary the bait, but renewed his call for the prime minister to quit. we need the widest possible to say i think the court was wrong. this, mr speaker, was ten minutes the prime minister should have done of bluster from a dangerous prime minister who thinks international support, he is above the law. the honourable thing. notjust the eu, notjust the us, but the broadest international but in truth, he is not fit support, and very clear consequences and resigned. for iran if its unlawful behaviour for the office which he holds. in all the different areas we talked about, nuclear, dual nationals, the attacks continue. dominic raab. thejudges concluded the... a few minutes later,

the archbishop had some advice for ministers amid reports that the prime minister was looking there was no reason, for a loophole in the law passed just a fortnight ago, requiring him to ask for a delay "let alone a good reason", for the prime minister to have in the uk's departure from the eu shut down parliament. if he cannot agree a deal. after yesterday's ruling, mr speaker, the prime minister should have done the honourable all that to come and more as mps returned to westminster parliament has just seen after tuesday's supreme court ruling that the government had acted unlawfully in proroguing or suspending parliament thing and resigned. its reputation sink very low over for five weeks. the order paper setting out the commons agenda was almost blank, but there was plenty for mps the last few months, to talk about. the speaker explained why. and one of the ways of dealing order, order. we must un—stick this mess with that is transparency, and we therefore regard... will he undertake that colleagues, welcome back and we must trust the people to make their choice. to our place of work. we cannot trust this prime minister. his time must be up. his days of lying, of cheating the uk supreme court ruled the government will be completely and of undermining the rule of law must be numbered. yesterday that parliament has not been prorogued. the prime minister is not serious. he needs to understand that so they got down to work. the prime minister had flown back actions have consequences. transparent and honest in the spirit and not merely the letter of the law early from new york to update mps and deliver his verdict. even my five—year—old knows that about the actions they take over if you do something wrong, the next few weeks in connection you have to say sorry. with the extension? we always endeavour to be

as transparent as possible with regard to these matters, while still preserving if my son can apologise the confidentiality of the negotiations. the minister was asked several times instead of facing the voters, for kicking a football indoors, about reports the prime minister the opposition turned tail and fled. would send two letters to the eu, the supreme court was asked surely the prime minister can one asking for a delay to intervene and it is no disrespect and another one asking the eu to the judiciary to say i think have the humility to say sorry to turn down the request. the court was wrong to pronounce 00:03:14,892 --> 2147483051:38:22,160 on what is essentially 2147483051:38:22,160 --> 4294966103:13:29,430 a political question. the lord did not address for misleading the queen, the speculation, but he did say misleading the country and illegally shutting down our democracy. the government would abide by the law. that was wednesday in parliament. i do hope you canjoin me i came here today notjust at the same time tomorrow for the latest from westminster. to represent my constituents, but hoping that this prime minister thank you for watching. bye for now. would show humility in the face of this condemnation and this judgment. will he now apologise if not to this place, to the country, and has he apologised to her majesty the queen? hello there. as she can imagine, i will not comment on my we're in the middle of a run conversations with her majesty. of really unsettled weather with no earlier the attorney end in sight, really. general geoffrey cox, whose legal advice on prorogation was rejected by the supreme court, pronounced that this rain at times coming our way over parliament is dead. the next few days with some fairly in a fiery question and answer strong wind around at times as well. session, he said opposition mps looking at the satellite picture,

were scared of a general election. we've got some shower clouds heading our way for today. this area of cloud, just to the north, is going to be they in turn accused him bringing some rain across parts of lacking any sense of shame after the government's actions on prorogation were of the uk on friday, judged to be unlawful. then as i spin right towards the other side of the atlantic, we have the government accepts the judgment thisjuicy looking loud, quite a deep area of low pressure and accept that it lost the case. that will be bringing some wet and at all times, the government and windy weather for some of us acted in good faith and in the belief that its approach as we head into this weekend. was both lawful and constitutional. so rain will continue to be blown our way. mr cox is under pressure to publish now at the moment we've got some the legal advice he gave rain crossing the country. it will ease across the west to the prime minister. with showers following. the winds continue to pick up as well. so it's increasingly blustery, tickly around the coast and hills. as a mild start of the day, with temperatures around ii— 15 degrees. i am bound by the long—standing convention that the views of the law officers are not disclosed outside the government without their consent. degrees. once the sun is up the rain is still with us initially, it will clear away from england and scotland, in the showers really however, i will consider over do that again. the coming days whether the public in northern ireland and scotland interest might require a greater disclosure of the advice given the troubles will probably most to the government on this subject. together to give some

lengthier spells at times. and things will begin to get a little bit cool across the north as well. i am unable to give an undertaking there will be some bigger gaps to the honourable lady at this between the showers in southern point, but the matter and eastern parts of england, but no—one is immune from seeing an odd heavy downpour. and through thursday night though is under consideration. showers will continue to rattle in as well with those brisk south—westerly winds continuing he was answering an urgent question to push the showers in, regularly into western from joanna cherry, a leading figure coast and hills. temperatures than through thursday night, between around 9—13 degrees, in the legal battle. and then for friday we have further showers heading away. let me assure the attorney general the showers will tend to most that i'm not going to call together to give some longer for his resignation yet. spells of rain. and this time it is properly most likely across england and wales. yesterday was a special day there will be plenty of showers for scots law and the scottish legal for scotland and northern ireland. tradition going back it will continue to be to the declaration of arbroath quite gusty as well, that the government around 30—a0 mph across the south of the uk. and the temperatures is not above the law. continue to slowly slump. so highs of around 14— 15 degrees. the northern ireland, documents showing geoffrey cox's even turning a bit cool and vice to the government stating across the south—east. that prorogation was legal have been now this weekend we do have some heavy rain and some strong winds leaked to the media. on the way, so that area of low many of us believe that the attorney general is being offered up as a fall guy for the prime minister's botched plans. so does he not agree with me that pressure showed you a moment ago. to release the advice in its entirety will help him avoid being the scapegoat for a plan

but the northward extent of where that was reamed up by the prime that low was going could change minister and his advisors, a little bit before and will he give the undertaking we get to the weekend. that he has hinted that he is the heaviest rain are strongest thinking of giving today? winds will be heading across england and wales. labour is also calling but it could cause localised disruption. the unsettled weather then for the advice to be published. continues, would you believe it, well into the first part this government stands in shame. of next week as well. that's your latest weather. tendering illegal advice to our monarch and not even able to uphold the most basic but important of principles, abiding by the rule of law. on this attorney general‘s watch, the government has been found in contempt of parliament. now it has been found in contempt of the law. doesn't he just accept he hasn't got a shred of credibility left? i don't know whether in his practice when he was at the bar,

welcome to newsday on the bbc. he felt thatjust because he had given advice that might not have i'm mariko oi, in singapore. been upheld by a court, the headlines: he had no credibility. that is an absurd proposition. another labour mp said the judgment as the impeachment inquiry against donald trump gathers pace. he denies pressuring ukraine's should put the government to shame. what is his view of a leader of the house who persists president to help him smear a rival. in believing and makes it known that he feels the supreme court have critics say they have damning instituted a constitutional coup? evidence, accusing him of "a classic mob shakedown". like any mafia boss, surely he cannot remain in his post the president didn't need to say "that's a nice country you have, if he has that view. it would be a shame if something happened to it," there is nothing wrong because that was clear from the conversation. with expressing robust, i'm ben bland, in london. critical views about a judgment. also in the programme: after tuesday's momentous supreme court ruling, insofar as it imputes inappropriate motive, then it is wrong. rather than being some newfangled innovative decision, this was a profoundly conservative decision by the supreme court, asserting the ancient

sovereignty of parliament. fundamentally, the principle at stake here is that of course, neither that court nor any other court should determine whether brexit takes place. that decision has been made by the people. but it is for this house, the only directly elected representatives of the people, to determine the form in which that brexit happens. geoffrey cox replied that parliament had rejected both a brexit deal and no deal. this parliament is a dead parliament. it should no longer sit. it has no moral right to sit on these green benches and whatever... mps shouted and cheered as the attorney general said there should be an election. they could agree to a motion to allow this house to dissolve, but they are too cowardly!

this parliament should have the courage to face the electorate. but it won't. it won't, because so many of them are really all about preventing us leaving the european union. but the time is coming. the time is coming, mr speaker, when even these turkeys won't be able to prevent christmas. no shame today. no shame at all. the fact that this government cynically manipulated the prorogation to shut down this house so that we couldn't work as a democratic assembly. he knows that that is the truth. after coming here with his barrister's bluster, to obfuscate the truth,

and fora man like him, a party like this and a leader like this, a prime minister like this, to talk about morals and morality is a disgrace. an angry barry sheerman there. you're watching wednesday in parliament with me, david cornock. don't forget, you can find this on the bbc iplayer. now, it wasn't just the constitutional crisis on the agenda. the collapse of the travel company thomas cook was also occupying, and the government had said that it will require 1,000 flights to bring home the 150,000 holiday—makers stranded in 50 countries. the transport secretary describe the situation as ridiculous. we've never had the collapse of an airline or a holiday company

on the scale before. we responded swiftly and decisively. right now, our efforts are rightly focused on getting those passengers home and looking after those employees who've lost theirjobs. but we also need to understand when and individuals have failed in their duties of stewardship within the company. our efforts will turn to working through the reforms necessary to ensure the passengers do not find themselves in this ridiculous situation again. i have two constituents stuck in mexico. they turned up for a flight. they told they were not. no accommodations, no flight. they are tired, they are anxious, they are running out of money. what is the government doing in this operation matterhorn to help people? every effort is being made. i hope he understands,

that hiring 45 aircraft while the market is restricted, has meant this is an enormous project which has meant that sometimes we have the wrong air craft size. what assistance is provided to be for people who have bought flights or holidays that have not yet started? if they were package holidays, they are protected and they will simply get that money back. when it is flights only, they do not automatically get that money back, and they will want to refer to their credit cards and debit cards, holiday insurance and sometimes an alternate travel agent from whom they have booked it. what has been done over the last four to five months, when the warning signs were all there and people could still buy package holidays just 24, 36 hours before the collapse? should we not be doing more when the warning signs are so clear? my constituents have worries about theirjobs and worries about their pensions. should we not be seizing the assets of directors who plundered this company and took it to ruin?

in may, the secretary of state's predecessors had the government work swiftly to introduce the reforms to airline insolvencies that are needed to ensure a strong level of consumer protection and value for money for the taxpayer. this was misleading. the government has done nothing to protect consumer or taxpayer interests. the government has sat back and let the company fold. can we make sure we do not collapse the sector? it is all about actions, not words. in simple terms, yes, as i mentioned before, the review was reported on the 9th of may. i have been on this role since the 23rd ofjuly, but the answer is quite simply, yes, we'll get on with it.

the transport secretary. a minister has told mps borisjohnson had no role whatsoever in awarding a grant to a firm led by us businesswomen jennifer arcuri. a review has been launched in figure this year into mrs arcuri's trading company. he insisted it had been open, transparent and a competitive process. it follows newspaper revelations about the prime minister's friendship with mrs arcuri when the pm was london mayor. asking an urgent question, a liberal democrat wanted to know if there was a conflict of interest. the fact we are in the commons today is the prime minister has been shown to run roughshod over these lands. it would be disappointing if we were to find the prime minister has form at bending the rules for personal or political gain. thank you.

i want to start by saying that the prime minister and his staff have absolutely no role in the award of this grant, and i suspect i will be saying that a number of times, but it will remain the case. he dismissed suggestions of the company not being eligible for the grant. this is a company based in britain, as far as companies, a company with a british phone number. we will review, but we have no reason to think, we have no reason to think that there is anything untoward in this particular matter. but labour said there were questions about the prime minister's character. does he understand that the trappings and privileges of power come with restrictions and restraints? is he capable of

restraining himself? the truth is that our prime minister does reckless things. he is a man whose character renders him unsuitable and unfit for the office he holds. i want answers to these questions, but we all know the broader essential truth. we can all see who borisjohnson is. may i remind the house that is mayor of london, the prime minister oversaw the bridge project which had allegations of corruption and was riddled with conflicts of interest? will the minister reassure the house that there will be no other examples of "friends with benefits" funding from dcms or any other department? of course, i speak for dcms, but as i've said, this is a process that is scrupulously transparent. it is a process that is rigorous and is applied equally to all. this is notjust about money but also about influence. it's been alleged the prime minister, while mayor of london, received trade missions forjennifer arcuri despite her not... can you tell me, on how many other occasions has the prime minister secured jobs for his pals? as i've said, there is no input from the prime minister.

opposition members can say it as often as they like, they won't make it true. the government has concluded iran was responsible for drone and missile attacks on two saudi arabian oil facilities earlier this month. was responsible for. iran's dire human rights record... we took our time to assess the facts carefully and independently. we are confident that iran was responsible. the evidence is clear and there is no possible alternative explanation. this conduct in these attacks on saudi arabia in violation of the basic principles

of international law under the united nations charter. the attacks cause serious damage in saudi arabia and affected 5% of the world's oil supply. labour joined the condemnation and joined a call for a de—escalation of tensions by getting the iran nuclear deal back on track. we have a prime minister openly talking about sending troops to saudi arabia in an apparent bid to please donald trump. as the leader of the opposition said yesterday, have we learned nothing? and on a day when we are also rightly focus on the powers of parliament and the abuse of power by the government, let me close by asking the foreign secretary one simple but vital question. will he guarantee, before any decision tojoin donald trump in military action against iran and put british service people in harm's way, that this house will be asked to approve that action and give the chance to save our country 00:18:55,751 --> 2147483051:46:12,590 from the disaster that would be 2147483051:46:12,590 --> 4294966103:13:29,430 warwith iran?