of testing for coronavirus has been described as "inadequate" by the country's leading public health official. dr anthony fauci's comments contrast with president trump's earlier assertion that the us had what he called "a tremendous testing set up". the outbreak has pushed global stock markets into spectacular falls — it was the worst day on wall street since 1987, and in the last couple of hours japan's nikkei index fell more than 10%, while the hang seng in hong kong opened 7% down. a in hong kong opened 7% down. judge in the us har immediate ajudge in the us has ordered the immediate release from prison of the former intelligence analyst chelsea manning who has been detained since last may. according to her lawyer she is recovering in hospitalfrom an attempt to commit suicide. now on bbc news,

thursday in parliament. hello and welcome to thursday in parliament. as the prime minister announces the next stage of the government's coronavirus plan, a health minister warns against closing down every public space, event or business. you can suppress circulation. but the moment you lift those restrictions, the virus spreads with a vengeance. mps debate the budget. a labour member reckons it's a radical change. it's a testament to the party opposite's capacity for reinvention, its hunger for power. and the bbc defends the letters it sends out chasing up viewers who haven't paid their licence fee. what behavioural research — and, if you like, nudge economics —

teaches you that a number of letters sometimes are needed. but, first, borisjohnson has announced that the government is moving to the next stage of its coronavirus action plan, describing the outbreak as the worst public health crisis for a generation with more families losing loved ones before their time. from friday, all people with flu like symptoms a fever and persistent cough — are being asked to isolate at home for seven days. all school trips abroad are to be banned. older people and those with pre—existing health conditions are being told not to go on cruises. but he said schools would not close and major sporting events would not be banned for now. overnight in the us, president donald trump announced sweeping travel restrictions on 26 european countries, in a bid to combat the spread of the coronavirus. the ban applies to travellers from countries which are members of the eu's border free travel area. the uk, ireland and other non schengen countries are unaffected. us citizens are also exempt.

in the lords, one peer wondered about the consequences of that decision. a considerable amount of commercial cargo is carried on passengerflights, including medicine and vital medical equipment, plus, obviously, time sensitive exports. now, while the brunt will be borne by our european neighbours, it will undoubtedly have a knock on effect on supplies within the united kingdom. what discussions is the government planning to have with the airlines to ensure that these vital medicines, these vital medical supplies, come through? the supply of medicines is of concern, we have already built substantial stockpiles of all medicines that we feel we need. in terms of the implications of president trump's declaration, we are working

through what those might mean. labour pointed out that other countries were taking a very different approach to the uk. last night, atletico madrid fans arrived, and as it turned out, celebrated in liverpool, again, which would not have been held in madrid because of social distancing procedures. can the noble lord please explain again the thinking about why we are not taking more stringent social distancing measures? and i gather from social media, literally, just now, that the decision in the republic of ireland is to close their schools. the evidence suggests that children, thankfully, are not strongly affected by this virus, if at all. and so in the balance between the social and economic effects, particularly on the clinical and care workers, of closing schools, and taking out mums and dads from the workplace, versus the safety of the children, the balance of opinion

of the chief medical officer, and those who advise him, is that closing schools is not the correct option in the uk today. the data paints a very worrying picture. japan and korea top the oecd table for hospital beds per thousand with 13 and 12, italy has 3.2, in the uk 2.5. and therefore, can i ask the minister what is happening to try and ensure that we have the itu beds and the ventilators that will be needed for the more severe cases, which is the news from italy has shown has been really problematic. yes, pressure is inevitable. there will be huge pressures on the people and the resources at every level, particularly on front line and primary care, but we are working extremely hard to ensure that they have the physical manpower and administrative resources that they need to meet the challenge.

if we look abroad to japan and china, it is clear that it's not as inevitable as the government assume that this will become widely spread through the population. the extraordinary fact is that in hubei province, the epicentre of the disease, the proportion of the population who caught it was .1%. so how are we hearing our experts talking about up to 80% of our population? this cannot be right. if you bring to bear intense social behaviour restrictions on a population, you can temporarily suppress the spread of the virus. if you ask the entire population to stay at home, and you close down every business, every public space, every event, you can suppress circulation.

but the moment you lift those restrictions, the virus spreads with a vengeance. it is often those who are most vulnerable who have been hit with a second peak that can take out the provisions needed to support them, and that is the primary concern. so the objective of the government is to manage the situation in a way that the virus spreads in as limited a way as possible, but in a way that is spread out over time to allow medical and social care resources to be given to those who need support. in the commons, the leader of the house, jacob rees—mogg, told mps that emergency legislation to deal with the covid—i9 outbreak would be brought in subject to talks between labour and the tories. but he said, at this stage, he couldn't give any more details. a labour mp wondered if the coronavirus outbreak might impact the brexit trade talks. i do wonder whether there is going to be sufficient

capacity in the system to finalise our new trading arrangements with the eu. so asking in all sincerity whether, in these circumstances, is it appropriate to begin considering an extension to the transition period? there is absolutely no need to extend the transition period. a tory praised parliament's "keep calm and carry on" attitude. despite the anxiety that the country, the whole country is feeling about the coronavirus, can hejoin with me in recording our thanks to everyone who works in this place, and will keep the show on the road, because doesn't that set the best possible example to the rest of the country that we should keep things going and remain calm, in order to make sure that we carry on making rational decisions in this crisis. jacob rees—mogg agreed, but not everyone was quite so relaxed about the risk at westminster. an snp mp suggested the commons should look at alternatives to the traditional voting system where mps troop through the division

lobbies a process that can take up to 15 minutes. we could use the deferred decision procedure, instead of having to stand in lobbies for up to 20 minutes in an extremely confined space with 600 other people. that could be done from the budget debate onwards, for as long as this emergency lasts. we could also look at ways in which people are able to vote without having to be here for an extended period of time. jacob rees—mogg had checked out the health risks of voting. after the commission yesterday, i went into the division lobby with the expert who presented to us from public health england, and his view, which i'm allowed to share with the house, is that division lobbies are not a high risk, and that the only step he would recommend is that we actually open the windows, because a flow of air would be beneficial. jacob rees—mogg there. mps spent most of the afternoon debating wednesday's budget. the shadow chancellor, john mcdonnell, welcomed the extra spending to combat the coronavirus

outbreak, and said labour stood ready to work with the government to protect people. but he dismissed claims that a £30 billion investment package was akin to a labour budget. he said rishi sunak‘s first budget had failed. it doesn't come close to reversing the damage of the last ten years of austerity. i just give this final warning to the government and all of us. if we sow the seeds of disappointment and disillusionment, it can stir up a form of politics none of us wish our country to experience. the business secretary rejected that view. this is a budget which has delivered for business, for our innovators and our entrepreneurs. a budget to power pioneers and problem solvers right across our country. mr deputy speaker, we are a one nation government, committed to leveling up investment growth and opportunity across the whole of our united kingdom.

the chancellor has made clear his intention to spend his way out of this crisis. it's very interesting, mr deputy speaker, that we have been told for years that there is no money. yesterday, sunak the hedge fund sprang up like a magic bunch of gold rings. and on these benches we are not going to argue that the uk government needs to loosen their purse strings, but i am concerned that in practice, it's simply not enough, and not focused enough to combat the last ten years of austerity, which has ravaged our communities. the growth in public spending that is in this budget is one that grows much faster than the overall growth of that's projected in the economy, and i think we all recognise on this side of the house that this is an exceptional response to exceptional circumstances, that you cannot carry on doing that as the ifs has said itself today, obviously, that is not sustainable for any prolonged length of time. this budget is the government's attempt to make a turn in the road. gone are the logic, the rhetoric and the assumptions that have driven uk spending policy

for the last decade. if nothing else, it's a testament to the party opposite's capacity for reinvention. it's hunger for power. but he added for the avoidance of doubt that was not an insult. well, staying with the budget, the government has set out proposals to shake up the planning system and boost house building in england. the housing secretary set out the scheme following the budget announcement of more money for new homes, renters and building safety. in a statement to mp5, robertjenrick said he would launch a consultation or white paper on the proposals around housing. he also announced moves to increase the use of commercial and brownfield sites in towns and cities and a review of building in flood risk areas. we will be reviewing our approach to planning to ensure our system enables more homes to come forward in the places that people most

want to live, with jobs, with transport links, and other amenities on the doorstep. this means making the best use of land and existing transport infrastructure. he said his aim was to create a modern, simpler and faster planning system. but he had some immediate changes to announce. we are introducing the freedom to build upwards on existing buildings and today, i'm announcing a new rate to allow vacant commercial, industrial and residential blocks to be demolished and replaced with well—designed, new residential units. and in the wake of the recent widespread flooding... we should seize the opportunity to consider how the built and the natural environments can work together more harmoniously, and in that spirit, i'm announcing today that i will be reviewing our policy to prevent the building in areas of high flood risk. after nearly ten years, still no plan to fix the country's housing crisis,

while the promise of the white paper is a threat to give big developers a freer hand to do what they want, ignoring quality, affordability and sustainability. he said planning was not a constraint on housing building, with more permissions given than homes built. the white paper is a red warning. it could strip local communities of the powers they have to say no to big developers, taking the easy option of building on the green belt. it could impose whitehall's total house—building numbers on local communities without the new affordable housing local residents need, and it could mean more unsuitable business buildings turned into slum housing with no planning permission needed at all. diarrhoea is we built more homes in this country last year than any year year in the last 30 years. we built 240,000 homes. the right honourable gentleman left house—building in this country

at the lowest level since the 1920s when he was the housing secretary. i welcome my right honourable friend's statement, particularly his comments about wanting more people to live in safer, greener, beautiful areas, something i'm sure we would all welcome. but, of course, some people are fortunate enough to live in those areas already and they will be concerned about overdevelopment. several labour mps pressed the housing secretary over the billion pound fund to remove combustible cladding from high—rise buildings. can he confirm it's his intention that no leaseholder should have to pay themselves for the replacement of cladding on their block? leaseholders at the moment are paying an awful lot of money for waking watches. will that be reimbursed as part of this fund? shortly after grenfell, the select committee recommended that all cladding that is not of limited combustibility should be taken off existing buildings of high—rise as well, as banned from new buildings. so the £1 billion is certainly

a step in that direction, but i think we want to analyse whether it is sufficient. the minister said the fund would be made available to housing associations and small councils. i welcome the work that he did with respect to the building safety fund and i hope this will now make a significant difference in helping those leaseholders, particularly in private buildings, move forward. you're watching thursday in parliament with me, alicia mccarthy. the defence minister has told mps that a spike in veteran suicides is not an "epidemic" but "one is too many". johnny mercer admitted the government had "not acted fast enough" and said the office for veterans‘ affairs is funding a study to gather data and shape policy. he told mps suicide rates were still lower among veterans than the general population, with eight deaths in 100,000 compared to around 17 in 100,000 in the general male population. i am more than we are currently experiencing a higher incidence of suicide in a cohort who served at a specific time in afghanistan.

some people want to make suicide about numbers, but suicide is not a number. one is too many, and in my view, any suicide is an individual tragedy, yes, for that person, for their family of course, but also the military as an institution. there are reports that 14 former and current serving personnel have committed suicide in the past two months alone, many of them having served in afghanistan. the minister has raised the point about data collection for serving personnel. however, we do not know the full scale of this crisis for veterans because, unlike our major allies such as canada, new zealand and the us, coroners in the uk do not record veteran suicide. this lack of data makes it extremely difficult to know the full scale of the problem but also makes it difficult to be able to provide better, more targeted interventions.

a conservative former chair of the defence committee raised a different government promise. when will the government be bringing forward the promised legislation — and i have in mind the promise made on armistice day last year, during the election campaign — to stop the repeated reinvestigation of veterans in the absence of any compelling new evidence ? the minister said he'd be introducing a bill on wednesday. this prime minister has made it absolutely clear that the days of lawyers running amok in our services and our veterans‘ community, trying to rewrite history in order to make money, are over. but an alliance mp warned of "unintended consequences". tens of thousands of people served with great honour and distinction in northern ireland, upholding the rule of law. if we end up putting in place some

sort of measure to give unnecessary protection and warping the rule of law, that may end up delegitimizing and undermining the integrity of their service that they're rightly very proud of. johnny mercer said he was "treading down this path with the utmost care". now, last month, the government launched a public consultation on whether non—payment of the bbc licence fee should remain a criminal offence. the bbc has already announced that it can't afford to give free licences to all over—75—year—olds. speaking to the commons culture committee, the head of the bbc, lord hall, was asked whether he would really be prepared to see 80 or 90—year—olds taken to court. the new chair of the committee, julian knight, started by asking about the kind of letters sent to people who didn't pay. i'm going to ask the clerk now to pass you an example... i placed today one of these letters. i placed several other examples in the house of commons library, which will be there to be viewed for the next week. julian knight read out

the letter, which concluded... "you could face prosecution and financial penalties. you then outline the fines. and then you say basically to stop this visit, buy a tv licence, move an existing licence or tell us you don't need one. "to stop this enforcement visit to your home and change your status, you need to act now." now, i'm just wondering, because these are letters that people get often even when they have actually declared that they don't need a licence, is this in any way an appropriate way, do you believe, for the bbc to communicate with your employer and my employer, the general public? we have gradations of response to licence fee—payers who don't pay. i can't tell you exactly where this is on that, but... do you think the letter is acceptable? if i may... so, that type of letter would come very much at the end of the process. the number of letters that we send out, the first one isjust a reminder — you know, "it's time to pay your tv licence."

and what we're trying to do — and what behavioural research and, if you like, nudge economics teaches you — that a number of letters sometimes are needed. but this would be coming towards the end of the process. the tone and approach that we use is regularly reviewed. david perry, who no doubt we'll come onto in a minute, who did a very detailed review into the issue of decriminalization, asked us to look again at the tone of our communication. an nao review in 2016 said that, in terms of our approach and our tone, it was rational and reasonable. the snp‘sjohn nicolson asked about the implications of criminalisation. if old people can't or won't pay, are you really prepared, lord hall, to take 80 and 90—year—olds to court? we will do absolutely everything we can, and as clare was saying earlier on,

you know, we've got a special team to make sure that our communications with the over—75s is sensitive and we'll do absolutely everything we can to make sure they understand what they need to do, how they need to sign up, in the easiest possible ways. because i don't want to see people going to court. of course. nobody does. but at the end of the process, you could end up with 90—year—olds in court. it's conceivable, but we don't want that, and we absolutely don't want to get there... imagine the reputational damage... let me finish the point. your own news programmes... it's a custodial sentence which only a judge can deliver. the bbc cannot possibly send people to court, to jail. but the distress caused to these old people, you would be in the bizarre position

of sending out your news teams to cover 90—year—olds, potentially, up in court for nonpayment of tv licenses because of a system that you, lord hall, signed up for. i can answer it. it's highly unlikely. and one of the reasons why it's highly unlikely is because the current lord chancellor answered a parliamentary question that said prior to the changes — so, priorto 2000 — i think for the previous decade, no over—75s were taken to court. they weren't prosecuted. the leader of the commons has insisted the multi—billion—pound price tag to renovate the houses of parliament must ensure value for money. over the last few days, there have been reports that the £4 billion plan could be shelved in favour of smaller—scale repairs. the project involves mps and peers temporarily moving out of the palace — or "decanting", as they're calling it. the speaker of the house of lords wrote to the times newspaper, denying there was any change of plan. the matter was taken up by labour's shadow leader of the commons.

we're all mindful of the costs, but does he agree with the lord speaker and chair of the house of lords commission that vacating the entire building is a far more cost—effective option? and will he find time to come to the house and explain the government's position if it's changing? there is always a regard to value for money that must underpin everything that we do, and there is widespread acceptance of the need for improving the mechanical and engineering plant. that is accepted. but some of the sums that have been mentioned are eye—watering, and this is something that members of this house will be concerned about in relation to their constituents and tax purpose. in the lords, peers put their concerns to the senior deputy speaker. he will be aware of reports that some ministers wish to stop the full restoration, a move to a plan of annual maintenance programmes which, my lords, would take decades to complete, actually cost more money in the long run, and put members, staff and visitors at risk. the deputy speaker quoted what the lord speaker, lord fowler, had written in response. swapping full restoration for a quick fix is fanciful,

sticking plaster solutions are simply not feasible and vacating the entire building while the work is undertaken is a far more cost—effective option and avoids having to work around mps and peers. that is why both houses agreed in 2018 to a full decant of the palace and enshrined this in an act of parliament. to go back on that would place an unacceptable burden on the public purse. and the house of lords commission agreed with that in its entirety. like all public—sector procurements, it will drag on much longer than is planned, will cost much more — and by the time parliament is eventually being asked to move back in, it will become so comfortable in its new premises, it won't come here. a lib dem didn't want to see incessant political interference. will he ensure that our colleagues

in another place are reminded that the reason that we have set up a sponsor body and a delivery authority is to avoid those delays and additional costs? a bill was passed last autumn to enable the work to go ahead. if ministers want to change the process, will they have to repeal the legislation and bring forward a new bill? and has there been any indications from government ministers that that is the case? lord mcfall said the answer to that was no. and that's it from me for now, but dojoin me on friday night at 11pm for the week in parliament, when we'll be hearing from dame eleanor laing on becoming the first woman to chair the budget statement. but for now from me, alicia mccarthy, goodbye. hello there. well, the weather's been

quite unsettled really, often quite windy with a number of showers around. we certainly have plenty of these on thursday and this was one of those shower clouds spotted in the skies around the wolverhampton area. the satellite picture shows showers swirling around an area of low pressure that is moving out to the north sea at the moment but that's not the last of the lows. we have another couple of swirls of cloud, another coming in late on friday and another one working in just in time for the weekend. if you're out and about for the next few hours, across northern areas, there will be further showers and at times, those will be falling as snow over the hills of scotland. elsewhere, it's going to stay quite windy. temperatures of the most part keeping above freezing but with a nip of frost in scotland, perhaps northern england, where we could see if few icy stretches where we see those showers fall. the rest of friday morning, showers get driven down the north sea by these cold northerly winds

and we could see cloud thicken and outbreaks of rain across wales and south—west england. in these two areas, we'll see areas of sunshine that is when moves across wales combined with winds coming across the north sea, we will get this line of moisture which will generate showers, more from merseyside down through the midlands to the greater london area. it could be quite slow—moving and could turn cloudy for a time as well. we got rains on the day across wales and south—west england. the aim becomes more extensive overnight and for the weekend, slow—moving weather front pushes its way eastwards across the uk so we will see rain at times across this weekend. the rain will be followed by showers. so it is an unsettled looking weekend and often it's going to be pretty windy as well. we'll take a look at more detailed forecasts and on saturday, a strip of cloud, the rain quite heavy in scotland, easing off later in the day but that's only because the next weather system will be racing its way in, bringing more rain across northern ireland and the return of wet weather for western scotland, north—west england and wales across the day. the rain could turn quite heavy across the hills across northern england overnight. and on into sunday as well. with some fairly large rainfall totals. given how what it's been recently, this could provide a risk of some further localised flooding. as it moves into east anglia

and south—east england, it will then be followed by showers and eventually, we will start to drag in some cool air across north—west areas as well. looking beyond that, we could see some high pressure develop towards the south, so it could become drier in london but it will become rather unsettled further north. looking beyond that, we could see some high pressure develop towards the south, so it could become drier in london but it will become rather unsettled further north.

welcome to bbc news. i'm mike embley. our top stories: as cases increase around the world, the american system of testing for coronavirus is described as "inadequate" by the country's leading public health official. the way people in other countries are doing it, we are not set up for that. do i think we should be? yes, but we are not. the outbreak pushes global stock markets into spectacular falls. asian markets are all heading down, the nikkei's already lost 10%. the australian grand prix is cancelled just hours before the first practice session — the latest sporting fixture to fall prey to the pandemic. a judge orders the immediate release from prison of the former us army intelligence analyst chelsea manning.