china's new security law has come into force in hong kong. many things seen until now as civil rights, including pro—democracy protests, can now be deemed subversion, terrorism or secession punishable by life in prison. the changes took effect as the former british territory commemorates the 23rd anniversary of the reversion to chinese sovereignty. the leading american expert on infectious diseases, dr anthony fauci, has warned that coronavirus cases in the us could double to 100,000 a day if lockdowns are not maintained. the surge has forced at least 16 mainly southern and western states to pause or reverse reopening plans. president trump is denying reports from many sources that he or his close advisers were briefed on intelligence suggesting russia covertly offered taliban militants money to kill us troops in afghanistan last year. now on bbc news,

tuesday in parliament. hello there, and welcome to tuesday in parliament. on this programme, a former pm questions the government's choice of new national security adviser — amid accusations it's a political appointment. why then is the new national security adviser a political appointee with no proven expertise in national security? calls for the government to do more to address inequalities facing minority communities in the police and justice system. over the last 12 months, over 12,000 stop and searches were conducted on black people in comparison to 5000 on white people. and the boss of the premier league criticises liverpool fans — who took to the streets

to celebrate their team topping the table. it was wrong. in the end, we are not in control of individual's actions, and it is possible to celebrate with social distancing. but first, the prime minister's decision to appoint the chief negotiator in the brexit talks, david frost, as the new national security adviser came underfire in both the commons and the lords — with borisjohnson accused of politicising a key whitehall role. david frost's appointment was part of a wider shake up at the top of government, which saw the current national security adviser, sir mark sedwill, who is also the cabinet secretary and the country's top civil servant, standing down. answering an urgent question from labour, the minister for the cabinet office, michael gove, defended the move. he is now, of course, the uk's negotiator, shaping our future relationship with the eu, covering issues from trade and tariffs to security and defence cooperation. as i say, david frost will help to deliver this government's vision for britain's

place in the world — supporting the prime minister in reinvigorating our national security architecture and ensuring that we defend our interests and values across the globe. but labour questioned the appointment. now, the first duty of any government is to keep people safe, and in carrying out that duty, any government should have objective and at times challenging advice from its national security adviser — and it's why making a political appointment takes this government into such dangerous territory. weak prime ministers take advice only from those who agree with them. those who put the national interest first should welcome different views and welcome challenge. what is the prime minister so afraid of, and why won't he put his duty to keep people safe first? prime ministers, whether of labour, conservative, or any colour, should have confidence in those advising them, and those advising them should also operate in a way which is true to the highest traditions of public service. but a former prime minister

wasn't convinced. i served on the national security council for nine years, six years as home secretary and three as prime minister. during that time, i listened to the expert independent advice from national security advisers. on saturday, my right honourable friend said, "we must be able to promote those with proven expertise. " why then is the new national security adviser a political appointee with no proven expertise in national security? we have had previous national security advisers, all of them excellent, not all of them necessarily people who were steeped in the security world — some of whom were distinguished diplomats in their own right. sir david, sorry, david frost is a distinguished diplomat in his own right, and it is entirely appropriate that the prime minister of the day should choose an adviser appropriate to the needs of the hour. of course, sir mark sedwill should be thanked for his distinguished

service, but the truth is, mr speaker, that his card was marked last year when he warned the cabinet that brexit would be a disaster. he also said that the consequent recession could be worse than 2008 and that prices could go up by 10%. so this is all about the revenge of the vote leave campaign. sir mark sedwill steps down at the end of september and will be replaced as national security adviser by david frost, who will also remain the eu chief negotiator — which he says will be his top single priority until the negotiations have concluded. if the negotiations carry on into october and beyond, who is going to have the nation's security as their top single priority? or is thisjust a case of misapplied persistent experimentation? one of the key things i would say about the negotiations with the european union is, as we both know, they are accelerating at the moment, as both sides seek to find a conclusion.

does my right on my friend share my genuine confusion at the ambivalence of the benches opposite — that somebody who was first appointed to the foreign office at a time to shadow home secretary was seven years old, who served in denmark, paris, cyprus and the united nations, doesn't command their full support? unsurprisingly michael gove did agree. david frost is to be made a peer but their was disquiet about his appointment in the lords too. mr frost is a man of proven resilience and stamina, he used to work for me. but he's been put in a very difficult position. will the minister reassure us that the government understands that the primary role of the national security adviser is speaking truth to power and not acting as a delivery mechanism to impose policies born in the back shop of number ten. and the first ever national security adviser, weighed into the row. since mr frost has not, as far as i know, worked on defence or security or intelligence matters the way each of his predecessors

have done — how is mr gove's dictum about the performance of the civil servant to be weighed in the light of mr frost's appointment? the prime minister has decided that the role of the national security adviser and the cabinet secretary be divided, and that will give the incumbent the time and dedication to display his skills. i'm in no doubt that he will. and the soon to be lord frost, did have some supporters. david frost will be a valuable member of this house and welcomed by all noble members, even those who may be embarrassed by his presence — given they had firmly declared he would never succeed in reopening the withdrawal agreement, dropping the original irish protocol, or completing negotiations by the end of november. peter — now lord — lilley there. the government's facing criticism for only implementing "the spirit" of recommendations from a review

into bias against ethnic minorities in the justice system in england and wales. labour's david lammy, who carried out the report for former prime minister, david cameron, warned ministers not to take people from black, asian and minority communities "for fools", and he urged them to implement all 35 recommendations. so the position now is that 16 recommendations have been completed, two have been rejected, and 17 are in progress. of those 17 in progress, 11 will be completed within 12 months and six thereafter. let me close by saying this, madame deputy speaker, enormous progress has been made, particularly in respect to the functioning fairness of prisons. it's the same story for recommendation eight, 18,19 and 35. you committed to not implementing my recommendations. it's wrong to pretend anything else. language matters.

and as the black lives matter movement makes its voice heard about systemic injustice here and abroad, the very least this government could do is be honest about its actions. in my borough, in my constituency, black people are four times more likely to be stopped and searched. and last year, the last 12 months, there were 12,000 stop and searches conducted on black people in comparison to 5000 on white people. i spoke to a group of year 12 students last friday — of that group from almost 50% of the boys put their hands up to say they had been stopped and searched and one girl. why is this still a big issue in this disproportionality? i'm very grateful to the honourable lady for raising it directly but sensitively, because my goodness, if people take the view that what's taking place is victimization, then, of course, it's going to corrode confidence in the criminaljustice system and in the police, but equally, we have to make sure that the police have the tools that they require to try and hunt

down crime, because as i've already indicated, it's very often people who are being stopped to themselves could be victims of crime. forgive me for repeating a point that i've made, the key to this is data. data to ensure that the right people are being stopped, and where they are not, it shines out like a beacon that there is an issue here in a particular borough — or wherever it is in the country — that needs to be addressed. if the words black lives matter are to have any real meaning, then we must have honest appraisals of whether or not the government has implemented the recommendations of the many reports that have already explored racial discrimination and disparities in the united kingdom. there's no point in commissioning yet further reviews if the government has not adequately addressed the recommendations in the reviews which have already been completed. and in common usage, the word implementing in relation to a recommendation means giving it effect.

it doesn't mean looking at it and then discarding it as inconvenient, or getting rid of it because it's too much like affecting real change. so it should be important that we get to the bottom of what's going on here, because the government's curious loose of language is not confined to this report. can the minister explained to me why only 1% of full—time police officers in 2019 were black, and why this has not been improved since the implementation of the lammy review? well, overall, diversity is improving, and i don't know the specific figures on the police, my apologies, that's a home—office matter, but if you at issues such as for example, the parole board. we had a situation on the parole board, there was not a single black member, and yet, what has happened as a result of the lame review is that a recent recruitment of 35% of new recruits were bame. that's great news, more to do. the minister has said there is more to do, so what is the government going to do next to improve the situation? well, i'm very grateful to the honourable gentleman for raising that.

there is a huge amount more to do, but what i indicated in the context of this debate is there are 17 further recommendations — of which 11 we want to do within 12 months and six a little after that. i spoke to my rage on about friend, the lord chancellor, we are determined to put the afterburners on this and really finish them all off without any delay. the government has seen off several attempts by some of its own and opposition mps to make changes to its immigration bill. the proposals will see the end of the free movement of people into the uk from the european union when the brexit transition period expires at the end of the year. the bill will give ministers the power to bring in a new system — under which eu migrants will be treated the same as those from the rest of the world — as part of a "points based system". but during detailed debate a former conservative cabinet minister led calls for immigration detention to be limited to 28 days — saying those being held were more often victims not villains. i have in front of me case after case of people who have

suffered human trafficking, torture, rape, forced prostitution and modern slavery — mostly before they got to these shores, but in some cases after they arrived here too. many are damaged people — whom the world has dealt a very very rough hand, and what do we do when they come here for our help? we lock them up for an indefinite period. looking at the current immigration detention figures, we see that 97% of people currently in detention are foreign national offenders, who have committed some of the most serious, heinous disgraceful crimes. crimes like murder, rape, and child abuse, but by implement an arbitrary time limit on immigration detention, this could make it much more difficult for these offenders to be removed from our country. we do not in the united kingdom imprison people indefinitely on suspicion that they might possibly reoffend. indeed, in 2003, labour introduced

a system of imprisonment for public protection from a very much along those lines, and a conservative government repealed that system. anyone wishing to leave immigration detention can do at any time so long as they leave the country as they are legally obliged to come and nobody is forced to be in detention. at 28 day limit would have resulted in the immediate release of many foreign nationals who are criminals. 0pposition mps had there own demands for changes. several wanted the system allowing unaccompanied asylum seeking children to be united with family living in the uk to remain unchanged. consider the case of a 14—year—old, stuck in the awful camp on lesbos — whose older sister or whose aunt may be living here and could care for them. if the home office loses, ignores or refuses that great request for a transfer to the uk to join family, there will be nothing that the child or the family or anyone else can do. well, that's wrong.

it is plain to see that despite talking a good game, the government's proposals are backsliding from policies previously made in this house, fewer safety guards for children to get to family here, and that means more children risking dangerous unsafe routes, the government is providing routes for traffickers and it's a disaster for children. 0thers called the government's plans damaging. if, however, instead, we accepted this jigsaw of amendments which we have before us, we could turn that bill on its head and it could become a positive welcoming piece of legislation. which would value people who come to this country and make a contribution. and welcome children, reunite them with their families and send a positive message to the rest of the world. it's built upon the premise that migrants should be discouraged from coming to the uk.

not satisfied with the disaster of the windrush scandal, this government seems determined to press ahead with this unjust and discriminatory and poorly designed piece of legislation. it's a bad system from an outdated model, and a discriminatory model, a system that works for europeans but against the rest of the world and it is in fact unfair. it discriminates against people, people who want to come here, people who we want to welcome here, people who help us build, run and support our country come of that add value to our committees, contribute to our national debate, bring challenge, expertise and drive, but who struggle to get ahead purely because they are not from europe. you're watching tuesday in parliament with me, alicia mccarthy. the chief executive of the premier league has criticised liverpool fans who gathered in the city centre to celebrate the team winning the league. liverpool's first title win in 30 years brought the club's supporters onto the streets for two nights running.

thousands gathered in spite of the authorities urging fans to stay at home because of the coronavirus pandemic. liverpool fc said the behaviour of some had been "wholly unacceptable". when mps on the digital, culture, media and sport committee questioned the chief executive of the english premier league, they wanted to know if the football authorities had thought about large—scale celebrations before they restarted the season. was it a discussion that you had and said, "well, look, yeah, ok, if we restart, liverpool are going to win the league and the fans are then going to gather to celebrate it." you can't entirely blame the fans when the team has just won the league, that was going to happen. and i'm asking whether the premier league bear the responsibility or part of the responsibility for what happened on thursday—friday, and what could happen in public—health terms as a result? i've said that what happened that night is regrettable, it was wrong.

in the end, we're not in control of individuals' actions and it is possible to celebrate with social distancing. and maybe lots of those people left their homes that night with the intention of doing very much that. and so i think it obviously got out of hand the same way we have seen gatherings on beaches, gatherings, street parties, and all these sorts of things going on within wider society. so, i see it as pretty much an extension of that where individuals have to take responsibility of their own actions. a local lockdown has been imposed in leicester because of an increase in covid—19 cases just days before leicester city are due to play at home. what is going to happen in leicester and was that pre—thought through and discussed with ministers? did ministers ask you to consider this? i'm not sure ministers asked to consider this but i would say just about every eventuality between our officials and dcms officials have been discussed at some point. and so, we've had a huge dialogue with the authorities about the concept of neutral venues.

and if what is happening in leicester, we are waiting to hear, does affect the club's ability to host home games, either the match on saturday against crystal palace at 3pm or subsequent matches, then we have the opportunity to put those matches elsewhere or postpone them until a date when it is safe to do so. so, of course contingency plans are discussed in parts of our overall planning. since the restart of the season, players have worn a black lives matter badge on their shirts. and they've taken a knee before kick off. the mps pointed out that up until now the premier league had opposed any sign of politics. it's perfectly possible to support black lives matter, the sentiment, without being seen to be supporting any political organisation. we are an apolitical organisation. we don't support political organisations. and so i think we are happy to support the players. we think it's the right moment to do it.

and for the first time, i feel that players, managers, league, and clubs are on the same page on the issue of discrimination and that feels to me like a positive step. if for example a player decided to wear a black armband commemorating the reported hundreds of workers who died through heat stress in qatar in the building of the world cup, would that be permissible? would you allow individual players for example to wear a black armband? because that is not a political statement, that is a cause, that's a moral cause. is that now something that would be allowed? as i said, by agreement. as i said, this isn't an individual player. this is all players coming together. so, we have dialogue with the club captains, and we have our own bame participants advisory group

with current and recently—retired players on it, and we've been listening to them. so, it isn't an individual player with an individual cause. it is a firm decision from all players. and as you know, they come from very culturally diverse backgrounds. on this occasion, we've decided to support them. that doesn't mean to say that whenever players on an individual collective basis want to do something that the premier league and clubs will be duty— bound or will be willing to support it. but on this occasion, we've decided to do that. whoever did that could be expect to be fined? yeah. i mean, if you do something without permission, then you are breaching the regulations of the rules. so, you can expect to be punished or fined. i think i find your last answers quite alarming. i think you're opening up a can of worms by how you've responded to those last questions, i have to say. a funding boost has been announced for northern ireland's health service. it's to receive almost £90 million as part of a £250 million reallocation of stormont funds.

the so—called monitoring round reallocates unspent money within stormont departments. the total also includes 12 million for free school meal payments for children over the summer months. departments need to respond as dynamically as possible to the fluctuating financial position and therefore extend the flexibility the departments have had in this round to reallocate internal budgets until the october round. all funding currently available has now been allocated. these allocations help our public services, including the health service, they assist in economic recovery, and they protect the most vulnerable in our society including children entitled to free school meals and the homeless. in northern ireland, we face two long—term problems — crises even — one, we are the most under invested, unproductive part of the uk or ireland. two, our government has a long—term structural challenge of getting capital spending out the door. those two challenges are related. as we have seen today,

we have hundreds of millions of pounds of capital underspend. i'm afraid today's monitoring round brings another missed opportunity in terms of setting long—term priorities for investment. surely, the minister will assure my deep concerns regarding the management and oversight of translink throughout covid—19. firstly, they did not furlough staff costing the ni block grant budget 3 million a month and secondly, they ran trains with supposedly only four passengers on board at a cost of £4000 per journey. bad behaviour and mismanagement seems to have murdered further budget allocations. surely, this deserves further scrutiny. the public transport network is vitally important to us. if we are to talk about it returning to economic activity, then of public transportation is a key part of that. returning to schools, public transportation is a key part of that. so, we do need a well—functioning and a properly functioning public transportation system that needs to be resourced by the executive. they rarely pay for themselves and they always will need that

subsidy from the executive. and they need to connect some of those rural areas which are very much unprofitable routes for them. all that said, we need to make sure that we are doing that in a way which stands up to scrutiny. the spending includes £2.5 million to cover the costs of setting up a compensation scheme for people injured during the troubles. the payments were approved by westminster but have been delayed. i'm sorry to say i'm feeling huge caution about welcoming the start up money for the victims payment scheme or pension as it is more commonly known because i'm not confident sinn fein accepts the qualifying criteria. and i'm sure the house would agree it would be beyond cruel to offer victims hope today and then dash that hope tomorrow. my question, deputy principal speaker, to the minister is this — minister, do you consider yourself a victim? no, i don't. i may have qualified under the terms of it but i don't personally consider myself a victim. conor murphy. now, borisjohnson‘s day had begun

away from westminster with a speech in dudley in the west midlands. the pm said now was the time to be "ambitious" about the uk's future and pledged to "build, build, build" to soften the economic impact of coronavirus. infrastructure projects in england would be "accelerated" with announcements on schools, roads, and broadband, and he confirmed a £12 billion affordable homes programme. back in the commons a conservative, sir geoffrey clifton—brown saw an opportunity to make sure those new properties were fit for the future. he wants all new homes to be have full fibre fast broadband, to be well insulated and energy efficient, and to have facilities for charging electric cars. the government is ready to build, but we must ensure in the urgency to deliver that we do not compromise on quality of these homes. as the public accounts committee reported last year in the planning and broken housing market report, the standard of many new developments does not reach acceptable levels. all these measures are far cheaper to install in initial build rather than expensively retrofitting them sometime down the line

which will be inevitable. they will literally transform our housing market by going a long way in helping us reduce the shocking 15% of residential emissions. they will also play a massive part in helping the government achieve its ambitious net—zero carbon emissions target by 2050. sir geoffrey clifton—brown, but unless the government backs his ideas, the bill stands little chance of becoming law. and that's it from me for today, but do join me at the same time tomorrow for another slice of westminster life, including the highlights from prime minister's questions. but for now from me, alicia mccarthy, goodbye.

hello there. the rest of this week is looking fairly unsettled with pressure always a little bit lower. that'll bring showers through today, and also thursday, and on friday, we'll see another area of low pressure bringing some wet and windy weather to many of us. now, this is the weak area of low pressure i was talking about. across the country today, it's a weather front bringing more persistent rain to start the day across parts of central southern scotland, northern ireland and the far north of england. this tending to break up into showers, which could turn out to be heavy into the afternoon. england and wales may see the sunshine breaking through that cloud — all that'll do is set off some heavy, maybe thundery showers. temperatures reaching the high teens, low 20s in the south, but a chilly feel to things across northern and eastern

scotland and northeast england with a northerly wind here, so, temperatures at best around the mid—teens celsius. looks like the showers will tend to merge together to create longer spells of rain across southern scotland, northern england, the midlands, and northern wales during wednesday night. it'll be milder in the south, further north with some clear spells with single figure values. again, it'll be chilly where we have our northerly wind. 0n into thursday, this weather front continuing to bring further showers particularly towards england and wales, but a brief ridge of high pressure will be trying to nose into scotland and northern ireland. so, here through the day, it should turn drier with light winds and sunshine. so a better day here, but for england and wales, again the threat of heavy, it may be thundery showers developing through the midlands into east wales, and across into the south—east. temperatures reaching again below 20 in the south with sunshine, a little bit better further north—west, but still chilly near those north—east coasts. as we head on into friday, here it is, the next area of low pressure starts to push in off the atlantic. lots of isobars on the charts, so it'll turn windier initially across the west, then spreading its way eastwards through the day. the rain will be persistent — northern ireland, especially western scotland, into the cumbrian fells, perhaps north—west wales. but i think central and eastern areas should tend to stay dry with variable amounts

of cloud and some sunshine. so here again, 20—21 celsius, mid—to—high teens further north. into the weekend, it remains unsettled with the pressure always lower, so it'll be quite windy at times and there will be rain around, particularly across the north and the west of the country. here, it will be windier and wetter, whereas further south and east you are, especially on sunday, it could be a bit brighter and feel a little bit warmer.

this is bbc news. my name is mike embley with the latest headlines for viewers in the uk and around the world. a coronavirus warning: the leading american virus expert says case numbers in the us are going in the wrong direction. we are now having a0,000—plus new cases a day. i would not be surprised if we go up to 100,000 a day. hong kong marks the 23rd anniversary of the former british territory reverting back to chinese sovereignty as beijing imposes a tough new national security law. the new research which suggests the virus can lead to strokes and long—term brain damage. hi, my name is kaitlyn. i am nine years old and i'm a figure skater. grace, poise and a message of hope: