on sunday and ned temko from the christian science monitor. and here in the studio, at a covid—safe distance, the bbc‘s special correspondent, clive myrie. more than 27.5 million people infected, 900,000 dead. on monday, india recorded its highest daily infection figure — close to 91,000. heroic efforts by scientists researching vaccines, the guinea pigs testing them and those treating the sick give us hope for the future. yet, as those figures demonstrate, the reality is that we are only nine months into a pandemic the world health organization says could be with us beyond next year. between april and june, india's economy shrank by a quarter. between the first and the second quarter, south africa's economy was down by 51%. ian birrell, let's leave those bigger countries for a moment

and talk about the smaller and poorer countries in the world, the least developed countries. every country has basically got the same question they are wrestling with. a new virus and we don't understand very much about it. how do we balance public health and wider health issues? we are beginning to see now the danger of many developing world countries rushing down to follow the same tactics used in the richer western nations, in particular, because they have very different population dynamics. the data coming in is frankly pretty alarming. the figures in india sound terrifying with rising infections and a high number of deaths, but the fatality rates are much lower than in italy or the us or the uk or even places like peru. i've been looking at the figures in africa where, on the face of it, a lot of countries have done a lot better than expected

when it comes to the virus. now we are beginning to see the wider impact and, frankly, it is utterly terrifying. the figures coming in... one study predicts a 9.1% increase in extreme poverty predicted across africa, and that's setting back the fight against poverty by 20 years. we're seeing rising maternal mortality, infant mortality, malaria, tuberculosis. 0ne prediction by the lancet is talking abouti million extra child deaths in six months in the 100 poorest countries around the world. the trouble is, what we have seen, we rush to go to lockdown, and yet these are countries, you look at the median age in africa, and it is 18, in india, it is 27, and in europe it is 41. you look at the numbers of people in the high—risk older categories and, in africa, across sub—saharan

africa, it is less than 2%, whereas in a country like italy it is 23%. my worry is what we have done is rush to adopt the same sort of tactics, entirely understandably because this is a new disease. but not looked at the local dynamics where the age profile is so much younger and the impact for people often with no security net, no safety net, is much more profound and equally they are struggling with the loss of other issues like malaria. one of the figures that struck me this week was latin america, where although the numbers may have started to level off and declined by the end of august, at the moment, 95% of schoolchildren in latin american countries, and there are some exceptions

like bolivia where they may not go back till next year, but 95% are still at home. the educational economic consequences of that for developing countries must be pretty severe. that is absolutely right. i would add one caveat to what ian said — i would agree with everything he said. one of the things we don't know about this disease, unfortunately, is the long—term effects. there is some indication these exist on younger people. yes, they initially don't seem to get as ill or widely ill. but we should be cautious because there are neurological conditions that seem to occur in some young patients. the fact is we just don't know enough. ian's general point and yours is crucially important. i would zero in on education, both in latin america, in africa, in parts of south asia...

education and jobs particularly in the informal sector are a matter of life and death, and education particularly for young women, has been an engine for social change, for economic change in whole societies and countries. it is a difficult balance, but there are absolutely potentially dire consequences for shutting down economies and education systems, particularly in developing countries. clive, you know south africa well, you've talked about the dramatic impact on the economy there and the dramatic shutdown that the president ordered for the country. but at least that is a country that has a relatively resilient economy in recent years, but how is it bearing up? not least its health services? very badly, there is no question about that. i totally agree with my two

co— panellists here. the longer—term effects of the pandemic on developing countries and on a place like south africa, rwanda, liberia and so on, the longer—term effects are potentially much worse than the pandemic itself. it is easy at this stage to look back and say, well, these countries should have done differently. we talk about south africa, its health system, one of the better ones on the continent, but frankly it's still not up to snuff in dealing with a global pandemic that very few people understood, certainly six months ago. injuly, they had 11,000 infections a day. i know it has gone down to about 1,000 a day now, but for any system to be dealing with that volume... it is not something you can plan for. absolutely not, particularly for countries on the continent of africa that are incredibly poor.

we saw how spain, italy, the us, the uk and so on, developed countries, have struggled themselves. adding to the suggestion from ian that the average age of people in these countries is lower, there is also a level of herd immunity to a degree for these countries because their inhabitants have been subject to coronaviruses in the past. they are a little bit more developed in dealing with local outbreaks of disease because of ebola and so on. but i think it is easy to look back and say, ok, they should have done this or that, the question is what do they do now? and that's what we should be focusing on. let's stay with that question, in terms of what they do now. in the uk, cases of infection

are rising, but from a much lower level and at a slower rate than in the period that led to a national lockdown. borisjohnson is a politician who prefers to look to the sunny uplands rather than wade too deeply through the quick sand of decision—making and delivery. he believes pessimism in public life risks being self—fulfilling and perhaps hopes optimism can be too. this week, though, because the rate of infection is growing, he has had to deliver bad news. social gatherings are to be restricted to a maximum of two households and no more than six people. but the prime minister then held out the hope of covid tests performed so quickly — results received in 90 minutes and perhaps as few as 20 — that many things we can't do at the moment, like go to a concert or see a play, could be possible again. clive, you were talking about the dilemma of what you do now to pull back the number of cases to keep a grip on what is happening. it is getting harder for

the government in the uk, isn't it? not least because even some of the prime minister's own backbenchers are now saying this trade—off between freedom and health they think has gone too far towards health at the price of freedom, economic and social. yeah, he is facing a bit of a backbench rebellion, really, on this. because, as you say, there are many within his own party who see this as a fundamental attack on their own freedom and the freedom of the british people. this comes at a dangerous time. it is six months since the world health organization declared this a global pandemic, six months yesterday. it is only in the next two weeks that the uk is going to be rolling out a comprehensive track, test and trace system across the country. six months on. that isn't good for any of us, it has to be said. at the same time, you've got surveys earlier this week that suggest that two thirds of the british population see those people who are not

potentially following the rules as people they either despise or hate. coronavirus, rather than bringing the country together, which was the sense from the office of national statistics back in march, has essentially divided us as a country far more deeply than brexit. borisjohnson is coming out with these rules that are draconian, in the minds of many, at a time when the country is deeply divided on this issue, when carrying the country for any leader in this pandemic is crucial, but it is proving more difficult here. what do you make of that? borisjohnson likes to be the cheerleader in chief, but he came out with this announcement that you could argue he is trying to keep people optimistic and hopeful when the figures are going in the wrong way and at a time when there is a danger people throwing up their hands and saying, what's the point, we are stuck with this thing?

so we'll ignore the rules. presumably, he's trying to say, hold on a bit longer, something better is on the horizon if we can get testing much more frequent and intensive. something closer to normal life is just out of reach. i think unfortunately borisjohnson‘s natural instinct and his political beliefs are the wrong sort of things we need now... i think clive was very accurate in what he was saying. i was in sweden a few weeks ago, which now looks to be rising in terms of new infections and rates. what is so striking there is they have come together. rather than flip—flopping like we have seen and several other european countries have seen in terms of lockdowns and then encouragement to go back to work and eat out and go to bars and then

another reversion, which is what we're seeing, which makes it very difficult, sweden went for a very simple and sustainable approach, and it is interesting they have been able to do that because it is a unified state of people trusting each other and their leaders, and i think this issue of trust, when the history books of this very dark age written, will focus a lot on this issue of trust and the way societies can or can't come together, which i think has been a real problem for countries like the uk and like the us. on the us, ned, it is striking that we had this regulation towards the end of the week that donald trump had told a journalist back in the spring, i'm talking down the threat from covid. he was challenged about that at a white house press conference at the end of the week. he said he doesn't want to frighten people or drive the world into a frenzy. on the one hand he is saying he's trying to calm things down, on the other it is against the backdrop of a highly divisive and very partisan political

environment in the states. yeah, partially the partisanship you have to put at donald trump's door, he revels in it. but at that same press conference, the journalist in question said, is it really a choice between panic and clear truth—telling? and raised the issue of angela merkel, who did both. i think that is borisjohnson's and donald trump's, to a certain extent, political challenge. if they want to reopen the economy, which is understandable, we all want that, the key is clear messaging. you can take the swedish option, which is very controversial, you can take the german option, the new zealand option... all of the ones that have a really sober ability to talk to people and say this is the problem, this is what we are proposing to do

to confront it and this is why. the danger for both trump and to a certain extent for borisjohnson is the messaging has been muddled and the trust in both of those leaders has suffered accordingly. now in the uk, we have simple rules, the rule of six. a new public health campaign. in a sense, we are almost back to where we were without a complete lockdown. very strong rules which the government is saying will be enforced. yeah, the police will be involved a lot more now. and they have been over the last

few months to a degree, but they will be really cracking down, by all accounts. ned and ian are absolutely right about this issue of trust. and the different kinds of messages, the way the messages have been put out there by the johnson administration, have left room for doubt, room for obfuscation and room for misinterpretation, and we don't really know what is going on. perhaps that does feed into this idea that there are sections within the population who simply don't trust the messages coming out from number 10. it is, as ned was saying, those countries where there is a build—up of trust that has been there before the pandemic where those health messages have been clearer, more straightforward, and the public have been more willing to follow them. studies have suggested these are actually countries by and large led by women — thailand, new zealand, germany, finland, iceland. these... this is an issue of trust that needs to be analysed

and needs to be looked at. it does feel a bit like groundhog day, having this message of six in a house and six out of a house that you can get together with. simplifying the message should have happened a long time ago. in terms of the longer—term implications of all this, ian and ned, i don't know which of you wants to pick up on this point first. where are we on global cohesion as a result of this pandemic? because we had lots of things like shutting airports, closing borders. there are things like remittances, the huge amount of money transferred by foreigners who send money back home to the folks back home. what are the kind of longer—term implications? ned, do you want to pick up on that first? i think there are multiple. the short answer is, global cohesion has suffered partly because of covid. it has been exacerbated,

but partly because that is the universe we live in now, particularly with the trump administration. one in particular i'd like to briefly identify is a vaccine, we don't have any international or workable strategy on distributing equitably a vaccine if and when one appears. people like david miliband, the former british foreign secretary, and others involved, particularly in the developing world, have expressed rightly concern that developing countries will once again be put on the back of the queue. in a way, covid has really sped up all the changes happening. one of the sad changes is the falling apart of any global cohesion and we've seen that from the start of the pandemic and we see it now. this has dire impact in terms of how we evolve.

it has become a macho contest of who is going to develop a vaccine rather than working out a way to equitably build and develop and share a vaccine with billions of people around the world in a way that everyone benefits rather than individual countries benefit. equally, at the very start, you mentioned remittances, because of the economic turmoil and the difficulties of getting stuff through, we know that remittances were four times the size of aid and many more times effective in terms of getting to people on the ground and helping people. it's one of the reasons this pandemic is such a problem for the poorer parts of the planet. one of the things that may not have caught much public attention was last weekend the government announcing £700 million targeted at some of the most vulnerable countries, little things that could make a difference, like in bangladesh,

refrigeration projects so they can to get a vaccine and store it. if you can't store it safely it will become unuseful. little things that can be done with the developing world can help each other. that is the kind of thing we have to see, this is a global pandemic, we all know that. if you deal with the problem in one country and you're getting infections in another, global travel, sea routes, trade — that problem will come to your shore. we have to work closely around the world. going back to what ned and ian were saying about the break—up of the global family, as it were, in the months and years, frankly, leading up to the pandemic... we saw that, at the very beginning of the pandemic, the chase for ventilators, the chase for masks, the chase for ppe from china. this became a rat race, frankly. we didn't see the kind of cohesion, the kind of linkage and the sense that we are all in this together

that we saw back, potentially in 2008, with the global financial crisis. the rush to beat this virus on an individual level around the world doesn't do anybody any good. i know we will be referring to covid—19 on many more weekends to come. to our ‘any other business section‘ of the programme, as our guests single out a story we might not have noticed, but they think we should. ned, do you want to kick us off with part of europe which is in a fair degree of turmoil at the moment and some intriguing games of cat and mouse between governments and opposition in belarus? yes, this has gotten some coverage, but i dare say would have gotten much more if we were not all understandably preoccupied with covid—19. that is the case of the president in belarus. europe's last surviving true

soviet—style dictator. who, in a highly questionable election, according to international monitors, managed to get re—elected and now is trying to hold onto power. there are demonstrators in the streets who have doggedly continued to fight for democratic values and democratic prerogatives. the president's regime, with the help so far of president putin in moscow, is trying to pick off the leaders of those protests and crack down on them. trying to walk them to the border and trying to force them to walk over at... the leader in question ripped up her passport.

i'm pleased to see the return of the premier league coming up, that moment when every fan can have hope and everyone is level, no matter which team you support. everyone is equal. as an everton fan, i know it is the hope that is painful! some are more equal than others. but you have the covid crisis a row going on with the government saying you can only have 1,000 fans in, the premier league saying that is useless, why can we let in more? behind this lies a huge economic catastrophe for football. all sorts of problems building up. it is a hopeful time but, equally, for any football fan, there are huge problems ahead. do think it could threaten the viability of some clubs? there is no doubt it will threaten the viability of some of the smaller clubs. the question is whether it is sustainable...

it depends how long this virus goes on for, what happens with social distancing, can we find ways to get crowds back into sport stadiums, theatres and things like that? that makes it very difficult for the clubs trying to plot a strategy. they need this strategy of1 million tests a day. clive, what do you think we should be aware apart from coronavirus? it's got a bit of coverage but nowhere near as much as it should have done. these devastating forest fires on the west coast of the us. washington state, oregon, california. some of us have seen those pictures of the sky turning completely red, a doomsday view from america there. actually, about five or six months

ago, it feels like 25 years ago now, i was in australia covering the bushfires there, the worst in australian history. some of these fires in california, some of the emergency service workers are saying they have never seen fires as intense as that. similar situation — bone dry summers, intensely hot, that have started slightly earlier in both australia and california and the northern united states, added to bone dry conditions on the ground providing fuel for these fires to take hold. we've been talking about covid, but the long—term effects of climate change are going to be far worse. and in australia... particularly in america because this is election year. climate change is at the bottom of the pile. it may move up the pile now.

it is way down on the priority list, but probably more important longer—term than anything we have discussed. thank you all very much. good to speak to you again and good to be with you again. that's it for dateline for this week — we're back next week at the same time. goodbye. hello, there is a burst of september heat on the way over

the next couple of days. temperatures starting to lift through the rest of today. a warmer day than yesterday, a dry day for most, but not for all of us. let's look back at the earlier radar picture. you can see where it's been wet so far this weekend across parts of northern ireland, northern england and particularly scotland. and the rain just keeps on falling across western and particularly north—western parts of scotland. there is a met office yellow warning in force for the risk of some localised flooding and travel disruption. elsewhere, a lot of dry weather around. fairly cloudy across parts of northern ireland, southern scotland. eastern parts of scotland should brighten up a little bit with some sunshine. the best of the sunshine today through east wales, the midlands, towards the east and the south of england. quite windy through this central slice, through northern ireland, southern scotland and northern england. gusts of around 45 mph. and temperatures a little higher than they were yesterday — 21, for example, in belfast. parts of eastern england likely to get to 25, maybe 26 degrees.

through this evening and tonight, the rain will slowly peter out across the north—west of scotland. a lot of cloud still filtering in for many areas and some patches of mist and fog developing down towards the south on what will be a relatively mild night — lows of 11—14 degrees. so, into tomorrow, a weather front still up to the north—west. that'll be bringing some patchy rain. not as wet across parts of western scotland, certainly, as it is at the moment. but for most of us, we start the new week on a very warm note. in fact, temperatures will approach 30 celsius. we haven't been up to 30 in september since 2016, but we may get there during tomorrow, particularly where we see the best of the sunshine across england and wales, towards the south—east. that's where we'll see values of 29, maybe 30 degrees. a bit cooler further north and west where we have more cloud and still some spots of patchy rain. we look ahead to tuesday — a similar weather story, still a bit of rain up to the north—west. some extra cloud creeping its way eastwards across england and wales with the odd shower.

that might just suppress temperatures a little bit. i think we'll still get to around 28 or 29 degrees and a little bit warmer by this stage for parts of scotland and northern ireland. but from midweek onwards, those temperatures will fall away. it will start to feel cooler but, for many of us, it will stay dry. that's all from me, bye for now.

this is bbc news with the latest headlines for viewers in the uk and around the world. former british prime ministers tony blair and sirjohn major call borisjohnson‘s brexit plans "shameful" — as the government continues to defend plans to override parts this is a collective will on the part of the government not just to prepare for the worst, but also to protect the internal workings of our united kingdom. that's responsible government. more than 30 people have died as wildfires burn in california, oregon, and washington, causing widespread pollution. and there are further concerns for the people living there. there's fresh concern in the uk over the growing spread of coronavirus