the governor of california says he may impose tougher to restrictions in the next two days, including a possible stay—at—home order, to counter a surge in cases. gavin newsom says projections show intensive care unit admissions are on track to exceed state—wide capacity by mid december. joe biden has announced nominations for top posts in his senior economic team. many of the positions are going to women. this includes the former head of the federal reserve, janet yellen, who could become the first female us treasury secretary. in the face of widespread protests, french lawmakers are rewriting a controversial clause in a security bill that would have made it an offence to share pictures of the police online, maliciously. there has been concern that it could have stopped people exposing police brutality.

now on bbc news, monday in parliament. hello again, and welcome to monday in parliament. a farming shake—up in england gets a hostile reception. the landscape of the lake district and the yorkshire dales is shaped by centuries offamilyfarming. by accident, the government could undo all of that in a few short years. but ministers say that after brexit it's time to sweep away the old eu rules. we have rules about the maximum width of a gateway, the minimum width of a hedge, the maximum width of a hedge, whether a cabbage should be treated the same as a cauliflower for the purposes of the three—crop rule. also in this programme, protests over the deportation of foreign—born criminals. many of these people have grown up in this

country since childhood, and it is in our country's moral responsibility to rehabilitate them. but first, a bold, new, green future forfarming post—brexit or the end of the family farm? the environment secretary, george eustice, came to the commons to unveil what's seen as the most significant change to farming and land management in england for more than 50 years. the common agricultural policy is no more, at least for the uk. subsidies will be phased out over seven years and replaced with payments to protect the environment. direct payments to farmers will be halved within three years, with the money saved put towards an "environmental land management scheme" which will reward farmers for sustainable farming practices and creating new habitats. there'll be financial help for those who want to leave the industry, with the aim of bringing more younger people onto the land as part of the overall package. we will remove arbitrary area—based subsidies

on land ownership, or tenure, and replace them with new payments and new incentives to reward farmers for farming more sustainably, creating space for nature on their land, enhancing animal welfare and delivering the other objectives set out in the agriculture act. we know that this policy marks a significant change. i'm also very conscious of the fact that many farm enterprises are dependent on the area—based subsidy payments to generate a profit, and that without it, some mightjudge they would not be profitable. so we have created a seven—year transition period. we want this to be an evolution, not an overnight revolution. labour weren't persuaded. strip away the green coating, and these proposals are a full—throttle attack on english family farms. english because scotland, welsh and northern ireland farmers are going in a different direction by maintaining support for small farms for longer. under these proposals, many small farms will lose up

to half their current support payments withinjust three years, leaving many financially unviable. he said labour had five tests for the policy. will there be more family farms in 2024 than now? i doubt it. will there be more family farm bankruptcies under these proposals? i expect so. will britain be producing more of its food here rather than importing it? will we be more reliant on food from america and australia in the future? and finally, will english farmers be having a tougher time than farmers in scotland, wales and northern ireland with their mix of direct payments and environmental funding? the snp said it was astonishing so many details remained unclear, more than four years after the brexit referendum. although scottish farmers and crofters do not face the same difficulties, as in scotland, the government has committed to continuing payments at the same level as they are currently, just days ago, our ministers

were told in the spending review that despite the uk government's manifesto commitments to match eu support, that rural scotland will be £170 million short of what was promised by 2025. it is the case that england is a long way ahead of scotland in terms of developing future policy. we want to take the opportunities that come from leaving the european union to chart a different course, to put in place a policy that makes more sense. and our view is that arbitrary area—based subsidies that subsidise people just based on the amount of land that they own or the amount of land that they rent makes no sense in this day and age and we should be directing those funds in a different way. the liberal democrats support the idea of paying farmers to protect the environment, but... the transition, whereby in a revolutionary way in three years' time, people lose half their income, when the average livestock farmer is reliant for 60% of their revenue on basic payment, will lead to hundreds upon hundreds of those family

farms going out of business and therefore not being in a place to deliver those environmental goods by 2028. the landscape of the lake district and the yorkshire dales is shaped by centuries of family farming. by accident, the government could undo all of that in a few short years, even months. george eustice told him what was wrong with the current basic payment scheme, or bps. the truth is that farmers may be the recipients of the bps, but they're not the only beneficiaries or indeed the only beneficiaries. the bps payment has inflated land rents, inflated input costs, prevented people from retiring and also prevented new entrants getting onto the land. that is what we believe there's a better way to pay and reward farmers in future. what he's actioning today is a charter for city slickers, for carpetbaggers, for spivs to take over our farming sector and drive out the traditional smaller english farmers who've been feeding our nation for so many years.

please, please think again before you eradicate the good english farmer. the area—based subsidy we have now has a habit of giving the largest payments to the wealthiest landowners. sometimes these are people who are not really actively farming. sometimes it is people who made their wealth in the city and who are trying to shelter it in land, and then also qualify for taxpayers' payments sometimes running into millions of pounds. that can't be right. the system we're developing is going to reward people for what they do with their land and what they do to help nature recover. now that this statement is pushing the fact that defra is going to be a help, not a hindrance, could the secretary of state explain how ending the bureaucracy and the unnecessary form—filling is going to help ensure that all of our farmers are exactly where they need to be, on the land? well, mr speaker, my honourable friend makes a very important point. under the current common agricultural policy, we have rules about the maximum width of a gateway,

the minimum width of a hedge, the maximum width of a hedge whether a cabbage should be treated the same as a cauliflower for the purposes of the three—crop rule, the list goes on and on. it makes no sense at all. we will be sweeping away those unnecessary rules. george eustice. the government has denied any discrimination in its policy of deporting foreign nationals who have been convicted of serious offences. campaigners have been trying to prevent a flight leaving forjamaica later this week. many on the labour benches were outraged. does the minister recognise that this decision effectively amounts to double jeopardy, when those with some lesser offences have already served their custodial sentence? and does he recognise that the message that it sends about the consequences of being a white offender or being a black offender given the racial disparities in sentencing? i hope the minister agrees that no—one is above the law, not even the government, and that no—one is beneath adequate defence and proper legal representation, not even those born in other countries.

over the last year, of the 5800 people who've been removed, only 33 have been of jamaican nationality. she mentioned black versus white. she was implying, she was insinuating in her question there was some element of underlying racism in this, but i've pointed out already that the majority of people, the vast majority of people, who are removed or have been removed this year have been removed to european countries. i put it to the government that many of these people have grown up in this country since childhood, and it is in our country's moral responsibility to rehabilitate them. newspapers have suggested that a secret deal has been agreed not to remove those who came to the uk as children. it's been reported that the government has now entered into an agreement with the government of jamaica, regarding this flight and others. when will that agreement be published? well, we do not have

any formal agreements. what we do have is a ongoing dialogue about any individual flight or any individual operational circumstance. but let me make completely clear that our commitment to discharging our duty under the 2007 act — which is to seek to remove, or deport rather, anyone committing an offence of over a one—year sentence regardless of their age on arrival — remains steadfastly in place. deporting those who've been in the uk since childhood shows the lessons of windrush have not been learned. the minister keeps referring to murderers and rapists, yet deportation applies to those with sentences as low as 12 months. is it not time to provide legislative certainty and protection for those who come to the uk as children? the debate about whether some age threshold is appropriate is a debate this house had. it had that debate in 2007, and this house decided,

i think rightly, that anyone who's convicted of an offence and sentenced to more than a year is in scope. one conservative spoke for many on his side of the house. those who come from foreign countries and then commit the most heinous of crimes — be it murder, sexual violence, violence against children, violence against the person — can expect to experience the full force of the law and then be required to leave the country at the end of their sentence. and does he agree with me that, far from the public disagreeing with this, they are wholly in support and expect the government to take this action to keep society safe? and there was a flash of anger from the minister in reply to a labour mp who'd asked about the human rights of the people being deported. the honourable lady talks about human cost. let me tell her about the human cost caused by these criminals. what about the children who have been sexually assaulted by these criminals?

what about the victims who have been murdered by these people? what about the victims of violent assault? what about the people whose lives have been ruined by drug addiction or who have been the victims of rape? what about those human tragedies? the honourable lady and many members opposite appear to have nothing whatsoever to say about the human tragedy of the victims. welcome to the modern labour party, more concerned about stopping the deportation of foreign criminals than keeping our streets safe. a labour mp hit back. the minister is making it clear that he and his department find it irksome having to comply with the current requirements of the law. thank goodness they do, because the law is there to protect everyone, and i get the impression a number of members opposite don't approve of that. the minister replied that it was frustrating when the legal system was used in an abusive way, something the government would be tackling with legislation next year. you're watching monday in parliament with me, david cornock.

still to come, will covid rules stop santa working this christmas? the government has been warned that nearly 6 million people claiming universal credit will lose out if ministers go ahead with a cut next year. the chancellor, rishi sunak, warned last week that unemployment was predicted to rise to more than 2.5 million people next year. universal credit claimants were given a £20 a week boost in response to the coronavirus pandemic in april, but it's due to end next april. last week, the chancellor said this was the biggest economic crisis for 300 years. and he's right. so what i cannot understand is how those same spending review documents show the government cutting universal credit next april, £1,000 a year cut, taken from 6 million familiesjust when they need it most. secretary of state, no government since the great depression has cut unemployment

benefits during a crisis, so how can the biggest economic crisis for 300 years be the time to do so? well, as the honourable gentleman knows, the government did introduce a raft of temporary measures to support those hardest hit, including the furlough scheme, self—employed income support scheme and the £20 uc uplift. now, the chancellor has confirmed the uc uplift until march '21. and it's right that we wait for more clarity on the national economic and social picture before assessing the best way to support low—income families moving forward. and that's exactly what i put in the written ministerial statement last week. the chancellor could have made the £20 uplift to universal credit permanent, but instead he has left households deeply concerned as they face the prospect of a cut to this vital lifeline in spring. now, we in the snp have pressed uk ministers on this matter countless times. can the secretary of state tell the house if she discussed extending the universal credit uplift with the chancellor prior to the spending review and whether she believes this extension should

have been included? well, the honourable lady will be aware that the temporary extension of the £20 universal credit uplift was made in line with the fiscal measures made earlier this year. in regards to the benefit upratings, i put that through, as that's the normal process that we go through. but as has been indicated, we will continue to look at this matter again in the new year. a labour mp turned to the situation in her own constituency. from january to august this year, there was a 68% increase in the number of families claiming universal credit. last week, the chancellor told us that the economic emergency has onlyjust begun and that unemployment is set to rise for months to come. when the minister knows that more and more families in nottingham are going to face wage cuts and job losses, how can he argue that universal credit should be cut in just a few months' time? well, mr speaker, firstly, i don't recognise those figures, and certainly nobody is making that case.

the chancellor of the exchequer has confirmed the universal credit uplift until march 2021 and it is right that we wait for more clarity on the national economic and social picture before assessing the best way to support low—income families moving forward. and i would just gently say to the honourable lady that the uplift isjust one part of a comprehensive package of support that we have put in place to support people through this most difficult of periods. the health minister, nadine dorries, has announced an independent inquiry into events over a period of 20 years at the linden centre in chelmsford, essex. it follows a series of deaths at the nhs mental health unit, including 20—year—old matthew leahy, who died from hanging in 2012. the minister made the announcement during a debate prompted by a petition from his mother, melanie, who — alongside otherfamilies — has been campaigning for a public inquiry. i ask the minister, on behalf of melanie leahy, to set up a public inquiry. only a public inquiry will have the transparency and broad participation needed

to rebuild trust in the services. the minister will know it is the only way witnesses can be compelled to give evidence without seeking to apportion blame and evidence must be given on oath. as melanie has said, "since matthew's death, i have been on a mission to get to the truth of what happened to him and to getjustice. on myjourney, i have not only found that many other families are in the same position as me but also individuals who have survived the "care" that they received." so, in this most tragic case, inadequate and neglectful care led to the death of a young man like matthew, and his mother's had to take on a fight over many years to get to the truth. as a result of what i have heard, both from melanie and other relatives, today, i can confirm that there will be an independent inquiry into the events at the linden centre, covering the period from 2000 to the present day. i hope melanie will understand

that an independent inquiry, a robustly independent inquiry, which is unafraid to turn over stones and to work with the families and to call those it sees fit to to give evidence, will understand that this is a way to discover what has happened at the linden centre over the past 20 years. nadine dorries. the government has rejected calls to hold a public inquiry to probe the state's involvement in one of the most notorious murders of the troubles in northern ireland, the killing in 1989 of the solicitor pat finucane. he was shot by paramilitiaries from the ulster defence association, and a paramilitary, ken barrett, was convicted of his murder. the decision by brandon lewis comes after a long campaign and a supreme court ruling on the need for an independent investigation of the killing. i have this afternoon spoken to the finucane family. i advised them of my decision

not to establish a public inquiry at this time. in reaching its conclusion, the supreme court identified a number of issues with previous investigations in this case. firstly, there was no identification of the officers within the royal ulster constabulary, security service and secret intelligence service who failed to warn patrick finucane of known threats to his life in 1981 and 1985, together with the circumstances in which these failures occurred. secondly, there was no identification of the ruc officers who, as desmond de silva said, probably did propose mr finucane as a target for loyalist terrorists in december 1988. and thirdly, there was no identification of the police source who provided intelligence about patrick finucane to ken barrett. he said a review of the evidence by the police service of northern ireland and the police ombudsman could fulfil the requirement for an investigation set out by the supreme court.

this government have demonstrated that, when the public interest requires it, we will establish public inquiries to look at any potential failings by government or state bodies, as, for example, we have done in the case of the manchester bombing. in this instance, i believe it is in the public interest to allow the police and ombudsman processes to proceed before taking any decision on whether the state's article 2 obligations have been discharged or whether further steps are required. this case, it has to be said, is, sadly, just one example of the violence and tragedy experienced by so many individuals and families across northern ireland, the rest of the united kingdom and indeed ireland during the troubles. that is why, as a government, we remain committed to dealing with the legacy of the past in its entirety. the murder of pat finucane in 1989, gunned down in front of his young family in his kitchen by loyalist paramilitaries, involved shocking levels

of state collusion. it is welcome to hear the secretary of state repeat former prime minister david cameron's apology, but he's right. it's not enough. there has never been an adequate investigation into pat finucane's murder, and supreme court justice lord kerr has said that previous investigations have had profound "shortcomings" that " have hampered, if not indeed prevented, the uncovering of the truth about his murder. " that this crime could happen at all in our country is shocking, that it has never been investigated to a lawful standard is unjustifiable. and we have to ask ourselves, as we do with all legacy issues with the troubles, "do we accept a lesser standard ofjustice for citizens in northern ireland than we would if this terrible crime had happened in our own constituencies? " on my 21st birthday, my friend and colleague edgar graham, a lawyer and lecturer at queen's university, was murdered by the provisional ira. there were people involved — not only the gunman,

but others who gave information that led to that murder, who pointed the finger towards edgar, his movements and so on. is it not the case, secretary of state, that all innocent victims are entitled to access tojustice and to truth, including edgar graham's family? the british state murdered pat finucane, and the secretary of state has failed miserably to do right by his family today. does he realise that he is sending out a very clear message to all victims? and the message is this — "if you want the truth about what happened to your loved ones, don't come looking for it here." northern ireland's deputy first minister, michelle o'neill, has warned that people who cross the border with the republic for work are "still in limbo", just weeks before the end of the brexit transition period. answering questions at stormont, the sinn fein vice president also criticised the uk's government's attempt to override parts of the brexit withdrawal agreement as it applies

to northern ireland. how does the deputy first minister feel about the guarded border that's been provided by the republic of ireland in respect of covid? and doesn't it illustrate the full anger and the farce of opposition to as much as an extra camera on the border when it came to brexit, both by dublin and politicians like yourself? or is she so wedded to an ideology that she doesn't care if restrictions on imports into northern ireland cripples the northern ireland economy? or, in fact, is that what she's looking for? well, can i say, just to remind the member, that it's the majority view of this house that actually reject brexit. the majority of the parties, the majority of the mlas elected to this chamber reject brexit. it's something that's been foisted upon us against our wishes. we set ourselves a task at the very start of the brexit

debacle to try and afford ourselves some protections, and that was achieved in the form of the protocol and the withdrawal agreement. and within that, albeit far from perfect, it at least provides us with some guarantees and some assurances, particularly in relation to no return to a hard border, particularly in relation to protection of the all—island economy. and whilst there isn't a meeting of minds on the issue of brexit within the executive, there is a joined—up approach insofaras minimising disruption, minimising cost being pushed onto the consumer, and we have worked very hard to make sure that has been right at the front and centre of all of this debate. does the joint first minister share my concern about the uncertainty facing cross—border workers in the context of brexit? yes, i certainly can say that i do, and i think the figure is 30,000 estimated cross—border workers in ireland — very many of whom cross the border back and forth every day, just part of their daily routine — so i think the loss of protections at the end of the transition period

in just over one month's time — i mean, that's fast coming towards us — that's going to have a huge, significant impact in terms of people's everyday lives. as the brexit negotiations enter the endgame, i think it's not an acceptable nor tenable position that cross—border workers are still in a limbo at this stage of discussions. so any frontier schemes must be accessible and cognizant of the special needs of cross—border workers here in ireland, and the british government must fulfil their legal obligations, as contained in both the good friday agreement and the eu withdrawal agreement. michelle o'neill answering questions at stormont. some of the questions she faced were more topical than others. this has obviously been a challenging year for children in northern ireland, and many — including two little people in my house — are really looking forward to the hope and gifts of christmas. so can i ask the deputy first minister, on behalf of younger and some older constituents, to confirm that the executive

guidelines will allow santa claus, insofar as possible, to deliver some presents to children this christmas? i think that's an excellent question... laughter well, i think it's an excellent question, and i'm quite sure all the little boys and girls out there are really wanting to know the answer to that, so i can confirm that the elves have confirmed to the executive that santa is getting ready, that dancer, prancer and rudolph are ready to go, that the presents are packed and that santa will be here, but they've also said that all the boys and girls need to be very, very good because 25 more sleeps and then santa's going to be here. michelle o'neill with a message of hope and a warning to little people everywhere. that's it for monday in parliament. thank you for watching. i hope you canjoin me at the same time tomorrow for tuesday in parliament. until then, from me, david cornock, bye for now.

hello there. we've started this week on a relatively quiet note. quite a lot of grey, gloomy weather around. although scotland didn't fare too badly with some sunshine. for the rest of this week, things are set to turn much colder and a lot more u nsettled. as low pressure takes over we'll see some rain, sleet and snow in some places. we've got this ridge of high pressure building in early on tuesday. fairly strong winds down the east coast. a cold front which spreads southward across the country during the overnight period. a chilly start but bright with some very welcome sunshine across many parts of central southern, eastern parts of england, but cloud will be thickening up again. this time against northern and western areas into the afternoon. it's going to be a chilly day pretty much wherever you are. in the warmest spots out west and also in the sunny spot in the east could make nine or ten degrees. as we head through tuesday night it looks like another front will start to push into northern and western areas. this is a cold front,

on it there will be outbreaks of rain. quite a lot of cloud and other clear, chilly night in the southeast. the northwest will turn cooler with some blustery showers. as we head through wednesday, this cold front will slowly migrate southwards and introduce much colder air to the north and west of the uk. very windy as well with gales in the northwest of scotland. it will be bright here it was sunshine, blustery showers, heavy across scotland and increasing wintry over the hills. but for england and wales, we'll see quite a bit of cloud with outbreaks of rain. confined to the southeast skies behind it will brighten up here. that cold front clears through as we head on into thursday. low—pressure takes over. it's going to be windy, outbreaks of rain, some of which could be quite heavy through thursday, especially through parts of england and wales. southern england and wales will see the heavy strength of the day for that, could see some gales through the channel as well. further north a bit brighter spells of sunshine, a few showers there will be wintry. even down to lower levels across scotland as temperatures

range from three to around seven degrees, so feeling cold. friday, this big area of low pressure spirals across the country. bringing further spells of strong winds and heavy rain. we could see the threat of some sleet and snow across the northern hills, perhaps even down to lower levels at times. there will be a bit of sunshine here and there too. another cold day on the cards for all.

welcome to bbc news. my name is mike embley. the top stories... as deforestation of the amazon rainforest in brazil reaches its highest level in a decade, scientific analysis suggests the paris climate agreement goals are now within reach. joe biden announces nominations for top posts in his senior economic team — including janet yellen, who could become the first female us treasury secretary. authorities in south australia are preparing to reopen the border with victoria and greater sydney as the state records no new coronavirus cases in 2a hours. and, why covid—19lockdown measures have seen a surge in tv watching and online streaming around the world. oh, my lord, everything has changed.