the economic damage caused by previous deindustrialisation. the greens admit some of their ambitious plans for tax raising and the transition to renewable energy cannot be achieved with the powers the scottish parliament currently has. they think an independent scotland could take a much more radical path. sarah smith, bbc news, glasgow. large sections of a cliff on dorset�*sjurassic coast have collapsed, dramatically changing the landscape. it's the biggest landslide in 60 years, with a substantial rock fall near thorncombe beacon. more movement is expected as fresh cracks have appeared. a further 300 metres of cliffs east of seatown also fell away, leading to the coastal path being cordoned off. dorset council is warning that with the ground drying out, there could be more landslips without much warning. manchester city are through to the semi—finals of the champions league after beating borussia dortmund in germany this evening.

but liverpool are out, after only managing a goalless draw at home to real madrid. 0ur sports correspondentjoe wilson has all the details. the streets outside anfield, as close the crowd could get, supporting their team. but look at what happened to real madrid's bus. damage liverpool football club described as totally unacceptable and shameful. 0n the pitch liverpool started two goals behind. two minutes into this second leg, well, that seemed too good a chance to waste. and just before half—time, this miss put the "why" into wijnaldum. move on, implored the manager. well, liverpool kept madrid out and kept going themselves, but having lost the first leg 3—1, 0—0 meant nothing. goalless and gone. meanwhile, at borussia dortmund, manchester city began 2—1 up but stand by for a lad from the english west midlands levelling the tie for the german team. commentator: jude bellingham with a fantastic finish! _

bellingham is just 17. these days germany is often the finishing school. now manchester city knew they had to score. there was urgency, there was kevin de bruyne... there was the crossbar. nothing for city in the first half, but soon another chapter of confusion in the handball handbook. the ball struck emre can, penalty given. manchester city's manager had no doubts but the officials did. they looked at replays. did that hit his head first? was that arm natural? still a penalty. riyad mahrez�*s opportunity. 3—2 to manchester city overall, and now they had an away goal. then dortmund made a critical error. they left phil foden with time and space for this. if this is city's year for europe, well, maybe it's foden who makes the difference. joe wilson, bbc news. that's it. now on bbc one, time for the news where you are. have a very good night.

hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the the papers will be bringing us tomorrow. with me are sonia sodha, chief leader writer at the observer and tom newton dunn, chief political commentator with times radio. tomorrow's front pages. starting with. .. the front page of the metro looks at the row over lobbying of politicians and civil servants by the finance firm greensill capital. it echoes the words of labour leader sir keir starmer who accused minister of a �*return to tory sleaze�*. in the wake of the greensill scandal the telegraph focusses on the crackdown on whether senior civil service officials have rule—breaking second jobs. meanwhile — as the treasury select committee looks into lobbying — the is headline is. �*uk lobbying watchdog is.

lobbists — away from greensill — the guardian reports that the issuing of �*covid passports�* could amount to unlawful indirect discrimination according to the government�*s independent equalities watchdog. and the daily mail features a newly released picture of the queen and the late duke of edinburgh with their great—grandchildren. so let�*s begin... 0h wordi 0h word i don�*t get hurt since 1997. sleaze is back according to the metro. . �* , sleaze is back according to the metro. . �*, , ., , metro. that's right. so the story about michael— metro. that's right. so the story about michael wan _ metro. that's right. so the story about michael wan and - metro. that's right. so the story about michael wan and dave - metro. that's right. so the story about michael wan and dave are| metro. that's right. so the story. about michael wan and dave are a camry on his role in lobbying on their behalf, his sort of sam with my formerfriends in their behalf, his sort of sam with my former friends in government rambling on. the longer the story goes on the more it is actually reaching be the direct question of david cameron and what he asked laura may or may not. for company. greensill to him he was acting as an

adviser, stood to gain lots of the company did it well. the story is moving beyond the question of that direct relationship as important as thatis direct relationship as important as that is to the question of other relationships, other ministers who may be involved. but also the question of very senior civil servants and very senior civil servants and very senior civil servant in the civil service. the telegraph reporting that some very senior civil servants themselves may have also been involved and doing paid work for companies, advisory work while they are working for the civil service. this seems like such an extraordinary conflict of interest. you just wouldn�*t expect if you�*re a senior civil servant working on business related, you would expect that you are working only in the service of the government and public interest. but it turns out first of all this greensill story we know that the

former head of procurement of the government while working in a senior position for the cabinet and paid adviser to greensill at the same time. it seems that other senior civil servants may have similar conflicts of interest. so a huge question developing over this. don�*t just relate to david cameron, the role of a former prime minister in lobbying but also other ministers to civil servants. and it really has been the big political story of the day. with labour calling for a much more independent, wider ranging than the government have committed to. and they didn�*t get in parliament. you mentioned the audience in the front page of telegraph, crackdown on second jobs. i like a lot of people were surprised at civil servants had second jobs anyway. fire servants had second “obs anyway. are the servants had second jobs anyway. are they allowed to? if you believe the cabinet _ they allowed to? if you believe the cabinet office who wrote back to the

chairman _ cabinet office who wrote back to the chairman of the appointments committee and its supposed to sign these _ committee and its supposed to sign these things off of former cabinet member— these things off of former cabinet member did not minister himself. then_ member did not minister himself. then yes — member did not minister himself. then yes. that was the distinct surprise — then yes. that was the distinct surprise of— then yes. that was the distinct surprise of everybody. quite a lot of government ministers, i think 10 downing _ of government ministers, i think 10 downing street as well. also some surprise _ downing street as well. also some surprise to — downing street as well. also some surprise to the cabinet secretary featured — surprise to the cabinet secretary featured on the front page of the daily— featured on the front page of the daily telegraph. who has written to every— daily telegraph. who has written to every single permanent secretary in whitehaii— every single permanent secretary in whitehall i hear after having a meeting — whitehall i hear after having a meeting with the ball was fairly testy— meeting with the ball was fairly testy saying we now need to get to the bottom of exactly who has the second _ the bottom of exactly who has the second jobs, who is effectively on double _ second jobs, who is effectively on double bubble, who is being enumerated by some private company in the _ enumerated by some private company in the big _ enumerated by some private company in the big wide world of commercialism. at the same time working _ commercialism. at the same time working for— commercialism. at the same time working for taxpayers. do commercialism. at the same time working for taxpayers.— commercialism. at the same time working for taxpayers. do they not know this? — working for taxpayers. do they not know this? no, _ working for taxpayers. do they not know this? no, this _ working for taxpayers. do they not know this? no, this is _ working for taxpayers. do they not know this? no, this is the - working for taxpayers. do they not know this? no, this is the heart i working for taxpayers. do they not know this? no, this is the heart ofj know this? no, this is the heart of the whole problem. _

know this? no, this is the heart of the whole problem. this _ know this? no, this is the heart of the whole problem. this comes i know this? no, this is the heart of. the whole problem. this comes from the whole problem. this comes from the chief— the whole problem. this comes from the chief commercial officer for the cameron— the chief commercial officer for the cameron government back in 2014, he then went _ cameron government back in 2014, he then went to— cameron government back in 2014, he then went to work in greensill capitai — then went to work in greensill capital. why were talking about this now is— capital. why were talking about this now is he _ capital. why were talking about this now is he was working for both at the same — now is he was working for both at the same time. he was allowed to do 'obs the same time. he was allowed to do jobs here _ the same time. he was allowed to do jobs here for a few months. that was this morning — jobs here for a few months. that was this morning front page story. now we're _ this morning front page story. now we're onto— this morning front page story. now we're onto the next thing which is the steps — we're onto the next thing which is the steps but panic across whitehall trying _ the steps but panic across whitehall trying to _ the steps but panic across whitehall trying to find out who else has had one of— trying to find out who else has had one of these job shares. it may be not many— one of these job shares. it may be not many or— one of these job shares. it may be not many or it may be quite a lot. the real— not many or it may be quite a lot. the real problem for downing street and the _ the real problem for downing street and the cabinet secretary now, all these _ and the cabinet secretary now, all these people trying to get to the bottom — these people trying to get to the bottom of this and clean this mess up bottom of this and clean this mess up as— bottom of this and clean this mess up as they— bottom of this and clean this mess up as theyjust don't know. they 'ust up as theyjust don't know. they just don't— up as theyjust don't know. they just don't know at the moment the scale _ just don't know at the moment the scale of— just don't know at the moment the scale of the problem. was to me is very hard _ scale of the problem. was to me is very hard went to fix. i scale of the problem. was to me is very hard went to fix.— very hard went to fix. i am not an exert at very hard went to fix. i am not an expert at interpreting _ very hard went to fix. i am not an expert at interpreting mandarins| expert at interpreting mandarins letters but even i saw that letter from simon casing there�*s an awful lot between the lines of theirs. absolutely. i think it raises many questions as it answered. i think the sort of bigger question from all

of this is if this has been allowed to go on and as tom says, we don�*t know quite yet how far it goes which is why i think labour are right to be asking for an independent inquiry that goes further than just the greensill, david cameron question. if this has been allowed to go wrong, what kind of more changes to be niegh? what�*s going wrong in the process as? 0bviously be niegh? what�*s going wrong in the process as? obviously it�*s just so blatantly wrong that you can draw a salary working in a very senior role in at the same time get paid again for advising a company that stands to benefit from government contracts was up that is just such a major conflict of interest. and it�*s extraordinary that we know at least in two or three cases that this has been going on. i think the real question is, how do we resolve this? it's question is, how do we resolve this? it�*s very clear that the system to try and prevent lobbying, try to prevent the royal fleet night

revolving door by which ministers and senior civil servants go work for companies and lobby their former government. now we know some of them are actually holding jobs for private companies the same time as working in government. very, very clear that the system is broken and needs fixing. i think that is really where we need to establish how far this goes and what changes we need to the system to make sure that we don�*t see these very serious conflict interest again. irate don't see these very serious conflict interest again. we will sta with conflict interest again. we will stay with the _ conflict interest again. we will stay with the telegraph - conflict interest again. we will stay with the telegraph again | conflict interest again. we will. stay with the telegraph again with the next story. next a picture in the next story. next a picture in the queen in 2018 with a great grandchildren is a story about the upcoming funeral. funerals of course are sometimes complicated, everyone comes together for one moment bringing what ever prior problems they might have had to a single family gathering. the story, deuce expected to wear civilian dress after uniform row. == expected to wear civilian dress after uniform row.— expected to wear civilian dress after uniform row. -- duke. you're riaht,

after uniform row. -- duke. you're right. funerals _ after uniform row. -- duke. you're right, funerals are _ after uniform row. -- duke. you're right, funerals are complicated - right, funerals are complicated emotional experiences for everybody felt emotional experiences for everybody fett up _ emotional experiences for everybody fett up not _ emotional experiences for everybody felt up notjust because your morning _ felt up notjust because your morning the person you're burying prince _ morning the person you're burying prince obviously on saturday and the royal family to attend. not many funerats— royal family to attend. not many funerals however get caught up in a bil funerals however get caught up in a big contrast to the neck controversy about _ big contrast to the neck controversy about the _ big contrast to the neck controversy about the dressing. that for many is straightforward for people. if you are the _ straightforward for people. if you are the royal family of course everything is complicated. i think it started — everything is complicated. i think it started with prince harry who has come _ it started with prince harry who has come back— it started with prince harry who has come back from the united states and quarantining so he can be free to go to the _ quarantining so he can be free to go to the funeral. he is not allowed to id to the funeral. he is not allowed to go to— to the funeral. he is not allowed to go to the _ to the funeral. he is not allowed to go to the funeral in military dress. as a working royal e is gave its responsibility and uniforms. he has no ceremonial rights anymore. he was facing _ no ceremonial rights anymore. he was facing the _ no ceremonial rights anymore. he was facing the prospect of having to walk— facing the prospect of having to walk behind his grandfathers coughing, that emotional walk is the only member of the family in a suit ora only member of the family in a suit or a morning — only member of the family in a suit or a morning coat or something. he wanted _ or a morning coat or something. he wanted to—

or a morning coat or something. he wanted to dress in an admirals uniform — wanted to dress in an admirals uniform. apparently he thinks he's entitied _ uniform. apparently he thinks he's entitled to — uniform. apparently he thinks he's entitled to wear the uniform. he was in the _ entitled to wear the uniform. he was in the royal— entitled to wear the uniform. he was in the royal navy never quite made it that _ in the royal navy never quite made it that high. that caused some controversy. the queen was reported today— controversy. the queen was reported today not _ controversy. the queen was reported today not so — controversy. the queen was reported today not so happy about him and perhaps _ today not so happy about him and perhaps not wanting, prince harry said that's — perhaps not wanting, prince harry said that's it, everybody is in civilian— said that's it, everybody is in civilian clothing. we will not have any more — civilian clothing. we will not have any more arguments about who wants to dress— any more arguments about who wants to dress up— any more arguments about who wants to dress up as all is going to wear a suit _ to dress up as all is going to wear a suit that— to dress up as all is going to wear a suit. that is the basic of the story— a suit. that is the basic of the story for— a suit. that is the basic of the story for the if you think your family— story for the if you think your family is— story for the if you think your family is complicated. talking about military dress _ family is complicated. talking about military dress and _ family is complicated. talking about military dress and lead _ family is complicated. talking about military dress and lead us _ family is complicated. talking about military dress and lead us onto - family is complicated. talking about military dress and lead us onto the l military dress and lead us onto the next paper, the guardian. which is about people who were in uniform for 20 years in afghanistan and who are not leaving. 0n the front page and biden ends at longest war with troop exit. that from the observer is the quote from biden the longest was sometimes called the forever war or the forgotten war. how would you sum it up?

the forgotten war. how would you sum it u - ? . , , ., , it up? certainly very long. this isn't i it up? certainly very long. this isn't i soppose _ it up? certainly very long. this isn't i suppose a _ it up? certainly very long. this isn't i suppose a great - it up? certainly very long. thisj isn't i suppose a great surprise it up? certainly very long. this i isn't i suppose a great surprise to isn�*t i suppose a great surprise to close watcher of bidens forest policy and foreign policy statements over recent months and years. probably one of the few things he shares in common in terms of policy position with donald trump. he always made it clear that he was going to at some point soon withdraw us troops from afghanistan. he�*s going to do that by september, we now know. i think the really serious question this raises is, the us has had an important, played a big role in afghanistan over the last two decades it really hasn�*t made things better towards intervention and people would argue it�*s made things worse. afghanistan isn�*t really in a much better place than it�*s been of late. there are lots of concerns about what�*s going to happen when the us and indeed other countries

withdraw their international presence. lots of fears from people living in afghanistan, particularly women about the return of the tele— band and when that could mean that for them. band and when that could mean that forthem. i band and when that could mean that for them. i think it —— caliban. i think you have to, it�*s just such —— caliban. foreign policy phase that was just no plan and caliban. foreign policy phase that wasjust no plan and i think caliban. foreign policy phase that was just no plan and i think the worst aspect about this is what this means for the people of x afghanistan going forward. the international community has no solution for them. no constructive solution. i think it�*s really the people of afghanistan that we have to feel sorry for for all of theirs. whenjoe biden first came to public office the united states was propping up a government in asia against seen as a guerrilla enemy, the united states left, that guerrilla enemy took over, is south vietnam, afghanistan the story now?

there are interesting parallels, of course _ there are interesting parallels, of course. very different countries. america — course. very different countries. america wasjust beaten in vietnam and had _ america wasjust beaten in vietnam and had to— america wasjust beaten in vietnam and had to leave, lost 50,000 troops there _ and had to leave, lost 50,000 troops there. different case in afghanistan, not as many dead. the victory— afghanistan, not as many dead. the victory not _ afghanistan, not as many dead. the victory not quite as clear. some report— victory not quite as clear. some report about that. i feel, worst effect — report about that. i feel, worst effect that can happen in afghanistan is the west isjust run out of— afghanistan is the west isjust run out of patience. you're right, they've — out of patience. you're right, they've been there very long time, 20 years— they've been there very long time, 20 years in— they've been there very long time, 20 years in fact. 20 years this september whenjoe biden wants 20 years in fact. 20 years this september when joe biden wants to pull att— september when joe biden wants to pull all the troops out. on the anniversary of 9/11. there is no other— anniversary of 9/11. there is no other reason for it apart from someone _ other reason for it apart from someone decided that that's it and we don't _ someone decided that that's it and we don't want to be there any longer — we don't want to be there any longer i_ we don't want to be there any longer. i will say, we don't want to be there any longer. iwill say, i covered

afghanistan for years and