this is bbc news. the headlines: in a speech to a joint session of congress, president biden has marked his one hundred days in office with the phrase "america is on the move again". mr biden hailed as a success the massive vaccination programme and said his administration has created a record number of jobs. just 200 people heard the president who remarked that he was the first to speak before a female vice president and speaker. he took time to woo the republicans in his audience, expressing the need to have bipartisan cooperation if the united states was able to compete with autocrats around the world. he said his administration had created a record number ofjobs. record number of jobs. republicans responded record number ofjobs. republicans responded to mr biden�*s speech saying the president had done little to heal the divide in america. to senator tim scott said he plans would hurt long—term economic growth. —— republican senator.

sally will be here at the top of the hour. now on bbc news, wednesday in parliament. hello there and welcome to wednesday in parliament. coming up in the next half hour, more questions for borisjohnson aboutjust who paid for the revamp of his downing street flat. don't the british people deserve a prime minister they can trust and a government that isn't mired in sleaze, cronyism and scandal? but borisjohnson insists he picked up the bill. he should know that i paid for downing street refurbishment personally, mr speaker. also on this programme, fresh demands for help for india as it struggles with its covid crisis. and abuse towards shop staff —

police respond to criticism that sometimes they're called but don't come. it's really sad i to hear, isn't it? but given the amount - of deployments and the calls that will come in, these occasions will occur- and we are doing what we can to reduce those. - the electoral commission has launched a formal inquiry into the funding of boris johnson's downing street flat refurbishment, revealing there are reasonable grounds to suspect that the rules may have been broken. borisjohnson and his fiancee, carrie symonds, carried out renovations on their private residence, above number 11. the total cost of the works isn't known, but it's reported to be well above the annual public grant of £30,000 that's available to spend on the flat. before turning to that row, sir keir starmer used his first question at pmqs to bring up another headline which has dogged the prime minister in recent days — comments he's reported to have made ahead of imposing a second lockdown in england. mr speaker, it was reported this week, including in the daily mail, the bbc

and itv, backed up by numerous sources, that at the end of october, the prime minister said he would rather have, and i quote, "bodies pile high" than implement another lockdown. can the prime minister tell the house categorically, yes or no, did he make those remarks or remarks to that effect? no, mrspeaker. and i think... the right honourable gentleman is a lawyer, i'm given to understand. i think that if he's going to repeat allegations like that, he should come to this house and substantiate those allegations and say where he heard them and who exactly is supposed to have said those things, mr speaker. well, somebody here isn't telling the truth. the house will have heard the prime minister's answer, and i remind him the ministerial code says,

and i quote, "ministers who knowingly mislead parliament will be expected to offer their resignation." i'll leave it there for now. turning to another issue, who... there will be further on this. there will be further on this, believe you me. who initially — and, prime minister, "initially" is the key word here — who initially paid for the redecoration of his downing street flat? he should know that i paid for downing street refurbishment personally, mr speaker. either the taxpayer paid the initial invoice, or it was the conservative party, or it was a private donor, or it was the prime minister. so i'm making it easy for the prime minister. it's now multiple—choice. there are only four options. it should be easier than finding the chatty rat, mr speaker. so i ask the prime minister again, who paid the initial invoice — initial invoice, prime minister —

for the redecoration of the prime minister's flat, the initial invoice? mr speaker, i have given him the answer, and the answer is i have covered the cost. and i think most people will find it absolutely bizarre... and of course there's an electoral commission investigating this, and i can tell him that i've conformed in full with the code of conduct, with the ministerial code, and officials have been advising me throughout this whole thing, but i think people will think it absolutely bizarre that he is focusing on this issue. the electoral commission now think that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence, or offences, may have occurred. that's incredibly serious. can the prime minister tell the house, does he believe that any rules or laws have been broken in relation to the refurbishment of the prime minister's flat?

no, idon't, mr speaker. what i believe has been strained to breaking point is the credulity of the public. he has half an hour every week to put serious and sensible questions to me about the state of the pandemic, about the vaccine roll—out, about what we're doing to support our nhs, about what we're doing to fight crime, about what we're doing to bounce back from this pandemic, about the economic recovery, aboutjobs for the people of this country, and he goes on and on, mr speaker, about wallpaper when, as i've told him umpteen times now, i paid for it. dodgy contracts, jobs for their mates and cash for access, and who's at the heart of it? the prime minister, major sleaze sitting there. don't the british people deserve a prime minister they can trust and a government that isn't mired in sleaze, cronyism and scandal? this is a government that is getting on with delivering on the people's priorities. we're rolling out many more nurses, 10,000 more nurses in the nhs, now than there were this time last year, 8,771 more police officers

on our streets now than there were when i was elected, including tougher sentences, mr speaker, for serious sexual and violent criminals, which he opposed, mr speaker. we're getting on. and by the way, i forget to mention it, i forgot to mention it, last night, our friends in the european union voted to approve our brexit deal, which he opposed, and which enables us notjust to take back control of our borders, mr speaker — which it does, which he fervently opposed — enabling us, amongst other things, to deal with such threats as the european super league, mr speaker, but it enables us to deliver free ports in places like teesside and, above all, taking back control of our country has allowed us to deliver the fastest vaccine roll—out in europe, as he well knows, mr speaker, which would not have been possible if we'd stayed in the european medicines agency, which he voted for. he accused labour of twisting and turning and thinking

the snp�*s westminster leader returned to the claims that the prime minister had said he would rather see bodies "piled high" than have another lockdown. the bbc and itv have multiple sources confirming that this is what the prime minister said. people are willing to go under oath, mr speaker, confirming that the prime minister said these exact words — under oath, mr speaker. now, parliamentary rules stop me from saying that the prime minister has repeatedly lied to the public over the last week, but can i ask the question — are you a liar, prime minister? boris johnson hesitated to stand up, waiting to see if the speaker would rule that language out of order. i leave it to you to judge whether the right honourable gentleman's remarks were in order, but what i will say to him is... can i just say? unfortunately, they're in order but were not savoury and not i what we would expect. boris johnson repeated the answer he'd given keir starmer, demanding ian blackford produce the person who claimed to have

heard the comment and insisting he hadn't said those words. ian blackford said it was the prime minister's behaviour which was not in order. this is a prime minister who is up to his neck in a swamp of tory sleaze. we've seen contracts for cronies, texts for tax breaks and cash for curtains. the prime minister has dodged these questions all week and he's dodged them again today, but these questions simply are not going to go away. so when exactly was money funnelled through tory hq into his personal bank account? when did he pay back this money? was it an interest—free loan? and who is the donor or donors who originally funded it? is the prime minister aware that if he continues to fail to answer these questions that the electoral commission has the powers to prosecute? will the prime minister publish these details today? or is he going to waiting until the police come knocking at his door? mr speaker, as i've said, i look forward to what the electoral commission has

to say, but i can tell him that, to the rest of it, he's talking complete nonsense. given that the sole judge on questions relating - to the conduct of ministers —| and the conduct of the prime minister — is the prime - minister himself, what happens when a prime minister goes rogue? - borisjohnson said people could make their minds up at the local elections on may 6. it's been reported that the reason for the downing street redecoration was to get rid of theresa may'sjohn lewis decor. a labour mp reckoned that smacked of snobbery. is it the truth behind all of this — the sleaze, the scandals, the jobs for your mates, the cash for curtains — that the prime minister thinks that rules,

wealthy donors to fund like him and his ministers? mr speaker, i think what people think is that the labour party are losing all the arguments across british politics. they've got nothing to say, they've got no plan for our future and no vision for our country. they see a conservative government that is getting on with uniting and levelling up, with the most ambitious agenda that any government has had for generations, and i think that's what they're listening to. the former treasury minister lord myners has said that taxpayers could lose around £1 billion as a result of allowing greensill capital to be an approved lender of government—backed covid loans. he also said nigel boardman was "not an appropriate person" to lead the government's review of david cameron's lobbying for greensill. is the inquiry that's being led, that's been announced, do you feel that that inquiry and the person leading that inquiry is going to do justice to all that's been exposed, both by the greensill case and also the ppe procurement contract scandals?

i've known mr nigel boardman for 30 years. i've taken advice from him on more than one occasion. he is one of the top lawyers in the city. but he is not an appropriate person to lead this review. he is not an appropriate person for three reasons. firstly, he's a non—executive director of the department of business. he stood down from that role, but he's going to rejoin. that's sort of half a foot out the door, the remaining one and a half remaining in the door. the department of business is the department that's cost the government more money with greensill than any other single department. the accumulated losses from greensill for the taxpayer, in myjudgment, are going to be north of £1 billion, of which nearly a half will come as a result of the department of business's scheme to accredit greensill as a lender, under

the coronavirus loan scheme. david cameron lobbied the treasury on behalf of greensill, which was seeking support from a coronavirus business support scheme. a former senior civil servant at the treasury shared his view with the committee. when businesses come and ask for access to subsidies, which in effect this was, you have to ask yourself very clearly, "what's in it for them and what's in it for the wider economy?" and those are the sorts ofjudgements you have to make. and ijust worry, in this case, that — and it relates to paul's point — that, actually, this was more about greensill�*s survival than about the survival of the sme sector.

in the end, the treasury rejected the request, but lord macpherson had concerns about disparities in access to whitehall. i'm in no doubt that business, generally, has more access to government than ordinary people up and down the country, or trade unions, or wider civil society, and i think this is difficult. it always slightly troubled me, the ease with which business does get access, which just comes back to the same point. it's why you have to be very careful. you're watching wednesday in parliament, with me, alicia mccarthy. india's official death toll from covid—i9 has now passed 200,000. experts believe the actual

number may be far higher. people have died waiting for beds, as oxygen supplies run low and hospitals crumble under the strain. in an urgent question, mps wanted to know what support the uk was providing to the indian government. the first shipment, mr speaker, of 200 ventilators and 95 oxygen concentrators arrived in india in the early hours of yesterday and is already being distributed to indian hospitals. a further 400 oxygen concentrators will follow today and tomorrow. this equipment will boost the oxygen supplies in india's hospitals which remain under severe pressure. so it's without doubt that support provided by the united kingdom will save lives. for more than a million britons with loved ones in india, this is a moment of fear and anxiety. the ties between our countries are woven into the fabric of this nation, something that through my own heritage i am

personally and acutely aware of. many britons of indian origin will have gone to work today in our nhs in our care homes helping to carry us through this crisis while desperately worried about loved ones in india. we can and must do more. what i would say, she references words, not deeds. i think what you've seen over the weekend is deeds, not words. we were the first — first country — to deliver support to the indian people. what is happening in india is an absolute tragedy. but it's also a stark warning that this virus thrives when we relax. after all, many in india thought that they had beaten this virus and every time a surge happens, the virus mutates faster and with every mutation, our collective fight goes back a step. there is only one way to beat this virus and that is to work together in lockstep across the global community to keep cases low, minimise the risk of new variants, and vaccinate. so will the minister now commit to both increasing the money

the uk gives to covax — much that that is, we need to do more — but to also start sharing vaccine doses through covax now today? right now, we're moving through the uk prioritisation list, that's what i think the country would expect us to do for our domestic roll—out and we don't currently have surplus doses. but we keep it under constant review. of course, i recognise that no one is safe until we're all safe with this pandemic but that's why i'm proud that the united kingdom, despite the challenging financial pressures that this pandemic has brought us, we've donated over half £1 billion to covax. the minister keeps repeating that no one is safe until everyone is safe. but the reality is that 80% of all covid vaccines are being delivered injust ten wealthy countries and covax is struggling to obtain vaccines. unless there is greater international solidarity, other health care systems like india's will collapse and vaccine—resistant variants will inevitably threaten those who live here. does the minister not accept that the uk needs to play its part by lifting the ban on exporting vaccines,

sharing covid technology with others, and increasing rather than slashing overseas aid? on tuesday, the fire safety bill was rejected in its current form for a fourth time by the house of lords. peers voted to re—introduce a measure to ensure leaseholders didn't have to meet the costs of safety work needed to avoid a repeat of the grenfell tower disaster. their insistence on that point meant the bill had to go back to the commons again, where the minister claimed the idea wouldn't help leaseholders. we have seen the key elements of this amendment time and this house has voted them down time and time again. yet time and time again, peers and the opposition —

i trust unintentionally — seem set on re—injecting uncertainty into the market which cannot help leaseholders. labour accused the prime minister and the chancellor of not caring enough to act. 14 separate companies and individuals with links to construction companies using the potentially lethal acm cladding on buildings have donated nearly £4 million to the conservatives since 2006. the prime minister must have his new curtains. so, they turn away from the screams for help from the people hit with extraordinary bills of 40, 50, £60,000, and the minister has to bunker down, hold his nose, and hold the line. i almost feel sorry for him. well, when the matter was put to a vote, the government won by a majority of 66. now, a conservative peer has compared new powers compelling stormont to implement abortion laws to adolf hitler's euthanasia programme against disabled people.

peers were debating regulations which would make politicians and health service commissioners in northern ireland adopt changes to the rules, which were passed by westminster mps while the assembly was inactive in 2019. lord shinkwin passionately opposed the idea. if we pass these regulations today, not only are we endorsing lethal disability discrimination right up to birth, but we are in practice saying to anyone who is born with a disability that they somehow escaped the net. it is tragic that despite the immense sacrifices of my grandparents�* generation who fought and died in the war that the eugenicist poison that informed adolf hitler's aktion ta euthanasia programme against disabled human beings is now informing government policy and being imposed

on the people of northern ireland. what we are talking about here today is about the provision, legal provision, of services which are locally accessible to women and girls who need them. it's part of an ongoing debate between those of us who believe that women and girls are capable and have the right to make informed choices about their reproductive health informed by health practitioners who wish to guarantee their safety and those who do not. and i have to say to the noble lord, lord shinkwin, there was much that i took exception to in his speech. today, i do not have time to address his issues but i do hope that the house will return to some of the very serious allegations that he made.

but lord shinkwin had support from other peers who also opposed changing the rules, arguing the move also threatened devolution. the assembly is sitting, the matter is devolved to that legislature. the regulations raise complex legal and constitutional questions. they undermined the devolution settlement. there's been no public consultation. and the regulations were made just before easter preventing the house from considering them before they came into effect. for the government, lord younger explained why the regulations were before peers. over a year after the 2020 regulations came into force, women and girls in northern ireland are still unable to access high—quality abortion and post—abortion care in northern ireland and the commissioning of full abortion services consistent with the conditions set out in the 2020 regulations. my lords, it has still not happened. he said women were still having to travel to england and wales to access abortion services. and when it came to the vote, three attempts to stop the regulations coming into force were overwhelmingly defeated. now, senior police officers have been challenged over their response to shop

staff being shouted at, threatened, and even attacked. the home affairs committee is holding an inquiry into violence and abuse towards retail staff. the committee chair, yvette cooper, said the mps had been told of a significant increase in such incidents, and that it was not being taken seriously enough by police. what would you say to all of those shopworkers and retailers about the violence that they are facing and about the police response to it? i understand and i share the concern that they have about the levels of violence against workers in the retail sector. we are not complacent. the challenge that we've had around covid where clearly shopworkers have been in the forefront of sort of keeping the economy going, keeping people fed, watered and essential services has meant we have done a significant amount of work with the retail sector during the covid period.

paul gerard from the co—op told us bearing in mind we report only the most serious offences to the police, we do not want to report every incident of shoplifting. we don't want to report every incident of shoplifting. two times out of every three, the police did not attend for those serious offences. so if the co—op are not reporting the most serious offences, so they are only reporting the ones that they think are serious, the police are not attending in two out of three of those incidents, can i ask you if you think that figure is accurate for forces across the country? patrick holdaway, is that what happens in hampshire? it's very difficult, chair,

to get the accurate level of data and i think you're right in what you say, it will reflect differently across our different forces. when a call comes in, of any call, the control room will make an assessment of that given the fact that they have been given. so, the first challenge is that we be making sure that the retailers get the right level of information which will have elicited a police response if it is described... you described a situation where someone came in 5pm wanting to buy paracetamol and then you're allowed, was refused, threats were made, began to get aggressive and abusive, assaulted people, was removed from the store, stayed outside the store, and then made personal threats against the female manager, colleague called the police and heard nothing back until the next day when the police rang to see if everything was ok. do you think that is an acceptable response? patrick holdaway said, no, such a case would be looked into. it's really sad to hear, isn't it?

but given the amount of deployments and the calls that will come in, these occasions will occur and we're doing what we can to reduce those. yvette cooper returned to the co—op�*s evidence. if they're reporting cases and only getting — two thirds of the cases that they getting police attending, is that what is happening in gwent? well, you know, unfortunately. on occasion when we do receive a call for service as patrick has said, when we don't. have a risk assessment evaluation to it using . threat—harm risk if the - offender has left the store and there are no other units to be able to deploy, - on occasion that does happen, and i would very much- like to make it clear that i whilst i am not comfortable with that, sometimes that's the resources that we have i available to be able to respond. - amanda bla keman there. and that's it from me for now, but do join me next time for a round—up of the week here at westminster. but until then from me, alicia mccarthy, goodbye.

hello there. it took till the end of the month before they started to make an appearance, but april showers feature quite heavily in the forecast through the rest of this week and into the weekend. and don't expect things to warm up as we see april out and go into may. it is going to be on the chilly side. area of low pressure with this weather front, which brought rain to end wednesday across southern counties. continues to push away eastwards, opening the door to north to north—easterly winds for all, all the way from the arctic. the blue colours indicating that cold air in place, and once again this morning, a fairly widespread frost away from the towns and city centres. that makes it every day in april so far, somewhere in the uk has seen a frost. lovely bright start, though, for many. 1—2 early showers, wales and the southwest, but the bulk of the showers will be

north—east england, eastern scotland, northern ireland. some of these could be heavy with hail and thunder. just watch how they develop through the day — become a bit more widespread, pushing a bit further southwards. now, it is going to be a day where some of you stay completely dry. southern counties, maybe along some eastern coasts, too, but all will be in that north to northeasterly airflow for all. temperatures will be down on where we should be. should be around 12 in aberdeen, just eight. should be 15 in london, just 12, as we go through the second half of the day. now, into the evening and through thursday night into friday, we will see clear skies return once again. a few showers to continue through the night, but another frosty night to see the last morning of the month. just about anywhere again away from towns and city centres. could have a bit of ice, too. we've seen some overnight showers and, like thursday, showers will start to develop, becoming heavy with hail and thunder. more, though, compared with thursday across parts of wales, central and southern england, particularly southernmost counties, and it will still stay chilly even though the breeze is not desperately strong. and that breeze becomes even less of a feature as we go

through friday night into saturday. notice how the isobars aligned, opening out, fairly light winds across the uk, and that does mean as the showers develop through the day after a sunny — in places, frosty — start, where you do catch some, they will be slow moving. most prone towards the south and southwest of the uk, western scotland and northern ireland. temperatures still down on where we should be for the time of year. what happens as we head into a bank holiday monday. deep area of low pressure pushes its way towards us, could be bringing, after a bright start, some heavy rain and strong winds. we'll keep you updated.

this is bbc news. i'm sally bundock with the latest headlines for viewers in the uk and around the world. madam speaker, the president of the united states. "america is on the move again". president biden marks one hundred days in office in a speech to the us congress. he received a warm reception from both democrats and republicans, before laying out an ambitious spending plan. thanks to the american rescue plan, we are on track to cut child poverty in america in half this year. his supporters call his $6 trillion rescue plan

a bold move — his opponents say its a risk that's too high a price to pay.