these works on show here now reflect a country, a culture, that is fighting for its very survival. katie razzall, bbc news, venice. 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 susie boniface, who's a columnist for the daily mirror, and ali miraj, a columnist at the article. tomorrow's front pages, starting with the ft reports that the pound has reached its lowest level since 2020

following a drop in high street sales. meanwhile, the times say health secretary sajid javid believes children are wrongly being given gender hormone treatment by the nhs. the telegraph, reports that germany and france have previously supplied arms to russia that are likely being used in ukraine. beside that story, a picture of prince louis, taken by the duchess of canbridge to mark his fourth birthday. the daily mail says that prime minister, borisjohnson wants to escalate help for ukraine as the war continues. they also feature the picture of prince louis. the mirror focusses on the man who has been declared an official suspect, in the disappearance of madeleine mccann, nearly 15 years ago. so, let's begin. do you want to kick us off this evening with this pretty intriguing story about arms sales to russia and these are arm cells that have gone on despite the fact that there was an embargo that came into force at the time crimea was annexed eight

years ago. in the time crimea was annexed eight ears a . o. if ~ years ago. in 2014, when mr putin went next door _ years ago. in 2014, when mr putin went next door and _ years ago. in 2014, when mr putin went next door and decided - years ago. in 2014, when mr putin went next door and decided to - years ago. in 2014, when mr putin l went next door and decided to steal have the garden in terms of taking crimea, there was a rule issued that there would be no more military arms sales to russia as a result because he's using it for terrible stuff. but there's a report that is been put out by the european commission that found that there is a loophole in there that's at least ten member states exported almost 350 million euros worth of hardware to vladimir putin and 70% came from france and germany and now they say that the reason they were able to send this equipment about £230 million worth, just under the quarter of £1 billion worth of kit to vladimir putin, was because they promise them it was for civilian, not military use. why you think it's ok to sell rifles and

special protection armoured vehicles to moscow on the grounds that he is going to use them only can civilians strikes me as bizarre. they should never have gone to them under any circumstances but i think, arms companies worldwide find ways around the rules quite often and british ones due to sometimes as well. fix, ones due to sometimes as well. a fair point, we have used this exemption of dual use, it could be used militarily but it's going to be used militarily but it's going to be used by the police in the country where the middle east countries, being the obvious example. two things going on, one thing is the dual use element which appears to be what was used on the one hand and on the other, this was the dual use in the other, this was the dual use in the german case, and france's case, susan grandfather clauses, the right to fulfil existing contracts rather

than saying no, this contract led to be cancelled. of the skill of this is quite considerable. it is very embarrassing. we put into context. _ it is very embarrassing. we put into context. we — it is very embarrassing. we put into context, we are talking about 250 million _ context, we are talking about 250 million here with which over 70% came _ million here with which over 70% came from — million here with which over 70% came from germany and france. but that is_ came from germany and france. but that is minuscule compared to the over 20 _ that is minuscule compared to the over 20 billion that is been funnelled towards russia in return for energy— funnelled towards russia in return for energy since the 24th of february— for energy since the 24th of february when this invasion began and that— february when this invasion began and that is— february when this invasion began and that is principally because parts — and that is principally because parts of— and that is principally because parts of europe and in particular germany— parts of europe and in particular germany that gets 50% of its gas from _ germany that gets 50% of its gas from russia is paying for it, has to pay for— from russia is paying for it, has to pay for it— from russia is paying for it, has to pay for it because has to keep the lights _ pay for it because has to keep the lights on — pay for it because has to keep the lights on and keep its factories going. — lights on and keep its factories going, and that is fuelling this wan _ going, and that is fuelling this wan yes. _ going, and that is fuelling this war. yes, it is extremely embarrassing that this happened but the bigger question is, that this whole _ the bigger question is, that this whole entire fiasco of the war has

shown _ whole entire fiasco of the war has shown the — whole entire fiasco of the war has shown the achilles' heel of europe's over dependence on russia for its energy— over dependence on russia for its energy issues and that has to be dealt _ energy issues and that has to be dealt with— energy issues and that has to be dealt with rapidly. germany has come under_ dealt with rapidly. germany has come under a _ dealt with rapidly. germany has come under a lot— dealt with rapidly. germany has come under a lot of criticism on the fact that is_ under a lot of criticism on the fact that is hot— under a lot of criticism on the fact that is not clamping down or incentive _ that is not clamping down or incentive venting but the reality is, if _ incentive venting but the reality is, if they're going to wean themselves off russia, it will take time, instead a quick fix. they've been _ time, instead a quick fix. they've been closing down nuclear reactors in their— been closing down nuclear reactors in their building energy ports as welt, _ in their building energy ports as well, potentially they're investigating more and their own armaments. but in the interim, people — armaments. but in the interim, people have been dying and munitions, some of them coming from the west— munitions, some of them coming from the west are _ munitions, some of them coming from the west are being used in the process — the west are being used in the process. in the west are being used in the rocess. ., ., ., , process. in front of the daily mail, boris johnson _ process. in front of the daily mail, boris johnson talks _ process. in front of the daily mail, boris johnson talks about - process. in front of the daily mail, boris johnson talks about sending | process. in front of the daily mail, l boris johnson talks about sending in borisjohnson talks about sending in our tanks. boris johnson talks about sending in our tanks. ., boris johnson talks about sending in our tanks. . ., «a boris johnson talks about sending in our tanks. . ., ~', ., our tanks. challenger tanks to poland which _ our tanks. challenger tanks to poland which will— our tanks. challenger tanks to poland which will in _ our tanks. challenger tanks to poland which will in turn - our tanks. challenger tanks to poland which will in turn give l our tanks. challenger tanks to - poland which will in turn give their own tanks— poland which will in turn give their own tanks to ukraine which are russian—made tanks and ukrainians

will know— russian—made tanks and ukrainians will know how to use them and this is a departure from statements weeks a-o is a departure from statements weeks ago that— is a departure from statements weeks ago that they do not want to provide any aircraft — ago that they do not want to provide any aircraft or tank machinery to poland _ any aircraft or tank machinery to poland in— any aircraft or tank machinery to poland in terms of providing it to ukraine — poland in terms of providing it to ukraine because it would be seen as her escalation of the conflict by russia — her escalation of the conflict by russia. but events of moved on in the country— russia. but events of moved on in the country we see more and more barbaric attacks occurring in some horrific— barbaric attacks occurring in some horrific stories and pictures seen in recent— horrific stories and pictures seen in recent weeks and so borisjohnson has changed tack on this put the prime _ has changed tack on this put the prime minister now in india is saying. — prime minister now in india is saying, questioning today, russia may actually end up winning this where _ may actually end up winning this where is — may actually end up winning this where is weeks ago, he was saying that russia — where is weeks ago, he was saying that russia must fail. and ijust go back to _ that russia must fail. and ijust go back to what i was in for weeks now is that— back to what i was in for weeks now is that russians are valiant and they— is that russians are valiant and they show— is that russians are valiant and they show great fortitude, we applaud — they show great fortitude, we applaud this, but it is highly unlikely— applaud this, but it is highly unlikely that they're going to win outright— unlikely that they're going to win outright on the battlefield ——

ukrainians. the they are outnumbered. and this is probably going _ outnumbered. and this is probably going to _ outnumbered. and this is probably going to involve an exchange of land for peace _ going to involve an exchange of land for peace. but noisily talking about that now _ for peace. but noisily talking about that now. there were talks but that seems _ that now. there were talks but that seems to _ that now. there were talks but that seems to have fallen by the wayside. and talking _ seems to have fallen by the wayside. and talking about putin must lose, but would lose look like?— but would lose look like? that's exactly the _ but would lose look like? that's exactly the point. _ but would lose look like? that's exactly the point. this - but would lose look like? that's exactly the point. this is - but would lose look like? that's| exactly the point. this is exactly the point — exactly the point. this is exactly the point. rhetoric is all very well, — the point. rhetoric is all very well, but _ the point. rhetoric is all very well, but at the end of the day, ui

already— for putin looks like. putin has already factored in the fact it's going — already factored in the fact it's going to — already factored in the fact it's going to get economic sanctions going _ going to get economic sanctions going to — going to get economic sanctions going to be attacked on that front and he's — going to be attacked on that front and he's ready for that. he's got nowhere — and he's ready for that. he's got nowhere to— and he's ready for that. he's got nowhere to go now, he has to show that he _ nowhere to go now, he has to show that he has— nowhere to go now, he has to show that he has some victory in my view is he _ that he has some victory in my view is he probably always wanted the area and — is he probably always wanted the area and make this corridor by mariuool, _ area and make this corridor by mariupol, do you want to take all of ukraine, _ mariupol, do you want to take all of ukraine, maybe or maybe not. but if he comes _ ukraine, maybe or maybe not. but if he comes away with donbas and crimea, — he comes away with donbas and crimea, he _ he comes away with donbas and crimea, he will regarded as victory. sending _ crimea, he will regarded as victory. sending tanks to poland, soviet tanks and to help ukraine which is a way of written constant challenge because their offensive weapons that would breach the nato deals. in this backfill and poland if they decide to send some tanks but that means poland then has armed ukraine with offensive tanks. in that mix poland

vulnerable to possible threat of attack from russia and further invasion. it doesn't really matter who provides the tanks to home, it does give putin, if you wanted, an excuse to invade further across the eastern board. his troops are very stretched, they're only able to attack donbas now. been able to take the rest of ukraine they proven to be very badly supplied and maintained and badly operated by the troops and generals. we have one general that's managed to take over and talking about the defensive to only attack a very small part of ukraine and though only be able to fulfil many of the threats that he's issued by poland, finland and sweden and other places of the join nato. but still supplying offensive weapons is always going to be coming up weapons is always going to be coming up badly. it's not going to make

putin very happy. is that there's going to be some sort of negotiation but, there's absolutely no way that ukraine with the support they have the leadership they have at the moment, would ever negotiate the donbas way. the fight for it for many years internally until now, they are not going to negotiate that. that would not be a part of it. it may be what putin wants to become set expectations but president zelensky is never going to give that to him. i’m president zelensky is never going to give that to him.— give that to him. i'm 'ust going to sa , on a give that to him. i'm 'ust going to say. on a fewh give that to him. i'm 'ust going to say, on a few weeks _ give that to him. i'm just going to say, on a few weeks ago, he - give that to him. i'm just going to say, on a few weeks ago, he was| say, on a few weeks ago, he was indicating — say, on a few weeks ago, he was indicating that he would be preparing to do look at the donbas and possibly give some assurances on complete _ and possibly give some assurances on complete neutrality and notjoining nato~ _ complete neutrality and not “oining nato. . , ., complete neutrality and not “oining nato. . , ., , ., ., nato. calls on the basis of a referendum _ nato. calls on the basis of a referendum is _ nato. calls on the basis of a referendum is not _ nato. calls on the basis of a referendum is not possible l nato. calls on the basis of a l referendum is not possible to nato. calls on the basis of a - referendum is not possible to have a referendum is not possible to have a referendum in a country that ukraine is at the moment. it will take years of rebuilding them a fair

referendum. that means total withdrawal of russia's troops before he gives her talking about will happen with the donbas. president zelensky is right to demand that and that they can have the referendum and have self—determination. there's no chance that he will withdraw his troops in five years time. that's returned to the subject, even if he's thousands of miles away from the uk, the prime minister has not been able to shake off party gate. interestingly, the papers all seem to be feeling towards moving in the conservative undergrowth as far as prime minister is position that's something, even in the short time since easter. the something, even in the short time since easter-— since easter. the fundamental -roblem since easter. the fundamental problem is _ since easter. the fundamental problem is when _ since easter. the fundamental problem is when the _ since easter. the fundamental problem is when the penalty l since easter. the fundamental - problem is when the penalty notice for this birthday cake event and cabinet, that was regarded internally in downing street as the

least bad party the borisjohnson had been linked to and therefore, if he got that and others looked more serious but were in the mail were coming, but sounds like now or reports this evening that there may be fine striping in whitehall in boxes right now to do with the byob, bring your own booze e—mail party on may the 20th 2020. this is one where martin reynolds, who, he was the private secretary to boris johnson at the time and actually sent an e—mail to staff in downing street during lockdown saying please, bring your own booze and come to the downing street garden for a get—together of more than hundred people. it's must be socially distanced drinks to take advantage of the lovely weather. weather. the prime minister has mentioned and known to have been there for over 20

minutes and said it was implicitly a work event even those in the garden and there was booze and even though dominic cummings said later that he had warned the prime minister against this very firmly, that this was waived way. the sounds of the garden were heard by others staffers and whitehall. and it's being investigated by sue and the police. but people who are at that event have been receiving fixed pounds and notices, the very strong likelihood that the prime minister has as well, he promised to tell people but the metropolitan police is promised that they will not discuss who is getting those until after the local elections in a fortnight time, can you hold for a fortnight if he has one? probably not. in you hold for a fortnight if he has one? probably not.— you hold for a fortnight if he has one? probably not. in front of the e e in one? probably not. in front of the eye in the — one? probably not. in front of the eye in the typical _ one? probably not. in front of the eye in the typical ways, _ one? probably not. in front of the eye in the typical ways, the - one? probably not. in front of the eye in the typical ways, the give l eye in the typical ways, the give some bullet points suggesting that he is on thinner ice than his aides and

some mps suggested a move against him perhaps depending on how the local election emerges. and pulling mike's suggest is that trusted on the economy which is more than the parties to convince him of the strongest suits in the elections. jeremy hunt and two former ministers have been the contribution but have been discreetly renewing preparations for a possible leadership contest. would you make of all of this? is in wishful thinking from journalists or do you thinking from journalists or do you think there's something different in the air? i think there's something different in the air? ~' ., . think there's something different in theair? ~ ., ., the air? i know that susie has been maintaining — the air? i know that susie has been maintaining the _ the air? i know that susie has been maintaining the spreadsheet - the air? i know that susie has been maintaining the spreadsheet on - the air? i know that susie has been j maintaining the spreadsheet on the past _ maintaining the spreadsheet on the past l— maintaining the spreadsheet on the ast. . , maintaining the spreadsheet on the ast, ., , , maintaining the spreadsheet on the ast. ., , , ., maintaining the spreadsheet on the ast. ., , ., ., maintaining the spreadsheet on the ast. ., , , ., ., and past. i was 'ust reading of the. and sean, for past. i wasjust reading of the. and sean. for me _ past. i wasjust reading of the. and sean, for me now, _ past. i wasjust reading of the. and sean, for me now, the _ past. i wasjust reading of the. and sean, for me now, the bigger - past. i wasjust reading of the. andj sean, for me now, the bigger issue is not _ sean, for me now, the bigger issue is not the _ sean, for me now, the bigger issue is not the fines, the fines and no

fines _ is not the fines, the fines and no fines. 0r— is not the fines, the fines and no fines. , p, , is not the fines, the fines and no fines. , ., , ., . , is not the fines, the fines and no fines-_ fixed i fines. or penalty notices. fixed enal fines. or penalty notices. fixed penalty notices _ fines. or penalty notices. fixed penalty notices are _ fines. or penalty notices. fixed penalty notices are done. - fines. or penalty notices. fixed l penalty notices are done. people fines. or penalty notices. fixed - penalty notices are done. people of made _ penalty notices are done. people of made up _ penalty notices are done. people of made up their minds whether he gets another— made up their minds whether he gets another three or 19, they've made up their another three or19, they've made up their minds— another three or 19, they've made up their minds on this. the bigger issue _ their minds on this. the bigger issue now— their minds on this. the bigger issue now is this. which is that the prime _ issue now is this. which is that the prime minister missed the parliament? that is the question. did he _ parliament? that is the question. did he do— parliament? that is the question. did he do that he did he break the ministerial— did he do that he did he break the ministerial code. the problem we have _ ministerial code. the problem we have in— ministerial code. the problem we have in the — ministerial code. the problem we have in the unwritten constitution that we _ have in the unwritten constitution that we are governed by is that we so arbiter— that we are governed by is that we so arbiter on whether or not that was broken. is the prime minister himself? — was broken. is the prime minister himself? if— was broken. is the prime minister himself? if you go on the ministerial code in 1992 underjohn ministerial code in 1992 under john majors. _ ministerial code in 1992 underjohn majors, some without the prime minister— majors, some without the prime minister themselves would be in a situation _ minister themselves would be in a situation where they would be found potentially to broken the ministerial code in the sled parliament. there could be given investigation that would have been a few months and this is going to go on and _ few months and this is going to go on and on — few months and this is going to go on and on and from a fundamental focus, there — on and on and from a fundamental focus, there are people can get him out are _ focus, there are people can get him out are tory— focus, there are people can get him out are tory mps. if they feel their

chances _ out are tory mps. if they feel their chances of— out are tory mps. if they feel their chances of retaining their seats in the next —