this is bbc news. the headlines: president zelensky has confirmed that around 60 civilians were killed when a russian bomb hit a school in eastern ukraine on saturday. he said people had been using the building to shelter from shelling in a nearby village close to the front line in the donbas region. in moscow, final preparations have taken place for the victory day parade — the annual event marking the defeat of nazi germany in the second world war. the g7 said president putin's war of aggression had brought shame on russia and the historic sacrifices of its people. the people of the philippines are voting to choose a successor to president rodridgo duterte. access to polling stations is being limited under coronavirus measures. tens of thousands of security personnel have been deployed to safeguard ballots. the frontrunner is the son of the late dictator, ferdinand marcos.

now on bbc news, dateline london. hello and welcome to the programme which brings together leading uk columnists with the foreign correspondents who write, blog and broadcast to audiences back home from the dateline london. joining us at the end of a busy week of uk electioneering and ofjudicial controversy in the united states are camilla cavendish from the financial times. she was head of the prime minister's policy unit when david cameron was in downing street. as baroness cavendish,

she is in the house of lords but doesn't sit for any political party. isabel hilton is the founder of china dialogue, which seeks to promote understanding of china's environmental challenges. isabel has been a foreign correspondent and is a regular columnist in british newspapers. henry chu is the london—based editorfor the la times — a role he has also performed for variety magazine. whilst the us west coast sleeps, he helps to edit the newspaper. welcome to all of you. thanks very much for being with us. now, in a democracy, who is thejudge? well, in much of the uk this week, it has been the voters. so, what sort of verdict has been delivered on boris johnson? the united states is a democracy, too, but one where the supreme court justices get to decide whether or or not a law is constitutional. —— whether or not a law is constitutional. are they about to declare that the nationwide right to abortion is not? and monday's victory day in russia — a country where vladimir putin is thejudge. what will his speech to crowds in moscow tell us about the war in ukraine?

isabel, let's start there if we can. how do you think this year's victory parade is likely to be? well, one of the difficulties about this year's victory parade is that there isn't a fresh victory, which i'm sure was the ambition when this whole terrible war started. what is actually being celebrated is the victory over germany, over the nazis in world war ii, in which tens of millions of russians died, so it's a bit of a holy day for russia, that enormous sacrifice, that victory. and it seems to me that the dangerous thing for us in what putin might do with this is that in the absence of a victory — and he has lost 11 generals, 10,000 troops, a lot of kit — that he will seek to link up his claim that he is denazifying ukraine with a victory over the nazis in world war ii, and that is a further escalation i think, a further mobilisation of russian society

and perhaps an escalation into adjacent geographies. he has to come up with something, from his perspective, positive, and that only means — i think he is not a man that backs down — that means going further, so that's why it's a very worrying moment. camilla? well, itjust seems to me that it's the ultimate irony, isn't it? that he is celebrating victory over a nazi aggressor when he himself is really behaving in exactly the same way, and this is the real tragedy of the situation. what i wonder from over here is how many russians actually see it like that? we know that about telegram, we know about some of the underground media, but what is the general view of the russian public? do they still believe in him and in this war that he is promulgating? ithink, though, we have i known that most russians, it seems, to get their view from television and that isi controlled by the russian state at this point. -

the independent - outlets are all gone. they have fled _ to other places or have just completely shut down - altogether and therefore, alternate messages are not getting through. _ and as isabel- was saying in terms of the message he wants to put out there, perhaps there might| be a victory to celebratej if the russian forces can finally rout those final- holdout defenders in mariupol. but absent that, it has been almost a disaster for russia | in many ways, but you are not going to see that, i don't - think, in any of the russian . propaganda that gets put out. will there be an actual. escalation of hostilities? that, i think, also is unclear. i think putin, as unpredictable as he might be, also - is not completely mad i and knows that continued losses, which will be harderl and harder to hide, would be difficult to sustain - and so, i think we will certainly see a lot ofjingoism and nationalism on display. and it is, as you say, - a central point of russian identity in terms of. overcoming nazism,

but whether it really means that we will be seeing - a greater— escalation of armed hostilities, i'm not sure. and on that question of overcoming nazism, all three of you have now mentioned the analogy with the �*30s and �*40s. have we learnt the lessons, do you think, from the �*30s? do you detect in the response to putin's actions towards ukraine a sense of that history and of not allowing the mistakes of the past to be repeated? well, obviously, it has taken a while, hasn't it? and we are now all feeling that the end of history has not arrived and i think particularly for germany, whose position has been fascinating in this period, that has been a big wake—up call and i do actually think that although the germans have been quite sluggish on oil and gas, where they are really exposed because they have spent 20 years, unfortunately, ignoring the possibility of this threat, actually scholz has reversed quite a lot of merkel's policy quite quickly. so, i think although we can all complain, i think the eu and europe have galvanised

themselves in a way that they should have done after crimea, but... well, indeed. the tragedy is that we didn't learn those lessons in 2014 and had we, we might not be in this situation. in a sense, this takes us rather neatly into domestic politics, because energy is just one aspect of the cost of living crisis — and everybody seems to be using that term. we have inflation running quite severe — even the prime minister says it could be 10% in due course. we have interest rates going up — both in the united states, dramatically, the first time in 22 years they have gone up that much in one go. similarly, we had an interest rate rise in the weekjust gone from the monetary policy committee at the bank of england. this is the issue now, isn't it, for domestic politics? regardless of election results, this is what will determine the shape of politics in the next couple of years, is that fair, would you say? um...| think it is slightly more complicated than that, shaun. ithink, clearly, this

is the issue of the moment. people are really worried about the cost of living. we don't know how temporary this inflation spike will be and a lot of economists until now have been saying this is only really about energy. it's a huge supply shock but it's very transitory. ithink... crosstalk. because a lot of it was to do with covid. and the covid recovery. covid recovery, exactly. i think the fed and the bank of england's actions and other policymakers actually suggest they are now worried this is not quite as transitory and that inflation could really take hold. but in terms of the political landscape in the uk, i mean, havingjust had the local elections, i think, funnily enough, what we have seen is we have not seeing a big backlash against this government and we have not seen labour doing as well as it ought to have done. the liberal democrats and the greens have done a bit better but the truth is, actually, keir starmer has not broken through in the way... the labour leader. ..the labour leader, in the way that you would have expected, and that raises a whole series of questions now about personality and conviction.

it's notjust about policy. it was interesting you use the word �*conviction�* because he now faces a police investigation into a so—called lockdown event — exactly what he criticised the prime minister for. i mean, that doesn't help, henry, does it? it will be a distraction, whatever message labour was hoping to get out this week and... and it will defame some of that argument they would make - —— and it will defang . some of that argument they would make - about partygate, how this and isjust gripped by sleaze now, as well. _ but in terms of the costi of living, if it's a durable issue — as we have seen in the us and britain - and in all democracies — - when it hits the pocketbook, that's what really matters. and partygate, if that can be weathered, if in a couple - of years' time when the general election rolls around, _ that will be almost - a nothing if people can find that they— cannot heat their homes or are unable to put food on the table i as they had been before. the food on the table is something that actually, we need to remember, because that's the other big issue around ukraine — nobody is planting. staples have already gone up significantly anyway over

the last couple of years. absolutely. and a huge supplier of wheat to the world. but also india, which is another major wheat grower, has had 45—degree temperatures this already this year. so, the spring planting in india has gone extremely poorly. we are going to have a real crunch on grain supplies, which will last at least a year, and that is going to destabilise a lot of poorer countries and it's going to hit people in this country who are already rather marginal on affordability of food and energy. just on the domestic politics, camilla, absolutely hear what you are saying about keir starmer. labour will be disappointed not to be further ahead than they are, clearly, with what could be no more than two years — and might be a lot less — until a general election. is there a risk, though, for the government in that strong performance from the liberal democrats? because the �*97 result was terrific for labour. even keir starmer�*s closest allies would not claim he is a tony blair, he hasn't got that star quality,

but part of that story was also how well the lib dems did and the combination of that absolutely devastated — �*decimated' is a better word — the conservatives. yes, so, i mean, there is clearly a possibility of a lib—lab pact. the liberals are certainly not going to ally with the tories, so the tories have nowhere to go. liberal and the labour are both saying that they are not going to enter into a formal pact but, of course, that-s— a possibility and it's probably the only way that the numbers would stack up. and the south—west — i mean, it's interesting. the south—west went largely blue at the last election, it was a liberal democrat stronghold, it does seem to be coming back, we have to see what happens right across the board but, clearly you are right. there is a lack of confidence in this government but i think what we have seen today is that we are not going to see the tories themselves moving to oust boris johnson. i think there is a more profound lack of confidence in the british constitution and democracy. i think people are

really, really fed up. the possibility of a lib—lab pact perhaps bring back the idea that finally, this dog's breakfast of a british constitution and an electoral system might get some serious attention. because if you look across the elections we have just had, it's only in england that the first—past—the—post system operates... in local... ..in local elections or indeed... not in westminster elections, perhaps, is how i should put it. right. but every level of government except westminster, outside of england, people use a one kind of proportional system or other. when scots are sending mps to westminster, it's first—past—the—post. when they are sending them to the scottish parliament, it's proportional representation. and the same with councillors. so, everywhere except england, that is true. and the result of this is that, since 1922, we have had two governments in this country elected with a majority of the popular vote, one in 1931 and one in 1935. laughter.

every other government has been has held power, despite the fact that most people who voted did not want it. now, how — why is this a good idea? nevertheless, when they held a referendum on that question on a coalition, the public resoundingly was either totally uninterested... that was more recent history than what you are looking... | the lesson of that is do not hold referenda on constitutional issues! and there are more recent examples of how that can go wrong. now, i wonder if a referendum, henry, might be the way out of the current crisis potentially engulfing the us supreme court. tell us what has happened this week and why it's so significant. well, in the us, of course, we have a written - constitution — _ unlike what you have in this country, an unwritten one — i and that gives powers to three branches of government and we have, at the top| of the judicial branch, the supreme court. . now, they are presented i with a case that would allow them to reverse a ruling thatj has stood for nearly 50 years that has allowed women to have abortions legally throughout -

the country — notjust in a particular state, i but nationwide. the arguments for this actually came before the courtjust- a couple — about five months ago, and it was already - apparent then that this conservative court — i because it's now 6—3 in favour of conservative justices — - it was going to strike it down. but once that draft opinion got leaked this last week, - which was actually quite . a major event in the court's history because it has. rarely ever happened — it was like the difference - between knowing something is going to happen— and the emotional impact of it actually becomingl or seeming reality. and has nowjust exposed this incredible divide that we havel in the us on abortion. and i think is also beginning to call into the legitimacy. of this high court, _ because it is so stacked in one direction — three of whose justices were appointed . by a president we just had to did not win the popular| vote, who were confirmed| by a senate who represent

a party that also - have a minority support in the country. this is really bringing up fundamental- questions of democracy. changing it, however, - whether through referenda or trying to amend that l constitution, is incredibly difficult. it very difficult situation, though. the judges, five of the judges on the supreme court in their confirmation hearings were asked about precedent and about roe v wade, and none of them, none of them gave any indication that they would do this. in fact, the opposite! they said, "we respect precedent and roe v wade "is settled precedent." now, hang on a minute, this is the supreme court and if the judges were not prepared to be honest in advance, i think the discrediting the supreme court is really a possibility. this is fascinating, i feel incredibly strongly, i have been on pro—choice marches in washington, the whole thing, in the past. and i feel very lucky to live in a country where this is not politicised, but the alito

judgement, which is the thing that has been leaked is actually legally very sound. so this makes it much harder. i mean, i think it is sort of, if you take a dry technical view of this, there was — the right to abortion is not in the constitution. well... no, no, but this is how they are going to win, this is what i am trying to say. is they are able to say, this is a legal argument, it's not political, and i think it's quite important to look at it, because as i remember, roe v wade was brought in under, there isn't even a right to privacy in the constitution, but it was stitched together under various headings. now, actually, what should have happened is it should have been in legislation, and the tragedy for america is you won't be able to get legislation through the senate on this issue. but, of course, that is where i think the conservative right will take this to say, "well, of course this should never "have come to the court, it should have been legislation." but there was an intent to legislate immediately after the roe v wade judgement, because it was a woman senator who saw that this could be...

that's what i mean, it's not practically possible. but i think the question for biden now, if we know there are probably 22 states, which are either going to ban or restrict abortion, as a result of this ruling, the question for the white house now is, what can they do to help those 27 million women who are going to be affected? interestingly, biden never use the word abortion until this i last week, since - he became president. it is a vexed issue for him as a roman catholic, - as is now a majority of those on the supreme court, - which is not a problem. people are obviously allowed to have their religious - viewpoints. i would differ with youl on whether it's actually jurisprudentially correct, this alito ruling, because he saysj that this is not going - to affect any other precedent, it's really only abouti the right to abortion. but, actually, if you are going to knock down something, . that itself sets a precedent. now killing precedence is not necessarily a bad idea, - because... we would still have -

segregation, in the us. however, when precedents have been overturned in the past, - mostly it has been to expand rights, to restore rights, - not revoke them, which is the case in this particularl case, and also when you look at popular opinion, public- opinion still supports- a legal right to abortion. the us, if it does this, is going tojoin countries like congo, i mean, there is almost no country in the world that would have this kind of... indeed. there is also, since this is part of a very vigorously prosecuted culture war, the question of what will they come after next? what about gay marriage? gay marriage sure as hell wasn't in the constitution. there are many other rights. contraception, yes. which are not in the constitution, so were that argument to be deployed, this is a disasterfor american life. there are a lot of people in america who would dispute that, wouldn't they? would take a different view. now, i would not want to quantify its numbers, but even if you think it's a minority, it's a significant

minority, otherwise presumably we would not be in the kind of debate we are now. yes, but once people start dying, and if this passes, people will die, then this argument will not be over. presumably, women who have more resources will have the ability to travel elsewhere and seek an abortion? yes, indeed, but a lot of states will enact... actually, in poland, where the law and justice party has done something similar, we have already seen two women die. so you are completely right, and that will become untenable. what about the argument, i opened this programme by saying, you know, who is the judge and in a democracy, it is usually elected, people who are elected, clearly the justices in supreme court are not elected. that presumably could become a problem if you have the unelected organ effectively determining very fundamental issues like this about personal freedom. isn't this, though, less of a rebuke of the justices, than of the elected arms of government in the united states, whether it's a state or federal level, that have not grasped

this nettle and have not established the kind of framework on which those individual rights could be built? it was the political side that appointed the judges and, but the judges are there to protect people from the abuses of politics. and this is their failure. i think we talk about democracy and majorities and minorities, i there should neither be - a tyranny of the minority nor a tyranny of the minority. unfortunately, we are tending towards the latterjust - in terms of the way that the the electoral system - and the legal system in the us is set up, so that has put up- this incredible dilemma we have now that is really only again polarising the country- still further. what's the danger for the court itself, do you think in this, if it goes through with thisjudgement? regardless of where people's views are on the question of abortion? it seems to me that one of biden's only options in this situation would be to pack the court

with his own people. essentially, if you think that trump has packed the court with his people, and this was never supposed to happen, because as isabel says, these people were supposed to be at the check of executive power. but one of biden's options would be to expand the court, pack it with people of a different hue, possibly bring in term limit, because of course it's actually an appointment for life, but again, that relegates it to a different status, doesn't it? and you lose that whole independence that it was supposed to guarantee. cross-talk. fdr was going to do that in the �*30s, wasn't he? he kept getting new deal things kicked out by the court, but never actually did it. and the composition of it now is nine, it wasn't always nine. j this has actually changed over time, there is nothing - sacrosanct about this particular number, i but as i wasjust saying, j the more you expand it, it will become unwieldy, . and just becomes a political instrument and is no longer serving the function that. originally the founders had expected it would. j henry, what do you think it means for the mid—term elections? well, of course the democrats, who are by and large, -

not 100%, but by and large in favour of preserving - abortion rights, are going to make hay with this. . they are already campaigning message going out saying, i "if you want to find a way. to preserve a woman's right "to have power over her own body, you need to turn out l "for the elections," i because all indications were and still are that- republicans will take over the house, possibly- the senate in the election, so this— could be a motivating factor and even biden himself has already gone on television l to say, "we are now looking "at a radical movement i trying to reshape the us." so, i think definitely it's going to be part| of the political conversation. is it going to be the number. one issue for a lot of people? not when inflation l is at 10% or higher. you raise that question of inflation again, so it takes us back to where we were a few minutes ago and i wonder, henry, how big a deal is this potentially forjoe biden? because some people have even blamed what the fed is doing on his stimulus, the money he injected into the economy

to try and help to bounce—back from covid. yeah, he is caught between a rock and a hard place, - because also, at the same time, iyou have for example oil pricesi partly going up with what's happening in ukraine, - and yet the public is - overwhelmingly in favour of what he's doing for ukraine, yet really upset about what's . happening to their pocketbooks. so it's very hard - to square the circle. so he's going to have to reallyj confront that in the midterms. he tries, but it's a tough- defence to make when somebody is opening their wallet - and discovering they cannot pay for staple goods or even find . them on the shelves any more. but the stimulus was wrong—headed, wasn't it? the truth was i think there was groupthink around the president, there were other voices like larry summers, who actually, it's really interesting that he took such a strong position so early on. he is a former treasury secretary. he is a former treasury secretary and he was, you know, very much, he is very much a prominent member of the democratic party, but he was willing to get out there and say, "no, this is going to risk inflation,"

that exact what happened. they unleashed an inflationary monster. and i'm afraid i do think it's impossible to say the stimulus wasn't part of that. the other question it raises of course is, because it's raising it in the uk as well, is the question of how far people are going to be willing to accept all the things they talked about back in glasgow at the summit, debating climate change, and all idea that we're going to have to take some hits, expensive hits, in the short—term in order to get to a less carbon dependent future. and a future in which the planet, we are able to survive on the planet, i won't go on. how difficult is that question now going to get, as things like basic costs of energy becomes so much more expensive? well, there are a couple of problems there. it does depend where you look. if you look in europe, it's actually reinforced the rather sound european green plan. and they have drawn the conclusion that, if you want energy security, build renewables. you do not have to import the sunshine. and you kill several

birds with one stone. in the states, there is an added complication that there is, at the moment, a trade embargo on solar panels, which means lots of... because they are produced in china? 0r it's more complicated? a lot of them are imported from south east asia but, the argument is whether they originate from china, so we have got a complete problem there. and in this country, you have an extreme wedge within the tory party. it includes the delightful mr farage, who may not be in the tory party, however... i'm glad you said that, because otherwise i may have had to. they are mobilising around opposing climate action. and although they have stopped denying that climate change is real, they are going on the, "oh, but we can't afford it, "it's really too expensive." as though this whole argument rests on the fallacy that if you change nothing, nothing changes. if you change nothing, life gets very dangerous very expensive and more people die.

so it isn't a sound argument, but it's an argument that plays into the current political anxieties. and we will see, we will see what this government makes of it. and it is difficult for a prime minister who has been under the kind pressure for years, who has taken this stance, just as the prime minister you fought for, take this kind of green stance and tried to defend the decision, and then found they were put under quite a lot of pressure within the party room. yes, that's true. i mean, funnily enough, borisjohnson is, you know, pretty solid on green issues. zac goldsmith, ben goldsmith, very, very influential neighbours of the conservative party, strong ecologists, i don't think, funnily enough... i'm not terribly positive about these things, but i would say with borisjohnson in power, you won't see the sliding back. where i think we have made unbelievable mistakes is, for example, to close down the biggest gas storage facility we had. i mean, they lack of even medium—term planning is really extraordinary.

we do have to be honest, though. as someone who, you know, i have been campaigning on these things for 25 years, we have to be honest about the real costs. the baseload costs for power. and i'm afraid we have sold the public, we have. politicians have been too glib about telling the public you can have net zero really easily. we are out of time. i wish i could give us more time, as i wish i could give as more renewable energy, but there we are. isabel hilton, camilla cavendish, henry chu, thank you all very much. thank you very much for being with date like london this week. more of the same next week. goodbye. hello. after a weekend of largely dry and warm late spring weather, things are now changing and turning more unsettled. we've got weather fronts moving in from the north—west and on monday they're bringing rain, particularly to scotland and northern ireland.

higher pressure setting to the east and that's going to be keeping things mostly dry for much of england and wales, long spells of sunshine although it will turn hazy and cloudier through the day as the high cloud spills in ahead of these weather fronts that will bring rain to northern ireland and scotland, particular persistent across the west of scotland. more intermittent elsewhere. temperatures 12—22 or even 23 in the south—east. monday evening, overnight into tuesday, the weather fronts continuing to push south and east. rain intending to fizzle out, just a band of cloud, drizzle coming out of it on tuesday morning. sunnier skies further north, northern ireland, scotland and northern ireland, with blustery showers continuing to pile in on tuesday. the cloud clearing away from the south—east and in the sunshine, highs 11—20. bye for now.

welcome to bbc news. i'm rich preston. our top stories: more than 60 people are believed to have been killed after a russian bomb hit a school in eastern ukraine. it comes as moscow prepares for victory day, its annual celebration marking the end of the second world war. voting gets underway in the philippines as the country chooses its next president. and the nepali sherpa who's taken on mount everest yet again. we speak to someone who's climbed with him.

hello and welcome to the programme.