this is bbc news. we will have the headlines and all the main news stories for you at the top of the hour straight after this programme. alex and chris, on an episode of newscast on bbc sounds the other day we were talking about there's a new rock opera about tony blair. and i said, oh, i'd love it if there was a newscast musical. big musicalfan. and i said, but please don't put too much effort into it. don't, like, do a demo of a whole newscast musical. jeff from indianapolis has actually done a demo of a newscast musical. so that's the first amazing thing. the second amazing thing is he's taken lots of newscast characters and written songs about them based on actual musicals. no! so there was one about chris mason based onjesus christ

superstar. so here isjeff serenading you, chris, in the style of andrew lloyd webber. # chris mason newscaster # do you think you're what they say you are? # chris mason, editor. # do you think you're what they say you are? five stars. brilliant. well done, jeff. oh, that's a work of musical genius, that is. i'm blushing, jeff. i'm blushing. that is blooming marvellous. thank you. and jeff also did one for katya, which is called the jellicle katya, which is the only way you can make me like cats.

did he do one for you? no. that's fine. because i think i'd be like the narrator character. you could be ma—adam butterfly. i mean, it's a bit operatic. that's very highbrow. it is quite highbrow. i don't even know what that is. too much for you? yes. exactly. at least it's not les miserables, which would be what you'd talk about if it was a musical about energy prices, which is what we're going to discuss on this episode of newscast. newscast from the bbc. hello. it's adam in the studio. hello, it's alex in the studio. hello, it's chris in a car park in watford. glamour. is that what you signed up for as political editor? of course it is. so lots of people are going to be joining us to talk about loads of issues. but the big one today is the cost of living. and the treasury will send us a very angry email if we say there was a mini—budget today. but rishi sunak, the chancellor, did announce a lot of things, didn't he, alex? yeah, he did. so this is the thing that we didn't think was going to happen and then we thought might happen and then it did happen and it all happened a bit quicker

than they said it was going to happen in the first place. but should i just give you the headlines, like the really quick precis of what this was? so this was the government's response to the cost of living crisis. and the big focus was on helping people, particularly with their energy bills. and to boil it down, every household is going to get 400 quid in the autumn to help with their energy bills. that's every household in the united kingdom. and then if you live in some of the lowest income households, so that's some of the poorest households, you're going to get 650 quid on top of that, and pensioners another £300, and people on disability benefits, they're going to get £150, all amounting to about 15 billion quids' worth of money being given to people to help with this cost of living crisis, funded in part by what we're not calling a windfall tax. that's the government not calling it a windfall tax, on the oil and gas companies. that will raise about five billion quid, about another ten billion quid, which we think is probably going to come from borrowing. that was like energy bill bingo. so many numbers there. i know. i'm sure everyone really took them in. it shows you that the government's found it quite tricky to reach everyone in the right way, i suppose. that's why it's ended up as a bit of a sound a bit

like a bingo game. chris, do you want to just give us kind of like the big politics around all of this? well, it costs a lot, doesn't it, to make a difference? that's the kind of politics of all of this. the government doesn't like the idea of a windfall tax and ministers have been sort of tumbling over themselves for weeks on end to say that they're a terrible idea, they're not very conservative and they don't like to do them, unless the circumstances are exceptional. and now they've decided that, yes, they are exceptional, they're going to do it. they don't even like describing a tax on a windfall of profits as being a windfall tax. instead, it is this energy levy, and it allows the opposition parties to say, look, you've finally caved in to doing the very thing we've been calling for for ages. labour making the point that they were first arguing this, arguing for this the best part of six months ago. i guess the challenge to the government is you do this big thing involving lots of spending and lots of borrowing because the windfall tax won't cover, by any means, all of the costs of all of this, and what difference does it make? because people aren't going to feel better off as a result of it. they'lljust feel

slightly less worse off. well, let's chat about it now with simon clarke, who's the chief secretary to the treasury. hello. and congratulations on your engagement. thank you very much. just discussing reasons why i hadn't picked up the phone to chris on sunday evening. sh, don't reveal his sources! no, that's very kind. well, at least you're used to big bills. indeed! yes. well, we're certainly aiming at reducing those bills for everyone this week, obviously. that's that's the other good news story of the week, that we are able to finally announce our package of measures to help with that. yeah. so you'd said, or certainly your boss, rishi sunak had said, oh, the government's ready to step in and help if more help is needed. and it became clear that it was, but he'd always been... and lots of your colleagues were quite down on the idea of taxing the oil and gas companies, and now you're really for it. well, look, there's a couple of things to factor in here. the first of which is that we are not instinctively, obviously philosophically, in favour of these sort of taxes, but we do recognise there is a problem that we need

to address here, and it's likely to be a problem of greater severity and longer duration than we hoped when we were initially looking at this earlier in the spring. and we want to make sure that there is the investment in the north sea in the new oil and gas exploration, which is good for energy security, good forjobs, and crucially, will help with bills over the medium term, if we can unlock it. and that's what we've been wanting to avoid disincentivising. so with the measures that we brought forward today, there is a very hefty investment allowance built into that, so that for every pound that companies do invest in north sea or alternative sources of exploration, they will get 91p back. so we've tried to do this in a way which is smart and effective. so could this actually end up helping us get to net zero? because you hear the north sea, you think oil, gas, and that's kind of old fuels. that's not like new fuels. well, we've been clear throughout our work

on the energy strategy this year that we really, really want and need oil and gas as a transition fuel to get us to net zero. there are few more passionate advocates of net zero than myself in government. i think it's something which is economically and environmentally logical, but we're not going to get there in a single bound. it's a 30—year commitment, and in order to maximise our chances of getting there at minimum cost and disruption, we are going to need north sea oil and gas. just to come back to adam's first point now. i guess there will be some people thinking, why does it take the government so long to get to where it's going to end up? so labour and the liberal democrats have been going, "windfall tax, windfall tax, windfall tax, windfall tax." and there have been ministers, the business secretary, one of them, is going, "whoa, whoa, no windfall tax." and then it felt like this inevitable plod towards a windfall tax. so why go through that process? well, it's partly because, as i say, we wanted to get the design of any measures we did take right. and the investment allowance element of this is genuinely important in making sure that this isn't just sort of a blunt instrument. it's also because this is a fast moving situation

and we wouldn't have done this had we, frankly, had an easier set of choices in front of us. the situation, even since we brought forward the spring statement back in march, has grown more serious. and the plight of households up and down the country has worsened. and we've had to take that into account. and we only had the data this week from 0fgem about what they think the october price cap is likely to be. and that's been a crucial moment in crystallising finally what we do and, crucially, the target that we're shooting at, if you like, to help families. simon, ijust wonderer how conservative all of this is. you as a government are hammering people for more tax than any government for generations, spending is through the roof. along comes today, an announcement with another tax and more borrowing. i see that a couple of your colleagues have described this as "tripe", and another one, "red meat for socialists," — i'm thinking that's quite a dish, those two things together, it's even more hearty

than a middlesbrough parmo. now, don't impugn the parmo, chris. the parmo is one of the great things of our time. but i take the point you're making. i wouldn't dispute that for a moment, but what about that point? well, look, we are ultimately a pragmatic government dealing with a series of unprecedented challenges in peacetime. and that would be the best and most honest answer i can give to that question. nobody sitting down in 2019, the day after we'd won the general election, would have imagined that we would end up having to do the things we've done. but, look, we've had a pandemic, we've had war in europe, we've got a global inflationary crisis, the like of which hasn't been seen, really, in my lifetime. and there is a clear need to respond to that using all the tools that government has at its disposal. we have not in any way turned our backs on our core philosophy, which is that the state should know its limits and that, ultimately, sound money really matters.

but when you are dealing with events of this magnitude, you do have to take the steps that are necessary rather than ultimately default back to what are ideological choices. and in this case, i think we've done what is what is required in the circumstances. and i don't think, frankly, we can apologise for doing that. there are no alternatives to helping families faced with a crisis of this magnitude. we have to raise the money to do that insofar as we can. and i think we've struck the right balance, as i say, with the investment dimension in the north sea in mind as well. can i just ask you about one specific? so every household is going to get £400 to help with the cost of their energy bills. why isn't that more targeted? because there will be some families for that is an absolute lifeline. you know, people that perhaps aren't on benefits, people on slightly higher incomes that are really finding things difficult. so that will really count. but there are others who just won't need it.

i mean, i don't want to get personal, but, you know, your boss, rishi sunak, he's on the rich list. he doesn't need 400 quid to help with his energy bills. why is it so wide? to be clear, three quarters of this package is going to the most vulnerable people in society. so we are confident it is a very well targeted series of measures. but the fact is that we are doing the £400 for every household because there is a recognition that whilst some households obviously need the maximum amount of help, which can under certain circumstances be as high asjust over £1,600, and the roughly eight million homes in receipt of means—tested benefits will be getting £1,200. and that's rightly where the bulk of the help is concentrated. actually, there are lots of homes relatively far up the income spectrum for whom these sort of bills are going to be a major pressure. if we do indeed hit the 2,800 energy price cap in october, that is going to trouble lots of families earning 30, 40,000 a year. and whilst they won't need all of that smoothing away, my goodness, £400 will still be important. and there are very few neater ways, if you like, of starting to distribute that kind of help.

and we have to do it obviously at some speed so it is paid out through the system in time to make a difference by the autumn. the thing is, though, simon, if you're handing a big chunk of money to a lot of people who might welcome it, but don't actually need it, don't they they then go out and spend it, and that is inflationary. that contributes to prices going up, which is the very problem you're trying to solve. well, chris, we always try and assess how best to strike the balance here. and i've been clear in interviews for weeks now that we mustn't do things which would worsen an inflationary spiral. and we've really tried to target this, as i say, in a way, which does mean that the money is going to the people for whom it will make the most difference. and, you know, i don't think there are many homes in this country where these kinds of price rises, which of course, aren't limited to energy, energy is the main focus, but not the only one, aren't going to have an effect. and so we are trying to provide genuine support for,

if you like, middle income homes, while focusing the great bulk of this at those homes for whom this could make the real difference between surviving, if you like, and not. so i think it's a carefully calibrated package... to be clear, do you accept that this will be inflationary? no, i don't think it will be inflationary. i mean, the reality is the main drivers of the inflation we're seeing sit outwith, frankly, the ability of any government to really affect. i mean, this is the global supply chain chaos resulting from covid, and areas like shanghai are obviously still in absolute turmoil. and that has a huge impact on global trade. but then obviously the energy effects of what russia's done in ukraine are also very profound. if there is any effect of this on inflation, it will be absolutely at the margins set against those factors.

now, one of the reasons you've ended up with a bit there are people in the lower incomes were going to really struggle. is there going to more to come? we struggle. is there going to more to come? ~ ., ., , ., more to come? we have to be a bit fairer than _ more to come? we have to be a bit fairer than that. _ more to come? we have to be a bit fairer than that. for - more to come? we have to be a bit fairer than that. for the - more to come? we have to be a bit fairer than that. for the 8 i bit fairer than that. for the 8 million — bit fairer than that. for the 8 million or— bit fairer than that. for the 8 million or so homes, roughly one — million or so homes, roughly one in— million or so homes, roughly one in three households in the uk who— one in three households in the uk who are on means tested benefits, _ uk who are on means tested benefits, the cumulative impact of what — benefits, the cumulative impact of what we did earlier in the spring — of what we did earlier in the spring and today means that they— spring and today means that they will— spring and today means that they will be getting £1200 in cash — they will be getting £1200 in cash sa— they will be getting £1200 in cash. �* ., ., ., they will be getting £1200 in cash. ., ., ., ., cash. a lot of that might have already been _ cash. a lot of that might have already been gone _ cash. a lot of that might have already been gone or - cash. a lot of that might have already been gone or been i already been gone or been swallowed up. already been gone or been swallowed u -. ., , ., swallowed up. notwithstanding that it would _ swallowed up. notwithstanding that it would have _ swallowed up. notwithstanding that it would have helped - swallowed up. notwithstanding that it would have helped them to gel — that it would have helped them to gel to — that it would have helped them to get to this point and there is more — to get to this point and there is more to— to get to this point and there is more to come. they think that— is more to come. they think that 1200, _ is more to come. they think

that 1200, more or less, equates— that 1200, more or less, equates to the increase in the energy— equates to the increase in the energy price cut over the course _ energy price cut over the course of this year. so we have more _ course of this year. so we have more or— course of this year. so we have more or less are dealt with that— more or less are dealt with that pressure. you know, identity— that pressure. you know, identity we should shy away from — identity we should shy away from this point. the government isn't _ from this point. the government isn't saying that we can or should _ isn't saying that we can or should smooth the way every bit of what — should smooth the way every bit of what is — should smooth the way every bit of what is a massive inflationary global challenge at the — inflationary global challenge at the moment. we have to try to help — at the moment. we have to try to help families in a targeted way, — to help families in a targeted way, but _ to help families in a targeted way, but we shouldn't pretend, because — way, but we shouldn't pretend, because it _ way, but we shouldn't pretend, because it is neither compassionate nor economically right, _ compassionate nor economically right, that we canjust make this— right, that we canjust make this whole issue not a thing, because _ this whole issue not a thing, because that would be to deceive people and it would be to out — deceive people and it would be to put the national finance is totally— to put the national finance is totally underwater we were to try. do you reckon your boss, rishi sunak, had a rough old time, ending up with a fixed penalty notice for turning up for a meeting in the cabinet room when simon case, the cabinet secretary who was also there, didn't get one? well, chris, it's not for me to question the met police,

and we have to respect the decisions that they've reached. you can if you want. there is no question that anyone who saw the photographs of the event for which the prime minister and the chancellor were fined in sue gray's report yesterday will say that hardly looks like a raucous party in the eyes of most people. and, you know, in that sense... the prime minister having a beer at two o'clock in the afternoon? i think it's a pretty low bar that was set in terms of what constituted a fineable offence. but look, the prime minister and the chancellor have both accepted the fine. they've apologised for it. i think it is absolutely right that we do ultimately stand behind the decision the authorities have made. they are the arbiters of this process. and if there's one thing i think that we need to do nationally now, it's to recognise mistakes were made, serious mistakes which needed to be apologised for and reforms instituted in response to. but i also think we genuinely have to move on. you say there was a low bar, but he was found to have

broken the law. people who listen to that — and i know you want to move on from partygate — but there will be people that go, hang about, you say there's a low bar, but he's the chancellor. he got fined by the police. and the fact you say we apologised but the bar was low, it sounds like it's a caveated apology. maybe that's why people can't move on. i mean, look, lam happy to repeat and i know rishi repeated just yesterday in his statement regarding sue gray that he apologises very humbly and sincerely again. there is no caveat to that apology. i'm saying, as someone looking at it from the outside, that i think a low bar was in place here. and i think many people would. but rishi is not trying to in any way evade that. and i think he has owned that in a way which ultimately i think reflects pretty well on him, and not chosen to contest it and chosen to get on with the job. simon, thank you very much. thank you. so, simon clarke from the treasury is being pretty supportive of boris johnson. somebody who's the totally opposite of supportive isjoining us now on newscast.

it's mark harper, a conservative mp and former chief whip, and quite a big critic now of borisjohnson. we have to add that to yourjob description now, don't we? yeah, well, look, it doesn't particularly give me any. pleasure to do so. i'd much rather be supporting the prime minister— and the government. but as i've set out very- clearly before, i think over the whole revelations . about breaking the law, not being straight about it, i and frankly asking, you know, decent men and women on my side of the house to defend _ the indefensible, i've made it very clear i think - he needs to go. i think the public's made its mind up. and at some point, mps listen to the public. - otherwise, the public. deal with mps that don't listen to them. ijust wonder, mark, if the public definitely has made its mind up, because here is a prime minister who, when he became prime minister, was perhaps better known as a character than any other prime minister taking the job in our collective lifetimes. and people knew he was unconventional and people knew that he behaved differently, frankly, from lots of other politicians, and people really like that.

and perhaps in a couple of years' time or whenever that election is, people will still have the capacity to do that. and will kind of pass all this up as, you know, in the way that tony blair used to say "john being john" aboutjohn prescott, might say "boris being boris". he breaks rules. we kind of accept that, even if we're not all that keen on it. well, they may, but that's not what they're saying. at the moment. i mean, even a very significant proportion of conservative - voters who voted for him and voted for us think. he should resign. not a majority, but enough that if they don't vote for us - again, we lose. and i think something like 60, 65% of conservative voters - think he hasn't beenl straight with people, that he hasn't been telling the truth over what's been happening in downing street. so i think once people decide you're not being straight - with them, you've i got a real problem. and i'm not sure, once i people decide you're not being straight with them, i you can ever quite put that right. if it's a policy thing, - you know, if you make some cock—ups on policy, - you know, you can fix those. but i think if people .

decide you're not being straight with them... and the thing with covid, why it's different is — - and you'll remember- the discussions we've had previously about the pandemic and when i chaired the covid . recovery group — _ that was a national experience. everybody went through it. everyone knew - what the rules were. everyone has gone through... many people went through really tough experiences and had - to make really tough calls about how they behaved. | ijust don't think people - are going to put it to one side lightly and go, "it's fine, we're cool about it". - this is so refreshing because in political parties, normally all their stuff is done quite coded, or they'll talk to you in the corridor afterwards and say, "oh, actually this is what i really think". you're just coming out and saying it explicitly that you think your boss, your party leader, is rubbish. it's quite amazing! is it quite empowering for you to do it? well, look, i don't take any pleasure in it. - i would much rather... you know, i voted for him, i because some people pretend that the only people - criticising him are people that never supported him. i voted for him because i.

wanted to get brexit done, i wanted to defeat jeremy corbyn, and he did both l of those things. and i would have preferredl that he made the right calls and things were great and i i could go out on programmes like this and be full- square behind both him and the government. i fully support the government, fully support the policies, - but i don't think he's- the right man to lead us. and i've set out why. i said it to his face, i not behind his back. 0h, did you? oh, no, of course you did! sorry, i was picturing a sort of confrontation in an office somewhere. no, no, no. but, i mean, look, i said it in the house of commons. | i laid out my reasons. but i don't take any| great pleasure in it. and frankly, the sooner it gets resolved, the better. - have you had a conversation with people who've maybe been wavering, and after they've spoken to you, they've said, actually, that's it — i've given up on him too? has that happened ? it has happened. and not just face—to—face conversations, but i wasl talking to a colleague who, when i said what i said - in the chamber, they| didn't agree with me. then they heard me set l out my reasons in slightly longer form on, i'm i afraid, a rival podcast. outrageous.

and they listened to my sort of detailed arguments - and they actually decided they agreed with me. - so you know, people do change their minds. - but no, i think it's really important in politics, - in your own party, that people can have different views - without falling out with each other. l i don't think that's very helpful. - and whatever happens, - we're all going to have to pull together, fight a general. election, win it as a team, and the sooner we can pull together a unitedl team, the better. but ijust don't think we'rej going to be able to do that under borisjohnson. mark, who should be prime minister? well, look... mark harper?! no, i've made it clearthat i'm not going to have another- go at it. but look, the conservative i party is chock full of talent. we've got really, really talented people both . on the front and back benches. people will put - their names forward. and we've got a very. robust process, which, frankly, i remind my. colleagues, you know, mps are in charge of. we're the ones that are going. to ask people tough questions,

put them through their paces and test them. i we'll come up with two - people who we think either of whom would make a fantastic prime minister, and then we'll. give those names - to our party members. and i've got a huge . amount of confidence in our party members. they're smart, sensible people, decent people, and they will make the final decision. i and then we will have a prime minister that we can - all unite behind. fight what will be the fifth term that we'll be seeking at the next general election, i which is pretty unprecedented in modern times. and we'll have a united team and go forward, i and i think we can win. mark, who's the best of the bunch right now? well, i think there's . a range of candidates. i haven't settled i on on anybody yet. i think there's some talented . people inside the government, there's some talented - people on the backbenches. i don't know who's going to stand. . i mean, you can't pick- someone who doesn't stand. there's quite a lot of chat about it across the road, isn't there? are you hearing all of the chat about the potential contenders? yes. people getting their camps ready. how advanced is it? well, to be honest, i i don't know how many people are preparing. there are lots of names being bandied about, i but, you know, you don't

in the end know who's i going to stand. they've got to stand, they've got to get support to stand. i but look, the point is, we've got lots of talented people. i anyone who... all this sort of nonsense that says there's no one else thatj can do it — that's rubbish. there's plenty of talented people and we've got - a robust process. aren't you advocating chaos, though, mark? you want to get rid of the prime minister but you can't tell us who you'd want to take over? well, because you've got to test people. . you've got to see i who wants to stand. you can't be prime minister if you're not prepared - to put your name forward. there'll be a range i of people who stand. they'll lay out their stall, their particular approachl to what the conservative party should be about. l through this process we'll have a debate as a party i about the direction i that we want to go in. we'll test people. they'll be tested, you know, in interviews with people - like you, chris, you know, with your new hat on, - you'll put them - through their paces. there'll be other broadcasters who'll put them through their| paces, and we'll be looking at them through the prism | of "is this somebody who we can put in front of the public- in a general election campaign, out on the campaign trail, - in the media, in the house - of commons, doing their stuff, and do we think they'll persuade the public i

to vote for them? " and at the end of that process, that test, you know, _ you're going to end up with the person that l you think can lead. in the old days, a leadership contest, the sign of it starting was somebody hiring an office and putting the phone lines in. i don't know, do we still have landlines? no, no, no — they all sign up to tiktok! what is the 2022 version of that? is it like, oh, a liz truss branded ruler arrives in your pigeonhole? a priti patel mug? it's probably a whatsapp group. are there any of them already? well, that's- for you to find out. oh, i'm sure we will! mark, thank you very much. thanks, mark. mark has led us to the end of this episode of newscast, but i'll be doing another episode tomorrow, and i'll be sitting in chris mason's chair because i'm going to stand in for him on any questions, and i'm going to be in burnham—on—sea in somerset. no idea how i'm going to get there, but it sounds like it's very nice. it's very nice. i've been there in a b&b overnight once. it was very pleasant. wish me luck, chris. good luck, adam, from the car park of a diy store in watford.

bye, everyone! bye. t0 tune of "jesus christ superstar": # chris mason, editor. # do you think you're what they say you are?" hello, there. we'll be developing a north—south split across the country into friday, that's because we've got higher pressure building in across southern areas. so, that will bring in quite a long sunshine around, far more sunshine across the south than we had on thursday, but we maintain the windy, blustery theme across the north with further showers. that's because it's closer to this area of low pressure. but this area of high pressure will continue to push its way northwards, dominating the weather scene across much of the midlands, southwards, and in towards wales. there will be some sunshine for northern ireland, southern scotland, too, but here it will be windier

and at times could see a few light showers. but most of the showers will be across the north and west of scotland, some though will be quite heavy and they will be blustery, as the winds will be quite a feature here once again. the winds will be lighter further south, with more sunshine — we could see 21 degrees again, otherwise, it's the low to mid teens across the north. through friday night, the showers continue for a while across scotland. the winds begin to back more northerly as we head through the night. that will feed in a few more showers across the far north of scotland, but much of the country will be dry. but it will be a cooler air mass, temperatures in the single digits, i think, for most places. so, it's a coolerfeel into the weekend. it will be turning cooler still, thanks to these northerly winds. and by sunday, we could even see a few showers around, with limited spells of sunshine. saturday though probably looking like being the brightest day of the weekend. but even then, there will be quite a bit of cloud being pushed down on this northerly wind across central, northern and eastern areas. i think the best of the sunshine, southwest england and wales, northern ireland, it's here where we'll see the best temperatures, perhaps 20 degrees in cardiff. otherwise, it's cooler across more northern and eastern areas,

where we will have more cloud as well. as we move into sunday, you can see the blue hue trickling further southwards across the country. it will be turning cooler as our area of high pressure begins to drift in towards iceland. so, northerly winds, quite a lot of cloud around on sunday. that wind will be quite stiff across northern and eastern areas, and the cloud thick enough for some scattered showers, as well. so, sunshine will be pretty limited. probably the best of it again will be in the southwest, where we could see 16 or 17 degrees. but distinctly chilly for the time of year across more northern and eastern areas, where we hold onto the cloud, as well. into next week, i think we will have a very weak area of low pressure nearby. that will bring further sunshine but also the risk of some showers, some of which will be on the heavy side.

welcome to bbc news. i'm rich preston. our top stories: slow to react or caution in a siege situation? police criticised over the texas school mass shooting. ukraine warns russia's offensive in donbas could result in the region becoming uninhabited and moscow's actions genocide. the us insists china remains a bigger challenge to the world order than russia. as far back as i get a rambo, as far back as i geta rambo, i as far back as i get a rambo, i always wanted to be a gangster. the hollywood actor and star of fellers, ray liotta, has died at the age of 67.