this is bbc news, i'm shaun ley. the headlines at 8pm... ajury in washington, dc finds steve bannon — donald trump's former presidential adviser — guilty of contempt of congress. tailbacks stretching for miles outside the ferry terminal at dover mean a miserable start to the summer holidays for thousands of people. the calais mp blames brexit. this is an aftermath of brexit. we have to run more checks than before. and again, this is the first time we are experiencing trouble on holidays without any health conditions. ukraine and russia sign an agreement to allow the resumption of ukraine's grain exports from ports on the black sea. the united nations says it was vital to get a deal. gcse and a—level exam results could face delays because staff at the aqa exam board are striking for three days next week in a row over pay.

the european union launches fresh legal action against the uk for failing to comply with the post—brexit northern ireland protocol. 15—year—old sebastian kalinowski, who died after months of torture at the hands of his mother and her partner — they've been found guilty of his murder. hello, welcome to bbc news. in the past few minutes, a jury in washington, dc has found steve bannon — donald trump's former presidential adviser — guilty of contempt of congress. he faced criminal charges after defying a legal summons to testify about last year's riot by supporters of the former president at the capitol building. mr bannon, who's 68, could face up

to two years in prison. let's speak to our correspondent barbara plett usher, let's speak to michael goldfarb, who's a journalist and foreign correspondent for pbs radio, in the united states. thank you for staying with us on bbc news. what do you make of the judgment being made here with steve bannon? it judgment being made here with steve bannon? . , m judgment being made here with steve bannon? ., a bannon? it was quick, it took three hours. it bannon? it was quick, it took three hours- it was _ bannon? it was quick, it took three hours. it was an _ bannon? it was quick, it took three hours. it was an odd _ bannon? it was quick, it took three hours. it was an odd case. - bannon? it was quick, it took three hours. it was an odd case. he - bannon? it was quick, it took three hours. it was an odd case. he was. hours. it was an odd case. he was subpoenaed by the january 6th committee to come testify over what happened onjanuary 6th, 2021 when donald trump's public pronouncements at the foot of the capitol inspired an assault on the capitol building. and he had declined to answer or turn up, so he was cited for contempt. he was tried — that judgment came through just now, and faces up to a year on each count,

two counts, maybe, maybe not that long a sentence, and a significant cash find. this is not by congress — i guess this must be a federal court. . ., ., , ., court. the court hands-down the 'udument court. the court hands-down the judgment because _ court. the court hands-down the judgment because he _ court. the court hands-down the judgment because he failed - court. the court hands-down the judgment because he failed to i court. the court hands-down the i judgment because he failed to show up? judgment because he failed to show u . ? ., . , judgment because he failed to show u? . . , �* , . judgment because he failed to show u? , judgment because he failed to show up? exactly. there's a part of him, because he's _ up? exactly. there's a part of him, because he's become _ up? exactly. there's a part of him, because he's become - _ up? exactly. there's a part of him, because he's become - he - because he's become — he was instrumental, kind of a dominant cummings figure in the election of donald trump, you know, dominic cummings was an oddball who helped push brexit over the finishing line and fell out with boris johnson. allegedly steve bannon fell out with donald trump, it was apparent donald trump is my family didn't like him. steve bannon is one of those people who has organised this ultra—right f no nationalists urge that you see

most successfully in hungary, but also in trump world. —— f no nationalists. he's got a top rated radio stream. if nationalists. he's got a top rated radio stream.— nationalists. he's got a top rated radio stream. if he's seen as that kind of a champion _ radio stream. if he's seen as that kind of a champion of _ radio stream. if he's seen as that kind of a champion of donald - radio stream. if he's seen as that i kind of a champion of donald trump ozment because that are now —— donald trump's, there's risk of making him a political martyr? he: hopes to be a martyr and maybe discussions of his fate on fox news or the other ultra—right wing media outlets in america. we'll have to see, sentencing will come later, that's the way the american justice system works. it won't hurt him amongst those who share his worldview, but i think — you bring

up, can you jailthe worldview, but i think — you bring up, can you jail the guy? it's a question of how far you can take this. there's another trump world person named peter navarro who was a special adviser of economics, a professor — he too has been cited for contempt. doesn't matter? it’s for contempt. doesn't matter? it's uuite a for contempt. doesn't matter? it's quite a challenge for the justice department about the dilemma of, how far do you pursue what happened in january last year without it looking like one administration punishing its predecessor?— like one administration punishing its predecessor? what's interesting is that this is _ its predecessor? what's interesting is that this is all _ its predecessor? what's interesting is that this is all part _ its predecessor? what's interesting is that this is all part of _ its predecessor? what's interesting is that this is all part of this - is that this is all part of this january 6th committee, which is kind of republican and democrats, unless the republicans decided not to take part in it. liz cheney, and a multi—term congresswoman from wyoming, has done a stellarjob trying to put together all the disparate facts to create a coherent narrative. and last night was the

final night before the break for summer recess — and all the networks cut to it, it was like the watergate hearings. i think that there is movement towards the understanding that something more than just a spontaneous riot happened onjanuary 6th, and i think people are beginning to understand notjust the public, but also people in washington would think, "can we jail these people? that'lljust take us a further towards civil" not war, but more violence between the factions that have split america apart. just ”ourin that have split america apart. just pouring petrol in the flames? i think they are getting to the point where the relays they have to put people injail where the relays they have to put people in jail because there really was too many coherent moving parts — that doesn't quite make sense as a metaphor, but there was the sense that the president of the united

states wanted to foment a riot so he could declare an emergency and stay in office, or prevent the counting of the electoral votes — excuse me. so the certification process which was due to be completed... fin was due to be completed... on janua was due to be completed... q�*i january 6th, which is why the right happened. steve bannon had certainly been encouraging that and he still talks about the election being stolen and all that. and i think there has to come a point where washington has to put a stop to this. the election wasn't stolen and we need to move on. and i think even the republican party would like to move on. �* . the republican party would like to moveon. ~ . , the republican party would like to moveon. . , , move on. and that i suppose is the dancer move on. and that i suppose is the dan . er of move on. and that i suppose is the danger of the _ move on. and that i suppose is the danger of the process? _ move on. and that i suppose is the danger of the process? because i move on. and that i suppose is the | danger of the process? because the january 6th hearings will come back after summer recess, but actually it doesn't allow politics. to move on from that, it traps democrats and republicans in a time warp. i’m from that, it traps democrats and republicans in a time warp. i'm sure the republicans _ republicans in a time warp. i'm sure the republicans in _ republicans in a time warp. i'm sure the republicans in general _ republicans in a time warp. i'm sure the republicans in general would - the republicans in general would like to move away from it. come

september, whatever happens to steve bannon, whether he's serving a 30 day hitch in countyjail orjust $10,000 poorer and somebody will write him a check, he won't have to spend his own money, there's 90 days until the midterm elections, which is about giving this alive, which i'm sure the democrats would like to do, in thejudgment in roe v i'm sure the democrats would like to do, in the judgment in roe v wade. it's completely change for the electoral calculations. two months ago, the facts that republicans were meant to sweep the midterms, now not sure. now bannon has an enormous ego and would like to stay front and centre and be a martyr. 0n the other hand, i think republican leadership behind the scenes would like him to go away because they don't want to be discussing this in september and october. �* .., , f be discussing this in september and october. �* .. , j ., be discussing this in september and october. �* , j ., , october. because they've got better targets. they _ october. because they've got better targets, they think, _ october. because they've got better targets, they think, like _ october. because they've got better targets, they think, like the - targets, they think, like the problems that the biden presidency has had. tonight cast ahead this,

given what you said about the trump legacy, the argument over the 2020 election — do you see a possibility that that next presidential election will involve neither ofjoe biden or donald trump? yes will involve neither of joe biden or donald trump?— will involve neither of joe biden or donald trump? yes i do, i really do. i'm on donald trump? yes i do, i really do. in on donald _ donald trump? yes i do, i really do. i'm on donald trump _ donald trump? yes i do, i really do. i'm on donald trump is _ donald trump? yes i do, i really do. i'm on donald trump is like - donald trump? yes i do, i really do. i'm on donald trump is like mailingl i'm on donald trump is like mailing list because when i went over in 2020 for the election —— donald trump's mailing list. i now get 15 e—mails a day, some of them just comments on the political scene, others asking me for money for maggot merchandise. what i'm getting a real strong sense of it is that the republicans have to be very careful about this, is the distancing. there are some names written will be hearing more of, like governor rhonda santos of florida, who are positioning themselves to take this vote. the longer this goes on, the more like a

bad loser donald trump looks. and i think there is a very good chance he might not get on the ticket, though this last week there has been talk he'll declare his candidacy right around the time we have the midterm election. he's a sociopath and he doesn't like the focus moving on from him. so he would scupper a lot of possibilities of further havoc party as long as he's still the headliner. as forjoe biden, the jury headliner. as forjoe biden, the jury is out. you can't be 82 and be president of the united states. that will be increasingly clear over the next year. but again, much will depend on what happens in november. michael goldfarb, thank you very much. let's speak to our correspondent barbara plett usher, who's in washington, dc. what more do we know about the case?

well, the committee wanted to speak to mr bannon because he had had contact with donald trump around the time of the capitol attack — specifically he had participated in a so—called war room at a nearby hotel where mr trump's allies were strategizing how to overturn the election results, and also on his podcastjust before january 6th, he had said "all hell will break loose" on that day. those are some of the things the committee wanted to talk to him about. they wanted documents and his testimony, and he refused both. so he has been convicted of contempt of congress on both those counts, and he's not yet been sentenced, he could be sentenced up to two years in prison and up to $200,000 in fines, to two years in prison and up to $200,000 infines, but to two years in prison and up to $200,000 in fines, but there are many lesser sentences involved, as well. i think what the committee will be looking at is that this

verdict, which is quite rare, there has been a contempt of congress verdict since watergate in the 19705, verdict since watergate in the 1970s, will strengthen their hand as they continue to seek evidence from mr trump's allies about what happened leading up to and around the insurrection.— the insurrection. barbara, i don't know what _ the insurrection. barbara, i don't know what steve _ the insurrection. barbara, i don't know what steve bannon - the insurrection. barbara, i don't know what steve bannon gave i the insurrection. barbara, i don'tj know what steve bannon gave as the insurrection. barbara, i don't- know what steve bannon gave as his reasons for not appearing before the committee, but there are those presumably on the public in who think it's a partisan process, notwithstanding there is two or publicans taking part and they've both been disowned by their party, that basically this is a democratic political operation? 50 that basically this is a democratic political operation?— that basically this is a democratic political operation? so mr bannon's defence did make _ political operation? so mr bannon's defence did make the _ political operation? so mr bannon's defence did make the argument - political operation? so mr bannon's defence did make the argument he | political operation? so mr bannon's - defence did make the argument he was a political target, and there is republican criticism of the committee as being politically biased. now it is important to note

that when there was talk of an investigation into the january 6th attack, initially the plan was for a commission of inquiry along the lines of the 9/11 commission which would've not been a congressional committee, but an outside committee staff equally by appointees from both parties. that pass to the house in legislation, in the senate basically killed that bill. so there was an attempt early on for a bipartisan investigation. then there was the decision to make it a congressional committee — at which point the republicans did put forward five members to participate, but two of them were also implicated in mr trump's efforts to overturn the election. and so, the house speaker rejected them, and then the republicans decided to pull them all, at which case there wouldn't have been any republicans at all, so the house speaker nancy pelosi chose

two that agreed that mr trump needed to be investigated. so that's a little bit of the background of how we got here, but it is criticised as partisan by republicans — i must say, the makeup of the committee has allowed it to present a very focused argument, a very efficient, snappy presentation without any sort of counter arguments or mr trump's allies trying to change the narrative. and i think that was probably the calculation of nancy pelosi that this would ultimately serve the interests of trying to find out what happened on that day. but it does mean that it looks like a partisan effort to many republicans.— a partisan effort to many reublicans. ., ., ~ a partisan effort to many reublicans. . ., ~ republicans. barbara, thank you so much. getting away for the summer holidays should be one of the highlights of the year —

but huge tailbacks stretching for several miles from the ferry terminal at dover have meant misery and frustration for travellers, some of whom had to endure delays of up to six hours. it's the start of one of the busiest weekends of the year for dover, but the port has declared a critical incident, and told passengers to arrive at least five hours before their departure time "to clear all security checks." we've heard in the last hour that french border checks there at now operating at full capacity. authorities there have blamed what they've called "woefully inadequate" staffing at french border controls — but french police say the problems arose from an "unexpected technical incident" in the channel tunnel. 0ur transport correspondent katy austin sent this report from dover. it's the big summer getaway. but no one stuck in these cues today was getting away very quickly. the durnford family took these photos on the way to catch a ferry for the first—ever holiday abroad together. so this was supposed to be

a one—hour carjourney from sevenoaks in kent. and it's just been nearly seven hours now, and we're still not checked in. we completely missed our 9.30 ferry. i was able to get out of the car with my girls and we got to the shops to get some food, because we didn't bring that much food with us because we thought we were going to be having lunch in france. and they were allowed onto a later ferry five hours after they'd expected to depart. dover and the surrounding roads are gridlocked and police were out managing traffic. with post—brexit and covid checks now in place at the port of dover said it had done what it could to prepare for a busy summer and worked with local and government partners. the report also said it had worked with french border police to plan for the expected traffic volumes, but it accused them of providing woefully inadequate resource this morning. what we had requested for the start of the day around 4am in the morning, was to have 1a officers in place that could manage, because the traffic starts arriving that early in the morning. what we did have was six, so we had an inadequate number of immigration officers.

the port boss insisted his teams had been providing regular updates on what was needed. i promise you there was no more communication, no more planning, no more analysis that we could have done. the french authorities hit back, saying it was not correct that they hadn't put sufficient manpower in place, that the plan had been to man all posts at 8.30am, but an unforeseeable technical incident at the channel tunnel led them to postpone full operational capacity by one hour. then eurotunnel said the incident had nothing to do with officials being delayed. it's now mid—afternoon, and things are flowing a bit more freely than they were. but the delays this morning were so great there is a really long backlog. as the blame game continues, the reality is a miserable start to many people's holidays. katy austin, bbc news. let's talk to our correspondent in dover, duncan kennedy.

the good news is the cars are running, which is an encouraging sign some feel it is and it isn't. what's happening is these police officers behind me are letting vehicles in impulses. they bring them up to hisjunction behind me because the or is at capacity, they wait for capacity to drop, then they let them all in. it’s wait for capacity to drop, then they let them all in.— let them all in. it's better than what it was — let them all in. it's better than what it was but _ let them all in. it's better than what it was but it's _ let them all in. it's better than what it was but it's not - let them all in. it's better than what it was but it's not back. let them all in. it's better than what it was but it's not back to normal here. a great day of frustration for thousands of people— notjust lori drivers, some people we spoke to have been in their vehicles for 15 hours, and lots of holiday—makers telling us they've beenin holiday—makers telling us they've been in their cars for seven hours. katie touched on the reasons why this all has happened. it started this all has happened. it started this morning when not enough french border staff turned up to deal with passports. the ports say they were expecting 1a, for only six showed up. the french responded to that by saying, "yes, some of our staff were

late this morning because they were dealing with that incident in the channel tunnel." but we got that repulsed from the channel tunnel people this afternoon, the euro tunnel saying there was an incident but only minor and it had nothing to do with what was going on in the port here today. what compound it was a very serious accident on the m20, which delayed people by seven hours and has gotten into the city. so that's added to the problems. looking forward, we do have that statement from the french ambassador saying they are at full capacity in the port now regarding staffing levels — we've had this final warning from the chief executive of the port here, saying that if staffing levels from the french are not at the level they should be tomorrow, then we could be seeing these cues all over again. the advice from them and the ferry operators is you have to check before leaving tomorrow morning. the

argument that was being made by the mp for calais, who i spoke to earlier, there problems with dover because it's not big enough for the amount of traffic it has to deal with, there's also brexit because the french have increased checks, as have we, because we are no longer in the european union and the free—trade area. we have to interrupt you, we have to go to washington now to get steve bannon's reaction. i had to take an entire week off to go through this. we respect that decision. we may have lost the battle here today, but we won't lose this war, 0k? david is going to talk your today about exactly what the jury your today about exactly what the jury heard — about what was put on in that courtroom. david will talk to you about our appeals process. but listen, in the closing argument, the prosecutor missed one very important phrase. i stand with trump

and the constitution, and i will never back off that ever. this didn't seem _ never back off that ever. this didn't seem like _ never back off that ever. this didn't seem like the - never back off that ever. this didn't seem like the misdemeanor from _ didn't seem like the misdemeanor from hell. — didn't seem like the misdemeanor from hell, mr bannon. what happened? this is— from hell, mr bannon. what happened? this is round _ from hell, mr bannon. what happened? this is round one, that's what happened _ this is round one, that's what happened. this— this is round one, that's what happened. this is— this is round one, that's what happened. this is a _ this is round one, that's what. happened. this is a bulletproof appeal — happened. this is a bulletproof appeal. have _ happened. this is a bulletproof appeal. have you _ happened. this is a bulletproof appeal. have you ever- happened. this is a bulletproof appeal. have you ever in - happened. this is a bulletproof. appeal. have you ever in another case _ appeal. have you ever in another case see — appeal. have you ever in another case see a — appeal. have you ever in another case see a judge _ appeal. have you ever in another case see a judge say— appeal. have you ever in another case see a judge say six - appeal. have you ever in another case see a judge say six times i case see a judge say six times that he thinks _ case see a judge say six times that he thinks the — case see a judge say six times that he thinks the standard _ case see a judge say six times that he thinks the standard for - case see a judge say six times that he thinks the standard for will - he thinks the standard for will furnace — he thinks the standard for will furnace is _ he thinks the standard for will furnace is wrong? _ he thinks the standard for will furnace is wrong? —— - he thinks the standard for will - furnace is wrong? —— willfulness? he said it _ furnace is wrong? —— willfulness? he said it doesn't — furnace is wrong? —— willfulness? he said it doesn't comport _ furnace is wrong? —— willfulness? he said it doesn't comport with - said it doesn't comport with jurisprudence, _ said it doesn't comport with jurisprudence, of— said it doesn't comport with jurisprudence, of the - said it doesn't comport with - jurisprudence, of the traditional definition. — jurisprudence, of the traditional definition, but— jurisprudence, of the traditional definition, but he _ jurisprudence, of the traditional definition, but he feels- jurisprudence, of the traditional definition, but he feels his - jurisprudence, of the traditional. definition, but he feels his hands were _ definition, but he feels his hands were bound — definition, but he feels his hands were bound by a _ definition, but he feels his hands were bound by a 1961 _ definition, but he feels his hands were bound by a 1961 decision. i definition, but he feels his hands i were bound by a 1961 decision. you will see _ were bound by a 1961 decision. you will see this — were bound by a 1961 decision. you will see this case _ were bound by a 1961 decision. you will see this case reversed - were bound by a 1961 decision. you will see this case reversed on - will see this case reversed on appeal. — will see this case reversed on appeal. you'll— will see this case reversed on appeal, you'll see _ will see this case reversed on appeal, you'll see all- will see this case reversed on appeal, you'll see all these i appeal, you'll see all these resources, _ appeal, you'll see all these resources, three _ appeal, you'll see all these resources, three federal. resources, three federal prosecutors. _ resources, three federal prosecutors, for- resources, three federal prosecutors, for fbi - resources, three federal. prosecutors, for fbi agents resources, three federal- prosecutors, for fbi agents of misdemeanor. _ prosecutors, for fbi agents of misdemeanor, of— prosecutors, for fbi agents of misdemeanor, of being - prosecutors, for fbi agents of l misdemeanor, of being wasted. prosecutors, for fbi agents of - misdemeanor, of being wasted. you cannot— misdemeanor, of being wasted. you cannot find — misdemeanor, of being wasted. you cannot find another— misdemeanor, of being wasted. you cannot find another crime _ misdemeanor, of being wasted. you cannot find another crime in - misdemeanor, of being wasted. you cannot find another crime in which i cannot find another crime in which misdemeanor— cannot find another crime in which misdemeanor or— cannot find another crime in which misdemeanor or felony— cannot find another crime in which misdemeanor or felony in - cannot find another crime in which misdemeanor or felony in which i cannot find another crime in which misdemeanor or felony in which a| misdemeanor or felony in which a person— misdemeanor or felony in which a person is— misdemeanor or felony in which a person is convicted _ misdemeanor or felony in which a person is convicted without - person is convicted without believing _ person is convicted without believing or— person is convicted without believing or knowing, - person is convicted without believing or knowing, or. person is convicted without - believing or knowing, or having reason — believing or knowing, or having reason to — believing or knowing, or having reason to believe _ believing or knowing, or having reason to believe he _ believing or knowing, or having reason to believe he or- believing or knowing, or having reason to believe he or she - believing or knowing, or having reason to believe he or she did| reason to believe he or she did anything — reason to believe he or she did anything wrong _ reason to believe he or she did

anything wrong-— anything wrong. that is steve bannon's lawyer _ anything wrong. that is steve bannon's lawyer there. - anything wrong. that is steve bannon's lawyer there. that's reaction from washington, dc to the finding of a reaction from washington, dc to the finding ofajury reaction from washington, dc to the finding of a jury in the contempt case brought by the department of justice on behalf of the us congress january 6th inquiry. you heard a fairly robust response from mr bannon, he stands his ground and will take legal action. a deal to resume vital exports of grain from ukraine, which have been blocked since the invasion by russia, has been signed by the two countries, brokered by turkey and the un. ukraine is one of the world's largest exporters of cereal crops and oils. but since the invasion, russia has been blockading ukraine's major ports along the black sea, like 0desa. 0ur international correspondent 0rla guerin reports. ukraine's golden fields of wheat. but this is a bitter harvest. the grain can't be sold abroad because of a russian naval blockade.

today in istanbul, a rare diplomatic breakthrough. the signing of a deal to resume exports from ukraine and help moscow export its grain and fertiliser. nice to see you, mr secretary general. the un secretary general who nurtured the agreement told me it benefits the world. this is exactly what we needed at the present moment because developing countries are in a dramatic situation with skyrocketing prices, and many people are at risk of famine. so, there is a moral obligation of all those involved in this process to make it a success. isn't there also a moral question that at a time when russia is killing women and children, and we see this every day — i've seen it in ukraine, you've been in ukraine on the ground, you've seen the aftermath of russian attacks — but here we are with russia being rewarded with russia getting a deal that is going to help it

get its food and fertiliser onto the world market. some would see this as a payoff for russia. sorry to say it, that is totally wrong. it is not russia that is rewarded. this was a basic need for the international markets. but russia will benefit. russia benefits much more with the export of fuel. it's incomparable, the volume, and we go on seeing russia exporting oil and gas to several european countries and to other countries around the world. that is where the big business is. but you understand some on the outside world will see this as the un helping russia to do business at a time when russia is killing women and children every other day in ukraine. no, we are helping ukraine. back in april, the secretary general saw the horrors there for himself during a sombre visit to suburbs around the capital.

forever scarred by russian atrocities. when you went to kyiv and ukraine, you yourself were in bucha and you were obviously moved by what you saw, and i remember you said you could imagine your own granddaughters having to flee. yes. against that backdrop, was it difficult to sit and negotiate with russia? was it a hard thing to do? of course it's not easy, but there is a sense of duty that the secretary general of the united nations must have in relation to the whole world. strong was my emotion when i visited the places just mentioned. today, it was also very emotional for me to sign this agreement. it's probably the most important thing i've been doing since i became secretary general. for the grain deal to work, they will have to be a de facto ceasefire in the black sea ports and safe corridor at

sea for cargo vessels. that's a big ask. this deal is fragile and peace is a very distant prospect. 0rla guerin, bbc news, istanbul. i'm joined now by chris elliott, professor at queen's university belfast and founder of the institute of global food security. professor elliot, thanks for being with us. i suppose the war in ukraine has illustrated, if we needed reminding, how fragile this question of food security is when it's about export and import of food between countries. what do you make of this deal in the prospects of a? why's it so important?— of this deal in the prospects of a? why's it so important? thank you. you're absolutely _ why's it so important? thank you. you're absolutely right, _ why's it so important? thank you. you're absolutely right, i - why's it so important? thank you. you're absolutely right, i think - you're absolutely right, i think what's happened in ukraine has shown to many people not only the fragility, but the complexity of our

global food supply system. we have so many single points of failure and this is one of those. to try to put things into context, ukraine has a population of a quarter of a million people, but produces enough food to feed half a billion people. a lot of that food is in serials and cereals have been caught in the black sea ports because of the blockade, because of the russian invasion. know what that has meant in global terms is that the united nations statistics say that 50 million more people have been put into starvation as a result of what has happened so far. and if this continues, it will move from 50 million to 500 million — that's the severity of the crisis we are currently in and facing into. in terms of implementing this deal, we have quite a long period in which ukraine's grain exporting vessels have been in operative, so

presumably there are operational questions about getting this moving and how quickly it can be got moving. i suppose the question is about security — we will ask people to operate these boats in waters that have been mined, because ukraine wanted to mine it to protect a russian invasion from c, but also the risk of being potentially hit, whether accidentally or deliberately, by russian attacks. that's asking a lot of merchants sailors. ., , ., ., sailors. you put an finger on some issues there- _ sailors. you put an finger on some issues there. some _ sailors. you put an finger on some issues there. some black - sailors. you put an finger on some issues there. some black see - issues there. some black see courtships were already filled with their cereal cargo that could leave relatively quickly. but it will take tens of ships per day — so we are talking about probably a fleet of 100 plus ships. where will you find those ships? it's like when we get a problem in the airport and you

always hear the planes are out of position, so a lot of the fleet is out of position, as well. added to that complexity is the crews of these ships, how can anybody possibly ensure that they will be safe? but i do know the united nations has been incredibly active in terms of discussing this with a lot of the shipping companies and trying to get all of the reassurances necessary to crew these ships. and because of these factors, it's not something that's like a button being pressed and the export of cereals will start tomorrow. it'll be a slow wind—up process over the coming weeks and months. {guild the coming weeks and months. could eventually mean _ the coming weeks and months. could eventually mean that _ the coming weeks and months. could eventually mean that some _ the coming weeks and months. could eventually mean that some product prices fall? eventually mean that some product rices fall? ~ . ., ., prices fall? ukraine, under normal circumstances _ prices fall? ukraine, under normal circumstances prewar would've - circumstances prewar would've exported 5 million tonnes of cereals

per month. at the most it'll be about 3 million tonnes. so i think there will be an alleviation of a lot of the problems in terms of food security, hungerand lot of the problems in terms of food security, hunger and starvation. lot of the problems in terms of food security, hungerand starvation. but there will still be a lot of ongoing consequences because of the conflict, and even downstream for next year and the year after, we are picking up a lot of problems that the ukrainian agriculture and food industries will face in terms of getting their production back to previous prewar levels. professor, thank ou previous prewar levels. professor, thank you very _ previous prewar levels. professor, thank you very much. _ previous prewar levels. professor, thank you very much. you'll - previous prewar levels. professor, thank you very much. you'll make | thank you very much. you'll make your welcome. now it's time for a look at the weather. hello again. friday brought us a mixture of bright spells and some fairly heavy showers in places, and many of those showers will slowly fade away overnight to bring some drier weather. however, in northern ireland, later in the night, this band of rain's going to move in from the west and

the rain will turn heavy. your overnight lows about 11—15 celsius. now, tomorrow, we start off with this rain across northern ireland. that pushes eastwards, so eventually we'll get some rain into western parts of scotland, western areas of england and wales, but the further east you live, the more likely you are to see little, ifany, rain. and indeed, with some spells of sunshine across to east anglia and southern england, it becomes quite warm again, with temperatures reaching the mid—20s. more generally, though, temperatures into the low 20s saturday afternoon. we've got more rain on the charts for sunday. it's going to be heavy for northern ireland and scotland. this time, we should get some useful falls of rain in the south of wales, which has been one of the driest areas so far this july. temperatures climbing a little bit, but becoming hot during the afternoon across east anglia and the southeast. staff at the exam board aqa are going on strike next week in a dispute over pay. 180 members of unison are expected to walk out for 72 hours on friday.

union leaders are warning the stoppage could affect the delivery of thousands of gcse and a—level results for students in england, wales and northern ireland. a spokesperson for aqa insisted that wouldn't happen. joining me now is lizanne devonport from the union unison. thank you very much for being with us this evening. explain why you have taken this decision to take strike action next friday? the decision to — strike action next friday? the decision to take _ strike action next friday? tue decision to take psych strike action next friday? tte decision to take psych action strike action next friday? t'te decision to take psych action is never an easy one, but we have been left with no option because of the actions of aqa —— strike action. 0ur actions of aqa —— strike action. our members have been offered a pay raise of 3%, which is significant below the inflation of 9.4%. our members are struggling in some instances to feed themselves, using food banks. we need to make sure they get a better pay rise, and aqa need to go back to talk to offer them that. tt need to go back to talk to offer them that-— need to go back to talk to offer them that. ,.,, ., , , ,~. �* them that. it is obvious why you've chosen this — them that. it is obvious why you've chosen this point, _ them that. it is obvious why you've chosen this point, because - them that. it is obvious why you've chosen this point, because if- chosen this point, because if you want an impact, arguably when the exams are taken and it results come in, not only perfectly sense. in the

broad sense, we have contingencies in place, it won't have an impact on the delivery of results, and it has kind of accused the union of scaremongering... the kind of accused the union of scaremongering. . ._ kind of accused the union of scaremongering. .. kind of accused the union of scaremonuuerin... .,, scaremongering. .. the last thing we are t in: scaremongering. .. the last thing we are trying to — scaremongering. .. the last thing we are trying to do _ scaremongering. .. the last thing we are trying to do is — scaremongering. .. the last thing we are trying to do is scare _ scaremongering. .. the last thing we are trying to do is scare monger. - are trying to do is scare monger. with hundred 80 taking strike action, i do not see how that can fail to have an impact on exams. having an impact on exam is the last thing these numbers want to do. they want to be in work, doing theirjob and delivering for aqa, they cannot do that with the pair is being offered, and what we need to see is a realistic pay rise that meets expectations. people in work should not be using food banks, they need to be paid properly and rewarded properly for the work they are doing. properly for the work they are doinu. ., , doing. you say it is the last thing ou doing. you say it is the last thing you want. _ doing. you say it is the last thing you want. but — doing. you say it is the last thing you want, but it _ doing. you say it is the last thing you want, but it is _ doing. you say it is the last thing you want, but it is intentional, i you want, but it is intentional, isn't it? you would not be striking at this point in time otherwise, because you recognise that having an impact on exam is the best way to

make your point and may be getting aqa to change its mind about the pay rise? ., ,., ., aqa to change its mind about the pay rise? . , ., . . ~' rise? the reason we are taking strike action _ rise? the reason we are taking strike action is _ rise? the reason we are taking strike action is because - rise? the reason we are taking strike action is because we'vel rise? the reason we are taking - strike action is because we've been trying to negotiate with aqa for months, to improve the offer that is on the table for these members, so it is not the fact we drawn this time to take the strike action during the exam period. if they want to avoid strike action and the potential impact on exams, they need to put a better pay offer for these members to stop what you're saying it is still possible this won't go ahead next friday, but it is still possible this won't go ahead next friday,— it is still possible this won't go ahead next friday, but you are... unison have _ ahead next friday, but you are... unison have been _ ahead next friday, but you are... unison have been very _ ahead next friday, but you are... unison have been very clear - ahead next friday, but you are... unison have been very clear we l ahead next friday, but you are... - unison have been very clear we want to enter into further talks with aqa. to enter into further talks with aqa, it is the employers themselves that he refused the talks. —— have refused. lizanne devonport at unison, thank you very much. let's return now to that deal

to resume vital exports of grain from ukraine. it's been signed by the two countries, brokered by turkey and the un. let's talk to matthew hollingworth, the world food programme's emergency coordinator for ukraine. thank you very much for being with us. the first question is, how quickly can this deal be implemented? irate quickly can this deal be implemented?- quickly can this deal be imlemented? ~ ., ., ., implemented? we are going to find it difficult to implement _ implemented? we are going to find it difficult to implement for _ implemented? we are going to find it difficult to implement for sure, - difficult to implement for sure, but it can be done. there are the three ports that have been mothballed since the war, five green terminals are functional, and they can start up are functional, and they can start up very quickly. it is getting up to speedin up very quickly. it is getting up to speed in terms of all of the other aspects of the agreement, to have a monitored, safe, confidence building approach to these safe liens in the black sea, thatis these safe liens in the black sea, that is going to take a bit of time,

but it is certainly doable, and we are thrilled that this agreement, these agreements, have come into place, but there is a lot of work that will go into it now, and both in terms of getting the corridor open but also granting that food can go to the ports from around the country, so it can be exported. th country, so it can be exported. in terms of the grain that has been stored, has it been stored in good condition? is it going to be usable still? ., condition? is it going to be usable still? . ., .,, condition? is it going to be usable still? ., ., i: ,, , still? there are almost 70 vessels which have _ still? there are almost 70 vessels which have been _ still? there are almost 70 vessels which have been blocked - still? there are almost 70 vessels which have been blocked in - still? there are almost 70 vessels which have been blocked in the i still? there are almost 70 vessels i which have been blocked in the port for the last five months. it looks like the grain in most of those vessels is ok, and lots of those vessels is ok, and lots of those vessels tended blocked out, having been blocked this time. —— can get out. then we will look at the commercial sector. 20 million tonnes in the silos. it looks like that is ok as well for it is important that

0k as well for it is important that thatis 0k as well for it is important that that is sent out of the country, because we have got about 300 million tonnes projected of harvest this year, of which two thirds should be exported, and that is going to come from all over the country. going to come from all over the count . g . going to come from all over the count . g , ., going to come from all over the count ., , ., ., , ., ., country. just on that question of the harvest. _ country. just on that question of the harvest, the _ country. just on that question of the harvest, the first _ country. just on that question of the harvest, the first year i country. just on that question of the harvest, the first year in i the harvest, the first year in which the harvest, the first year in which the country has been at war, an obvious question is, are there the farmers ability to harvest it, given that many of the men in the country particularly have gone to the front line to help defend ukraine? there are arts line to help defend ukraine? there are parts of— line to help defend ukraine? there are parts of the — line to help defend ukraine? there are parts of the country _ line to help defend ukraine? there are parts of the country in - line to help defend ukraine? there are parts of the country in the i are parts of the country in the front line area, around the donbas and the other occupied zones, where it is going be very difficult to harvest, and there is fighting nearby, but there are large amount of the country far away from the front line and certainly the harvest can go ahead. the problem is the country is facing huge fuel because refineries have been bombed, so it

is difficult to truck around the country, and also the railways, which are really import for moving around this country, have been targeted in the war —— really important. and so it is not going to be easy. but i do not think the biggest issue is finding labour to harvest, particularly because this is a country that produces vast numbers of food, the exported in a million tonnes last year, 400 million tonnes last year, 400 million people around the world fed, and that is because it is a mechanized farming country. these are enormous farms.— are enormous farms. yet... absolutely. — are enormous farms. yet... absolutely, i— are enormous farms. yet... absolutely, i accept - are enormous farms. yet... absolutely, i accept what i are enormous farms. yet... i absolutely, i accept what you are saying. it was a very vivid memory left, ofjust how vast left, of just how vast the agricultural land is and how unmanaged it is, and therefore resourceful. just in terms of the

other part of this equation —— how well—managed it is. the impact on the rest of the world, particularly on countries in north africa and sub—saharan africa, what does this deal mean? the sub-saharan africa, what does this deal mean?— deal mean? the potential is huge. there are millions _ deal mean? the potential is huge. there are millions of— deal mean? the potential is huge. there are millions of people i deal mean? the potential is huge. | there are millions of people across 82 countries that are living today in acute food insecurity, more than a million people living in family conditions, for those people around the world, this will be incredibly important once it gets functioning —— famine conditions. but ukraine is not the only cause of food insecurity around the world. covid—19 is still with us, the aftereffects of two plus years of pandemic, enormous costs that that pandemic, enormous costs that that pandemic has been paid for around the world, inflation around the world, all of that is creating food insecurity, but this is something that we hope will help stabilise the

food processes right now and food inflation around the world, and there are more than 50 countries with 50% or more food inflation on prices, and their countries with triple digit food inflation prices, and the ability that this will provide will actually ensure that food prices do reduce. the fertiliser that this deal or these deals will put into the marketplace will help the production for the future, so they are incredibly important deals that have had a lot of work to be done to actually put them into place and make them operationalised.— operationalised. matthew hollingworth, _ operationalised. matthew hollingworth, coordinator operationalised. matthew. hollingworth, coordinator at operationalised. matthew- hollingworth, coordinator at the world food programme in ukraine, thank you very much. let's return to our breaking news this hour.

one of donald trump's former top aides has been found guilty on two charges of contempt of congress. steve bannon defied a court order by a congressional committee investigating the january 6 riots, who wanted him to give evidence. jurors in the dc court house took less than three hours to return the verdict. he could now face up to two years in jail. we can speak now to scott lucas, an american who lives here, and is a professor of american studies at the university of birmingham. what do you make of the judgment? completely unsurprised. 0nce what do you make of the judgment? completely unsurprised. once the judge ruled in the preliminary discussions that bannon could not claim executive privilege, since he was not in the house, and once the judge ruled bennington not claim his lawyers misled him but this was an open and shut case, and it simply was, did steve been refused to comply with a subpoena to testify to the house select committee? and bannon quite clearly did that. his last resort was to say he thought he could have gotten an extension and felt it was flexible, but the persecution called two witnesses, and one of those two witnesses said, no, it was made clear to mr bannon

this was a fixed date, so the first stage — and i emphasised first stage — was cut and dry that he was guilty, but even after what you see, if you get the maximum two—year prison sentence, the next stage is that his defence team will appeal this verdict. brute that his defence team will appeal this verdict-— that his defence team will appeal this verdict. ~ . ., ., this verdict. we cut away from him, and intact. — this verdict. we cut away from him, and intact. mr— this verdict. we cut away from him, and intact, mr bannon's _ this verdict. we cut away from him, and intact, mr bannon's lawyer- this verdict. we cut away from him, and intact, mr bannon's lawyer has| and intact, mr bannon's lawyer has finished speaking and mr bannon is talking again... forgive me, that is a prerecorded link. the livelink has just finished. we are looking at pictures from a few minutes ago, but the point is lawyer was making is they will certainly appeal. does this tell us anything above what strategy the department ofjustice might pursue for others involved in this case, not least the former president himself? the this case, not least the former president himself?— this case, not least the former president himself? the first stage of this, this _ president himself? the first stage of this, this is _ president himself? the first stage of this, this is fairly _ president himself? the first stage of this, this is fairly cut _ president himself? the first stage of this, this is fairly cut and i president himself? the first stage of this, this is fairly cut and dry, l of this, this is fairly cut and dry, in that there were four white house officials who the house of representatives recommended contempt

of congress charges. they were mr bannon, peter navarro, trump's social media director dense camino and mark meadows, and thejustice apartment —— apartment decided to proceed with two charges. meadows and macklin were let off, in part because they participated with the kennedy —— meadows and scavino... donald trump will say that anything that was discussed while he was president, including the capital attack, is under executive privilege, but the timing of the this is significant, because it was only essay we heard that trump refused to intervene, and we heard in a previous hearing that trump wanted to leave that march on the capital that led to the attack, so the public relations of this does not look good for trump in one respect, which is for most americans

his chief strategist steve bannon has been found guilty. will he face further charges? but that leaves the open question. how many think donald trump cannot be guilty of anything and will follow him through hell and high water? and will follow him through hell and hiuh water? . . and will follow him through hell and hiuh water? , ., ., and will follow him through hell and hiahwater? , ., ., ., ., , , high water? gerald ford famously ardoned high water? gerald ford famously pardoned richard _ high water? gerald ford famously pardoned richard nixon _ high water? gerald ford famously pardoned richard nixon upon i high water? gerald ford famously i pardoned richard nixon upon becoming president, after nixon was all but forced out of office stub he resigned, but if he had not resigned, but if he had not resigned, he would have been impeached from office, he did say, because the only way you could restore faith in government was not to have one administration punishing the previous administration. you can argue whether that made any difference, but most people give gerald ford credit for seeing a bigger picture. do you thinkjoe biden will take the similar perspective?— biden will take the similar --ersective? ., , , ., ., perspective? no, because we are in a mirror image — perspective? no, because we are in a mirror image here. _ perspective? no, because we are in a mirror image here. the _ perspective? no, because we are in a mirror image here. the people - perspective? no, because we are in a mirror image here. the people who i mirror image here. the people who try to take down the entire system, the people who tried to take it down, were steve bannon, when he

came in as the white house chief strategist. that was his goal, to take him down and rebuild it, and then it was donald trump, who effectively launched a two on generator six, 2021, so to get accountability, you need to do the opposite, not to issue pardons —— in january 6. let thejustice january 6. let the justice department decide january 6. let thejustice department decide on january 6. let the justice department decide on the legal basis and not the clinical basis, is it time for the trump camp, including trump, to face a courtroom rather than just public trump, to face a courtroom rather thanjust public opinion —— political basis. than just public opinion -- political basis.— than just public opinion -- political basis. professor scott lucas, political basis. professor scott lucas. from — political basis. professor scott lucas, from university - political basis. professor scott lucas, from university of i lucas, from university of birmingham, take you forjoining us. i will be back with the papers —— thank you forjoining us. it is time for the film review. hello and a very warm welcome to the film review on bbc news.

and taking us through this week's releases is, as you see, mark kermode. hi, mark. hi. what have you been watching? well, as always, a very mixed bag. we have where the crawdads sing, which is an adaptation of a very popular novel. we have she will, which is the feature debut from charlotte colbert. and kurt vonnegut: unstuck in time, a documentary about the american writer. good old mixture there, yes. yes. so, where the crawdads sing, which is an adaptation of the deep south novel which became a publishing sensation — millions and millions of copies sold. this is adapted by lucy alibar, who is best known for beasts of the southern wild. one of the producers is reese witherspoon, so very, very good pedigree. yes. daisy edgar—jones is kya, who is called "the marsh girl". she grew up amidst the marshes of the deep south, fending for herself, understanding nature. at the beginning of the film, we see her being arrested on suspicion of the murder of a local boy. david strathairn is the lawyer

who comes to represent her. here's a clip. this might help you. for the jury to be able to hear from you, for them to be able to see you as the... ..as the kind person you truly are. they're never goingj to see me like that. listen, i know you have a world of reasons to hate these people. no, i never hated them. they hated me. i mean, they laughed at me. they left me. they harassed me. they attacked me. you want me to beg for my life? i don't have it in me. i won't. i will not offer myself up. they can make their decision. but they're not deciding anything about me. i so on the one hand, you've got the court case, then you have the flashbacks to her life, her childhood — abusive father, abandoned by her mother — relationship with two boys, both of whom let her down. two young men, i should say.

the book was a huge hit. the film's credentials are impeccable. and yet, and i hate to say this, it all felt very lukewarm. now, i haven't read the book, so i don't know how somebody who had read the book would feel about it. i know that whenever a book is this popular, it's always very difficult doing an adaptation. yes. there were moments in this in which i could almost hear the book behind it, thinking, ok, i can sort of see what the text would have been. the performances are good. i mean, it's a very good cast, it's very well done. the production design is really beautiful. but it all feels very safe. it deals with some dark subject matter, but it feels like a very polite treatment of that subject matter. and i kept thinking, "somewhere in here, there is an earthier, grittier version of this story," but it's kind of got a touch of the nick sparks about it. itjust felt oddly bland.

that's not to say it's bad, and it may well be that if you have read the book, you get more out of it. but i did think, "ok, it's kind of..." like i said, despite that swampy setting, it had a very lukewarm feeling and i didn't get emotionally involved in the way that i had expected to, so... because reese witherspoon options some interesting things, doesn't she? yeah. and she loves stories that put women at the heart of it, and that attracted me to it. but i haven't read the book either. well, it's the ethos of her production company is, you know, stories, women are right at the heart of the production and the stories themselves. i mean, you know, she's a great force in cinema. i confess, it's one of those times when i really wanted to like the film, and i confess that i thought it was ok, but not more than that. right, 0k. sorry. 0k. women at the heart of your second choice as well. yeah, so she will, which is a psychological chiller from director and co—writer charlotte colbert. alice krige is a fading actress called veronica,

who is recovering from surgery. she goes to a remote retreat in scotland, where she thinks she'll be on her own. when she gets there, she isn't alone, she's surrounded by a bunch of people, which she doesn't want. it also turns out that the land that the retreat is on has in its ground the ashes of women who were burned there over the years during the witch hunts. there is also another plot about the director of the film that she starred in when she was 13, played by malcolm mcdowell, and she's having flashbacks to her encounter with him. he is now being greatly revered and yet there is a horrible, haunting sense of what happened in the past. but somehow the ground, the earth, the history of everything that happened in the place that she's at somehow gives her strength. rather than it becoming horrifying, it gives her some kind of dreamy strength. now, the director calls it "a psychological horror "about a woman's expunging of her trauma through dreams" and says it's about revenge, the unconscious and the power of nature.

i think that's a very good description. i'd also say that it's a very tactile film. it feels very... you know, i was saying this wasn't true of where the crawdads sing, it feels like it has its feet and its fingers in the earth. the landscape is beautifully evoked. it has great performances. it has a brilliant score by clint mansell, who is just... just never puts a foot wrong. it's a fairy tale, it's a fable. i thought it was really impressive. it's low—key and understated with moments of sort of shock, but it's not really a horror film. it's much more of a psychological chiller. and i think charlotte colbert will do great work in the future. i thought it was hugely atmospheric to the extent that, you know, i confess i couldn't get to the end of it because it was too creepy for me. yeah. but i thought... i was very impressed with what i was able to watch and thought, "wow, this is a "first—time film—maker? "that's impressive." you feel like you're in that landscape, don't you? yes, completely, and i loved that about it. i thought that was very clever. those scenes when she goes out into the woods and the camera follows her out and you get

the sense of the past and the present all intertwining, i thought was... yeah, but then when you're me, you're going, "don't go into the woods!" that's right — "get back on the train! "go back to the safe place." at that point... yeah. but, yeah, really interesting debut. good. kurt vonnegut. where do you stand on kurt vonnegut? erm... ignorant, to be fair. 0k. although i know an awful lot more after watching this film. so unstuck in time, documentary by robert weide about the american author kurt vonnegut, who rose to fame after writing slaughterhouse—five, which was inspired by his own experiences as a prisoner of war and the bombing of dresden. he had tried to write about it for ages but couldn't find a way to do so, until he found science fiction and comedy as a way into a horrifyingly real subject. here's a clip. when i was a child, and there were many serious things going on, such as the great depression and all that, it was laurel and hardy who gave me permission not to take life seriously. and it turned out that it was ok to laugh your head off.

he laughs life was a very serious business and it inspired me to try and write funny books — that this was a good thing to do with a life, is to be funny. now, what i liked about this is this documentary has interviews taken over a long period of time — cos weide wanted to make this vonnegut documentary — and there are several interviews. and we also see film of him talking over the years that he didn't complete the documentary. he worked on other things. he worked on a very good adaptation of mother night, which i think is one of the best adaptations of vonnegut�*s novels on screen. and it becomes a story notjust about vonnegut, who... i should say, i love vonnegut. i met vonnegut in manchester when he came to talk. i was one of those fans that the film deals with about how his life was changed by suddenly people going, "0h, mr vonnegut, i think you're the greatest thing on earth!" there's a lot of them. there are a lot of them. so i really enjoyed this. your own feeling about it? i thought it was fascinating. and the documentary side of it, i loved.

i mean, the wealth of material is fantastic, notjust of him, all the family archive, even voice recordings of his messages that he's left on answering machines — remember those? i mean, all of that is so rich and wonderful. and i learned masses and i thought it was fascinating. there is a "but" coming. i've heard of slaughterhouse—five, and i'm ashamed to say i've never read it. so that was brilliant. i wasn't. .. i'm not sure i entirely bought into robert weide's idea that, "of course, i didn't really want to be in this film," and then he's in it all the blooming time! actually, at one point, he says... you chose to put yourself in it! i know. at one point, he says, "i don't like the idea of documentaries "in which the director is in it," and you go, "yeah, "you couldn't be in it any more!" ithink... personally, i think it's fair because i think that vonnegut clearly admired him and admired the work that he was doing, and because vonnegut is very hard to pin down. but also i say all this as... i'm a vonnegut fan. there is enough vonnegut in this documentary that i'll just sit there, because even in that clip, when you see him laugh, vonnegut�*s laugh is like steam coming out of a steam train, you know? and i do... i love all the.. i love his philosophy of time,

that time is not linear, time is something that you can jump in and out of, and i like the fact of dealing with historical tragedies with invention. and, you know, so anyway... but i do know what you mean. it is a film with a lot of the film—maker in it. it really is. really is. but there's lots to enjoy in it. i would say that, i would say that. ok, so best out — brian and charles, which is a film which is not about a robot, although it appears to be about a robot. a man who is very lonely builds himself a companion, which is a robot built out of a washing machine. and then it's about their friendship and it's about fatherhood and being a child and all those other wonderful things that you don't think a film about a washing machine with a mannequin head on it should be about. i thought it was really charming and it's such a sort of home—grown treat. and, you know, with all the marvel movies doing the rounds in the cinema, why not support brian and charles, a film which really deserves to do well in cinemas? yes, it's a british film and... it's very british. very british!

and when i was in the cinema the other day, they had a big charles sitting in the foyer, all made out of silver foil. and it was like a child's toy. i suppose we should say, very welsh, because i mean, that welsh scenery is absolutely extraordinary. that's absolutely key to it. no, i loved it, i loved it. and then for dvd, the northman... you'll remember that when i reviewed the northman when it came out, i said, "ok, there are there are a lot "of things wrong with the northman," and it flopped in cinemas. this is robert eggers' viking epic. but there are things right about it as well. and since it didn't do well in cinemas, now that it's out on dvd, this is probably the way to catch up with it. if you didn't see it in cinemas, this is probably the way to go. i mean, there are so many things wrong with the northman. i do seem to remember you saying that at the time! it's a huge, romping viking epic that cost a staggering... it had a massive budget, didn't it? ..directed by robert eggers, who is somebody who makes small, independent arthouse movies about two blokes going crazy in a lighthouse.

and i still look at the film and i wonder how it came into existence, but it is worth seeing. and if you didn't make it to see it in the cinema — and many didn't, and i understand why — dvd is the chance. but, you know, if you're going to the cinema, go and see brian and charles. yeah, that's next on the list. thank you very much. and read kurt vonnegut�*s novels! but now i do want to, you see. and that's the success of the documentary. i'm going to bring you a copy of breakfast of champions. you do that. that's my homework. enjoy your cinema—going this week, whatever you choose to go and see. see you next time, bye—bye. hello again. friday brought us a mixture of bright spells and some fairly heavy showers in places, and many of those showers will slowly fade away overnight to bring some drier weather. however, in northern ireland, later in the night, this band of rain's going to move in from the west and the rain will turn heavy. your overnight lows about 11—15 celsius. now, tomorrow, we start off with this rain across northern ireland. that pushes eastwards, so eventually we'll get some rain into western parts of scotland, western areas of england and wales,

but the further east you live, the more likely you are to see little, ifany, rain. and indeed, with some spells of sunshine across east anglia and southern england, it becomes quite warm again, with temperatures reaching the mid—20s. more generally, though, temperatures into the low 20s saturday afternoon. we've got more rain on the charts for sunday. it's going to be heavy for northern ireland and scotland. this time, we should get some useful falls of rain in the south of wales, which has been one of the driest areas so far this july. temperatures climbing a little bit, but becoming hot during the afternoon across east anglia and the southeast.

this is bbc news, with the latest headlines for viewers in the uk and around the world. steve bannon, the former aide to donald trump, has been found guilty of criminal contempt of congress. he tells reporters he remains defiant. the prosecutor missed one very important phrase, right? i stand with trump and the constitution, and i'll never back off that, ever. russia and ukraine have signed a deal to resume vital exports of ukrainian grain, which has been hailed by the un as a beacon of hope. this is an agreement for the world. it will bring relief for the european countries on the edge of bankruptcy, and the most vulnerable people on the edge of famine. as the deal is signed, we report from the farms on the front line in the donbas

region, which have now become a battleground.