she produced the shows as well as starring, and became, they said, the richest woman in hollywood, with a fortune estimated at $70 million. herfilms for children showed her gift for comedy. 0h, bother, i do hate shoddy work. there was bedknobs and broomsticks and later, nanny mcphee. i smell damp. no, at least, not noticeably. i thought there was a medium before me... at the age of nearly 90, she was starring in noel coward's blithe spirit in the west end. i had my first trance when i was four and a half. and was thrilled to be made a dame... it's a lovely thing to be recognised and given that nod of approval by your own country and i really cherish it. a character actress as comfortable on stage as she was on screen, over many decades, angela lansbury

was one of britain's most versatile and successful performers. music: theme from murder she wrote. time for a look at the weather. here's nick miller. sunsets and the moon are dominating our photographs here this evening, but you may have notice things changing out there. more persistent rain running across northern ireland and that is heading into western scotland over the next few hours. also, that will introduce rain to north west england and parts of wales. for the midlands, eastern and southern england, some clear spells, allowing temperatures to drop close to freezing in the colder areas, but not as cold as this morning, but elsewhere with all of the cloud and the chance for rain, as tomorrow begins, it will be a milder start, a

damp start in scotland and northern ireland, with heavy bursts of rain in scotland especially. that will clear to sunny spells, well into the afternoon before it pulls away from south—east scotland, and more of the rain moves into northern england, parts of wales and the midlands during the day, patchy nature. up to 18 degrees in east anglia and the south—east and dry until after dark. some of the rain moving in. clear skies in northern areas going into thursday morning and this is where you could see a touch of frost and if you mist and fog patches here and there and then on thursday we have a couple of other systems, one bringing rain into southern england, and another into northern and western parts of scotland and northern ireland, that is likely to stay dry with sunny spells. big picture, low pressure close to scotland on friday, very windy in the far north where most of the showers will be at another area of low pressure, a bit further south heading into us at the weekend and that will keep things blustery over

the weekend, and although some rain to be had at times this weekend, not all the time, not a washout. thanks, nick. more analysis on the day's top stories of course on newsnight. kirsty is just getting ready there, as you can see. we are now going to join our colleagues in the as you can see. we are now going to join our colleagues in the nations and regions with the news where you are. from everyone here, good night. hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the papers will be bringing us tomorrow. with me are lord darroch

welcome to both of you. thanks for your time this evening. what an interesting night again. we will talk to you about that in a moment, bringing you up—to—date on what the papers, i'm afraid on the bank of england interventions and the ongoing drama on the financial event. which the chancellor led just a month ago. which the chancellor led just a month ago. the ft leads with the bank of england however governor andrew bailey has an interview in washington tonight says the emergency scheme will end on friday. he says pension groups and have three days to get the house in order. the i says the prime minister will try to silence rebels in her own property by a. these companies will in fact they say when paul tags with the ministers don't want to call it that presumably because labour proposed one. the

metro figures the lights burning into the night. don't letjames kill or walk free. that's the plea on the front of the mirror. the mother of james bulger who was murdered in 1993. she's pleading with the prime minister not to release her son's killer. they expressed says king charles iii will hold a peer down coronation in may effect but the cost—of—living. let's plunge straight end. allie, do you want to kick us off tonight? preventing fires cells by pension funds. the key word here is again. that's right. the bank of england had already announced a intervention programme and buying up guilds to the tune of £65 billion it hasn't reached that level, as i understand it. but that was the whole thing was good to be. it's also announced in addition it would be buying in depth link gilts. all these programmes would end at the end of this week.

some limited support is still to be discussed and considered. the idea is that it would end this week. basically defined benefit pension schemes to get the house in order. the reason why this intervention from the bank of england was required is because the weight that pension schemes hedge their positions meant that if they actually had to go out and sell guilds to provide collateral to shore up their hedge and that is why the government had to intervene. there are several issues or the chancellor here in relation to all of this. because he announced that many budget which frightened the market he then came out today and said he was going to give an upbeat announcement on the physical which is it exactly my birthday. i hope it doesn't turn out to be of thriller budget. he's got to reassure the markets now. the institute for

fiscal studies as said they are going to have to make 60 billion o'clock. if he's not raising taxes going to have to make cuts somewhere and the question is where. you can't touch the defence budget, where these cuts fall? we already heard about benefits rising in line with inflation potentially which i think the government is probably under a lot of pressure on it is going to cave on. where this money could've come from?— come from? that is the question. that's exactly _ come from? that is the question. that's exactly right. _ come from? that is the question. that's exactly right. 60 _ come from? that is the question. that's exactly right. 60 billion - come from? that is the question. that's exactly right. 60 billion is| that's exactly right. 60 billion is an awful— that's exactly right. 60 billion is an awful lot of money to find if vou're — an awful lot of money to find if you're going to protect nhs defence for the _ you're going to protect nhs defence for the presumably they don't want to touch _ for the presumably they don't want to touch it — for the presumably they don't want to touch it. so it's extraordinary difficult — to touch it. so it's extraordinary difficult. there is some language around _ difficult. there is some language around about there being a material risk to— around about there being a material risk to financial stability. i think it comes — risk to financial stability. i think it comes from bank of england sources — it comes from bank of england sources. must be quite worrying you would _ sources. must be quite worrying you would think— sources. must be quite worrying you would think for the markets and for the government. there is also more criticism _ the government. there is also more criticism from the imf saying the

uhfuhded — criticism from the imf saying the unfunded tax cuts are going to make the inflation situation worse. so there _ the inflation situation worse. so there is— the inflation situation worse. so there is nothing good in this for there is nothing good in this for the government. and it keeps the pressure — the government. and it keeps the pressure on the chancellor and the prime _ pressure on the chancellor and the prime minister. 1 pressure on the chancellor and the prime minister.— prime minister. i wonder what you both think of _ prime minister. i wonder what you both think of andrew _ prime minister. i wonder what you both think of andrew bailey's - both think of andrew bailey's decision to intervene again in public tonight. he was speaking in washington at the institute of international finance. washington at the institute of internationalfinance. we washington at the institute of international finance. we will play a little bit of what he had to say. we have had to return back to further, including keeping us up for the whole of the night to do further intervention. it became clear that we as the event of england, has never bought index linked, operation so realise the financials ability purposes we had to do it. we've announced that we will be out by the end of this week we think of rebalancing must be done in a message to the funds and firms

involved you've got three days left. you've got to get this done. because again, part of the essence of financial stability intervention is that it financial stability intervention is thatitis financial stability intervention is that it is clearly temporary. andrew bailey speaking _ that it is clearly temporary. andrew bailey speaking to _ that it is clearly temporary. andrew bailey speaking to washington. - that it is clearly temporary. andrewj bailey speaking to washington. the response from the markets anyway todayis response from the markets anyway today is not been brilliant. be interesting to see what happens in the far race two bar raised. what was necessary for him to say that, to effectively reemphasize a cliff edge? to effectively reemphasize a cliff edue? �* ., , , edge? i'm not sure why he did it. i think he is — edge? i'm not sure why he did it. i think he is trying _ edge? i'm not sure why he did it. i think he is trying to _ edge? i'm not sure why he did it. i think he is trying to manage - think he is trying to manage expectations because you don't want to set a precedent that the bank of england is in definitely going to be stepping into the guilt market to shore up things. ultimately, if there is market volatility pension funds are to be affected because they have to post collateral for the positions they hedge. and that is the way it is. it's not like it's all can end on friday. i don't quite

follow the logic. ijust all can end on friday. i don't quite follow the logic. i just think all can end on friday. i don't quite follow the logic. ijust think he's trying to manage the market and try and set expectations up. the other issueis and set expectations up. the other issue is here as the imf said in its world economic outlet and more broadly in relation to the governments policy. it is moving in one direction, which is to quote kwasi kwarteng, relentless growth. in all the other, the bank of england is trying to manage inflation that is close to 10%. even the imf said that global core inflation, which is excluding food and energy cause is good to be running at 6.6%. that is very high. you are to be looking at further interest races, you've already seen the 30 year guilds close to 4.8% or something like that. what the market is signalling in terms of these gusts is that they do not expect interest rates to go down anytime soon. there is good to be a potential slowdown in the economy, but on the other hand the government is trying to push for growth. these

two things are not compatible. this is exactly what the former governor of the bank of england said, basically the government and the bank moving in opposite directions. take us to the front of the i. trying to sell with cap on energy profits. trying to sell with cap on energy rofits. , . ., ., profits. yes, which out tonight without clearly _ profits. yes, which out tonight without clearly understanding | profits. yes, which out tonight l without clearly understanding all the detail of what the government is doing. _ the detail of what the government is doing. it _ the detail of what the government is doing, it does feel like something that it _ doing, it does feel like something that it is _ doing, it does feel like something that it is not a windfall tax and surely — that it is not a windfall tax and surely it — that it is not a windfall tax and surely it has some of the same effects— surely it has some of the same effects of— surely it has some of the same effects of a windfall tax. it's clearly — effects of a windfall tax. it's clearly being briefed out as something that is a message or action— something that is a message or action for— something that is a message or action for that part of the governments backbenchers who are calling _ governments backbenchers who are calling for _ governments backbenchers who are calling for action to a windfall tax or somehow take away some of the

massive _ or somehow take away some of the massive profits in which companies are making — massive profits in which companies are making. certainly the guardian has been _ are making. certainly the guardian has been more explicit in saying this is— has been more explicit in saying this isjust — has been more explicit in saying this isjust a has been more explicit in saying this is just a windfall tax has been more explicit in saying this isjust a windfall tax by another— this isjust a windfall tax by another name. it does feel like one way or— another name. it does feel like one way or another a bit of a u—turn. the _ way or another a bit of a u—turn. the second — way or another a bit of a u—turn. the second major u—turn by the government. again, it looks like quite _ government. again, it looks like quite a _ government. again, it looks like quite a defensive mood under pressure _ quite a defensive mood under ressure. �* quite a defensive mood under pressure-— quite a defensive mood under ressure. . ., , , , pressure. la, he quotes bit his secretary _ pressure. la, he quotes bit his secretary in — pressure. la, he quotes bit his secretary in the _ pressure. la, he quotes bit his secretary in the i _ pressure. la, he quotes bit his secretary in the i saying - pressure. la, he quotes bit his secretary in the i saying with i pressure. la, he quotes bit his. secretary in the i saying with cut bills because of the rising cost of gas will no longer dictate electricity prices. they are breaking the link. i don't think that's exactly the same as capping profits. i get the impression this is two different elements were in the overall plan how is capping profits... is the government right? is a windfall tax orjust politically understandable way of doing what you're doing because labour were proposing it? it labour were proposing it? it basically amounts in the same thing.

i think the government is taking a sensible step here because obviously, when companies need to earn money because they need to invest in capital expenditures and renewables. they need to make profits and further investment. 0bviously, you've got to allow them to do that. the question is what level of profit should be allowed to make? if it's being dictated by the gas price when the actual cost of renewable energy is much lower than that, is that a fair deal for consumers is because you are one price dictating market? the marginal cost of alert because prices, change in the whole market doesn't seem logical. i do think there is a an argument for regulation where investors in renewable energy can earn a decent return on the investment they make but not dictated by gas price. the problem politically for the government is it's doing decent things like the massive 89 billion intervention to stop the average energy bill that people pay in this country going

beyond two and half thousand pounds that was a good thing. however it was so back candidly delivered, they be zero political to the government from doing it. the whole evolution of the peat rate. this is a sensible measure from the government but yet again politically i fear they will get zero credit for this because they seem to be late to the party and it was labour that was calling for a windfall tax without you call this whatever you like, it's basically a windfall tax de facto by another name. yet again the government is doing the right thing but again late and a socket to get the political capital for doing it. it's missed manage and it looks bad. it's missed manage and it looks bad. i detract from your tone quite a considerable degree of frustration. yes because i do think that look, i understand the government was to encourage growth, i fully understand it. the problem is we have inflation in this country running at about 10%. i acknowledge the fact that thatis

10%. i acknowledge the fact that that is been in large part driven by the war in ukraine and the increasing gas prices. the government is arguing that with massive intervention to support energy bills is get a damper down inflation to the tune of about 5%. i don't know where they get them numbers from, i'm not convinced by it. i cannot fathom the fact that you got inflation running away from you, you've got to get a grip on the first with a view look at what jay powell is doing with the fed, he tried to induce a mild recession now because it preferred to take pain up front and let this linger on, which makes it worse for savers, homeowners, everything. you've got rising interest rates with the people are knocking to afford extra 8% interest rate rises. the whole system will break down. i am concerned. i also think that when the government does u—turn and do the government does u—turn and do the right thing it is too late then because it loses all the political capital it could of got by making these recessions up front and early. us reviews saudi legs on the front of the guardian. we have that much

of the guardian. we have that much of the article but is someone who is in washington for so long