james, welcome back to newscast. this week we have three guests. for the price of one. shadow education ministerfor for the price of one. shadow education minister for labour. and the snp deputy leader in the house of commons. find and the snp deputy leader in the house of commons. and we will talk about _ the house of commons. and we will talk about this _ the house of commons. and we will talk about this issue - the house of commons. and we will talk about this issue that. will talk about this issue that has dominated our lives. which is this coming together of two very knotty and complex and controversial issues. one of which is the uk constitution, which we'll come to in a minute, but the other of which is this planned law that the scottish government's been working on for a long time around trans rights.

yes. so, in summary, what is it? so, what happened was, last month, the scottish parliament, by a pretty big majority, passed this legislation and the legislation, this gender bill, seeks to remove administrative and medical barriers to changing the sex on your birth certificate. that's basically what it does. it's passed the scottish parliament and it was waiting to be given the rubber stamp by the king, royal assent. but, crucially, while the issue of trans rights is devolved to the scottish parliament, the issue of equalities is something that's decided at westminster — on behalf of england, scotland and wales — and the uk government says, hang on a minute, we think those two clash. and there's a line in the rule book that set up devolution a quarter of a century ago that allows us, they say, to pull this trigger and stop that proposed law becoming law and getting royal assent. that's what they've done and it's caused one heck of a row. right, well, let's chat a bit more about that,

chris, with mhairi black, deputy leader of the scottish national party in the house of commons. hi, mhairi. hello, how you doing? welcome. yes, welcome, welcome. right, so, to business. where to start... i know, it's been busy. yeah. but the main thing is this, isn't it, westminster has vetoed a bill of the scottish parliament using this particular mechanism for the first time ever? yes. what do you make of it? i think it's disgraceful, absolutely. i mean, especially considering that in the nearly eight years that i've been in parliament, all that we get flung back at us is, you have the most powerful devolved parliament in the world. well, do we? if when we pass something which is absolutely within the devolved competence of the scottish parliament that westminster, who is a tory government, which again scotland hasn't voted for, canjust go, ah, no, you're not passing that. i suppose when you say absolutely within the devolved competence, that's the essence of the row, isn't it, whether or not it is, given the suggested, as the uk government sees it, consequences of the proposed

law elsewhere in great britain? have you read the statement of reasons? i have. right, and do you see anything that's genuine in that? that is the most flimsy piece of argument that i've ever seen. to explain, this was the document that the uk government put out to at least partially justify their cause. we haven't actually seen, as the labour party are demanding, the legal advice that they took their decision based upon. but let's just be clear and this is a little bit technical, but it does matter. they are not arguing that this bill is not within the devolved competence of the scottish parliament. that's not what they're saying. they're saying is within the devolved, within competence, i.e.,., it is a devolved matter that the scottish parliament has the right to legislate on. they are saying something slightly more subtle, which is, and i'm so sorry, but using section 35 of the scotland act 1998, that it impinges on a uk piece of legislation.

and there's a for the equality act and quite a lot of lawyers back them up. i think that's nonsense because the house of commons itself has done three reports, the women and equalities committee, and all of those reports came to the conclusion that it does not affect the equality act whatsoever. this... the law that's been passed under scottish parliament, it's an administrative change. this is about making the process to get a gender recognition certificate much more humane and dignified. that's it. and this has been turned into... it's been blown out of all proportion, certainly in scotland it has for a long, long time. respectfully, you're not a lawyer, i am not a lawyer. i don't believe chris to be a lawyer. i'm not, no.

i was talking to the first minister the other day, and i suggested to her that perhaps this was just an honest disagreement between the two sides. that both of you were approaching it in good faith and there was an honest disagreement. nonsense. she used similar words to suggest otherwise. absolute nonsense. but let me put to use something you hear from those in government here in westminster, which is almost like the counterpoint, which is that they say you guys must have seen this coming, where the outcome could be useful to you either way. either you get the law that you are really keen on and i'm not suggesting anything other than that, that you are really keen on, or you get a bit of a constitutional issue which allows you to make an argument that devolution isn't really where you want to be and you'd rather get towards independence. again, i would say, given the fact that the uk government has never shown any of these concerns about self id from other countries, i don't buy that this idea that they are coming at this in good faith. there is a division in your party, isn't there? about how to get there, about the mechanism by which you seek to achieve independence? so nicola sturgeon strikes me, i'm interested in your take because it struck me as odd. nicola sturgeon sets out the policy. she says, look, we're going to have, treat

the general election as a de facto referendum. in other words, if you or you and perhaps other pro—independence parties can win more than 50% of the vote in a general election, you would take that as a mandate to open negotiations with westminster over scotland leaving the united kingdom. so she does that first and then she says, we're going to have a special party conference to decide whether that's a good idea. that's a bit odd, isn't it? i think the uk set up is pretty odd, to tell you the truth. so, first of all, you are right, we are going to have a conference about this. but why announce the policy first and then have the conference later? see, this is what i'm going to come on too, right? so we will have the conference eventually, because there are a wide range of arguments for what election should be used and the best way to do it. it sounds a bit messy. of course it's messy and the reason it's messy is because the snp and the scottish government have been elected numerous times on a commitment manifesto to have a second referendum. now the uk government

are the ones ignoring that. they are the ones who are going, no, no, it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter... and i get that you can make an argument about a sense of democratic injustice... so that's what i think... you are confronted because you've run out of other options or better ideas to get a referendum by a choice and yet... we shouldn't have to explore other options. but still, given where we are, the cart was before the horse, wasn't it? the leader of your party announces the policy and then says, oh, i'll ask the party what they want. well, i mean, you could look at it that way. that's exactly how it is. but she's moved now. you know, she's recognising that actually, if we are going to take on this massive establishment, let's think about this and make sure everyone's on board. the party is going wobbly on which test its going to set itself. i honestly don't think the party is going wobbly. i want to ask you one more thing. more of a personal thing. the first time we met, if you recall, was the 2015 general election in which you were elected, before you were elected and we came out on the campaign trail with you and we had

quite an interesting day, i think. you know, knocking on doors and you were taking on douglas alexander. of course, you won. and you go to the house of commons and you are what they call, and i bet you don't like this, the baby of the house. but that's what they call it, the youngest mp. how old were you? 20? 20. right, and now you're the deputy leader of the party at westminster. it's a journey, isn't it? it's a big question but what's that been like? it's all downhill from here, you know! i've peaked too soon. what was the start of that journey like? being so young. i don't mean to be, i really don't mean to be... no, you're not patronising at all, not at all. ..patronising. it's unusual. definitely. so, honestly, the answers that i gave when i was 20 were true. it was a case that i became impassioned by the independence referendum. i was knee—deep in policy and politics and of course, we lost the referendum and i thought, we've not put in this amount of work

for things tojust go back to the way they were. this has to change. and people were encouraging me to put my name forward, and eventually i thought, i can't argue with them any more. they are winning the argument. but when you got here to westminster, how were you treated? it was a mixture, to tell you the truth. did people patronise you? oh, god, aye, yes. notjust because of being young but because you're a woman, at westminster as well. within your own party? yeah... — yeah, sometimes, yeah. in what way? just like that, patronising, or undermining or, you know, saying things or doing things that they would never do to an older male colleague. like what? just whether it's undermining or being rude or, you know, leaving you out of things or deliberately not giving you the full picture.

your colleagues? this is politics! but this is your colleagues you're talking about? well not any current colleagues, i should say, and it was very minute. the real abuse, actually, which surprised me, came from the labour party, to tell you the truth. because what shocked me when i came down was the tories could not have been nicer. they were all so polite. you know, holding doors open, good morning, how are you? did that change your perception of... plenty of people, political opponents of the conservative party are pretty outspoken about them, that's the nature of politics. in fact, you've been pretty tough about them. just because you are very smiley and polite as you tell me that you don't think i should have certain rights doesn't make it any less horrific, you know? i can appreciate, i can talk to anybody, i can. as long as folk treat you with respect. but fundamentally, when we are in there, we are talking about politics that affects everyone's lives, so i think there is a very high bar which a lot of members,

mainly conservative, don't really meet. mhairi, cheers for coming on. thank you for having me. so we got the perspective there of the snp. we are going to talk to labour in a bit. let's get the perspective of the conservatives next, because we can talk to the business secretary, grant shapps, who is in davos, in the snow in switzerland, at the world economic forum. hello, grant. hi there, hi. it looks very nice there, a bit cloudy but lovely mountains behind you. i suppose the question people looking at those lovely mountains might have, though, is why is that minister swanning around in the beautiful swiss alps when people here are, to be brutally honest, dying on hospital trolleys and freezing in their homes? i think the truth is, when the world gathers together and there are all those businesses and other ministers from around the world, what you get is the opportunity to discuss a lot of things which matter to us back home, none more so than bringing home investment to the uk. bringing jobs to the uk. and so to not be here runs the risk ofjobs

going elsewhere. you're also an mp for a constituency in the south east of england, of course. so i guess you must be pretty delighted to hear about this levelling up money heading your way. although, i wonder if some people might be a bit surprised to hear it heading to the south—east, with all the talk about levelling up in the north of the country. labour are saying this is just a partial refund on the money that's essentially been stripped away from them by years of austerity. is that fair? well, they came up with the same old lines, no matter what you do. the fact is, we were elected in 2019 with that mission to level up. it is not true what you are saying about london and the south—east. they got about half as much money, even in this round, it is the second round, compared with say the north west for example. so actually, the money is much more spread across the country than is suggested. i get that there is always an argument about precisely where the money goes and how you measure a sense of fairness because there was some pointing out that if you look at it per head of population, it reflects better in terms

of the north—south argument than it might do in a different way. but i wonder, grant, about the absolute... the formula, the mechanism via which your government's whole approach to this business of trying to address regional geographical inequalities is based ? andy street, your colleague, the conservative mayor of the west midlands, has said this afternoon that in his view, the whole way of having different areas competing against each other to get hold of money suggests that the whitehall bidding and begging bowl culture is broken, he says, the centralised system of london civil servants making local decisions is flawed. i suppose the idea that there is somebody sitting in a building in central london deciding whether somewhere in morecambe or gateshead or welling gets money, how can they possibly know better than people locally that is a good idea? look, i think the truth is, you have got to run the country somehow, right? so you have got to have some sort of system in place. not everything, not everything can be decided from the local town hall or even

the local mayor. but isn't the argument, grant shapps, that it is not about everything, that we live in an incredibly centralised england in particular, it is an incredibly centralised country and the uk as well, arguably. i am just going to push back gently against that if i can. because i was going to say, actually, andy street, in the west midlands, no—one has done more than him as a mayor to actually ensure that he is bringing in huge resources and all credit to him. i would say the same... he still says the system doesn't work. the mayor in the north—east has been doing the same thing as well. well, you know, you have got to have a system of some kind, right? you have got to collect taxes centrally, i mean, if we are going to have a serious conversation about this, you have got to collect taxes centrally. you have got to think of a way of dividing that up. just to your point about centralisation, i have been in politics for quite a while. i don't remember a time that there been more localisation and regionalisation of those funds. and even in my own department, we are moving people out at quite a pace to other places. i went to our leeds office the other week for the business department, i mean, and hundreds of people

are not sitting in whitehall, but government is shifting itself out of london as well. so i mean, i agree with the idea that, you know, the country, the closer you can govern to people, the better. but in the end, we are one nation. you have got to collect the money somewhere. decisions have to be made somehow and actually, i do think the west midlands has done superbly well under andy street and long may it last. well, something that is happening all across the nation, it is strikes, isn't it? i mean, we have seen, what, nurses, teachers, paramedics, civil servants all out or heading out in the coming days and weeks. this industrial relations problem is getting worse, is it not? yeah, look... fundamentally, i think we have to kind of recognise that things are tough — and things are tough because putin invaded ukraine and pushed up the energy prices and has pushed inflation. worse? you said yes.

i am just being clear that that is your view — that is what you think. well, i mean, it would be crazy to say that compared with, say, a couple of years ago, we're experiencing strikes and we weren't then. the difference, of course, is not only going through covid and all of that but, primarily, the increase in inflation. i suspect that if we hadn't seen inflation spike as it did because of putin's war in ukraine, the energy prices and, therefore, the inflation that has followed it, i don't suppose we would have this industrial action. that's not to say... so you accept that it is worse now than it was, say, a month or two months ago? to say strikes aren't worse than they were, of course, wouldn't be true. yeah, because the impact on people's, you know, lives and livelihoods through high inflation is having a bigger impact. let's talk about the whole idea of minimum service levels, or minimum safety levels — this idea that it is put into law that there is a baseline provision of a service during a time of industrial action. let's put to one side, you know, the arguments for or against that idea. there are those who will make a passionate case for it and others who will criticise it.

what about the issue of timing? is doing it right now, when there is clearly a fractious relationship between the government and plenty of trade unions, is that helpful in actually doing the one thing that plenty of newscasters will want seeing, which is a resolution to these industrial disputes, so that they're not inconvenienced every day? we both want to see it resolved and, you know, we have made a real push particularly into the new year to try to do that but look, actually, what has moved us on this is we've seen people's lives potentially put in some danger by not having a nationally agreed safety level, minimum safety level in place, particularly when it came to ambulances. on the other hand, when it comes to the nurses and the royal college of nursing, we found that, very responsibly, we thought, they agreed a national level, a minimum level of safety and service and so, you know, all we're saying to the unions is, "look, it cannot be right

"to leave in ambulance areas down to individual "regions and trust," but instead, that should be decided at a national level. otherwise, how can we ask the army to cover for the ambulances if they don't know where they are going to be? grant shapps, last question, you are — we can see you, for those who are watching newcast as opposed to listening, you are well wrapped up. what is your technique for staying warm in the davos winter? so, one is the hand warmers, what i have here. this one's actually not particularly warm. it looks like a tea bag in my pocket. and the other little hidden secret is that under myjacket here, i have one of these jackets which attaches to the kind of battery you might use to charge your phone, and it is giving me a warm glow. you are wearing a battery—powered coat? i tell you what, you want to watch going through airport security with that on! years of going to football and watching my sons play football and standing on very cold sidelines has taught me to dress up very warmly. you look cosy. thank you very much, grant shapps, business secretary, thank you for joining us on newscast. thank you. so, from the business secretary

in his high—tech pufferjacket in the snow in davos in switzerland, here in the newscast studio, we have got bridget phillipson, labour mp, shadow education secretary. welcome. good to see you. davos — let's talk about davos for a minute and talking to grant shapps, there. it is a curious old gathering, isn't it? plenty of critics will say it kind of screams the global elite. keir starmer has been over there as well in the last few days. what is the value of it? we were asking grant shapps that. to you, what is value of your leader going off and mingling with a load of millionaires and chief executives — what value does that bring to your constituents, to this country? i think it shows we're serious about the approach that we'd be taking from government. the fact that keir starmer and rachel reeves have both gone out there demonstrates the change in our relationship with business. you know, we are serious about working with business to drive kind of growth and newjobs in our economy and that, you know, keir starmer has been talking while he's there about the need to decarbonise the economy

but how we use that as an opportunity to create brilliantjobs, and i think there is real potential in every corner of our country, and particularly in communities that have not seen those jobs or investment for some time. let's talk about child care because you've been doing quite a bit of thinking about child care and what a labour government would do as far as child care in england is concerned, and it's pretty radical. you set out your vision — i think it even involved a trip to estonia and looking at how they do it. just to go back a slight step in identifying what the problem is and what we're seeking to solve. on child care — often more than rent or mortgage — and actually, we're still in a position where lots of women are giving up work in growing numbers — and it usually is women — because they can't afford child care or it is not available _ that has a big cost in economic growth. it has a big cost to the individual and family and also to children, who do need a really great start in life and really hi-h quality child care and early years education is an important part of that. so, you know, we've set out

that we believe we need to fundamentally rethink how we approach child care in this country. it should be a part of our education system. we need to make sure that those issues around affordability and availability are addressed. and for me, that involves building a modern child care system. so, from the end of parental leave, when most parents will return to work, to the end of primary school, and what we set out as a first step around that is universal free breakfast clubs for every primary school child in england so to ease that pressure that parents face around the school day, not just when their children are young. how much, then, in specific terms would the breakfast club idea cost? so, that's £365 million a year, and that's paid for out of the changes that we put in place around non—dom tax status. so, as i say, everything that we set out fully funded and fully costed and a plan to deliver it, but that— would make a massive difference to so many parents who, you know, giving up shifts, can't get to work on time because that hard drop—off of 8:45am, whatever it happens to be. if you were education secretary for england, what would you do to stop the strikes that

are coming up in schools? i would've been talking about this months ago with the trade unions. very long time. —— we've known that this has been coming for a very, very long time. but crucially, saying what? i know that you, and i have spoken to keir starmer, say, "look, there has got to be a dialogue and you have got "to get people around the table in order to get to a resolution "and most people would accept that" but crucially, it is what happens around that table, doesn't it? and i and they are going to say, we know what they are going to say because they say it in public, they want more money than is currently on the table. so, logic would suggest the only way it is going to be resolved is if there is more money. would there be more money under labour? i take your point. however, you've got to be around the table to be having that discussion. it's only in the last week that ministers have even been willing to meet and discuss it. ok, sure. let's accept that and, obviously, part of your role understandably is to critique the government. what do you do in the situation right now if you were sitting in the seat of the secretary of state for education? i do think you have

to get ahead of problems. i'll come onto what i would do. you do have to get ahead of problems. we've known this was coming for months and they have not been willing to talk about pay. the first indicative ballot took place last september and yet, here we are, and the government have not taken this seriously. i'd take it seriously. i would want to work with trade unions to deliver better outcomes for children and proper support for teachers. but they would say taking it seriously would mean putting more money on the table and i am asking you would you do that? i'm not going to make commitments right now in that, you know, we don't really know what the economic situation the next labour government will inherit, other than it is going to be pretty parlous — not least because we have had such a — you know, we have years now of poor growth and the more recent... so you might not be able to do any more. what labour did — labour's record in government last time around was real terms increases in pay for teachers. we did make sure that people were properly supported for what they were doing. yes, pay is absolutely important, of course it is, but it is terms and conditions and workload, too, and that comes up time and time again. teachersjust feel underappreciated, undervalued for the work that they do. i'm trying to establish definitively whether or not

you're suggesting, as you seem to be, that the government should — that the labour party's position is that the government should sort out conditions for teachers and pay them more than they are currently being offered. i mean, tell me if that's not your position, but it seems to me that it is. labour from government, whether it's teachers, nurses, all of our brilliant public servants, we always want to make sure that they get a fair deal and under labour governments in the past, they always have had a fair deal, but we're not in government yet. and the deal at the moment is not fair? i think when you look at the fact that experienced teachers have had a 13% pay cut over the last decade, i don't think that's right. i've got to ask you a final question that has nothing to do with your ministerial or shadow ministerial responsibilities whatsoever but picks up on a conversation we had with grant shapps out in davos. he was wearing — he was wearing a battery—powered pufferjacket to keep warm. so, not only did he have a million layers on and then, this coat that looked pretty adequate at the job in hand, but he told us it had some kind of battery pack to pump hot air around him or something. and i'm wondering, i started my career in your neck of the woods, in the north—east

of england, and of course, the famous cliche is that people are so tough, they can go out in the winter without a coat on at all. but what's the wearside, the sunderland solution to the january weather and keeping warm? have you got a battery—powered coat? no, i'm, as you say, i am from the north—east so . can— more than manage a bit of cold weather. i think i'd be all right. as they say, you go out in the streets like this. i do have a coat. you are tough. you are tough. i do have a coat but i can manage. i'm used to the bad weather. grant shapps is a southern softy! your words, not mine. laughter. thank you very much. cheers for coming on. thank you. cheers. so that is your lot from james and from me, and newscasters, you have an upgrade tomorrow. yes, the professionals will be here tomorrow because we have greg james, radio one's greg james, and roisin hastie from the bbc world service. well worth a listen. from us, thanks for listening. bye. bye— bye. newscast. newscast, from the bbc.

hello there. quite a change of fortunes with our weather this week. it's been cold and frosty, has even been some snow showers around as well. we're going to close out the working week on a similar story — a frosty start, maybe some freezing fog around but for many of us, it's going to be sunny and cold. temperatures to greet us first thing below freezing in towns and city centres, so colder still in more rural spots, particularly where we've got that lying snow. but we've got this little brief ridge of high pressure that's going to quieten things down and give us some sparkling sunshine throughout the day. weather fronts waiting in the wings. a change is on its way. now, a brisk northerly breeze mightjust drive a few showers along that exposed east coast. they'll be fairly isolated. for many, after a frosty start, lots of sunshine. freezing fog may linger in northern ireland for a time but generally, those temperatures are going to peak for around 3—7 degrees. maybe a little bit milder in the south—west — the reason being this weather

front that's going to drive in this milder air. so, a south—westerly wind starts to kick in to northern ireland and scotland for the start of the weekend. that will bring milder air with it, a rapid snow melt, as well, at times. you can see to greet us first thing on saturday morning 3 or 4 degrees here, but across much of england and wales, still temperatures below freezing. it's going to be another cold, frosty start. lots of sunshine around across england and wales on saturday but the cloud will push in through scotland, northern ireland, maybe north west england, and there'll be some showery outbreaks of rain — not really amounting to too much — but a difference with the feel of the weather, 9 or 10 degrees here, maybe temperatures around 3—7 across england and wales. still that weather front creeping in for the second half of the weekend but the far south—east corner may well cling onto that colder air throughout the whole of the weekend, so it's a slow process. certainly on sunday, there'll be more cloud around than we saw on saturday. there'll be showery outbreaks

of rain along west—facing coasts — some poor visibility here. the best of any brightness perhaps in the south—east — only around 3 or 4 degrees. out to the west, again, we could see double digits. the milder air will start to push in across the country but it comes at a price, unfortunately — we're going to lose that sparkling winter sunshine. there'll be a little more in the way of cloud around but we'll see double figures for all.

welcome to bbc news. i'm monika plaha. our top stories: the actor alec baldwin is to be charged with involuntary manslaughter, after a fatal shooting on the set of the film, rust. growing pressure on nato countries to send more tanks to ukraine — we have a special report from the front line. explosions. very active front lines this morning. very close to soledar, seized by the russians in the last few days. reports of more deaths and more protests as anti—government demonstrations continue in peru.

and why light pollution — the interference caused by towns and cities —