this is bbc news broadcasting in the uk and around the globe. our top stories... fighting for his political life — former prime minister, borisjohson is due to be questioned by mps over why he misled parliament. a global water crisis due to pollution and excessive consumption — a warning from the un. here in the uk, mps will vote today on rishi sunak�*s new brexit deal for northern ireland. but the democratic unionist party have said they will be voting against it. the inflation rate in britain rose unexpectedly to 10.4 percent in february, after three months of falls. and france's president macron prepares to defend the new law on pension reform — as protests continue — against raising the retirement age

hello and welcome to bbc news. borisjohnson is preparing to face the committee of mps who willjudge whether he deliberately or recklessly misled parliament about parties at downing street, during the covid lockdown. the former prime minister has admitted misleading mps , but he insists his statements claiming rules and guidance were followed at all times were made in good faith. he's expected to offer a robust defence to the commons privileges committee, as our politicial correspondent, jonathan blake, reports. borisjohnson and downing street staff gathered inside number ten when covid restrictions were in place. when those events came to light, borisjohnson said no rules had been broken. the guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times.

yesterday, he admitted those denials meant parliament had been misinformed, but argued that wasn't his fault. the former prime minister said, i accept that the house of commons was misled by my statements, that the rules and guidance had been followed completely at number ten. but when the statements were made, he added, they were made in good faith and on the basis of what i honestly knew and believed at the time. i did not intentionally or recklessly mislead the house, mrjohnson said, adding i would never have dreamed of doing so. here's what the former prime minister told mps in december 2021. what i could tell the right honourable gentleman is that — is that all guidance was followed completely. a week later, he gave a similar statement. i have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that and that no covid rules were broken.

a key question for mps is whether mrjohnson later corrected himself after he was fined by police... it did not occur to me then, or subsequently, that a gathering in the cabinet room just before a vital meeting on covid strategy could amount to a breach of the rules. ..and once the senior civil servant sue gray's report had found a failure of leadership. i'm happy to set on the record now that when i said i came to this house and said in all sincerity that the rules and guidance had been followed at all times, it was what i believed to be true. borisjohnson claims he relied on the advice of his aides, questions the methods of mps investigating him and says he can't see why he received a fine. mps will later test that defence, as they question a former prime minister on the saga that played a part in his downfall. jonathan blake, bbc news.

our political correspondent, nick eardley, joins us from westminster. we are expecting an afternoon here of political theatre, but there are really serious question is at stake here, and there are a really serious question is at stake here, and there are _ here, and there are a yes, fundamentally _ here, and there are a yes, fundamentally whether . here, and there are a yes, i fundamentally whether boris here, and there are a 7" fundamentally whether boris johnson misled parliament, ithink fundamentally whether boris johnson misled parliament, i think we know the answer to that, he has admitted the answer to that, he has admitted the comments he made misled parliament, and then the question is why today was it an accident and that he was talking from a genuine belief the rules had not been broken, he said for example that his aides had assured him that was the case, that will be his defence. there is a question about whether borisjohnson should have known more and should have been more open with parliament. the privileges committee has already said that it should have been obvious to borisjohnson the rules were not being followed because he was at some of these

events and he was the man responsible for the rules and responsible for the rules and responsible for the rules and responsible for explaining them to us in press conferences every night of the television. a big question todayis of the television. a big question today is going to be whether boris johnson was reckless or deliberate in his misleading of parliament. that is the fundamental here. it is not about whether the parties happen, we have seen photographs we know they don't happen, it is not about whether the rules were broken, he was fined so we know they wear. it's about whether the prime minister at the time was open with parliament or try to cover what had happened. we parliament or try to cover what had ha ened. ~ . parliament or try to cover what had hauened. ~ . , . happened. we are expecting new documents _ happened. we are expecting new documents imminently, - happened. we are expecting new documents imminently, they - happened. we are expecting new documents imminently, they are | happened. we are expecting new - documents imminently, they are being released in the next few minutes if not already, what is in those? bill i wish i knew. they have not been published just yet. my i wish i knew. they have not been published just yet. published 'ust yet. my understanding from published just yet. my understanding from speaking _ published just yet. my understanding from speaking to _ published just yet. my understanding from speaking to a _ published just yet. my understanding from speaking to a couple _ published just yet. my understanding from speaking to a couple of- published just yet. my understanding from speaking to a couple of people | from speaking to a couple of people close to the committee is that this is going to be some of the evidence

referred to this afternoon. it is going to be something for anyone who is particularly interested in this to print off and happy side them so that when mps refer to it, we know what they are talking about. it is no new evidence the committee has got hold of, but some of it may be something we have not seen before so it may give us more of an indication about what the committee and what borisjohnson about what the committee and what boris johnson have about what the committee and what borisjohnson have been basing their arguments on. the boris johnson have been basing their arguments on— arguments on. the political consequences, _ arguments on. the political consequences, can - arguments on. the political consequences, can you - arguments on. the political| consequences, can you span arguments on. the political - consequences, can you span out what happens after today? the? consequences, can you span out what happens after today?— happens after today? they could be si . nificant. happens after today? they could be significant. today _ happens after today? they could be significant. today is _ happens after today? they could be significant. today is the _ happens after today? they could be significant. today is the hearing, i significant. today is the hearing, it will not finish today, it is expected to wrap up in the next few weeks and report back before the summer. the fundamental question they will be asking themselves is why did borisjohnson misled parliament and did he correct the record quickly enough when he realised that he had a few if they think there was something reckless or deliberate or malicious about his

comments, they could decide that he deserves a sanction. now, the raft of sanctions available to them goes from one side of the scale to the other, anything from an apology to parliament to suspending him from the commons for ten days or so, if that happened, it could trigger a by—election in his oxbridge seat. i have got to say, the more severe of those sanctions seem less likely because that would require we think the committee to find that there was a deliberate attempt to mislead parliament, and proving intent is a bit more difficult. whatever happens, if the committee comes back and says we do not think boris johnson was open with parliament, he could have been more open with parliament, that will definitely have a big impact on him and be a big blow to his political credibility which is why you will see him come out swinging this afternoon. he wants to launch a staunch defence of what happened and insist to everyone around westminster that he was acting in

good faith, telling us all what he knew at the time and when. that will be tested rigorously by the seven mps on this committee. some of whom do not seem to be convinced. thank ou ve do not seem to be convinced. thank you very much _ do not seem to be convinced. thank you very much indeed. _ joining me now is the deputy editor of conservative home henry hill you are in touch with the far section of the conservative party. what is your sense about boris johnson's level of support at the moment? ., , ., ., , , moment? conservative home surveyed our anel moment? conservative home surveyed our panel of— moment? conservative home surveyed our panel of conservative _ moment? conservative home surveyed our panel of conservative activists - our panel of conservative activists and we found strong but not overwhelming support for the prime minister, a majority of our panel did think that he broke the rules, they do not think he deliberately misled the house, they do think the process against him is not fair, which is the angle he has been trying to push, and they think he should be a conservative candidate at the next election. the

disappointment of some of the supporters in parliament, they do not want him to come back as leader. in parliament. borisjohnson has a committed band of supporters, but i think the sense among many other conservative mps is basically wariness about repeating mistakes that brought borisjohnson down. the ball started rolling on the end of his premiership when he intervened and the prime minister and others recognise that the last thing they want to do is be seen by the public, fairly or not, to be intervening and trying to stitch something up for borisjohnson. trying to stitch something up for boris johnson.— boris johnson. therefore, when eo - le boris johnson. therefore, when peeple watch — boris johnson. therefore, when people watch boris _ boris johnson. therefore, when people watch boris johnson - boris johnson. therefore, when| people watch boris johnson give people watch borisjohnson give evidence today, is your sense, looking at conservative mps in particular who not only are on the committee but potentially will have to vote on what happens to boris johnson, do they think it is fair and right that a procedure should potentially deprive him of his seat as an mp in the house of commons or do they think he has already paid

the political price? bill it will depend on the evidence presented by the committee of mps. the depend on the evidence presented by the committee of mps._ depend on the evidence presented by the committee of mps. the mps on the anel will the committee of mps. the mps on the panel will take — the committee of mps. the mps on the panel will take pains _ the committee of mps. the mps on the panel will take pains to _ the committee of mps. the mps on the panel will take pains to be _ panel will take pains to be scrupulously impartial because of the allegations by borisjohnson. being truly charming, if the comeback was something truly damning to suggest that borisjohnson should be suspended from parliament, it will be difficult for many tory mps, as your previous speaker said, the committee would have to have extraordinary evidence to justify that. and then the only way boris johnson would be deprived of his seat as if somebody used the petition and he lost a by—election. it would ultimately be in the hands of the voters. and? there are big questions here, fundamentally it is whether a sitting prime minister is being honest with parliament and parliament represents the public.

that is why this matters, doesn't it? ultimately, the system holding to account somebody on the question of honesty and integrity. absolutely, parliament and politicians operate anyway slightly differently to the way most workplaces and most of us live our lives and that is necessary because parliament is a political body, it governs us, mps have extraordinary leeway over things like free speech, they have more autonomy in how the employed people, that most people don't have, so it is very important that this institution is able to police itself because nobody else can police it as effectively and democratically. what we are trying to establish here is whether or not there are effective mechanisms in place, did borisjohnson mislead the house deliberately? if you did, there are there effective mechanisms in place so that this conduct can be punished and they will not happen again. and? when you have read the

evidence that borisjohnson released yesterday, what are your thoughts and what is the reaction you are sensing from the conservative party to that? we will taunt, would there be a smoking gun? there really isn't, it is what borisjohnson has been saying throughout, hairsplitting about whether or not the committee is meant to be investigating the rules are the guidance for the law, and claims his behaviour broke the part that is not illegal, but not the part that is illegal. attempts to disparage the process, i do not think it is going to change many people's mind either way, ultimately, the problem for the prime minister, we have the photographs of the gatherings, he did not really admit to that until the photographs came out, and there is a gulf between those pictures and what they represent versus what people were going through all over the nation at the time. and his explanation. maybe he didn't,

genuinely didn't understand those things were against the rules that he had set and imposed on the nation, that in itself is an extraordinary feeling for a building full of people who made up the rules in the first place. the rate of inflation in the uk , as measured by the consumer prices index , rose unexpectedly last month to 10.4%. there was widespread expectation that it would fall , but the office for national statistics said it had been pushed up by higher prices in cafes and restaurants, and the cost of food and clothing. the chancellor, jeremy hunt said falls in inflation weren't inevitable so it was important to "stick to the plan to halve it". an analysis of the government's plan to block asylum claims, from people crossing the english channel in small boats, has warned that it could cost nearly £10 billion in its first three years. the refugee council say this is because it won't be possible to remove or detain all the

migrants, tens of thousands of whom could be left in limbo in the uk. the home office has said it doesn't recognise the figures. the united nations is warning of an approaching global water crisis because of pollution, global warming and over—consumption. it's published a new report on the issue before the first dedicated water summit in more than a0 years. consumption of water keeps rising, and the report says about 10% of the world's population live under water stress — where the ratio of water use to water availability — is considered "high" or "critical". at the last assessment in 2020, over a quarter of people around the globe still lacked access to safe drinking water, while 3.6 billion lacked access to safely managed sanitation services. the report says the water crisis is worst in low—income countries — for example, an estimated 70% of the population of sub—saharan africa lacks safe drinking—water services. aru na iyengar reports. humanity�*s lifeblood, water, is increasingly at risk around the world due to vampiric overconsumption and overdevelopment.

that is the language used in the un report. 10% of the global population currently lives in areas that are high or critically water stressed. in our report, we said that up to 2.5 billion people live under conditions of water stress at least one month a year. the meeting in new york is asking governments and the private sector to come up with a water action agenda to meet a goal set in 2015 to ensure access to water and sanitation for all by 2030. the un says up to half the world's population does not have access to sanitation and a quarter does not have access to safe water supply. it blames unsustainable water use, pollution and unchecked global warming. the un is now calling for a change in attitude towards water as a shared resource. the global water cycle is a global common good,

we just don't want to understand it because we believe water belongs to us. we need to invest with that in our minds. the report notes that water scarcity has the greatest impact on poorer people and children. unicef had recently warned that 190 million children in ten african countries don't have access to clean water. the un says current levels of investment would have to be tripled to get safe drinking water for all by 2030. aruna iyengar, bbc news. at least 13 people have died after a 6.5 magnitude quake shook parts of afghanistan and pakistan. more than 200 have been hurt — most of the casualties so far are in pakistan's khyber pakhtunkhwa province. the epicentre of the quake was in the remote hindu kush mountains and was felt as far away as india. while many roads are blocked and some buildings damaged, officials say it's been less then

feared for the mountainous region. i'm joined now by our south asia correspondent yogita limaye in mumbai. what do we know about the damage? yesterday, when the earthquake happened, i was speaking to someone in afghanistan while it was happening, it went on for a really long time and people were very scared. people came out running onto the streets, and there was general sense of people thought that the devastation could be massive. later, we found out that the epicentre of the earthquake was in the north—east of the country, this is a very mountainous province, i have been there, even going 20 to 30 kilometres can take hours, you are on winding roads, extremely rugged terrain, a remote and per province as well. we have not yet been able to contact some of the people we know they're because the phone lines have been interrupted. the taliban government is saying that at the

moment, the casualties in afghanistan are four people killed, and 75 people injured. but it could take time to fully assess what has happened in this province. in neighbouring pakistan we have more information, most of the damage seems to have occurred in one area, more than 160 injured they are, and nine people have been killed. thank ou ve nine people have been killed. thank you very much- _ two of rishi sunak�*s mps are going to vote against his new brexit deal in parliament today. the mechanism aims to give the stormont assembly a greater say on how eu laws apply to northern ireland. the democratic unionists' eight mps will oppose the measure , but it's not known whether the european research

group of euro—sceptic conservatives will join them. labour is backing the deal so the government is expected to win the vote. i'm joined now our ireland correspondent chris page.. who is in belfast for us.. this is complicated. but ultimately, this is rishi sunak�*s plan on northern ireland and brexit. it is likely to pass even though we are expecting two former prime ministers to vote against it.— to vote against it. yes, it is likely to — to vote against it. yes, it is likely to pass, _ to vote against it. yes, it is likely to pass, my - to vote against it. yes, it is likely to pass, my question| to vote against it. yes, it is - likely to pass, my question is how comfortable will the passing of the motion be for rishi sunak given the wider political implications. i suppose the two main aims in reaching the new agreement with the eu known as the windsor framework, one was to reset relations with the european union after brexit, the other was to try to pave the way for a restoration of power sharing in the regional government here in northern ireland. there have been no

local ministers in place for more than one year now. that is because the democratic unionist party is using its veto to block the formation of a power—sharing coalition in protest against the brexit trading arrangements for northern ireland as they stand at the moment. in essence, the dup believes it amounts to an economic border with the rest of the uk and as unionists, they find that unacceptable. the dup has decided to vote against the government and the vote against the government and the vote in the coming hours, however, it is not an outright rejection of the windsor framework, the dup has said it will continue to work with rishi sunak on outstanding issues and that is important because the dup ultimate verdict on the windsor framework, whether they support it or reject it will depend on whether, it results in a decision from them to allow the power—sharing government in belfast to come back and the people of northern ireland

would have a government once again. when are they likely to give the final verdict? we have a couple of dates for regional elections, the anniversary of the good friday agreement ahead, joe biden, the us president expected to arrive to mark that and get no functioning government.— that and get no functioning government. that and get no functioning covernment. , ., , , , that and get no functioning covernment. , . , , , ., government. the dup has set up a anel government. the dup has set up a panel chaired _ government. the dup has set up a panel chaired by _ government. the dup has set up a panel chaired by former _ government. the dup has set up a panel chaired by former party - government. the dup has set up a i panel chaired by former party leader and first minister of northern ireland, peter robinson, to consult businesses and other groups in northern ireland about the windsor framework, that panel is going to report to the current party leader ljy report to the current party leader by the end of the month. will it result in a quick decision? the expectation here is that it will not. next month, on the 10th of april, the 25th anniversary of the good friday peace agreement which largely ended the conflict here, and around that time, not sure when, president biden is due to visit northern ireland. i do not think the dup view is that event in particular as a deadline. there are elections

to local councils in northern ireland coming on the 18th of may. election time in northern ireland mainly sees parties less likely to compromise, to retreat to their harder positions. where anything is possible, i think most people think it is not likely that the dup will announce its firm decision on the windsor framework for at least a number of weeks yet.— windsor framework for at least a number of weeks yet. thank you very much. let's get some of the day's other news... a britishjudge is due to open an inquiry into allegations that members of the british armed forces killed dozens of unarmed people during military operations in afghanistan. it will focus on raids carried out a decade ago. the initial findings are expected to be published within 18 months. the imf has reached a long—awaited deal which will provide ukraine with support worth more than 15 billion dollars. the package is intended to help shore up the ukrainian economy which has been badly damaged by the war with russia. the imf said it hoped the four—year agreement would unlock extra funds from other lenders and donors.

russian authorities have opened a criminal case against one of the leaders of �*memorial�*— an established human rights group, after a series of raids on its headquarters. 0leg 0rlov has been charged with discrediting the military under a law introduced days after the invasion of ukraine. the us state department has said it is deeply troubled by a vote in israel's parliament— to allow israeli citizens back into four evacuated settlements in the occupied west bank. there's been widespread criticism of the move, including from the palestinian authority and the european union. more than half a million children have missed lessons in los angeles as schoolworkers started a three day strike. bus drivers, cafeteria workers and special education assistants are striking over what they say are "poverty wages." many teachers who aren't part of the dispute refused to cross picket lines.

it isa it is a big day here on the political front. the house of commons privileges committee investigating whether former prime minister borisjohnson knowingly misled parliament over the "partygate" affair has published its evidence bundle ahead of the hearing on wednesday afternoon. 0ur political correspondent, nick eardley, joins us from westminster. there are a lot of documents, well over 100 pages. some of the first ones are all about a famous garden party that took place in downing street back in may 2020 at the height of some of the covid—19 restrictions in england and the committee has published a bunch of documents with different pieces of evidence from officials who worked there at the time including the prime minister director of communications saying he did not think this event was a good idea. we have also got, in public, for the first time, some comments from martin reynolds who was the private

secretary of the prime minister talking about why he had sent an e—mail to people at the time saying let's have some drinks out in the garden. after what has been a busy time. interestingly, you can see the level to which this was organised in some e—mails. we can show you on the screen, putting tables out in the downing street garden to serve drinks to staff and two other people who were in downing street at the time. i suspect that is one of the things that will be brought up by mps on the committee this afternoon. we have not seen any of this before. there is a lot to go through, so let me get back to that. there are some very interesting documentary evidence as you can see on the screen just now. evidence as you can see on the screenjust now. some evidence as you can see on the screen just now. some of the discussions that were taking place at the very heart of government about these events that were taking place. whether there is any smoking guns, not sure yet. i'll have a read

of some more. i guns, not sure yet. i'll have a read of some more-— of some more. i know it's very difficult. _ of some more. i know it's very difficult. i'm — of some more. i know it's very difficult, i'm looking _ of some more. i know it's very difficult, i'm looking at - of some more. i know it's very difficult, i'm looking at some i of some more. i know it's veryl difficult, i'm looking at some of thesejust now, it difficult, i'm looking at some of these just now, it is difficult to obviously go through this in real time, and work out the importance of it, just to remind everybody watching why this matters politically. it is about the british parliament holding to account a former prime minister on whether he told the truth and he has admitted misleading the house of commons and all this evidence and questioning will be about whether it was intentional, deliberate, orwhether it was reckless or whether it was accidental. those are the three options before them and those three outcomes, we do not know exactly how these will distinguish between the evidence to get to those outcomes. there is some scepticism that boris johnson's defence which is 52 pages long, which says that he was acting in good faith when he said all rules

had been followed at all times. what some of this evidence is about as the counterclaims, to some of the staff who work there at the time saying surely borisjohnson should have known that these events are taking place because concerns were raised about of them. fundamentally, the question that parliament is weighing up are the privileges committee weighing up, was boris johnson as honest with parliament as he could and perhaps should have been? there is some scepticism about his defence, the other thing in this document as photographs of him at various events, some would say, if you look at the photographs, it is pretty clear the social distancing is not being followed. this is one here on my screen that borisjohnson attended. 0ne here on my screen that borisjohnson attended. one of the questions mps well ask him, you were there, you knew the social wasn't taking place, where the man who was explaining to the country every day on television

what the rules where, and that they had follow them. how did you not know that the rules were being broken at the time? we have had something in his defence that it was guidance on social distancing and it wasn't always possible and a busy workplace like downing street, one of the accusations he will face is that it should have been a lot clearer to him that the rules are being broken. i clearer to him that the rules are being broken-— clearer to him that the rules are being broken. clearer to him that the rules are bein: broken. . ., ., ., being broken. i wanted to mention a -araara-h being broken. i wanted to mention a paragraph that _ being broken. i wanted to mention a paragraph that was _ being broken. i wanted to mention a paragraph that was in _ being broken. i wanted to mention a paragraph that was in boris - paragraph that was in boris johnson's evidence from yesterday, paragraph 78, an example, he talked about the gathering just before christmas and he said the staff were preparing for a deal or no—deal brexit, in stressful busy time and everyone understands that in the run—up to christmas. he says that people were gathered and the staff had wine and cheese and exchange gifts at their desks. this did not sound like a breach of the rules let alone a party, drinking wine and exchanging gifts at work whilst

working did not turn a local workplace into an unlawful one. that is a matter ofjudgment, isn't it? important to remember that the rules and restrictions that everybody else in this country at the time, and ultimately, it comes down to a common sense decision about whether thatis common sense decision about whether that is a good judgment on behalf of the prime minister charged with keeping everyone safe or not. it’s a keeping everyone safe or not. it's a really good — keeping everyone safe or not. it's a really good point. _ keeping everyone safe or not. it's a really good point, one _ keeping everyone safe or not. it's a really good point, one of— keeping everyone safe or not. ut�*s —. really good point, one of the questions mps will be weighing up, is there any evidence there was intent from the prime minister to mislead. if you accept that argument that there was interpretation involved in that, it may be harder for mps to say definitively, yes, we think he knew and did not tell parliament the truth. a lot of this will come down to different recollections, the different counts of what went on, and fundamentally about whether mps believe he could have reasonably concluded that he was telling the truth when he told

parliament that rules and guidance were followed at all times. look, i mean, 110 pages of documents, some of which are not as interesting as the others, some are screen grabs from the advice at the time, we will go through all of that, but some of this will give us an impression of the discussions that were going on in downing street and more widely and government at the time. and will be used to make the argument on the counter argument over whether boris johnson should have known the rules were followed, which would undermine his argument that he was completely honest with parliament when he said they were. and? are you getting some level of guidance that if this committee were to find not deliberate misleading, but reckless. which has its own interpretation, doesn't it? that he recklessly misled the house of commons on this. whether it would then be too far to suspend borisjohnson whether it would then be too far to suspend boris johnson for ten

whether it would then be too far to suspend borisjohnson for ten days and therefore potentially trigger a by—election. is there any guidance on that? it’s by-election. is there any guidance on that? �* , ., by-election. is there any guidance onthat? �*, . ., ., ,,, on that? it's a reasonable analysis that boris johnson _ on that? it's a reasonable analysis that boris johnson was _ on that? it's a reasonable analysis that boris johnson was not - on that? it's a reasonable analysis that boris johnson was not found i that borisjohnson was not found guilty of the most breaches, then he would not face the most severe punishment which is the suspension from parliament. there is not president of the situation like this, but there is president of mps have been found to mislead parliament or to not be completely transparent about the truth. there is an assumption around westminster although it is not definitive that if borisjohnson were found to recklessly have misled parliament, he would avoid the lengthy suspension, ten days or more, which could lead to a by—election in his seat. the honest answer at the moment as we just don't know. that is for the mps on the committee to look into in the first place, they will base that on what we are talking about now, what is in these documents and what they hear from the former prime minister later.

they will make the initial conclusion probably before the report. then it goes to the house of commons as a whole to make the decision. as i say, i think it is a fair analysis if it is not the most serious breaches it is not the most serious breaches it is not the most serious punishment, but that will be for them to decide. and? fascinating, thank you very much indeed. iamjoined by i am joined by the legal commentator joshua rosenberg. what is the legal status of the ceiling? it is joshua rosenberg. what is the legal status of the ceiling?— status of the ceiling? it is a parliamentary _ status of the ceiling? it is a parliamentary proceeding, | status of the ceiling? it is a i parliamentary proceeding, not status of the ceiling? it is a - parliamentary proceeding, not a court, and for that reason, boris johnson's lawyer will not be allowed to address the committee. we think you will be sitting there, may whisper suggestions to the former prime minister, may pass boris johnson notes, but not going to be allowed to address the committee, as he would a court.— he would a court. boris johnson takes an oath, _ he would a court. boris johnson takes an oath, so _ he would a court. boris johnson takes an oath, so has _ he would a court. boris johnson takes an oath, so has to - he would a court. boris johnson takes an oath, so has to tell- he would a court. boris johnson| takes an oath, so has to tell the truth here, it... he

takes an oath, so has to tell the truth here, it...— takes an oath, so has to tell the truth here, it... he does take an oath, truth here, it... he does take an oath. certainly — truth here, it... he does take an oath, certainly as _ truth here, it... he does take an oath, certainly as required - truth here, it... he does take an oath, certainly as required to - truth here, it... he does take an| oath, certainly as required to tell the truth, but the procedure is a matter for parliament and that is the concern. his lawyer argued that the concern. his lawyer argued that the committee should not find him in contempt of parliament unless he intended to mislead parliament, the committee has said no, recklessness is sufficient, if we conclude in any way that misleading parliament was reckless or intentional, we will consider what sanction to recommend to the house and to answer the question you were just discussing with nick, i will be for the house of commons to decide whether to accept the conclusions on what to do about it. ., , ., , , about it. can you distinguish between us _ about it. can you distinguish between us very _ about it. can you distinguish between us very clearly - about it. can you distinguish between us very clearly the | between us very clearly the difference between intentionally misleading and recklessly misleading?— misleading and recklessly misleading? misleading and recklessly misleadinu? , ., ., , misleading? yes, intention means that ou misleading? yes, intention means that you went _ misleading? yes, intention means that you went out _ misleading? yes, intention means that you went out of— misleading? yes, intention means that you went out of your - misleading? yes, intention means that you went out of your way - misleading? yes, intention means that you went out of your way to i that you went out of your way to deliberately mislead parliament. it is difficult to look into a person's mine but courts are used to doing that, they look at the evidence and they say did he intend to? 0r that, they look at the evidence and they say did he intend to? or was he reckless, meaning he did not care

whether he misled parliament or not? he says intention is necessary, they say recklessness is sufficient, in other words, say recklessness is sufficient, in otherwords, if say recklessness is sufficient, in other words, if he ignored advice, ignored his own knowledge of what happened, ignored what people told him, then he was reckless as to what he told parliament, the crucial point is, once he knew that the information he had given parliament that no parties was an error, when did he correct it, as soon as he should? if he did not correct the errors as soon as he should, that something that is notjust against him as a serial code but the resolution of the house of commons —— the ministerial code. he resolution of the house of commons -- the ministerial code.— -- the ministerial code. he said it was because _ -- the ministerial code. he said it was because sue _ -- the ministerial code. he said it was because sue gray _ -- the ministerial code. he said it was because sue gray was - was because sue gray was investigating. in terms of how the mps make the decision, are they getting any legal advice? in courts, as you know very well, there are different levels of trying to establish whether something is true or not, the level of evidence required etc.— or not, the level of evidence required etc.

or not, the level of evidence reuuired etc. , required etc. boris johnson is the to- kc, required etc. boris johnson is the top kc, the _ required etc. boris johnson is the top kc, the top — required etc. boris johnson is the top kc, the top barrister - required etc. boris johnson is the top kc, the top barrister in - required etc. boris johnson is the top kc, the top barrister in the i top kc, the top barrister in the country in this area of law, but the committee has gone one better and they've recruited a retired lord justice of appeal is who is giving them evidence. to be fair to the committee, they are putting very much in the public domain the line they are taking, have warned boris johnson of the approach they are taking to intention recklessness, given him the chance to respond and they will take advice from sir ernest ryder, meeting privately before boris johnson ernest ryder, meeting privately before borisjohnson comes in to make them at give evidence, they will meet after and they will consider the report before they send it to parliament. i5 consider the report before they send it to parliament. is a consider the report before they send it to parliament.— it to parliament. is a balance of probabilities _ it to parliament. is a balance of probabilities or _ it to parliament. is a balance of probabilities or is _ it to parliament. is a balance of probabilities or is it _ it to parliament. is a balance of probabilities or is it beyond - probabilities or is it beyond reasonable doubt? this probabilities or is it beyond reasonable doubt?- probabilities or is it beyond reasonable doubt? , , . . reasonable doubt? this is a matter for them, reasonable doubt? this is a matter forthem. it's— reasonable doubt? this is a matter for them, it's not _ reasonable doubt? this is a matter for them, it's not a _ reasonable doubt? this is a matter for them, it's not a core _ reasonable doubt? this is a matter for them, it's not a core and - reasonable doubt? this is a matter for them, it's not a core and it - for them, it's not a core and it cannot be challenged in court because a parliamentary privilege. exactly what standard of proof they are going to go for it remains to be seen. they will set out the evidence and leave mps to decide whether mps are satisfied that this is contempt of parliament by misleading the house. , , .,

of parliament by misleading the house. , ., , , . , house. just to pick up the example which about _ house. just to pick up the example which about that _ house. just to pick up the example which about that with _ house. just to pick up the example which about that with nick, - house. just to pick up the example which about that with nick, for - which about that with nick, for example, if he says it's a matter of judgment, whether allowing some drinks at your desk is a party or not. how in terms of parliamentary and legal procedure do you decide that? ~ ., , ., and legal procedure do you decide that? ., , ,, ., , that? what is to publish morning is a bundle of— that? what is to publish morning is a bundle of documents _ that? what is to publish morning is a bundle of documents that - a bundle of documents that include the regulations that were made during lockdown that set the rules. what the exceptions were for work, social distancing, what was worked out monthly committee is not really looking into whether those rules were broken. that was the matterfor the metropolitan police, to some extent, for so grave a smack report. the committee is not looking at that, is looking at whether boris johnson misled parliament, and allow parliament to remain in the dark for about six months from when he made all the statement saying that there

were no parties, nothing happened and so on, on, and after the police report and so grave a smack report, that's when he told parliament what was happening. that is the challenge he has to face and he says he has done what he can.— he has to face and he says he has done what he can. very quickly, an interesting — done what he can. very quickly, an interesting choice _ done what he can. very quickly, an interesting choice of _ done what he can. very quickly, an interesting choice of lawyer- done what he can. very quickly, an interesting choice of lawyer for- interesting choice of lawyer for borisjohnson, a brilliant lawyer worked across many cases. boris johnson, a brilliant lawyer worked across many cases. brilliant la er, worked across many cases. brilliant lawyer. defeated — worked across many cases. brilliant lawyer, defeated boris _ worked across many cases. brilliant lawyer, defeated boris on _ worked across many cases. brilliant lawyer, defeated boris on the - worked across many cases. brilliant i lawyer, defeated boris on the second miller case. lets lawyer, defeated boris on the second miller case. , ., . ,, ., a miller case. lets go back to nick in westminster— miller case. lets go back to nick in westminster looking _ miller case. lets go back to nick in westminster looking at _ miller case. lets go back to nick in westminster looking at those - westminster looking at those documents that have been released by the privileges committee. what else have you seen? still going through. some really interesting stuff here about what was given to borisjohnson before he made the key comments that have been looked at by the committee today. avoid turned up at prime minister this question set all the rules will follow the all—time and we have an

account from martin reynolds, a senior official in number ten saying he had a conversation with boris johnson about prime minister's questions, where borisjohnson wanted to say that all rules and guidance had been followed. he says he cannot remember exactly when, but he cannot remember exactly when, but he believed... sorry, he did not welcome an interruption but told me he had received assurances that a comms event was within the rules. i accepted this, martin reynolds said, but questioned whether it was realistic to argue for that this is a key bit, questioned whether it was realistic to argue that all guidance had been followed at all times given the nature of the working environment in number ten. he agreed to delete the reference to that guidance. you see on screen there, seven to february, the goose the 8th of february because that is the day the prime minister's questions was, but he then turned up, sorry 8th of

december, not eight february, and seeing two dates, this is the 8th of december prime minister's questions were talking about, in this matters because boris johnson were talking about, in this matters because borisjohnson did take a section of his opening statement in prime minister's questions out, so he did not refer to all rules and guidance been followed but did say it later in prime minister's questions in response to an answer, a question from a labour mp. that's something the committee will ask about, whether that was correct, whether the stock should have been corrected a lot earlier, and i want to go to another bet, which is a bit punchier, a bit easier to read, on page 66. this is the evidence of simon case, cabinet secretary, the most senior civil servant in the country, about what he told boris johnson when it came to advice about what had gone on in downing street, arejust some simple what had gone on in downing street, are just some simple questions from sue gray, it appears, to simon case, where he was asked, did you tell

borisjohnson where he was asked, did you tell boris johnson that all gatherings, covid rules were followed at all times in number ten? no, covid rules were followed at all times in numberten? no, simon cases. did you tell borisjohnson that covid guidance was issued to alton? no. did you tell boris johnson that no parties were held during the period of covid rejections and ten? no. do you know whether anyone else gave mrjohnson any such assurance and if so whothat is simon case basically saying it was not me who gave borisjohnson this advice that he talks about, but all rules were followed at all times. rememberthere all rules were followed at all times. remember there was some evidence that came out yesterday from borisjohnson, i have not reached the source material for ya, which said other aides had assured mrjohnson the events, some of them anyway were in the rules. the top civil servant in the country, the man who you might have expected mr johnson to ask, simon case, is saying that he did not tell boris

johnson that all rules and guidance were followed and that no parties had taken place. the were followed and that no parties had taken place.— were followed and that no parties had taken lace. ~ , , , , had taken place. the mps presumably on this committee _ had taken place. the mps presumably on this committee have _ had taken place. the mps presumably on this committee have had _ had taken place. the mps presumably on this committee have had this - on this committee have had this material, one would hope, for some time. , . , , ., ., time. they have. this is not new to them. it time. they have. this is not new to them- it is — time. they have. this is not new to them. it is the — time. they have. this is not new to them. it is the first _ time. they have. this is not new to them. it is the first time _ time. they have. this is not new to them. it is the first time we - time. they have. this is not new to them. it is the first time we are - them. it is the first time we are seeing a lot of it published in the public domain, the reason we are getting at this morning is because a lot of this stuff will be specifically referred to during the hearing, so it will be, for example, if an hearing, so it will be, for example, ifan mp hearing, so it will be, for example, if an mp brings it up, as you can see on page 66 of the evidence that was published this morning, i will give us all a chance to kind of cross reference with it. they have had this for some time, the report, this one here, quite a lot printed out here, this is the one where they say it should have been obvious to borisjohnson rules were being broken. this is based, a lot of this report will be based on some of this evidence, so they have had it for some time, they have been mulling

over it, and this afternoon what you will see is them putting what they think are the key elements to boris johnson and saying we have got this evidence from simon case that says he did not tell you no parties were held or that all the guidance and covid rules were followed. is that right? who did tell you? that is probably a line of question we will see this after in. taste probably a line of question we will see this after in.— see this after in. we will let you read more _ see this after in. we will let you read more and _ see this after in. we will let you read more and then _ see this after in. we will let you read more and then probably i see this after in. we will let you i read more and then probably come back to you. a bit of a westminster team in the bbc newsroom having a look to help you through the details there. thank you for now. inflation unexpectedly increased last month after three consecutive months of easing. the ratejumped to 10.4% in the year to february. that's up from 10.1% injanuary. the rise is mostly driven by food prices going up at their fastest rate for 45 years. i'm nowjoined by our business

correspondent mark lobel. this has come as a surprise to us here in the uk, the bank of england was expecting inflation to hit 9.9%, to drop to that figure, and in fact it's gone up to 10.11. markets were surprised. this does indicate the bank of england is going to raise interest rates on thursday but let's start with why the cost of living is going up. as you say, higher prices and cafe in restaurants, driven by higher food and cafe in restaurants, driven by higherfood prices, holding it's gone up competently for kids and mums in nassau despite fuel prices coming down. if we look at food inflation, it's gone up the year to february up 18.2%, so that's why some of those cost increases were passed onto consumers by restaurants, but also, rememberthe shortages in the uk on the shelves of tomatoes, peppers and cucumbers caused by that harvest with extreme weather in spain and north africa, but also high energy prices that are factored into those on supply chain issues, so all of that was a

surprise, but the 0ns that monitors these things, the office of national statistics, says alcohol prices, they will surprise, that went up. and when you strip out, food and alcohol also went up. some reaction from uk chancellorjeremy hunt, saying these falls in inflation we were all expecting are not inevitable.— inevitable. what are the implications _ inevitable. what are the implications for - inevitable. what are the implications for interest j inevitable. what are the - implications for interest rates? this, because, interest rates brought in to control the cost of living when the cost of living is getting too high. we've seen the bank of england raised interest rates from .1% to 4% over 1a months. huge rises. this of course as to the pressure to control rising prices. we weren't sure whether the uk, when they announce these figures on thursday, we do this because the backdrop to this in the last two weeks is of these two banking failures in america, and that has caused a huge concern and some people... and credit suisse in

europe. part the reason people said there was these bank failures and problems with credit suisse, we will see on wednesday, we are moving too fast and too hard with these interest—rate rises, but because inflation is rising in the uk, seen as an indication rates for what are more likely rates will go up on thursday. in the us, this balancing act, the americans don't increase the interest rates, they will suggest to the market there may be there are other problems in the us banking sector they know about, so a big decision to make for the fed there. ., . . ., , big decision to make for the fed there. ., . , there. contradictory signals with bank stress _ there. contradictory signals with bank stress and _ there. contradictory signals with bank stress and inflation. - there. contradictory signals with bank stress and inflation. thank| there. contradictory signals with i bank stress and inflation. thank you very much. whether it was the treachery of traitors, the nostalgic comedy of derry girls, or the moving drama of i am ruth, we've been spoiled for top television in the last year. and the nominations for this year's bafta tv awards have been unveiled today.

the bbc drama series the responder, and the medical memoir this it is going to hurt, lead the nominations with six each. let's talk to our entertainment correspondent colin paterson. the baftas reward british television first of all, show sold in britain, so a very british land these lists. those two shows you mentioned lead the way, the responder, in which martin freeman, which people probably still know best from the office, played a liverpudlian cop struggling with his mental health and having to do night shift. it was written by a real—life cop in merseyside. tony schumacher. based on his own experiences. the other show leading the way also based on own experiences of a real—life doctor, adam mckay, the show is this it is going to hurt and stars ben

wish of people will know from the james bond movies. it's about a junior doctor and all they went through in the years of training to be a doctor and has got nominations, ben wish of the leading actor, and also the writer of that show, adam k, based on his own memoir. this was a year in britain where tv watching was dominated by the queen and she is nominated, there are nominations for two events involving the queen in the life events category, because there are nominations both for the party at the palace, the joyous celebration of the green's platinum jubilee, you will remember that was the one famously had the sketch with queen elizabeth ii and paddington bear, that is nominated, and the bbc is also nominated for its coverage of the state funeral of queen elizabeth ii, a real reflection of some of the year's tv viewing there. what are these nominations tells about the sort of trends successful on television? and just how much

people are still watching tv? we keep obfuscating about the threat to television, if you are in this industry, in the digital landscape? it is very interesting to see netflix has more nominations than itv this year, so that is a sure sign of how people are moving towards screaming, and were talking about the queen there, imelda staunton is nominated for playing queen elizabeth for the first time in series five of the crown. in britain, a very interesting one, nomination for a show called the traitors, shown during the world cup, almost kind of thrown out there, the best way of describing it would be it is a kind of televised version of murder in the dark, the old parlour game, but it was a real word—of—mouth hit, very small viewing figures at the start which got bigger and bigger during the series as people set have you seen this? and claudia were uncommonly percent of that is nominated for best entertainment presenter, her fourth nomination of a career the

other three have been for strictly come dancing. this time for the traitors. an example of how in this age of streaming there is still the room for the word—of—mouth hit to be back. that is a real example. another very interesting nomination is forjoe lycett, the comedian who did an expose of david beckham's involvement with the qatar world cup, calling for him to quit his involvement with the world cup and being a paid ambassadorfor involvement with the world cup and being a paid ambassador for catcher. after that show was broadcast, it was revealed thatjoe lycett himself had actually played stand—up comedy gigs in qatar that he totally failed to mention in the programme. despite that, he is bafta nominated for that show today. the nominations are out today and the baftas are on the 14th of may, and that is going to be a busy weekend because it's the same weekend britain hosts eurovision.

wright you are going to be very busy. enjoy it. thank you very much indeed. protests have again continued into the night in paris after the french government narrowly survived a no—confidence vote on monday over its pension reform plans. police used tear gas against protesters who set fire to motorbikes and rubbish bins in the city centre. president macron is due to give a televised interview on wednesday in which he's expected to defend the new law. the legislation raises the retirement age in france by two years to sixty—four. there is an outcry in france. in the past week, more than 1500 protests have taken place all over the country. this was place de la republique in paris last night. some protests turned violent.

police clashed with demonstrators. and hundreds were arrested. this all happened after president emmanuel macron used controversial executive powers last week to push through his deeply unpopular pension reform. this means that the retirement age in france will now be raised from 62 to 64. translation: i think that today the fifth republic i is showing its true face which is that of a regime that is not democratic since the president can decide to pass a law that is rejected by 90% of french people. to think that all those people who were already in really trying jobs will have to keep going until they are 64 is not right. theyjust see people as profits. well, macron never listened to us, so now this is war. _ i think at one point -

he will not have a choice, he will have to withdraw his reform. but president emmanuel macron does not seem to have any intention of backing down. he said there will be no government reshuffle, no fresh elections and no referendum for his pension reform. and, after a week of not being seen in public, today, he will give a rare tv interview. his hope will be to use the interview to calm things down and put an end to the protests. but that is easier said than done. emmanuel macron is facing his most serious challenge since the yellow vest riots four years ago. and, with more strikes planned for thursday, the anger that many french people feel is not going away. (pres)uganda's parliament has passed a bill which would criminalise uganda's parliament has passed a bill which would criminalise people for identifying as gay, with those found guilty facing up to ten years in prison. under the proposed

legislation, friends, family and members of the community would have a duty to report individuals in same—sex relationships to the authorities. homosexual acts are already illegal in the east african country, but the bill seeks to go further and criminalise people on the basis of their sexual identity. the bill passed with widespread support in uganda's parliament. the house of commons privileges committee investigating whether former prime minister borisjohnson knowingly misled parliament over the "partygate" affair has published its evidence bundle ahead of the hearing on wednesday afternoon. 0ur political correspondent, nick eardley, joins us from westminster. some fresh information release that the committee is using as part of the committee is using as part of the evidence it is assessing, tell us what else you've seen today. hi us what else you've seen today. h again, about three quarters of the way through now, a few minutes ago we were talking about the simon case

evidence and the cabinet secretary saying he had not given boris johnson advice that no rules had been followed, that no rules had been followed, that no rules had been broken sorry. when you go through the subsequent pages, there is evidence from some of boris johnson's political allies, mps who advised them in downing street and from some other senior officials in number ten. we can show you page 72, evidence from jack doyle, number ten's com is the right of the time, the man in charge of messages being given to the media. you can see there at the top he... this is from there at the top he... this is from the survey report, he is asked, did you tell borisjohnson at any time that covid rules were followed at all times? and he says i believed that no rules were broken. but there is a bit of a difference a year when

it comes to guidance on this says that he did not tell borisjohnson that he did not tell borisjohnson that no overt guidance was broken in number ten. there are different accounts on this evidence of what exactly went on and it feels likely that something that could come up indicating this afternoon, this question of if the legal rules were not broken, was the guidance broken? we know the legal stuff was broken because boris johnson we know the legal stuff was broken because borisjohnson was eventually fined, but his team and some of his advisers seem to have been drawing a distinction between the two things. as i say, there are other parts of this if few pages back where different aids, some of them mps, a parliamentary secretary to boris johnson at the time for example saying mrjohnson was told that meetings before the key prime minister's questions session is that rules had been followed, so he will have that line of defence later but thatis have that line of defence later but

that is the question commented boris johnson and missy as many as are of the opinion, say "aye". to the contrary, "no" and if you did, did he do it recklessly or intentionally? we will bring you live coverage of proceedings in parliament later today. whilst there is more sunshine than today, a bit of a wild and windy one for some of you, especially at the moment across parts of scotland. we have winds and nine, 58 and 60 mph, get more rns and western coasts well. not to see where we have strong winds, right across the board be a widespread gills today. those coupled with high spring tides means around some western coast, notjust a tape of the next few days, an increased risk of some coastal flooding. as for the weather itself, this big strip of cloud is what brought the overnight rain, clearing away, sunny spells developed widely but showers in the north of scotland could come with the odd rumble of thunder to go with strong winds, away from that the cloud in the southeast breaks up, sunny spells here and most of us

will see some sunny spells of the afternoon. a few show is coming and going back push through and quite a strong wind a few see them, so last too long, even in southern and western coast, gusts of 40—50 mass nerve at some of you will get through the day can put the dry and a few do a combination sunshine, out the breeze, 15—6 and east england, then down and east of england, downing a city in eastern scotland all parts milder than we should be. tonight we will see one batch of showers pushed through during the first part of the night, clear skies for a time, another batch into the us later on and it will be cooler than recent nights, temperatures more widely into single figures but still overall for the stage and much fairly mild starter tomorrow morning. we see again, more pressure still dominating things and just got to watch the progress of this report of a weather front where you get this result ripples and waves developing, rain becoming more persistent and heavier. showers in the west to begin with, working eastwards, tomorrow a greater chance of a showery coming your way, still

some sunny spells in between and then later on more persistent rain down towards the south and south—west. when strongest tomorrow around parts of england and wales, 40-50 around parts of england and wales, 40—50 melon gusts and temps are still on the male side, 11 celsius the most. clear through friday, friday another story of sunshine and showers, but what we're seeing day by day is the show is becoming more frequent, more widespread, becoming heavierwith frequent, more widespread, becoming heavier with hail and thunder. still staying mild on friday a to the start that we can picture turning colder later on the some snow showers across the north on sunday.

this is bbc news broadcasting in the uk and around the globe. our top stories... the parliamentary committee investigating whether former prime minister borisjohnson knowingly misled parliament, publishes its evidence ahead of the hearing. according to the evidence, a senior civil servant had questioned mrjohnson's plan to say covid guidance had been followed at all times in number 10. a global water crisis due to pollution and excessive consumption — a warning from the un. here in the uk, mps will vote today on rishi sunak�*s new brexit deal for northern ireland. but the democratic unionist party have said they will be voting against it. the inflation rate in britain rose unexpectedly to 10.4 percent in february,

after three months of falls. and france's president macron prepares to defend the new law