hospitals and community spaces. daniella relph, bbc news, chelsea flower show. time for a look at the weather. here's sarah keith—lucas. we had another largely dry day with spells _ we had another largely dry day with spells of— we had another largely dry day with spells of strong sunshine out there and in _ spells of strong sunshine out there and in the — spells of strong sunshine out there and in the stable area of the high pressure — and in the stable area of the high pressure that is with us, these clouds — pressure that is with us, these clouds were spotted earlier as the sun was— clouds were spotted earlier as the sun was setting in inverness, lenticuler— sun was setting in inverness, lenticular clouds, these clouds form in a stable _ lenticular clouds, these clouds form in a stable air as it flows over mountain_ in a stable air as it flows over mountain ranges and rebalance either side. ,, t, , mountain ranges and rebalance either side, ,, a, , a, a, mountain ranges and rebalance either side. ,, ., . ., , ,, side. stable air and high pressure with us over _ side. stable air and high pressure with us over the _ side. stable air and high pressure with us over the next _ side. stable air and high pressure with us over the next few - side. stable air and high pressure with us over the next few days i side. stable air and high pressure with us over the next few days so i with us over the next few days so not a lot of change in the forecast for the rest of the week, staying largely dry and settled with spells of strong sunshine but there will be areas of cloud drifting around this high pressure and weak fronts working in from the north—west. for the rest of the night we have a bit of cloud out there, pushing in from

the north—west we have areas of cloud across southern and eastern england as well but most places looking dry through the night. temperatures about 6—10 but we could see temperatures of 3 or 4 with clearer skies. a little bit fresh first thing tomorrow, slightly cooler with the wind is coming from a more northerly direction. more cloud through the morning across northern ireland and scotland, a few spots of light rain in the far north and more sunshine south but you could catch a rogue shower. temperatures at about 20 degrees for the warmest spots and a touch could close to the east coast. we have got moderate to high levels of uv out there where you see the sunshine breaking through. tuesday night into wednesday stays dry and settled with more cloud once again on wednesday working from the north—west. most places with long spells of sunshine and wednesday will be a little bit warmer than tuesday so top temperatures at 21 degrees. high pressure holding on as we look towards the end of the week and into

the weekend also, so a lot of dry, settled weather on the cards and those temperatures are creeping up towards the bank holiday weekend. thanks, sarah. and that's bbc news at ten. there's more analysis of the day's main stories on newsnight with kirsty wark, which isjust getting underway on bbc two. the news continues here on bbc one as now it's time to join our colleagues across the nations and regions for the news where you are. but from the ten team, it's goodnight.

front in the face of this week's expected record immigration figures, and questions of what he does about the way she handled a speeding offence? with so few solutions from the government or the opposition about how to reduce migration, and what migration is most

valuable to our economy, we hear from a former universities minister, a university vice chancellor and the chair of the public accounts commitee. also tonight... an exclusive interview with a global expert on nerve agents, disinvited to speak at a government—backed conference after his social media account, in which he had been deeply critical of the goverment�*s asylum policy, had been vetted. if that's not the definition of blacklisting, i don't know what is. kate lamble on what living with climate change could look like. a new study out today suggests by the end of the century more than 2 billion people will live in places with an average temperature of over 29 degrees, if we stick to our current policies. and one of the eu's sharpest critics of the uk government during brexit and during the row over the northern ireland procotol, mairead mcguinness, tipped to be the next president of ireland, is here ahead of her meeting with the chancellor tomorrow to discuss just how close our relationship is going to get now.

good evening. for any government, a prime minister hearing his home secretary publicly criticising policy is not where it wants to be, but this pm finds himself embattled by his home secretary on two fronts. one is the question of whether she has broken the ministerial code for a second time, after seeking civil servants' advice on how to handle a speeding offence. the prime minister has a decision to make on whether to ask his ethics adviser to investigate. the other is on migration — an issue that is likely to dominate this week, as we await what are expected to be record net migration figures released on thursday. suella braverman last week criticised her own government's reliance on foreign workers. both rishi sunak and leader of the opposition keir starmer say they want to reduce overall numbers coming here but, other than a government plan to curb the number of dependents that overseas students can bring to the uk, specific measures appear to be in short supply. this week on newsnight, we'e going to be examining why this is the case,

looking at how deep—seated structural issues are impacting the government's ability to pull an immigration lever. we'll hearfrom ben in a moment. first, here's nick. before we discuss suella braverman, you have breaking news about dominic raab.in you have breaking news about dominic raab. ., , , �* raab. in the last few minutes, we've learned that — raab. in the last few minutes, we've learned that dominic _ raab. in the last few minutes, we've learned that dominic raab, - raab. in the last few minutes, we've learned that dominic raab, the - learned that dominic raab, the former deputy prime minister, will be standing down at the next general election as conservative mp for esher and walton. that story was broken by the daily telegraph and it has now been confirmed by the bbc. dominic raab has exchanged letters with his constituency association and he is essentially saying that he thinks that the media focus, it's too intense, he has a young family and he wants to give them some space. obviously, it's only a few weeks ago that tony casey upheld two counts of bullying against him. the

prime minister take a deliberative approach and has met similar problem. he has spoken to sir laurie magnus, is ethics adviser, and who says the prime minister is to take a very careful approach because, when he entered downing street, he said he entered downing street, he said he would lead a government of professionalism, integrity and accountability so, at least, he needs a scoping exercise to see whether suella braverman has acted consistently with the ministerial code into areas, one, did she ask civil servants to take action on her behalf on a personal matter, which is how she would attend this driving awareness course, and second, she acted in line with the principle of public life, which is about openness and integrity? the atmosphere at westminster, the prime minister is keeping his cards close to his chest, but there is not a feeling that the prime minister is about to sack his home secretary to dip there is a feeling she may have a reasonable explanation. the home secretary has armed guards all the time and perhaps there would be a

discussion about how she would attend course with those people. harper attend course with those people. how are thin . s attend course with those people. how are things in — attend course with those people. how are things in whitehall out of these net migration increases? it are things in whitehall out of these net migration increases?— are things in whitehall out of these net migration increases? it could be a big motive — net migration increases? it could be a big motive net _ net migration increases? it could be a big motive net migration - net migration increases? it could be a big motive net migration heads i net migration increases? it could bei a big motive net migration heads up to thei million mark. a lot of irritation in number ten the whips office with the home secretary criticising that figure when of course it is her area of responsibility. this is a big moment for the prime minister. if you spoke to his aides recently, they would say his focus is on bringing down what he calls illegal migration, not too fussed about illegal migration. well, he is very fast now. == too fussed about illegal migration. well, he is very fast now.- well, he is very fast now. -- very first nova — later in the week, we'll be looking at how reliant some industries using lower paid workers are on immigration to fill their staffing needs, but today we're putting higher education under the spotlight, as the numbers of foreign students and their dependents is rising — students that the universitites rely on. here's ben. international students are a major contributor to overall immigration to the uk. let's dig into the numbers. in 2022, there were around 486,000

sponsored study visas granted. as you can see, more than double the pre—2020 period. where are they coming from? china has long been a major source — but that country has now been overtaken by india. you can also see big recent increases from nigeria and pakistan. students can bring dependent family members too, provided they can show they can afford to support them. in 2022, around 136,000 dependents were issued visas to come to the uk — as you can see, also a considerable increase on previous years. these student and student—dependent visa figures are one of the reasons thursday's overall official net migration figures for 2022 are expected to show a considerable increase on even the record half a million recorded in the year to lastjune. some point to the cost of this in terms of the higher demand for housing and public services like schools and hospitals.

yet bear in mind the economic benefit of these flows of people, too. overseas students pay large fees to universities. we can think of these as exports of uk higher education services to foreign students. and they amounted to some £25 billion in 2020. for context, that's roughly the same as total annual uk exports of cars and also of pharmaceutical products. and in 2021, the government said it wanted to increase these exports to £35 billion by increasing the number of overseas students. this is really important to recognise — high student migration has been government policy. by the way, the impact of reducing the number of foreign students is likely to be financially weaker uk universities, which could translate into a hit to research budgets or upward pressure on tuition fees. universities would like fees for home students to go up in line with inflation. i think they recognise

that's unlikely this side of a general election, at least, but the pressure would certainly go up for more government money or more money via students as fees if they lost the income from international students,. and it's perhaps worth asking whether students should be considered immigrants at all, given they are doing time—limited courses. there's some evidence that this is what many people think. when the think tank british future asked people in 2014 what they considered to be "migrants", a high proportion said that this applied to unskilled labourers, refugees, eu citizens looking for work and also dependents. yet international students? only 22% said they thought this group were migrants. that said, the increasing number of dependents could change attitudes. and, while history suggests most overseas students will leave the uk after their courses finish, we can't be certain about what proportion — so the long—term implications of these student numbers for annual net migration is inherently uncertain. but, again, we have

to bear in mind that, if these are high—skilled migrants, the government's policy has been to encourage this sort of migration to help fill important gaps in the labour market. it was borisjohnson who made it possible for international students to stay in the uk for two years after graduating to find work. for a country like the uk, with its globally—respected higher education system and its need for more skilled workers to grow the industries of the future, there are deep structural reasons for large numbers of overseas students. whether or not those barriers should be overcome, it's unlikely to be easy to do so. i'm joined now by charliejeffery, vice chancellor of york university, and by the labour mp meg hillier, chair of westminster�*s public accounts select committee, who last year looked at the financial stability of england's universities. i'm alsojoined byjojohnson, universities minister under david cameron, theresa may and borisjohnson, and now a member of the house of lords. we did approach a number of conservative politicians with concerns over the number

of foreign students and their dependents, but none were available to join us. so, good evening to all of you. let's begin with you, charlie jeffery. is it fair to say that a lot of universities have an overreliance on fees from overseas students and that of itself is not a good enough reason to have a lot of overseas students at universities? i think that's one of the themes that stood out in meg hillier�*s select committee report but i think there is a more fundamental theme, and thatis is a more fundamental theme, and that is that publicly funded research at our universities is not fully funded, it's funded to about 80%, and recently, with the impact of inflation on the system for funding home undergraduate study, we are also at about 80% funding there,

so there are funding shortfalls in both those areas absolutely fundamental to our universities. we try and manage those shortfalls in different ways, but the biggest way we do so is through international students, so the question is not for me one of whether we are too reliant on international students, it's whether we are funding the higher education system in the right way. with a lot of international students, it doesn't necessarily bring a lot of diversity, because it tends to be the better off international students that come come. ~ . ., ., , , come. we are in a tremendously ositive come. we are in a tremendously positive situation. _ come. we are in a tremendously positive situation. we _ come. we are in a tremendously positive situation. we can - come. we are in a tremendously| positive situation. we can attract some of the brightest and most talented young people from around the world at our universities, in fierce competition, especially with the us with australia, with canada, and we have a brilliant record. about 97%, according to the ons in some work couple of years ago, go

back after their study or after doing their post—study work and are only in the figures temporarily. isn't there an issue about growing our own? there are limited places for everything from pharmacies to doctors to nurses to biochemists, so if you're talking about growing a resilient workforce in this country across a range of disciplines, and you overlie on international students because financially you have to, because tuition fees are set in england, wales and northern ireland, were not in the best of our domestic population. and ireland, were not in the best of our domestic population.— ireland, were not in the best of our domestic population. and there are ca -s on domestic population. and there are caps on numbers — domestic population. and there are caps on numbers which _ domestic population. and there are caps on numbers which the - domestic population. and there are - caps on numbers which the government move on _ caps on numbers which the government move on in— caps on numbers which the government move on. in our report, we were concerned — move on. in our report, we were concerned that it was this financial situation _ concerned that it was this financial situation which is driving the desire — situation which is driving the desire for— situation which is driving the desire for overseas students, so it's not— desire for overseas students, so it's not a — desire for overseas students, so it's not a complete choice universities. they have modelled their— universities. they have modelled their finances on that. in the four or five _ their finances on that. in the four or five veers _ their finances on that. in the four or five years up to 2019—20, you see the number— or five years up to 2019—20, you see the number of universities with deficits — the number of universities with deficits in — the number of universities with deficits in england rise to 32% of the they— deficits in england rise to 32% of the they have a challenge and

they're — the they have a challenge and they're using foreign students to help plug the gap. in they're using foreign students to help plug the gap-— they're using foreign students to help plug the gap. in terms of the net figures. _ help plug the gap. in terms of the net figures, what _ help plug the gap. in terms of the net figures, what we _ help plug the gap. in terms of the net figures, what we have - help plug the gap. in terms of the net figures, what we have is, - help plug the gap. in terms of the| net figures, what we have is, yes, help plug the gap. in terms of the l net figures, what we have is, yes, a rise in international students but a massive rise in the number of dependents come in. should we reclassify them differently? lanthem dependents come in. should we reclassify them differently? when i was a minister— reclassify them differently? when i was a minister in _ reclassify them differently? when i was a minister in the _ reclassify them differently? when i was a minister in the home - reclassify them differently? when i was a minister in the home office, | was a minister in the home office, there _ was a minister in the home office, there wes— was a minister in the home office, there was a — was a minister in the home office, there was a debate about how you classify— there was a debate about how you classify students, and students and their dependents generally go home at the _ their dependents generally go home at the end of it. it's interesting, no one — at the end of it. it's interesting, no one has— at the end of it. it's interesting, no one has been able to reclassify that, _ no one has been able to reclassify that, for— no one has been able to reclassify that, for whatever reason there are. jojohnson, — that, for whatever reason there are. jojohnson, you will that, for whatever reason there are. jo johnson, you will universities minister across jojohnson, you will universities minister across a range of prime ministers. theresa may said, you've got four months after you finish your ma, your phd, whatever. boris johnson said two years. but the conservatives never really squared a change in policy, because inevitably, if you call students migrants and they stay for another two years, they stay on the books as

migrants for another two years. ages. migrants for another two years. yes, it's a big nonsense _ migrants for another two years. a" it's a big nonsense that we categorise them as migrants. we should get them out of these net migration figures because, as the vice chancellor said, they come and study for a period, one year for a masters, study for a period, one yearfor a masters, perhaps study for a period, one year for a masters, perhaps three for an undergrad, and by and large they leave. this is the most compliant visa category or categories in our system. students do respect the rules, they respect the terms and conditions of their visas and they go home when they finish their studies, so it's a nonsense. so are saying we have a skewed view of migration because you cost students as migrants. would you class their dependents as migrants? no, because they come and go with the person of they come and go with the person of the study visa so they wash out of the study visa so they wash out of the system in the same way. but they use ublic the system in the same way. but they use public services. _ the system in the same way. but they use public services. but _ the system in the same way. but they use public services. but the _ the system in the same way. but they use public services. but the cost - the system in the same way. but they use public services. but the cost of i use public services. but the cost of the use of public—

use public services. but the cost of the use of public services - use public services. but the cost of the use of public services is - use public services. but the cost of the use of public services is a - the use of public services is a tenth of the economic benefits they bring to the country. i5 tenth of the economic benefits they bring to the country. is a tenth of the economic benefits they bring to the country.— bring to the country. is a complete no-brainer— bring to the country. is a complete no-brainer from _ bring to the country. is a complete no-brainer from a _ bring to the country. is a complete no-brainer from a fiscal _ no—brainer from a fiscal perspective. would it be labour policy to train students from being migrants and leaving their dependents as migrants? this migrants and leaving their dependents as migrants? this is an issue no one _ dependents as migrants? this is an issue no one seems _ dependents as migrants? this is an issue no one seems to _ dependents as migrants? this is an issue no one seems to crack, - dependents as migrants? this is an issue no one seems to crack, the i issue no one seems to crack, the office _ issue no one seems to crack, the office for— issue no one seems to crack, the office for national statistics, different offices... but i think it's absolutely right, i agree with jo, it's absolutely right, i agree with jo. it's _ it's absolutely right, i agree with jo. it's not — it's absolutely right, i agree with jo, it's not to classify them as migrants _ jo, it's not to classify them as migrants because they do leave. it was labour— migrants because they do leave. it was labour as a government that clamped — was labour as a government that clamped down on some fraud where students _ clamped down on some fraud where students weren't leaving, stringent nteasures_ students weren't leaving, stringent measures are now in place, universities have very strong approach _ universities have very strong approach is now to making sure students — approach is now to making sure students are complied with their visa restrictions and that they do have _ visa restrictions and that they do

have to — visa restrictions and that they do have to leave at the point their visa runs out. it's also a bit of nonsense. _ visa runs out. it's also a bit of nonsense, really, we've got government saying on the one hand, is the _ government saying on the one hand, is the education secretary said a month— is the education secretary said a month or— is the education secretary said a month or so ago, we are proud of the number— month or so ago, we are proud of the number of— month or so ago, we are proud of the number of students arriving, and then— number of students arriving, and theniust — number of students arriving, and theniust a — number of students arriving, and thenjust a few number of students arriving, and then just a few weeks later, the home _ then just a few weeks later, the home secretary saying, we want to curb international students. this is confusing — curb international students. this is confusing for universities and no wonder. — confusing for universities and no wonder, they are struggling financially, because they can't make proper— financially, because they can't make proper financial plans on that basis — proper financial plans on that basis. ., , ' , proper financial plans on that basis. . g , , ., �*, basis. charlie jeffery, what's your view? you _ basis. charlie jeffery, what's your view? you know— basis. charlie jeffery, what's your view? you know a _ basis. charlie jeffery, what's your view? you know a lot _ basis. charlie jeffery, what's your view? you know a lot of - view? you know a lot of international students, you know their dependents, should they be classed differently, and should there be a reduction in the amount of dependents allowed to come with an international student? we see the figure going up exponentially in particular categories, for example, from nigeria, sometimes are more dependents than students. i from nigeria, sometimes are more dependents than students.- dependents than students. i think that's quite _ dependents than students. i think that's quite rare. _ dependents than students. i think that's quite rare. you've - dependents than students. i think that's quite rare. you've got - dependents than students. i think that's quite rare. you've got to i that's quite rare. you've got to realise — that's quite rare. you've got to realise how— that's quite rare. you've got to realise how much _ that's quite rare. you've got to realise how much it _ that's quite rare. you've got to realise how much it costs - that's quite rare. you've got to realise how much it costs the i realise how much it costs the individual _ realise how much it costs the individual to _ realise how much it costs the individual to not _ realise how much it costs the individual to notjust - realise how much it costs the individual to not just come i realise how much it costs the i individual to notjust come here, realise how much it costs the - individual to notjust come here, to pay fees. to— individual to notjust come here, to pay fees. to pav— individual to notjust come here, to pay fees, to pay their _ individual to notjust come here, to pay fees, to pay their own - individual to notjust come here, to pay fees, to pay their own fees i individual to notjust come here, to pay fees, to pay their own fees andi pay fees, to pay their own fees and immigration — pay fees, to pay their own fees and immigration costs, _ pay fees, to pay their own fees and immigration costs, but— pay fees, to pay their own fees and immigration costs, but also - pay fees, to pay their own fees and

immigration costs, but also the i immigration costs, but also the immigration _ immigration costs, but also the immigration and _ immigration costs, but also the immigration and related - immigration costs, but also the immigration and related costs i immigration costs, but also the| immigration and related costs of their— immigration and related costs of their dependents. _ immigration and related costs of their dependents. if— immigration and related costs of their dependents. if you - immigration and related costs of their dependents. if you really. immigration and related costs ofi their dependents. if you really do want _ their dependents. if you really do want to— their dependents. if you really do want to come _ their dependents. if you really do want to come over— their dependents. if you really do want to come over with _ their dependents. if you really do want to come over with six - their dependents. if you really doj want to come over with six family members. — want to come over with six family members, which _ want to come over with six family members, which is _ want to come over with six family members, which is the _ want to come over with six family members, which is the number. want to come over with six family . members, which is the number that often _ members, which is the number that often gets— members, which is the number that often gets quoted, _ members, which is the number that often gets quoted, basically, - members, which is the number that often gets quoted, basically, you i often gets quoted, basically, you have _ often gets quoted, basically, you have to _ often gets quoted, basically, you have to be — often gets quoted, basically, you have to be quite _ often gets quoted, basically, you have to be quite rich. _ often gets quoted, basically, you have to be quite rich.— often gets quoted, basically, you have to be quite rich. that's what i was saying — have to be quite rich. that's what i was saving or _ have to be quite rich. that's what i was saying or make _ have to be quite rich. that's what i was saying or make the _ have to be quite rich. that's what i was saying or make the diversity, l was saying or make the diversity, there isn't much diversity in terms of ability to pay, in universities. you've got rich foreign students. i think you pointed to the issues there _ think you pointed to the issues there about _ think you pointed to the issues there about how— think you pointed to the issues there about how the _ think you pointed to the issues there about how the system i think you pointed to the issues i there about how the system was currently — there about how the system was currently funded, _ there about how the system was currently funded, but _ there about how the system was currently funded, but one - there about how the system was currently funded, but one morel currently funded, but one more point, — currently funded, but one more point, we — currently funded, but one more point. we talk— currently funded, but one more point, we talk about _ currently funded, but one more . point, we talk about international students — point, we talk about international students here _ point, we talk about international students here largely— point, we talk about international students here largely as - point, we talk about internationali students here largely as numbers. point, we talk about international. students here largely as numbers. i don't _ students here largely as numbers. i don't like _ students here largely as numbers. i don't like that _ students here largely as numbers. i don't like that. i — students here largely as numbers. i don't like that. i feel— don't like that. i feel uncomfortable - don't like that. i feel uncomfortable with. don't like that. i feel- uncomfortable with that. don't like that. i feel— uncomfortable with that. because they uncomfortable with that. because thev enrich— uncomfortable with that. because they enrich our— uncomfortable with that. because they enrich our campuses - uncomfortable with that. because i they enrich our campuses enormously and they— they enrich our campuses enormously and they are — they enrich our campuses enormously and they are friends _ they enrich our campuses enormously and they are friends of _ they enrich our campuses enormously and they are friends of the _ they enrich our campuses enormously and they are friends of the uk - they enrich our campuses enormously and they are friends of the uk for i and they are friends of the uk for life, and they are friends of the uk for life. having — and they are friends of the uk for life, having studied _ and they are friends of the uk for life, having studied here - and they are friends of the uk for life, having studied here and i and they are friends of the uk for i life, having studied here and having typically— life, having studied here and having typically had — life, having studied here and having typically had a — life, having studied here and having typically had a fantastic _ life, having studied here and having typically had a fantastic time - life, having studied here and having typically had a fantastic time here. i typically had a fantastic time here. they are~~~ — typically had a fantastic time here. thevarem but— typically had a fantastic time here. they are... but very _ typically had a fantastic time here. they are... but very quickly, - typically had a fantastic time here. they are... but very quickly, jo i they are... but very quickly, jo johnson, that argument, the harsh financial reality is, doesn't wash, does it? there has to be a policy on migration from somewhere. it seems

that universities are the easiest to have a go at because both government and opposition have some sort of plan. what needs to be done with international students coming to this country? do they have to pay more? does there have to be a cut in dependents coming, what has to happen, briefly? dependents coming, what has to happen. briefly?— happen, briefly? you're right, i mean, international— happen, briefly? you're right, i mean, international students i happen, briefly? you're right, i. mean, international students are happen, briefly? you're right, i- mean, international students are the easiest way for the government to bring down net migration numbers. it's obviously a major policy mistake to do this and to take this approach. we make this mistake before as a country, in 2012, when prime minister theresa may took away the post study work visa. that collapse to our international student numbers and it's taken a decade for us to rebuild them. we shouldn't make the same mistakes all over again. shouldn't make the same mistakes all over aain. ~ . shouldn't make the same mistakes all overauain. ~ . . ,, , �* over again. when that happens, we'd see adverts — over again. when that happens, we'd see adverts in — over again. when that happens, we'd see adverts in canada _ over again. when that happens, we'd see adverts in canada and _ see adverts in canada and australia... see adverts in canada and australia. . ._ see adverts in canada and australia... . ,, , ., , . an expert in nerve agents who worked in the white house for 12 years has said he is "outraged" after being told he could not attend a uk government—organised conference to which he had been invited because of what he'd said about

the government on social media. this is the second such cancelling by a government agency that newsnight has reported on this year. dan kaszeta is a specialist in defence against chemical, biological and radiological weapons and warfare. in april, after agreeing to be a keynote speaker at the chemical weapons demilitarisation conference, organised by the government's science and technology department, he was notified by email that his invite had been cancelled. the conference is being held tomorrow. bbc newsnight�*s uk editor, sima kotecha, has been speaking with dan kaszeta, and she started off by asking him what exactly happened when he was asked to speak at the weapons conference. i got asked to speak. i got asked to speak two years ago. i got asked more or less to do a repeat performance. i didn't really want to go. i found the last one not really terribly interesting from my perspective. after some hemming and hawing with the conference organisers, they said, "no, no, we'll waive the conference fee," you know, "we'll make you a keynote speaker." i'm like, "fine, ok. it's ten minutes from my house. i'll do it."

nothing happens, nothing happens, nothing happens. almost three months later i get a quite stonking email — which i'm happy to show to you, by the way, i brought it with me — uninviting me and uninviting me from speaking because of a cabinet office policy allegedly in place since 2022, saying that i've been critical of government officials and/or government policy on social media. and so if that's not the definition of blacklisting, i don't know what is. just to be clear, what were you going to speak about at this conference? i mean, was there anything political about your appearance whatsoever? i was going to speak about possible future scenarios around the world in which chemical demilitarisation, which is actually the technical process of getting rid of old chemical weapons, would be relevant. i think perhaps the most controversial thing i would say was perhaps, "gee, we don't really know what's going on in north korea," or also, "it's problematic that egypt has not signed the chemical weapons convention." and these are both things

where there is not even a wafer thin bit of air between me and uk government policy. so when you got this email from one of the conference organisers telling you that the government had decided that you were unsuitable, what went through your mind at that point? well, several things. first of all, a little bit of outrage. a little bit of relief in a funny way, because i didn't actually want to go to that conference, but relief was overwhelmed by, "this is kind of nonsense. let me show this to people i know. let me see if i'm feeling like... if the outrage i'm feeling about this in principle is up to, you know, scrutiny." now, you have said some anti—government things on your social media feed. yes. so has everybody, probably, by this point. do you feel that that should dictate where you speak and when? no, i don't think so. i mean, for example, i'm a critic of the government's policy on homelessness and asylum seekers.

why that should have any impact whatsoever on whether or not i can speak to a technical conference in my own area of expertise? that's. .. that's stalinist. i mean, i'm a... i'm a liberal democrat. i'm not a firebomb thrower, 0k? these rules aren't actually published... no! ..as far as i can tell, having looked for them. yeah, so how... i can't find them anywhere. so how am i supposed...how am i supposed to abide by these rules? the most we have is an assurance from the cabinet office that they will eventually be published in the house of commons library. well, how am i...? how am i supposed to know these things? and you're someone who has worked at the white house. yes. you have three decades' experience in your field. yes, i've written books... you're a nerve agent specialist. yes. so would you describe yourself as being somebody who is an expert in their field and would have been an asset to the audience if you had had the chance to speak? indeed, indeed. i have spoken to un organisations, i've spoken to

interpol, i've spoken many times formally and informally to uk government organisations. i've spoken to... i've given classes to governments of allied countries. people value my expertise. why have you chosen to speak to me today about this? because i think this is an outrage against free speech. is there somewhere, are there brilliant doctors and scientists being barred from government sponsored conferences on valuable things like climate change and infectious disease because, i don't know, they retweeted a tweet? it's also an abrogation of our rules and democracy. parliament never voted for this. this is a rule that is, you know, taking rights away from people and we don't know how many rights and how many people it's been taken away from. more importantly, the government needs experts. it needs people like me and others

to give them advice on areas where the government does not have its own adequate specialists. i mean, i broke cover because i think it's an important issue. dan kaszeta, thank you very much. 0k. the ministry of defence told us, "as the public would expect, we conduct due diligence checks and carefully consider all speakers at any government—hosted conference to ensure that we can have a balanced and constructive discussion around our policies." i'm joined now by the editor of guido fawkes, paul staines, and times columnist and liberal democrat parliamentary candidate for the cities of london and westminster seat, edward lucas. good evening to both of you. evening. good evening to both of you. evenina. . good evening to both of you. evenin.. . .. , good evening to both of you. evenin.. . .., , good evening to both of you. evenina. . .., , ., good evening to both of you. evenin., ., , , ., ., evening. edward lucas, first of all, a ulobal evening. edward lucas, first of all, a global expert _ evening. edward lucas, first of all, a global expert in _ evening. edward lucas, first of all, a global expert in nerve _ evening. edward lucas, first of all, a global expert in nerve agents i evening. edward lucas, first of all, a global expert in nerve agents but there is a jacob rees—mogg a global expert in nerve agents but there is ajacob rees—mogg edict that social media needs to be checked, and to be fair, one would assume that things should be checked to make sure this person is not incendiary in any way, isn't going

to sort of exploded secrets that they might learn at a conference like this, that is a reasonable thing to check, isn't it? that's the sort of vetting _ thing to check, isn't it? that's the sort of vetting that _ thing to check, isn't it? that's the sort of vetting that m15 _ thing to check, isn't it? that's the sort of vetting that m15 does, i thing to check, isn't it? that's the. sort of vetting that m15 does, when it decides if you need a security clearance or not, and it's done very carefully, with great expertise. it wouldn't be based just on what someone says on social media. and i think that the idea that you can't criticise the government publicly on one thing and then give advice to it one thing and then give advice to it on another is like you're behind the iron curtain, in communist countries, they had the idea that if you speak out of turn you may suffer professionally, personally, whatever. i never thought that would be happening in this country. and what's so puzzling is, this is a government which is worried about cancer culture and is complaining that free speech is under attack, and they're doing exactly the same thing to their critics. what they're complaining that the left wing is

doing to conservatives. just complaining that the left wing is doing to conservatives.- complaining that the left wing is doing to conservatives. just to be clear, doing to conservatives. just to be clear. and — doing to conservatives. just to be clear. and l'm — doing to conservatives. just to be clear, and i'm paraphrasing i doing to conservatives. just to bei clear, and i'm paraphrasing here, they said in one tweet that the small boats crisis is a government made crisis and they need a scapegoat, i assume he means for migration figures, that is something that clearly has issues with this government.— government. yes, i mean, conservative _ government. yes, i mean, conservative mps - government. yes, i mean, conservative mps had i government. yes, i mean, i conservative mps had issues with government. yes, i mean, _ conservative mps had issues with the government and governments change over time, currently these checks go back five years. you think how many changes we had in five years, almost everybody will have some criticisms of a government in the last five years. of a government in the last five ears. . ,, . , ., of a government in the last five ears, ., ., ., , ., y., ., years. paul staines, do you think it's riaht years. paul staines, do you think it's right to _ years. paul staines, do you think it's right to call— years. paul staines, do you think it's right to call out _ years. paul staines, do you think it's right to call out people i years. paul staines, do you think it's right to call out people with l it's right to call out people with particular political views if they are antithetical to the government, when they're asked to speak at a government agency which might be of sensitive material? i’m government agency which might be of sensitive material?— sensitive material? i'm disappointed but i think sensitive material? i'm disappointed but i think in — sensitive material? i'm disappointed but i think in this _ sensitive material? i'm disappointed but i think in this case _ but i think in this case the position— but i think in this case the position is absurd, this expert cosmic— position is absurd, this expert cosmic reviews on brexit immigration are irrelevant to his professional expertise — are irrelevant to his professional expertise on an important subject, and this— expertise on an important subject,

and this is— expertise on an important subject, and this is an example of a civil service — and this is an example of a civil service gold—plating the guidance to absurditv _ service gold—plating the guidance to absurdity. i think we need to disentangle the intention and the implementation of what you call the edict. _ implementation of what you call the edict. i_ implementation of what you call the edict, i think it'sjust guidance, it was— edict, i think it'sjust guidance, it was brought into regulate something that was going out of hand in government diversity networks, if people _ in government diversity networks, if people don't know what they are, they're _ people don't know what they are, they're kind of vital's equivalent of student union societies or cops. you've _ of student union societies or cops. you've called these out, in a sense, by calling attention to them, have you wrapped up the government's antenna to look for anything as some kind of problem?— kind of problem? thank you for creditin: kind of problem? thank you for crediting our — kind of problem? thank you for crediting our public _ kind of problem? thank you for crediting our public service i crediting our public service journalism for inspiring this guidance! the fact was, and this was in a period. — guidance! the fact was, and this was in a period. i— guidance! the fact was, and this was in a period, i think in november 21, where— in a period, i think in november 21, where there— in a period, i think in november 21, where there was a whole host of these _ where there was a whole host of these things getting out of hand. you had — these things getting out of hand. you had sessions where, i've got a list of— you had sessions where, i've got a

list of them — you had sessions where, i've got a list of them here, a beginners guide to crystal— list of them here, a beginners guide to crystal healing and deep relaxation, in the same month the department for work and pensions, you had _ department for work and pensions, you had a _ department for work and pensions, you had a lunch with a witch including _ you had a lunch with a witch including a q and a. that was cancelled _ including a q and a. that was cancelled after i called them out. a few days _ cancelled after i called them out. a few days later, they were hosting a bite-size _ few days later, they were hosting a bite—size session on becoming a pagan~ — bite—size session on becoming a pagan~ i— bite—size session on becoming a pagan. i don't know what pagans can do pagan. idon't know what pagans can do for— pagan. i don't know what pagans can do for the _ pagan. i don't know what pagans can do for the public... pagan. i don't know what pagans can do forthe public... i pagan. i don't know what pagans can do for the public... i don't think they're — do for the public... i don't think they're going to solve our problems. edward _ they're going to solve our problems. edward lucas? we they're going to solve our problems. edward lucas?— edward lucas? we are a serious count , edward lucas? we are a serious country, chemical— edward lucas? we are a serious country, chemical weapons i edward lucas? we are a serious country, chemical weapons is i edward lucas? we are a serious country, chemical weapons is a | country, chemical weapons is a serious topic. is a serious expert. i think it's outrageous that the government is so worried about what paul and his blog may say about someone, that they are, as he points out, ludicrously gold—plating these secret rules, that have never been discussed in public, giving... giving the right of appeal... and who is to say, impersonation is rife

on twitter, who's to say the social media belongs to the person concerned?— media belongs to the person concerned? , ., , concerned? there is a serious point about this which _ concerned? there is a serious point about this which was _ concerned? there is a serious point about this which was raised - concerned? there is a serious point about this which was raised by i concerned? there is a serious point about this which was raised by dan | about this which was raised by dan kaszeta, he saw no work where the rules were written down, i suppose there can be no rules which presumably covers someone as an expert in chemical weapons and someone who is a crystal healer. there is no this has actually been examined properly, is that fair to say that there needs to be some predation, as it were, of counselling?— predation, as it were, of counselling? predation, as it were, of counsellin: ? . . , ., counselling? certainly there should be some common _ counselling? certainly there should be some common sense _ counselling? certainly there should be some common sense in - counselling? certainly there should be some common sense in this. i i be some common sense in this. i mean. _ be some common sense in this. i mean. bear— be some common sense in this. i mean, bear in mind that i think one ofthe— mean, bear in mind that i think one of the cases— mean, bear in mind that i think one of the cases the bbc reported was a cambridge _ of the cases the bbc reported was a cambridge academic who insulted priti patel in pretty cruel language. you can't expect the home office _ language. you can't expect the home office to _ language. you can't expect the home office to have her as a guest after that, _ office to have her as a guest after that, can — office to have her as a guest after that, can you? it would be a bit ridiculous _ that, can you? it would be a bit ridiculous. so that, can you? it would be a bit ridiculous-— that, can you? it would be a bit ridiculous. , .. �* ., . ,, . ridiculous. so you're now taking a line of great _ ridiculous. so you're now taking a line of great reasonableness i ridiculous. so you're now taking a line of great reasonableness butl line of great reasonableness but when this came out, you were

rejoicing over dan's cancellation on the grounds he was an anglican lib dem and that was two strikes against him. you're contributing to this kind of witchhunt.— him. you're contributing to this kind of witchhunt. thank you, i'm afraid i kind of witchhunt. thank you, i'm afraid i will— kind of witchhunt. thank you, i'm afraid i will have _ kind of witchhunt. thank you, i'm afraid i will have to _ kind of witchhunt. thank you, i'm afraid i will have to leave - kind of witchhunt. thank you, i'm afraid i will have to leave it i kind of witchhunt. thank you, i'm afraid i will have to leave it right l afraid i will have to leave it right there. i afraid i will have to leave it right there. .. �* afraid i will have to leave it right there. . afraid i will have to leave it right there._ thank| there. i don't recall that. thank ou ve there. i don't recall that. thank you very much _ there. i don't recall that. thank you very much indeed. - we are used to talking about migration in economic terms — or, for asylum seekers, in language of threat and safety — but climate may become the biggest, ireversible driver for the mass movement of millions upon millions of people by the end of the century. despite increased pledges and targets to tackle climate change, the world is currently on course for warming of around 2.7% by then, far above the paris agreement of 1.5%. a new report sets out to quantify the human cost and where it would no longer be safe to live. here's kate. from sweltering spain to schools closed in india, this spring has seen record temperatures worldwide, already established to have been made more likely by climate change. today, though, a new study attempted to put a figure on the potential human consequences for our warming world. humans don't tend to like living

anywhere too hot or cold. population density is highest in temperate climates, like the uk, concentrated where the average temperature is around 13 degrees. there's another population peak in monsoon climates, which average around 27 degrees. partly this is because we rely on fertile river deltas, crops and livestock, but get any hotter and humans also start to see biological risks. in the worst case, it's so hot and humid that the body can't keep itself cool because it can't evaporate sweat. that's at the extreme. before you get to the extreme, we see cognitive functions like brain function degrading, as we go to high temperature and high heat humidity extremes, we see adverse pregnancy outcomes, we see performance of the workforce degrading. interestingly, even when people work in air—conditioned factories, it turns out there seems to be some correlation to how good the weather is or how hot or extreme

the weather is outside. tim's team found that, back in 1980, just 0.3% of people lived in areas with an average temperature of 29 degrees or more — so, as a simplified proxy for the many complex consequences of climate change, they looked at how many people might be exposed to that level of extreme heat towards the end of the century. they found, at 1.5 degrees of warming, the preferable limit set by the paris agreement, 5% of the future population would be affected. but, at 2.7 degrees, what's expected if the world sticks to its current policies, the heat—exposed population will be five times that — over 20% of the future population, around 2 billion people, a significant proportion would live in india and nigeria, to 1.8 degrees of warming. but this study suggests each tenth of a degree we prevent could save around 140 million people from living in these extreme temperatures.

of course, some areas will be able to adapt, building cooler homes orjust buying air—conditioning. air—conditioning demand on energy is expected to rise threefold up to 2050, which means an equivalent of ten new air—conditioners will be bought every second for the next 30 years. that's an iea number. the implications of that for the environment are, of course, very damaging, because increased air—conditioning use means increased electricity demand, particularly during peak times. increased electricity demand, particularly if it is fuelled by fossil fuels means further emissions, and further emissions means higher global warming, more climate impacts and further increase for air—conditioning. so we're in this vicious cycle that is driving up dangerous impacts. there are, though, already some who can't afford to protect themselves from the heat or who have to work outdoors, particularly in the global south countries most likely affected. ultimately, some may be forced to consider relocating.

the world bank has estimated that over 200 million people by 2050 may move for climate—related reasons. in some countries, like bangladesh, we're seeing migration from coastal areas into inland cities because sea level rise is quite pronounced in some of these areas. we all remember the devastating floods in pakistan last year. events like that are going to lead people to migrate. also, in one of the areas where i have been doing research, in central america, we're seeing smallholderfarmers having to move because they've experienced drought for multiple years in a row. the horn of africa has experienced consecutive failed rainy seasons since 2020, a pattern scientists found wouldn't have occurred without climate change. in 2022, the number of women and unaccompanied children migrating from the area to the gulf states doubled. and there's some evidence those affected by long—term changes

are less likely to return. this research then reminds us cold political debates about what action we should take will hold very real consequences for millions of people. it's three months since the uk and the eu reset their fractious relationship with the windsor agreement — the framework which designed a new trading rules on goods travelling from gb to northern ireland, and it appears that since then, the relationship has warmed several degrees. one sign is the agreement between the eu and the uk to collaborate on curbing the small boats migration across the channel in a plan to exchange intelligence and expertise, a contract finalised just last week, and now brussels is set to sign up to a deal with the uk to boost co—operation on the regulation of financial services. ahead of a meeting tomorrow with the chancellorjeremy hunt and the governor of the bank of england the eu commissioner for financial services mairead mcguinness is here, and i'll be speaking to her in a moment, but first i'm joined again by nick.

do you sense a do you sense a new era do you sense a new era between the uk and eu?— uk and eu? that relationship has been transformed _ uk and eu? that relationship has been transformed after _ uk and eu? that relationship has been transformed after the i uk and eu? that relationship has - been transformed after the agreement on the windsor framework. the commissioner president talking about my dear rishi and rishi sunak talking warmly about eu leaders. the question is, will that lead to a change in the relationship and can they reach an agreement on the horizon science project? keir starmer was criticised recently for saying he wants to change the nature of that relationship. whoever is prime minister in 2025—26 will have to review the trade and cooperation agreement that governs gb— eu trade. there has to be a review of every five and the question is, does the uk, whoever is prime minister, what a closer relationship, and the european union, does the bargain change, the michel barnier bargain,

which was, if you want a lot of sophistry, you can't have much access. will they show sensibility on that? and now i am joined by mairead mcguinness, european commissioner for financial stability, financial services and the capital markets union. thank you very much. do you sense exactly the same atmosphere that nick is talking about, a woman relationship, partly because there is this idea that, my goodness, where the uk leads, other countries might follow. that hasn't happened. absolutely, i think the eu27 are stronger since brexit and we've had to deal with the pandemic and then the illegal ukraine invasion by russia. the relationship has developed between prime minister and the president of the commission of an ad for a pragmatism and trust to be rebuilt, including the work of my colleague, so we are in a better place in terms of the relationship.

over the years we've had long discussions about what happens