welcome to newsday. i'm katie silver, broadcasting to viewers in the uk and around the world. we begin with the latest in spain, where at least 158 people are now confirmed to have died after the worst flash flooding to hit the country in decades. king felipe held a minute's silence for the victims today, nearly all of whom were from the region of valencia. almost a year's worth of rain fell in just eight hours earlier this week. it caused terrifying scenes, water rushing through the streets, sweeping away bridges and roads. emergency teams continue to search for survivors and the dozens who remain missing. officials warned residents to remain at home with more heavy rain predicted over the next 2a hours. our correspondent andrew harding reports. the flood came and

rearranged valencia. boats on the streets. streets turned into scrapheaps. homes inside out. bridges brushed aside. all this by a flood as fast as a mudslide, packing the punch of a tsunami. for many here, the warnings came much too late. the water came very, very fast and we got so much water coming down, coming out, and we were safely home, watching from the balconies and seeing the cars moving, moving. i said, "we can't do anything". but it wasn't raining. it was all the water coming from inland. that's it. almost inevitably, the true death toll has only now begun to reveal itself, alongside happier stories of the vulnerable hauled to safety.

from this height, you can see the scale of what hit eastern spain and of what nearby regions are still bracing themselves for. the small town of paiporta stood in the floods path. miguel�*s pharmacy swamped. no family here left untouched. everybody has someone who lost someone. i feel worse than yesterday. i couldn't sleep. at the end, it's like a nightmare. a big nightmare. a nightmare for which this prosperous region seemed woefully unprepared. as the rescue work ramps up here, so do the questions. could the authorities have warned people earlier, and more urgently, to move to safer ground? and at a deeper level,

how do we prepare better for what the scientists all agree is the more menacing climate heading our way? meanwhile, supplies of food and water in some areas here are scarce. the internet is limited. we're not going to be able to even start repairing. i can't even contact my work. no—one in this area can contact each other because we have no internet. tonight in towns and suburbs like this, people say they feel abandoned. the darkness masking the damage to a major european city in deep shock. andrew harding, bbc news, valencia. scientist they were climate change may not have explicitly because the heavy rainfall, it is clear it has a role in creating the conditions that led to the disaster. their satellite imagery shows what happened on tuesday with spain experiencing huge storms. the

area around valencia became completely waterlogged resulting in a devastating loss of life. here is matt mcgrath. heavy storms blowing from the mediterranean are a regular occurrence in eastern spain in autumn and winter scientists believe a warming climate is now supercharging these natural events in a number of ways. the mediterranean sea has been exceptionally hot recently, after 30 celsius in some places, all the extra heat has added extra energy, water vapour and instability to these big storms. let's have a look at how those warmer waters of influence the floods. this is an image of the valencia region taken a few weeks ago. compare that to this image taken just after the floods. scientists say the climate driven drought has dried out the soil likely increasing the speed and the breadth of the rain run—off. from europe to the us to asia, many parts of the world have seen extremely heavy storms and

dangerous was this year. scientists say that over the past two decades, our ongoing reliance on fossil fuels has meant the very worst events are more frequent and more lethal. a rapid move away from coal, oil and gas could limit the daily impact of these storms. if we now really get our act together and stop burning fossil fuels, together and stop burning fossilfuels, which together and stop burning fossil fuels, which we can because we have the knowledge and technology to go away quickly from fossil fuels, we will avoid these events from getting even worse in the future. .. ., , future. other factors undoubtedly - future. other factors l undoubtedly influence future. other factors i undoubtedly influence a future. other factors - undoubtedly influence a scale of the destruction in spain. expert seeing some homes have been built on dried up river beds or areas prone to flooding. questions have been asked about the inability of modern infrastructure to cope with extreme downpours. that is because our roads, bridges and histories have been built to deal with last centuries climate, not the one we experience now.

benjamin horton, director of the earth university joined me earlier. scientists are reluctant to pin any one event to climate change but the body of evidence that we see recently from devastating natural hazards becoming humanitarian disasters clearly points to the climate change is the root cause for the increase in intensity and severity of these events. intensity and severity, are they also more difficult to predict? of course in this instance in spain there is a huge amount of criticism that people will not wanted ——were not warned. meteorologists and experts, are they able to predict when something like this will happen with more difficulty? i think unfortunately, climate change has been predicting these events for decades now. we knew that if you increased

the amount of fossil fuel gases in the atmosphere, you would increase our atmospheric and ocean temperatures and that would cause more flooding or more droughts or wildfires or more heat waves. the problem we have is communication. our cities are developed to their extremes of the last century and because of climate change, those preparations or those resilience of the cities doesn't matter anymore. we now need to prepare our cities, provide early warning systems that is ready for the climate of the 21st century. and how would you define the climate of the 21st century, compared to the climates of previous centuries? well, we live in a world where we have not seen carbon dioxide concentrations for several hundred thousand yea rs. we've not seen temperatures on planet earth

for 125,000 years. this event in valencia was caused by extremely warm temperatures in the mediterranean. some five degrees centigrade above average. but it's very, very similar to the events that occurred in florida, where we had very warm waters in the gulf of mexico causing the rapid intensification of the hurricanes milton and helene and its near identical to the very warm waters we had in the middle east which caused the devastating flooding in dubai. the science is very, very clear on this — each city has a university that is studying the impacts of climate change. it is now for policymakers and governments to work with the research scientists that are studying climate change to make sure our cities are safer and more resilient to these climate change hazards. ok, if you were advising the government here, for example, in singapore

orthose in spain, what is perhaps the one or two things that city leaders can do to make the city safer? i think it's quite simply communication. we need to communicate that when a policy official says it has a one in 100 year event, that is based upon data of the last century. they are not one in 100 year events now because of climate change. they are one in a decade or several times in a decade. so it's communication, the lack of misinformation to provide better warning to the people. on the medium term, we need to retrofit our cities and that does not need to be costly. we can use many nature—based solutions. that was benjamin horton speaking to me earlier. as people in south—east asia get richer, people are turning to convenience foods to feed their babies, which are promoted as healthy and key to supporting

growth. but many of them contain sugar. the same products are being sold in mostly western supermarkets have no added sugar. in the philippines, the stakes are high — obesity and diabetes rates are on the rise and experts warn that a new type of malnutrition is emerging. we travelled there to find out more. we interview the companies at the heart of it. jen is a new mum. as a make—up artist, she travels all over the city, taking precious time away from her ten—month—old son. infant cereals make sense for busy working mums like her. translation: ifi need to make something from scratch, - it takes double the amount of time but for the cereal, ijust need to add hot water and prepare the mix. celreac, and instant porridge mix, is a

bestseller by far but some of these foods also contain added sugar. they are widely available, sold on every street corner. this is what filipinos call a saree saree store, a mum and pop store or a convenience store and they sell everything here from canned goods to soft drinks and other daily essentials and it also sells baby food. this one comes in these small packets that parents can just buy one portion but it also makes it more affordable. nestle, which makes cerelac, says there is good reason for adding sugar to its products. nutrient deficiency is widespread in the country. 97% of babies do not meet their daily nutrient requirement. 40% of babies 0—5 sufferfrom iron deficiency anaemia. that means we fortify our products but we

also make sure that... we also have dat which is a brain nutrient, it is fishy, fishy taste, you imagine you have iron and dha, how difficult it is to take the food. look at nestle cerelac today, one bowl of iron—fortified cereal with 20 vitamins and minerals can provide the baby, i will say that categorically, this is one of the healthiest food complementary food you can introduce to your baby. nutritionists say in the philippines many foods catering to a sweet pallet started early. if a mother or a family introduces sweet complimentary solids, then you set the baby up to prefer the attractive, sweet taste of sugar. in starting these babies so young on this level of sugar, it's mind—boggling. the most popularflavour of cerelac in the philippines

has about 17.5 g of total sugars per serving. that's the equivalent of more than four teaspoons of sugar. it can include both naturally occurring and added sugars. laws around labels don't require brands to distinguish between the two, so it is hard to know how much sugar has actually been added. nestle says its range also includes variants of flavours without added sugar. all of our variants with added sugar are all way below the threshold of international and local guidelines. those international guidelines are set by a commission jointly established by the two un agencies who and fhra. the who recommends that these standards be updated with a particular focus on avoiding the addition of sugar and salt in children under three —— fao. another un agency, unicef, points to more

lax regulations in countries like the philippines. for its part, nestle says it is listening to concerns about added sugar. a banana will already come with a no added sugar varient and the next two or three years we will already have eliminated all of the added sugar in our variants. as concerns grow about the health of children, a commitment to eliminate sugar in baby food is a step in the right direction but the journey is likely to be long and complex as parents tried to give their babies the best start in life. you can catch the full document to read the sweet divide on the bbc this weekend and it is also available on iplayer. if you prefer to read we have it on our website as well, featuring an interview with the sister of the current president who sponsors a bill that would

criminalise added sugar in baby food. around the world and across the uk, this is bbc news.

to the us where we are days away from the election. donald trump and kamala harris are appealing to voters in the southwest. the former republican president bradley krasner new mexico, next up will appear in arizona and nevada, both critical states. kamala harris will criss—cross the state as well, stopping in what is known as the sunbelt, both candidates looking to win over latina and hispanic voters. at their rallies at the border states both highlighted theissue border states both highlighted the issue of immigration, a top concern for voters this election. it's hard to have an — voters this election. it's hard to have an american - voters this election. it's hard to have an american dream i voters this election. it's hard - to have an american dream when crazy killers and horrible

murderers — coming through your border — you know how you had? 13,099. border patrol endorses me either way. you know what they say? she is the worst person they have ever seen having anything to do with the water. ., ._ , water. phoenix, with five days left in the _ water. phoenix, with five days left in the campaign, - water. phoenix, with five days left in the campaign, my - left in the campaign, my opponent is also making his closing _ opponent is also making his closing argument to america. you _ closing argument to america. you have _ closing argument to america. you have probably seen a bit of it, you have probably seen a bit of it. it _ you have probably seen a bit of it. it is — you have probably seen a bit of it. it is an— you have probably seen a bit of it, it is an argument full of hate — it, it is an argument full of hate and _ it, it is an argument full of hate and division. he insults latina. — hate and division. he insults latina, scapegoat immigrants, and it— latina, scapegoat immigrants, and it is— latina, scapegoat immigrants, and it is notjust what he says. _ and it is notjust what he says. it _ and it is notjust what he says. it is _ and it is notjust what he says, it is what he will do. if elected. _ says, it is what he will do. if elected, you can be sure he wiii— elected, you can be sure he will bring _ elected, you can be sure he will bring back family separation policy. only on a much — separation policy. only on a much greater scale than last time~ — much greater scale than last time~ it_ much greater scale than last time~ it is— much greater scale than last time. it is time then to turn the — time. it is time then to turn the page _ time. it is time then to turn the page on donald trump. over

60 million _ the page on donald trump. over 60 million people _ the page on donald trump. over 60 million people have - the page on donald trump. or 60 million people have already voted according to the university of florida. it is far more than the early voter turnout record set in 2020. inessential swing states, the remains extremely tight. let's zero win on this they could the election. the trend has shifted slightly in front�*s favour. neither candidate can bank on victory in any of these states. they are within the margin of error, meaning it could not be tighter. could less than 1% of american voters decide who wins the election? now, that may sound odd, but look at 2020. in georgia, arizona and wisconsin, biden got only several thousand more votes than trump, which is not unusual — these are what we call swing states, where a candidate can win by a relatively small number of votes. and there were quite a few of them that could be won by republicans or democrats. they are pennsylvania, wisconsin, michigan, north carolina, georgia, arizona and nevada. unlike most other states which tend to vote for the same party at every election. this matters because relatively few voters in these states

could make the difference between winning or losing the entire state, and that could decide the presidential election. that means the candidates are concentrating on a relatively small number of voters in crucial swing states that could go either way. the us election will be closely watched globally given how i could impact on us foreign policy. donald trump and kamala harris have different views on how countries and leaders should interact across areas of the military, global economy entrainment change, though perhaps more agreement when it comes to china. the more we are joined by international relations professor wesley of the australian national university. thank you for joining me. let's start with the middle east. and when we speak with is that both iran and tel aviv are waiting to see who comes into office before deciding the next steps. how might donald trump, harris look different when it comes to the

policy? different when it comes to the oli ? �* ., ., policy? between the two of them there is not _ policy? between the two of them there is not much _ policy? between the two of them there is not much space - policy? between the two of them there is not much space with - there is not much space with respect to us support for israel. that support has hardened over the last three decades. to the extent that the us has a role to play as a neutral arbiter respected by both sides, that is probably a bad thing for the peace process. kamala harris would perish a bit harder for a ceasefire then trump but neither one was support an arms embargo on israel. the substance of foreign policy would remain the same in terms of supporting israel on each side of the ticket.— of supporting israel on each side of the ticket. turning to china, it _ side of the ticket. turning to china, it seems _ side of the ticket. turning to china, it seems to _ side of the ticket. turning to china, it seems to be - side of the ticket. turning to china, it seems to be a - side of the ticket. turning to i china, it seems to be a country where both sides hold similar views, basically that china is a significant rival that is to be contained. you agree or do you see new ones in the way they approach the policy? to they approach the policy? trr the extent that trump is sometimes called an

isolationist, it is an oversimplification. it comes out of his background as a realtor, interesting in accumulating concentration of market power, he sees america's foreign policy as carving out spheres of influence with other great powers, carving up the global market of influence between — franklin roosevelt tried to do it as well. setting up tried to do it as well. setting up policemen, it was going to be china, russia, the us in the uk watching over the rest of the world. while trump is wary of china and sees another adversarial, to the extent that china please buy general rules on his own backyard, trump is willing to tolerate that. kamala harris is more in tune with the postwar foreign policy consensus on balancing power, preventing the emergence of any regional challenges to the united states, and supporting the notion of a rules—based international order. seeing cooperation between countries on issues like climate change,

economic lesion, fighting the financial crisis, something the us cannot do on its own that requires cooperation between states. china is a complicated challenge for the us and in some ways a developing country in other ways the leading competitor on quantum computing. in short, harris is adhering to the foreign policy, the us foreign tradition whereas trump is much more of a spheres of influence foreign policy maker who sees the us as capable of coexisting with other regional head demands. i other regional head demands. i could ask you about everything for days but thank you for the insights. let's get you some updates on the middle east. us secretary of state antony blinken says negotiators have made "good progress" towards a truce in lebanon. two of presidentjoe biden�*s

top advisers on the middle east are now heading back to the us after spending thursday in tel aviv to work with israeli officials on a ceasefire deal with hezbollah. the israeli prime minister said the israel