and prince harry's legal battle against british tabloids for allegedly unlawfully intruding into his life goes to trial. in breaking news, prime minister sir keir starmer has announced a public inquiry into what he called the "senseless, barbaric" murders of three schoolgirls at a taylor swift—themed dance class, in southport last summer. on monday, 18—year—old axel rudakubana pleaded guilty to stabbing the girls. in the wake of his plea, it emerged he'd had "contact with a range of different state agencies throughout his teenage years" including the police, social services and mental health services. in an address from downing street, sir keir said the public inquiry into the killings would seek to answer "difficult questions".

the responsibility for this barbaric act lies, as it always does, with the vile individual who carried it out. but that is no comfort. and more importantly, it is no excuse. and so, as part of the inquiry launched by the home secretary yesterday, i will not let any institution of the state deflect from their failure. failure which, in this case, frankly leaps off the page. for example, the perpetrator was referred to the prevent programme on three separate occasions — in 2019 once and in 2021 twice. yet on each of these occasions, a judgment was made that he did not meet the threshold for intervention,

a judgment that was clearly wrong and which failed those families. and i acknowledge that here today. throughout this case to this point, we have only been focused on justice. if this trial had collapsed because i or anyone else had revealed crucial details while the police were investigating, while the case was being built, while we were awaiting a verdict, then the vile individual who committed these crimes would have walked away a free man, the prospect ofjustice destroyed for the victims and their families. i would never do that, and nobody would ever forgive me if i had.

that is why the law of this country forbade me or anyone else from disclosing details sooner. nonetheless, it is now time for those questions. and the first of those is whether this was a terrorist attack. the blunt truth here is that this case is a sign britain now faces a new threat. terrorism has changed. in the past, the predominant threat was highly organised groups with clear political intent. groups like al-qaeda. that threat, of course, remains. but now, alongside that, we also see acts of extreme violence perpetrated by loners, misfits, young men in their bedroom accessing all manner of material online,

desperate for notoriety, sometimes inspired by traditional terrorist groups, but fixated on that extreme violence, seemingly for its own sake. now, it may well be that people like this are harder to spot, but we can't shrug our shoulders and accept that. we can't have a national security system that fails to tackle people who are a danger to our values, our security, our children. our chief political correspondent, henry zeffman was listening to the prime minister's speech. what the prime minister said was pretty significant. i think this was one of the big moments of his six or so months in downing street so far because he started with addressing the horrific, brutal, he called them, murders committed by axel rudakubana to which he pleaded

guilty in liverpool yesterday, but then he broadened it out much more. he talked about the changing nature of terrorism. he said that where once you might have terrorist activities committed by people with a clear allegiance to a terrorist group, like al-qaeda, he said now you have loners, misfits, young men in their bedrooms. he questioned whether the legal architecture of our state has kept pace with that. he announced that lord anderson kc, who has previously an independent adviser to the government on terrorist legislation, is going to look at the prevent counterterrorism system which, as we now know, failed to pick up axel rudakubana after he was referred. then he talked much more broadly about the changing nature of society, about how too many people have fallen

into parallel lives. he talked about rights and obligations which people might previously have owed to each other fraying. a this was the prime minister promising, not only that he will deal with the specific things that have come out in this case, in this trial, but more broadly talking about how he wanted to use those to address what he sees as failings in british society. let's speak to lord carlile, the former independent reviewer of terrorism legislation. welcome to bbc news. you have been quite a vocal supporter of the prevent programme and it has been shown as the prime minister said today to have failed dramatically when it comes to this case of axel rudakubana. what are your thoughts on that today? i think our thoughts on that today? i think your summary _ thoughts on that today? i think your summary is _ thoughts on that today? i think your summary is possibly - thoughts on that today? i think your summary is possibly not l your summary is possibly not accurate. the prevent programme has been reviewed twice, once by me in 2011 and once by sir william shawcross very

recently. sir william came up with some useful suggestions to improve the performance of prevent and i hope those will be put into effect with this case. we do not know until the inquiry sits and we hear evidence as to whether prevent failed. . ., . ~ evidence as to whether prevent failed. . . . ~ ., failed. can i read back what the prime _ failed. can i read back what the prime minister - failed. can i read back what the prime minister said - failed. can i read back whatj the prime minister said this morning. he said the perpetrator had been referred to the prevent programme on three separate occasions, yet on each of these occasions a judgment was made that he did not meet the threshold for intervention, judgment the prime minister, not me, said was clearly wrong and which failed those families. that is a failure, coming from the prime minister's mao. —— mouth. the inquiry will have to decide how much of a failure it was. 0ne how much of a failure it was. one of the reasons he might not have been admitted to the prevent programme is the people who decide on admission decided he was unsuitable to go on that programme because it requires cooperation and consent and

looking at what we know of this perpetrator, it seems pretty likely he was not prepared to cooperate and consent. my concern is particularly what happened before he was referred to prevent and what happened when he was not accepted for prevent. what level of cooperation was there between education as he was removed from four schools including two pupil referral units between education, those who may have treated ill health, housing and all of those who had connection with him, it is my view that the reference to prevent was probably worth doing but he probably worth doing but he probably didn't meet the criteria. ., . . , probably didn't meet the criteria. . . . , ., probably didn't meet the criteria. , ., criteria. , accepting what you said 'ust criteria. , accepting what you said just there _ criteria. , accepting what you said just there and _ criteria. , accepting what you said just there and your - said just there and your viewpoint, we've spoken to others who have suggested that the way terrorism is viewed now

in the context of this programme perhaps needs to be reassessed. so what is your take on that.— take on that. there is no difference _ take on that. there is no difference between - take on that. there is no difference between me l take on that. there is no i difference between me and brendan cox on that and i agree entirely with the important point made by the prime minister that the nature of terrorism has changed over the last 20 odd years and when i became the independent reviewer of terrorism in 2001 we were dealing with al-qaeda and so—called islamic state shortly after but now we are dealing with a completely different situation in which people are being radicalised often, as the prime minister described, lonely young men in their bedrooms by online sources and there is insufficient control of the online sources. and heavy responsibility lies on the companies that own loan —— that own those online sources which are not prepared at the moment, to moderate, as the

term is used, tojudge the content on their websites and remove it when it incites or comes near to inciting terrorism and other extreme forms of activity. 50 terrorism and other extreme forms of activity.— forms of activity. so clearly from what _ forms of activity. so clearly from what you _ forms of activity. so clearly from what you are - forms of activity. so clearly from what you are saying . forms of activity. so clearly - from what you are saying there is a burden on the social media companies to do more and that's a conversation that a lot of people have been having for some time but what about the government. what questions do you think need to be answered in this public inquiry? the questions _ in this public inquiry? the questions need _ in this public inquiry? the questions need to - in this public inquiry? tie: questions need to be answered by an inquiry. it has been asserted that the government should have given information about ricin, and i think that is completely wrong and i agree with the prime minister. the one piece of information that was not given should have been given by the operational police at the beginning of the inquiry to inform the public that it was not an immigrant. it was a lie, the disinformation that he was an immigrant that was a major contributory factor to

the riots that took place in southport and elsewhere, so as far as the other matters, ricin, the material on his computer are concerned, those are important issues that go to his bad character, to his propensity to look at terrorism, but that has to be decided by the trialjudge. the rules are absolutely clear, the prime minister was right on this, the trialjudge who would have tried the perpetrator had he pleaded not guilty, a very experienced criminaljudge would have had to adjudicate on each of those issues as to whether it would be admitted in evidence before the jury and the prime minister was emphasising the point i would put in this way, that we don't have two standards ofjustice, one for what might call ordinary criminals and another for what my call violent criminals. we have the same standard ofjustice with the same rules of admissibility and it will remain thus.—

it will remain thus. thank you very much — it will remain thus. thank you very much for— it will remain thus. thank you very much for sharing - it will remain thus. thank you very much for sharing your. very much for sharing your thoughts on this developing story. thoughts on this developing sto . ., ~ thoughts on this developing sto . ., ,, , ., thoughts on this developing story-_ this - thoughts on this developing story._ this is - thoughts on this developing l story._ this is bbc story. thank you. this is bbc news.

marketer donald trump has started his second presidency his second presidency by signing a series of sweeping executive orders. sitting behind his desk in the oval office, mr trump declared a national emergency on the us—mexico border, designated drug cartels as terrorist organisations, and withdrew the us from the world health organisation. mr trump has also pardoned more than 15 hundred of his supporters who stormed the us capitol four years ago, when they tried to overturn his 2020 election defeat. the senior democrat, nancy pelosi, has called the decision "shameful". one of the riot�*s organisers was among the first to leave prison. stewart rhodes was serving an 18—year prison sentence after being convicted of seditious conspiracy. last month, thejudge

who presided over rhodes' trial said it would be �*frightening' if rhodes and other members of his 0ath keepers group were pardoned and released. nomia iqbal reports on donald trump's return to power. president trump is back to business, and always in front of a crowd. the first item that president trump is signing is the rescission of 78 biden—era executive actions. cheering. he signed executive orders rolling back biden—era policies, including pulling out of the paris climate change deal and the world health organization. could you imagine biden doing this? i don't think so. laughter. it's been a long road back to power for donald trump. he's overcome two impeachment trials, several criminal indictments and an assassination attempt. it seems only a hat can hold him back. he described his win as a divine intervention.

just a few months ago, in a beautiful pennsylvania field, an assassin�*s bullet ripped through my ear. but i felt then — and believe even more so now — that my life was saved for a reason. i was saved by god to make america great again. cheering and applause. as well as god, it seems he has the world's richest men by his side. the so—called tech bros were guests at his inauguration. 0ne even went viral. but to some on his own social media site, x, elon musk was accused of throwing a nazi salute. my heart goes out to you. four years after he was evicted from the white house, donald trump is back inside. he has long portrayed america as a country with huge problems only he can solve. but now is the time for him to prove it. approximately 1,500 for a pardon. and he's making

a big show of it. full pardon. he's pardoned nearly all the pro—trump rioters who stormed the capitol four years ago... full pardon. ..including those convicted of trying to overthrow the us government. it's a reminder of how radical donald trump's presidency is likely to be once again. nomia iqbal, bbc news, washington. what can we expect in the relationship between donald trump and the eu this time around? here's our correspondent in brussels, nick brussels. i think a lot of european politicians, mainstream politicians, are concerned about a number of areas. the economy, first of all, president trump said yesterday he was complaining that the europeans don't buy enough american cars, that they don't buy enough american farm products. and he says he's going to straighten this out by imposing tariffs, which we've heard a lot about, or by getting the europeans to buy more american oil and gas. so those are the levers that president trump suggests he'll be using. i think there's also concern among a lot of politicians about what happens with security in ukraine.

president trump vowing to end the ukraine russia war within a day. his team are now talking about doing that in a matter of months. so there is concern, i think, that possibly the american relationship with nato may diminish because president trump has linked this to the the europeans, as he sees it, not paying their way, not contributing enough money to defence. so i think there are lots of different aspects about this relationship that is concerning a lot of people. but president macron, for one, saying, actually, this is an opportunity for europe to stand on its own two feet. 0ne things for sure, it's not going to be straightforward the next four years. mr trump was very vocal during the election campaign about the war in ukraine, saying he could end it within 2a hours. 0ur correspondent sarah rainsford has more from kyiv.

think, you know, we're basically in a waiting game here. lots of big words, big promises about ending the war here in ukraine by donald trump when he was on the campaign trail. but of course, that 2a hour clock started ticking already. and and clearly, you know, ending this war in a day is not going to happen. i think there's a lot more realism now in the white house now that donald trump has returned to office. and it was interesting, i think, for people here in ukraine to notice that, in fact, in his speech, his big inauguration speech, he in fact made no direct reference to this country at all. he simply talked about america being a peacemaker, and he pledged to end all wars, which presumably includes the one here in ukraine. although, as i say, absolutely no direct reference to ukraine. i think it's interesting looking at how the ukrainian leadership is responding. i think president zelenskyy is trying to look to the positive, trying to be optimistic, to be hopeful, trying a little bit to flatter donald trump, talking about him as a decisive and as a strong leader, and talking about his inauguration as a moment of hope and opportunity for the world, but also for ukraine. but i think really for ukraine,

the biggest hope is that donald trump will realise that ending this war quickly isn't going to happen. and as far as kiev�*s concerned, that it can't end in ukraine's capitulation. there is great nervousness about discussions that are due to begin in two weeks' time on the next stage of the deal. us president donald trump says he is "not confident" that the gaza ceasefire deal will be upheld. here's our middle east correspondent yolande knell, injerusalem. president trump didn't really allay those fears when he was asked by reporters in the oval office if he thought that all three phases of this ceasefire and hostage release deal that he has been taking credit for would be implemented. he said to reporters, "it is not our war, it is their war, i am not confident." but at the same time we have been hearing from his new special envoy to the middle east, steve witcoff, who was also very much involved in those indirect negotiations between israel and hamas, and he was indicating his

ongoing commitment to this deal being implemented, outlining what he says was president trump's bold vision for the middle east and seeking to ultimately build new relations between israel and other arab countries. dangling out there the possibility that there could be a normalisation between israel and saudi arabia down the road. coming up at 1600, we'll bejoined by experts and correspondents to discuss what to expect from donald trump's second term and answer your questions live. so get in touch using the hashtag #bbcyourquestions — or email yourquestions@bbc.co.uk. prince harry's legal battle against the publishers of the british tabloid newspaper, the sun, goes to trial today. the duke of sussex is one of two people, along with former labour deputy

leader, lord tom watson, suing news group newspapers. prince harry alleges they intruded into into his private life, in an unlawful way. this is their hearing court in london where it will begin. 0ur correspondent helena wilkinson is following developments from the high court in central london. i think we can expect a bitter battle over the next eight weeks. the first day of the trial, prince harry, as you say, is suing the publisher of the sun newspaper and the long—closed news of the world. we're expecting the hearing to get underway in about ten minutes or so. and we've just seen david sherborne, prince harry's barrister, arrive at court, walk through the doors. prince harry is not going to be here today. he doesn't have to be, but we will expect to see him because he is expected to give evidence at his trial. with me now to discuss what we can expect a bit more is our media correspondent, david sillito.

and david, what's this all about? this is a fascinating trial. prince harry, in a recent interview at a new york times event, was asked, "what is this? "why are you going to this trial?" and he said, one word accountability. there have been 1300 people over the last 15 years or so who have brought claims against news group newspapers saying that they were hacked. all of those claims, bartwo, have been settled out of court. there have been 14 trials that have begun but have never reached this point so far. because each time newsgroup newspapers has made a settlement with them. and the question is, why do you accept a settlement? the reason is, if you go to trial afterwards and the compensation that is offered, maybe in the the trial, is less than you were offered before.

you have to pay the legal fees. so it's a massive, massive gamble. and everyone so far has realised they've been advised. hugh grant recently was bringing a case and realised at the last minute, well, there was no way financially even he could take that risk. so we're now down to the last two out of 1300. we have prince harry and we have lord watson, former labour minister. and essentially this is about having the day in court where they can question the bosses of newsgroup newspapers, and what they want is a bit of light shone on what was going on inside this organisation. very briefly, david, a lot of people will see this as prince harry taking on rupert murdoch, who owns the newspapers he is suing. very much so. there has been — and it is no

secret — a long animus between prince harry and the media over many years. and for him, he has said this many times, that this is about, essentially revealing what he believes was widespread wrongdoing inside newsgroup, which they have denied all along. they have admitted that there was a problem with the news of the world. it was closed down in 2011. they have said there was nothing wrong with what was happening in the sun. so this has always been the issue about this allegation of widespread wrongdoing and a cover up, which is what they believe will be revealed and what they hope will come out of this trial, all of which has been strongly denied by newsgroup newspapers. all right, david, thank you very much indeed. the hearing, as i say, gets underway at 10:30 this morning. it will be fascinating. the top story, so keir starmer has announced an inquiry into the southport stabbings. we have had some reaction there with the conservatives welcoming the inquiry and the lib dems also welcoming it

saying it must not shy away from asking tough questions about what went wrong. we have more information on that on the live page we are running today on the bbc news website. more through the day, so stay with a c on bbc news. hello again. the weather for the next couple of days is very similar to what we had yesterday, but it is going to change towards the end of the week. today we've got a weather front across the north—west of the country enhancing the showers here. we've got another weather front draped across the central swathe of the country, which is producing all this cloud and outbreaks of rain. to the south of that we could see one or two brighter breaks, but there will be a fair bit of cloud around. the sunniest skies today in northern ireland and scotland and later in northern england, but even so, there will be a peppering of showers across the north and the west, with top temperatures eight or nine. through this evening and overnight our weather front moves a little bit further south.

we import more cloud and some showery outbreaks of rain from the south, but as we push further north, with light winds and clear skies here, we could see some mist and fog patches forming and it's going to be a cold night with a touch of frost here and there. tomorrow, we do have a weather front very close to the south—east. that will be moving away as we go through the course of the day. this cloud and the showery outbreaks of rain will continue to drift south—eastwards, but we will still be left with a fair bit of cloud in the south—eastern quadrant of the country, whereas move north and west of that we are into brighter skies, some sunshine and just a peppering of showers in the north and the west. temperatures five to about eight degrees. then on thursday, after a dry start, a weather front coming in from the west will introduce some rain pushing west to east. there will be some transient snow on the hills of northern ireland, also northern england and scotland. the wind is going to pick up in the west and the south through the course of the day. then things change. we've got this potent area

of low pressure coming our way drifting north—eastwards. look at the isobars. we are looking at widespread gales. the position of this low pressure could still change — it could be a bit further north, it could be a bit further south — but what we think at the moment is it's going to take all this rain, preceded by some heavy hill snow in the north of the country. we will have widespread gales and as it moves away things will dry up. temperature—wise we're looking at tens and elevens, but as it moves through the temperature will actually drop through the course of the day. beyond that, it remains unsettled with the potential for another low pressure at the end of the weekend.

the us considers steep tariffs on mexico and canada as soon as february, as donald trump signs a raft of executive orders. britain considers building new airport capacity, including new runways at heathrow and gatwick, but how long will it take? as events in davos get under way, a special appearance by david beckham, who tells the bbc what it means to mix with the world's top bosses. there are very powerful people here that can make change — leaders in business, leaders in economics, leaders in life.

global trade is very much on the agenda at the world economic forum in davos this week as donald trump settles into the oval office in washington. speaking in davos, the european commission president, ursula von der leyen, said europe has entered a new era of harsh geostrategic competition, with president trump playing a protectionist game. last night, the president suggested 25% tariffs on the united states' neighbours canada and mexico. he also confirmed the us will pull out of the global paris climate agreement. ms von der leyen criticised the move. the criticised the move. paris agreement continues to the paris agreement continues to be the best for all humanity. so europe will stay the course and keep working with all nations that want to protect nature and stop global warming. let's hear now from trade expert allie renison. she is associate director at sec newgate and formerly a government special adviser and head of eu and trade policy

at the institute of directors.