♪ ♪ narrator: funding for this presentation of this program is provided by... woman: architect. bee keeper. mentor. a raymond james financial advisor tailors advice to help you live your life. life well planned. george: actually, you don't need vision to do most things in life. it's exciting to be part of a team driving the technology forward. i think that's the most rewarding thing. people who know, know bdo.

narrator: funding was also provided by, the freeman foundation. by judy and peter blum kovler foundation; pursuing solutions for america's neglected needs. and by contributions to this pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. announcer: and now, "bbc news". >> hello. . this is the context. >> a 98% chance that one year in the next five will be the hottest recorded. >> the estimation is that arctic temperatures will be three times the global average. >> we are heading into unprecedented territory to, temperatures we have not experienced before, and the

impacts will be equally unprecedented. >> good evening. are we acting with enough urgency to tackle the climate crisis? the you and confirmed what we have known. there's no credible pathway to maintaining the average temperature rise to 1.5 celsius. it is 66 more likely -- 66 percent more likely we will be there within five years. a new renter's charter that would outlaw a no-fault evictions. car manufacturers sounded the alarm. thousands of jobs could be lost unless the brexit trade deal is altered. and the titanic like you have never seen it before. what new secrets will be's latest images reveal?

first, the problems facing our planet. there's one number heard more than any other when united nations talks climate change, 1.5 degrees celsius. scientists believe if we n keep warming at that level we can stave off the extreme weather patterns that will result. since 2020, the world meteorological organization has given an estimate the world breaks that threshold in any one year. three years ago, they said it was 20% likely in the five years ahead. last year, that increased to 50%. now it is 66%. there's a 98% chance the warmest year on record will come before 2027. over that same period, the arctic will probably be eating three times fasterhan the global average. >> the most dramatic changes we expect to happen in the arctic, where we have already seen more than double the global warming taking place and in the coming

five years the estimation is that arctic temperatures would be three times the global average, so we will see more dramatic impacts there. >> joining me to discuss from dehli is the head of global political strategy at the climate action network and climate policy expert, thomas, former expert for the united nations framework convention on climate change. thomas, can i start with you. why is the percentage chance of 1.5 increasing from 20% to 66% in just three years? >> well, put simply, we just have not been reducing emissions. there was a dip during covid but that's come back up. over time, potential consequences turn to real consequences.

unless we are able to dramatically reduce emissions and invest in natural ecosystems that can balance this, the risk will continue to get bigger, so it's noturprising the risk is getting greater. what is concerning is it's happening so quickly. we knew we were on track to breach the 1.5 threshold unless we did sething drastic in the 2030's. we are now told he could happen in the next five years. >> if we passed that threshold in the next few years, is it still possible to bring it back down, or is that tipping point the point of no return >> scientists have clearly said that it is a temporary rise in temperatures and they can bring it back. as thomas said, we will have to dramatically cut emissions, and options are available. recent report said we have choices to make and if you make the right choices, invest more,

move away from fossil fuel extraction, it is possible. it is all about political will. >> what would a 1.5 degrees celsius rise mean for a country like india? >> we are already in the middle of a heat wave. last month, the temperatures in many parts of india went up to 45 degrees celsius, which was unprecedented. we are already seeing massive impacts in terms of floods and storms, drought, wildfires and rising seas. i was discussing the grim situation in an area facing high levels of c rise. we are seeing devastation not only in india but around the world and with temperatures rising more, it means a lot more death and destruction. communities are going to face massive issues around health, food, water, energy and shelter.

we will see many people losing their homes and livelihood ally displacement is already on the rise and people are being forced to migrate. we will see that phenomenon really getting worse and people being forced out of their homes to earn a living. >> there's no doubt that when people talk about the energy transition that is inextricably linked with the climate crisis, which is linked to food security, all these arguments are tied together by government, but do you see enough urgency in the debate? >> absolutely not. what you heard from him is a terrible litany of issues that will be faced by, let's , people who have done the least to cause this issue. mbermerethere's a shocking lackf political will around the world and a shocking lack of urgency. what we are seeing, which is interesting, is the emergence of potential moments of transformation. we are seeing that in a negative way on the climate system and

also seeing it in a positive way as it relates to our response. you invest for long enough in electric vehicles and the cost drops, they become cheaper, and you see a rapid uptake. that could happen for renewable energy. it happens for heat pumps and insulation. we are seeing rising costs of conventional energy and dropping cost for renewable. the best we can hope for is that these rnings we are hearing that are so stark, 1.5 and more in terms of warming, along with the investments we've been making for decades, will actually lead to a rapidly accelerating curve of solutions so we n stop this. >> what we are looking at is trends over time, but increasingly, and with some regularity now, we are seeing extreme weather events all around the world. can we talk about the one we are expecting this summer, which is the el niño effect? what sort of effect will that have on global temperatures?

>> what scientists have predicted, that in the next couple of months, and mostly in 2024, that will push the temperature to 1.5 degrees in the next few years. that means we will see more devastating floods, drought, and the ecosystem becoming more erratic. the last few years, the temperature was actually kept low because of the love nina phenomenon -- the la nina phenomenon, but now it will go up, and the world is not ready to go at that. we knew that these impacts were going to happen. we have known about it for decades but we did not prepare for it. we did not tackle the root cause, which is fossil fuels, but also did not pre people around the world to deal with climate impacts, which means

retrofitting homes and having robust early warning systems, building die takes, and now to -- building dams, and now we don't have the resources to deal with disasters. so on one hand we have problem. we also have to invest in preparing people for disasters and people already facing climate crises daily to be supported to recover from these impacts and we are failing on all three counts. >> indeed. the report card is not strong. thank you very much, both of you, for your tughts. if we were any doubt about what we are storing up, we only need to look towards italy, one of the nations that's suffered the most from extreme weather events in europe in recent years. chronic droughts in the north last summer. now severe.flooding

. at least five people have been killed in northern italy. hundreds rescued. there are currently 50,000 people without electricity. they hav had to cancel this week in's grand prix to focus on the rescue efforts. this is bull -- is balogna. terrible scenes across northern italy. a story that's been making global headlines. prince harry says he and his wife were involved in a car chase tuesday evening after an awards ceremony in new york. there's a lot we don't know about this. our reporter has been trying to piece together what we know and he's in the newsroom with more. >> the facts surrounding the incident are still unclear but we know that around six new york time, harry, megan and her mother were seen arriving at the award ceremony.

at 7 p.m. it began. at 10 p.m., they were leaving. they got into a black suv, which left the ballroom in manhattan and headed off. they were later seen in a yellow taxi but what we do not know is what happened between them getting into the suv and being photographed in the taxi. we became aware of this just after 3 p.m. u.k. time in the newsroom. we were alerted to this statement by the duke and duchess of sussex. they talk about an aggressive car chase which had near catastrophic consequences at the hands of the paparazzi. they said this lasted over two hours. the mayor of new york, eric adams, had this to say. >> i find it hard to believe that there was a two hour high-speed chase. that would be -- i find it hard to believe but we will find out the duration of. but if it's 10 minutes, a 10 minute chase is extremely

dangerous in the new york city. we have a lot of traffic, movement. a lot of people are using our streets. an type of high-speed chase that involves something of that nature is inappropriate, you know? police do it under limited circumstances, when they are going after violent people, but to do it because you want to get the right shot can turn out to be a place where people can be harmed. >> shortly after that statement from the mayor of new york, the nypd released this one and said they assisted the private security team protecting the duke and duchess of sussex and numerous photographers made their journey challenging. but they say the duke and duchess arrived at their destination and there were no reported collisions, injuries or arrests in this regard. later on, the washington post released an article in which they say they have an interview

with the driver of the taxi, who says it was not a car chase meanwhile, cnn have an interview with the security detail of hair he and meghan -- of harry and meghan, who s the chase could have been fatal. there are blanks that still need filling out. we areot sure what happened, especially in between them getting in the suv and being photographed in the taxi. >> let's bring in our royal correspondent. there are conflicting reports as to what happened. could you put this into some context for us? >> yes. it's a matter of perception, isn't it? we seem to have been here before with the sussexes. clearly something happened, something worrying, something which, had you been at the center of it, would have been alarming, but whether it

justified this vivid, dramatic, hyperbolic, rather breathless statement issued by the sussexes' spokesperson some hours ago, talking about a near-catastrophic car chase, a relentless pursuit by a ring of paparazzi that lasted more than two hours, it reads like a tabloid story. you have to wonder who wrote it. and has it left the sussexes looking sensible? i question that, really, as it appears to not be substantiated by the my pd, by the mayor of new york -- the nypd, the mayor of new york, and according to cbs, two line -- two law enforcement sources have told them no one was in danger during the pursuit. the paparazzi were following harry and meghan for about an hour, less than half the time they are claiming.

they took refuge in the nypd station in the 19th precinct and were able to switch vehicles to get away, so that is part of the conflicting perception about this event. i think we just must await further details, but the way in which the sussex spokesperson has pitched this is looking increasingly questionable, though i stress something clearly did happen, which must have been frightening had you been at the center of it. in a situation such as that, it comes down to how experienced is your driver, how good is the protection team around you. i was struck by something said a few hours ago by a former scotland yard detective, ken wharf, who was bodyguard to harry and took princess diana. he said the last thing you do is to start a chase and try to lose them because the chances are you will not succeed. your driver puts his foot down and tries to get away, it

simply will not work. when you have got to do, the inspector says, you have to find a way to calm the situation and that does not appear to have happened. that's an important detail. thank you very much for that. we are getting some reporting from the man who was driving the yellow taxi. it appears they got out of the suv, which the client into after the awards, and theswitched to a yellow cab. the driver spoke to our partners, cbs. have a listen. >> i was on 67th street and the security guard held me -- guard hailed me and they got in my cab and we were blocked by a garbage truck and the paparazzi came and started taking pictures. they told me to circle back to the precinct, so we circled back to the precinct and that is where i dropped them off. >> bureau member where you picked them up? >> 67th street by the 19th

precinct. >> how are they looking? >> they looked nervous. i think they were being chased the whole day or something. they were pretty nervous. the security guard, he was on it. >> let's try to get an understanding of how the paparazzi worked in new york. we are speaking to a senior fellow at the manhattan institute and columnist for bloomberg. he spent some time with the new york paparazzi. when i look at the pictures that have come in this afternoon, there are a lot of paparazzi. there's a lot of flashbulbs going off, huge interest. what do you make of what nick has told us about the varying accounts we have? >> i really do not know. there's a lot of details, you know, that still need to be filled in, and it doesn't seem like it was a scary situation at the very least, but in some wa, i found it surprising, because chases like this have become a lot more unusual. you don't hear about them so

much anymore just because, i mean, the economic benefits of the paparazzi getting a shot of them is not what used to be. so while used to hear about these things all the time in 2008 or before, they are becoming increasingly rare just because the economics of the industry have changed. >> do you think it is a new york thing? obviously they come from california, where there's an awful lot of celebrities, a celebrity culture. was the interest tightened because they were in new york? >> for sure. i think was changed in the industry is not unique to york. it is unique to the entire american media ecosystem, where before they might have been 10,000 pounds. but now that most of this stuff is online, they are working on a different royalty structure. if you are not getting an exclusive photo, you might be expecting to get eight to 20

pounds for that shot, so it would not be worth putting your life or the lives of pedestrians in danger. >> the questions i'm left with is what are the nypd doing? there were two officers there so we need to hear their account. the second is, which refers to what nick was saying about the way you deal with this if you are a royal driver or security, is why did they switch? if they felt they were in danger, why did they switch from an suv to a new york cab, a yellow cab, a car that -- the driver would have no skills to evade paparazzi? it doesn't seem a safe thing to do. >> yeah. that seems curious, especially as they don't have the same level of security, the training. new york taxi drivers are very well trained in traffic, they are not trained to evade paparazzi or to -- any security threat. so that seems like an odd

choice, especially because in a taxi you could not accommodate your security detail, but i guess they were desperate to throw them off the trail. >> thank you very much indeed. around the world and across the u.k., this is bbc news. let's take a look at the other stories making headlines today. a bbc investigation has found a lack of significant progress toward boris johnson's high-profile election pledge of building 40 new hospitals in england by 2030. more than three quarters of the trusts involved said they didn't have clarity over fundi and had not begun building. it is suggested ministers underestimated how long these projects would take. the hearing into the metropolitan police's treatment of protesters on coronation day was briefly interrupted by just stopped oil activists. the committee hearing was paused about 25 minutes into proceedings. a spokespson said removing the protesters from the committee room was a continuation of the silencing of legitimate dissent that we saw at the coronation.

the chancellor jeremy hunt has said the default locatio for workers should be in the office unless there's a good reason to work from home. the latest statistics show around one forhe people work from the office and remotely while less than% of workers were based at home permanently. you are live with bbc news. the government has table draft legislation today to ban landlords in england from evicting tenants without justification. the proposed overhaul of the private rental sector would also make it illegal for a landlord to refuse tendencies -- refused tenancies to families with children. the private sector accounts for one in five households. the government says these reforms will benefit tenants, giving them more security, but labour says it is not clear they will address the problem of increasing prices in what it

describes as the wild west rental market. we are joined by the spokesperson for the london renters union. thank you for being with us. the principal change is that advanced section 21 evictions, no-fault evictions. what impact will that have on the market? >> we have been campaigning for this change for the last five years. we know that it's not -- that it is landlords that have the power to evict us for no reason and we know landlords use that power routinely to evict tenants when they complain about issues with their home. so this is a massive victory for the grassroots housing movement, which has been campaigning for this for many years, but are also worried because it looks like the government is trying to sneak in me loopholes. in the last six months or so, we had members of the london renters union with 6000 pound

rent increases. there's nothing in the bill today tt will stop landlords from being able to use these huge rent increases to force tenants out of their homes. there's a real risk that the government will break its promise to end no-fault evictions unless tenants are protected from unfair rent hikes that can be used to force us out of our homes. >> one of the concerns -- i take your point about commercial landlords who have pushed up rents extortionate lead -- extortionatly, but there are private landlords who say getting rid of section 21 will make it haer to evict tenants, and therefore they might not think about renting their properties. are you at all worried that maybe one of the impacts of this is that there's an even more acute shortage of property? >> we absolutely need a huge social housing program in this country.

decades of government policy has been designed to make being a landlord as profitable as possible and being a landlord is still going to be a very profitable thing to do if that fi with your ethics. i think when landlords say that this is going to make it less attractive for them, what they are communicating is that the only business model they have got to offer his a business model -- offer is a business model that is inappropriate. in london, one in 10 homes a unsafe, one in five in some boroughs, where children are growing up developing asthma, where families are forced out of e neighborhoods they have lived in for generations by unfair rent increases, and the question we have got to be asking is do we want a housing system that is about maximizin profits for people who choose to be landlords or do we want a

housing system that recognizes that all of us deserve a home where we can live and flourish and live a good life? >> i take your point. i take your point. i'm just a little concerned that you are lumping all landlords together, because there are people who move abroad or rent out a house. not all landlords are the same, are the? >> no, but we saw michael gove say today the majority of landlords play by the rules, but look at the white paper that his government published last year. it said that only 30% of landlord comply with the law and best practice, and we see routinely, day in, day out at the london renters union, abuse, violence, unfair rent rises, people getting thrown out of their homes for no reason, and i think a few bad apples does not capture it.

what we have got is a system that's been set up by the government that incentivizes landlords to maximize their profits and a complete lack of regulation in the u.k. the private rental market is one of the least regulated in europe. >> we will go to a break but we will talk about this play more in the program. a new deal for rente narrator: funding for this presentation of this program is provided by... narrator: financial services firm, raymond james. man: bdo. accountants and advisors. narrator: funding was also provided by, the freeman foundation. by judy and peter blum kovler foundation; pursuing solutions for america's neglected needs. and by contributions to this pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. ♪ ♪

narrator: you're watching pbs.

♪ ♪ narrator: funding for this presentation of this program is provided by... woman: architect. bee keeper. mentor. a raymond james financial advisor tailors advice to help you live your life. life well planned. george: actually, you don't need vision to do most things in life. it's exciting to be part of a team driving the technology forward. i think that's the most rewarding thing. people who know, know bdo.