Skip to main content

tv   Outside Source  BBC News  September 11, 2019 9:00pm-10:01pm BST

9:00 pm
hello, i'm ros atkins, this is outside source. the british government has published its hitherto secret contingency plan for a no—deal brexit. it warns of possible disruption to the supply of medicine and fresh food, and of protests and disorder. the documents relating to operation yellowhammer were published after parliament voted to demand their release. chris mason has been reading them, he'll bring us up to speed. also coming up... the advice given by the government to her majesty the queen to prorogue parliament from 9 september to 1a october was unlawful. judges from the high court in scotland said the prime minister's decision to suspend parliament had been motivated by the "improper purpose of stymying parliament".
9:01 pm
opposition mps say the parliament should be recalled immediately. the government say they are waiting for a final decision from the supreme court next week. donald trump says he's considering a ban on flavoured vaping products after a sixth person dies of lung disease related to vaping. and astronomers have discovered the first planet outside our solar system with the right conditions to support life. we start with some breaking news. in the past couple of hours, the uk government has published its contingency plan in the event of a no—deal brexit. no—deal brexit means the uk leaving on 31 october with no arrangements in place between the uk in the eu in
9:02 pm
terms of their relationship as they go forward. on monday, parliament supported a motion demanding this was done. the document is code—named operation yellowhammer. you can find online right now if you wa nt to you can find online right now if you want to read the whole thing. it was prepared by the civil service, and outline what it calls "the reasonable worst case assumptions". here's some of the detail. here are some of the headlines as a document is being released. the supply of medicines will be impacted, it goes on to say there may be protests and counter protests gci’oss may be protests and counter protests across the uk, and may absorb large amounts of police resources. chris masonjoins me from westminster. what else have you picked out? it's really just start, that's the what else have you picked out? it's reallyjust start, that's the most striking thing when you look at this. —— stark. the government has described this as not a prediction, but a reasonable worst—case
9:03 pm
scenario. it talks about the prospect of riots, lori is having to wait up to two and a half days to cfoss wait up to two and a half days to cross between dover and calais —— lorries. delays at the channel tunnel, delays on the road in kent and south east england in and around dover, the possibilities of medicine delays, anger and disruption in the fishing industries because there will no longer be rules about fishing between the uk in the eu. it talks about how public and business readiness for no deal remains at a low level, and the prospect that water supplies, while possibly encountering problems in local areas, could see hundreds of thousands of people not being able to get fresh water because of an absence of the chemicals needed to purfiy absence of the chemicals needed to purify it. that is categorised as one of the less likely risks, or the lower risks. also talk of businesses
9:04 pm
seeking to trade as a result of ta riffs seeking to trade as a result of tariffs and import taxes wiping out their margins and forcing them out of business. growth in the black market, and problems in the adult social care sector. that one is curious because you would think, why would that have an impact? why would it be impacted by a no—deal brexit? it is described as a fragile industry, and the fear as suggested in this document is that some providers could go out of business within a few months of a no—deal brexit. so a very stark outline of a worst—case scenario as brexit. so a very stark outline of a worst—case scenario as the government describes it, about something which could conceivably happen here in the uk at the end of next month. chris, to what degree - the government has seen that document for some time, how can it work to mitigate the risks outlined there? when you speak to government officials, they make the observation that this is a document which was the subject of a presentation behind closed doors at the beginning of
9:05 pm
last month, so about 5—6 weeks ago. but crucially, whilst it had been compiled they say for the incoming government of prime minister boris johnson, the assumptions on which it was based date back several months. there is a hope in government that some of the mitigating measures put in place since then might mean that this worst—case scenario is potentially as bad as described. the brutal truth here is that even if this was not to be the reality of a no—deal brexit and things were considerably better than this, the government says it is not a prediction, it still suggests that in the short term at least a no—deal brexit can be very bumpy indeed. stay right there, chris, because the government has rejected another of pa rliament‘s demands for the release of internal communications between the prime minister's advisers over their decision to suspend parliament. michael gove — the minister tasked with overseeing no—deal planning — to has sent a letter
9:06 pm
to dominic grieve, the mp who brought the motion. mr gove says the request was "unprecedented, inappropriate and disproportionate". my my question here is does michael gove and the government does get to decide whether they publish the stuff? that's a good question, because every one has backstopped different aspects of the constitution which have been bent and stretched to breaking point. as things stand, it would appear the government can make the argument that parliament can get lost, and therefore not publish these documents. the government argues that it would —— if it were to do so, it would be acting illegally, that the actions of civil servants in private should remain part of that, they have an expectation of privacy, and ministers who are accountable. there... civil servants
9:07 pm
who would not be able to reply or engage in a public discussion about any communications which were published, therefore should not be subject to the publication of said messages. now dominic greve was thrown out of the parliamentary party as a result of those votes last week in the house of commons. it's entirely possible to try to get to the bottom of how this prorogation decision was taken this summer. prorogation decision was taken this summer. as expected, it was not expected to publish these documents. i've not managed to to dominic greve this evening to see if there any other avenues he can pursue. the usual avenues by which a backbench mp would make their feelings known are shut off at the moment with parliament being suspended, and that itself is causing a great deal of anger amongst many mps, and it is still subject to this legal challenge which would appear in the
9:08 pm
uk supreme court next tuesday. yet another example of precedents, if you like, unusual conventions being twisted and smashed in front of our faces in britain day after day at the moment. chris, thank you very much at the moment. brexit has torn at the social and political fabric of the uk for three years. today, the country's most profound crisis since the second world war deepened, and the very relationship between parliament, government and the courts was dragged centre stage. this is why. scotland's highest civil court has ruled that borisjohnson's decision to suspend parliament for five weeks was unlawful. lord carloway is scotland's most seniorjudge and was one of three judges who reached a unanimous decision. each opinion expresses the view that the advice given by the government to her majesty the queen to prorogue parliament from 9 september to 1a october was unlawful — and that therefore, the prorogation itself is unlawful.
9:09 pm
it is 50 days until the brexit deadline of 31 october, and borisjohnson's highly unusual decision to suspend parliament and so restrict its ability to work on brexit came into force on monday night. in case you missed it — here were the scenes in the house of commons. booing. some in the opposition shout shame on you as government ministers walk out. mps aren't due back until 1a october — and as you can see, many of them are furious. and the case in scotland was brought by more than 70 of them, who argue parliament's suspension is attack on democracy. the scottish nationalist pa rty‘s joanna cherry lodged the case in court. she was first to react. now for every moment parliament remains prorogued, the british government are breaking the law. so we, as politicians, are calling for parliament to be recalled so that we can get on with scrutinising what this government is up
9:10 pm
to in relation to brexit. the case was heard in the court of session, in edinburgh. one of the threejudges was particularly scathing. lord brodie called the suspension an "an egregious case of a clear failure to comply with generally accepted standards of behaviour of public authorities". in their ruling, thejudges concluded that the prime minister was motivated by an "improper purpose of stymieing parliament". and the prime minister's motivation is central to this. when he announced his intentions two weeks ago, he denied it had anything to do with brexit. prime minister, to do that queen's speech, you will need to prorogue parliament several days. your critics will say this is an insult to democracy and deny the mps the time they need to deliberate and possibly vote on brexit. well — that is completely untrue. if you look at what we are doing, we are bringing forward
9:11 pm
a new legislative programme on crime, on hospitals, making sure that we have the education funding that we need. the judges today ruled that what he said there wasn't true — and that the real motive was to prevent parliament obstructing his brexit plans. that in itself is an explosive conclusion. but there's more. the power to suspend parliament doesn't lie with the prime minister, it lies with the monarch. and so to get it done, borisjohnson had to ask the queen. number ten says the reasons that were given to queen elizabeth are the same he gave in public. and let's reiterate, scotland's highest court says he didn't tell the truth in public. which leads us a question that is extraordinary to even ask — did the prime minister lie to the queen? here's our scotland editor sarah smith. yes, well the ruling from the court of session doesn't explicitly say that borisjohnson lied to the queen or tried to mislead voters. but if you dig into the complex legaljargon, you will see that that is essentially
9:12 pm
what they are saying. borisjohnson has repeatedly said, and his lawyers argued in the court of session, it is perfectly normal for a new government to prorogue parliament and that he wasn't trying to undermine democracy in any way. well, the three seniorjudges at the scottish court of session have essentially said today that they don't believe him, that they think it is his intention to try and undermine parliamentary scrutiny in the run—up to the uk's exit from the eu. but what if the prime minister did lie to the queen, what must follow? this is dominic grieve, a former attorney general, and one of the mps kicked out of the conservatives last week. this has been a lurking issue. it's absolutely central to our constitution that the relationship between the prime minister and the queen is one of the utmost confidentiality and the utmost good faith — central. so if it were to be the case that the government had misled
9:13 pm
the queen about the reasons for suspending parliament and the motives for it, that would be a very serious matter indeed. indeed, my view would be for mr johnson to resign, and very swiftly. we must also mention this. today's judgment overturns this ruling from a scottish court last week, which found mrjohnson had acted lawfully. a similar case in london ruled in his favour, too. that is being appealed. and the government is appealing today's ruling in scotland. which means all roads lead to the uk's supreme court which will consider them both next week. more on the way all of the courts relate to each other — and the government in a minute. questions welcome! next though, this the view of the tory mp and vocal brexiteer, nigel evans. there had been other court hearings prior to this appeal today
9:14 pm
which the government has won. and the supreme court will now meet on tuesday — nine of the most seniorjudges in the united kingdom will make the decision. yes, they were unanimous, but after all, it's not as if there isn't precedent — john major prorogued parliament for longer than borisjohnson is doing. and also we have to remember that we've not had a queen's speech in about two years. this is the longest sitting of a parliament for over 400 years. and i think really that must be taken into account. to digest all that and analyse it for us, here is bbc‘s rob watson. this is an extraordinary turn, and it's immensely awkward for the prime minister. i think i've heard it described as a bombshell — because if the decision is not overturned by the uk's supreme court, it is immensely difficult. i mean, you've been through but the judgement was, essentially accusing mr johnson of misleading everyone when he said that when he gave the reason for probing and suspending parliament, and therefore given
9:15 pm
unlawful advice to the queen, which is not a great look. and then of course, there's the practicality — if the supreme court doesn't overrule all this judgement, what will happen? parliament will come back and ask all sorts of awkward questions of the government about the brexit strategy. stay with us, rob. opposition mps are now demanding that parliament is recalled immediately. some actually showed up immediately today — here is the labour mp, kevin brennan saying... he says... there he is, i'm sure it wasn't a huge surprise of the prime minister wasn't there, but you get the quote to make a point he's making. we are also told that according to the times, mrjohnson is indicating he will recall parliament if the supreme court said he had acted unlawfully, but that will not come until next week. there is some question though, rob, about whether this ruling in scotland is enough to mean that parliament isn't technically prorogued at the moment. where have we got to with that?
9:16 pm
well, i think broadly speaking, it is expected that parliament won't be recalled unless the uk's supreme court upholds the scottish court's decision when it meets on tuesday. i'm not sure if the judgement will be instant. and while we were on that subject, i think it is important to see that this may well be the prime minister's best hope in the sense that a lower english court called the high court ruled that the prorogation was ok last week. but he should be in no doubt, that ruling did not go into the evidence into the evidence of mrjohnson's motives, whether he had given duff advice to the queen or anything like that they said, "look, this is a political question, this is not for the judges". so there may be a chance that the supreme court takes a similar view and allows the parliament to be prorogue. but i will say this, even if it does, this statement, this finding of fact by the scottish court would stay — in other words, that mrjohnson
9:17 pm
had behaved improperly. plenty more to come on all the developments around british politics at the moment. still to come: donald trump says he's considering a ban on flavoured vaping products. we'll be live with our business correspondent in new york. the government is to allow international students studying at uk universities to stay in the country for two years after graduating. the announcement reverses a decision made in 2012, which forced foreign students to leave the country within four months of completing their degree. vivienne stern from universities uk international welcomed the move. the fact is universities in the uk are really widely—recognised for offering some of the best higher education in the world. and we are pretty much the first choice destination for international students when they are thinking about quality. but we've been holding ourselves
9:18 pm
back by presenting a visa policy that isn't really competitive with the other major economies that attract international graduates. so i think we've been tripping over our own feet, and today's announcement really allows us to get out there and make sure that those students who want an absolutely outstanding higher education also have the opportunity to get a bit of work experience alongside that. this is outside source live from the bbc newsroom. our lead story is... the british government has published its hitherto secret contingency plan for a no—deal brexit. it warns of possible disruption to the supply of medicine and fresh food, and of protests and disorder. donald trump says his administration will ban
9:19 pm
flavoured e—cigarettes. there have been six deaths in the us and a50 cases of lung illnesses linked to the relatively new devices. mr trump says vaping firms have become very rich, very fast. but people are dying from vaping. so we are looking at it very closely. and you know, if nothing else, this is a conference that is going to let people know about it, because people are going to watch what we're saying and parents will be a lot tougher, with respect to their children. a lot of people think vaping as wonderful, it's great — it's really not wonderful. that's one thing i think we can say definitely, commissioner, it's not a wonderful thing, it's got big problems. vivienne nunis is in new york. are we looking at a street band here, or is it more about further regulation? at this stage we have heard trump talk about a band of all flavoured e—cigarettes products.
9:20 pm
these come in flavours like menthol, mint, mango, and even alcohol. many hope that those novelty flavours that have attracted so many young people to take up e—cigarettes in the us. last year, 3.6 million people like gong the us said they have used up e—cigarettes. the last few days we've seen a flurry of health issues, six deaths, a50 vaping related illnesses have been found here. there's a lot of attention here, and that is why mr trump has announced this ban will stop there will be health guidelines, and we will see the band after that. i need to understand this, because obviously cigarettes kill thousands of people a year. they aren't band, just regulated. why is there such a focus on these products? i suppose it is because we have seen all the press coverage in the last few days, but there is a debate raging about all —— the cause of all the deaths. proponents of the
9:21 pm
vaping industry saying it is not the regulation of the e—cigarettes causing these problems, but e—cigarettes on the black market with thc that is causing these problems. that debate has raged on, but trump has stepped in and announced this ban on flavoured products. thank you very much, good to talk to you. the owners of hong kong's stock exchange have made a $39 billion takeover offer for the stock exchange in london. hong kong says it would bring together the most important financial centres in asia and europe. here's one analyst on why the timing of this offer is crucial. it's about bringing together two financial centres, creating this axis of east and west capital markets. there's also an element of the hong kong stock exchange capitalising on the lse's technology platform. i think the timing has a lot to do with the refitted of offer. the stock exchange is inquiring a lot of data business, and it would become the largest
9:22 pm
exchange in the world by revenues through this acquisition. so probably the hong kong exchange wants to move now and make a bit now, instead of after the transaction being completed. a doctor has been cleared of breaking dutch legal euthanasia laws, in what's been seen as a test case for the country. the doctor was accussed of failing to get proper consent before giving a dementia patient a lethal injection in 2016. the woman had written a statement four years before she died, saying she wanted to die at a time of her own choosing. but it was the doctor — together with two colleagues — who ended up making the decision. the process was not an easy one — the woman was first given a sedative but then woke up and had to be held down by family members whilst she was given a final injection. her daughter was supportive of the doctor, saying they "freed my mother from the mental prison which she ended up in". here's steven pleiter from the
9:23 pm
centre of expertise for euthanasia. first of all, it feels good for people in the never netherlands that this is a clear view after the judges and courts that it is possible to give euthanasia to a person who is not mentally competent any longer. the netherlands legalised euthanasia in 2002, and this is the first time such a case has gone to the courts. the numbers of people choosing euthanasia has been growing every year. so too have the numbers of patients with dementia choosing that option. anna holligan has more. thejudges in this the judges in this courtroom thejudges in this courtroom ruled that the doctor had followed the correct medical and legal procedures by sticking to the patient‘s original request. because refusing
9:24 pm
to do so would undermine the patient‘s wishes when she was of sound mind. those wishes expressed before she became deeply demented and didn't even understand what the word euthanasia meant any more. under dutch law, euthanasia is decide to empower the patient by offering those experiencing extreme and unending suffering the right to decide when they end. but even in a country where it is widely supported and has been legalfor almost country where it is widely supported and has been legal for almost two decades now, the practise remains controversial. as people live longer, we are more likely to develop these conditions that affect our ability to sync and remember. and this trial was important in establishing the limits of the existing euthanasia law, which could help to protect patients and doctors in the future. we start with some breaking news. in the past couple of hours, the uk government has published its contingency plan in the event of a no—deal brexit. on monday parliament supported
9:25 pm
a motion demanding this was done. it is now online, you can read it. the document is code—named operation yellowhammer. it was prepared by the civil service, and outline what it calls "the reasonable worst case assumptions". here's some of the detail. that's a shift in what the title was titled when it was leaked. buzz feed says... there's a lot of attention on that where the government tries to say this is a complete worst—case scenario, not a likely outcome. a colleague of mine here at the bbc highlights some of the things macklin outlines, saying... there could be food and clean water problems. expect blockages and public disorder, energy may cost more and care homes make a bust as well. it is a stark document outlining what could happen in the uk if there is a no—deal brexit on
9:26 pm
31 october. we will come back to all that in a few minutes. hello. your next uk forecast is coming up in half an hour, this time of the evening, we take a look at some of the main weather stories happening around the world. first of all, i want to take you to spain. and the radar picture from yesterday, showing some really intense downpours, particularly into majorca. so that's the capital there, palma. palma itself didn't see a huge amount of rain, but elsewhere on it majorca, whether it was some huge rainfall totals, and the 2a hours, a source i had 18a mm of rain, but in just one hour, look how much of that fell. that's the reason for some flash flooding. now it's looking a little bit quieter towards these islands, as we go through the forecast, but, look how wet it's going to be across eastern parts of spain. alacante certainly in the zone, some
9:27 pm
particularly high rainfall totals, as this system hangs around for the next couple of days. this part of spain that could be seeing some of for the flash flooding. some big impact from the weather here. it is high—pressure in australia, there are some really nasty wild fires burning, one particularly into queensland. there's nothing in terms of rain to dampen those in the forecast, and lots of places are looking dry, just a few weather systems skimming southern areas as we look at the forecast going into the weekend. some heat around parts of western australia, 23—2adc in perth, but queens and has areas in the mid—20s with sunshine. looking at the philippines, the satellite picture here shows a disturbance to the east which has been developing tropical weather systems here, looking much better in the couple tobacco looking much better in the couple to ba cco next looking much better in the couple tobacco next couple of days. a lot of heavy downpours being produced.
9:28 pm
it is hot in hong kong, warnings of the heat here, but very went through central parts of china and the potential for more flooding rain here. as we take a closer view now at the forecast into the bahamas, and other weather system is closed by producing gusty winds and heavy downpours. it may develop into a tropical weather system, perhaps more so as tropical weather system, perhaps more so as this energy crosses into the gulf of mexico in the coming days. more heavy rains to talk about now, this is the forecast for thursday on india. read weather warnings are in place, there's already been a lot of flooding and fatalities as a result. eastern parts of spain getting rain, looking dryer elsewhere but this weather system coming thursday into the uk across to norway. once that is out of the way, the pressure building and the weather settles down for many of us going into the weekend. temperatures are heading up, as well. much more about that coming up
9:29 pm
in 30 minutes and our weather for the week ahead.
9:30 pm
hello, i'm ros atkins, this is outside source. the british government has published its hitherto secret contingency plan for a no deal brexit — it warns of possible disruption to the supply of medicine and fresh food — and of protests and disorder. the documents relating to operation yellowhammer were published after parliament voted to demand their release. chris mason has been reading them, he'll bring us up to speed. also coming up... to her majesty the queen, to prorogue parliament from the 9th of september to the 1ath of october was unlawful. judges from the high court in scotland said the prime minister's decision to suspend parliament had been motivated by the "improper purpose of stymying parliament".
9:31 pm
opposition mp‘s say the parliament should be recalled immediately. the government say they are waiting for a final decision from the supreme court next week. president trump says he's considering a ban on flavoured vaping products after a sixth person dies of lung disease related to vaping. a reminder of our breaking news tonight — the uk government has published its contingency plan in the event of a no—deal brexit. on monday parliament supported a motion demanding this was done. no—deal brexit is the moment when the uk exits the eu with no arrangements between between that you are the uk in terms of how they will interact beyond that point. in the last couple of hours, this document has been put online, it's
9:32 pm
titled official, sensitive, operation yellow hammer. it says an assessment of reasonable worst—case planning assumptions. here's some of the detail. there is warning of severe disruption, hitting the supply of medicines, and certain types of fresh foods. it says the protests and counter protests may take place across the country, accompanied by a possible rise in public disorder. and thatis that is just the beginning of the warnings. let's speak to the economics editor who is with us outside of westminster palace. thank you very much indeed forjoining us. i'm sure you've digested the lot, what do you pick out to focus on?|j think the first thing to say is the date. august the 2nd, remember when a document rather similar to this emerged in the pages of the sunday times at the end of august, the government said that it was an old document. but, it is dated from august the 2nd. so by any stretch of
9:33 pm
the definition of the word old, it was only a couple of weeks old. and now it's only five weeks old. and what you see in there is a core assumption about disruption in a worse case scenario, assumption about disruption in a worse case scenario, it says, about what that would mean it to the cross channel short straits routes. and it says, roughly speaking, that that could lead to around half, may be more of the lorries that normally flow through the channel tunnel, not being able to flow through. because despite all the best laid preparations, if those individual businesses are not ready, if they don't have the right paperwork, they will not be able to get across the channel. this is what this is about. from that assumption flows presumptions and assumptions about what happens in a whole suite of things. trade, of course, is disrupted. the food trade has an issue, and a problem, and although the government, as we have said
9:34 pm
before on the bbc, doesn't assume that there is going to be an overall issue around food supply in general, it does clearly say, that there will be an issue around fresh food supplies. that's because we are more dependent on european union imports, precisely in late october, and there is less warehousing capacity available for food in general. is less warehousing capacity available forfood in general. and in reference in this document, it's about a two and half day weight on in cans, knock on impacts potentially for fuel, if those cues stretch back to the dartford tunnel. talks about issues there, medicines, supply as well. and there are other issues, in fact, supply as well. and there are other issues, infact, i supply as well. and there are other issues, in fact, i haven't quite clocked around electricity in northern ireland. there is issues around uk nationals and their rights in the european union. northern ireland. i thank you explain some of that in the introduction there, real concerns about what happens in
9:35 pm
northern ireland and a no—deal situation. enforcement of fishing rights, boats that have hitherto fished illegally will suddenly become illegal, but where are the maritime security efforts to enable, to be able to enforce that. and also, perhaps surprisingly, social care. a fear here in this document that social care providers could essentially go bust, because an increase in prices, but also a decrease in the availability of european union staff. so really, pretty serious stuff. now it will tell you one thing. it says that at the top of this document, reasonable worst—case scenario. the top of this document, reasonable worst—case scenario. but others, other sources have said to me, that a document very similar to this had the phrase, base case scenario, associated with it. so that's a bit ofa associated with it. so that's a bit of a mystery. this document is only emerging because of the parliamentary vote yesterday. so it is also worth noting that actually, these assumptions that say half of lorries can get to the channel
9:36 pm
tunnel, they are in fact an improvement on it where they were about six months ago, when the government had to assume that the french would check every lorry manually. as a result of some of their preparations and the facilities that they have built, the technology they are introducing that has got not good, but it's gotten less bad. in terms of let's say the problems with dover calais, do they put a timeframe on a? because clearly this is happening for 2—a weeks, that's less serious if it goes on for months at. they are saying for a period of over 3—6 months, the preparedness of uk businesses would and should improve. but it should be said, you know, the flow of traffic being impinged by half means it's really bad stuff. evenif half means it's really bad stuff. even if it went down by 20%, i am told that that would impact medicines supply. i think with the government would argue is that even in the relatively brief time since this document was produced, they have done a series of initiatives,
9:37 pm
whether it's allocating customs numbers to small businesses, or those adverts that you are seeing everywhere, and they hope that the preparation will be sufficiently high, that these problems won't be as acute. but as they've said, having been forced to release this, it is the latest full assessment that they have. thank you very much indeed for taking us through it. that's the bbc‘s economic editor. aside from that huge news, today's other top story. already digesting another hugely significant moment in the story of this prime minister. and in the story of brexit, because the fallout continues following scotland's highest civil court ruled that borisjohnson's decision to suspend parliament for five weeks was unlawful. the relationship between parliament, government and the courts has been dragged centre stage. let's look the ruling in more detail. if you are confused as to why we are getting differentjudgements, from different courts across the uk then lets try and bring some clarity.
9:38 pm
the uk does not have a single unified legal system. there is one system for england and wales, another for scotland, and a third for northern ireland. this graphic will help us understand it. the decision today was taken by the court of session, the highest civil court in scotland. civil courts deal with matters that aren't criminal. its decision that suspending parliament was unlawful makes it the highest court in the uk to have ruled on this matter so far. above the high court in england which gave ruled it was lawful last week. but, as you can see, the supreme court in london sits above all the appeal courts in the uk in civil cases. which is why it will take the ultimate decision on tuesday. moments when politics and justice intersect are fraught with danger for democracies. not least because it leavesjudges, who are politically neutral in the uk— open to accusations of taking sides. which is why this tweet from tom newton dunn of the sun
9:39 pm
went viral this morning. he says... he quotes a source in downing street, we note that last week, the high court did not rule that prorogation was unlawful. that generated a huge amount of attention. then tom noted not long afterwards... clea r? perhaps. listen to one government minister, speaking to the bbc‘s andrew neil a little earlier. the more courts get involved in politics, that is a detriment, not only to politics, but also to the courts, because many people are saying, i am not saying this,
9:40 pm
but many people, and i'm sure nigel farage might have a view on this, many people are saying that the judges are biased. thejudges are getting involved in politics. i'm just saying what people are saying. that's what people are saying. so, you don't think these judges took an independent and properly... you know what i said andrew. i said, i said that i think that they are impartial. but i'm saying that many people, many leave voters, many people up and down the country, are beginning to question the partiality of the judges. that's just a fact. these kind of discussions have meant that lots of people are referencing this now infamous, orfamous daily melt front page from late 2016. ‘enemies of the people' was how it described three high courtjudges in london. thosejudges had ruled that only parliament and not the prime minister could begin the process of leaving the european union. the mail didn't like those judges getting involved. now back to the case which has been ruled on today. the case was brought before a civil court in edinburgh partly because the high court in england was on holiday.
9:41 pm
but we have seen legal action in england. gina miller launched a judicial review case at the high court. this is when a court is asked to test whether a decision made by the government or other public bodies are lawful. well, thejudges rejected gina miller's claim, saying the suspension of parliament was "purely political" and therefore "not a matter for the courts". that's not the conclusion of the scottish judges today. so two courts with two very different opinions — and those decisions will now collide next week at the uk's supreme court in london. it will give a definitive ruling on whether the prime minister acted unlawfully. not sure what we'd do today without the bbc‘s legal correspondent, clive coleman. here he is. it's incredible, isn't it? you could scarcely have two more contradictoryjudgements. the scottish one finding that the prime minister acted unlawfully, because his purpose improper purpose was to stymie parliament. the judgement from the high court
9:42 pm
in london finding that, look, advice given by the prime minister to the queen isn't a legal matter at all. it's a political matter. you cannot judge it in a court of law. now those two contraryjudgements are now hurtling towards this place, the uk supreme court, the highest court in the land, and in a hearing beginning next tuesday, the contradiction between the two of them, will be resolved. and we will get a definitive ruling as to whether the prime minister was acting unlawfully, or not. and that will determine whether mps and parliament sit in the lead up to the uk leaving the eu. this really is the uk constitution in action. independentjudges acting through judicial review can halt the might of a government in its tracks, if what ministers have done is unlawful, because as lawyers like to say, be you ever so mighty, the law is above you. catherine barnard is a professor of european union law,
9:43 pm
university of cambridge. she isjoining us from brussels, thank you very much indeed. oh... thank you very much indeed for being with us. i suppose my first question, having introduced you and yourjob title, question, having introduced you and your job title, would question, having introduced you and yourjob title, would be to say, has european union law have anything to do with this do you think? well, in fa ct, do with this do you think? well, in fact, this is really very much, as clive just said, testing the outer limits of the uk constitution. and what does the uk constitution say? and this is the fascinating dilemma for uk lawyers, is that, because we don't have a written constitution. what does our highly flexible, unwritten constitution tell us about these issues, ? which unwritten constitution tell us about these issues,? which is essentially about the separation of powers between the three branches of government, the legislature of parliament, the executive government, and the courts. and what is so interesting is that the scottish courts have said one thing, and the courts of england and wales
9:44 pm
has said something completely different. and while the uk doesn't have a constitution written down, do you think that makes it harder for the courts, when they get stuck in these political moments of extreme pressure? it certainly does make it difficult, but even those countries with a written constitution by its very nature, it will not prescribe every single situation. so inevitably, the courts have to interpret constitutions. just think about the us constitution, now, more than a couple hundred years old, of course it wouldn't be dealing with this sort of case. so the judges would have had to interpret what the original drafters had in mind, how that constitution has evolved. but for our judges, that constitution has evolved. but for ourjudges, this really is absolutely at the limits of where thejudicial role absolutely at the limits of where the judicial role sets.|j absolutely at the limits of where the judicial role sets. i was going to ask about that, because presumably next week and the supreme court, it's partly about whether mr johnson behaved unlawfully, but also about whether it is actually the business of the supreme court to ta ke business of the supreme court to take a position on this. that's
9:45 pm
absolutely right. and that's where there is such a stark difference between the scottish court, and the courts of england and wales. the courts of england and wales. the court of england and wales said very clearly, this matter is notjust fishable, which is legal speakfor same, we will not get involved in this issue. it's an issue which is about politics, and we will not look at something which is such high politics. because it's such high politics, we cannot applyjudicial standards, there is no yardstick to measure what is being done in the name of politics. but the scottish courts have taken a rather different line. i think what's really striking about what the scottish courts said is just the strength of their language. now i should be careful here, because we haven't seen the fulljudgement, or we have seen it -- all fulljudgement, or we have seen it —— all we have seen is the summary of thejudgement. and just —— all we have seen is the summary of the judgement. and just take for example, lord brody, and i willjust quote one small bit of what he said, he said, this is an egregious case ofa he said, this is an egregious case of a clear failure to comply with generally accepted standards of behaviour of public authorities. that is what he is saying that the
9:46 pm
prime minister has done. this is pretty damning. and one last question for you. there will be some viewers thinking, can't they get on with a? why do we have to wait for a week to the supreme court to rule on something as important as parliament being suspended? in judicial terms, this is getting on with it. and getting on with it really very fast indeed. as you will see, in the case of the gina miller case, remember, she is being joined byjohn major and... that case has gone straight from the first tier court up to the supreme court, missing out of the court of appeals stage. and this is being done in a matter of days, and of course, the issues here raise such profound constitution importance. i fully accept for those people who voted leave, they are thinking, this isjust people who voted leave, they are thinking, this is just further way of delaying the actual act of getting on with leaving. but of course, for any country which is priding itself on democracy, priding itself on parliamentary sovereignty, what does parliamentary sovereignty
9:47 pm
mean in this context? revisor of european union and law at the university of cambridge. now in a few minutes, we will have more on that story. but we will also talk about astronomers who have discovered the first planet outside our solar system with water, and the right temperature to support life. a total of 86 migrants were picked up by the border force after crossing the english channel in small boats yesterday. it's believed to be a record for a single day. a further 21 migrants were stopped as they attempted to enter the uk today — as richard galpin reports. this is just one of the six boats which crossed the channel from northern france here to the south—east coast of england yesterday. a record 86 people from countries including afghanistan, iraq and iran making thejourney in a single day.
9:48 pm
what i saw was them just immediately get out of the boat and run up the beach. all of them ran up the beach. it is only about 50 yards from the sea to where we are standing now. and then run across and they ran across into the fields. the border force carrying this boat away have, like the coast guard, had a busy summer and it's now extending into the autumn. last month 336 people were stopped by the border force at sea, that's more than in the whole of last year. and so far this year, 1,191 people have been picked up. under pressure from london, the police here on the northern french coast have ramped up their surveillance. using drones to scour the beaches in search of migrants hoping to reach the uk and the smuggling gangs organising the crossings. this operation partly funded by the british government. already today, the lifeboat
9:49 pm
and other rescue services have intercepted two boats off the kent coast. but while the numbers trying to reach britain may seem high, they are tiny compared to those reaching greece. in august alone, more than 3000 arrived on lesbos, nearly ten times more than those crossing the channel. richard galpin, bbc news. this is outside source live from the bbc newsroom. our lead story is... the british government has published its hitherto secret contingency plan for a no—deal brexit — it warns of possible disruption to the supply of medicine and fresh food — and of protests and disorder. here are some of the main strays from the world service. 2500 people have been registering as missing,
9:50 pm
have been registering as missing, have been registering as missing, have been registered as missing in the bahamas. ten days after hurricane dorian smashed into the islands. so far, 50 people have been confirmed dead, but the authorities have warned that the final number will be far higher. the plane carrying the body of robert mugabe has arrived back in harare from singapore, where zimba bwe's former president died last week. he was undergoing medical treatment there. he was met with a presidential guard, with the coffin draped in the country's flag. more on bbc world service. scientists in italy have successfully created two northern white rhino embryos. they want to bring back the species from the brink of extinction. the world's last male northern white died in kenya last year. more on bbc.com. as we've been hearing, the queen had to give her consent for parliament to be suspended. and she's now become part of the story. now let's be clear — the scottish court's ruling today doesn't criticise the queen's decision to prorogue parliament. it is a ruling about the advice the prime minister gave to queen that led to her taking that decision. the advice was given via the privy council which was sent to ask the queen for permission.
9:51 pm
now let's be clear — the scottish court's ruling today doesn't criticise the queen's decision to prorogue parliament. it is a ruling about the advice the prime minister gave to queen that led to her taking that decision. the advice was given via the privy council which was sent to ask the queen for permission. the council is a group of senior ministers, including leading brexiteerjacob rees—mogg. and the request is seen as a formality. but today's ruling raises questions about this process. bbc royal correspondent jonny dymond. it has done the one thing that everybody has said they don't want to do — and it has politicized the monarch, the crown, the queen. it has put her right in the middle of this tempest over the suspension of parliament. and it has opened up questions about how decisions are made, where advice comes from, and where the line should be drawn. but there is another question about how much discretion the queen ever had over this prorogation, over the suspension of parliament. because she says — or rather, the palace says — look,
9:52 pm
she acts on the advice of ministers. does that mean she has no discretion whatsoever, and that she is simply a rubber—stamp? in theory, no, she does have discretion, in which case when would she perhaps say yes or no? all these questions are supposed to be comfortably buried away, because you just don't do this sort of thing under the british constitution. let's ta ke let's take a break from brexit. astronomers have discovered water in the atmosphere of an earth—like planet orbiting a distant star. here you go. the planet is known as exoplanet k2—18b. it was discovered four years ago — is around twice the size of earth — and sits at a distance from us of 1,000 million million km. i'm told that it is how to say it. this graph is from a study in thejournal nature astronomy. it shows this peak where the light has been absorbed by water vapour.
9:53 pm
we're told that means there's water — and the planet plus the right temperature to support life. here's more. and we have the possibility in the next decade to understand what is the nature of this world. how it formed, how it evolved, and in some cases, whether it can support life. i think it'sjust mind cases, whether it can support life. i think it's just mind blowing. stand by for the next bit — astronomers say new telescopes are coming in the next ten years that may be able to determine the presence of life on this planet. this is one of them. nasa and the european space agency are working on these giant telescopes. they can identify chemical signs of life. and of course at stake is one of the biggest questions in science — is there anything out there? we've always wondered whether we are alone in the universe. and within the next ten years or so, we will know whether there are biomarkers or chemicals that are due to life in these atmospheres.
9:54 pm
this new generation of telescopes can look for gasses that could be produced only by living organisms. this is an actual video of three planets orbiting a star 1000 million, million kilometres away. distances like this are clearly too far to send a probe, so we await these telescopes. here's the bbc‘s science correspondent pallab ghosh. over the past 30 years, scientists have discovered more than a,000 worlds orbiting distant stars. now some of them, they found, have water vapour in their atmosphere. but they are far too hot or inhospitable to support life. now the new planet, k218b, is about the right size — about twice the size of earth. and it's temperature is between 0—a0 centigrade — the temperature where liquid water can flow. so all the conditions to support life, but does it?
9:55 pm
it is 650 million million miles away, too far to send a probe. so what researchers will have to do next is to use powerful space telescopes to study its atmosphere to find out whether it contains any gases that could only be produced by living organisms. and that they'll do in the 20205. thanks to pallid for that, and that ends this edition of outside source. we will be back with plenty more tomorrow. bye—bye. hello. low pressure is in charge of our weather at the moment, and these aren'tjust any old areas of low pressure. they are weather systems that started life in the tropics. the first, the remnants of what was hurricane dorian, in a much weakened form passing to the north of the british isles during wednesday. we saw some blustery winds
9:56 pm
and some outbreaks of rain, and then our next ex—tropical weather system approaching, this is the remnants of what was tropical storm gabrielle, some outbreaks of rain, some breezy conditions, but in between these two weather fronts, a wedge of humid tropical air. you will certainly feel the effects of that during thursday, particularly across england and wales, it will turn increasingly cloudy here through the day. rain moving through northern ireland and scotland down into northern england, but tending to weaken all the while. brighter skies behind. it is going to be windy again, those are the wind gusts, you can expect through the afternoon. and behind that band of cloud and rain, it will feel fairly cool and fresh, but ahead of it, remember, that wedge of humid air. so highs of around 2a degrees. but much of that warm humid air will be swept away during thursday night. we push on increasingly weak weather front southwards and eastwards. clear skies following behind, and single—digit temperatures for the northern half of the uk. some showers developing across northern parts of scotland. those showers will continue across northern scotland on friday, courtesy of this
9:57 pm
little whether frontier, but for the most part, high pressure will be building its way in it, so we're looking at a lot of dry weather, but a cooler fresher feel for friday. that humid airfor a cooler fresher feel for friday. that humid air for the a cooler fresher feel for friday. that humid airfor the time being, at least, getting pushed out into the near continent. so, plenty of sunshine for most of us on friday, but fairly cool and a fresh field to the weather, temperatures into the high teens or low 20s celsius. there will be some showery rain across the western side of scotland, where it will also be quite windy. as we go into the weekend, we will see further frontal systems trying to push into the north of the uk, but high pressure will become a dominant further south. so, saturday, again, should bring plenty of fine, dry, sunny weather away from the northern half of scotland, where we will see cloud from outbreaks of rain, and a brisk breeze. and at this stage, the air is starting to come back in from the southwest, temperatures will begin to climb. that process continues as we go through sunday across southern areas in the sunshine in the southeast could get to 25 degrees. those frontal systems in the north will try to push southwards,
9:58 pm
weakening all the while, so just some patchy rain into northern england and northern ireland. and that increasingly weak cold front will push its way southwards during sunday night into monday. and really, it's a repeat performance, clearing away that warm and somewhat humid air. so monday, we are back to a cooler, fresher feel with good smells of sunshine. it will feel largely dry, high pressure building back in from the west once again, but those temperatures range from 1a degrees to 21 degrees in london. as we look through next week, the jet stream which drives weather systems across the globe looks like it will push a long wait north of the british isles. that's where the areas of low pressure will go, and high pressure is likely to dominate the scene across the british isles. the exact positioning of the highs still under question, and the positioning of that high will determine just how hot it gets. but indications are we may tap into some really rather warm and humid air as we go through next week. but with high pressure in charge, it looks largely dry with sunny spells, but a warm and humid feel —
9:59 pm
and with that humidity, a chance of some overnight fog. so a low pressure becoming less dominant, high pressure taking charge.
10:00 pm
tonight at ten, demands to recall parliament, after scotland's highest court declares the five—week suspension to be unlawful. the ruling could have huge ramifications at westminster and beyond if it's upheld by the uk supreme court next week. judges at the court of session in edinburgh decided that borisjohnson's intention was to prevent parliament from doing its job ahead of brexit. the advice given by the government to her majesty the queen to prorogue parliament from ninth september to 1ath october was unlawful and that therefore, the prorogation itself is unlawful. downing street said it was disappointed by the ruling, and insisted the prime minister's decision had been lawful.

28 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on