professor, can i just law at cambridge university. professor, can ijust start law at cambridge university. professor, can i just start with you. it seems that the court has set down a marker today that it's prepared to take a role in upholding our unwritten constitution.” prepared to take a role in upholding our unwritten constitution. i think that's absolutely right. they are clear statements in the judgment that the uk's constitution isn't just based on legislation comments based on these common law principles and they direct two important principles, parliamentary sovereignty and the accountability of government. it showed that the court was willing to look carefully and say, well, if these are being restricted without a reasonable ground, then we are in a position to step in and say that it's unlawful. the prime minister has said again today that he wants to take the country out on october the 31st. if he's going to stay within the law, which he says he will, how is he going to do that? is best option is by getting a deal now. i

university and robert craig from the university and robert craig from the university of bristol law school. robert, you've been inside pretty much throughout watching the proceedings, can you give us any inkling as to what and how you think this might go? there appears to be a consensus forming amongst the legal community that the government is in trouble. but i think the government is more confident and perhaps the consensus might suggest but it could go either way. we can see some of thejudges were go either way. we can see some of the judges were genuinely troubled by some of the arguments put forward by some of the arguments put forward by lord panic and he is an outstanding advocate. the lawyer for gina miller. and he is one of the leading advocates. —— pannick. and if he manages to get people on his side, over the weekend there have been conversations going on and discussions between them and they managed to get themselves to a majority, it can go that way and if it doesn't it could it is extremely difficult to call. alison, i know you studied these things carefully, the 1

let's try and pick through the legal arguments with two professors of law from cambridge university. that argument that this is really nothing to do with the courts, the courts cannot rule on what mr johnson did, do you buy that?” think i do. it was persuasive in the court in england and this morning sirjames eadie was very persuasive, i thought, in pointing out once the courts get into the business of seeing how long a prorogation could be, there is no guidance. how can you say five weeks is too much but four is too little? it essentially is not a judge —— job forjudges, they need to be clear and defined standards. one of the judges did intervene and say what if parliament we re intervene and say what if parliament were prorogue for a year? surely that would be too long?” were prorogue for a year? surely that would be too long? i think everybody would agree it would be too long but that does not necessarily follow that there wouldn't be other remedies. for example the government would run out of money if it did not call parliament back. and there would be all sorts of diffic

university. good morning to you both. jeremy, first of all, what are we expecting today and how important will today be in these proceedings? today is an absolutely critical day, particularly for the government. they had a difficult time yesterday. lord pannick was on his feet yesterday morning for gina miller, putting that case against the government as to why fluoridation was unlawful and why it effectively stymied parliamentary solidarity. —— why prorogation. today i think they will start with the question of where can the court get involved and where does the court will draw the line and say, this is actually not a legal matter anymore, this is about politics and policy, and that will be the real ci’ux policy, and that will be the real crux of sirjames eadie plus max emissions this morning. is that how you see it, alison young? yes, i think he will look at the legal standard that lord pannick suggested and say that there is no legal standard present. we have heard about proper purpose a

professor young first of all from cambridge university, a public law professor. what did you make of what you heard today? i think we are dealing with a very controversial issue. we've had two very strong arguments, one saying this is all politics and should be decided by politicians and the other saying there are legal limits. there are legal purposes and there are constitutional principles you just cannot cross. it'll be interesting to see how this turns out later on. jeremy, a barrister and legal commentator, is this a matter for the courts? that is the first thing the 11 judges have to decide, effectively is this any of their business? it is a side of the times and the court are being asked to intervene in matters like this all the time and here we are standing right in between the houses of parliament and the supreme court. absolutely representing where the justices find themselves, the battle between what is the realm of the court to find justiciable, able to be adjudicated on by the courts and what is the realm of high policy, of politics. things that shou

university. 0ne professor of law at cambridge university. one of the key issues for thejudges to decide university. one of the key issues for the judges to decide it is this a matter for them to decide? for the judges to decide it is this a matterfor them to decide? is for the judges to decide it is this a matter for them to decide? is this their business? you take the view that it their business? you take the view thatitis their business? you take the view that it is not? i would agree with the divisional court that says this isa the divisional court that says this is a territory of politics, high policy. this is in the area courts tend to get involved in because how can they take a view on how long is a valid prorogation? you would expect the courts to intervene when there is a clear threshold as to when to draw the line but they cannot easily do this on a question like this and that is what the divisional court found in england but the scottish court of appeal find that this was a scottish court of sessions and we have two appeals, one fr

university. jeremy, will thejudges had to explore the grey area between the law and politics? galba absolutely, this is about the key issue of the prime minister's advice to the queen, whether it is just. it means it is the threshold of where the courts intervene. is it a matterfor judges or are some things in a purely political domain, high policy that the court simply say it is not for us to get involved in, there is no threshold by which we can measure this. this is not what the scottish court of session said and that is why today is so interesting, the supreme courtjudges will have to look at two different judgments supreme courtjudges will have to look at two differentjudgments on the same issue and come to one of you. allison, do you have a best guess, will they decide this is a matter for them to consider. this guess, will they decide this is a matterfor them to consider. this is within the realms of theirjustice ability? | within the realms of theirjustice ability? i think it has become a

in some universities, cambridge would be a good example, students will find a university that is really focusing on the data, analysing the scale of the problem, making sure they have a real handle on it, whereas in other places they don't even know how much they are spending. they are not maintaining and monitoring data, not collecting the data, and in that way, i think students' experience is completely inconsistent across the country. universities say they already plan a voluntary mental health charter and need the nhs to provide more effective care for students. liverpool university said it was deeply saddened by ceara's death, and is working with the health service on changes. branwen jeffreys, bbc news. the uk's former chief scientist, professor sir david king, says he's scared by the speed at which the climate is changing in response to global warming. speaking to the bbc, he's called for the uk to advance its climate targets by ten years. i'm joined by our environment analyst roger harrabin. tell us more about what he had to say. the interesting thing for me is the use of the wo