hello and welcome to 100 days. the entire us senators on its way to the white house for a rare briefing on korea. on the korean peninsula there has been competing of force with each side demonstrating their military hardware. all options are on the table. we want to bring kim jong unto his senses, not to his knees. nafta is one of the largest trade agreements in the world that has been in place for more than two decades. so why is the trump administration eager to get out? no president since ronald reagan has succeeded in reforming america's tax code — it's that tricky. but now donald trump says he can break that loosing streak. also...

the campaign posters are printed with the french election in full swing. for emmanuel macron it was less than a warm welcome in his hometown — where marine le pen showed up as well. and... the white house says funding for that mexican wall may have to wait. we go to the border where not all residents are convinced. you build a 20 foot wall, someone isjust going to build a 21 foot ladder to go over it. hello, i am katty kay in new york, christian fraser is in london. the us senate is about to decamp to the white house as a top admiral wa nts the white house as a top admiral wants lawmakers a north korean attack on the us is possible. mr trump has summoned his senators were briefing, quite a show. the

television image of senators going into the white house make the president look assertive in the run—up to 100 days but then he has already shown his resolve coming to korea. the carl vincent battle group is now positioned. and the us michelin is always there. the us military last night began to deploy pa rt military last night began to deploy part ofan military last night began to deploy part of an anti—missile defence system. sparky overnight in the south. meanwhile these are big strawberry pictures yesterday from north korea. hundreds of tanks lined up north korea. hundreds of tanks lined up on the beach for a massive exercise in life fire. it is a p pa re ntly exercise in life fire. it is apparently only a tiny portion of the total artillery arsenal assuming these photographs are showing the real thing, they are a reminder that north korea has a formidable fighting force. all options are on the table. we want to bring kim jong un not to his knees but to the

table. russia and china do not seem to respect international agreements they have signed up to. well among those us senators on his way to the white house is democratjeff merkley from oregon. hejoined me from capitol hill just before he left. what do you expect from this rather unusual visit that the senators are making, you included, to the white house for this briefing. well i certainly hope to hear an overview of the strategic plan and an understanding of the gravity of the situation. an understanding that we are ina situation. an understanding that we are in a situation that if not carefully monitored and planned and executed could be spiralling out of control. so this conversation needs to include dialogue with china and oui’ to include dialogue with china and our allies and with the united nations. the white house has been ratcheting up the language at least against north korea in the last couple of weeks. do you think there isa couple of weeks. do you think there is a risk that america might paint

itself into a corner, might actually exacerbate this crisis by the tone thatis exacerbate this crisis by the tone that is coming out of the white house? certainly the concern is that if north korea was to launch a ballistic missile and the us should respond with an attack on the northern korean homeland, north korea might respond with an attack console. this is the situation where the situation spirals out of control and into war very quickly. so as you mmp and into war very quickly. so as you ramp upa and into war very quickly. so as you ramp up a threat and certainly the movement of ships into the area, the destroyers better than now connecting activities with both japan and south korea, the movement of us nuclear submarines into the area that has more than 150 cruise missiles aboard, all to send a message but what is the aim in terms ofan message but what is the aim in terms of an outcome to the situation. and how do we get there without war in. this is going to be the important

component. will it be useful at this stage for the us to tone down some of the rhetoric and tried to calm the situation? i do think i will know a lot more about this after this meeting of the white house. and here more details about our conversation with our allies, south korea and japan and china. we have been focusing a lot on the nuclear threat from north korea but you saw those extraordinary pictures coming out of the life fire exercise of conventional weapons. another indication of how quickly even just ona indication of how quickly even just on a conventional military level, m ista kes on a conventional military level, mistakes can be made and the threat that this poses to soldier song that —— just south of the border. that this poses to soldier song that -- just south of the border. north korea has artillery that could destroy the city of cell and they're prepared to act on short notice. so your point is right. some of your democratic colleagues have expressed concern about this trip to the white house, they think somehow it is an

act almost of political theatre. the normal thing would have been for you to have been briefed in the secure facilities in the senate. there's no question this is political theatre. you have 100 senators heading to the white house instead of having three 01’ white house instead of having three orfour brief is coming to white house instead of having three or four brief is coming to the senate. the senate where we have appropriate rooms for top—secret conversations. the white house when is no such room. so this is about theatre, i've little doubt that the president show up for a few moments, he will have cameras with him, i think there is a tremendous amount of political theatre here. but you are going anyway? yes, the situation in north korea is one we all have to ta ke in north korea is one we all have to take extremely seriously. and i do wa nt to take extremely seriously. and i do want to have the chance to have my collea g u es want to have the chance to have my colleagues and myself question the

administration over their objectives, their plans, how they intend to respond to certain things if they occur. what is the outcome if they occur. what is the outcome if they occur. what is the outcome if they are looking to achieve. we have to leave it there, thank you very much. the president said the other day i'm not sure kim jong un the president said the other day i'm not sure kimjong unis the president said the other day i'm not sure kim jong un is as strong proceedings he is. no one in congress is downplaying the threat of north korea but i get the sense from that interview that they are concerned that the president is painting himself into a corner. concerned that the president is painting himself into a cornerlj think there are two forming groups of opinion about what to do right 110w of opinion about what to do right now about north korea. as the crisis seems to get more urgent. there are those who believe the president is doing the right thing by putting pressure publicly and visibly with the senators going down, ratcheting up the senators going down, ratcheting up the language against north korea. they think that is useful and sending a message that this is not an administration to be messed with. and those on the other side who think we should be toning down the

rhetoric at the moment because the risk of some kind of mistake, of provoking north korea into doing something i do with conventional or nuclear weapons get increased by the rhetoric is hot as it is at the moment. so those are the counterpoints if you like in national security communities at the moment. as everyone recognises that the threat is very real from north korea. let's look at something happening just as we were coming on air. the financial markets are responding to reports that the white house has drafted in order to pull the us out of the north american free trade agreement. of course mr trump railed against this agreement during his campaign and called it a job killer. but pulling america out of nafta would come as still as something of a surprise. it is one of the largest trade agreements in the world, signed originally in 1994 by president clinton. the white house has confirmed that the head of

the national trade council has drafted an executive order with steve bannon and it is now being reviewed. the canadian dollar and mexican peso have fallen on these news reports. the canadian and mexican share prices are also down. we werejoined by mexican share prices are also down. we were joined by the chief economic adviser for alliance. what you we were joined by the chief economic adviserfor alliance. what you make of these reports estimate it is part of these reports estimate it is part of these reports estimate it is part of the negotiation approach that the trump administration is taking. of the negotiation approach that the trump administration is takinglj think the probability of the us pulling out of nafta is very low. however, they will use this to get attention from mexico and canada to try to reform certain elements of nafta. are you saying that this is just a negotiating tactic? yes, i think this is part of the approach they have ta ken think this is part of the approach they have taken with several other

areas. and so far it has worked. so the administration is continuing with what has worked for them so far. just to be clear, if the american —— the americans did pull out of nafta bought with the economic impact be notjust on canada and mexico, but globally as well. for the three members of nafta, canada, the us and mexico, it would mean the return of that phrase we thought had been put away for a long time, stagnant inflation. they would suffer a hit on growth and high inflation. so both consumers and producers would be worse off. for the rest of the world it would add to the destabilisation of existing structure. you see brexit as an element of that. so this would be destabilising both for the three economies within nafta and the global economy as well.

we are finding with brexit it is not easy to unpick a deal with the single market. is at the same with nafta, because car parts for example go back and forth across the border many times. you cannot replace something with nothing so you need a replacement because supply chains have gone right across borders. this isa very have gone right across borders. this is a very complicated equation. the reason why brexit has been a slow brexit is because people realised early on that you have to have good alternatives. and i think for any trade arrangement that has been in existence for a long time, whether brexiteer nafta, you must have an alternative. we will carry on watching the markets and this story. stay with us for another big announcement on plans for tax reform by donald trump of the american taxes are so complicated that

american taxpayers spend 7 billion hours every year filling in their tax returns. so the promise of simplifying the system has enormous appeal. but it has proved almost impossible to do. here is what donald trump would like to do. he plans to cut corporate tax rates from 35 to 15%, a drop of 20%. there would be taxed breaks for childcare expenses. and also a cut in tax rates for individuals. the exact figure still to be worked through. but it is not clear how the white house plans to pay for these cuts. here was gary cohn just a short time ago. the president is going to seize this opportunity by leading the most significant tax reform legislation since 1986 and one of the biggest tax cuts in the american history. we have been working on this very long time. we have had great meetings, we had a great meeting last night with the leadership of the

house in the senate, we have agreed on many of the important principles of tax reform. we look forward to working together with the house and the senate very closely in the weeks ahead. one of the reasons of course that financial markets have been so giddy ever since donald trump was elected is exactly this promise of tax reform and particularly a cut in the corporate tax rate down to 15%. do you think it is important now that the white house lays out how it is going to pay for that proposed tax cut? it is very important and there are cut? it is very important and there a re two cut? it is very important and there are two elements to the tax plan. one most people would agree on, tax reform. simplifying the tax system, making it easier, making it transparent and making it less captive by special interests. the majority of people would agree on this. the other element is aggressive tax cuts. which is the

other element of the trump administration, hear people need details because it is very simple, it isa details because it is very simple, it is a race between economic growth and debt. if economic growth when fine but if debt wins then the economy will be worse off. so what people are going to be looking at closely when the details come out, how much growth will this promote and will it be enough to offset what is likely to be a higher deficit. and will it be enough to offset what is likely to be a higher deficitm is likely to be a higher deficitm isa is likely to be a higher deficitm is a fascinating topic. just today in the uk the opposition labour party said we want to pay for doctors and nurses by putting up corporate tax rates so big business pays for it. and in america they have completely the opposite attitude. i just have completely the opposite attitude. ijust wonder, is there any evidence at all that cutting corporate tax rates so low actually does what is is meant to do. the

evidence is it is not sufficient so if you just do that and nothing else, profits will go up but the re st of else, profits will go up but the rest of the economy will not feel it. that is the concern. that you may end up simply by altering the distribution among corporations and the rest of the economy. so it is not sufficient. to make it sufficient you have to move on a numberof other sufficient you have to move on a number of other areas sufficient you have to move on a numberof otherareas and sufficient you have to move on a number of other areas and that is why it is important to put this tax plan in the context of what else is going to happen to enhance productivity of labour, on education reform, on infrastructure building. thank you very much. that is the issue, are the tax cuts pro—corporate profits or pro—economic growth. and that i think is where the debate is at the moment. russia now and the administration

will want to keep the focus on jobs and tax reform this weekend — what they will not want to talk about is that russia enquiry. it is back on the front pages. because it has now emerged michael flynn, the former national security advisor who stood down in february, did not disclose foreign payments he had received from russia and turkey. general flynn would have needed special permission for his appearance at a gala in 2015 sponsored by russia today, for which he was paid $45,000. for his work lobbying on behalf of the turkish government, he was paid more than half a million dollars. here was the reaction from the republican chairman of the house oversight committee jason chaffetz. that money was received by general flynn, we believe that it was. that money needs to be recovered. as a former military officer, you simply cannot take money from russia, turkey, or anybody else and it appears as if he did take that money. it was inappropriate and there are repercussions for the violations of law. but this was the response from the white house. to ask for every call and contact that a national security adviser

made is pretty outlandish. right now, to ask the white house to produce documents that were not in the possession of the white house is ridiculous. everything that he did was prior to coming to this white house. there is nothing that is being asked for in respect to his service here at the white house. that would be a matter for them to look into, not for us. again, that would need to go to general flynn. iam i am puzzled. the white house seems to be saying we did not know what was going on with general flynn before he came to the white house war before he came to the campaign. we were running these pictures of general flynn at this dinner with president putin, this particular picture, before the inauguration. they must have known that he was being paid for an event like this put up orat being paid for an event like this put up or at least could have been. there are two big issues, one is the white house vetting process under

the trump administration. the questions about whether michael flynn was properly vetted or what donald trump just a keen to have flynn was properly vetted or what donald trumpjust a keen to have him in office that they took his word when he killed in those forms and they did not check what he had actually building. the second issue i think, surrounding why the white house is not giving up these documents. there is no evidence at all yet that the trump campaign had links with russia to try to influence the american election but every time the white house says we're not going to give up these documents people get suspicious. smoke and fire and all that. so the white house is not doing yourself any favours by not being transparent on this issue. flynn had to go and why not be clear about what actually happened. president trump may have given up the push to fund his border wall in the spending bill that has to pass this week but that doesn't mean he's giving up on the key campaign pledge — shrugging off questions about how it will be paid for. landowners in texas have received letters ordering them

to sell their land to the government to make way for the wall — while more than 200 building firms have submitted bids to construct the barrier — said to be over 16—hundred kilometres long. as our north america correspondent james cook reports from el paso in texas — at least one of the bidders has been receiving death threats. on the us—mexico border a bizarre beauty contest is about to begin. some 200 companies have submitted bids to build donald trump's wall. soon a handful will be invited to make prototypes. the bids include some eye—catching designs. there is a wall in the medieval style. another which doubles as a nuclear waste store. this one, made of solar panels, and even a design for a barrier adorned with glittering gems. some though, are less outlandish. this will be 30 feet high and then six feet below in the footing. michael evangelista said he had to search his soul before bidding, as a latino who wants to build

the wall, he has received numerous death threats. his voice mail is not pleasant. i know that you're trying to build that wall and i think it's disgusting, a disgrace. and you are a traitor. you had better watch your back. there are plenty of people out there like me that would love to see you get hurt. so why on earth did he get involved at all? members of my own family were initially upset about it. but when they understood and i explained to them that the reason why we are entering this conversation is because we do not want this wall to have lethal options including an electrified fence or razor wire. the border wall is a reality and if it is going to be done, we needed it to be done right. it won't be easy. a treaty with mexico prohibits building on the edge of the rio grande. instead the proposed route slices through private property. bitter battles loom. this is where they want to build a wall. this would be part of the section

that they want, 60 feet wide by over a mile long. but it would be no man's land because who is going to want that property? noel benavides has received a government letter telling him his land will be cut into by the wall. we need access to the river, we have water rights, we have several feet of water rights from the river that right now we're not using, but in the future we probably will. a wall, you go back in history, it has never worked. people just go over it. you've got a 20 foot wall, but someone is going to build a 21 foot ladder to go over it. he is not the only critic. in fact all along the border there is scepticism. here in texas opposition to lengthening and strengthening this barrier comes notjust from president trump's democratic opponents. notjust from mexico across there. but also from quite a few republicans. among them is this congressman.

will hurd used to be a cia spy. now he is battling his own president on the home front. i think building a wall from sea to shining sea is the most expensive and least effective way to do border security. we should be using technology, we should be using people, we should be increasing intelligence on the bad guys that we are trying to stop and stop them before they get to our border. these are all things that are better use of american taxpayer dollars. the white house continues to claim that the cost of a bigger, better barrier, will be met in the end by mexico. critics say that it's fantasy. but president trump still insists that his wall will be built. james cook, bbc news, el paso in texas. well it will be built but the question is who is going to pay. the president is sending his best wishes today to the first lady, melania trump — it is her birthday. he is not sending his fond wishes however to the us

districtjudge william orrick. no and that's becausejudge orrick of san francisco has just blocked the president's executive order to withhold money from sanctuary cities — those are cities that offer sanctuary to illegal immigrants. it is the third time judges have blocked one of his orders — and each time the stop has come from the ninth circuit court in san francisco. once again the president took to twitter this morning to complain... first the ninth circuit rules against the ban and now it hits again on sanctuary cities—both ridiculous rulings. see you in the supreme court! there is a technical issue because thejudge is not part of there is a technical issue because the judge is not part of the there is a technical issue because thejudge is not part of the ninth circuit. he would appeal to that but we are getting into legal details. there is an issue here and the president had a point that there seems to be more liberal and more conservative courts in the us and that may come as a surprise to people who live in countries where judges are not politically appointed. but here they are by presidents and you end up with what

is called for shopping work if you have a political cause you go to a conservative court or a more liberal court and you hope your calls will be heard by one of the judges there. so he thinks there are too many liberaljudges in so he thinks there are too many liberal judges in san so he thinks there are too many liberaljudges in san francisco and of course democrats are going to san francisco. the thing is there has been a lot of anger on the front pages today saying he and he goes again, criticising thejudges. some people would say you know what, judges are big boys and girls, they know the rough—and—tumble of the legal world, they make big decisions, they do have much power. why should they not be criticised. decisions, they do have much power. why should they not be criticisedlj do why should they not be criticised.” do not think it is undermining the credibility of the judges, not saying so—called judges which she had done before. 18 of the 25judges on the ninth circuit court were appointed by democratic presidents for them and they tend to be more democrat. so he has a point but the thing is republicans have played

this game before because under barack obama this game before because under ba rack obama conservatives this game before because under barack obama conservatives went to court syntaxes which tended to be more conservative in order to return some of the executive orders of president obama. so both sides play this game. he has 147judges to appoint. you're watching 100 days from bbc news. still to come for viewers on the bbc news channel and bbc world news. how do you contain the threat that is north korea. senators are going to the white house for a special briefing. and in france emmanuel macron was booed by factory workers in his hometown. the reception was much warmerfor his rival, we in his hometown. the reception was much warmer for his rival, we will be finding out why. that is all still to come. try and sunny day for some for

others the shower clouds are still around and some of them pretty menacing. they continued through the night and so far we have the raider charts, development with power —— parts of the south and east. we still have that chilly northerly airflow but scotland and northern ireland not feeling as cold as it did yesterday. the showers get heavier across eastern england into the afternoon and some rumbles of thunder and hail mixed in with that as well. showers also affecting parts of the east midlands but further west due showers around through the afternoon, many places will be dry. temperatures still on the low side for the time of year. across the north of england. but with the wind slightly larger than yesterday not feeling quite so cold. into the evening across northern

ireland and men in scotland pure showers around. the showers this evening in east anglia and the south—east quickly fade away. but occasional rain in scotland and northern ireland, keeping temperatures up through the night. the chill is still on though with southern parts of england and wales and temperatures below freezing in some areas. so cold and frosty start across the south but a bright start here clouding over. a cloudy and damp start for northern england but slowly brightening up. only a few showers and increasing amounts of sunshine breaking through into the afternoon. still feeling a bit chilly further south. into friday with slowly start to lose the northerly akpro. many places dry after a frosty start. temperatures slowly on the up back into double figures quite widely. and the trend

continues into saturday with a southerly airflow. saturday looks like the birthday of the bank holiday weekend at the moment because by sunday and monday low it comes into play bringing windier but also milder weather. but also some rain at times. we will keep you updated on night over the next few days. welcome back to 100 days with me, katty kay, in new york and christian fraser in london. our top story... donald trump invites the entire us senate to the white house for a briefing on north korea. this is about theatre. i have little doubt that the president will show up for a few moments, that he will have cameras with him. i think there is a tremendous amount of political theatre here. there are reports that the white house has drafted an order to pull the us out of the north american free trade agreement, or nafta.

mr trump has called the trade agreement with canada and mexico "a job killer". more now on one of our main stories — and in the next hour the us senate will decamp to the white house. as a top us admiral warns lawmakers that a north korean attack on the us is quite possible, mr trump has summoned all the senators for a briefing on the crisis. they are all heading down there at. —— down there right now. for more, let's talk to congressman bradley byrne, who's on capitol hill. everybody agrees that the crisis is real and seems to be getting more urgent. what does the trump administration hoped to do about it? you are seeing a multilayered response, first working with the chinese, who have a lot of influence

with north korea. we are seeing some effects, the chinese doing some things to bring the north koreans backin things to bring the north koreans back ina things to bring the north koreans back in a bit. you are seeing the trump administration pushing primary and secondary economic sanctions. that will also have a good effect. the third layer is the military power we are showing, letting them know we are serious and we have assets to bring to bear in that part of the world if necessary. the third layer is the last option we want to use but we have to show them that we haveit use but we have to show them that we have it and have the will to use it if necessary. we can see the senators getting in buses and going to the white house. that is being televised, it is part of the display of america and the white house taking this seriously. kym nelson has no incentive to give up his nuclear arsenal. —— kim

has no incentive to give up his nucleararsenal. —— kim il—sung. if they give it up that is the end of them as a nuclear state. you will never get them to voluntarily riddling quiz them.” never get them to voluntarily riddling quiz them. i don't anticipate any thing permanent but at least temporarily we can get them to stand down. the chinese have the biggest stick here. president trump i think is right to work with the chinese to get him to back off at least for a period of time. you are right, he sees this as a threat to his personal existence, because the regime in his mind is at stake. he believes he will be at stake as long as he is considered to be a nuclear power. we can't accept north korea asa power. we can't accept north korea as a nuclear power because of the danger notjust as a nuclear power because of the danger not just the as a nuclear power because of the danger notjust the people in that pa rt danger notjust the people in that part of the world but to people in the us and other parts of the world.

admiral harry harris, who heads the pacific council, said the us is weighing whether it needs to put new missile interceptors on hawaii on which is in range of kimjong—un's missiles. is that debate the us has to have, protection on us soil, things like missile protection?” was there for his testimony today andi was there for his testimony today and i think he was painting a very realistic picture of the us. the ultimate decisions for that are up to the ticket of branch but it is our obligation to authorise and appropriate the money to pay for it so we will be part of that decision. i think he is wise to tell us the things he told us. we may have to do a number of things we are not accustomed to doing to make sure we are protecting the us, hawaii and

the west coast. i was of course confusing my kims, the younger one with his grandfather. that is the ultimate issue, the north does not wa nt to ultimate issue, the north does not want to give up its nuclear weapons and it believes that if it does so that will be the end of the state. how can any country negotiate to get it to do so? even the chinese, it seems to me, don't have that power, if they had that interest. that is the problem, how you get leverage. the new york times said they have enough material to make nuclear bombs every six or seven weeks, they would have an arsenal as big as pakistan in a short period of time. we have seen the pictures of the beach, that is 2% of what kim has in terms of conventional weapons. north korea is not easily

neutralised and this is what these senators and congressmen are saying, that it has to be, you would think, a diplomatic solution somehow, but how do you get the leverage? you have to imagine that kim jong—un is sitting in pyongyang, watching what happened to colonel gaddafi in libya, who gave up his nuclear weapons and found himself out of office and out of life, thinking, it didn't work then, i am not going to go down that same route. they are two very different prospect. libya is an awfully lot different to north korea. the french presidential frontrunner, emmanuel macron, was in his home town in northern france today but this probably wasn't the welcome he was expecting. booing factory workers, whose jobs are under threat, booed mr macron as he arrived

to talk to them, on somewhat of a chaotic visit. no such worries for his rival, the far right‘s marine le pen. this was a surprise visit to the same factory, arranged at the last minute, perhaps to hijack mr macron's appearance. ms le pen's welcome was rather different. the factory is situated in amiens. we were there last week, if you were watching. it is part of the french "rust belt", where hundreds ofjobs have been lost. ms le pen's anti—globalisation message is going down pretty well in the town. we'rejoined by agnes poirier of the french weekly magazine marianne. do you think it is possible for marine le pen, by turning up at factories like this, saying she is the candidate of the factory worker, not the corporation, to try to eat into macron's support? she has

nothing to lose. what we have seen since sunday evening and macron arriving, 32 points ahead of marine le pen, he finds it difficult to think he is not already president, and that is quite dangerous. he should work. he went to celebrate his victory on the first round at a paris brasserie with his supporters and people didn't like it so much. jacques chirac went through to the second round and he didn't rejoice, and the element of gravity as is probably still something that the macron team is not grasping. francois hollande, the current

president, today reminded macron that it president, today reminded macron thatitis president, today reminded macron that it is not a done deal, that he should keep working. it is really interesting because we were talking about hillary clinton last week and this new book called shattered, and the author said that her campaign had no sense of purpose, nobody had figured out how to make the campaign about something more than hillary. i get the sense that that is going on with mr macron. yes, but to be fair he isa with mr macron. yes, but to be fair he is a formidable political phenomenon, if you consider that his movement didn't exist 30 months ago. the fact that he is independent and he isa the fact that he is independent and he is a centrist and is very new and very young, he is also responsible for the fact that the two mainstream political parties have disappeared for the second round. everybody

rallies around him. it is not really that marine le pen loses in two weeks' time, that he should win rather than leaving it to circumstances. a lot of people will vote for him by default. he is the anti—le pen candidate. this is a poster that marine le pen has put out. she has stood down as the political leader, if you will, of the front national. you can't see on that poster that she is the leader of the front national, there is a blue rose, it is very soft, she looks like the mother of the nation, choose france, she says. she is trying to stand outside the party system and say, elect me as a woman, elect me as president. she is very

astute, she has proved to be a shrewd politician since being voted to the helm of her party, and she hasn't put a foot wrong sense really. you see what she is trying to do, she is trying to look already very presidential, already above parties. she stepped down and she presents herself as independent, just like macron. she is bouncing about because she didn't do a very good campaign, a few months ago she was credited at 28%. it was a disappointment for her and her party that she managed to get 21%, which of course is enormous. thank you very much for that. it will be interesting when they come head—to—head in the debate next wednesday. there were clashes today between the prime minister theresa may and the

leader of the opposition jeremy corbyn in the final pmo ahead of the general election in june. mr corbyn said the conservative party only represented the view of the minority but mrs may said voting for her would mean better brexit negotiations for britain. the election is a choice, on the 8th ofjune, the election is a choice, on the 8th of june, between the election is a choice, on the 8th ofjune, between a conservative government for the few and a labour government for the few and a labour government that will stand up for all of our people. the choice is clear. every vote for him is a vote for a chaotic brexit. every vote for me isa for a chaotic brexit. every vote for me is a vote to strengthen our hand in negotiating the best deal for britain. the british prime minister is holding talks with the european presidentjean—claude junker and the european negotiator. there is a

summit on friday and we will cover that because we have an extra programme on 100 days which coincides with their first meeting on brexit. a reminder that we have a special programme this friday — day 99 of the trump administration. the programme will also carry on beyond the 100th day, watching these big political events on either side of the atlantic. the headlines just before quarter to eight. in the last pmo before the general election, jeremy corbyn and theresa may traded blows about the nhs, security and leadership. tonight theresa may is meeting leading eu negotiators at downing street to discuss the uk's brexit plans. tax officials have raided west ham

and newcastle united as part of an investigation into suspected fraud. a look at the markets at close of play in london. there was a slight rise. small rises on the dow and nasdaq. in a moment — one rhino's search for a partner on the dating app tinder. the prime minister, theresa may, is meeting the european commission presidentjean—claude juncker and the eu's chief brexit negotiator, michel barnier. let's get more from our political correspondent in westminster. i can't ican't imagine i can't imagine what is on the agenda! 0h, i can't imagine what is on the agenda! oh, to be a fly on the wall. they don't meet very often, jean—claude juncker and theresa may, they meet at summits in brussels. it

is the first time theresa may will have met michel barnier face—to—face. we talk about the daily skirmish around the general election. meetings like this could have a much longer and more important bearing on how brexit unfolds in the next few months. these are critical days for the eu, ministers meeting in luxembourg tomorrow to finalise their negotiating mandate ahead of a european council meeting at the weekend that won't of course include the uk, we are not in the room until we sit down and negotiate. i am sure this evening in downing street they will be discussing the choreography of brexit and the order in which things will be discussed, the divorce deal, the terms of separation, the rights of eu citizens and some talk about the future trading relationship between the uk and eu. what about the

pending election, does that get in the way of anything that might be discussed? to the eu it doesn't make any difference whatsoever. their timetable, we know, is that they will