and iran will not succeed. the estimate actually comes from two us officials _ the estimate actually comes from two us officials — that iran is preparing a strike against israel that would use more than 100 drones, dolens— that would use more than 100 drones, dozens of— that would use more than 100 drones, dozens of cruise missiles, and perhaps— dozens of cruise missiles, and perhaps ballistic missiles as well. those people i spoke to, most people shrugged . their shoulders and say, "look, we live with thisi "threat all the time." there was a sort of. resignation about it. there wasn't any sense _ of heightened concern or imminent threat in how they felt. welcome to the programme, let's get the latest headlines now. belgium is formally investigating russian attempts to influence the outcome of the european elections. prime minister alexander de croo said moscow's aim was to bring more

pro—russian candidates into the european parliament. large numbers of people have been leaving their homes in the southern russian city of orenberg, where floodwaters are rising. officials have warned that the situation along the swollen ural river is critical. the un refugee chief has warned of a crisis in europe, if displaced sudanese people don't get more assistance. filippo grandi said criminals were poised to exploit refugees by bringing them towards the continent. researchers have discovered the cause of the brightest burst of light ever recorded. the burst of light, spotted in 2022, is now known to have had an exploding star at its heart. president biden has given iran a stark message after us officials warned that tehran could launch a major attack on israel and that it could happen soon. these warnings follow an air strike in syria last week on an iranian diplomatic compound in damascus, that killed several military advisers, including a top general.

us officials have told cbs news an attack could involve more than 100 drones and dozens of missiles. washington has said it's taking the threat of an iranian attack listen to this exchange between the american president and reporters that took place a short time ago. mr president, what is your message to iran in at this moment? don't. are american troops at risk as well, mr president? we are devoted to the defence of israel, we will support israel, we will help defend israel and iran will not succeed. thank you very much. earlier, us defence spokesperson john kirby was talking about the timing of the threat. we're watching this very, very closely. we still deemed the potential threat by iran here to be real, to be viable, certainly credible. and we're watching it

as closely as we can. right now, our focus is on having conversations with our israeli counterparts and making sure — not just conversations — but making sure that they have what they need and that they're able to defend themselves. and as i think, you know, we're also clearly it would be imprudent if we didn't take a look at our own posture in the region to make sure that we're properly prepared as well. meanwhile, the iranian—backed hezbollah group in southern lebanon has said it has fired dozens of rockets at artillery positions in northern israel. it said the move was in response to previous israeli strikes in southern villages. the israeli military said it had identified a0 launches, some of which were intercepted. our diplomatic correspondent james landale says officials live now to ali vaez, crisis group's iran project director and senior adviser to the president. hello to you. great to be with you.

just a quick— hello to you. great to be with you. just a quick note _ hello to you. great to be with you. just a quick note on _ hello to you. great to be with you. just a quick note on those - just a quick note on those attacks from hezbollah that we've been hearing about in the last few hours, a lot of commentators saying this is pretty much in keeping with what they've been doing on a near daily basis over the last few they�*ve been doing on a near daily basis over the last few months— they've been doing on a near daily basis over the last few months— is that what you would see, rather than some stomach retaliation by proxy from iran? ~ , , ., �* ~ from iran? absolutely, i don't think iran wants to _ from iran? absolutely, i don't think iran wants to sacrifice _ from iran? absolutely, i don't think iran wants to sacrifice hezbollah . from iran? absolutely, i don't think iran wants to sacrifice hezbollah or| iran wants to sacrifice hezbollah or bring hezbollah into the fray at the stage. hezbollah is really the tip of the spear and iran will preserve it for the defence of its own land as a last resort, i doubt hezbollah would get involved at this stage. where do you think this is going, what's your assessment of what iran will be considering right now? look. will be considering right now? look, the reality is — will be considering right now? look, the reality is that _ will be considering right now? look, the reality is that there _ will be considering right now? look, the reality is that there are - will be considering right now? look, the reality is that there are no - the reality is that there are no real good options for iran, every option is fraught with risks. at this stage, the problem iranian as i haveis this stage, the problem iranian as i have is that they have to respond in a way that is not too little,

because in that scenario they would because in that scenario they would be unable to save face either at home with their own core constituents, or their allies in the region. but the response can also not be too much because in that case, they might lose their head and they might end up in a direct military confrontation with much more powerful israeli and/or us militaries. so it's a very difficult operation for them to calibrate, and it does appear that iran prefers to respond directly against an israeli asset. i respond directly against an israeli asset. , , , ., asset. i suppose the question will be, what will _ asset. i suppose the question will be, what will israel _ asset. i suppose the question will be, what will israel do _ asset. i suppose the question will be, what will israel do in - asset. i suppose the question will| be, what will israel do in response to that? what do you think israel's aim was in the first place in launching this attack in syria on the consulate in damascus? look, israel has been _ the consulate in damascus? look, israel has been systematically - israel has been systematically trying to prevent iran from defeating its military foothold in syria, it's a campaign that's called the war between wars — it started when the syrian civil war started

and iran started sending more military assets and deploying personnel, and military advisers to syria. but the reality is in the past few months, israel has been much more targeting senior commanders of iran, around 18 ir cg personnel and commanders have been killed. and for iran, the problem is targeting an iranian consulate basically means that there is no safe havens for iran to operate in in syria, and iran's militaries presence there will become unsustainable. this is a military residence for which iran has paid a very high price in blood and repetition, and its regional deterrence would be disastrous for iran if it doesn't respond to israel. but again, the problem is if it responds in a way that elicits an israeli counter strike on iranian soil, then we will end up in a regional confrontation that would be

disastrous. 50 regional confrontation that would be disastrous. ., , ., , disastrous. so disastrous if it does or doesn't- — disastrous. so disastrous if it does or doesn't. we've _ disastrous. so disastrous if it does or doesn't. we've heard _ disastrous. so disastrous if it does or doesn't. we've heard from - disastrous. so disastrous if it does or doesn't. we've heard from the l disastrous. so disastrous if it does l or doesn't. we've heard from the us it wasn't told in advance about israel's attack, i suppose that's a symptom of the relations and where they are at the moment. there is sure to be a lot of diplomatic efforts going on right now to try to stop things spreading to the region — what do you think the reason would've been for these us officials talking to our cbs partner in the us aboutjust how big this attack could be in terms of them saying things it could be 100 drones — why would they be doing that? i could be 100 drones - why would they be doing that?— be doing that? i think the us is t in: to be doing that? i think the us is trying to signal— be doing that? i think the us is trying to signal to _ be doing that? i think the us is trying to signal to iran - be doing that? i think the us is trying to signal to iran that - be doing that? i think the us is trying to signal to iran that it i trying to signal to iran that it should not miscalculate and believe it this moment, the relations between the netanyahu government and the biden administration are strained, that the us will not have the back of israel. and it is important for the iranians to understand that because that would then help them further measure what they are going to do and what the

consequences of their actions would be. my own guess is that, because we've seen a similar scenario in 2020 when the us killed general silly money and iran conducted a spectacular rack tobacco attack in iraq on us bases that thankfully didn't result in any casualties and the tit—for—tat remained limited in scope and time, that's the kind of response that iran is trying to get, and in order to ensure iran doesn't miscalculate, the us is signalling both its support for israel and its full knowledge of what iran is doing. full knowledge of what iran is doinu. . ~' full knowledge of what iran is doinu. . . ., .~ doing. thank you so much for talking to us, doing. thank you so much for talking to us. thank— doing. thank you so much for talking to us, thank you. _ doing. thank you so much for talking to us, thank you. my _ doing. thank you so much for talking to us, thank you. my pleasure. - let's bring on my panel. i'm joined by andrew fisher, former director of policy for the labour party — and former

gop strategist, rina shah. ifi if i can start with you first, what do you think of what he was just saying in terms of what america is trying to do right now to really stop iran's reaction being too big? well, i'm certainly struck by this moment, as are many americans — but folks in the national security community, ifeel very folks in the national security community, i feel very safe to say, are seeing more of the same from their commander—in—chief. joe biden has been accused of taking a drip drop approach to a lot of the geopolitical tension that we've got our hands in from here in these united states. so in this moment, i think it's safe to say that his approach is safe — it's acknowledging, yes, we see you iran for we know you are still a threat and want to engage us, vis—a—vis israel. but again, what you seeing biden do is nothing new, this is a

continuation of the playbook of saying, "we will have israel's back no matter what." so right now, what we are seeing is iran trying to push its limits with us, but the question really remains, will change his response? and we just don't know right now, it's looking very steady and, as expected right now, which doesn't give me great hope for the future. . �* , , , ., future. that's the issue with iran, but in terms _ future. that's the issue with iran, but in terms of _ future. that's the issue with iran, but in terms of the _ future. that's the issue with iran, but in terms of the relationship . but in terms of the relationship between the us and israel, as i was saying, they weren't alerted to this attack in advance, but we know things have been really strained recently — what does biden need to do to show that he has got control? right now, that's almost a question does your— right now, that's almost a question does your here in washington, dc, what _ does your here in washington, dc, what can— does your here in washington, dc, what can biden do does your here in washington, dc, what can biden— does your here in washington, dc, what can biden do to win the upper hand back? — what can biden do to win the upper hand back? it _ what can biden do to win the upper hand back? it feels _ what can biden do to win the upper hand back? it feels like _ what can biden do to win the upper hand back? it feels like even - hand back? it feels like even netanyahu has it, and he's almost flaunting in the face of americans that he can do whatever he wants without biden really coming down on

him and continuing to, again, propagate that line that "we will have israel's back no matter what." you have people pushing the limits here with these united states and seeing just what biden will do. and i think they know that he's not a mad man, he's not somebody that's predisposed to erratic action, so he'll continue to be steady and keep his hands steady here at the wheel — but this is a moment in which i don't think anything is changing anytime soon, especially not with this relationship between netanyahu and biden. ijust don't see what can change things or the calculus for how also israel will change its actions towards gaza as well, which is what a lot of americans want to. andrew, to you, i see also today we've had the uk reaffirming its support for israel, countries are keen to stress that in terms of this iranian threat. where do you see the uk's iranian threat. where do you see the uk's role in this, in terms of

showing the pressure it might be putting on in terms of israel and what it can do diplomatically, in terms of the contagion, the spread of this conflict in the region — that would be disastrous, as my former guest was saying. it that would be disastrous, as my former guest was saying. it would be, i think— former guest was saying. it would be, i think both — former guest was saying. it would be, i think both the _ former guest was saying. it would be, | think both the us _ former guest was saying. it would be, | think both the us and uk - former guest was saying. it would | be, i think both the us and uk are looking _ be, i think both the us and uk are looking extremely weak and netanyahu is taking _ looking extremely weak and netanyahu is taking full advantage of that. we saw the _ is taking full advantage of that. we saw the pantomime, which i think was primarily— saw the pantomime, which i think was primarily for— saw the pantomime, which i think was primarily for domestic audiences in the us— primarily for domestic audiences in the us and — primarily for domestic audiences in the us and uk of the security council— the us and uk of the security council motion calling for an immediate cease—fire, which britain voted _ immediate cease—fire, which britain voted for. _ immediate cease—fire, which britain voted for, the us didn't use its veto— voted for, the us didn't use its veto in— voted for, the us didn't use its veto in a — voted for, the us didn't use its veto in a very rare occasion, allowing _ veto in a very rare occasion, allowing the motion to pass. since then. _ allowing the motion to pass. since then, both — allowing the motion to pass. since then, both the us and uk have affirmed — then, both the us and uk have affirmed they fully back israel and are still— affirmed they fully back israel and are still sending weapons. so there's— are still sending weapons. so there's not any real genuine commitment to a cease—fire because if you _ commitment to a cease—fire because if you genuinely want one, you don't keep arming one of the parties. and when _ keep arming one of the parties. and when it— keep arming one of the parties. and when it comes to iran, look, i detest — when it comes to iran, look, i detest the _ when it comes to iran, look, i detest the iranian regime, as i suspect— detest the iranian regime, as i suspect most people do — but israel

attacked _ suspect most people do — but israel attacked an— suspect most people do — but israel attacked an iranian consulate in another— attacked an iranian consulate in another country, in syria, and we were _ another country, in syria, and we were just — another country, in syria, and we were just talking about the right of israel— were just talking about the right of israel to— were just talking about the right of israel to defend itself — surely that applies to iran as well. we are in a very— that applies to iran as well. we are in a very dangerous moment here where _ in a very dangerous moment here where we — in a very dangerous moment here where we can see escalation, we see israel— where we can see escalation, we see israel bombing and less benign —— lebanon. — israel bombing and less benign —— lebanon, there's been the houthis and shipping channels, so there is a real risk— and shipping channels, so there is a real risk of— and shipping channels, so there is a real risk of this getting out of control. at the moment it doesn't look like — control. at the moment it doesn't look like any of the potential leaders _ look like any of the potential leaders of the free world, as they like to— leaders of the free world, as they like to call— leaders of the free world, as they like to call themselves, have any handle _ like to call themselves, have any handle on — like to call themselves, have any handle on this or any idea on what to do. _ handle on this or any idea on what to do. and — handle on this or any idea on what to do. and i— handle on this or any idea on what to do, and i suspect because both are up— to do, and i suspect because both are up for— to do, and i suspect because both are up for election later this year, they are _ are up for election later this year, they are very cautious of doing anything — they are very cautious of doing anything too dramatic at this point that may— anything too dramatic at this point that may alienate certain voters. but there's a very big risk that this gets — but there's a very big risk that this gets out of control. and we talk about— this gets out of control. and we talk about this pantomime at the top level of— talk about this pantomime at the top level of great leaders and what they are doing. _ level of great leaders and what they are doing, but 34,000 palestinians are doing, but 34,000 palestinians are dead _ are doing, but 34,000 palestinians are dead - — are doing, but 34,000 palestinians are dead — where does this stop? we

had another— are dead — where does this stop? we had another report today from cnn journalists, a direct attack on them from _ journalists, a direct attack on them from military, we've seen un officials — from military, we've seen un officials being killed as well. at what _ officials being killed as well. at what point do we say to israel, "is enough _ what point do we say to israel, "is enough -- — what point do we say to israel, "is enough —— enough is enough, you've slaughtered — enough —— enough is enough, you've slaughtered thousands of people, including journalists and aid workers. _ including journalists and aid workers, including women and children" _ workers, including women and children." at what point do we say, "this— children." at what point do we say, "this is— children." at what point do we say, "this is too — children." at what point do we say, "this is too much?" at the moment, the us— "this is too much?" at the moment, the us and _ "this is too much?" at the moment, the us and the uk aren't offering any solution to this at all, and it's heartbreaking to watch. thank ou ve it's heartbreaking to watch. thank you very much _ it's heartbreaking to watch. thank you very much for _ it's heartbreaking to watch. thank you very much for the _ it's heartbreaking to watch. thank you very much for the moment. it's heartbreaking to watch. thank l you very much for the moment from both of you. it's been a dramtic day at the the public inquiry into the post office scandal — which has been hearing from two of the most senior managers in charge at the time. the inquiry is looking into how the faulty it system — known as horizon — led to hundreds of people being wrongly convicted of theft and fraud. alan cook, the former managing

director of the post office, said at the time he did not know the company was bringing prosecutions against sub—postmasters. i was unaware that the post office were the prosecuting authority, you see — i knew there were court cases, but i didn't realise that the post office, in about two thirds of the cases, had initiated the prosecution, as opposed to, you know, the dpp or police, or whatever. adam crozier was chief executive of royal mail, which at that time owned the post office, also said he did not know about what he called the "tragic situation" facing sub—postmasters. just listen to this exchange with king's counsel sam stein. it appears that nobody took responsibility for the prosecution of sub— postmasters. nobody took oversight, nobody at all, are you proud of that? no. how much were you paid in your time as chairman of rmg? i would need to look back,

i'm sure it's absolutely available in all of the annual reports. it's millions, isn't it, mr crozier? yes, it probably is, yes. andrew, what did you make of those two saying theyjust didn't know? it's astonishing that people who are the managing director and chief executive, both paid 6—7 figure salaries. — executive, both paid 6—7 figure salaries, don't know what's going on inside _ salaries, don't know what's going on inside their— salaries, don't know what's going on inside their own organisation. they are either— inside their own organisation. they are either incompetent or lying, and neither— are either incompetent or lying, and neither reflects well on them. it's astonishing, people may not know but these _ astonishing, people may not know but these people went through — the sub postmasters are the people who ran small— postmasters are the people who ran small local — postmasters are the people who ran small local post offices, they went through— small local post offices, they went through decades of trauma basically by being _ through decades of trauma basically by being accused of breaking the law, fiddling the books. some were imprisoned, and for these people to say "i _ imprisoned, and for these people to say "i didn't— imprisoned, and for these people to say "i didn't understand what was going _ say "i didn't understand what was going on." — say "i didn't understand what was going on," even though they were the head of— going on," even though they were the head of the _ going on," even though they were the head of the organisation, isjust appalling. — head of the organisation, isjust appalling, which ever way you look at it. _ appalling, which ever way you look at it, whether you believe them or think— at it, whether you believe them or think they— at it, whether you believe them or

think they must be lying, it really comes— think they must be lying, it really comes across badly. i think what it tells people is the importance of having _ tells people is the importance of having a — tells people is the importance of having a trade union as well, someone _ having a trade union as well, someone looking out for you in the workplace — someone looking out for you in the workplace because it's clear time and again— workplace because it's clear time and again that these bosses at the top are _ and again that these bosses at the top are just so far removed from the average _ top are just so far removed from the average worker who they supposedly represent. _ average worker who they supposedly represent, you do need your own back-up — represent, you do need your own back-up in — represent, you do need your own back—up in the workplace, so that's a key— back—up in the workplace, so that's a key lesson— back—up in the workplace, so that's a key lesson is well. it back-up in the workplace, so that's a key lesson is well.— a key lesson is well. it 'ust shows that we fl a key lesson is well. it 'ust shows that we see these h a key lesson is well. itjust shows that we see these inquiries - a key lesson is well. itjust shows that we see these inquiries all. a key lesson is well. itjust shows| that we see these inquiries all the time, these investigations, and all the time we hear people saying "it wasn't my responsibility i didn't know," then who did? who will ever take responsibilities? and terms of accountability, it seems so hard to pin senior people down on anything. this seems really clear—cut to me, the facts are there. when cook was in charge, it seems over the course of four years, there were hundreds of four years, there were hundreds of people prosecuted. this is not just a rare case where this was a dozen people wrongly prosecuted — we're talking about hundreds, so

this is an honest situation where anyone was asleep at the wheel, these are bold—faced lies, people who believed that they are in many ways what we call over on the side of the pond above the law, and they should not be touched because whatever they say it goes. i think whatever they say it goes. i think what i find most confusing in this case where, again, everything is clear—cut and direct, is cook saying there would've been a higher bar for these prosecutions if there had been an outside body like the crown prosecution services, if those people had brought the case. i don't agree with that, i think this is all passing the buck and accountability should win out here, but it's hard to tell how that happens when again, it seems that there's some bold—faced lying happening here. they're saying they didn't know, and we will see what this public inquiry finds. let's take a short break for now but stay with us and we'll be back shortly. around the world and across

the uk, this is bbc news.

us vice president kamala harris is heading to arizona, to highlight the issue of reproductive rights. it comes after the state's supreme court recently reinstated a near—total abortion ban from 1864. that makes performing an abortion punishable by 2—5 years in prison, except when the mother's life is at risk. that's pushed the abortion issue to centre stage in a state that could be pivotal in deciding who wins november's us presidential election. the vice president is expected to deliver remarks slamming former president donald trump for his record on the issue. for his part, donald trump has said the arizona law goes too far, and called on the states lawmakers to change it. he said it would be "straightened out" without giving any further detail. his former vice president, mike pence, has described those comments as "a slap in the face" to voters who oppose abortion.

lets speak to our panel on this. what is the republican strategy on abortion? . �* . . what is the republican strategy on abortion? . �*. . , what is the republican strategy on abortion? . �*, . , abortion? that's a very loaded question- _ abortion? that's a very loaded question. it's _ abortion? that's a very loaded question. it's week _ abortion? that's a very loaded question. it's week and - abortion? that's a very loaded - question. it's week and predictable. we've just seen the arizona supreme court act to uphold the civil war era statute which was before arizona even became a state, well before women even earned the right to vote which was in 1920. so this is a situation where republicans even writ large understand how problematic this is for truly essentially every woman not just problematic this is for truly essentially every woman notjust in arizona. look, there are 1.6 million arizona. look, there are 1.6 million arizona women of reproductive age between the ages of 15—49, of which some 38% are hispanic and 43% are white. you've got a lot of new americans in that state who may not have voted before. will this galvanise them to vote against republicans? we don't have great empirical evidence to show that, but

again, donald trump saying what's happened in arizona is too extreme and saying something should be done about it shows that he is nervous because he knows everywhere that abortion has been on the ballot, which it will be in arizona by the way this fall, that is what will happen. there will be a constitutional challenge to what they're supreme courtjustice cited, and the question will be kicked to the voters. again, every time abortion ends up as a question on the ballots, we see people voting against republicans— we saw that in ruby red kansas, in ohio, and florida recently we saw their supreme court uphold the state's legislature six week band. these are draconian bands that not even super republican voters want. so i'll say this, i think the world is looking at the united states right now and how the issue of abortion is being played out from state to state with a legislatures taking very extreme bands, and i think the world is saying, "what is going on in america?" because i'll say this is a

long—time republican affiliated voter, i'm anti—abortion for myself but pro—choice for other women because we have separation of church and state here, and i genuinely believe that women, when they do not have bodily autonomy, they are not free and equal citizens within our representative democracy. so we have to get this under control from the party set, but it's hard to believe how that can be done when our supreme court of the united states has ruled that abortion is kicked back to the states, so it's state—by—state for so long as we can for see. state-by-state for so long as we can for see. ~ �* . state-by-state for so long as we can for see. ~ �* , , ., , for see. we're 'ust seeing images of, the for see. we're 'ust seeing images of. the harris — for see. we're just seeing images of, the harris arriving _ for see. we're just seeing images of, the harris arriving there - for see. we're just seeing images of, the harris arriving there in - of, the harris arriving there in tucson — what do you think of what donald trumps trying to do ——, lloyd harris? is trying to appeal to everyone and no one by being so noncommittal? he everyone and no one by being so noncommittal?— everyone and no one by being so noncommittal? he recognises the slit noncommittal? he recognises the s . lit within noncommittal? he recognises the split within their _ noncommittal? he recognises the split within their publican - noncommittal? he recognises the split within their publican base, i split within their publican base, and i'm — split within their publican base, and i'm sure that the majority of republican voters are turned off by this massively, and the electoral

results _ this massively, and the electoral results that she mentioned back that up. results that she mentioned back that up there's _ results that she mentioned back that up. there's also a lot of trump reporters— up. there's also a lot of trump reporters in— up. there's also a lot of trump reporters in favour of this sort of thing _ reporters in favour of this sort of thing the — reporters in favour of this sort of thing. the problem is that the republicans have moved very far to the right _ republicans have moved very far to the right. they look like a far-right— the right. they look like a far—right party from the uk, but this is— far—right party from the uk, but this is a — far—right party from the uk, but this is a whole new page and it's really— this is a whole new page and it's really a — this is a whole new page and it's really a wake—up call for americans and american women more than anything. — and american women more than anything, it's that whole phrase ralph— anything, it's that whole phrase ralph nader used, "you don't turn on the politics. _ ralph nader used, "you don't turn on the politics, politics will turn on you" _ the politics, politics will turn on you" this— the politics, politics will turn on you." this is— the politics, politics will turn on you." this is dangerous stuff, taking — you." this is dangerous stuff, taking away people's rights — as i read _ taking away people's rights — as i read it. _ taking away people's rights — as i read it. the — taking away people's rights — as i read it, the news coverage of this story. _ read it, the news coverage of this story. this — read it, the news coverage of this story, this doesn't make exceptions for rape _ story, this doesn't make exceptions for rape or— story, this doesn't make exceptions for rape or incest, this is an outright— for rape or incest, this is an outright ban of abortion on a level that very— outright ban of abortion on a level that very few countries in the world have in— that very few countries in the world have in that — that very few countries in the world have in that way. i that very few countries in the world have in that way.— have in that way. i suppose the issue is whether _ have in that way. i suppose the issue is whether people - have in that way. i suppose the issue is whether people will. have in that way. i suppose the issue is whether people will be | issue is whether people will be voting on that. there's so many things at play in terms of the cost of living and the economy, maybe

even foreign policy playing a much larger part than it might usually — what do you think, andrew, will it be the big issuejust briefly? i be the big issue just briefly? i think it is because it's a basic right. — think it is because it's a basic right. it — think it is because it's a basic right, it comes down to the basic question— right, it comes down to the basic question of— right, it comes down to the basic question of women's autonomy, and there _ question of women's autonomy, and there are _ question of women's autonomy, and there are fundamental questions about— there are fundamental questions about our— there are fundamental questions about our rights, they do cut through— about our rights, they do cut through of the other issues. quite rightly. _ through of the other issues. quite rightly, people thought for these rights. _ rightly, people thought for these rights, and is well there's a lesson here _ rights, and is well there's a lesson here for— rights, and is well there's a lesson here for the — rights, and is well there's a lesson here for the democrats, which is if you get— here for the democrats, which is if you get back into power again and have _ you get back into power again and have a _ you get back into power again and have a majority, you need to legislate _ have a majority, you need to legislate for abortion rights across the whole — legislate for abortion rights across the whole of the us, not leave it up to state—wide legislation. we�*ll the whole of the us, not leave it up to state-wide legislation.— to state-wide legislation. we'll be back with my _ to state-wide legislation. we'll be back with my panel _ to state-wide legislation. we'll be back with my panel after - to state-wide legislation. we'll be back with my panel after this - to state-wide legislation. we'll be| back with my panel after this short break, stay with us here on bbc news, we'll be back very shortly. hello. temperatures for some of us today got up into the high teens, the low 205 celsius — particularly where we saw some sunshine — but don't expect those warm conditions to last.

it's actually going to turn cooler this weekend. often windy, the wettest weather towards the north and the west of the uk. today, we've had this feed of south or south—westerly winds bringing this relatively warm air, but notice some colder air lurking out in the atlantic. that will head our way as westerly winds start to kick in through the weekend. those westerly winds moving in behind various different frontal systems. here comes one. not much more than just a little bit of showery rain, certainly more cloud with that. most places, i think, will be largely dry through the night. some further hefty showers into north—west scotland, where it will be windy. it's going to be mild to take us into saturday morning. so, for saturday, a couple of different weather fronts to pass across the uk. this first one here bringing some mostly fairly light, showery rain. this next weather front here bringing some more intense downpours across northern ireland and the north—west of scotland. some heavy, thundery downpours are possible. between the rain bands, we will see some spells of sunshine and what will be quite a windy day, particularly across northern areas,

gusts of 40 mph or more, but a pretty windy day wherever you are. temperatures in the south—east corner getting up to 20 degrees celsius. further north and west, it will be turning cooler as the day wears on, and actually saturday night could be quite cold. we could see a touch of frost in northern areas. these weather fronts moving out of the way, a window of drier weather, but we're into those westerly winds and that chillier air mass by this stage. sunday is going to be a sunshine and showers day. it could be a frosty start for some northern areas, then some spells of sunshine. showers getting going, particularly across northern ireland, scotland, northern england, some down into wales. some of the showers wintry over the highest ground in the north. not as many showers down towards the south—east corner, 9—15 degrees. that is about where we should be temperature—wise for this time of year. now, monday, we'll see this area of low pressure passing across the uk. we'll see showers or longer spells of rain, some pretty blustery winds as well.

the showers becoming fewer and further between as we head deeper into next week. temperature—wise, well, around the average for the time of year.

hello, i'm lucy grey. you're watching the context on bbc news. as the minimum age forjoining whatsapp is lowered —

a bbc investigation finds that children as young as nine are already seeing alarming content. the minimum age limit for children using whatsapp has been lowered from 16 to 13. the technology company — meta — which owns it says it's bringing the uk in line with the us and australia. but campaigners have called it a "highly irresponsible" approach to child safety. it comes as a bbc investigation has found that children as young as ten are being added to whatsapp groups containing inappropriate material. here's martin lindsay. i noticed a real personality change in my 12—year—old. after some coaxing, she told me she'd been added to a whatsapp group. i immediately removed my child from the group and deleted it. this is one mum's story and a real fearfor many parents. i was shocked to see inappropriate sexual images, racism and swearing among the messages.