i think it is inescapable that help? i think it is inescapable that help? i think it is inescapable that we are going to need to provide more resort, in particular, for social care. i think it is a mistake to think all you need to do is raise taxes and money. what we need to address, and that is why i am in favour of looking at a more fundamentally, is the to break down the silos which are, in themselves, a major cause of inefficiency and service failure. that is the summary of the news. newsday is coming up at the top of the our. now won bb then use it as newsnight. that something nazi germany would have done and did do. i think it's a disgrace that information that was false and fake and never happened got released to the public. that's right, you heard america's president—elect compare america to nazi germany. why? he thinks intelligence agencies spread salacious slurs to a hostile media. give us a question. you're attacking us. can you give us a question? don't be rude.
no, i'm not going to give you a question. i'm not going to give you a question. you are fake news. after an electrifying hour—long press conference, what more have we learned of trump, the truth, and his relations with his own spies? we'll ask glen greenwald. also tonight... we've all seen humanitarian crises around the world. to use that description of a national health service was irresponsible and overblown. crisis, what crisis? the government tries to paper over growing concern about the nhs. and this... i've already made the decision that i want to be a girl but i haven't made the decision if i want to do the surgery is. —— surgeries. is it right that primary school age children should be permitted gender reassigement surgery? good evening. donald trump has suggested that us intelligence agencies may be behind
claims that russia has gathered compromising information on him, and rubbished the news agencies that chose to publish the salacious sexual allegations about him from leaked and unverified documents. speaking at his first press conference sincejuly, the president—elect reminded reporters just how different the next four years will be. in an explosive and combative exchange, trump attacked both cnn and buzzfeed, which he described as a failing pile of garbage. and he compared the actions of the cia, who had shared the intelligence with him, to nazi germany. the documents appear to claim russia had secretly filmed him for later use as blackmail. donald trump and his surrogates spelled out why none of the facts contained in it made sense. our diplomatic editor, mark urban, has pieced together what we understand of those claims. with his first press conference in six months, donald trump was bound to have been under close scrutiny. so last night's allegations couldn't have been better timed,
and indeed does make indeed the leaks finally pushed into publicly blaming russia for hacking rivals. as far as hacking, i think it was russia. but i think we also get hacked by other countries and other people. and i can say that when we lost 22 million names and everything else that was hacked recently, they didn't make a big deal out of that. that was something that was extraordinary, that was probably china. we have much hacking going on. but if that seemed to put the president—elect on the same page as his intelligence chiefs, think again. that nonsense that was released by the maybe the intelligence agencies, who knows? maybe the intelligence agencies, which would be a tremendous blot on their record, if they in fact did that. a tremendous blot.
because a thing like that should have never been written. it should never have been had and it should never have been released. the allegations published last night have been known to some reporters for months. but it was the fact that intelligence agencies decided to brief trump on these claims and votes for the credibility to brief trump on these claims and vouched for the credibility of their author, a former mi6 officer, that gave them traction. these were based on memos compiled by a former british intelligence operative, whose past work us intelligence officials consider credible. when that had aired, the reports ended up online. the documents, marked confidential and sensitive source, argue the russian government had been backing trump for at least five years. one makes salacious claims about his alleged use of prostitutes, and that the fsb had either arranged or moderate them. the latest memo details a meeting
in moscow between carter page and senior russian officials. one source suggests the russians have compromising material on both trump and hillary clinton. a kremlin spokesman is alleged to have led the campaign to help trump and damage his opponent. he today issued his own denial. there were also alleged meetings between trump lawyer michael cohen and kremlin officials. one suggests he met kremlin officials in 2016. michael cohen says he has never been to moscow. cnn reported may have been a different michael cohen. the memos claim deniable payments were made to hackers who had worked for the kremlin and against clinton's campaign. the fact that buzzfeed and cnn made the decision to run with this unsubstantiated claim is a sad and pathetic attempt to get press.
the report is not an intelligence report, plain and simple. people need to look very carefully at a range of information in front of them. and, come to their own conclusions as they sift through a variety of different facts. and come to their own conclusions. i will say that i listened to him very closely and listened to be denied and what he did not. and the point about the number of different contacts that people in his campaign had with the russians, which he was asked about repeatedly, he did not comment on that point. today's confirmation hearings for trump's pickford secretary today's confirmation hearings for trump's pick for secretary of state spent much time
on russia and putin. i have not had unclassified briefings because i have not received my clearance. i did read the report released on january 6. that report is clearly troubling. it indicates all of the actions you describe were undertaken. for never trump republicans and spies alike, the tycoon‘s kremlin ties are the chosen battleground. this was a press conference like no other. pure theatre. terrifying, comical and compelling. the bulk of it was spent on dispelling what donald trump referred to as fake news. but in between, we got plenty of real news. the mexican wall will be built with almost immediate effect, obamacare would be replaced with a new healthcare system, a border tax would be enacted on those companies who move production abroad, and the president—elect would be isolating himself from all his business interests and handing the company over to his sons to run. how did all that sound?
have a quick look. as a press conference, this was unwieldy, confused and exhausting, but as a piece of television, it was, frankly, unmissable. the man who in just ten days will be sworn in as the leader of the free world began by dismissing the lurid allegations of sexual behaviour in a russian hotel room and commended those who chose not to report them. i want to thank a lot of the news organisations here today. trump pulled back to questions of his relations with russia. if putin likes donald trump — guess what, folks — that's called an asset, not a liability. trump then explains why those extraordinary claims against him can't be true. he's cleverer than that. i was in russia years ago with the miss universe contest, which did very well. moscow, the moscow area. did very, very well. and i told many people, be careful, because you don't want to see yourself on television. cameras all over the place. and then the grand finale.
trump lashes out at both the us intelligence agencies, and picks a highly personalfight with the news organisations who did choose to print what he calls lies. since you are attacking us, can you give us a question? go ahead. no, not you. not you. your organisation's terrible. go ahead. quiet, quiet. go ahead. she's asking a question, don't be rude. don't be rude. no, i'm not going to give you a question. you are fake news. go ahead. i think it was disgraceful, disgraceful, that the intelligence agencies allowed any information that turned out to be so false and fake out. i think it's a disgrace, and i say that, and i say that. and that's something nazi germany would have done, and did do.
i think it's a disgrace. as far as buzzfeed, which is a failing pile of garbage, writing it, i think they're going to suffer the consequences. they already are. he picks up parts of the story he claims are demonstrably false. michael cohen of the trump organisation was in prague. it turned out to be a different michael cohen. it may well be that none of the leaks are true, but the story in some ways has already moved on. a man about to enter the highest office in the land who distrusts the very agencies tasked with keeping america safe. no note to end on, so he falls back on a role he does better than any other — showbiz. these papers are alljust a piece of the many, many companies that are being put into trust to be run by my two sons. i hope that the end of eight years i'll come back and i'll say, though, you did a good job. otherwise, if they do a bad job, i'll say, you're fired. goodbye, everybody.
well, within the last hour, the bbc has named christopher steele as the author of the series of memos regarding donald trump which has aroused such controversy. he is a former member of the secret intelligence service, mi6, and has been a director of orbis, which describes itself as a leading corporate intelligence company. he has not yet responded to a request for comment. glen greenwald — best known for his role in the publication of the national security agnecy leaks — joins us now from rio. you heard buzzfeed, the publication that went ahead with publication today, being described as a failing pile of garbage. would you have published? i think the question about whether to publish was a very easy one before yesterday, which was the decision that every news organisation that had this document made, which was not to publish, because nobody could verify this information. material, and that russia
allegedly had dirt on trump, i actually think buzzfeed did an important journalistic service by ending the speculation about what that was and letting everybody see what a farcical document this actually was on which this is based. you call it a farcical document, donald trump called it fake news. you basically with him on that? i don't know if it is fake or real. i say it is farcical because when it was disclosed it was not only anonymous, now a person has been identified, it was somebody paid by democratic operatives to pick up dirt on hillary clinton. there is no evidence. it is all based on what anonymous people allegedly told him. it is impossible to evaluate whether or might not these claims are true, which is why no journalist
or organisation was willing to publish despite efforts to get them to do so. it was taken seriously by the cia, doesn't that elevated above gossip? right, so the cia is an agency that has repeatedly got caught lying in the past. it is designed to disseminate propaganda and they are currently in open warfare with the person elected president of the united states. there were behind the hillary clinton campaign. once the cia briefs the president and president—elect on this document, it becomes newsworthy. but the mere fact the cia tried to enshrine this document in a cloud of authenticity or credibility, doesn't for me as a journalist convince me. i want to see evidence first to believe claims. you are calling the cia partisan. you basically suggesting a donald trump ignores everything the caa tells him, that is no great loss to america? no, i didn't say anything even a multi—like that. no, i didn't say anything
even remotely like that. you suggested the caa was partisan and pitted you suggested the cia was partisan and pitted against the president—elect? that is absolutely true. the former head of the cia, michael morrell, went to the new york times and endorsed hillary clinton. general hayden went to the washington post and did the same. they both accused trump of being a recruit of vladimir putin. whatever they tell him now, in that case, he would have to take with a pinch of salt because he would see them as a partisan organisation? is that what you are suggesting? i would say that any rational human being with minimal history of the united states and the cia would take everything that the caa says with a huge grain of salt. i would call it a dose of rational scepticism, given how many times in the past that agency has lied and been in error. the iraq war was started because that agency said that saddam hussein had weapons
of mass destruction and was in alliance with al-anda. something that was tragically untrue. so of course people would treat those claims sceptically. but intelligence is not the same as fact. if someone comes to you with a terrorist threat, it is what they understand might be about to happen. if they came to you with fact, it would be too late. that is what the cia is doing, isn't it? what the cia calls to be public is not fact in anybody‘s mind, not even the cia say it is fact. as own report demonstrated, one of the only claims that could be verified, that trump's lawyer travel to prague to meet with russian officials, came pretty close to being affirmatively disproven, given that michael: was not in prague. given that michael was not in prague. it is not a fact. it is a falsehood, as the cia so often disseminates. but it may not always come down
to fight with intelligence. are they right to try to alert the incoming president that this may be going on? surely that is an intelligence agency doing itsjob, isn't it? i don't think anybody has a problem with the fact the cia told donald trump this happened. i think the problem is they called the source credible, then somebody went to cnn in a coordinated way, multiple officials, to tell cnn that this was briefed to the president and the president—elect, knowing they would report it and the document would surface. you can take the line that the cia was trying to do its job, but it is obvious there is open conflict between the intelligence community and the elected president and this was a way
would that change how you view wikileaks and the way they leaked? i don't regard donald trump as a paragon of truth that we are duty bound to agree with. i want to see evidence before i believe russia did it. second, every media organisation, when they get material, ask two questions: is it authentic, and is it in the public interest? it does not matter what the provenance of the documents was from a journalistic perspective, it depends on whether they were in the public interest, and they clearly were. it resulted in five democratic officials being removed. wikileaks did the right thing in reporting on those materials. labour has accused the prime
minister of being in denial over the state of the nhs. in the commons today, jeremy corbyn pointed to the increasing number of patients waiting more than four hours in a&e, and the number of hospitals now overstretched, and called for extra investment in health and social care, calling it a humanitarian crisis — the phrase first used by the red cross. theresa may rejected the phrase, but admitted the pressure exists. it is winter, the nhs‘s hardest time of the year, and while it is not actually snowing in westminster, it feels positively arctic in the english health service. today, its chief executive, who already has a pretty frosty the government has repeatedly told
as that the nhs is getting more money than it asked for. what is your view? it is a matter of fact. i have said it previously to a select committee in october that, like probably every part of the public servers, we got less than we ask for in that process, and so i think it would be stretching it to say that the nhs has got more than it has asked for. so how bad are things? is it just january? no, it isn't. here are the 2014 figures for the share of patients at a&e dealt with within four hours. you can see how cold weather ways on the service. you can see how cold weather —— weighs on the service. it is well below its 95% target at the end of the year. here's 2015 and 2016. now, let's look atjuly.
you can see that, yes, winter matters, but performance has declined each year, and each year, there was matching deterioration in the financial position of the hospitals. the hospital sector is struggling on all fronts. hospitals started the financial year with an underlying deficit of almost £4 billion, which meant they were spending £4 billion more than theirfunding. in the summer, the government introduced a so—called reset, a set of measures to address this, including targets for hospitals to gradually reduce those deficits, and some extra money over the next three years, though that has to be taken from elsewhere in the nhs. there is also a restriction on hospitals hiring locum staff. as part of the reset, hospitals were supposed to increase performance. here is the average of the plans set out, starting from july. you can see they were supposed to gradually moved back to that
elusive 95% target, but here is what happened. the hospitals started off behind and fell further back. the bbc has obtained leaked data suggesting recent performances in this region of the graph down here. the reset utterly failed. some of the causes of this winter's problems in health care are very long. for example, the country's ageing and every year technology means that we can treat new diseases, which means there is rising demand for health care every year. it is a type that comes in and never goes out. but some of the problems have more medium—term causes. for example, what's going on in social care. if you go back to 2010, we now have 400,000 fewer people receiving social care, so 25% cut in the number of people getting support,
which means you have large numbers of people in hospital ready to be discharged, medically fit for discharge, but we cannot get them into social care facilities. packed hospitals mean bad care, high costs and long waiting times, which is why simon stephens supports more money for local authority social care. the hospitals themselves have another problem: they have taken up particularly big part of the nhs‘s funding strain. they wanted to drive more productivity in hospitals by reducing the amount the given per patient. this meant that by 2015, the hospital was paid the equivalent of £850 to treat a patient they would have been paid £1000 to treat five years earlier. the hospitals aren't coping on those lower prices. it's really notjust another winter. hospital bosses now talk about the new law of longer waiting times and worse
hospital performance. so does it all come down to money? does the nhs need comprehensive reform ? i'm joined in the studio now by former health minister, dan poulter. by the former president of the royal college of gps, clare gerada. and by ali parsa, who is the founder of the digital healthcare company, ba bylon. there was this dismissal of it being a crisis, or at least not on the scale the british red cross suggested. when the prime minister talked at pmqs about the small number of incidents, there was a collective groan at someone who had clearly underestimated the problem so badly. when we think of a humanitarian crisis, she rightly said, we think of syria and iraq, but it is the case that there is a big problem in the nhs, and we have seen tragic examples in worcester and elsewhere this week, where people's lives have been lost because of the pressures on a&e. you are clear, there
is a big problem in the nhs, not a small number of incidents will stop -- —— not a small number of incidents. it is worse than i have seen things in the decade or so but i have been working as a doctor. a lot of pressure on front line services, we can see that, if you like, the shop window of the nhs, a&e, is under pressure, both in terms of difficulties in discharging patients due to reductions in money to local councils for social care, but i think we really need to start to fund general practice and community care to make sure we can prevent some of those admissions. when we talk about increases in the budget over the last few years, almost all has gone to the acute sector, to hospitals, many of them in debt, and a lot of that money has
sometimes been taken from mental health budgets at the expense of primary care, and that needs to change. this talk of a humanitarian crisis, do you think it has been unhelpful in the debate because it makes it sound rather political? i wouldn't use the term, but i think it is a human crisis for those elderly people waiting for hours on trolleys, for those children with mental health problems having to travel hundreds of miles to find a hospital bed, and for my profession, who are trying to deliver and unable to deliver. so it is certainly a human crisis, and i believe that what dan hasjust said is absolutely correct. it is sometimes easy to say that we need more money. we have an incredibly cheap health service. we eke out so much care from our health service. we have one of the most efficient services in the world. it is a precious gift to the people of this country, and if we lose it, we will all be
more the worse off for it. ali, do you think it comes down to money, is it really that obvious? i don't know whether it all comes down to money or not, but i do know that money is not the only solution. we have to deploy better technology. one of my children got sick at the weekend, and i had the option of taking the child to a&e, on a bus or whatever, adding to the overcrowdedness, spending hours and putting a burden on doctors, or i picked up my phone, made an appointment in seconds, saw a doctor within minutes, my prescription was sent... when you say you picked up your phone, argue talking when you say you picked up your phone, —— are you talking about a private clinic?
with my private company, babylon, all of that went away within minutes. i pay a subscription every month, which is a fraction of the price it costs. that is a fraction of what we pay each year. if we push people towards this as an alternative to a&e... there is no doubt that investing in technology is an important part of improving the delivery of care. it is notjust the application, it is the extra payments. i believe in a health service free at the point of care, and free in terms of need. i think it should be funded from general taxation. there is a sensible discussion we need to have about whether the level of money you put into the health service and the level of taxation should perhaps be increased to pay
for and maintain a health service we all care about. do you think we need more taxation? it used to be the case that national insurance was strongly linked to health contributions. it's now a tax thatjust goes to the treasury. if we can re—establish some link between hypothecated health and care tax it is something i would be open to discussing. i think there is a good case. i am not a politician but i agree. the public probably don't mind paying more tax if they are sure it is going to the health service. the over 65s don't pay national insurance. there are ways that the public can start to look at how we can fund the health service. if you lose the service, or even the idea of the service, it's something that you regret
and you never get back. do you think, in a sense, that is inhibiting the nhs from trying new, more radical ideas? there is so much iconography about the nhs, it doesn't dare disturb itself much. in that respect, i think you're right. we provide the same service in rwanda. in 15 weeks since we launched, we signed up 2.5% of the population of rwanda. we delivered 70,000 consultations over the phone to the people of one of the poorest, most economic way challenged countries in the world. we have to be careful about this. this is not whether they should be private or public. in essex, we have the same arrangement with the nhs where we do this for the national health service. what are some of the other
solutions you are looking at? if you see yourself as a pioneer, it's not just about an application on your phone. where else are the solutions? ten years ago, it would have cost $1 million, £1 million, to do diagnostics on you. today, i can do that for £10,000, a 99% reduction of the cost in diagnostics, and i can throw in your gene sequencing. what is happening with technology and its effect on health care is significant. we need to embrace it, as well as keeping our old system. it is not one against the other. if we were self prescribing more, is that a danger? it can be a danger. it has to be used in a safe way. we need to improve the delivery
of front—line patient care. most health care organisations spend only a small fraction. please don't fall into the trap of assuming that all innovation is in the private sector and not the public sector. in my practice, we have developed an online digital offering for patients currently offered to 2.5 million patients across england. it will offer people pre—care. it will tell the gp what they think is wrong with them. we can do electronic prescribing. i think it is 2 billion prescriptions described digitally. we self— prescribe pharmacists. let's not look at one sector and save the nhs is a luddite
and a dinosaur. the nhs is an innovative institution. the problem is people working in the nhs are exhausted. to innovate, to experiment, requires energy and headspace. do we have to get used to living with crisis? in one sense demand will always outstrip income. there will never be a time when there is a surplus of money to spend on health, right, because of how the population has changed? we had an unprecedented period of a squeeze on finances. demand for services has increased by 5% a year. there are people with increasingly complex care needs. but funding is going up by 1% a year. that is not a sustainable long—term solution. we spend a lower amount of gdp compared to other countries by oecd calculations.
when we saw a transformation in what we could do with the health service was when tony blair put the money in and made an investment. we need a similar investment now. you are the tory minister talking about the need for a tony blair, gordon brown government splurge? i care about the health service. i care about patients. that made a difference. with gordon brown, tony blair or theresa may, we need to make a difference. if that isn't done, do you have to look at the services that can no longer be offered? i think you're right. if it isn't done we need to send some of the practices we have into general practice. if we resource them better, we will keep patients out of hospital and we will hopefully be able to ride this crisis. fundamentally we get what we pay for and if we don't put more money
we can't pay for anything. thank you. around the world there has been a significant increase in the number of children being referred to gender clinics. increasingly, parents with children who say they've been born in the wrong gender, are adopting a gender affirmative approach and supporting their children in changing sex. tomorrow night, a documentary airs on bbc two which looks at the choices children and their parents are making in canada. around the world, the transgender community is on the march. you are the new world. there is no normal any more. this is the new normal. not all boys have a penis, and not all girls have a vagina. parents are facing an explosion in the number of children saying they were born in the wrong body. i'm not comfortable in the boy body. ijust want to be a girl. warner is transgender, so she is... identifies as female. i never actually fitted in with being a boy.
i don't like the games, the hairstyles, the clothes. and i always thought from the beginning that i was a little bit feminine. there's nothing wrong with being a boy. it's just that i don't enjoy being a boy. so, warner is nine years old. she's just at an age now where sexuality is starting to develop, so boy crushes and things like that are just starting to come in. i'm pretty sure i'm going to have to get surgeries and all that to become... to become a boy.. wait, a girl. it might be rough, cos everybody has a rough life. it's going to be rough. at this point, we have to start considering puberty blockers, things like that, so we've been researching that like crazy
and speaking to doctors and different things to try to make those decisions for her because she's too young to make them. cos it's a really big decision. like, i've already made the decision i want to be a girl, but i haven't made the decision if i want to do the surgeries. and you can see the whole of that documentary — transgender kids: who knows best — tomorrow night on bbc two at 9pm. joining me now is a transgender journalist in bristol. at what point do you think children are able to makes up their own minds on this? i think the whole point about this kind of treatment or realisation is there is a lot of nonsense in the media at the moment about transgender children
and about the kind of treatments they go through. something like puberty blockers, which was just discussed, are in fact about delaying it and allowing children space and time by delaying puberty. they experience such stress out of their gender role. it gives them the time before puberty takes over and essentially takes a lot of decisions out of their hands that have to be reversed painfully later. let me bring in ray blanchard, who isjoining us from toronto. ray spent many years researching factors that determine sexual orientation. do you think if you can take out that messy, awkward, complicated stage of childhood puberty because a small child knows best, wouldn't you choose to do that? there are some facts that have to be introduced. every follow—up study has shown
that the majority of children with gender identity issues do not end up transsexual. the majority and up with normal gender identity. the majority end up with normal gender identity. secondly, we have no diagnostic procedure and methods that can reliably distinguish which children are going to go on a sexual trajectory and which are going to end up with normal gender identity. even without intervention. thirdly, i think people who are not enthusiastic about it in young children take the decision that the first line of approach clinically should be helping the child accept his or her sex. if they can't do that by puberty, it is reasonable to consider puberty blockers. in other words, for asking children to pause before making that kind
of gender choice. surely it's right for the medical profession to try and stop that in the first instance because it's irreversible? one thing i want to say is actually the doctor in question wasn't fired purely because of his ideology about children and gender. and unfortunately, one statistic that genuinely is true in this country is that 48% of trans—teenagers before they hit 18, attempt suicide. when you call for this very reasonable pause, parents and teachers increasingly know and the majority of clinicians know... the objective data shows gestures in gender children are the same as those in other psychiatric populations of children and adolescents. there is no data about the rate of completed suicides is hiring gender this form to children than in adolescence.
isn't the question that parents do not want to feel they are guilty of having failed to listen to their child's concerns when they could have done something meaningful about his? yes, iagree. some parents are being emotionally blackmailed by false information about threats of suicide by these children into thinking that if they make any attempts to help their kid that they are putting their child at risk of suicide. it isjust pure manipulation. it is manipulation and emotionally blackmailing? who is manipulating? where is this coming from? i'm tra nsgender myself. i work with many transgender children. no one‘s parents were looking for this. most parents of transgender children have had to go through a long process. it's not like your gp pushes it. it's quite difficult to access health care in this country. schools aren't very aware of it. this idea that there
is some kind of pressure, or some trans—mob that walks into a home and says, your child is playing with dolls, it's time for surgery... we have run out of time. ray, last word to you,... do you think it's just because essentially this is a new science and people have not caught up with where it transgender issues are, even those who work within it? i think the problem is that the media coverage, i'm not talking about the bbc, the media coverage has been so one—sided in terms of cheerleading for gender transition, and has not covered other aspects of the question. thank you both. that is all we have time for this
evening. good night. hello once again. let's talk about thursday, shall we? it will be an interesting day to say the very least. it will dawn bright, blustery with frequent heavy snow showers yet again across the northern parts of britain. i say it will be an interesting day because in the south it starts off dry enough, relatively mild in the south—eastern quarter but don't be fooled by the dry start woman 01’ but don't be fooled by the dry start woman or in fact that there's quite a bit of rain on the way because we have real concerns about the strength of the wind again, although maybe not as windy as wednesday. and about the prospect of snow and that's not going to be just an issue for the northern half of the country where there will be the prospect of blizzards in the high ground. we're bringing mild airfrom the blizzards in the high ground. we're bringing mild air from the atlantic, which, as i've suggested, will start as quite an unpleasant area of rain,
working initially through the south—west and up into wales. but as we bring this warm, moist air in from the atlantic, it runs into the cold airand as from the atlantic, it runs into the cold air and as we get into the latter pa rt cold air and as we get into the latter part of the day we will see a converging on the back edge of the rain into significant snowfall getting to really quite low levels. back to that in a second. all the while through the day on thursday, the northern half of the country, especially northern and central and western scotland will be blasted by frequent heavy, blustery snow showers, which will give blizzards across the high ground. not a day for the high ground of scotland. that's what your phenomenonjo, maitua will say and when you add in the wind this is how it will feel, a raw day in the north and that care, cold air will be a nuisance as it taxing behind that rain in time for the evening rush hour in the midlands, east anglia and the saudis, the low—level snow, that will quit the scene and then ice
becomes a real problem and into the mix drags another area of moisture down from the north into the eastern side the british isles, such that friday morning could be a realfrost and ice vest with into that mix the prospect of navies further snowfall just in time for your rush—hour into the midlands, east anglia and parts of the south—east as well. once that has quit the scene, yes, it's a stonking north—westerly again. never a one direction at this time of year but at least for many those not exposed to that north—westerly breeze may well get away with not too many showers and a wee bit more sunshine. but the real issue is the wind and the snow. hello, everyone. i'm rico hizon in
singapore. the headlines... donald trump uses his first press conference to attack the intelligence agencies of america. he says they may have leaked claims that russia has compromising information about him. it is all fa ke information about him. it is all fake news. it is phoney stuff. it did not happen and it was bought by opponents of ours. mr trump's choice for secretary of state is also in the spotlight. he called china, aggressive expansionist and unreliable. as it went to bite hard across europe we report on how refugees living in camps in greece are coping with subzero temperatures. and 25 years at the top in bollywood. we