this is bbc news. i'm martine croxall. the headlines at 11:00: just weeks after president trump said he'd pull america out of the paris climate accord, he hints at a shift in position. he also defends his son's meeting with a russian lawyer during the presidential campaign i think from a practical standpoint most people would have taken at that meeting. it is called opposition research. the brexit secretary urges all mps to work together as the government publishes the repeal bill. an american doctor says he may travel to the uk next week after telling the high court there's a chance terminally ill charlie gard could benefit from an experimental treatment. and on newsnight, the government tells us that in the wake of the grenfell disaster, it accepts that building regulations are not up to the job and will be fully reviewed. good evening and welcome to bbc news.
president trump has hinted america could still shift its position on the paris climate accord despite his decision just weeks ago to withdraw from the global agreement to limit climate change. he made the comments in paris after talks with the french president, emmanuel macron. he also faced questions about the controversy surrounding his son's meeting with a russian lawyer during the presidential campaign last year. this report from our paris correspondent, lucy williamson, contains some flashing images. if diplomacy is about power disguised as flattery, there are few more potent greetings than a ten—second handshake. emmanuel macron welcomed donald trump today with a visit to the tomb of france's and military leader, to the tomb of france's grand military leader, napoleon, the impressive location designed to flatter both the visitor and host.
both these two men see themselves as modern—day political revolutionaries, sweeping away the old rules and expectations. but mr macron also sees nothing wrong with using france's imperial history and military might to put its current diplomatic relations in context. the two men have been battling for the role of alpha male ever since their first handshake on the sidelines of the g7 summit. donald trump later pulled out of a key climate change deal brokered in paris, prompting mr macron to issue a video parodying the us president's campaign slogan. make our planet great again. but mr macron, keen to boost french influence abroad, has since turned on the charm. and mr trump's comments today on climate change suggest it might be working. something could happen with respect to the paris accord. we'll see what happens.
but we will talk about that over the coming period of time. and if it happens, that will be wonderful, and if it doesn't that will be ok, too. translation: i want to continue discussions with the us and president trump on this very important subject. i respect the wish to preserve jobs. i think it's compatible in the paris agreement. now we have to let the us work on its road map and to continue talking with them. and amid allegations that russia interfered in the us election, mr trump was also asked about his son's contact with a russian lawyer last year. i have a son who is a great young man, he is a fine person. he took a meeting with a lawyer from russia. it lasted for a very short period and nothing came of the meeting. and i think it's a meeting that most people in politics probably would have taken. today, no differences were allowed to mar the transatlantic ties. but what do french voters think
of mr trump's visit? i don't like him much, but what do i have to say? he's not my president. thank god. trying to understand what he wants and where he's going is not a bad idea. even if he does not appreciate him as a person, or what he stands. so i think french diplomacy at its best. in a visit where symbolism was the substance, the two couples dined tonight at the eiffel tower. a place labelled pragmatic, rather than pretty, to cement an alliance imperfect but crucial to france's place in the world. lucy williamson, bbc news, paris. in a major step towards brexit, the government has published its long awaited plans to allow eu law to be transferred into british law. the european union withdrawal bill is being described as one of the largest legal projects ever undertaken in the uk.
the government's called for all parties to work together to make it a success. but already labour is calling for significant changes, and the liberal democrats are warning they will make life "hell" for the government. the bill will take an estimated 12,000 eu laws. and copy them into uk law on the day that the uk leaves the european union. the government will then have powers to amend laws as it sees fit. 0ur political editor laura kuenssberg has this report — a warning that it contains some flashing images. has nothing changed? still doing the handshakes, rolling out the red carpet for royalty — spanish, this time. still embarking on the task of taking us out of the european union. no, everything's changed. for the first time today, the prime minister explaining her shock at the election. ifelt, um, isuppose, devastated really, because, as i say, i knew the campaign wasn't going perfectly, but still, the messages i was getting
from people i was speaking to, but also, the comments we were getting back from a lot of people, that were being passed on to me, were that we were going to get a better result than we did. devastated enough to shed a tear? well... yes, a little tear. yes. at that moment? at that moment, yes. and then you obviously have to brush yourself down. you have a responsibility, you are a human being, you have been through that experience. but i was there as leader of the party and prime minister. i had a responsibility then, as we went through the night, to determine what we were going to do the next morning. presentation of bill. it won't get any easier. today, the bill that will legally take us out of the european union arrived in parliament. broadly, the withdrawal bill cuts and pastes thousands of eu laws that govern so much right now into british law.
once we leave, they won't apply. but with theresa may's shaky grip, mps will inevitably try to make big changes. i think there is a big understanding now amongst ministers, right the way across the board, that there will need to be a bit of compromise, there will need to be inevitable changes. so you think ministers have understood that, but perhaps not yet theresa may? i think we will wait and see. the withdrawal bill is such a huge undertaking. it also gives ministers the power to try to change or strike out swathes of regulation without guaranteeing mps a say. this bill, as it stands though, would give ministers like you sweeping powers to change, get rid of bits and pieces of regulation that you don't like, without mps having a guaranteed vote and full debate. these are hardly massive changes, these are technical changes to make the law work. and it's up to the house of commons, if a statutory instrument is placed front of the house of commons,
the house of commons decides whether it debates it and votes on it. but they're not guaranteed votes unless today you want to give them a guarantee... ? that's in the call of the house of commons, what it chooses to vote on and so on. but no, it's notjust a ministerial signature, it is what they call a statutory instrument, which can be debated and voted upon. morning all. labour is making its own way. asking for its own meetings in brussels. trying to get the eu's negotiator onside. a football shirt! man u? barnier, you are now playing for arsenal! although it might take more than an arsenal shirt to do that! but there's no way, as it stands, that labour will back the bill. we will make sure there is full parliamentary scrutiny, that has to be key to it. we have a parliament where the government does not have a majority, we have a country that has voted in two ways, on leave and remain. obviously the majority voted
to leave, we respect that. but they didn't vote to lose jobs, they didn't vote to have parliament ridden roughshod over. nor will the scottish government. nicola sturgeon with her own kodak moment in brussels today too. the scottish parliament can't technically veto the plan, but it can refuse willing consent. as the bill stands just now, in good conscience i could not recommend to the scottish parliament that it gives legislative consent to this bill. this bill takes powers away from the scottish parliament and undermines the very foundations of the devolution settlement that that parliament is built on. as whitehall begins this enormous process, ministers are all too well aware that there will be conflict ahead. the question, how they balance, compromise and hang onto their credibility. and what ends up on the statute books does notjust sit on the shelf, but shapes how ministers govern, how we live our lives. the parent company of southern rail
has been fined more than £13 million after widespread delays and cancellations to services. the department for transport says the amount would have been much higher, but most of the problems were caused by strike action and high levels of staff sickness. nhs england is overhauling the system that decides how quickly ambulances should reach patients. the changes are aimed at saving more of the sickest patients, and making sure ambulances are only sent out when they're needed. call handlers will now have four minutes, rather than just one, to assess patients. an american doctor has told the high court that a trial therapy in the states could give a chance of meaningful improvement to the condition of the terminally ill baby charlie gard. charlie's parents returned to court today for the latest stage of their legal battle to keep him alive. the judge says he will only change his ruling — allowing great 0rmond street hospital to withdraw life support — if new evidence is compelling. our medical correspondent fergus walsh reports. save charlie gard, save charlie gard.
they call themselves charlie's army, some of the half a million people who signed the petition calling for him to be allowed abroad for experimental treatment. chris gard and connie yates reject evidence from charlie's doctors that their son has irreversible brain damage. we love him more than life itself. if he is still fighting, then we are still fighting. charlie is terminally ill, can't move or breathe unaided. four courts have already ruled he should be allowed to die. the key evidence today came via video link from the american doctor offering to treat charlie. he said he now had a better understanding of the benefits of nucleoside therapy. of nine patients treated so far, none of whom has the same genetic mutation as charlie, five now spent less time each day on a ventilator, and one of them could breathe completely unaided.
he said this led him to conclude there was at least a 10% chance of meaningful improvement for charlie. and this is nucleoside therapy. it's a powder added to food, which aims to boost energy production in cells. six—year—old art estopinan has a muscle—wasting condition and is one of those treated with it in the us. we were able to give him the medications, and little by little he started to get stronger. they gave us hope. i didn't care if he was the first human to try these medications, because they only told us he was going to die. but great 0rmond street says charlie's catastrophic brain damage makes the treatment futile. they say: the final decision
of the court is aimed to be at charlie's best interest, and that would be a balance of the many risks and benefits. it's not black—and—white, but it's going to be a summation of all the possible benefits and all the possible risks, and what that could do for charlie, not what it does for anybody else. in court, connie yates insisted charlie is not suffering or in pain, and both parents briefly walked out of the hearing after the judge said they had agreed their son currently had no quality of life. so this desperately sick boy remains in intensive care, kept alive on a ventilator, as arguments over what is in his best interests continue. fergus walsh, bbc news.
that's a summary of the news, newsday is coming up at midnight — now on bbc news it's time for newsnight with kamal ahmed. tonight... grenfell — the regulations not fit for thejob. it wasn't just horrific flames but poisonous gases that killed. could changing rules on cladding have contributed? so, this small amount of material, if it burned in a house or flat, would be enough to fill the whole house would be enough to fill the whole house or flat with toxic smoke. enough to stop you escaping and kill you. we'll be asking, just how long will it take before we can trust the rules will improve safety and not undermine it? also tonight... as that great eu repeal bill is finally published, we ask, can labour be trusted with brexit? we need a different type of bill. i'm hoping the government are going to let us amend our lot of this bill and on that basis we might
be able to support it. but we can't at the moment because it is so undemocratic. # i always flirt with death. # i could kill, but i don't care about it. and we catch up with the man who wrote this song. what have you been doing in the years when we haven't seen too much of you? hmm, i suppose it was like spiritual research, exploring the inner universe. good evening. grenfell is one of those events that changes attitudes and opens our eyes to subjects that before the horrific events of a month ago were the preserve of experts, bureaucrats and the people — often ignored — who were living every day with risk.