about the wm ii‘ul‘ei ufult e‘ﬁr ml he urul e‘ﬁir il-‘uﬁe first time about the night and the search for new accommodation. we came from the 21st floor all the way day. my daughter was in a coma for ten days. we nearly lost our lives. how come i not a priority? a long summer away from how come i not a priority? a long summer away from parliament and now all the talk is about brexit. no one is pretending this will be easy. i have always said that these negotiations will be tough, complex and at times confrontational. we will get the latest and our first sight of a dramatic new report in which the likes of the archbishop of canterbury and heavy thinkers say the model is broken. hot on the heels on hurricane harvey, another massive storm is brewing and this is
what it looks like. we will ask how bad hurricane irma can be and what parts of the caribbean and the us are most at risk. this is the first timea are most at risk. this is the first time a woman and her daughter have spoken about grenfell tower. and a warning, this film contains content which we may find distressing. i was sleeping and my mum, she got up, she saw the whole house, the kitchen was on fire, so she grabbed me and she told me to get the dog, so i got the dog and i ran out. on their way to see what could become their new home, beauty salon owner helen and her daughter lulya lived on the 21st floor of grenfell tower. they had a terrifying escape with neighbours, three hours after the fire broke out. this is the first time they've spoken publicly about their ordeal. ijust looked up, at the window, there was a fire, i saw the fire
coming, so ijust ran, and i grabbed my daughter. helen and lulya are talking to us now because they and so many others face yet another battle — for a new home. a battle that can end up pitting resident against resident. the plan is to rehouse some grenfell tenants in what is termed affordable housing in this new development. helen and lulya thought they were going to visit a lower floor flat, only to find out it had been given to someone else. instead they were shown one far higher up, on the tenth floor. these details can be all—important. when you see the full windows and the height, that is the difficulty for me. my mum likes them, the rooms and everything are ok, but it's not what i think they should be showing us, because of what happened. i never used to have any type of problem with anything, but now i'm getting anxious whenever i see any tall buildings or anything. so, it's a big change for me.
the council has opened a website to match grenfell residents with a new home. flats are being offered under a four band priority system. helen believes that is divisive at a time when the tower‘s former tenants still feel traumatised and vulnerable. why should i bid? i should be priority as well. we are the ones, we came from the 21st floor, all the way down, my daughter, she was stuck on the tenth floor and she was in a coma for ten days, so how come i am not priority? how? we nearly lost our life. does she have to be dead for them to prioritise me? no. it should not work that way. in fact, it's not fair what they're doing it's not fair. kensington and chelsea council say this is a matching rather than bidding process. those who lost a family member are number one priority, then comes anyone with a disability, then those with dependents and then grenfell residents and evacuated residents of nearby grenfell walk. none of the flats in
grenfell tower had a balcony. after their horrific experience, helen and lulya are adamant that their new home will have one. the flat they were initially shown didn't. the fact that the fire was coming from the outside and the fire was on the kitchen wall, so if you have a balcony, you could step out and you would have a bigger chance of being rescued, so they could bring anything to come and save you. hear their story, and you understand their logic. we tried to come out three times, but then, we had to go out the fourth, because the bedrooms were already on fire. so, we had to take the stairs. i had my dog. my friend luwanna had her dog. this was around liz30am. smoke had long ago entered
grenfell tower's only stairwell. while i was going down, all the smoke, it was really thick, so it's like thick airgoing into you, it's really strong. i can hear everyone trying to find air, like everyone screaming, choking, gagging, then i trip over someone, someone lying on the floor, which is the worst part of everything. so, i'm squeezing my dog so much and my dog is trying to reach up to me and i roll down the stairs with my dog. i roll down like another ten sets of stairs and... and then i passed out and then i let go of my dog because i couldn't breathe any more. my dog is so clever though. after i'd passed out and i dropped him, he went back up to the 21st floor, which is the floor that we lived on, and he was with...
lily, the other dog, they found them both together. lulya spent ten days in an induced coma undergoing treatment for cyanide poisoning. when you're sleeping, you feel numb. like, you don't know what's happening. you're sleeping, you feel relaxed, but in a coma, you feel everything. you feel what's happening. you feel all the pain. but... but you can't move. it's like you're paralysed. neither lulya nor helen will ever forget their experience. i'm saying to myself, you know, it'sjust a bad dream. you know, just a bad dream. but, no, it's not. it did happen and it's really bad. it's very very bad. it will always be with us. we'll never forget.
i don't want to forget. but i want to overcome it. i don't want to forget. it's a lesson. helen and lulya have now seen two flats that they'e keen on. helen and lulya have now seen two flats that they're keen on. they're still waiting to find out if either will become their new home. she really liked the third floor, so let's hope they can do something about the third floor for us. because we've been let down and i hope they're not going to let us down again. i hope so. yes. helen and daughter lulya talking to katie razzle. in a statement, kensington and chelsea council deputy leader kim taylor—smith told us the council had prioritised bereaved families and made accommodation offers to them all. he added that the council had secured more than 100 homes to resettle people and said the housing team was working hard to find homes for everyone. no one — david davis observed today of brexit negotiations —
ever pretended this would be simple or easy. the brexit secretary came before the commons with a concrete example of something he had managed to agree with the eu negotiator this week — continued use of the european—wide health insurance card for those britons living in the eu when this country leaves the bloc. it's a step that will reassure many older retirees outside of britain — although we don't yet know if the same priveleges will apply to tourists and visitors as they do at present. the chance to dwell on this was shortlived, however. this evening, the guardian splashed on a leaked government proposal that suggests britain might end free movement of labour immediately after brexit. something mooted, but never previously laid quite so bare. chris cook — our policy editor — and nick watt our political editor are here. does this sound like confirmation of what we knew would happen? it is a lot more colour in the picture.
the dilemma was that we wanted a really smooth transition after leaving the eu, we wanted eu to treat us much like a memberfor a little while until we get our acts together just that and that we wanted to convince the eu that basically free movement was probably going to continue during that transition period. at the same time the government wanted to convince us, the british public, that free movement was ending. so it was a delicate needle to thread. the thing is, this document doesn't do it, it is very clearly ending free movement, even the registration of workers coming in during the transition period. i think this signals that this is a document from the home office side, the anti—migration side of the civil service, it's about a government, if it were to be followed, worrying more about domestic consumption than perhaps securing the best deal we can get from the eu.
in terms of what david davis said today in the commons, nick, what did you pick out from what he had to offer? very important illustration of the old phrase follow the moneyjust if david davis has his way, we will be following the money for the entirety of these two—year negotiations. now, that is not what the eu wants. they want the uk to come to an agreement on the framework in three areas — the divorce bill, the rights of eu citizens who are already here at the point of departure and northern ireland. and what this intervention from david davis today shows is his confidence that he is going to be able to say to the eu, you have a rigid structure and we simply cannot agree the fundamentals on these three points until we know what the overall deal for the future will be. a lot of chat in whitehall how michel barnier, the eu's chief
negotiator, carrying out the agreed mandate of the 27 member states, is being rigid and there is a hope, not a belief, that if angela merkel is re—elected in september come we might get a bit more flexibility. brexit may well provide the biggest structural change to the british economy in a century. tomorrow, the ippr will release a report containing its response to the challenges — and interestingly, for a think tank often seen as on the centre—left of the political spectrum — they've got together with helena morrisey, the high profile fund manager and keen brexiteer — to work with them on it. this is her take on the way ahead. i'm in the city of london, ranked the world's top financial centre. and outside the city, of course, britain is home to many world—class companies. but as well as those world—class companies, we also have a problem, we have more companies than our international competitors that are lower productivity. productivity is a measure of output versus input. and since the financial crisis
a decade ago, the uk's overall productivity growth has stalled, reducing our economic potential. and no—one is quite sure why and economists have dubbed this the productivity puzzle, but it really matters, because if we're not making the best use of skills, then people are in insecure jobs and on low wages. at this stage, we have rising pay inequality, stagnating household incomes and many young people today don't expect to have higher living standards than their parents and that is the first time that has happened for many generations. and the uk's economy is also geographically very imbalanced, with about 40% of output generated by london and the south—east and there are many geopolitical uncertainties, including brexit. you could argue that we don't really so much have an economic model, as an economic muddle. the specific challenges may be quite different, but in many ways, the situation we are at today is not dissimilar from the 1940s,
when we were looking to rebuild the economy after the war, or the 1980s, when we were recovering from a deep recession. the question is, how do we change the economy for the better? how can we make it work for more people? our economy needs fundamental change, not just tinkering around the edges. we need the city and british businesses to be investing for the long term. we need employers to be focused on creating good jobs that contribute to higher productivity and improved competitiveness. and we need the government to implement an industrial strategy that helps british businesses grow at home and compete abroad. helena morrisey. well, another of those behind the report is the man whose job it once was to respond to these changes in government, the head the civil service between 2012 and 2014, sir bob kerslake. thank you forjoining us. this report, as helena was saying
and as the archbishop of canterbury has said, is pretty bleak. it says the economy is broken, the model is broken, it is a real slating of the british economy. i think we have to recognise that the uk economy has simply stopped working for ordinary people and the statistics are really very stark. we have had the longest period of wage stagnation for 150 years and, at the same time, the very wealthy people, the chief executives, have raced ahead. 30 years ago a chief executive may on average earn 20 times that of a worker, now it is 150 times. there are some very fundamental questions about our economy and they will not be tackled... if phillip hammond was sitting here, he would say we have low unemployment, faster growth than europe over the years, the deficit has come down,
the structure is all there, is he wrong? i think what he's talking about is one set of measures. but if you look at the economy over a period of time, we have deep structural problems that have been there for a while. productivity, 20% lower than france and germany and our investment has fallen for 30 years and the differences between different parts of the country are quite extraordinary. if you live in the north—east, the north—west, you might be on 30% less in terms of your salary. is this the way the free market is operating? it is partly about how the free market works, but it's actually about what kind of economy do we want to create? there is a sense in which people say we cannot do much about the economy, it is settled by the market, but i think we can have an ambition for a prosperous and just economy and work towards it.
it is a question of clarity and well. you used the word just and it is striking when you have a figure like the archbishop in this. do you think the way the economy is being run is a moral? i think it is producing outcomes that we will find very hard to defend if we are asked the question because it is not delivering fair outcomes for many of the people in this country. others will form a view whether that is about morality. bob, you had to defend those practices, you worked in the civil service over many yea rs. did you find them wrong at the time? i don't think we necessarily saw individual policies as wrong, but what you need to look at is a longer period of what has happened in the uk over many years. help me on this, give me a sense, it is all very well to say the model is broken and we need to change the structure, fundamental reform, what does that mean? when you talk about taxation you say we need there, smarter, simpler taxes.
you don't address the question of whether we need more taxes, should we be taking in more taxes. does that need to happen? my personal view is that the current austerity approach has run out of road and we need a new approach... but that's broadly agreed across the spectrum, even to reason may have said that now. consequences flow from that. we have a fiscal gap that will need to be addressed. we need to look at who pays what and how the system works. you will not get people to buy into a change around tax unless they feel the system is fair. do you want to see more intervention of the state, the government playing a bigger role? we do not start from presumption that it is about more of a state role, we start from a sense were you need to be clear what kind of economy you're trying to create and everyone gets behind it. so, yes, there will be really important tasks for the state to do and in the report we set out 30 different new ideas that can be considered.
but it's notjust about the state. it's about business and the trade unions and others. let me put this to you. a couple of years ago, jeremy corbyn became labour leader and he said pretty much what is in your report today. many in the establishment laughed at him today. you have the likes of yourself and the archbishop of canterbury broadly saying, he is on the right track with what he is talking about now. what you have is a number of politicians, including of course the prime minister, saying, there are issues. she talked about burning injustices that needed to be tackled. so, yes, jeremy corbyn is saying some things, so is vince cable... would you now embrace that vision for britain? we want a vision that is embraced notjust by one party, but by the country, a clear sense in which we can create a fair, just and prosperous economy and then we want business and trade unions and others to get behind it. we are not, as you will see from the membership
of the commission, starting from one political party. let's talk about brexit, you were a civil servant at the heart of this, when david davis said no one thought it would be easy, there were some sniggers, because some suggested it would, you ran the civil service, do you think they are embracing this challenge, are they ready for this and can they deliver it? the civil service prides itself on doing thejob it is asked to do by the government of the day. the government of the day is wanting to deliver brexit. the challenge here and i will be direct, from my perspective, there is no upside. this is about damage limitation and we are working in a situation where policy has not been properly settled. the guardian story that chris was talking about, that it would be the end of free movement of labour, pretty much from the start of brexit and the document, draft document admittedly, describes a massive it operation and solution which would let people know, whether that person was allowed to work in the uk,
where tapping on a number, is that feasible? truthfully, i haven't seen the details and i cannot comment. an election that was intended to settle the way we left the european union did nothing of the sword. so we still have a very live debate about how the transition period will work. in that situation, civil servants will struggle to get coherent policies, if the politicians have not sorted out their priorities. so when theresa may says that no deal is better than a bad deal, from a civil service point of view, no deal even an option? could we survive no deal? i don't know what the civil service view is, but my view is that it would be an utter and complete disaster for this country and we need to be very frank about this, there is not a no deal option that would be good for this country.
thank you for coming in. when a teacher, social worker or health care professional suspects that a child has been the victim of female genital mutilation, they're obliged to report their suspicions to the local child safeguarding authority. but an investigation for newsnight and radio 4's the world at one has established that it can take months for children to be examined in cases where fgm is suspected. and families can face lengthy and traumatic waits to prove their innocence. in some cases, children have been taken into care before they have even been examined. newsnight has also revealed questions about the capabilities and the credibility of one of the uk's best—known fgm specialists, comfort momoh, when it comes to examining children for fgm. dr faye kirkland, a practising gp and investigative reporter, has this. it has been called a hidden crime. fgm has been illegal in the uk for more than 30 years. but it's still a common cultural practice in many
countries in africa, parts of asia and the middle east. there are no definitive figures, but the british government has warned thousands are at risk and has committed to ending fgm worldwide within a generation. the issue of fgm is one on which i think we are all agreed across this whole house, it is an abhorrent activity, it should not be taking place. but are the authorities taking the right approach to investigating suspected cases of fgm, especially where children are concerned? we have been told that excessive waits for the examination of children are causing unnecessary trauma and that children can be placed under child protection measures while enquiries are ongoing. i felt like the whole world was crumbling down on me. newsnight heard concerns about the credibility of one of the country's leading fgm campaigners and health care professionals. nearly two years ago,
it became a legal requirement for health care professionals, social workers and teachers to report cases of fgm in children to the police. but there are concerns the way some cases are being investigated is harming children and their families. if a child is suspected of having been subjected to fgm they should be physically examined by a specialist. in many cases, however, it is a final part of the investigative process and can take place months after an accusation is made. when the child could already be on a child protection plan or in foster care. one reason being told is that police and social services and often misunderstand the nature of the examination, believing it to be more intrusive to the child than it actually is. this is the letter... as it says there, there
is no evidence of fgm. yes. pregnant with her third child, this woman, we will call her emma, to protect the identities of children, asked a question out of curiosity during a routine medical appointment after the midwife mentioned fgm. emma told me that she wanted to clarify what fgm was but her question sparked an investigation. it wasjust curiosity. and who would be the best person to ask? it was the midwife. that same night, a police officer came to her door, gave her leaflets and warned her about the practice. a year later, the same officer came back with social services, this time they said they had been informed she had had the procedure herself and there were concerns it had been carried out on her daughters. emma denied the accusations, but the girls were put on a child protection plan, a measure local authorities used to safeguard children and maintain oversight of the family, before they
had even been examined. what happened over the next few months? the atmosphere changed in the house. i wasn't myself. i had just had a baby, i was not given time to recover. i felt like the whole world was crumbling down on me and my children's behaviour changed in school. it triggered naughty behaviour and that had not happened before. i needed an examination done on me and my children and i knew that i hadn't undergone fgm, my children hadn't. my children were fine and healthy, i had not hurt them in any way. newsnight has been told that her story is not uncommon. forward, a charity that works with families, told us they had seen a child
is placed in foster care for eight months while waiting to be examined. she was found not to have had fgm, but the delay caused serious distress. they are calling for changes to be made. using the right translators, ensuring that there is effective support for families to get legal assistance, because of the challenges with legal aid and ensuring that families are examined on time and children are as well, but in a sensitive way and within the right environments. do you think the way some investigations are being handled is letting families down? oh, yes. a lot of times, what becomes a problem is possibly lack of training for professionals, effective training. there is a knee jerk reaction from professionals when they hear fgm. sometimes, i don't know whether it is terrified or wanting to make sure that something does not go wrong. so, they really go in too hard.
a 2016 study by experts at university college london hospital, showed children were waiting nearly two months on average to be referred for an examination, but there are cases of waits of over one year. in a home affairs select committee report two years ago, then committe chairman keith vaz warned: but i have been told by specialists around the country that many cases they see are historic and they do not believe that fgm is taking place in this country at anything like the same rates as some politicians have stated. there are three main specialist centres in the uk where children are examined for fgm, based
in london, birmingham and here in manchester. doctor catherine white of saint mary's sexual assault referral centre has seen more than a0 referrals since mandatory reporting came in. 14 of those cases were found on examination to have had fgm. so far we have not noticed fgm in cases where the family have said, no, the child has not had it. of the cases you have seen, how many of them have occurred here in the uk? none. so where we have seen evidence of fgm, the children have been born outside of the uk and the history is that they have had the fgm done outside of the uk. in the media we have been told that they might be thousands of cases. why do you think there is a discrepancy in those figures? i know that some of it might be that it's hidden, but i think if certain types of fgm were being done at the rates that we were led to expect, we would be seeing cases coming
through with infection or bleeding, they would be ending up in front of health officials and they would then be referred to us — and that's just hasn't happened. these clinics provide very specialised care. but newsnight has learned that some children have been examined by people whose qualifications and experience have been called into question. comfort momoh is a midwife and leading campaigner against fgm. she established one of the uk's first fgm clinics at a guy's hospital and is recently retired from guy's and st thomas' trust. gee whizz! mbe for her work in women's health, but senior specialists have raised concerns to newsnight
about whether she is completely credible, specifically when it comes to examining children for fgm. the home office and the bodies which set the standards for the forensic examination of children all say that only doctors with the relevant qualifications and experience should examine children for fgm. but comfort momoh has examined at least five children, despite not having the relevant codification is. in a high—profile case she testified that a child had had fgm. ajudged described her report as a remarkably shoddy piece of work and worse than useless. he concluded the child had not undergone fgm. a week later, in a separate court case, comfort momoh was listed as a key expert witness for the prosecution of the trial of the first doctor in the uk prosecuted for allegedly carrying out fgm. newsnight understands comfort momoh
was due to give evidence but was dropped just before the trial, although no reasons were given. a jury acquitted the doctor after less than half an hour of deliberations. there are also suggestions that comfort momoh might be exaggerating her professional qualifications. she has repeatedly describe herself as a doctor but is not a qualified medical doctor. instead she has an honorary doctorate from middlesex university. a university spokesman confirmed to newsnight that this does not enable her to use the title doctor. newsnight put these allegations to comfort momoh but she has chosen not to respond. newsnight also approached the nursing and midwifery council and they told us they were already investigating concerns about comfort momoh. we do not know whether this is connected in any way with our findings. emma had to fight to get her children examine the, but she says the struggle has had long—lasting effects on her and her family. the police officer said to me, if i had not had the examination
taken for my children because i would have lost my children — social services would have taken them away. what impact has this had on you as a mum and your children? i didn't want to lose my children. it would have been so heartbreaking, so it gave me the strength to get them examined by a specialist that is trained to examine in that field, knock anybody, any doctor orany gp, it should be somebody trained specifically for that. protecting women and girls from fgm is crucial. but examinations needs to be timely and carried out by qualified people. there is more work to be done to save young girls from unnecessary distress.
we asked to speak to someone from the home office, but no—one was available. a government spokesperson said... "female genital mutilation is a horrific act of abuse which this government is working to tackle." they added... joining us now is leyla hussein, a psychotherapist and campaigner on fgm. it is nice of you to come in. you've seen some of these delayed cases — why are children separated from their parents for so long? for me i think it is important that we make it very clear — whenever a child is at risk of any harm, obviously, i think the authorities do the right
thing by removing the child. is it delayed? yes. is it wrong? yes. but there is a reason. the reason it happens, unfortunately, when we work in such cases, multi—agency work needs to take place. unfortunately when we are dealing with fgm, there aren't enough experts who are working with the authorities, hence why there is such a long delay. but when you talk about multi—agency approaches, for most people watching, they assume it's physical college is fairly easy to spot, it's something that actually a doctor can look at and tell very quickly — why isn't that the case? there are different types of fgm, that important. but also we need to understand, communities who practice fgm still don't see this as a form of abuse. this was something that was good for us, it's something for professionals to understand, so we're not going to come forward and say this happened to us,
hence why it is still not being picked up as it should be. but when the suspected cases were followed up, most of them were found to be false, these allegations, so does that suggest the system is wrong or they are chasing the wrong people or they are not able to...? i think we need to be careful when we say it's false allegations. from my own experience, we are talking about... since the protection orders were introduced, it invented girls from undergoing the practice. and any family, you contact them regarding any form of abuse, they're not going to say to you, we abuse our child. from my own experience, when protection orders were introduced over a two years ago, the first year, there were over 90 reported cases, 90 protection orders were put in place and a lot of them came from family members, we cannot ignore that. of those 90, do we know how many...? i can't give a specific...
from my own experience, families who i worked with, it came from siblings who overheard families talk about planning to take them away. and of course, if you take somebody away before it's happened and there is no physical evidence, it doesn't mean it's not going to happen? and this is the thing with fgm. the only way you can actually prove it takes place is if it actually happens. what we are trying to do, and the uk government, is to do the prevention work. i'm going to repeat myself but if you are dealing with any form of abuse of a child, there is a procedure you have to go through to investigate. does it take long? absolutely and it shouldn't, but what the government needs to do is invest more resources in working with the local authorities, and that's what's been missing. let me ask you something. we heard in the film, what's remarkable is that many quietly think the problem of fgm in this country has shrunk,
that it's a good news story, a positive story they don't say that for fear that people will turn round and say, you're covering this up — where do you stand on that? for me, in terms of attitude is changing, we are seeing a little bit of change. and also i think those of us who work in the uk, what we need to take credit for, if you look at fgm globally, we really are leading in terms of how we are dealing with this. but we have a law, the french don't have a law — has the law actually hindered us compared to the french system, which has actually... ? i have always been against the fgm act. for me, if you have a child because you treat it like any other form of abuse. if you were cutting a child's finger, it should not be any different from cutting
their genitals. that's why a lot of communities feel ostracised, because they feel they need to have a specific lawjust for them. and hence why no—one comes forward. the reason france has been successful in this particular aspect of the work, it's because they haven't treated it differently. i know from colleagues who work in france who say to me, we would see this as a form of child abuse. it's a form of child abuse. i've had police officers here in the uk who have come up to me and said, if i walked into such a scene, i wouldn't call it female genital mutilation comma it's a sexual assault against a child. thanks for coming in. and last but certainly not least tonight, growing fears about another giant hurricane in the atlantic ocean. hurricane irma is gaining in strength and heading towards the caribbean and united states. stav danaos, from our weather centre, is here. talk us through what you're
expecting — how do you know how big it's going to be? we are looking at the satellite picture, which is proving what a huge monster this storm is. but in the last few hours, it has intensified rapidly. it has become an extremely catastrophic, strong eckel category it has become an extremely catastrophic, strong category five storm, with winds of 185mph with gusts in excess of 220mph. it does not really get stronger than this. you have a sense of where it is going to hit land? most computer models agree that it is heading westwards into a cluster of islands. because it's such a big storm, it is difficult for it to avoid that cluster of islands. the strongest winds are around the eye, where we see the extreme devastation. but even further out, the winds will be damaging. and then you have got an extremely powerful is toms surge associated with it and with the low pressure
and the strong winds as well and the heavy rain. we can see here on the satellite picture the intensity of the eye. they're saying this is the biggest for ten years? it is and it could be up with the top three strongest ever atlantic storms and it is not far off being the stronger stuff all. is it possible that it could avoid land treaty? is it possible that it could avoid land completely? not really, because it's going to be heading westwards towards the virgin islands and haiti. bluntly, you would be getting out if you were in any of those islands tonight? absolutely, and in places like antigua, barbuda, which are going to be hit in the early hours, if you're in a concrete, reinforced building, you will be fine, but other areas will be completely flattened. the difference with harvey, back did cause damage on the coast, but because the landmass of the united states is so huge, the landmass kills off
the supply of moisture, so all the rain which fell in harvey fell in a small area. it almost stalled around the houston area. this one is going to be more mobile and it's going to maintain its strength. we would like to leave you with more pictures from outer space, the voyager probe, launched a0 years ago today, the first man—made probe to leave our solar system, built in the 19705 and still sending us back answers — as well as questions — about the universe. good night. we have lift—off! hello from the children of planet earth...
good morning. all eyes are focused on the caribbean with hurricane irma but closer to home, things are quieter. breezy. and it is a slightly fresher source of air. there will be some spells of sunshine, particularly in sheltered eastern areas sunshine, particularly in sheltered eastern areas away sunshine, particularly in sheltered eastern areas away from the westerly breeze. more cloud and a scattering of showers not out of the question. as we move out of wednesday into thursday, low pressure moving in bringing wet and windy weather across scotland and northern island and moving into england and wales. central and southern england should stay dry but then the rain setting clear on friday and some squally
showers with hail and thunder. welcome to newsday. the headlines: russia's president putin says more sanctions against north korea won't work and warns hysteria could lead toa work and warns hysteria could lead to a global catastrophe. hurricane irma strengthens into a potentially devastating category five storm as it heads towards the caribbean. also on the programme, the scheme to protect young migrants in the us is being scrapped by president trump. and a new twist in the legal row of australia's gay marriage postal vote. live from studios in singapore and london, this is bbc world news. it's newsday.