this is bbc news. the headlines at 7pm. theresa may won't say whether she knew about a failed trident missile test, which happened as mp5 were debating to renew the weapons system. i have absolute faith in our trident missiles. when i made that speech in the house of commons, what we were talking about was whether or not we should renew our trident. the prime minister says she wants to establish a "productive working relationship" with president trump when they hold talks on friday. the white house accuses part of the media of dishonestly reporting numbers attending his inauguration. also in the next hour: a shock for the world number one at the australian open. andy murray's hopes of winning the tournament for the first time, end with a surprise fourth round defeat by the world number 50. choose life. choose facebook, twitter, and hope someone,
somewhere, twitter, and hope someone, somewhere, ca res. and: it helped define the 1990s, now trainspotting returns for a new generation. good evening and welcome to bbc news. theresa may says she has "absolute faith," in the uk's trident nuclear deterrent system, despite claims an unarmed missile veered off course during a test last summer. on the andrew marr programme today, the prime minister declined to say whether she knew of the incident, before a crucial vote on the future of trident, in parliament lastjuly. our defence correspondent jonathan beale reports. this is what the launch of a trident missile looks like. lastjune, the royal navy carried out what it calls a routine unarmed test launch from hms vengeance. but it now appears
something went wrong. hms vengeance was about 200 miles off the florida coast. it was going to fire the missile around 500 miles across the atlantic but a malfunction occurred during its flight. yet just weeks later, theresa may was asking mps to vote on spending £40 billion to renew the weapons system. mr speaker, we have waited long enough, it is time to get on with building the next generation of our nuclear deterrent. today she was asked four times if she knew then there had been a problem. the issue we were talking about in the house of commons was a very serious issue, whether or not we should renew trident, whether we should look to the future and have a replacement trident. that is what we were talking about in the house of commons, that's what the house of commons voted for. i believe in defending our country, jeremy corbyn voted against it. prime minister, did you know? there are tests that take place all the time regularly for our nuclear deterrent.
what we were talking about in that debate that took place... not going to get an answer to this. we understand the prime minister chose not to inform parliament about this, and it has come out through the media some months later. it is a pretty catastrophic error when a missile goes in the wrong direction. while the ministry of defence has publicised past successful test launches of the trident missile, in this instance is they say they will give no further details of the incident injune because of national security reasons. in a statement, they would only say that hms vengeance and her crew were successfully tested and verified, but significantly officials do not deny that there was a problem with the missile or that it might have veered off course. the former head of the navy says ministers should have come clean. the missiles have been fired now since 1990 regularly, and they work all the time.
this clearly was a problem, that's why you have tests, to check. if there were some minor problem i don't think it would have made any difference at all, but by not publicising it, it immediately makes you think are they hiding something, is there something wrong? it was a stupid thing to do. the government still says it has absolute confidence in britain's nuclear weapons system. but this incident does raise questions about its reliability. joining us now is rear admiral chris parry, former navy officer. what exactly is being tested in a situation like the one we've been reporting? what's really being tested is the launch procedures and the mechanisms by which the submarine actually gets the missile out of its hole through the water
and into independent flight. and i think it's fair to say that that was proved during this trial. i think the subsequent telemetry will reveal what went wrong with the missile. what do you think did go wrong if it veered off course and headed towards america? we don't know if it headed towards america, that is rumour. it did not go on its preprogrammed ﬂight did not go on its preprogrammed flight path. that could be anything to do with the tiny component, a transistor or something will stop remember this is an inert missile covered with telemetry indicators and things like that. it does not have a warhead and is designed to go somewhere where there is not any land. anything could have gone wrong. it could have been a component failure or indeed a softwa re component failure or indeed a software glitch or something like that. and i think as lord west said, it is unusual for this to happen. and if it did i'm sure the engineers are all over it at the moment. i
suspect that the time that politicians were not told because the analysis had not been done. lord west also said it is much better to come clean and tell parliament, do you agree? if there is something to tell. if this bull fight of life was we had a problem and we think it is to analysis we have not done yet, it would be crazy to go to parliament if you don't know about it. the other thing to stress is that our nuclear technology is shared amongst very few people indeed. and unless the politicians are very inquisitive about what is going on, they are not going to be told unless there is something significant that affects national security. this is not because of the nuclear content of this system, it is all to do with the direction, the telemetry, as you describe it. everyone seems to be trying to minimise this, why shouldn't we worry? as lord west
said, the reason we do testing is so that we can find out faults. 0ne said, the reason we do testing is so that we can find out faults. one of the things i would say, quite a lot of these shots nowadays are being done to test the limits of the system so that we can get the next generation of ballistic missiles in. 0n generation of ballistic missiles in. on this occasion it may well be that they were testing this missile close to its flight limits so that we can see where it is not going to work. we don't know that. one thing i know is that amongst professionals, they scare politicians silly about the security arrangements for this such that the politicians are terrified to talk about it. i think to be honest the prime minister should have said, yes we have a problem. when we have the analysis will tell you about it, but right now it is speculation. that would have been sensible. might it have been the case that everyone wanted to keep this quiet because the vote in parliament to renew the system at a cost of £40 billion might have gone a different way? i don't think so.
leaving over the period its lifetime trident has been shown to be incredibly reliable. it is the best system incredibly reliable. it is the best syste m o n incredibly reliable. it is the best system on the murky, we want to depict, and obviously when the next generation comes in it has to be proved to be just as good if not better. and also value for money. i doubt if the analysis of that incident back in june doubt if the analysis of that incident back injune was actually shared immediately with either david cameron or theresa may, so at the time of the debate i doubt if the information was available to brief on it. rear admiral chris parry, thanks for talking to us. and we'll find out how this story and many others are covered in tomorrow's front pages at 10:30 and 11:30pm this evening in the papers — our guests tonight are the broadcaster natalie haynes and deputy political editor of the independent, rob merrick. the prime minister has also confirmed today that she'll visit washington for talks with president trump on friday, the first world leader to meet him since his inauguration. mrs may said she would build on the special relationship between britain and america,
but would challenge any opinions she finds unacceptable. here's our political correspondent iain watson. 0n the surface, the special relationship appears almost intimate. britain's prime minister will be the first foreign leader to meet the new president. but that relationship with donald trump may have to become extra special after brexit, as britain searches for new global trade deals. the special relationship between the uk and the us has been strong for many years. we will have opportunity to talk about our future trading relationship but also some of the world challenges that we all face. he and people around him are also spoken about the importance of a trade arrangement with the united kingdom, and that that is something they are looking to talk to us about at an early stage. it all sounds positive, but the two leaders will have to square this circle. i want this to be a truly global britain. america first! the president's critics say that his emphasis on protecting american drops might make things
difficult with the uk —— jobs. recent figures show that we sell more to america than we buy. we sold them £88 billion worth of goods and services and brought injust £52 billion worth of imports. the reverse is true with the eu, we buy more goods from them than sell of ours. but you can see our business with eu partners is worth far more than our trade with the united states. no trade agreement with america, however ambitious, can replace or match what we are potentially going to lose on our own doorstep in europe. it is well known here in downing street that the team around theresa may were not necessarily donald trump's biggest fans when he was a candidate, but as soon as he was elected, the officials were dispatched to the states to try to mend bridges quicker than construction workers on overtime. but now the prime minister insists that she still isn't afraid to raise really difficult issues with the new leader
of the free world. yesterday, millions of women across the world and thousands here in london marched against a president they see as disrespectful. theresa may was a little coy of what she would say face—to—face with donald trump, but she argued her own presence in washington made something of a statement in itself. i think the biggest statement that will be made about the role of women is the fact that i will be there as a female prime minister, prime minister of the united kingdom, talking to him directly about the interest that we share. in the ‘80s, mrs thatcher and ronald reagan had a close and candid relationship, while donald trump reportedly calls theresa may his maggie, it is likely to take a lot of diplomacy and good grace to form a similar partnership. 0ur deputy political editorjohn pienaar said today's revelation this story on trident is notjust
awkward, it is embarrassing. ministers can argue there is no chance of the navy launching a strike against moscow or disneyland by accident. they can point out that most mps support the nuclear deterrent, that is true, but the way mps were kept in dark over such a crucial vote on trident, it will not be hard for the opposition tomorrow to make the government feel uncomfortable and even the rather evasive when they would rather talk about the coming american trip. and as far as that is concerned, we don't know how the trunk residency will play out, but we know something of his character and style. and given that it will be hard to see theresa may exercising the same influence over him that margaret thatcher the double ronald reagan. some argue that the government could be embarrassed by this relationship, but predictability, that was a feature of politics, and no predictability and politics seems a long time ago. the white house has vowed to fight the news media "tooth and nail," over what officials see as unfair
attacks on president trump. the new president has taken issue with estimates of the size of the crowd at his inauguration on friday. he claims at least a million people attended, aerial photographs appear to tell a different story as our north america editorjon sopel reports. the weightiest issues on the planet were discussed at donald trump's inaugural address, but what the president is in a white rage about are suggestions that the crowds for him were not as big as they were for barack 0bama eight years ago, even though the evidence is incontrovertible, as these two photos, each taken 45 minutes before the inauguration started. last night, journalists were summoned to the most extraordinary white house briefing to be told they were lying. this was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period. this kind of dishonesty in the media, there has been a lot of talk in the media about the response bulleted to hold donald trump accountable,
and i'm here to tell you that it goes two ways. we are going to the press accountable as well. no questions were allowed. earlier in the day from donald trump, on a visit to cia headquarters, a similar attack, though this time the target different. as you know, i have a running war with the media. they are among the most dishonest human beings on earth. they sort of made it sound like i had a feud with the intelligence community. but, hang on a minute, how do you reconcile the suggestion that it is all got up by the journalists when he tweeted this 11 days ago? he accused the intelligence services of leaking material against him, and suggested their behaviour made it seem as though we were living in nazi germany. and today, key lieutenants were intensifying their attacks. there is an obsession by the media to delegitimise this president, and we are not going to sit around
and let it happen. 0ur press secretary gave alternative facts to that. alternative facts are not facts, they are falsehoods. part of this can be put down the donald trump's obsession with the size of his crowd, but there is deliberate strategy here too. it seems the white house wants to undermine the conventional media so that donald trump is able to present his own version of reality through twitter and facebook without any mediation, and say to the public, who do you believe, me or the establishment media? and while this battle plays itself out, the satirists are making hay. this is their take on what vladimir putin makes of it all. i am glad to see so many people showed up to your inauguration. oh, wait, that's the women's march. here is the inauguration. jon sopel, bbc news, washington.
david willis is in washington. thanks forjoining us. it is nice to see you to talk about this once more. how worrying a start is this for the media, particularly in the states, and the new administration? there is normally a honeymoon period with an incoming administration, but we barely had time to consummate the marriage with this one before anybody gets cosy. just look at the way sean spicer came out yesterday, all guns blazing, basically giving that five—minute very angry statement he read from prepared notes and then turned on his heel and refuse take any questions. this is the way clearly that the trump administration is going to deal with
the fourth estate. they will hold us accountable, they say. what that actually means is presumably an extraordinarily fractious relationship that is going to be in stark contrast to what we've been used to over the last eight years under 0racle bummer. —— under barack 0bama. sean spicer, the communications chief, laid out his stall, and this is not going to be a right for the faint of heart. it will be a all right, as we wait to see how it all pans out. how often, if ever, our journalists see how it all pans out. how often, if ever, ourjournalists and from press briefings? this administration did actually ban, during the campaign, representatives of certain news organisations it fell out with, among them the washington post. it
is not afraid to do that, and clearly this is the sort of tactic that it holds up its sleeve. but they can also do other things, more subtle, including withdrawing access to certain events, showing preference to other outlets and so on. there is a number of things they can do to get back at the media. it is, as they say, a brave new world out there. what are journalists saying about the way they will need to approach reporting stories with mrtrump in the to approach reporting stories with mr trump in the white house? there has been quite a combat of kickback from a couple of media organisations, including the new york times, which has basically criticised the press conference that we saw from sean spicer yesterday. i think that the media is probably shell—shocked by this. there were kept waiting an hour yesterday for
sean spicer to come and make is very angry statement. i think there are probably a lot of people, veteran white house press corps members who are smarting from this and are wondering what sort of relationship they will be able to forge if any, with this administration. mr trump's adviser was on nbc, we saw clipper that earlier, part of a long quote, but she says," i don't think that in the end president are judged at the size of the crowd that comes to the inauguration." at what point do they drop this and move on and we get down to business? according to their campaign there are a lot of issues that need dealing with. absolutely, yet donald trump cannot leave this alone. he is like a dog with a bone. he tweeted this morning about the tv ratings for the inauguration, saying
31 million people witnessed his swearing in, 11 million more than four years ago when barack 0bama took the oath of office. these are the sorts of things that matter to him. when he is making these sorts of remarks in front of an audience at the cia, for example, there are a lot of people who say there are more important things to be dealing with in yourfirst important things to be dealing with in your first day as the leader of the free world than arguing about the free world than arguing about the size of attendance at your inauguration. david, thanks. and from monday here on the bbc news channel we have a new programme covering donald trump's first acts as president, the brexit effect and much more. that's 100 days with katty kay in washington and christian fraser in london at 7pm. the headlines on bbc news: theresa may won't say when mps were voting
to renew the weapons system. the prime minister confirms she'll be the first world leader to meet president trump when they hold talks on friday. the white house accuses the american media of dishonestly reporting the size of the crowd at friday's inauguration of president trump. the authorities in israel have approved the construction of more than 500 homes for settlers in occupied eastjerusalem. the decision was delayed until donald trump took power in washington, with the new president promising to be israel's "best friend." he's due to speak to the israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu by phone later today. the former president of the gambia, yahya jammeh, has flown into exile — 22 years after taking control of the west african state in a coup. there are reports tonight that the state coffers appear to be empty after mrjammeh fled the country.
he sparked a political crisis when he refused to accept the outcome of the country's election. jammeh finally agreed to hand over power to the winner after the leaders of neighbouring countries threatened military action. at least 39 people have been killed and many more injured, after a train derailed in the indian state of andhra pradesh. police are investigating claims the track may have been tampered with. it's thought a number of people remain trapped in the wreckage. voting has been taking place in france today in primaries to decide the socialist party's candidate to contest the french presidential election. seven candidates are on the initial ballot paper, butjust two candidates will make it through to the next round of voting. amongst those trying to win the nomination is former prime minster manuel valls. 0ur correspondent is in paris. hugh, who are the front runners? manuel
valls is one of them, and there are these two left—wing candidates, benoit hamon, and the former economy minister, both on the left of the party. early indications from exit polls is that then what hamon, the education minister, whose great policy initiative was for a universal income for everyone, he seems to be leading in these early a cts seems to be leading in these early acts of polls, and it will be interesting to see that is confirmed. normally we would expect to people to go through, one from the left, one from the right. if there is logic it would be benoit hamon plus manuel valls, and that way in the run—off you would have clear—cut way in the run—off you would have clea r—cut left way in the run—off you would have clear—cut left — right decision for socialist posters. but that is not necessarily the way it will turn out because it could be that manuel valls is eclipsed by the other left—wing candidate, in which case we would have a left— left run—off.
how interested out the electorate in this nomination? they are not as interested as they were in the right wing party primary which opened in november which ended with francois fillon been chosen as the centre—right candidate. the differences that francois fillon has a strong chance of becoming the country's next leader, so notjust centre—right voters were interested but people across france, in the left, they voted for that primary as well because we wanted to have a choice of say in the man who was likely to become next leader. everyone knows who wins this primary for the socialist party has a very limited chance of becoming the next president. it is not impossible, but the odds would soon to be stacked against this person. there are two other candidates broadly of the left who are more popular in the polls right now. that has meant that
voters have and not so much taking pa rt voters have and not so much taking part in this campaign. however they can overturn that the menton and start digging orfrom the can overturn that the menton and start digging or from the other two candidates of the left. how do they suggest they might tackle the popularity of the rise of the national front, we solve marine le pen meeting other far national front, we solve marine le pen meeting otherfar right leaders and the yesterday. on the left we have these two characters who are advocating policies that are pretty left—wing. not the same policies as marine le pen, but they are appealing to the same voters, they hope, as she has been able to ca ptu re. hope, as she has been able to capture. the disenfranchised, the poon capture. the disenfranchised, the poor, the white people in the small towns of the north. they are appealing for a big increase in budget spending, a big no to budget rules handed down from brussels. benoit hamon wants this idea of a
universal revenue to revolutionise the way people approach work. 0thers believe that europe should be ignored, and the sugar cane of protectionism in france or within europe. these are quite radical ideas in the party, recognising that the recent large pool of voters out there who are tempted because of the general sense of failure and pessimism in the country as a whole are tempted by the appeal of the far right. president francois hollande has not stood again. not at all popular. how damaging has his tenure as president into the left? there are certainly many people on the left, socialist party voters who are totally disillusioned by his mandate. it is exactly five years ago to this day that he made a famous speech in paris where he said
that his one enemy was finance and quite clearly pitched for the left—wing vote in france, and a lot of people thought this was great, we will have a left—wing president. he was not for these people a left—wing president, he moved towards the centre, and there are a lot of people on the left in france who feel they want to complete break and are drawn to these politics of a much clearer left—wing nature. are drawn to these politics of a much clearer left-wing nature. thank you very much. polls have closed, we will no doubt return to speak to you later when we have an idea of what is happening. a woman with dual british and iranian citizenship has had her appeal against a five year prison sentence rejected by a court in tehran. nazanin zaghari—ratcliffe, hasn't been told the full details of the charges against her, but her husband says she was accused of recruiting staff for the bbc‘s farsi service, and of being married to a spy. she denies both accusations. earlier we spoke to her husband.
sentence was the first five years, and we lived in hope would change with the appeal. the longer the time went by after the appeal you start to get uncertain. that was about three weeks ago the appeal happened. but in secret? yes, lots of judiciary and revolutionary guard there, and nazanin was there with a lawyer, but no one else was allowed to watch. what were the accusations against her? different ones at different points. there were crazy things at the start about her being involved in the overthrow the regime. what came through in this hearing were to new ones, one was that she was the head of recruitment for ubc farces, and the other that she was the wife of a british spy. are you? both are completely crazy, com pletely are you? both are completely crazy, completely untrue. she did once worked for the bbc charity for a
year, a production assistant, not some grand important role. and as i understand, the reason they are accusing her of being married to a spy accusing her of being married to a spy was because of the media campaigni spy was because of the media campaign i have been doing and the fa ct campaign i have been doing and the fact there was 500 pages in her file of media coverage we had done. protesting your innocence is what proves your guilt. is there anything you can put yourfinger on proves your guilt. is there anything you can put your finger on that may have led to her arrest initially?” think it is probally the fact she has media connections, she works for a charity that does media training. doesn't do it in a run, but the sort of organisation that could do. that is what got her income and thereafter they keep making up stories and they keep changing. take us stories and they keep changing. take us back to the day this happened. she was with your baby daughter? they have gone on holiday in easter, they were on their way back, i was due to go to gatwick to be, the airport. i got a phone call to say,
she did not catch the flight, so don't go. i didn't worry about it at the time. they said there was a passport problem. as the days went on and it was clear she had been taken for questioning and it was not clear where she was, and there was confirmed that the revolutionary guard had and that she was down there, that was terrifying. and the fa ct i there, that was terrifying. and the fact i had been sitting and waiting and assuming a would work out fine and assuming a would work out fine and is not done anything, it was ha rd and is not done anything, it was hard when i realised what she had been through. where was your daughter at this point? she was at the check—in desk and was given back to her grandparents who went to see nazanin off. since that point she has been living with her grandparents. 0bviously traumatic at the beginning. she did not going that well and did not speak far see. after ten months her language is pretty much fluent, and her grandmother is mr sara get mum.