now on bbc news, the week in parliament. hello again, and welcome to the week in parliament — a week when borisjohnson found himself under pressure. on several fronts. i'd take the prime minister a little bit more seriously if he hadn't spent £2.6 million of taxpayers money on a downing street tv studio. but the prime minister hit back. we're increasing pay for nurses, we're massively increasing our investment in the nhs. he wasn't the only leader under pressure. this week has shown, again, that sexual harassment - complainants cannot. trust the ruling to deal with a complaint properly. and the problems could be mounting at the palace of westminster too. a major asbestos leak, a sewage failure, or indeed, a devastating fire such as we saw at notre dame. all that and more, but first, when news emerged that the government was recommending a 1% pay rise for nurses and most other nhs staff in england, ministers said it was all they could afford. other public sector workers would see their pay frozen. labour accused borisjohnson of cutting nurses�* pay — once you take inflation into account — a charge he dismissed. but after a week of constant pressure, could the prime minister now be paving the way for a u turn? the government's tone has certainly softened. this was a health minister's initial robust defence of the offer. nurses are well—paid for their job. they have a secure job and they have other benefits. my lords, there are many people in this country who look upon professionaljobs in the nhs with some envy, and we shouldn't forget the fact that some public sectorjobs are in fact extremely well—paid. but the same day, tuesday, the head of nhs england confirmed to mps that it had budgeted for a larger increase. at the time, the working assumption was that there would be available 2.1% for the costs of the agenda for change pay group in 2021-22. 2a hours later, the issue dominated prime minister's questions. an mp made the offer for nhs workers personal. the prime minister has said l that he owes his life to them. he stood on the steps of- number ten and applauded them. so will the prime minister do more than pay lip service - and pay them the wage that they deserve? - prime minister. mr speaker, she is indeed right that we owe a huge amount to our nurses, an incalculable debt, and that's why i'm proud that we have delivered a 12.8% increase in the starting salary of nurses, and we are asking the public pay book review body to look at increasing their pay, exceptionally of all the professions in the public sector. the prime minister's answer failed to satisfy the labour leader, sir keir starmer. frankly, i'd take the prime minister a little bit more seriously if he hadn't spent £2.6 million of taxpayers money on a downing street tv studio, or £200,000 on new wallpaper for his flat. mr speaker, they say charity starts at home, but i think the prime minister's taking that a little bit too literally. let me try something very simple. does the prime minister accept, does the prime minister accept that nhs staff will be hundreds of pounds worse off a year because of last week's budget? no, mr speaker, because of course, we will look at what the independent review body has to say, exceptionally about the nursing profession — whom we particularly value — but what he should also know, which he should reflect to the house is that under this government, we not only began by a record increase in nhs funding, i think {33.9 billion, but because of the pandemic, we have put another £63 billion into supporting our nhs, mr speaker. could that reference to the independent pay review body offer the prime minister a way out of the problem? keir starmer piled on the pressure, saying nurses had been promised a bigger rise. mr speaker, my mum was a nurse, my sister was a nurse, my wife worked in the nhs. i know what it means to work for the nhs. when i clapped for carers, i meant it. he clapped for carers, then he shut the door in their face at the first opportunity. and the more you look at the prime minister's decision, the worse it gets — because it's notjust a pay cut, it's a broken promise too. the prime minister stuck to his script, record spending meant more doctors and nurses. and we're going to go on, mr speaker, and we are going to deliver our promises, i can tell the right honourable gentleman, we are going to go on and we are going to build 40 more hospitals and we're going to recruit 50,000 more nurses, and we're going to get on and deliver on our pledges to the british people, and we are going to do that because of our sound management of the economy and the fastest vaccine roll—out programme of any comparable country. keir starmer said even conservative mps thought the i% rise was mean... the mask really is slipping, and we can see what the conservative party now stands for. cutting pay for nurses, putting taxes up on families. he has had the opportunity to change course, but he's refused. so if he's so determined to cut nhs pay, will he at least show some courage and put it to a vote in this parliament? prime minister. mr speaker, the last time we put in a vote, he voted against it. as i said before, we're increasing pay for nurses, we're massively increasing our investment in the nhs. we are steering a steady course whereas he weaves and wobbles from one week to the next, mr speaker. we vaccinate, we get on with delivering for the people of this country. we vaccinate, he vacillates, mr speaker, and that's the difference. labour later complained to the speaker that the prime minister's claim that keir starmer had voted against a pay rise wasn't true. some recollections may vary, as someone said. in his response, sir lindsay hoyle quoted from the rules for ministers. the government's own ministerial code could not be clearer about what is expected of ministers. it says, "it is of paramount importance that ministers give accurate and truthful information to parliament, correcting any inadvertent error at the earliest opportunity." the speaker with some direct advice for the prime minister. at least the vaccination programmes continues to deliver good news, and that means borisjohnson�*s under pressure from conservative mps to lift england's lockdown earlier. but his government's chief medical adviser warned that easing restrictions too quickly would lead to a substantial surge in covid infections. professor chris whitty was appearing before mps on the science and technology committee. what we're going to see is as things are opening up, what all the models suggest at some point we will get a surge in the virus, and whether that happen, we hope it doesn't happen soon, but it might, for example, happen later in the summer if we open up gradually, or if there is a seasonal effect, it might happen over the next autumn and winter. but i think all of it suggests there is going to be a further surge, and that will find the people who either have not been vaccinated or where the vaccine has not worked. and some of them will end up in hospital, and sadly, some of them will go on to die. he was asked if improved data could speed up the lifting of lockdown. zeroing in on particular numbers, every single number will be incorrect. what they are doing is giving an indication of general principles, and the first and most important principle that models demonstrate is if you open up too fast, a lot more people die, a lot more people die. a conservative mp looked ahead to the scheduled lifting of all restrictions injune. it's 104 days until the 215t ofjune, and i understand your natural caution, but the lesson from last year is obviously not just that things can turn back quickly, but the idea of protecting the path of the virus 100 days ahead seems to be something of a fools errand. so, you know, i understand your natural caution, but are we really saying that 215t ofjune date is set in stone and there is no way we could possibly go quicker? chris whitty said it was a decision for ministers, but he offered advice based on principles. do not try and quicken the five—week breaks because if you want it to be based on data, you will have to use those five weeks if you wish to give people a week's notice. there isn't...you simply cannot see the effect size any time that is shorter than that. the chief scientific adviser was equally cautious. the estimate is that - after three weeks, you can start to get a real handle on this and it is probably| between three and four weeks to really get a decent handle i on what is happening. and that is the week- that the ministers want to be able to alert businesses - and others to what will happen. i think if you truncate that, you are essentially flying . blind. you might feel, "i can smell it going in a certain direction - and looks like this" - but you really won't know. sir patrick and professor whitty co—chair sage — the government's scientific advisory group on emergencies. but do ministers follow the science? scientific advice on this issue and on previous occasions in terms of advising the government to go into lockdown in the first and second waves and to not lift restrictions too early and to implement a circuit breaker lockdown in september and against people mixing over christmas, these pieces of advice have seemingly been ignored by the government. do you agree that the government has a track record of ignoring scientific advice or at least using it inconsistently? our advice is there for all to see. - our advice is clear. we have given it repeatedly and not always welcome - by all sorts of people - and when we give the advice of all sorts of different i parts of the community, but we give it as we see it and then of course it is up to others to try and interpret . that with the other information that have and the other. priorities they may have. sir patrick vallance. in scotland, nicola sturgeon confirmed that more pupils will return to schools during the coming days and restrictions on outdoor gatherings are being eased. but at first minister's questions two days later, she was challenged over the impact of the covid pandemic on waiting times for cancer treatment. the scottish labour leader said cancer targets had been missed throughout nicola sturgeon�*s time in office. doesn't that show that we can't come through covid and go back to the old arguments? instead, we, in this parliament, should focus on what unites us as a country, rather than what divides us. shouldn't the focus of this parliament be a recovery and a catch—up plan for our nhs so that we never again, never again have to choose between treating a virus or treating cancer? in terms of cancer waiting times before covid, average waits in terms of the time between diagnosis and treatment starting are very short in scotland. we have recognised for a long time there is more to do to meet targets and to reduce waiting times further. covid has undoubtedly been a serious difficulty because of the pause in many normal aspects of the nhs that it has necessitated. but that is why, through investment, through reforms to how treatments are being delivered and many of the actions i've set out, we are now focused on getting the nhs back to normal. she also faced yet more questions about her government's mishandling of sexual harassment allegations against her predecessor, alex salmond, who was cleared in court of criminal charges. presiding officer, at her committee appearance, | the first minister became very forgetful, and she seems- determined to forget - that it was her government who were the ones who failed these women so badly. - according to five people now — including a qc and a civil- servant — her government is responsible for leakingl a complainant's name to salmond's team. . but nobody's been sacked, or even reprimanded. - and despite all her protests, the flawed procedure — - the one that let these women i down — has never been changed. this week has shown again that. sexual harassment complainants cannot trust the ruling party to deal with a complaint - properly. first minister. firstly, can i say, the first allegation that ruth davidson made there is disputed, and i disputed it at committee last week. obviously, i wasn't party to the conversation that it is based on, and i'm limited in what i can say because of legal reasons. i want everything about this to be open and transparent because i do want to learn lessons. ruth davidson — perhaps belatedly, over recent days — has started to talk about the women, and i welcome that, because that is the issue right at the heart of this. i will be haunted for probably the rest of my life about the way in which the government, through an error made, i think, in good faith, but nevertheless, an error, that let down those women. i've apologised for that. i wasn't involved in the investigations, i wasn't aware of the error at the time, but as head of the scottish government, i take and ifeel responsibility for that. nicola sturgeon. now, brexit may be in the rear—view mirror since we cut our ties injanuary, but tensions are rising between the uk and the eu. at stormont, northern ireland's first minister was asked about the practical problems that have followed new trading arrangements under what's known as the northern ireland protocol — and, in particular, checks on goods which arrive there from england, wales and scotland. the synagogue is in my constituency, thejewish community has been unable to get kosher meat and as we reach passover, this has become particularly acute. is the government aware of the scale and depth of this protocol is causing problems to people in northern ireland? this is not hiccup the teething problem as the prime minister might suggest. i thank the member for those very real and tangible examples of the impact on the protocol and i have taken account of his comments regarding the jewish community which is very concerning. we have a very smalljewish community in northern ireland and the fact they can't access kosher meat is something that would cause me a great deal of concern. arlene foster wants the protocol scrapped. instead, the uk wants to give businesses more time to adapt by extending the so—called grace periods, a move that's prompted a threat of legal action by the eu. that didn't go down well on the conservative benches in the lords. the somewhat hysterical reaction of the eu demonstrates yet again their one—sided inability to recognise legitimate unionist concerns and to see the belfast agreement to all of its strands. all sides need to be sensitive to social and political realities and the fact that the operation of the protocol rests on the confidence of both communities in northern ireland. i can reassure my noble friend we will consider very carefully any legal process launched by the eu, we will defend our position vigorously. in the commons, opposition mps accused the government of provocation and belligerence. and it raises serious questions| about whether the government has a strategy at all to deal with the complex realities i facing northern ireland. provocation is not a strategy and a stop—gap is not - a solution. this is an extraordinary - position for a government to be in, having to break the law and trash britain's - international reputation - to remove checks that they claim never existed. but the northern ireland secretary insisted the actions taken were lawful. they are temporary operational easements introduced where additional delivery time is needed, they don't change our legal obligations set out in the protocol and we will continue to set out protocol implementation in the committee. it is not protecting the flow of goods at issue here but rather the provocative and belligerent manner in which the government seems determined to go about trying to achieve that. mps in northern ireland were not persuaded by the government's approach. even an extended grace period still leaves us i with the reality that _ in the words of the permanent secretary of the department of agriculture, 20% of all. the checks taking . place on all borders across the european union are now taking place - in the irish sea, and thati will increase substantially beyond the grace period. last week, the secretary of state rushed out, sneaked out an announcement unilaterally on budget day that his government would once again break international law. given that governments across europe, politicians on capitol hill and in the white house are furious about this move, is the secretary of state at all concerned that this government's reputation is in tatters across the world? if the protocol is to be sustainable, we need to see a genuine partnership between the uk and the eu to fix problems, not for northern ireland to become a pawn in a war of attrition with the eu. stephen farry. in a debate on international women's day, a labour mp listed all women killed in the uk over the last year, where a man has been convicted or charged. it tookjess phillips more than four minutes to read the list of almost 120 names. she ended with the name of sarah everard, who disappeared earlier this month. we have all prayed that the name of sarah everard would never be on any list. let's pray every day, and work every day, to make sure nobody�*s name ends up on this list again. the government has been defeated several times in the house of lords over its domestic abuse bill. peers overwhelmingly backed an amendment calling for more safeguards for children when they have supervised contact with a parent they don't live with. my lords, please ask yourselves, why would anyone who really cares about children not want to be fully trained in child development and safeguarding? is it acceptable to leave children who are already traumatised by being victims, or watching abuse, to be in situations of increased risk? but the minister was not convinced there was a problem to solve. i do continue to question whether the statutory accreditation that is proposed in this amendment is required, or whether it would provide a more effective form of regulation than that which currently exists. the snp and others have criticised the replacement of the eu—funded erasmus student exchange programme, with a new uk scheme named after the mathematician alan turing. yesterday, the prime minister published his plans _ for an erasmus replacement without any consultation - or discussion with- devolved governments. the replacement scheme offers lower living support, _ no travel support, no tuition fee support. i why is this tory government taking opportunities away. from our young people? she is wrong about the difference between the erasmus and the turing project because the turing scheme, unlike the erasmus scheme which overwhelmingly went to kids from better—off homes, the turing project is designed to help kids across the country, of all income groups, get to fantastic universities around the world. a senior executive at heathrow airport has described the queues for immigration there as �*unacceptable�*. the border is controlled by border force and managed by the home office. emma gilthorpe told the home affairs committee that before the pandemic, it was common to queue for up to two hours. now, it's not uncommon to see queues of three hours, and we have had queues extending out to nearly six hours on occasions. so, the extra layers that have been introduced are crippling the resourcing capability that border force has in place. emma gilthorpe, with another reason to stay at home this summer. mps have begun an inquiry into the links between sport and long—term brain injury. it follows growing concern that professional footballers are far more likely to develop dementia than the general public. football has now introduced a system of concussion substitutes where a player with a suspected head injury can be replaced even if all other substitutes have been used. but an expert on brain injuries told the digital, culture, media and sport committee that the new system was a shambles. i think at last football is introducing temporary substitutes although it is way, way late in the day. unfortunately it is not temporary substitutes. i wish they were. unfortunately has a habit of looking at more it is a shambles of the moment. the physios say they have no more — the physios say they have no more time, no more opportunities or assistance to assess— opportunities or assistance to assess potentially complex brain — assess potentially complex brain injuries, so it hasn't improved _ brain injuries, so it hasn't improved the assessment of players _ improved the assessment of players with brain injury, or potential— players with brain injury, or potential brain injury, all it has — potential brain injury, all it has done _ potential brain injury, all it has done is consider the tactical_ has done is consider the tactical disadvantage of a player— tactical disadvantage of a player removed. in 2021, of all the way— player removed. in 2021, of all the way is _ player removed. in 2021, of all the way is a sport might have addressed the issue of grain injury— addressed the issue of grain injury in_ addressed the issue of grain injury in the game, i think that— injury in the game, i think that has— injury in the game, i think that has beenjust dreadful. the former england striker jeff astle was the first footballer known to have died from a brain condition linked to heading the ball. jeff astle died in 2002, 19 years ago, yet here we are talking about football protocols being a shambles. and you've said yourself that the majority of funding comes from the united states. why are we letting people down in this way? what is our problem, in terms of our sporting bodies? i share with you the frustration that it's taken 20—odd years to get the point where we're sitting down discussing this today. is there any difference between evidence to suggest heading has gotten less dangerous over the years because of the change in the ball? in the 60s and 70s, the ball was very heavy, had laces, were leather, and now are polyurethane and different materials. is there any evidence to suggest that changing technology has had an effect? so, the weight of a ball probably doesn't change the impact that much. and of course, if you think of the modern ball zipping through the air because it comes off the foot slightly faster, you could almost argue that the problem is greater in the more modern football than it is in the older football. the reality is, we just don't know. willie stewart. finally, to the seemingly neverending saga of how to prevent the houses of parliament falling down. one former leader of the commons is frustrated that plans for restoration and renewal seem to be making no progress. my right honourable friend must surely see that the risks of a major asbestos leak, a sewage failure or, indeed, a devastating fire such as we saw at notre—dame are very high and remain very high, and we have virtually no contingency for this place. now, my personal motto, mr speaker, isjfdi, and i would like to offer that to my right honourable friend, to gird his loins to make some progress. mr speaker, i always preferred the motto of queen elizabeth i, which was 'semper eadem' — always the same — which i think makes a very good motto. jacob rees—mogg had heard the works could cost more than £10 billion. he said they had to be value for money. and, yes, we need to redo the wiring, yes, we need to ensure this place is safe and secure, but we must not turn this house of commons into disneyland. jacob rees—mogg, dashing hopes of a palace of westminster theme park. those of us hoping for a ride on the commons dodgems will have to wait. thanks for watching the week in parliament. i'll be back on bbc parliament at 11 o'clock, on monday evening, with the latest from the commons and the lords. until then, from me, david cornock, bye for now. hello. last week, the uk took quite a battering from strong winds. there was some heavy rain at times, too, and we spent a lot of time talking about low pressure. for the week ahead, the biggest difference will be lighter winds. we're going to be focusing on high pressure, trying to build in. this high here, pushing up from the south—west. it's not an entirely straightforward story, though. we will see some weather fronts running into the north of our high. that will mean some showery rain perhaps across the south—east of england first thing on monday, and then some more clouds generally pushing in to the west as the day goes on. some rain across northern ireland, a little bit for western scotland, wales and the south—west on monday afternoon. the winds, much lighter than we've been used to. the sunshine in the east should just about cling on until the evening. temperatures about where we'd expect for the time of year, perhaps a degree or so above. through monday evening, overnight into tuesday, the warm weather front continues to push its way eastwards across the uk. this cold front pushes down from the north, but the air around it has actually come from the atlantic. so don't be too concerned about the temperatures falling behind this front as it slides south during tuesday. some cloud, some light rain across england and wales first thing, but a lot of sunshine come the afternoon and temperatures looking pretty healthy, perhaps up to 1a degrees. mayjust get a bit of cloud lingering across the south—east of england. could turn a little chilly overnight tuesday into wednesday, with clear skies under the high. but for wednesday, the high well established, a lot of sunshine on the way, perhaps a little bit more cloud at times coming into the far east of england. more cloud for scotland could give us the odd light shower here. but with plenty of sunshine, a fine day with temperatures up to maybe 12 or 13 degrees again. from midweek onwards, though, particularly wednesday night, quite a significant change to come. the highs still there, but this low runs down into scandinavia and it switches our wind direction to a northerly or northeasterly. and as it does so, we not only see the wind strengthening, but we see much colder airflooding in. we lose that mild air that came from the atlantic, and it's replaced by pretty cold arctic air for thursday and friday. so here's your week. we start off feeling pretty spring—like — a lot of fine weather and some sunshine. by the end of the week, though, it could start to feel quite chilly, potentially with rather raw northeasterly wind. this is bbc news — i'm lewis vaughanjones with the latest headlines for viewers in the uk and around the world. one of the bloodiest 2a hours since the military coup in myanmar — activists say at least 39 people have been killed in protests against last month's military coup thousands of australian women are about to march through the capital to protest against gender discrimination and violence. despite record numbers of coronavirus deaths, large crowds turn out in brazil to protest against local restrictions. retaliation and retribution between china and the west as tensions rise overjournalism and media coverage. and beyonce, taylor swift, and dua lipa lead the nominations for the grammys, the music industry's biggest night of the year.