of pounds that saudi arabia has been investing in sport in recent years. the sense is that all of that has been gearing up to this moment, but i think it will come as a shock to people. after all, because of the extreme temperatures, it's likely that the traditional summer slot will have to be moved again, as it was in qatar. with all the disruption that that would entail. there is concern over the way that fifa appear to have paved the way for the saudis�* bid by accelerating and restricting the bidding process rules. and then, of course, because of saudi arabia's notorious human rights record, its discriminatory laws, there are those accusations of sportswashing by campaigners. now, the saudi authorities deny all that. they say this is about growing the game, diversifying their economy, boosting tourism, inspiring their people. they say some of the criticism is hypocritical, but others will say that money has been put before morals here. what is certain is that this once again reinforces that shift in power towards the middle east when it comes to sport. spain have continued their perfect run in the women's nations league with a 7—1 thrashing of switzerland in zurich. double ballon d'or winner alexia putellas helped herself to two goals, while real madrid forward athenea del castillo also bagged a brace. it means spain stay top of their group, with 12 points from four games, five ahead of sweden, in second place. that's after the scandinavian side, ranked top in the world, were held to a 1—all draw at home to italy. roma forward valentina giacinti put the italians ahead and were heading for a famous away win, but sweden waiting until the last few seconds of added time before they managed an equaliser through linda sembrant. world cup runners—up england are in belgium, just a few days after beating them i—nil to go second in the group. it's 2-2. play was delayed for a long period after a nasty clash of heads between england's alex greenwood and belgium's jassina blom. for those watching in the uk... it's goalless between scotland and the netherlands. hungary leading northern ireland, i—o. earlier, wales lost 2—1 in denamrk. their hopes of avoiding relegation from league a likely to rest on their home clash with iceland in december. bangladesh have become the first team to be knocked out of the 2023 cricket world cup, after falling to their sixth successive defeat, losing to pakistan by seven wickets on wednesday. bangladesh could only muster 204 all out, after winning the toss. shaheen shah afridi and mohammed wasim each took three wickets. pakistan cantered to their target with 105 balls to spare. openers abdulah shafique and fakhar zaman both smashed quick half centuries. pakistan keep their hopes of reacing the semi—finals alive, with matches against new zealand and england remaining. to rugby, and it's been a heroes�* welcome for world cup champions south africa, as they were mobbed by adoring fans on their return from france after winning the webb ellis cup for a record fourth time. there was an enormous crowd at the airport injohannesburg to greet their champions�* return. captain siya kolisi said the narrow victory over new zealand was not about the players, but "for every single person in south africa. rich, poor... it doesn't matter where you come from." to the nba, and former mvp — most valuable player — james harden is reportedly on the move, after a long—running dispute with the philpadelphia 76ers. they're expected to send the 34—year—old to the la clippers, alongside two other players, for a package of four players and multiple future first—round picks. and that's all the sport for now. back to you, christian. thank you very much. let's return to the politics in washington and the row that brewing over foreign aid. there is a $105 billion spending package the white house has sent to congress. included in that is more than $41; billion for ukraine and $10 billion for israel. the sweetener is the money the administration included for tighter security at the southern border. trouble is, hardline republicans in both the house and the senate want a vote on the bill's constituent parts. they want to separate israel spending from the rest and vote on that first. and what's more, the new speaker in the republican—led house wants israel funding to be financed by budget cuts to the irs. a non—starter for the democrat—led senate. so here we are again, a standoff in congress, split government, reluctance to compromise, all of which puts american interests on the line. i have been getting reaction to that from republican senator mike lee, who has been attending a conference here in london. starting with his position on the calls for humanitarian pauses in gaza. 0bviously, peace is always the objective. nonetheless, i believe it's also important to let israel fight israel's war. israel was barbarically attacked by savages on october 7th, and israel needs to have some leeway to fight the war and to win that war in the manner that it deems most effective. there's been a lot of talk about whether iran was or was not involved. what should it mean, do you think, for america's policy towards iran and its approach to saudi arabia and its gulf allies? well, first of all, i think the notion that iran was not involved in these attacks is utterly absurd. we know that iran was involved. we know that iran has been funding hamas for many, many years. and we know that they have been supplying them, including very recently, with the means by which an attack like this would be carried out. the idea that they've been supplying them with all this training and weapons, but they wouldn't have been involved in the preparation for this attack is just utterly illogical, as i see it. you'll be aware the debate back home today is very much about the funding funding for israel, funding for ukraine and also for the southern border. can i start by asking you, do you support in principle funding for ukraine? look, the united states of america has spent $113 billion on the war effort in ukraine. it's an enormous sum of money, and that's either two or three multiples of what russia spends on defence in an entire year. americans understandably, are understandably are becoming a little weary of this. in fact, just over the last few months, the number of americans supporting giving more aid, more weapons and so forth to ukraine has gone from about 65% injune down to only about 39% today, just in a few months time. and in fact, this was showcased in this week's cover story article in time magazine, talking about the fact that the american people have grown less enthusiastic about this, at the exact same time that we've learned of more and more allegations of widespread corruption within the ukrainian government, including corruption involving aid from the united states. so, we've done our part. we've spent more than all the, all of our european allies combined by far. and the american people have given enough at this point. not quite. i think the europeans now have outstripped american spending. but i take your point. there is a case to be made with regards to public sympathy for the war in ukraine. and there's also a question of corruption, which volodymyr zelensky is obviously addressing. right. and here at the conference of the alliance for responsible citizenry, we've been talking about a number of factors and how many things tie into energy. a lot of this war really is being fueled by energy. we need better energy policy in the united states, we have been exporting, producing and exporting really large volumes of liquefied natural gas to europe. at some point, it would have been enough gas to forestall this invasion and, for that matter, the invasion that happened nearly a decade ago, with regard to crimea. vladimir putin is being funded by energy, and if we had better energy policy, we could stop this thing now. we could have stopped it a long time ago, before it even started. but if the objective is to stop vladimir putin, i want to put to you what general mark milley said. he said that if congress was to stop support for ukraine, it would increase the probability of a great power war in the next 10 to 15 years. it would mean, he said, increasing, if not doubling, the defence budget in the years ahead. so isn't cutting ukraine aid in the end a false economy? in fact, your fellow senator mitt romney in utah would say it's pretty good value for money when you consider what the ukrainians are doing to the russian military. yeah, a lot of that argument loses its punch, sir. first of all, we received these pieces of evidence about widespread corruption in ukraine involving the money that we're giving them. and you add to that the fact that ukrainian officials and our own officials are increasingly telling us we've got to brace for close to a decade more of this with no end in sight and no reasonable explanation as to what ultimate victory looks like and how it's going to be achieved, much less, achieved in less than a decade. is it not, though, a very odd message to send to the united states allies here in europe that you care about war in the middle east, but you don't care about a war in europe and the threat that poses to allies within europe? yeah. i'm really worried about the message it would send to the american people, the american taxpayers funding this, who recognise that our government is 33 and a half trillion dollars in debt, paying interest on that debt at a rate of nearly $1 trillion a year. and that's only only going to go up dramatically as our interest rates increase. and that we're going to continue to fund a war effort with no reasonable end in sight, no path toward achievable victory, and a possible decade—long glide path into this amorphous sense of victory. the american people who have been funding this effort really deserve answers, we don't have them. and for that reason, they've got a lot of legitimate reasons to be concerned about this. the new speaker, mikejohnson, the new house speaker, he wants to split israel funding from ukraine funding. but he also, you talk about the debt problem, he also wants to claw back $40 billion from the irs which, of course, goes after tax cheats. that's not going to fly in the senate. so this is going to be a row about funding for israel within the republican caucus. i mean, democrats are, the democrats in the white house are going to reject it out of hand. doesn't it look, yet again, like the republicans are running with themselves, putting american interests on the line? no. look, what mikejohnson is doing here, i wholeheartedly support. we need, at a time when we're 33 and one half trillion dollars in debt, paying interest to the tune of $1 trillion a year, we need a plan that doesn't involve just printing or borrowing more money. this is a plan. it's a legitimate plan. and there's nothing engraved in stone that says we need the entirety of the $87 billion that democrats, without a single republican vote in either house, rammed through congress just over a year ago in order to pass. there's nothing written in stone about that figure. nothing that says that the irs can't do its job without all $87 billion of that going in this direction,, that if we take out 1a billion or so to fund aid to israel, it's not going to be the end of the world. now, to your point... if democrats don't like that, then democrats can and should and i believe must come up with their own paper. they don't like this one, let them propose something and we'll consider that. right. 0k. so i'm slightly confused, though, because obviously, if it's rejected, you've talked about the urgency of getting aid to israel. it's a must and it must go now. but if there's a congressional fallout over how this is funded and let's face it, within the house, the fundamentals haven't changed. the motion to vacate is still there. it could just as easily be someone, even a moderate within the caucus that brings down mikejohnson. how does that benefit the republican party? it benefits the republican party to have some consensus around the idea that we've got to start getting our fiscal house in order and that we can'tjust print or borrow more money every time we see another need arise. so, again, if this one doesn't work, i think this is a very legitimate paper. i would frankly love to have an earnest, honest debate with my democratic colleagues and counterparts in the house and at the white house about this. i think it's legitimate. if they don't like it, i'd like to hear the reasons why. i would love, love to hear their proposal. but, senator, that debate will start with their own borrowing. he is wrong on that and he is outnumbered not only among his republican colleagues in the senate, i believe he is outnumbered among the american people who don't want that. . . r' the american people who don't want that. . ., _, the american people who don't want that. . ., ,, ., .,, the american people who don't want that. . ., ., , ., that. can i ask you a last question about the new _ that. can i ask you a last question about the new speaker _ that. can i ask you a last question about the new speaker mike - that. can i ask you a last question - about the new speaker mike johnson? about the new speaker mikejohnson? i mean, people on this side of the pond, he looks like he's quite an extreme character, if you don't mind me saying. he believes there were dinosaurs on the ark, that is how he squares creationism with evolution. he thinks there was merit to the allegations the voting machines were rigged. he wants a national abortion ban, he has tried to criminalise gay marriage. he wants to end medicare and social security. is he really the modern face of the republican party? i the modern face of the republican pa ? u, �* the modern face of the republican pa ? �* , ., ., party? i can't stand here and tell ou party? i can't stand here and tell you exactly _ party? i can't stand here and tell you exactly what _ party? i can't stand here and tell you exactly what mike _ party? i can't stand here and tell you exactly what mike johnson's| you exactly what mike johnson's position has been on every issue. i can tell you just based on your recitation of that litany of facts, which has been parroted by the mainstream liberal media in the united states over and over again. you don't think it is true, you don't think he stands for those positions? i don't think he stands for those positions?— don't think he stands for those ositions? ., , , ~ positions? i would be shocked if every piece _ positions? i would be shocked if every piece of — positions? i would be shocked if every piece of that _ positions? i would be shocked if every piece of that ends - positions? i would be shocked if every piece of that ends up - positions? i would be shocked if| every piece of that ends up being true. but regardless, even if it every piece of it were true, mike johnson does have a vision that is shared by most republicans. most republicans in congress, most republicans in congress, most republicans who are americans and many who are not republicans. he's a good man, i have known him for years. he is dedicated to the country, to the rule of law. no, i exists —— i understand the left�*s intention especially through their proxies in the media to attack every conservative in the way they would never do with a democratic politician, that is part of the air we breathe. but it doesn't make it true, doesn't mean that we should all just true, doesn't mean that we should alljust defer to them on what is unacceptable politician. they don't like republicans, they especially hate conservatives. mikejohnson is both. hate conservatives. mike johnson is both. , , ., ., both. listen, it is good to hear our both. listen, it is good to hear your thoughts. _ both. listen, it is good to hear your thoughts, senator, - both. listen, it is good to hear your thoughts, senator, thank| both. listen, it is good to hear- your thoughts, senator, thank you for coming in the programme, we really appreciate it.— not a voice we often hear, but important to get a direction of travel within the republican party and what they think about ukraine funding because it matters. and as the senator said, a growing number of people think like him in america like him about funding the war in ukraine. we like him about funding the war in ukraine. ~ , ., ,, ukraine. we will perhaps get reaction to — ukraine. we will perhaps get reaction to that _ ukraine. we will perhaps get reaction to that with - ukraine. we will perhaps get reaction to that with our - ukraine. we will perhaps getl reaction to that with our panel later in the programme. around the world and across the uk, this is bbc news. bbc news, bringing you different stories from across the uk. - it isn't ping—pong, tennis or badminton, so what exactly is pickle ball? pickle ball�*s a great game. it's a game that's easy to learn and fun to play. and we have players who are not necessarily the best players in the world, but enjoy coming out there once or twice a week, meeting with their friends, having some exercise and feeling much better about their mind and body. here in bolton, hundreds of people of all ages and abilities are taking part in the national championships. it might look easy, but this lot are competitive. i've never had a background in any sort of sport before, any racket sport. it'sjust really accessible to everyone. i'm quite competitive, so i love it for gettingl into competitions and playing tournaments, which i would i recommend to everyone. because as you can see here, i it's just a fabulous day as well. every time i play, ifeel like i learn something new. the rules are simple. underarm serves only, each team has to play their first shot on the bounce and volleying's only allowed in the zone closest to the net. you're live with bbc news. amid those terrible scenes we have witnessed from the jabalia refugee camp this afternoon, more small body bags. children make up half the population of gaza. the hamas—led health ministry claims that among more than 8,000 killed, there are 3,400 children. often, the hospitals will write their names on their legs before the body bags are sealed, so their parents can identify them. james denselow, head of conflict and humanitarian at save the children uk, joins us live. thank you very much for coming on the programme. i think if i am right in saying you have 25 people working for the charity currently in gaza. those figures i havejust for the charity currently in gaza. those figures i have just given, they are difficult to verify because we don't have enough people on the ground in gaza. we are relying on the hamas led health ministry. but from your people are telling you, do those, does that number of child casualties tally with what they are experiencing? casualties tally with what they are exoeriencing?_ casualties tally with what they are ex-aeriencin ? ., ., , ., , experiencing? unfortunately, in any conflict, the — experiencing? unfortunately, in any conflict, the fog _ experiencing? unfortunately, in any conflict, the fog of— experiencing? unfortunately, in any conflict, the fog of war _ experiencing? unfortunately, in any conflict, the fog of war means - experiencing? unfortunately, in any conflict, the fog of war means that l conflict, the fog of war means that you never have certainty as to the toll that it is taking and that's true notjust of gaza, but of course of ukraine and other parts of the world. but there is no reason to think if you think about the high density that is present in gaza of a child population and use of explosive weapons with wide area effects, that these numbers are sadly and too tragically accurately —— accurate. and of course, this is a conflict that shows no sign of de—escalating and deba