nor do i know of anyone else in the campaign who did so. i had no improper contacts. and we ask president obama's legal counsel if there's any more to this than political spite. also tonight: the fate of the northern powerhouse. it was george osborne's pet project, designed to upgrade the trains of northern england, but did it almost get shunted into a siding? i was a minister when it was pretty obvious that those two advisers to theresa may were purely, out of animosity, trying to discourage her from continuing it and apparently doing things without her knowledge. we'll ask the mayor of manchester, andy burnham, what he makes of that. and... we're all talking about women's cricket. we'll be talking about women's sport more generally, and how fast it can grow its appeal. we'll ask a sports executive and a former ashes winner what needs to happen now.
good evening. washington is reeling from an extraordinary public appearance from someone they hear much of, but see very little. jared kushner is president trump's senior advisor. he's also his son—in—law, husband of ivanka. today, he was called to give evidence over four meetings he had with russians before the election. meetings critics say could have interfered with the democratic process. we'll ask whether the sound and fury that surrounds team trump and russia signifies nothing but rumour. at the senate, were also hearing protests about health reform, the bill in its last stages may not get past with certainty this week. first, the day as we saw it here. a man whose name is whispered throughout washington,
a face that is seldom seen. but today, jared kushner unwillingly entered the limelight, aiming to dispel rumours of collusion with russia. my name is jared kushner. i am senior adviser to president donaldj trump. for many, it was the first time we'd heard his voice. it sounded for a moment like a resignation speech. the record and documents i have voluntarily provided will show that all of my actions were proper and occurred in the normal course of events of a very unique campaign. let me be very clear — i did not collude with russia, nor do i know of anyone else in the campaign who did so. earlier, trump's son—in—law and senior adviser had been summoned to capitol hill. he arrived low—key, no motorcade, to give evidence at a senate hearing. the press were not fed
as handsomely as they'd hoped. the hearings were off—camera. today's was not even under oath. i think one of the interesting dynamics of this process has been the degree to which, from our point of view as reporters, if you look at the york of this, when we ask questions over the months and longer than months now, where their meetings with russians? did you talk about these things? we will always told, no, no, no, absolutely not. then when you've find out such a thing happened, you have to say, why were you guys denying this for so long? and what else would you deny now that might later proved to be true? he was grilled about his four meetings with russian contacts before the election and pre—empted his speech with an extraordinary ii—page statement to the select committee, insisting nothing
inappropriate had occurred. when you talk to those in the trump administration, they accuse critics, democrats, we the mainstream media, of a certain level of hysteria over this issue. political campaigns are tawdry things, one source told me who has run a fuel himself. run a few himself. if someone offers you dirt on an opponent, you take it, it is hard to turn a deaf ear. there is a certain truth to that, but where does grubby politics start being something a little more sinister? something that, in the words of former cia directorjohn brennan, might "make russia great again". there is a great deal of alarm among foreign policy experts, over different administrations likejohn brennan, that this case is about if nothing else the weakening of american power and influence internationally. because we are as a country if not being snookered by russia,
then at least going along with and agreeing with russia and a host of issues where we have not previously agreed with them. so, what exactly is being alleged about the trump team's ties to russia? well, donald trump's always been much more favourably disposed towards vladimir putin than his fellow republicans. american intelligence agencies all agree that not only was russia behind the e—mail hacks on democrats last year that were so damaging to hillary clinton, but that the hacks were designed specifically to help donald trump win. a dossier compiled by ex—mi6 agent christopher steele on behalf of trump's opponents made various salacious, albeit so far unverified, allegations about what motives donald trump might have for working with the russians. a number of trump's closest advisers and relatives have been caught lying about or omitting to mention contacts they had with russian officials or russians with kremlin links. president trump's attitude to the investigation has
also attracted scrutiny. he fired the fbi director james comey because of — in his words — "the russia thing". and he's been publicly critical of the team assembled by robert mueller, the special counsel tasked with investigating those russia ties now. kushner maintained he joined those meetings late, half—briefed. protestations some heard as him throwing don junior, the president's son, under bus. awkward, that. when the family business is running america, things get complicated quite quickly. here, washington's summer has erupted into the rain. that is the sound. we're sitting in a place literally called the swamp. familiar to viewers more as a metaphor for somewhere trump has promised to drain. we will talk about that now with obama's legal counsel when he was president and ron christie the republican strategist. thank you for sitting
through a soaking wet shower. jared kushner, extraordinary intervention today when he came in front of the cameras because we had not seen him because the hearing was closed. and he made that point of saying, this was basically sour grapes, he won a good campaign, trump did it and anybody suggesting anything else was just sort of being bitter about it. he probably knows better. ten days ago now, we had the release of e—mails indicating where conversations between people claiming to be members of the russian government and the trump campaign for some collaboration to the presidency campaign, so we have genuine questions and mr kushner understands that, i think. this is the trouble, there had been so many inconsistencies, you can call them lies or certainly on troops. people saying they have not had meetings we now know they did,
why would you believe any of this? good evening, bob and i understand that having filled out security clearance forms, you have to have a good sense of who you have spoken to and what you spoke about and the fact he has had to amend this a couple of times makes you wonder what else are you not disclosing to the american people? so you are nervous as a republican watching this? as a republican watching this, get it out early, tell the truth. disclosed to the american people everything you have done and if you have nothing to hide, there is nothing to worry about. these amendments make me think, what else will we uncover from this investigation? even if a lot of stuff is uncovered, we have an extraordinary statement from donald trump saying he has the ability as president to pardon. yes, i don't know where he get that idea, there is significant disagreement about it and there is nothing to suggest that. there is no precedent for that? there is no precedent and serious reason to doubt it. it is certainly a matter if he chose
a course like that that would go before a united states supreme court and i don't know he would be very happy with the outcome. if they meeting has taken place, has it been illegal? why are we talking about this in terms of collusion? many republicans would say these were four meetings in good faith by anyone trying to work out if there was dirt on their opponent, what is wrong with that? let's take the meeting injune, arranged by donald trumpjunior, in trump tower, he received an e—mail saying russia wanted to help their government support donald trump and they came from moscow for the purpose of having that conversation. so right there, you have fundamentally a question under the law prohibiting campaigns from soliciting support from foreign national is and prohibits foreign nationals from providing support to american
political campaigns. how much more will come out? how long will the republican party and loyal supporters such as yourself stand back and find excuses always to explain what is going on? as a lawyer, i look at this and say, a meeting does not collusion make. you need to have a sustained campaign and effort to get something of value from a foreign sourced and we have not seen that yet. but i will say this, a lot of people in this building behind us nervous as republicans, from swing districts, and when do we cut the chord with the president and run more independent from him for real action rather than stick with this administration? that is coming very quickly. i look at september at the latest, a lot of republicans fleeing from this administration. just go? just go. if you are hearing cheering off—camera, it is a protest about the health care bill that donald trump is trying to pass this week.
mike pence hasjust driven in to bully the senators into going his way. a lot of this has been forgotten in this talk of russia. is that something he gets through? what is your sense of this? it does not appear there is any unified republican support for an alternative for the health gap bill passed in the obama administration. senator mcconnell and speaker ryan tries to find common ground and it is not there. the republican electoral constituency is not comfortable with having the health care provided under the previous statute. i think we have lost family. i think we have lost emily. that was a rainfall, not a feeble british drizzle! that really was quite something. we will move on. time was you couldn't avoid the words ‘northern powerhouse‘ in public discussion. but then george osborne was sacked by theresa may and,
as it was his pet project, it seemed to fade somewhat. and there are new worries about it now, because the government has announced it's potentially scaling back some earlier promised basic upgrades of rail services around manchester. this goes back to a precursor to the northern powerhouse, which was a project called the northern hub, which involved extra platforms at piccadilly station, better connections between the stations within manchester and electrification of the transpennine line to leeds. some of this has now been questioned by the transport secretary, chris grayling. ironically, though, mr grayling did give today a tentative thumps—up to a hugely expensive project in london, crossrail 2. nick watt is with me. the northern powerhouse very much back in the news, and you have been speaking to one of the early fathers of this project. this evening i spoke tojim o'neill, one of the fathers of the northern powerhouse project, and he told me that theresa may
is strongly committed to this project, but interestingly, he told me that he believes that the former joint chiefs of staff, fiona hill and nick timothy, had attempted to discourage the prime minister from continuing with it. he talked about his annoyance in government, he resigned in september over frustration on a number of fronts, but nick timothy has denied these claims, he has told me tonight it is categorically untrue and i was responsible for saying we needed more of the same for more of our cities. so that is the debate around jim o'neill, but new concerns around the northern powerhouse because of these announcements. that is right, this green light for crossrail 2, north— south in london, and a question over the electrification of the east— west links in the north. so with those questions, i have been taking a look at the proposed modernisation of northern railways.
we are a nation of, if not exactly train spotters, then certainly train lovers — back to the cards of the 1960s, our leaders have learned that they tamper with our railways at their peril. today the transport secretary, chris grayling, ushered in end of the era of rail travel when he gave strong support to crossrail 2, a new link through london. in the north of england?
only last week, chris grayling appeared to cast doubt over the government's commitment to the northern powerhouse by suggesting that an upgraded line between leeds and manchester may not be fully electrified. george osborne, who championed the northern powerhouse in government, may be disappointed. we want to build the northern powerhouse, we want to make sure that our country is going across the nation, notjust in london and the south—east, notjust putting all of our bets on the city of london, and that means investing in the transport of the north, and we are publishing a comprehensive transport strategy that includes faster routes between manchester and leeds. but the father of the northern powerhouse says electrification of that line isn't everything. i kind of sympathise with many other council leaders in the north who are saying this sort of thing, as they have done before when previous plans for a electrification have been delayed. i think they are being a little bit too emotional and that they are probably not focusing on the real substantive matters.
the electrification issue over the pennines is not really... it is a bit of a red herring. the key to the speed is the straightness of the line. jim o'neill resigned last year. tonight, the former goldman sachs executive tells newsnight he believes that theresa may's formerjoint chiefs of staff, fiona hill and nick timothy, tried to downgrade the northern powerhouse out of spite towards george osborne. he became suspicious when the former communications director accused fiona hill of encouraging staff to strip out references to the northern powerhouse. well, of course i saw that report, and itjustified my annoyance when i was a minister, when it was pretty obvious that that those two advisers were, purely out of animosity, trying to discourage it from continuing, and apparently doing things without her knowledge. but now that they are gone, i think it is more likely that this prime minister will be more
supportive of it. nick timothy has told newsnight these claims are categorically untrue. the former number ten adviser said he was responsible for saying the government needed more of the spirit of the northern powerhouse for more cities. the former minister believes theresa may is now wholly committed to the project. we have a new northern powerhouse minister, who i have spoken to, and i think he feels quite empowered by the pm. i think it is going to get more notoriety than it has done for the past few months without those two add advisers around. so perhaps our nation of train lovers can be reassured that the northern powerhouse is back on track. but george osborne has this evening put down a marker — if britain is serious
about its future, it needs to recommit to those northern rail links. andy burnham, the labour mayor of greater manchester, joins me now from salford. good evening to you. did you get the sense, in period from last summer to this summer, that there was a sidelining of the whole northern powerhouse thing in central government? oh, very much so, and i heard a rumour in westminster that the phrase "northern powerhouse" had been banned from press releases and speeches, and that was confirmed at the weekend by the former press officer at number ten. and it worries me greatly, because we have sensed ever since george osborne left that there has been oh real commitment to the north in the current government. i cannot see anyone speaking up for the north, and to be fair to george osborne, he did at least do that,
and he deserves credit for that, but i have become buried worried about the lack of commitment to the north, and indeed the promises it made. it promised people a powerhouse, and everyone is asking, where is it? how serious do you think the announcement is that there may not be the extra platforms at piccadilly station and there may not be the entire electrification of the trans—pennine route? i think the government would be making a major mistake if it underestimates the fury that people here feel when they see those announcements last week and then here today that billions more will be spent on london. you know, number one, crossrail 2 was not in the conservative manifesto, so on what basis has it gone to the front of the queuehead of the north? i think many people in our country would see those links across the north as a high priority. but number two, all of this has been announced since parliament went up.
i would have loved to see chris grayling announced the scrapping of various schemes for electrification alongside crossrail two, because there would have been uproar. i will contact mps in greater manchester and across the north, because while this may be the government's view that it can cancel the schemes and give the green light to crossrail, i do not think it will be parliament's view, and mps need to seek a vote to see whether they agree that this is the way to proceed with rail investment in our country. jim o'neill, the one who was saying that he thought it was being sidelined, he didn't think it was any longer necessarily being sidelined, and that the short—term stuff around a electrification and the northern hub project, the predecessor project, that is not the point, and it has not been abandoned — you are talking like they have
abandoned it, but they are still officially committed to it, right? i very much hope thatjim is right, i am not necessarily here to play party politics. if they had said that they would make commitments to the north and honour that, iwould be the first to say thank you, because this is where the need is, the north cannot become a powerhouse economy unless there is serious investment in our rail and transport infrastructure, and that is the point thatjim o'neill has correctly made this evening. but we can't wait forever, we need improvements now, that is why electrification is important, and it is why we need more capacity at manchester piccadilly. people travelling across northern cities who will have other long
commute home tonight, they will be furious watching your programme, hearing the news that the government has cut back on rail investment in the north on the day it has given the green light to crossrail 2. i think they will peel that the government is not listening to what people are saying, they are not governing for the whole country. do they have any other vision for the north? post—brexit britain, coming up with an economic model for the whole country is what everybody says is the goal — do they have a plan for the north of england? well, if they do, i have not heard it yet, and if anyone was to hear it, it is me, because i am listening very carefully to what they say. another example of why i am getting worried — david davis gave me a commitment that he would meet me shortly after the mayoral election alongside that newly elected mayors to talk about brexit, and that has not happened. we are hearing rumours about education funding post—i6, that they may try to change that. so we have no evidence at the moment that they are committed or have a vision for the north,
but they need one, they need to help the northern economy have a positive future outside of the european union, they need to help us invest in new industries like digital, advance manufacturing, but i have not seen any evidence of that yet. but none of it is possible without investment in 21st century infrastructure. andy burnham, thanks. in kabul, dozens were killed in a suicide car bombing today. the taliban claimed responsibility. the numbers killed in terror attacks there are horrifying. 49 dead in march when gunmen attacked a military hospital. 150 killed by a truck bomb at the end of may. the people of afghanistan are bearing an insufferable burden, caught between the taliban and is, who sometimes claim responsibility for attacks, and an unpopular central government in kabul that doesn't control the whole country. remember, the afghan war goes back to 2001, so it's 16 years of unresolved conflict now. the british withdrew in 2014, the americans still have a presence. our diplomatic editor, mark urban, has been looking at the state of things. a fresh bomb attack in kabul,
this time attacking government workers in a bus. it claimed dozens of lives, and it comes at a time when policy in washington is deadlocked and the afghan security situation worsening. the afghan national security forces are suffering completely unsustainable casualties in the war over the past year as well. they also simply can't sustain in terms of replacing lost troops or troops lost to casualties or simply leaving the army. and they're losing territory as well. there's been a slow rolling back of government authority, from 72% of the country's districts in november 2015 to 60% this february, and an expansion of insurgent—held districts from 7% to 11% over the same period. things this year have deteriorated further.
for the british, insurgent gains in helmand province have proven particularly hard to swallow. guerilla groups taking over in districts like sangin or musa qala, where hundreds of british soldiers lost their lives. there have been other taliban gains, for example around kunduz and in the east. in the last few days, major attacks have happened in ghor and badakhshan provinces. what i'm seeing there, really, is what has always been the case, that the centre of helmand matters. it's being held, the afghans are doing a fantasticjob there, but at the extremities it's much harder. as so often, it's impossible to see afg hanistan‘s security in isolation from pakistan. the afghan government has often blamed a major attacks in kabul on proxies of pakistan military intelligence, and the trump administration wants to increase pressure on pakistan — itjust hasn't worked out how yet. so that ranges from withholding more military assistance to the pakistani government,
but also much more sort of robust, ha rd—nosed options. they're trying to put the screws on islamabad, including things like expanding the scope of drone strikes to try and target taliban and other militant leaders in parts of pakistan outside of the tribal areas, where drones have previously not been flown, and that would provoke a real sort of crisis in us—pakistan relations. and as the campaign against government bases in rural afghanistan has stepped up, insurgents have used the type of tactics we've seen in syria and iraq. here, you can see a light truck, circled there, heading into a police base in helmand province late last year. it penetrates right into the base through the gate there before the driver detonates it. now, late last week, a more sophisticated tactic was used in an attack on girishk, one of the key places in the british campaign to secure helmand province.
there's a ring of security posts around the town, and the taliban attacked it with three truck bombs, captured humvees, lightly armoured vehicles, one of them driven by the son of a local taliban leader. they then followed up with an infantry attack. it's very hard for lightly armed police and troops to withstand assaults like that. i think what's needed is to continue to invest in the specialist capabilities which will make all the difference for the afghans in this campaign and will give them the edge over the taliban. so the british have announced, i think, just over a hundred soldiers. the americans, as you say, are considering their options — i think general mcmaster, james mattis, general nicholson, these are very competent, wise individuals who will be giving excellent advice. us marines have been
involved in the recent helmand fighting, drawn in by the deterioration in security. president trump and his military advisers, meanwhile, are deadlocked about whether thousands more should be sent — but what none of them want is for the afghan government to collapse under this new insurgent onslaught. mark urban with a rather grim assessment of the situation. lord dannatt oversaw britain's operations in afghanistan as chief of the defence staff from 2006 to 2009. he is now a crossbench peer, and hejoins me from norwich. a very good evening to you. do you recognise that the country there is slipping away? well, i certainly recognise, on the basis of the film you have just shown, that the situation remains very difficult, and as is expected, it remains one that we have to fight, or the afghan security forces have to fight with great intensity. i think the proportion of the country that the film showed,
of 10—12% under taliban control, is entirely consistent with what we expected. kandahar province, helmand province, these were always the heartlands of the insurgency against the kabul government, so it is not at all surprisingly this is where the focus of the fighting is. and then of course you have got various sallies forth by the taliban into kabul to catch the headline — very successfully, i may say, courtesy of the international media — of what goes on in kabul. a very telling slip you made, and then you said the afghan army needs to fight. let me be clear. we, the british government, may have ended our combat operations in 2014, but the british government did not end its support to the afghan government.
there were over 500 british servicemen still serving in afghanistan. principally running the afghan national army officer training academy. many international diplomats and other experts supporting the government activities. we have not abandoned afghanistan. we have changed our support to afghanistan because frankly, afghanistan remains an extraordinarily important player in the stability of that part of the wider region in that part of the world. you can go to districts like musa gala in helmand province, many british troops died trying to keep those districts. they are now occupied by the taliban. how much does that upset you? of course, in the narrow context of the families of those who lost their loved ones in fighting those tactical battles, it upsets me hugely. but in the wider context of the wider operational and strategic effort to try and stabilise afghanistan,
to become a significant player in that part of the world, it is understandable. the loss of life of any individual leaves a shattered family and extraordinarily regrettable. but in the bigger picture, i'm afraid casualties have to be accepted. afghanistan is very important in that part of the world, musa qala tactically is important, as is sangin, but if we lose control of those places, in the wider picture, it matters a lot but it does not necessarily matter in the big picture. do you have an idea of what we should do about pakistan? by all accounts, it is causing much of the instability in afghanistan. we were not sorting out the one without finding a solution to what the other one is trying to get out of that? i couldn't agree with you more this wider issue means test needs to be
tackled energetically on the wider diplomatic circuit and extraordinary pressure should be brought on afghanistan. the ambivalent attitude that pakistan has had towards the situation in afghanistan, the isi has played both sides against the centre, this is quite extraordinary, quite unacceptable, and the united states, united kingdom, united european union, anybody else with influence should bring it on to pakistan to say, let's get settled on this. because you not helping. and i also, a parallel conversation, with slightly less intensity, should be brought on india as well. do we have much influence in this, does the foreign office have the power to knock heads together? you would think in pakistan, you might have, but i wonder whether we do. in the bigger context of brexit, we think we want to be a big player in the world, maybe we should be, maybe we are a big player in the world. india and pakistan are part of a sort of heritage, we do have influence in those parts of the world, i think our international diplomats
should be on and off the jets very rapidly banging heads together in that part of the world to say afghanistan mattered in the 19th century, it mattered in the 20th century and it sure as hell matters in the 21st—century. thank you very much. you will already know that england won the women's cricket world cup yesterday. it was a well—timed victory in a dramatic match, giving a big push to women's team sports, ahead of the women's euro football tournament and the rugby world cup this summer. it feels like it's been a year in which there has been growing spectator interest in women's sports but, true as that is, we are still clearly at the stage where, on programmes like this, we often end up discussing women's sport as a progressive social trend, as much as a sporting spectacle. so where does women's sport go, and how fast can the business, broadcast and sponsorship grow? with me now is the former england bowler isa guha and joanne adams, the chief executive
of england netball. good evening. am i right, isa, it has been a big yearfor women's sport? you were playing in the world cup when? in 2005. won in 2009 in sydney and we did get a fair bit of coverage, but it quickly dwindled away and that is where i think cricket can really learn from that. a successful campaign for the england women, still recovering from yesterday, to be honest! a truly special moment for everyone involved. you got a sense everybody was pulling together. but we were speaking of air about the fact that the significant but we were speaking off air about the fact that the significant change was around the 2012 olympics. the 2012 olympics? absolutely, the focus on women in sport. the government made a big push to try to include women's sport in the media. and as a result, we have had a knock—on effect. it gets trajectory and people get interested ?
there has been a change perception. does it feel like a moment, joanne, is tipping point? yes, i think so, sport been working hard for many years. but there does seem to be now a point where there is a magic moment in time. we have just had the cricket world cup, we have the hockey world cup in 2018 and the netball world cup in 2019. there is a three—year span when we can maximise from a commercial and broadcast point of view. we have seen netball is the team game that does not have the men's counterpart, on my cricket and football. does that make it easier to promote, or harder? it is a double—edged sword. we do not have the millions of pounds are backing the men's game it can give. they did not previously, but they are now investing. so everything we have to create on our own. and it is our usp, it is women that play it, with predominantly administrated, the volunteers are nearly all women,
so it does have a unique position within a woman's life. it is double—edged. isa, what drives some sports, especially the non—team sports in the olympics, it is virtual parity, and in other sports, it is a long way between the men's game and the women's game? what counts for how much parity or equality there is? yes, i think individual sports, you look atjessica ennis, she is constantly out in the media and she is a singular entity, but has been the kind of champion and has done so well for great britain. whereas team sports, you only have one or two stars and that has been the case with cricket in the past. but now, when the icc decided to broadcast every single game of the women's world cup, we suddenly were able to see all of these girls on the bigger stage and certainly throughout
england's campaign, it was not down to one or two individuals, it was every single person contributing at different times. and i think on the back of that, the media and the broadcast cottoned onto it and everyone was talked about. joanne, you must know in netball, there is a chicken and egg and the media do not arrive until there is the interest and the interest does not happen without the media? we cannotjust say, oh, woe is me, we have to create stories and an interest and that is what we have done really well. in netball, we look at ways women can play the game and we find the right form of the game for the right form of women so we have turned ourselves into a sports business and we have created the interest. once we do that, we can take the products to the broadcasters and sponsors. we have to take responsibility for that and we have done it really well in women's sport.
now it is time to push on, we need the broadcasters and the money, the investment. it seems to me, i'm not clear about the audience. is it men interested in cricket? women interested in cricket? women who are not interested in cricket, but who are interested in women's sport? a bit of both, the final was played in front of a sell—out crowd, 50% of the tickets were women in going down to watch. a completely new audience and i think across the world globally, it is notjust women, it is men as well. you look at india and how much the male counterparts got behind their team. 1.2 billion people living in india and everybody is glued to the screens throughout the indian campaign. it appeals to everyone. more importantly, it is the legacy that is being created and trying to appeal to young boys and girls. there is no better time
for women and girls to get involved in cricket. joanne, do you think in team sport, netball being the exception, do you think there is a day when parity, anything like parity will be achieved between women's soccer or cricket and men's? it is ourdream. across sport, people do not want to say it is the women's or the men's version, it isjust great sport and people wanting to watch it as a great spectacle and to be administered throughout the game. thank you both very much. that's it for tonight, but we leave you with news from the computer world. if you were worried about emily and the downpour in washington, they did not completely disappear, but they sent this photograph taken a couple of minutes after they went off air! clearly, the weather moves as quickly in washington as the politics. but that is it for tonight. news from the computerworld.
an innocuous looking document has been published by microsoft called the windows 10 fall creators update. but it foretells the demise of microsoft paint, one of the iconic pieces of 20th—century graphic design software. the fact that the software remained so utterly basic is apparently what made it redundant, but it was that which also spurred the creative juices in its many users. so we leave you with a few masterpieces from the microsoft paint by hand internet subculture. goodnight. music: "get lost" by la witch # i don't need nobody else. # need nobody else. # just take me where you go. # to get lost from my soul. # get lost from my soul. good evening. let me paint a picture
of the weather forecast for you and actually it is a pretty mixed picture. clear skies for some of us. some places struggled for sunshine today, particularly the east. a lot of cloud across eastern areas and a further weather systems waiting out in the atlantic. for the time being, we are essentially between systems. cloud for eastern scotland and eastern england and perhaps some drizzle. through tomorrow cloud breaking up and eastern areas will see more sunshine. across parts of wales and the west country, the best of the sunshine. maybe sparking the
odd shower but majority staying dry. across the south—east and up into parts of north—east england, a little on the cool side are mostly fine day tomorrow for northern ireland. one or two shower was for scotland, most places dry. find through tomorrow evening for the most part. tomorrow night, and into wednesday, things begin to change from the west. quite a band of rain pushing its way through northern ireland, scotland, wales and north—west england, courtesy of this. this is not what we are expected to seek at this time of year, winds will be on the risk side and we will see whether france bringing out breaks of rain. —— where the front. later in the day,
something brighter working its way in from the west. a cool feel to the day. the weather fronts in from the west. a cool feel to the day. the weatherfronts responsible for the rain to ring in the east. this area of low pressure close by so this area of low pressure close by so quite blustery day across the country. showers, especially towards the north. not as many in the south—east. as we head towards the end of the week, there will be a cooler, fresher feel to the weather. some sunshine but also lost three showers as well. a pretty mixed picture. good night. i'm sharanjit leil in singapore, the headlines. president trump's son—in—law jared kushner insists he did not have improper contact with the kremlin during the us election campaign. i did not collude with russia, nor do i know of anyone in the campaign who did so. one of the pope's most senior