this is bbc news. the headlines at 8pm: amber rudd quits boris johnson's cabinet, attacking his handling of brexit — the government insists it is doing all it can to get a new deal you might expect in the balance between getting a deal and no deal, 50—50 in terms of work, but it's not that, it's, like, 80, 90% of government time going into preparing for no—deal. we're always going to behave lawfully as a government. of course you'd expect that. and, anyway, it'll be challenged in the courts. but what we are going to do with that legislation is test very carefully what it does and doesn't require. and that's not only the lawful thing to do, i think it's the responsible thing to do. peace talks between the taliban and the us are called off. president trump blames a deadly attack in the afghan capital, kabul. hours to go before british airways pilots go on strike, affecting up to 300,000 passengers.
joy for australia. they've retained the ashes after bowling out england on the final day of the fourth test at old trafford. good evening. government ministers have dismissed the accusation of a former senior colleague that too little effort is going into securing a new brexit agreement with the eu. amber rudd, who resigned from the cabinet last night, said today that the vast majority of brexit—focused work was going towards no deal and that there were no formal negotiations with brussels. she's also called the expulsion of 21 conservative mps opposed to no deal "an assault on decency and democracy". the chancellor sajid javid says
the government hasn't given up on a deal and is sticking to plans to leave at the end of october, come what may. 0ur political correspondent jonathan blake reports. from cabinet minister to backbench mp overnight, amber rudd walked out of government no longer believing the prime minister's priority was to get a new brexit deal. this morning i'm joined by the now former work and pensions secretary, amber rudd... this morning she explained she could see little evidence of efforts to reach an agreement with eu. deal, which is fine, you might expect in the balance between getting a deal and "no deal", 50—50 in terms of work, but it isn't that, it's about 80, 90% of government time going into preparing for no deal and the absence of actually trying to work to get a deal which is what has driven 21 of my colleagues to rebel and i need to join them.
expelling those mps that voted against the government was an act of political vandalism. the former work and pensions secretary had written in her letter of resignation. i know i could not carry on in the conservative party at such a high level and see 21 of my colleagues, who are good, moderate people, who also want a deal, excluded from it. and ijust needed to move and stand by them. will brexit ever happen, sir? the chancellor said he was sad at what happened, but defended the prime minister's strategy and hit back at amber rudd's claim the government wasn't trying in earnest to get a new brexit deal. i am absolutely clear that we are working wholeheartedly, straining every sinew, to get a deal, and that the prime minister is personally putting in all of the significant effort you would expect from a leader to get this deal done. what's on the agenda today?
in brussels this week, the uk's top mp official having regular meetings. by the eu's chief negotiator reportedly described talks as in paralysis. downing street said negotiations have been constructive, but acknowledged the two sides are still far apart. the prime minister has been in campaign mode this week for the election he wants to avoid asking for a brexit delay. 0pposition parties say not until leaving without a deal is ruled out. i don't trust him an inch. i don't think anyone does. we've got a prime minister now who is saying he won't even abide by the law. the law! i've never heard that before. we are in a situation now where no one can trust while he is in place what might happen. keeping away from the cameras, the government's countryside retreat, the prime minister met his closest advisers, perhaps plotting his next move. the promise is still to deliver brexit by the end of 0ctober. the unanswered question, how? jonathan blake, bbc news. let's look ahead
to the next few days and weeks — and what might be in store. tomorrow, the government will make a second attempt to call a general election but that requires the support of two—thirds of mps and is expected to fail. the government is then expected to suspend parliament for five weeks. 0n the 17th of october there's the key eu summit in brussels, where the government says it hopes to agree a brexit deal and leave on the 31st of october. but if there's no agreement, then by the 19th of october the new legal deadline imposed on boris johnson because of the law pushed through by mps comes into force. it requires the prime minister to either persuade mps to agree to leave with no deal at the end of october, which is highly unlikely, or it says he must ask the eu to delay brexit — something he's insisted he will never do. today, the foreign secretary dominic raab said the government was scrutinising the new law in the hope of finding a loophole.
we're always going to behave lawfully as a government. of course you'd expect that. and, anyway, it'll be challenged in the courts. but what we are going to do with that legislation is test very carefully what it does and doesn't require. and that's not only the lawful thing to do, i think it's the responsible thing to do. earlier i spoke to our political correspondent, jonathan blake. i asked him if he thought the government were going to try and get around the law, which requires them to ask the eu for an extension to article 50. although government ministers have in the last couple of days been saying explicitly that the government will abide by the rule of law and not seek to break the law, it looks pretty clear that they are going to try and find a way around it, perhaps not surprising, because the government strategy has been since borisjohnson the government strategy has been since boris johnson became the government strategy has been since borisjohnson became prime minister to deliver brexit by the sist minister to deliver brexit by the 31st of october come what may, do or die and this legal gauntlet thrown down by opposition parties and former conservative mps in the form ofa former conservative mps in the form of a bill forcing the prime minister to ask for a delay if he cannot get a new deal by the summit in
mid—0ctober isn't going to change the game plan in downing street. how exactly they intend to do it, well, we just have to wait and see, because that is a question everyone is asking at the moment. legal advice will, i'm sure, be being taken, and as you saw in the piece there the prime minister has been at chevening discussing his next move, and whether anything will change in the days ahead before parliament is due to be suspended by thursday at the latest, we will have to see. but i think the message to mps who are preparing a legal challenge should the prime minister try to get around that law, the central clause in the build—up forces him to ask for a brexit extension, the message from government coming in response to that today seems to be, we will see you in court. 50 that today seems to be, we will see you in court. so amber rudd is the latest cabinet resignation. how likely is it that we will see more stepping down? well, after amber rudd dramatically resigned last
night there was perhaps an expectation that others who share her concerns in government would follow suit, but it seems that the prime minister has managed to stave off any further ministerial walk—outs for the time being, the likes of manhattan kong —— matt hancock, who's made it clear he is going nowhere, and nicky morgan the culture secretary s appears to be staying put. robert buckland, the justice secretary, tweeting today that he has confidence in the prime minister's tragedy and is being reassured that the government's intention to follow the law —— rule of law. it doesn't seem any more mysterio resignations are imminent —— ministerial. but we will have to see in terms of what downing street's next moves are as to those who do have an uneasiness in government about the overall strategy staying put, or deciding they cannot continue to serve. president trump has called off peace negotiations with the taliban after they admitted being behind an attack in afghanistan that killed
an american soldier. the taliban condemned the decision to withdraw from talks that come after 18 years of war, warning america would lose the most. 0ur chief international correspondent lyse doucet reports from the afghan capital kabul. a busy kabul junction. the attack said to have changed president trump's mind. a young us soldier died here and ten afghans, aged ten to 70. the taliban struck this kabul neighbourhood, too, the very day last week the us said it had reached a deal in principle with the taliban to start bringing its troops home. they've been negotiating for nearly a year in the gulf state of qatar, and the taliban almost hit the diplomatic jackpot — a trip to camp david to talk to president trump, his classic high—stakes summitry. but now, it's off. a taliban spokesman sent us their response.
a few days ago, the peace agreement was concluded with the us negotiation team, and it was initialed by heads of both negotiation teams. that tweet by president donald trump is astonishing, and i think it harms his reputation. a peace process that may have consequences. . . the afghan government the taliban still refuse to talk to welcomed the move. i think it was the right move at the right time, and a genuine reflection of the concerns that not only the afghan people, but many in dc, raised of the threats, of the consequences of any deal that could be harmful to all of us. was it this one terrible attack in kabul which provoked president trump's dramatic move, or was it the rising cores of anger and anxiety, in kabul and in washington, over peace talks which only seemed to bring more war?
many fear taliban at the table don't speak for fighters on the ground. until they put down their guns, their commitment to peace won't be clear. lyse doucet, bbc news, kabul. 0ur north american correspondent david willis has been following these developments in washington. this attack last thursday near the american embassy in kabul which killed an american serviceman, he says that basically that is proof, as he believes it, that the tally ban is not negotiating in good faith —— taliban. but the very fact as we heard in the report that this secret meeting was due to take place today at the presidential retreat, camp david, has come as a surprise and i
would say a shock to many people here, not least because the taliban is the same group that has been taking many american service men and women's lives over the last 18 years during fighting in afghanistan and many people have said it's almost unprecedented, it is unprecedented for them to be invited onto american soil, let alone to be invited to sit down with the president at camp david. republicans as well have expressed dismay about this. it's not just the expressed dismay about this. it's notjust the democrats, the republican house member liz cheney, whose father dick cheney was vice president under george w bush tweeted no member of the taliban should set foot there, referring to camp david, ever, and the illinois republican echoed that statement saying members of the tally ban should never be allowed in the us.
meanwhile, a democratic senator said that this was another example of president from treating foreign policy the same way he would again show. but the president made all sorts of promises about afghanistan, didn't he? he did. he made a promise to withdraw a sizeable number of us troops that are still there and actually wanted to get them out by now, but the generals have convinced him to maintain his presence until this sort of peace agreement had been signed off on, although it is on hold and mike pompeo has been doing the rounds of the us talk shows this morning and says the peace negotiations are, as he says,
for the time being, and he says the us is still working on making a deal that will pave the way for the withdrawal of some us troops. of course, time is running out for president trump to make good on his promise to that effect before the election which is next november. earlier i spoke with michael kugelman, an afghanistan expert at the wilson centre in washington who said president trump and the taliban were on the cusp of a deal. well, one reason why it is so surprising that trump made this announcement to call off talks for now is that the talks had got further than they had ever got before. the two sides, the us and the tally ban, were on the cusp of a deal and it was at the point where the chief negotiator was trying to get buy in is from kabul, which had been shut out of the negotiations, and from others in washington, so clearly we had never got to the point where we had been over the last few days and that makes it all the more incredible, to put it
mildly, that president trump decided to call off talks for now, if not permanently. how hopeful are you that they will start up again and why? i think at the end of the day both sides, the us and taliban, have a similar role, which is to make a plan for a withdrawal of us forces. ido plan for a withdrawal of us forces. i do think eventually there will be a deal. trump, of course, has been very clear about how he wants to get out of afghanistan and certainly he would like to be able to make some sort of decision or announcement well before the us presidential election and bring the troops home. the taliban has said for a long time it wants the us troops out, so that suggest to me that eventually the two sides will come back together and clearly a major blow has been dealt to this negotiation process, however, give it time. as you indicated, the administration officials in washington have suggested that there were plans to try and set up new meetings, so i
think it will happen and at the end of the day what happened here is that the trump administration was uncomfortable with the deal and it suddenly became uncomfortable thinking that there weren't enough assurances that the taliban would be willing to lay down arms after signing the deal with the states. we are of course only a few days away from the anniversary of nine slash 11 and a lot of people will be rightly remembering those who died in those atrocities —— 9/11. for many people it was an apparent idea to have the taliban at camp david. why would president from one such a thing to take place? this is really, in my view, this idea of the taliban coming to camp david is widening the wheelhouse. it would have been a dramatic affair with a lot of pageantry dramatic affair with a lot of pagea ntry and photo dramatic affair with a lot of pageantry and photo opportunities and media attention, much like a reality tv show. but i think the timing of it is what would have been so tasteless. as you noted, we are coming up to the 18 year anniversary
of the 9/11 attacks carried out by a group that was sheltered by the taliban. i think that simply would have been a dreadful idea. so in that regard, it's possibly a good thing that this is not happening and the taliban will not be coming here. setting that aside, the fact that, as trump said, it wouldn't have just been the taliban leadership, also the afghan leadership, would have been at camp david and they would have been separately —— meetings between him and the us and the taliban and the us but it would have been significant given that the taliban has reputedly been refusing to be involved in negotiation with the afghan government in terms of a deal with the us, which is another key factor, that the taliban would probably never have been comfortable with participating in this type of meeting at camp david so long as you have the afghan president there. what is the minimum the united states needs from a deal with the taliban? it's hard to say. at first it was basically an assurance from
the taliban to not provide any space to international terrorist groups like al-qaeda and isis. but i think that has changed. the expectations of the us will be that they want more from the taliban. when negotiations resume, the us will wa nt to negotiations resume, the us will want to see some type of clear indication that the taliban would lay down arms, even if only temporarily, before there is a deal between the us and the taliban, and i also think the us government would like to see some sort of assurance from the taliban it would be willing to start negotiating formally with the afghan government before there isa the afghan government before there is a final deal between the us and the taliban. the problem is there is no way to measure that. there is no way to trust that the taliban will do those things, even if the us gets those assurances, so this is really a very complicated process and when the talks to resume, and i think they will, it will be a very long process to get to any kind of resolution.
the headlines on bbc news — amber rudd quits boris johnson's cabinet, attacking his handling of brexit — the government insists it is doing all it can to get a new deal peace talks between the taliban and the us are called off. president trump blames a deadly attack in the afghan capital, kabul. hours to go before british airways pilots go on strike, affecting up to 300 thousand passengers. sport and time, for a full round up, from the bbc sport centre. australia have retained the ashes after a 185 run victory in the fourth test, england unable to bat out the final day to salvage a draw which would have kept the series alive. despite some spirited resistance from engalnd's lower order, they lost their last wicket with a little over 13 overs remaining. and so australia take a 2—1 lead into the final test at the oval next week, in what has been steve smith's
series, the batsmen with that brilliant double hundred and then 82 in the second innings, setting them up for victory. everyone is hugely disappointed, but you find yourself in a situation like today and you learn a lot about your team and the guys around you andi your team and the guys around you and i thought everyone showed a lot of courage, a lot of resilience, a lot of character and everyone should be really proud of how we approach the day. i think we will look back at other points in the game and thought maybe we could have been better. and most importantly, we have to look forward to the next test match and make sure we get something out of this series. chelsea's women played a super league match at stamford bridge for the first time this afternoon — and they enjoyed a winning start to their season. they beat league newcomers tottenham 1—0, thanks to a brilliant strike from bethany england. 0ur sports correspondent natalie pirks reports.
chelsea's women played a super league match at stamford bridge for the first time this afternoon — and they enjoyed a winning start to their season. they beat league newcomers tottenham 1—0, thanks to a brilliant strike from bethany england. a familiar rivalry inafamiliarsetting. with chelsea handing out free tickets, 211,000 fans turned up at stamford bridge eager to see this opening day derby. they didn't have long to wait before they saw some action. here's england. a stunner! last season's top scorer starting where she left off with a worldy, just one week after making her england debut. it's spurs‘s first season in the top flight, but they were determined to leave their mark. chelsea needed to exert their dominance but the woodwork, well, it was having none of it. despite a great atmosphere, 2018's champions felt a little flat. but in front of a crowd five times bigger than the previous record, chelsea's win was all the more special. in front of this crowd and on this pitch, it's unbelievable. i'm so proud of the girls. we came here, we wanted the three points, we got them. the world cup made new fans of women's football this summer. now the trick is to keep coming.
natalie pirks, bbc news. defending champions arsenal began their title defence with a win. an equally impressive strike helping them to it, england's beth mead with arsenal's first in a 2—1 over west ham. mead's england teammate fara williams scored for reading just before half time, to give them a 1—0 victory over liverpool. and everton started with a win. they beat birmingham 1—0, thanks to an own goal from kerys harrop. england's paul casey has won his first european tour title for five years, at the european 0pen in hamburg. he closed with a six—under—par 66 to finish just one shot clear of a group including scotland's bob macintyre — the third time he's been beaten into second place in his rookie year. casey has won on the american tour this year but this ended a long wait for his 14th european tour triumph. mo farah has become the first athlete to win the great north run six years in a row. the four—time 0lympic champion beat off competition from tamarit tola of ethiopia to win
the race in 59 minutes and seven seconds. that's both his fastest time at the great north run and his fastest ever half marathon time. pippa funnell has won the burghley horse trials — her first major win for 14 years. the multiple 0lympic medallist led from start to finish on grafton street. she knocked one fence down in the final show—jumping phase but stayed clear around the rest of the course, beating her british team mate piggy french byjust a tenth of a penalty point. that's all the sport for now. back to you, martin. passengers are being warned of possible disruption to british airways flights this evening, ahead of a pilots' strike which is due to begin at midnight. most ba flights taking off from the uk on monday and tuesday have been cancelled. the dispute is over pay and conditions. our business correspondent katie prescott has the latest from heathrow.
one of ba's exclusive hubs. heathrow terminal five before the passengers empty out. after midnight tonight, almost all flights leaving from here are cancelled. with several weeks' notice, most of the 300,000 customers affected have made other arrangements. but not without a lot of disruption behind—the—scenes. duncan lion is currently in ibiza, and is owed around £400 after he had to rebook his flights. this is the first time i've ever thought i'll never, ever book with british airways again. they are a disgrace. their customer service is a disgrace. i could book a flight tomorrow with british airways, they want my money, but they will not refund me for a flight booked in january last year. they took £1102 from me. and i'm still waiting for my refund. months of negotiations over pay between british airways and its pilots have failed to reach an agreement. for the first time in the company's history, british airways pilots are refusing to fly.
the pilots' union says they accepted pay freezes when ba made losses, they now want to share in its success. that means a share of the £2 billion profit british airways made last year. pilots have rejected their offer of an 11.5% pay rise over the next three years. but british airways says it's a generous offer that's been accepted by the rest of staff on the airline. people are being advised not to head to the airport and any passengers who are affected by the strikes are entitled to a refund or a rebooking with british airways or another airline. joining me now is the independent‘s travel editor simon calder. just tell us quickly about the background. of course, as we heard in the report from katie, it's an old—fashioned pay dispute. ba believes it rewards its pilots extremely well and the union says that they made sacrifices in difficult times and they deserve a slice of ba's profits. it's already
begun, hasn't it. how many flights will be affected? i calculate about 1017. they began with the british airways departure from gatwick to jersey and i make that the first cancellation followed by others to glasgow and edinburgh and in about an hourfrom glasgow and edinburgh and in about an hour from now glasgow and edinburgh and in about an hourfrom now there glasgow and edinburgh and in about an hour from now there will be a whole wave of departures to nairobi, abu dhabi, those will begin and then loads of american flights will be rounded and they will not be coming from new york, boston, toronto and some of the flights from miami and los angeles and that is simply nothing to do with a strike because pilots cannot strike while they are abroad. they are simply running out of space to put the ba planes at heathrow. so what are the options for passengers affected? everybody should have been told two weeks ago that their flight was cancelled. thousands of people were told that their flights were cancelled and then they were reinstated, which
annoyed a lot of people. yes, you can geta annoyed a lot of people. yes, you can get a refund, rebook, but an awful lot of people have contacted me to say that the obvious like they could be on is on the easyjet from gatwick because ba competes directly with easyjet, and ba have flatly refused to book any flights on easyj et. refused to book any flights on easyjet. so there's a lot of upset about that. the civil aviation authority is also concerned about it. but ba has also rebook people on dozens it. but ba has also rebook people on d oze ns of it. but ba has also rebook people on dozens of other airlines, particularly from heathrow, and because it hasn't happened in peak summer there is quite a lot of capacity, but even so, you are talking about a quarter of a million passengers whose travel plans have been torn up. reputational damage, it is difficult to assess that, how much that is worth, but how much is it reckoned to be costing british airways? it is 75 up to £80 million in lost revenue over the two days of the strike with a few days either
side, and on top of that you have the extra costs involved, everything from extra hotels or passengers stranded through to the cost of parking seven jumbo jets are new yorkjfk, for example. but long term, well, it is looking quite damaging. the union tonight have said that we might call further strikes and we have a mandate for those up until january, strikes and we have a mandate for those up untiljanuary, which of course could persuade people to move their christmas and new year flights to other airlines. another strike is planned for the 27th of september and that appears still to be going ahead and since ba says it is stripping the pilots of their staff travel rights if they go on strike, there's no sign of a dispute cooling down. and with social media, the prevalence of social media, people are taking to places like twitter and are venting their spleen very readily. they do. a lot of unhappiness out there and everybody is furious, basically. ba is furious
because it thinks it pays its pilots perfectly decently, thank you. the union is furious because they don't think ba is playing fair with them. but the public are especially furious because they are caught up in the middle of a dispute between a relatively well—paid bunch of people and a very profitable company, and their travel plans are being hit.|j am sure we will speak again. but the moment, simon, thank you very much. iran says an oil tanker that's been at the centre of tension between tehran and the west has reached its destination and sold its cargo. iranian state media didn't say where the tanker had gone, or who'd bought its cargo of oil. but satellite images that emerged on saturday appeared to show the ship just off the syrian port of tartus. injuly, the authorities in gibraltar seized the vessel on suspicion that it was bound for syria, in breach of eu sanctions. wildfires across two australian states are continuing to rage in hot and windy conditions that officials warn are unprecedented this early in springin queensland over 50 fires were burning on sunday. a lodge founded by
conservationists in the 1930s, binna burra in lamington national park, has been gutted by the flames. thousands of pro—democracy activists have marched to the us consulate in hong kong to urge america to support their bid for political reform. some of them carried the us flag, the stars and stripes, and called for president trump to "liberate" the territory. china claims the united states is orchestrating the protests, which have been going on for three months. the number of deaths during a summer heatwave in france rose by 10%, according to data from the ministry of health. figures show there were 1,500 more deaths than usual injune and july, during which temperatures reached a high of 46 celsius. half of those who died were aged over 75. the health minister said that preventative measures had ensured that the rate was 10 times lower than the same period in 2003