when she was underage, after a usjudge ruled her lawsuit against him can proceed. ms giuffre claims the prince sexually abused her on three occasions. prince andrew has consistently denied the allegations against him. he is effectively a dead man walking, as far as the royal family is concerned. but the one thing he can do is to accept the responsibility, except the blame, except that he has to fall on his sword. russia and nato hold their first face—to—face talks in two years, as tensions remain high over the build—up of russian troops on the border with ukraine. and soaring energy costs could affect household bills for the next two years, warns the boss of the uk's biggest energy supplier hello, if you're just hello, if you'rejustjoining us, welcome to bbc news. the prime minister has for the first time admitted that he attended a party in downing street at the height of the first lockdown. appearing in front of a packed house of commons, boris johnson apologised, saying he knew the rage people felt with him and the government. he said he was at the drinks in the downing street garden in may 2020 for about 25 minutes to thank staff but insisted that he believed it was "technically within the rules". at the time, it was forbidden to meet more than one person outside your household for social reasons. borisjohnson is facing intense pressure from all sides. the labour leader sir keir starmer called on him to resign saying he was a "man without shame". the leader of the scottish conservatives, douglas ross, has also called for his resignation saying his position is no longer tenable. 0ur political editor, laura kuenssberg has the latest. a mess. there is no other word. the prime minister belatedly trying to clean up. with an admission of possible rule breaking, an apology from a weakened leader. but will the answers to today's prime minister's questions see boris johnson through? mr speaker, i want to apologise. i know that millions of people across this country have made extraordinary sacrifices over the last 18 months, and i know the rage they feel with me and with the government i lead when they think that in downing street itself the rules are not being properly followed. by the people who make the rules. there were things we simply did not get right. and i must take response ability. —— responsibility. claiming to disbelief in the commons that technically a "bring your own booze" organised drinks event was within the lockdown rules. even if it could be said technically to fall within the guidance, there would be millions and millions of people who simply would not see it that way. well, there we have it. after months of deceit and deception, the pathetic spectacle of a man who has run out of road _ his defence that he didn't realise he was at a party... laughter it is so ridiculous that it is actually offensive to the british public. labour able to mock the unusually subdued tory showman. when the whole country was in lockdown, he was hosting boozy parties in downing street. is he now going to do the decent thing and resign? i regret very much that we did not do things differently that evening. the prime minister pretended that he had been assured there were no parties. now it turns out he was at the parties all along. council prime minister see why the british public think he is lying his teeth? mr speaker, it is up to the right honourable gentleman to choose how he conducts himself in this place... laughter. there was derision, laughter at the prime minister's defence. six questions later, election—winner borisjohnson looked defeated. this is notjust a westminster drama. it is exactly mid—day, we are heading over to westminster... it was the must—watch from the morning sofa. the country seeing repeated calls for borisjohnson to quit. will the prime minister, for the good of the country, accept that the party is over and decide to resign? do the decent thing and resign. do the honourable thing and resign. he must resign. and the concern on his own side is potent. the number of mps saying it's overfor mrjohnson growing in the shadows. and calls for him to quit out in the open now. even from the mp who is also the leader of the conservatives in scotland. i explained to the premise today that i felt he should stand down because of this, but that is ultimately his decision. —— i explained it to the prime minister today. but does the conservative party, let alone the country, really have the appetite for more political turmoil? i've just seen a text from the pm which _ i've just seen a text from the pm which is — i've just seen a text from the pm which is hilarious. _ there was a sprinkling of supportive messages, notjust texts from mrjohnson himself. what is needed above all is doubling—down, a determination to rebuild trust between the government the prime minister leads and the british people. borisjohnson�*s admission and apology in their has bought him a little time, a pose until the report into what did and didn't happen in at number ten is complete. yet for many on his own side, he has already lost the benefit of the doubt. growing numbers of his own mps want him out, discussing frantically how and when his exit could happen. it is not inevitable though that he will beat hastened out of office — but it's no longer impossible to imagine that the prime minister might be gone before too long. look at this, this is a fantastic garden. it is indeed a beautiful garden. this was a former bomb crater. a placer prime minister was happy to show off in days gone by. do you see yourself being here for the very long—term? we are working very hard. but his time in residence could be brought to an early close by what happened literally in his own backyard. laura kuenssberg, bbc news, westminster. the inquiry into a series of alleged parties held during lockdown in number ten and whitehall is still ongoing. it's not known when the senior civil servant sue gray will release her findings. 0ur deputy political editor, vicki young, considers the political fallout of the last few months. it has been a disastrous three months for the prime minister, and he stood here today accused of deception, of treating the british people with contempt. some on his own side think this could be a tipping point that leads to his downfall — but this is a man who has recovered from setbacks before and cabinet colleagues are rallying round. i think it is right that he was saying today he the house of commons that sue gray is given the time to conduct that investigation, there will be a full counting, the premise will come back to the commons and that is the right way to handle this. —— the prime minister will come back. there is a long list of allegations that covid rules were broken in downing street starting during the first lockdown in 2020. a photo taken on 15 may showed the prime minister, his wife, and staff in the downing street garden with bottles of wine and cheese. when asked about it, borisjohnson said... a few days later about 100 people were invited by e—mail to socially distance drinks in the number ten garden. today, the prime minister admitted he attended for around 25 minutes. and on 15 december multiple sources told the bbc there was a christmas quiz for number ten staff. borisjohnson took part remotely — but others gathered in one room. a video obtained by itv news showed the prime minister's then press secretary, allegra stratton, joking about reports of an event on 18 december, saying this fictional party was a business meeting and it was not socially distanced. those that worked with theresa may in downing street say going back support can be difficult. —— clawing back support. the issues this government are suffering from at the moment are self—inflicted wounds and about the way in which the prime minister is running his government. it is not clear to me that he is ever going to be able to fully recover his reputation from what has happened, but the starting point i think has to be to get all of the facts out there, to be completely honest about what has happened. conservative mps wanted persons and as a leader because they thought he could win him elections — brexit and his unique campaigning style made him a vote winner. but governing brings different challenges, the endless scrutiny having to watch every word you say. and some fear it is his flawed judgment that is now being exposed. and on that, his former closest adviser, dominic cummings, has become his harshest critic, accusing him of not being up to the job. for months, there were questions about how mrjohnson paid for a lavish refurbishment of his downing street flat. his standards adviser said he had acted unwisely. and then when foreign minister 0wen paterson was involved in a row over sleaze, he tried to change the rules to protect him, backtracked, and the lib dems then won the safe tory seat. borisjohnson�*s authority has been severely dented and all this is a huge distraction from the policies he promised to deliver. vicki young, bbc news, westminster. 0ur politicial correspondent damian grammaticas is at westminster. i should imagine it's been quite a lively place to be today. has the prime minister's apology eased any of the pressure on him, do you think was yellow well, it seems a little bit, it's fair to was yellow well, it seems a little bit. it's fai— was yellow well, it seems a little bit, it's fai ., , , �* bit, it's fair to say, because we've seen this evening _ bit, it's fair to say, because we've seen this evening senior- bit, it's fair to say, because we've seen this evening senior tour- seen this evening senior tour is coming out, quite a few members of the cabinet, and other mps saying they think he's bought himself some time, as you heard it there, saying that they thought this was a heartfelt apology, saying everyone should wait for that inquiry by the civil servant sue grey into events. but there are still many conservative mps and actually growing numbers who i think were very, very disquieted by what they heard and didn't buy into it. i can give you a quick selection of quotes. 0ne mps said the statement was meaningless, it's overfor him. another tory mp said it doesn't bear scrutiny, it will unravel. another said, "i think he's finally run out of teflon." so a lot of disquiet, and a lot of mps wondering whether his time may soon be up. but still, for the time being, i think, that line coming out of the government, to wait for the inquiry, is what everyone will have to do now, so sit and wait over the next few days to see how this build, and will we have to wait long to see what she says? that's giving some of his colleagues a bit of protection. i heard dominic raab saying earlier today the prime minister believed this event wasn't a social gathering, it was a work event. he can say "i think he's right," but when asked about it, he said to wait for the inquiry. what are the expectations of this inquiry? is she expected to deliver anyjudgment about what happened, or simply lay out the facts? mi; simply lay out the facts? ij�*i understanding simply lay out the facts? m understanding is simply lay out the facts? m1 understanding is that the terms of reference, which were set out for her superior, reference, which were set out for hersuperior, simon reference, which were set out for her superior, simon case, the cabinet secretary, the top civil servant — he was originally meant to be doing the inquiry, he recused himself and stood down because it was revealed that he had been at one party — so passed to her, she's an experienced civil servant and has dealt with ethics inquiries before. but those terms of reference, interestingly, said the inquiry should look into establishing the facts of what happened — that's a fairly limited thing— and possibly recommending any disciplinary action that might be taken against individuals. but within the code of conduct for ministers— the prime ministers office at one of those — that means it is the prime minister who would decide, johnson who would decide based on the facts found in the report what would happen. so crucially, the facts as she determines them will be very important. but that may be where it's very important about what johnson said today. what he did was he said he apologised, but he said he was apologising because he thought this was a work event, he believed implicitly, despite what some like keir starmer said. but he also then said that this was, the garden was an extension of the office, and the event could technically be said to fall within guidance, millions wouldn't see that way, and that's what he offered his apologies. his apologies for the way it could be seen, and the was a work place. now it may be the inquiry says those technicalities might be true, but whether that —— where that leaves the prime minister politically is very up in the air some point thank you very much. the headlines on bbc news... pressure is growing on the prime minister after he apologised for attending a minister after he apologised for attendin: . , attending a party in the downing street garden. _ attending a party in the downing street garden. he _ attending a party in the downing street garden. he claimed - attending a party in the downing street garden. he claimed at. attending a party in the downing| street garden. he claimed at the time that he thought it was a work event. the duke of york, prince andrew, will face charges after a us judge ruled her lawsuit against him can proceed. prince andrew has consistently denied all the allegations she's made. russia and nato held their first face—to—face talks after two years. prince andrew has failed to get a civil case dismissed in the united states which accuses him of sexually assaulting a teenage girl. virginia giuffre is suing the duke of york, claiming that he abused her when she was 17 at the homes ofjeffrey epstein and ghislaine maxwell. the prince has strenuously denied the allegations. but the ruling by the judge in new york today means the civil trial can now go ahead. 0ur royal correspondent nicholas witchell reports. everything for andrew had rested on this ruling — and it has gone against him. in his 43—page ruling in the case of virginia giuffre, plaintiff, and prince andrew, duke of york, defendant, the judge's conclusion was very straightforward. "the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint is denied in all respects," the judge wrote. the possibility of appealing at this stage appears to be remote, so these are andrew's basic options. he can settle out of court — there'd be no admission of liability, but he would pay a perhaps substantial sum to virginia giuffre. he can default — that is ignore the court case and by default they would be a finding against him. finally, he could fight it out in court. he would have to give a deposition under oath, lawyers who have been following the case say none of the options will be attractive to him. andrew has got no good options now. he can't make things better, so essentially, i think he's either going to have to engage in the trial process, or he's going to have to settle. that may well be his least worst option. but it would be up to virginia giuffre to decide whether to accept any article settlement. —— any out—of—court settlement. at the moment, she doesn't seem inclined to do so. in a statement, her lawyer said... all of which leaves andrew facing the prospect of a bruising court case, and the queen, in this, her platinum jubilee year, of enduring months of upset. in his newsnight interview, the one in which he said he couldn't remember meeting the then—i7—year—old virginia giuffre, andrew was asked whether he felt his behaviour had damaged the queen and the royal family. i don't believe it's been damaging to the queen at all. it has to me. if i was in a position to be able to answer all these questions in a way that gave sensible answers other than the ones that i've given that gave closure, i would love it, but i'm afraid i can't because i'm just as much in the dark as many people. if andrew does fight on, he'll have to answer all the other side's questions under oath and he will be able to declare his innocence and his lawyers will be able to test virginia giuffre's allegations. but at what price to the reputation of the royal family? as lawyers are saying, he has no good options. nicholas witchell, bbc news. 0ur north america correspondent nada tawfik is in new york. she told us what happens now. essentially this case moves forward. there is a long shot that his team could appeal, but that would require judge's permission — and that is not looking promising at all, given this 46 page decision. now even if an appeal attempt is made, the discovery process will move forward as scheduled with deadlines this summer. and that is the stage where each side must disclose a wealth of information and documents. we already know from virginia giuffre's lawyers that they have demanded prince andrew's medical records after he alleged that her claims are false because he's unable to sweat — claims he made in a jaw—dropping newsnight interview. and it's worth noting that if he does fight this case, he will face questioning from virginia giuffre's lawyer — considered one of the greatest trial lawyers in america. so while prince andrew has always denied the allegations, he now has some crucial legal decisions to make. 0ur royal correspondent nicholas witchell says there are no good options for prince andrew now. i think this is an absolutely monumental mass for andrew, and it's undoubtedly damaging for the royal family for i think the weight of opinion amongst lawyers would be that he would have to now seek an out—of—court settlement. and of course, an out—of—court settlement requires both sides to agree, to acquiesce, and there are certainly suggestions at the moment, whether it's for tactical reasons or not, that virginia giuffre wants her day in court. and all of this, three days now after buckingham palace confirmed the programme for the platinumjubilee. can confirmed the programme for the platinum jubilee. can we really suppose that we will have a platinum jubilee with the queen happily taking part in it, will still charge as of the serious nature, civil charges are laid against her second son and he's defending them in the autumn? and we suppose he'll take part in the trooping the colour, writing as colonel of the grenadier garden? well, they don't want him. we mark his repeated protestations of innocence, but i do think many people will now feel that it is time for him to withdraw gracefully and completely now. we can speak now to rachel k paulose, a law professor and former us attorney. thanks very much for being with us. let's talk about what happens next— can you explain a bit more about this process of disclosure that would happen in proceedings like these? , , , ., these? yes, it is very important to understand — these? yes, it is very important to understand that the _ these? yes, it is very important to understand that the judge has - understand that the judge has assumed that all of virginia giuffre's accusations are accurately correct. so she has prevailed as a matter of law in establishing that she has legal claims against prince andrew. the next stage requires her to prove that the facts that she alleges are actually true — so the fact that she alleges regarding specific abuse at specific places under specific circumstances, as the judge described it today, must be tested through the civil discovery process. in other words, tested through the civil discovery process. in otherwords, most likely will be moving into an exchange of documents and civil depositions, which is testimony under oath. find which is testimony under oath. and is prince andrew, in these circumstances, obliged to make a deposition of his own? 0r circumstances, obliged to make a deposition of his own? or could he ignore that? if deposition of his own? or could he ignore that?— ignore that? if he ignores any notice from _ ignore that? if he ignores any notice from the _ ignore that? if he ignores any notice from the court, - ignore that? if he ignores any notice from the court, he - ignore that? if he ignores any| notice from the court, he does ignore that? if he ignores any - notice from the court, he does so at his own peril. under american law, he is obliged to answer and cooperate with the civiljustice system. cooperate with the civil “ustice s stem. �* , ., , ., ., system. and in terms of the standard of roof, system. and in terms of the standard of proof, obviously _ system. and in terms of the standard of proof, obviously it's _ system. and in terms of the standard of proof, obviously it's lower - system. and in terms of the standard of proof, obviously it's lower than - of proof, obviously it's lower than in a criminal case, so it's not beyond a reasonable doubt. what is the standard of proof required here? in a civil lawsuit, the standard of proof is that the plaintiff, miss giuffre, must prove her allegations by a preponderance of the evidence. it is typically thought of as by 51% — whereas beyond a reasonable doubt is the highest standard of american law, which is reserved specifically for only criminal cases. in this situation, prince andrew is facing a civil lawsuit, the burden of proof is on miss roberts, miss giuffre, and it is by preponderance of the evidence. �* ., ., ., , evidence. and who would rule on this in the end? — evidence. and who would rule on this in the end? is — evidence. and who would rule on this in the end? is this _ evidence. and who would rule on this in the end? is this the _ evidence. and who would rule on this in the end? is this the sort of- evidence. and who would rule on this in the end? is this the sort of case i in the end? is this the sort of case in the end? is this the sort of case in new york that would go before a jury, orwould in new york that would go before a jury, or would it be a matterfor a singlejudge sitting a jury, or would it be a matterfor a single judge sitting a loan dashed alone? , ., ., alone? the parties are entitled to resent alone? the parties are entitled to present their _ alone? the parties are entitled to present their case _ alone? the parties are entitled to present their case in _ alone? the parties are entitled to present their case in front - alone? the parties are entitled to present their case in front of - alone? the parties are entitled to present their case in front of a - present their case in front of a jury. laypeople, however, if both people agree it could be a judge trial, it will be held in front of a judge instead. trial, it will be held in front of a judge instead-— trial, it will be held in front of a judge instead. what are the risks for prince andrew _ judge instead. what are the risks for prince andrew in _ judge instead. what are the risks for prince andrew in terms - judge instead. what are the risks for prince andrew in terms of - judge instead. what are the risks| for prince andrew in terms of this process? for prince andrew in terms of this rocess? ~ a for prince andrew in terms of this rocess? ~ r’, ., process? well, the risks are enormous — process? well, the risks are enormous and _ process? well, the risks are enormous and the _ process? well, the risks are i enormous and the reputational process? well, the risks are _ enormous and the reputational damage done to the monarchy under prince andrew are already significant. the longer this lawsuit drags out, the longer this lawsuit drags out, the longer he continues to make statements that some people view as not credible, the greater the risk of his standing as a royal, as well as his future financial security. among the disclosure that miss giuffre's lawyers are reportedly asking for evidence about the prince's health — what is she seeking there? prince's health - what is she seeking there?— prince's health - what is she seeking there? prince's health - what is she seekin: there? . �* . ., seeking there? prince andrew claim did an interview _ seeking there? prince andrew claim did an interview that _ seeking there? prince andrew claim did an interview that he _ seeking there? prince andrew claim did an interview that he does not. did an interview that he does not sweat, and he made other claims as well— so very likely they are seeking more evidence regarding what his capacities are, and what his physical fitness is. the his capacities are, and what his physical fitness is.— his capacities are, and what his physical fitness is. the only way presumably _ physical fitness is. the only way presumably of _ physical fitness is. the only way presumably of avoiding - physical fitness is. the only way presumably of avoiding this - physical fitness is. the only way - presumably of avoiding this process of disclosure now, given the judge has ruled that he's satisfied her case is sufficient to proceed and that she has grounds to sue him, is that she has grounds to sue him, is that he could settle with miss giuffre. what do you think prospects of that are? after all, she settled with mr epstein. she of that are? after all, she settled with mr epstein.— of that are? after all, she settled with mr epstein. she did settle with mr e stein, with mr epstein. she did settle with mr epstein. and _ with mr epstein. she did settle with mr epstein, and she _ with mr epstein. she did settle with mr epstein, and she has _ with mr epstein. she did settle with mr epstein, and she has not - mr epstein, and she has not indicated yet that she will require prince andrew to go to trial. so the door is still open for settlement talks. as well, prince andrew could file a motion for re—judgment, which is a renewed judgment where all the facts come in to have the judge determined that the facts do not meet the standard required under american law. 50 meet the standard required under american law— american law. so grateful for you settin: american law. so grateful for you setting that _ american law. so grateful for you setting that out _ american law. so grateful for you setting that out so _ american law. so grateful for you setting that out so clearly - american law. so grateful for you setting that out so clearly for - american law. so grateful for you setting that out so clearly for us. | setting that out so clearly for us. thank you for your time.- setting that out so clearly for us. thank you for your time. thank you. breakina thank you for your time. thank you. breaking news - _ thank you for your time. thank you. breaking news - conservative - thank you for your time. thank you. breaking news - conservative mps l breaking news — conservative mps have been meeting for their regular gathering at westminster following the prime minister's apology this lunchtime and his appearance in the tea rooms soliciting and storing up support for his continued leadership of the conservative party. we've had this tweet from the chancellor of the exchequer in the last few minutes, saying... that the investigation that damien graham atticus was telling us about just a few minutes ago. that tweet from the chancellor, at least according to many mps, would be a great candidate for to succeed mr johnson. nato's secretary general has warned there's still a real risk of new armed conflict in europe, after talks in brussels with russia left significant differences unresolved. jens stoltenberg said the western alliance was ready for more discussions over the buiild up of russian troops on the border with ukraine. 0ur defence correspondent jonathan beale spoke with him a little earlier we are undera we are under a dangerous situation, therefore i think it is dangerous to special speculate. therefore i think it is dangerous to specialspeculate. but therefore i think it is dangerous to special speculate. but we are clear about the possibility for an armed conflict. but also it is extreme important that we meet, sit down, and are able to address russia to find a political way forward. thank ou ve find a political way forward. thank you very much. — find a political way forward. thankl you very much, secretary-general. and our defence correspondent jonathan bealejoins me now from brussels. these talks are significant, they come about because russia demanded them — does that put president putin on the front foot? to them - does that put president putin on the front foot?— on the front foot? to be honest, i think it's as _ on the front foot? to be honest, i think it's as much _ on the front foot? to be honest, i think it's as much is _ on the front foot? to be honest, i think it's as much is nato - on the front foot? to be honest, i think it's as much is nato wanting j think it's as much is nato wanting these talks. remember, there hasn't been a meeting of the nato russia council for more than two years. nato has expelled some russian diplomats, saying they were spying, then russia closed down its mission at nato. so they always wanted to talk to russia. but you are right, we had the choreography of the us talking with russia earlier this week in geneva — again, no breakthrough. the talks here in brussels between nato, all 30 members, went on for four hours— longer than predicted, that said, again, no breakthrough. neitherside appears willing to blink on the key demands. now for nato, they do not agree with russia's demands to halt the expansion of the alliance, to allow member states to join nato would like, for example, ukraine. as far as nato is concerned, they want russia to de—escalate — no indication russia will do that. remember, russia has got around 100,000 troops on ukraine's border, those forces slowly being built up, and nato wants to see those forces going. but they are not at the moment. so no breakthrough there. the one glimmer of hope, bearing what you just heard earlier, was that you must be cleared i dashed clear eyed about the real risk of a new conflict in europe. he's made proposals for continuing the talks— these are not on key issues, but some of the issues surrounding tensions that exist, for example, on more transparency about military exercises, arms control. so diplomacy is not dead, but again, confrontation and the possibility of conflict, of war is not off the table either. in conflict, of war is not off the table either.— table either. in terms of the prospects for _ table either. in terms of the prospects for the _ table either. in terms of the prospects for the rest - table either. in terms of the prospects for the rest of - table either. in terms of the prospects for the rest of the table either. in terms of the - prospects for the rest of the week, talks are happening with a number of different partners, what is the best that you think britain hopes to get out of this? we had some very tough words from the foreign secretary today, saying if there is any further military action, we will push back against it — though she said not militarily, but economically.- said not militarily, but economically. said not militarily, but economicall . ~ , ., economically. as you say, there are more talks — economically. as you say, there are more talks tomorrow _ economically. as you say, there are more talks tomorrow in _ economically. as you say, there are more talks tomorrow in vienna, - economically. as you say, there are more talks tomorrow in vienna, the osce that will lead those talks. as 0sce that will lead those talks. as i said, diplomacy isn't dead. i think we heard also a clear message — if russia did invade ukraine, there would be a military response in the sense of bolstering the defences on nato's eastern flanks. we've already seen after russia invaded ukraine, troops from the uk and us go to the baltic states and poland, and the suggestion clearly that if russia did invade ukraine, that if russia did invade ukraine, that those defences would be strengthened. so they are looking at their military options, but clearly their military options, but clearly the focus is on hitting russia hard if they did invade ukraine with economic sanctions. jonathan, thanks very much- — now it's time for a look at the weather with stav danaos. hello there. there was quite a bit of sunshine around today, particularly across england and wales. but as we go through the next few days, we'll start to see some issues with mist and fog — very dense fog across parts of england and wales, which could cause travel issues. but with high pressure always nearby, it's going to stay largely dry and settled for many of us. fog patches will develop across parts of england and wales tonight, really dense patches in places. further north we will have more cloud, more breeze so less cold cold here, slightly less cold air moving in off the atlantic, but it's going to be cold further south with the widespread frost. it's high pressure with us for thursday, very light wind across the south, breezier here though for the north of scotland. those winds coming in from the west and southwest. so again, a breezy, cloudy day here, the odd spot of rain. further south, more sunshine around but cold, and we'll have those fog patches. some of them will be stubborn and linger all day in places. elsewhere will stay sunny. temperature wise, 6—8 degrees, cold in that weather, fog lingers but mild in the north. hello this is bbc news. the headlines. pressure grows on the prime minister, after he apologises for attendeding a party in the downing street garden, but claims at the time he thought it was a work event. eyes certainly wish that things had happened differently on the evening of may the 20th, mr speaker. i apologise for all misjudgments that have been made for which i take full responsibility. have been made for which i take full responsibility-— responsibility. when the whole country was — responsibility. when the whole country was locked _ responsibility. when the whole country was locked down - responsibility. when the whole country was locked down he i responsibility. when the whole l country was locked down he was hosting — country was locked down he was hosting boozy parties in downing street _ hosting boozy parties in downing street is— hosting boozy parties in downing street. is he now could he do the decent _ street. is he now could he do the decent thing and resign? the duke of york will face a civil trial over allegations he sexually assaulted virginia giuffre when she was underage, after a usjudge ruled her lawsuit against him can proceed. ms giuffre claims the prince sexually abused her on three occasions. prince andrew has consistently denied the allegations against him. he is effectively a dead man walking as far as the royal family is concerned. the monday and he can do is to accept the responsibility, accept the blame, except that he has to fall on his sward. russia and nato hold their first face to face talks in two years, as tensions remain high over the build—up of russian troops on the border with ukraine. and soaring energy costs could affect household bills for the next two years warns the boss of the uk's biggest energy supplier. back to our main story now and for the first time borisjohnson has admitted attending a drinks event in the garden of downing street during the first lockdown of the pandemic. speaking at prime minister's questions, mrjohnson apologised and acknowledged there were things the government "simply did not get right" but he insisted he thought the gathering in may 2020 was related to work. before the question session got under way, the prime minister made this statement to a packed house: under way, the prime minister made mr under way, the prime minister made speaker, i wa know mr speaker, i want to apologise. i know that millions of people across this country have made extraordinary sacrifices over the last 18 months. i know the anguish they have been through, unable to mourn their relatives, unable to live their lives as they want or to do the things they love. and i knew the rage they feel with me and with the government i lead when they think that in downing street itself the rules are not being properly followed by the people who make the rules. and though i cannot anticipate the conclusions of the current inquiry i have learned enough to know that there were things we simply did not get right. and i must take responsibility. number ten is a big department with the garden as an extension of the office. which is been in constant use because it the role of fresh air and stopping the virus. and when i went into the garden on the six of the 20th of may 2020 two thanked groups of staff before going back into my office 25 minutes later to continue working i believed implicitly that this was a work event. but mr speaker, with hindsight i should have sent everyone back inside, i should've found some other way to thank them and i should've recognised that even if it could be said technically to fall within the guidance, there would be millions and millions of people who simply would not see it that way. people who suffered terribly, people who were up from eating love ones at all in side or outside and to them and to this house i offer my heartfelt apologies and all i ask is that sue grey be allowed to complete her inquiry into the day and several others so that the day and several others so that the full facts can be established. i will of course come back to the south and make a statement. i will of course come back to the south and make a statement. labour leader sir keir starmer told the commons that borisjohnson's defence was �*ridiculous' and he should do the �*decent thing'. mr mr speaker so we've got the prime minister attending downing street parties, a clear breach of the rules. we've got the prime minister putting forward a series of ridiculous denials which he knows are untrue. a clear breach of the ministerial code. that code says ministers who knowingly mislead parliament will be expected to offer their resignation. the party is over prime minister. the only question is, will the british public kick him out, will his party kick him out overly do the decent thing and resign? the scottish tory leader douglas ross has called for the prime minister to stand down and mr ross has since been publicly backed by the majority of scottish conservative msps after he admitted attending a party thrown in the downing street garden during lockdown isaid i said yesterday that if the prime minister attended this gathering on the 20th of may last year, if he was there after the invasion went out inviting them to bring their own booze and come to the downing street garden that he continued to in you. that would also in the house of commons he's excepted and admitted he was there. he's also apologise for that. and crucially for me he said in hindsight if he had this time and again he would've done things differently. that to me is an acceptance from the prime minister that he had drawn. to be consistent with that said before i believe his position as prime minister in the conservative party is tenable and he does need to resign. and he does the conservative chair of the public affairs and constitutional affairs committee told bbc radio 4's pm programme that the prime minister's position was "untenable" and that he should resign. unfortunately, i wasn't reassured. unfortunately, iwasn't reassured. i fear this— unfortunately, iwasn't reassured. i fear this is— unfortunately, iwasn't reassured. i fear this is simply going to be a continuing _ fear this is simply going to be a continuing distraction to the good governance of the country. and i'm pa rticuia riy — governance of the country. and i'm particularly concerned as a conservative mp that with the interests of the country, my constituency and the conservative party— constituency and the conservative party that — constituency and the conservative party that a series of unforced errors— party that a series of unforced errors on— party that a series of unforced errors on matters of integrity are deeply— errors on matters of integrity are deeply damaging to the perception of my colleagues and the party. and that is— my colleagues and the party. and that is deeply unfair to them. as colleagues are saying to one another and off— colleagues are saying to one another and off the _ colleagues are saying to one another and off the record, i sadly think that the — and off the record, i sadly think that the prime ministers position is untenable — that the prime ministers position is untenable. i don't believe it should be left _ untenable. idon't believe it should be left to— untenable. i don't believe it should be left to the findings of a civil servant — be left to the findings of a civil servant to _ be left to the findings of a civil servant to determine the future of the prime — servant to determine the future of the prime minister and servant to determine the future of the prime ministerand indeed servant to determine the future of the prime minister and indeed who governs _ the prime minister and indeed who governs this country. i think it is for the _ governs this country. i think it is for the conservative party, if not the prime — for the conservative party, if not the prime minister in fact to make that decision and to realise what is in the _ that decision and to realise what is in the best— that decision and to realise what is in the best interests so that we can move _ in the best interests so that we can move forward both as a party and a country _ during an interview at the palace of westminster, the deputy prime minister dominic raab says that he neither attended or knew about the party he went on to support how the prime minister had gone about delivering his apology in the commons. the prime ministers come to the house of common given it very clear account, taking questions on this, he's been clear that he believed he was acting in accordance of the rules at the time. but of course understands that those in power it not following the rules and others are required to do. particularly those who have been troops hardship or lost loved ones. that's what he's apologised in relation to all the details and claims i think it's right as he was saying today the house of commons that sucre has given the time to conduct that investigation, there will be a full accounting of the prime minister will come back to the house of commons. will come back to the house of commons-— will come back to the house of commons. ., �* , ., commons. that's the right way to handle this- _ commons. that's the right way to handle this. at _ commons. that's the right way to handle this. at what _ commons. that's the right way to handle this. at what other - commons. that's the right way to handle this. at what other line i commons. that's the right way to handle this. at what other line of| handle this. at what other line of employment would you be allowed to bring booze to your work meeting? you're making suppositions about the various kinds of questions in... that's precisely why sucre a very senior civil servant and has been tasked to it conduct the independent investigation to make sure that all those questions can be answered in a way that is clear, transparent and open. how's it going down on the doorstep? 0ur political correspondent, alex forsyth, has been to the west midlands to find out how voters are feeling after borisjohnson admitted he had joined no ten staff for the drinks. mr speaker, i want to apologise. prime minister's questions isn't usually a blockbuster event at this boutique cafe on the outskirts of wolverhampton but, today, some staff did stop to watch. silly boris. all conservative supporters, they were keen to hear what the prime minister had to say. but for millie, it didn't cut it. i'm angry. i think he's broke the rules. everyone who's broke the rules in government have resigned, i and i do think it's time he needs to resign, personally. _ i think he's broke the rules and i |think that's what he's got to do. j her colleagues, though, think he deserves another chance, though they are frustrated. kind of could almost excuse the christmas event but this, like, a0 people in a garden, no. that's not a work meeting, or event. i'm angry with him, because it's bad because i really liked him. i thought he was doing a good job. i'm not angry about what's happened, i'm disappointed that they've - had to admit to this. i think all the goodwill they've i built up is beginning to fade away. i'm still a big supporter, _ but i think the mood of the country is turning against them. just over two years ago, this part of wolverhampton turned to the conservatives from labour, as borisjohnson toppled seats across the midlands and north of england. now some tories worry what this politically toxic issue will cost. some people who voted conservative for the first time at the last general election say it was the fact boris johnson wasn't like other politicians. he didn't play by the same rules as others — that was part of his appeal. now it's that same sense that, for some, is causing such anger. i can't stand him, really. how much longer can he go on saying sorry? so many times. he isn't really sorry, is he? he wanted to say thankl you for all the hard work that was done and i understand that, but in the light of what was - going on in everybody else's home, i mean, j you know, there's a lot of people that i would have liked _ to say thank you to, _ but we weren't allowed to gather. outside the city centre, retailer mark says he was well supported by the government during the pandemic, but now he is frustrated that well his business was locked up, others were meeting up. i do feel quite angry about it, really, the way that we've kind of been almost mistreated in a way and kind of, you know, disregarded a little bit really. you know, i think a lot of local small businesses are very hard—working, so it's almost like a kick in the teeth a little bit really. winning in places like this is the reason borisjohnson's been popular within his party. be in no doubt, if the voters turn away, that support will soon fade too. alex forsyth, bbc news, wolverhampton. the boss of the company which owns british gas has warned that soaring energy costs could affect household bills for the next two years. bills are expected to rise to up to two thousand pounds per household from april when a new energy price cap takes effect. the chief executive of centrica, chris 0'shea, says there's no suggestion that prices will come down any time soon. our business editor, simonjack, has been speaking to him. millions of households may see any disposable income go up in flames this spring, as average energy bills rise by an estimated 50%. households like sean's, in the forest of dean. and we're not talking 5,10,15 quid here. this is catastrophic, really, for me, as i will have no more money in my personal income to do anything. this wipes out my spare money. we'll have nothing left. this is no short—term price shock, according to the uk's biggest energy supplier, who says an international scramble for gas means higher prices are here to stay. i can't say that this will be done in six months or nine months, in a year. i can simply look at what the market says at the moment, and the market suggests the high gas prices will be here for the next 18 months to two years. he says customers are rightly concerned, and something must be done to protect them. when i talk to our customers and i hear how distressed they are at the increase in prices that are coming, then i think it's inconceivable that we don't do something to help those people. and when he says "we", he, like other providers, is looking mainly at the government. options for the treasury include scrapping vat of 5% on energy bills. that will be worth about £100 a year. quick, easy, but blunt. better—off households would benefit too. more targeted, reform the warm home discount — a one—off payment of £140, available to a limited number of people on certain benefits. make that more generous and widen the eligibility. and there are green charges on our bills of £170 a year. you could scrap those, or move them into general taxation. maybe fairer, because higher earners would pay more. and how to pay for all of this? maybe a windfall tax on the gas producers making big profits as prices soar. chancellors, both conservative and labour, have done it before. that would deter investment in domestic gas sources like the north sea, says 0'shea. one way or another, the uk's rising energy bill has to be paid. ultimately, everybody in the uk is a taxpayer and an energy cofisuttiei'. so, the cost of this is going to have to be paid by uk citizens. the question as to whether that's paid for through the energy bill or through general taxation is one for the government. the government has promised answers before the new price cap is set in early—february. simon jack, bbc news. at the headlines. pressure grows on the prime minister, after he apologises for attendeding a party in the downing street garden, but claims at the time he thought it was a work event. the duke of york will face a civil trial over allegations he sexually assaulted virginia giuffre when she was underage, after a usjudge ruled her lawsuit against him can proceed. prince andrew has consistently denied the allegations against him. russia and nato hold their first face to face talks in two years, as tensions remain high over the build—up of russian troops on the border with ukraine. an update on the market numbers more trouble for the prime minister for vip for awarding contracts for personal protection equipment at the height of the pandemic was unlawful. the campaigning group that brought the case argued that two companies were given lucrative deals because of their connections. 0ur correspondent, lucy manning, has more: well, this is all about the enormous amount of money the government spent, especially the first stage of the pandemic, on things like masks and aprons and overalls for staff in hospitals on the front line. and the bbc and others reported that some of that couldn't be used, some of it had failed safety tests, and money was being spent that didn't necessarily have to be spent. the government was taken to the high court about this vip lane. what this meant was, if you had a company that thought you could get masks and other equipment and if you knew a minister or an mp or civil servant, they would put you on to essentially what was a fast track lane. and people said that was unfair, that other companies didn't get the same chances. so, two campaign groups — every doctor and the good law project — took the government to the high court about this, about specific contracts that were given to two companies. the high court this morning decided that that vip lane was unlawful. they said that it had given earlier consideration to some companies, it was better resourced, it was able to respond to offers on the day that they arrived and that was in breach of the law and it was unlawful. so, that's not great for the government and certainly, in court, there were tales about how some of the equipment couldn't be used and we understand that still some masks haven't been able to be used in the nhs and other pieces of equipment. where it did come down in favour of the government, this ruling, it said that even though this vip lane shouldn't have been used, the two companies still would have got these contracts, even if they hadn't gone down the vip route, because they were offering so much in terms of volume of ppe equipment. but it's not a great result for the government and again, i guess, feeds into this idea that if you knew, if you were well connected to the government, then you could get your offers seen quicker by those who were deciding on these multi—million pound deals. interest has been made... in the unsolved murders of three british family members and a french cyclist who were shot dead in the alps in 2012. saad al hilli, his wife iqbal, and her mother, suhaila al allaf, were killed as they drove through the french alps. their two daughters survived the attack. the cyclist, sylvain mollier, was also found shot dead. let's return to the story of that legal action against prince andrew. joining is now the us attorney gloria allred who represents a number of the alleged victims of jeffrey epstein. it's very good to have your time. thank you very much for speaking with us. let me ask you first, what did you make of the judges decision today? it’s first, what did you make of the judges decision today?- first, what did you make of the judges decision today? it's a 40 for .a i e judges decision today? it's a 40 for -a . e lona judges decision today? it's a 40 for page long decision _ judges decision today? it's a 40 for page long decision but _ judges decision today? it's a 40 for page long decision but i _ judges decision today? it's a 40 for page long decision but i think i judges decision today? it's a 40 for page long decision but i think he i page long decision but i think he was correct in his analysis of prince andrews motion to dismiss virginia's lawsuit against him. the major issue, although not the only issue had to do with whether or not virginia and jeffrey epstein in the settlement which they reached in 2009 release prince andrew from any claims or lawsuit that virginia might file against them. bottom line is thejudge found might file against them. bottom line is the judge found that it was ambiguous in terms of the resection of the settlement. and that prince andrew who is not specifically named as someone who was to be released from any additional claims or claims prior to that date of settlement that he is not covered by that release. so that means that the lawsuit by virginia against prince andrew can continue. that also means thejudge was saying andrew can continue. that also means the judge was saying he's not drawing any conclusions as to whether or not what virginia alleges against prince andrew is true or not. he was simply deciding a motion to dismiss. so whether it's true or not will be decided by a jury later on. if it reaches that point and if the case is not settled prior to that. ~ ., , ,, the case is not settled prior to that. . ., , y., ., that. what is yourjudgment on the that. what is your 'udgment on the possibility of — that. what is your 'udgment on the possibiiity of a — that. what is yourjudgment on the possibility of a solomon _ that. what is yourjudgment on the possibility of a solomon could i that. what is yourjudgment on the possibility of a solomon could not. possibility of a solomon could not after all virginia giuffre did settle with jeffrey epstein. yes, she did. cases _ settle with jeffrey epstein. yes, she did. cases can _ settle with jeffrey epstein. yes, she did. cases can settle i settle with jeffrey epstein. yes, she did. cases can settle at i settle with jeffrey epstein. isis she did. cases can settle at any time. in some cases settled before a lawsuit is even filed. we don't know whether there was in an effort to settle this case with prince andrew prior to virginia filing the lawsuit. that would be confidential if there were settlement discussions. but even after a lawsuit, a settlement could be reached at any point but both sides would have to agree on what the settlement would include. so we don't know whether prince andrew would even be interested in any settlement and if he were interested, we don't know if virginia would be interested. and if she were interested how much she would demand in order to agree to a settlement. there is risk on the part of both parties but we will have to wait and see how they assess that risk. for now the lawsuit is going forward. prince andrew will have to answer it at some point he will have to answer written questions under oath called interrogatories put up at another point he will have to appear for his deposition which could be taken in the uk and there he will have to raise his hand and testify under oath to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help them god. and then he will have to answer any questions that are asked. and that will be recorded on video, there'll be a video recording of the deposition and a court reporter will be there and she will create a transcript of his testimony, under oath which can be used later, potentially at trial if he does not testify or appear for trial. in he does not testify or appear for trial. , ., he does not testify or appear for trial. ,., ., ,., trial. in the point about not testifying. _ trial. in the point about not testifying, that _ trial. in the point about not testifying, that removes i trial. in the point about not| testifying, that removes the cross—examination? testifying, that removes the cross-examination? if cross-examination? what, . .. if ou're cross-examination? what, . .. if you're not _ cross-examination? what, . .. if you're not they _ cross-examination? what, . .. if you're not they are _ cross-examination? what, . .. if you're not they are the - cross-examination? what, . .. if you're not they are the others l cross-examination? what, . .. if you're not they are the others i | cross-examination? what,... if- you're not they are the others i can challenge your answers. ihe you're not they are the others i can challenge your answers.— challenge your answers. he is going to be challenged _ challenge your answers. he is going to be challenged at _ challenge your answers. he is going to be challenged at the _ challenge your answers. he is going to be challenged at the deposition. | to be challenged at the deposition. so it's not going to be in easy time for him, it can be very uncomfortable for him. just to clari , uncomfortable for him. just to clarify. when _ uncomfortable for him. just to clarify, when you _ uncomfortable for him. just to clarify, when you say - uncomfortable for him. just to clarify, when you say you i uncomfortable for him. just to clarify, when you say you can l uncomfortable for him. just to l clarify, when you say you can be challenged at the deposition, somebody representing ms. giuffre would be present whether it's in your court or london? absolutely. it ma be your court or london? absolutely. it may be david _ your court or london? absolutely. it may be david boyes _ your court or london? absolutely. it may be david boyes on _ your court or london? absolutely. it may be david boyes on behalf i your court or london? absolutely. it may be david boyes on behalf of i your court or london? absolutely. it may be david boyes on behalf of his| may be david boyes on behalf of his client virginia giuffre will be asking the question at the deposition or it may be another member of his legal team. also, prince andrew has the right to take the deposition of virginia giuffre. and the princes attorney, whom i do know and who has been the opposing counsel on many of my cases he will be asking virginia questions. he will be asking and they're very aggressive manner. so we will have to and see. we will have to wait and see that if the prince things at any point he wants to assert or thinks he has the right to assert against self—incrimination and declined to answer certain questions, we will have to wait and see whether that happens, we don't know. i'm sure there will be objections on both sides to whoever is testifying to questions that are asked. that's an intri . uini questions that are asked. that's an intriguing possibility _ questions that are asked. that's an intriguing possibility for _ intriguing possibility for the pleading the fifth when you're not even an american citizen. it's a fascinating thought you raise. can i ask you another, a bit cheeky? if you are his lawyer, what would you advise? i you are his lawyer, what would you advise? ., �* , ., , advise? i wouldn't be as lawyer i represent _ advise? i wouldn't be as lawyer i represent victims _ advise? i wouldn't be as lawyer i represent victims i _ advise? i wouldn't be as lawyer i represent victims i only - advise? i wouldn't be as lawyer i l represent victims i only represent those who are accused. i don't give advice to those who have been accused of engaging in sexual misconduct.— accused of engaging in sexual misconduct. ~ ., ., misconduct. what about your 'udgment then? presumably, i misconduct. what about your 'udgment then? presumably, we i misconduct. what about yourjudgment then? presumably, we should - misconduct. what about yourjudgment then? presumably, we should be i misconduct. what about yourjudgment then? presumably, we should be clear| then? presumably, we should be clear this is a civil case, that means a standard of proof is lower, do you think there are circumstances in which a judgment in herfavour think there are circumstances in which a judgment in her favour would cause the criminal authorities to take an interest in these allegations? the allegations date back sometime. find allegations? the allegations date back sometime.— back sometime. and you are absolutely — back sometime. and you are absolutely correct. _ back sometime. and you are absolutely correct. first i back sometime. and you are absolutely correct. first of l back sometime. and you are i absolutely correct. first of all, you're right about the burden of proof, it is much less in a civil case was that it is the lowest burden of proof, it's called preponderance of evidence. if she is seeking punitive damages, damages to punish then it would be the next highest burden of proof which is called clear and convincing evidence. but a criminal cases right appear, the prosecutor would have to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. and not a lot of evidence in order to convict and potentially deprive somebody of their liberty. so right now there is no criminal charge against prince andrew. we don't know whether there ever will be. we don't know whether it would even beat within the time period set by law to proceed with the criminal case even if there was enough evidence and the prosecutors mind to proceed with the case. there are many unknowns. for now the princes denying the allegations and we will have to wait and see what happens. tbs, have to wait and see what happens. a real pleasure to speak with you. thank you very much for allowing us to probe your thoughts on this given all your decades of experience on the law on this. time for a look at the weather. hello there. there was quite a bit of sunshine around today, particularly across england and wales. but as we go through the next few days, we'll start to see some issues with mist and fog — very dense fog across parts of england and wales, which could cause travel issues. but with high pressure always nearby, it's going to stay largely dry and settled for many of us. fog patches will develop across parts of england and wales tonight, really dense patches in places. further north we will have more cloud, more breeze so less cold cold here, slightly less cold air moving in off the atlantic, but it's going to be cold further south with the widespread frost. it's high pressure with us for thursday, very light wind across the south, breezier here though for the north of scotland. those winds coming in from the west and southwest. so again, a breezy, cloudy day here, the odd spot of rain. further south, more sunshine around but cold, and we'll have those fog patches. some of them will be stubborn and linger all day in places. elsewhere will stay sunny. temperature wise, 6—8 degrees, cold in that weather, fog lingers but mild in the north. hello, i'm christian fraser. you're watching context on bbc news. the british prime minister says he did attend a downing street party while the rest of the country was in lockdown — and he apologises. borisjohnson tells the house he was at drinks with downing street staff for 25 minutes, but still insists that "technically" it didn't break the rules. i regret the way the event i have described was handled. i bitterly regret it and wish that we could have done things differently, and i will continue to apologise for what we did. the party's over, prime minister. the only question is, will the british public kick him out, will his party kick him out, or will he do the decent thing and resign? cheering prince andrew will face a civil trial in the united states over