of the past in the house of commons? we'll have the latest on the dress code which could leave some breathing easier. welcome to the programme. i am in washington, christian fraser is in london. the pentagon is concerned that north korea's nuclear programme has advanced so quickly, they are no longer able to monitor it effectively. intelligence experts believe that, very soon, pyongyang will have a nuclear weapon capable of reaching the western seaboard of the united states. that is forcing a rethink in the white house. the president recently suggested china's attempts to put pressure on pyongyang has failed. so what is the right way forward? nobody wants to consider a military option but one is being prepared nonetheless. what we see now is really two fundamental things have changed. one is the threat is much more immediate now and so it's clear that we can't repeat the same approach, failed approach, of the past. and the second is the recognition that previous approaches have not worked and so the definition of insanity would be to continue to do the same thing and expect a different result. tonight donald trump will meet the new south korean president moon jae—in at the white house. the two countries are closely aligned. there are over 20,000 american troops on the korean peninsula. both men want an end to north korea's nuclear programme but they disagree on how to get there. and in recent months the alliance has been strained. and joining us now is christopher hill, who formerly served as us ambassador to south korea and is currently dean of the international studies school at the university of denver. we often hear the north korean programme is advancing more quickly than we thought beforehand. is there something new in the intelligence? they are referring to engine tests on missiles, that they have managed successfully to start testing this new generation of solid feel rockets. an abundance of caution. there is an expectation that in the next couple of years we may have a deliverable north korean nuclear missile and that presents huge challenges for the united states and presents questions about the degree to which the us would be prepared to get into a war on the korean peninsula if that were could include attacks on the us mainland with nuclear weapons. we are getting to a no kidding period of time and the president bet heavily on china and what he has seen is that china has been encouraging north korea to come back to talks but in no way does that mean that north korea has indicated that they will give up their nuclear weapons as they did before or that they plan to negotiate elimination of nuclear weapons. there is a very serious problem and the administration is quite concerned about what to do with it and now comes the planned new south korean president who has indicated mod of an interest and somehow having talks with the north koreans, talks about talks, and that is not a very robust response. certainly not in the way this administration likes to look at things. the focus will be on the alliance between the us and south korea. for decades to have had thousands of troops on the peninsula but is there a point when this nuclear capability goes so far that what takes president says america's domestic influence? does it become a domestic influence? does it become a domestic debate? it becomes more so but i do not think it ever becomes exclusively so. it is inconceivable for the us to take military action without working together with its south korean ally. if it comes to some kind of military action they need the south koreans and 20 million south koreans live within range of north korean artillery so any type of decision to move mullet early would probably involve some kind of civilian evacuations and it is not clear that the south koreans are prepared for these kind of steps as yet. what is important about this meeting is if they are going to have to establish a good relationship with south korean want to show they can manage the american relationship but also wants to appoint the americans with some of their special problems that are different with the problems that are different with the problems of the us several thousand miles away. it was just last week president trump tweeted: does that suggest that the president has a different strategy, that he has a different strategy, that he has pitched the idea that chinese could be the way to tame north korea? it is premature to say that. he is trying to respond to criticism especially within the republican party that somehow he has been duped by the chinese. he wants to be able to say i am disappointed as well but at least they are trying as opposed to others. he is trying to manage that and double down on china. that said he needs to and will feel he needs to look beyond china to solve this because it is clear the way china is talking is to somehow have the freeze for freeze, if they can get north korea to freeze these things maybe we can freeze ourjoint exercises with south korea, and that is not a dog that is going to hunt in washington. thank you. there are no good military options but no certainty diplomacy will work either. the white house has some scepticism about the diplomacy. yes. the great bromance, the white house setting stall that china could be answer. officials saying that the administration is proposing more trade sanctions against china. this week the state department have put china on a list of countries that are guilty of human trafficking. i wondered if you would have seen that list, out at the beginning of the administration. there are not very many other good options. the national security adviser said we are still going to try to cooperate with china. once again we are in a situation where an you make sense of it, messages coming out of the administration when it comes to china and north korea are modelled. the south koreans are worried about it. i was looking about the research. 88% of south koreans in favour of the job that barack obama was doing and i7% have confidence in donald trump. no doubt they are worried about it. after months of court battles, parts of donald trump's travel ban finally come into effect tonight. on monday, the supreme court partially upheld his executive order, restricting travel from six mainly muslim countries. there is an exception for those with "a credible claim of a bona fide relationship". those with business or educational ties are also exempt. so will this make the country safer? joining us now is republican congressman will hurd who sits on the intelligence committee and formerly served in the cia. you know from your claim and the cia that america works closely with countries like iraq and syria with civilians and military members of those countries and they need those people to translate them, to help protect them in those countries. to what extent does this undermine america's security and a sense in countries like iraq and syria?” america's security and a sense in countries like iraq and syria? i was originally against the travel ban in its initialforum just originally against the travel ban in its initial forum just for that reason and when it comes to iraq and syria the people that we are fighting shoulder to shoulder with our iraqis and syrians. this changed travel ban, if you have a relationship already, so if you are a translator, if you are going to school, you will be allowed to continue to come to the country. it addresses some of the biggest concerns we had which was making sure those that are being helpful to our country are allowed to come back and forth. the way that we are going to solve the problem of security in our homeland and making sure we are defending our borders is by improving information exchange with our allies. we have to make sure we get the right information to the right people at the right time to keep terrorists off of our shores andi keep terrorists off of our shores and i have introduced legislation to do that, to give some open sourced knowledge it to our partners to improve information sharing with allies. because of the concerns you outline, iraq was taken off of the list, syria is still on it, but the message is the same. you sit on the house intelligence committee. you've said before that this investigation into russia needs to be thorough and bipartisan. yesterday, former nato ambassador nicholas burns testified at the committee's hearing on the russian meddling in elections. and here's what he said. it is his duty, president trump's, to be sceptical of russia. it is his duty to investigate and defend our country against cyber defences because russia is our most dangerous adversary in the world today. if he continues to refuse to act it is a dereliction to defend the country. russia is going to do this again. those are pretty strong words. it seems that everybody in congress sees the russian interference as a problem but when donald trump hears russia and the russia investigation he hears it is bad for him and he does not want to engage with it so how do you get round that? we do not have an emperor, we have a president. we are getting ready to start the appropriations process and when it comes to... we are looking to get more money to the agencies trying to collect more information on the russians. our secretary of defence has been very clear at the threat russia poses. i was recently in ukraine and i saw what the russians were doing in eastern ukraine and they are a threat and we should be doing everything to stop them and be prepared for them to try to manipulate and influence our elections in 2018. we should be having a broader conversation about how to do a counter covert influence campaign will stop the russians are using debt information and asymmetrical warfare to try to erode trust in our institutions and we cannot let that stand. president trump will have a meeting with president clinton on the sidelines of the g20 summit —— president putin. iam of the g20 summit —— president putin. i am sure the issue of syria will come up but america does not have a strategy, does it?|j will come up but america does not have a strategy, does it? i would not agree with the premise of your statement. i would say it has been very clear that we are not going to let al asad use chemical weapons. i believe assad must go. he has used chemical weapons on his own people dozens chemical weapons on his own people d oze ns of chemical weapons on his own people dozens of times. that is unacceptable. i think the recent state m e nts unacceptable. i think the recent statements that they used weapons we will respond and making sure that we make clear what our response is going to be to different actions is partly a deterrent as well. that is a strategy in of itself. that is something that in the international community we need to get on the same page and look at what happens in syria after assad and one of the questions president trump should be asking glad you put in is why vladimir putin is not outraged and what he is going to do if assad uses chemical weapons again. because of the syrians use chemical weapons it is just as the syrians use chemical weapons it isjust as much the syrians use chemical weapons it is just as much at fault as the russian government or the iranian government. thank you. on the issue of the travel ban, the numbers do not look huge. in the fiscal year of 2015 60,000 people from the six countries affected received visas, half of those went to people in iran. those people apparently will not be affected because they tend to have a bona fide reason for coming orafamily have a bona fide reason for coming or a family member so that is down to 30,000, some of whom will meet the criteria. it is not very many. you are starting to look at 10,000 or 20,000 people who could be affected. it is worth bearing that in mind given all of the chaos that we saw on the first few weeks of the administration and the scenes that we saw. those lines at the airport. we may see that again tonight. it comes into effect in six hours. it will be interesting to see what happens. north korea, the travel ban, health care, the issues that the white house wants us to focus on. today's tweaked targets an anchor. the response from the president's own party has not given him much support. and here's what house speaker paul ryan had to say. obviously i don't see that as an appropriate comment. what we are trying to do round here is improve the tone and civility of the debate and this doesn't help do that. and here's what the vice president of communication at nbc universal news group tweeted. full disclosure, she is somebody i work with, she is a friend of mine, but i would not say this is about how or that programme. what has caused the uproar, the response from republicans has been swift and condemnatory, has been the words that he used and the particularly personal way he talked about how bleeding, are having a face—lift. that is what has shocked people. yesterday we ran a piece of footage that was from the briefing and the press secretary said americans deserve something better from the media. reading twitter today, that is the point many people are making, we need something betterfrom is the point many people are making, we need something better from the office, because if you make that comment with any company or perhaps anywhere else in politics you might be fired. what is frustrating for the congressmen we quoted as they are working hard on the agenda of the white house is putting out and they are being pulled away from the agenda when they come out of their committee rooms to comment on something he is tweeting. she is saying we are not addressing policy. they need to speak to the president and ask him to keep them on policy. it is his tweets shifting the agenda. yes. the white house communications team has to spend time cleaning up something the president has tweeted about but not a single republican or supporter of donald trump has defended. mullally is running an anti—bullying campaign on cyber. she has come out in support of her husband and said when he is attacked he attacks back. even harder. that has been her response. a retired court of appealjudge, sir martin moore—bick, has been chosen to lead the public inquiry into the grenfell tower fire. he said he's doubtful that the investigation will be broad enough to satisfy all the survivors. police believe that about 80 people died in the fire in west london two weeks ago. one of the pope's closest advisors, cardinal george pell, has been charged with historical sexual offences against children. at a press conference this morning the cardinal insisted he was innocent and said he looked forward to having his day in court. theresa may has such a wafer thin majority in the house of commons, she can't afford to miss any of the important votes. today she was in berlin at a planning meeting for the g20, a trip she cut short. hours later she was back in the uk to ensure the government's legislative programme passed. within it are eight brexit related bills. tonight, with the support of the dup, the queen's speech was approved by a majority of 1a votes. through the day the conservatives did have to see off a series of challenges from the opposition. not that the labour leader jeremy corbyn has been getting it all his own way. one amendment tabled by his own backbencher, chuka umunna, exposed labour's own divisions, over mr corbyn's wish to leave the single market. labour's hillary bennjoins us from our westminster studio. he was chair, in the last parliament, of the committee that is scrutinising the government's brexit policy. chuka umunna's amendment is interesting. 322 mps voted against it, 101 voted for. what he set out was that the government should remain or britain should remain within the single market. only 49 labour mps voted for it. does that definitively say that labour is coming out of the single market? we recognise that membership of the single market creates a difficulty because of the issue of free movement because you cannot control free movement if you are in the single market. a policy on which we fought the election was to say we wish to retain the benefits of the single market and of the customs union. if the reference to the single market had not been in the amendment you would have seen a different outcome. what today and since the election demonstrates is that the government no longer controls the kind of agreement that parliament in the end is going to decide to sign up to and we have seen open decide to sign up to and we have seen open dissent in theresa may's cabinet between brexit secretary and the chancellor of the exchequer because firstly the prime minister knows the idea of leaving the european union with no deal is dead and buried. secondly we have to make sure we get the right deal out of the important negotiations that have just begun and parliament in the end is going to be hugely influential in determining what kind of deal we are prepared to accept. somebody said this is a backbencher is' parliament and we have seen that with the number of amendments put forward. i wonder if there's a balance between putting forward position, rightly putting forward position, rightly putting forward position, rightly putting forward opposition to what the government is discussing, but at the government is discussing, but at the same time not undermining the position of the country, because the other 27 countries are united and we look chaotic. to describe it as a backbencher is' parliament is a pretty good description because we saw a stunning example of that today. stella creasy put—down an amendment with cross—party support calling on the government to fund a abortions in england for women from northern ireland where it is not permitted and the government gave way ina permitted and the government gave way in a matter of hours. that shows the power that parliament has because the government is not sure apart from supplying money and votes of confidence exactly what they are going to be able to get through. all of us who accept the outcome of the referendum, ie regretted but they accepted. what was not determined by that referendum is the terms on which we leave for the nature of the new relationship we wish to have with our friends and neighbours new relationship we wish to have with ourfriends and neighbours in the other 27 member states. if we put pressure as we will do on the government it is because we want to get the right deal and i would highlight trade and ministers say we wish to minting tal y fan barrier free trade. i personally do not understand why we decided against britain remaining part of the customs union because that would deal with that and it would deal with the problem of northern ireland where nobody wants to see a return to customs posts on the border between the republic and northern ireland. trying to negotiate a trade and market access agreement is going to be very challenging. nobody i have met thinks that it is possible to be done before october. we have to be done before october. we have to leave it there. i do not know whether we got the answer to the question about whether it helped, this outright opposition. yes, it is interesting. we are almost out of time but to the there was an interesting from the speaker of the house of commons. i don't know whether you knew this or not, but it is customary for male mps to wear ties in parliament, especially when asking a question. but it seems, in a break with tradition, speaker of the house of commons john bercow now says otherwise. iam i am slightly worried about this. i have brought my tie collection. i am worried i am going to have to go to the car—boot sale. worried i am going to have to go to the car-boot sale. it's not a fashion programme. the car-boot sale. it's not a fashion programmelj the car-boot sale. it's not a fashion programme. i do not think you need a tie. it raises etiquette issues. you have one or two buttons? i know it worries you. you can carry on wearing your tie on this programme. ijust never know if you should tuck in. it is a minefield once you get rid of the - —— he. elli fiéfié fififfi 5.53233? ieiieei further rain across notjust scotland and northern ireland, but wales and the south—west. that rain could be heavy for a while, with rain further east too. as a result, temperatures no lower than 13 or 1a, not dropping much from the highs we had today. as we head into the rush hour on friday, we have rain in devon and cornwall, perhaps in west wales. not quite as wet by the morning. in the midlands, cloudy skies and maybe the odd shower, but a hint of sunshine across east anglia and the south—east of england. a bit misty and murky over the hills as you head further north, where we have this patchy rain. it is mostly light. it will not be the continuous, heavier rain that some places had earlier, but not a very pleasant start. add to that this northerly wind. that will be blowing down the chilly air. where we keep the rain, temperatures will be very slow to rise. it should dry off across northern ireland and western parts of scotland. the rain is beginning to push into england and wales. it should be a bit warmer across the midlands towards the south—east, where you get sunshine. ahead of that weather front, which takes the patchy rain southeastwards across the uk, for the weekend, everything is coming from the atlantic. the weather fronts should be weaker. there will not be as much rain and with a bit of sunshine around, it should feel a bit warmer. but it's all relative, of course. it's been quite chilly under the rain recently. some early rain in the south—east corner of england will clear away and we will see rain through the day, eventually heading over the irish sea. for most of england and wales, a nice day. it should be dry, the winds will be lighter and it will feel warmer. we'll get a bit of rain overnight. again, that should be gone and we'll get a few showers towards the north—west on sunday. otherwise, dry and bright. welcome back to 100 days+. america says the threat of an attack by north korea is more immediate. donald trump's upper bann will take effect in a few hours' time after the supreme court allowed parts of it to go ahead. people from six muslim majority countries will be affected. the g20 meeting for world leaders already has a stormy forecast. european heads appear to have solidified their stance to keep markets open, with a warning that the protectionism and isolationism symbolised by mr trump's america first stance will not solve global problems. angela merkel has stressed that the eu will push ahead with measures to tackle climate change, despite the president'sdecision to pull out of the paris agreement on global warming. here is what the german chancellor had to say in her parliament earlier today. translation: the eu fully supports the paris agreement and will implement it quickly and resolutely. furthermore, since the united states decided to leave the paris agreement, we are more determined than ever to be successful. french president emmanuel macron said he hoped the us would return to britain after announcing it would pull out of the paris come to god. but since donald trump's announcement, president trump has used the make it a great slogan for the climate. i'm here with president macron. well talking about environmental issues. now we want to make the planet great again. i am joined by now we want to make the planet great again. i amjoined by the london economics correspondent for lamont. we were surprised by this yesterday. i'm surprised firstly that mr macron extended the invitation and more surprise that donald trump accepted it. what is emmanuel macron stand to gain? he is poking fun openly at trump, saying, let's make the planet great again. he was going towards the leaders who we re he was going towards the leaders who were together and almost extended his hand to trump, and said hello to merkel first. then he finally shook hands with trump. so he was playing to the idea that, oh, yes, i am going to stand up to trump and have a strong handshake. but in the end, he is the leader of the first country in the western world and we have to deal with him. let's invite him ona have to deal with him. let's invite him on a pretty impressive day, which is the 14th ofjuly, bastille day. it shows that he is in the top rank of world leaders, doesn't it? what does donald trump stand to gain from this, cathy? —— katty? what does donald trump stand to gain from this, cathy? -- katty? well, it makes emmanuel macron looked like a statesman. but for donald trump, who hangs onto grudges, to agree to go to this, it is interesting. eric, what will the actual day look like in terms of awkwardness, with donald trump turning up and the french presumably not happy to have him, given the low approval ratings the president has in france? actually, the backlash was much less than has been in britain. maybe the question is why the backlash was so big in britain. trump was officially invited almost a couple of months ago and invitation was unanswered. then macron called him again ten days ago. finally, he did say yes to the invitation. so why did he change his mind? trump did poke fun at france not long ago, saying france is not what it used to be. paris is dangerous now. but there is a pattern here. you might have spotted this trend among global leaders. they know that if they flatter mr trump in order to get his ear, he might respond. we have seen it with otherworldly goes, where they roll out the red carpet for him and he does respond. and that official invitations for the 100th anniversary of the us fighting in world war i. so there will be us troops and french troops on bastille day and it will look very grand that he will like that a lot. that will flatter his ego, for sure. eric, thank you for coming in. we are out of time. we will do some therapy, christian. get you outside of your comfort zone. take the tie off, look californian. going back to what eric was talking about, have you seen how we are now slipping back to the back of the queue? he is going to poland first, mrtrump, of the queue? he is going to poland first, mr trump, then of the queue? he is going to poland first, mrtrump, then he of the queue? he is going to poland first, mr trump, then he goes to hamburger than to france. theresa may must be sitting there weakened and not in a stronger position as emmanuel macron, thinking, iwould love to do this, but she doesn't have the poll rating to back it up whereas emmanuel macron has the mandate and the power and he is able to socket both the berlin and also to socket both the berlin and also to london. and he is doing something which could be unpopular in one country, but he has managed to transform it into a sign of his own statesmanship. i am transform it into a sign of his own statesmanship. iam interested in the fireworks. gold cup will have to watch the bastille day fireworks. what if the french fireworks are bigger than the american ones for the 4th bigger than the american ones for the 11th ofjuly? bigger than the american ones for the 4th ofjuly? they won't be! at a time of austerity in france! the secretary of state rex tillerson has relied so far on a very small team of trusted advisers. he is yet to fill several hundred senior posts, some of his picks have been vetoed by the president. there are top jobs in europe, asia and the middle east that are still vacant. and there are scores of countries, britain included, that don't yet have an ambassador. it would seem mr tillerson's patience is wearing thin. this week, there are reports that he exploded on a morejunior member of the white house staff when he dared to question one of his appointments. he also complained, according to those quoted, that the white house was leaking damaging information about him. let's pick that up with republican political strategist ron christie, who is with us. run, how unusual is all of this? not just the lack of personnel, but to have stories that the secretary of state is basically fed up with the situation and doesn't like the fact that you can't get his staff and doesn't like the fact that people in the white house are running foreign policy? it is extraordinarily unusual to find is being played out in the press. in the bush white house and with the obama white house, the president'sclose aides might have concerned about the direction of policy, but you never let this play out in the press. i look at this administration and it seems ironic to me that their way of trying to quell difficult situations is to leak information to the press. it is not presidential. it doesn't serve the president'saddenda and it makes a bad situation look worse. how unusual would it be for someone like jared kushner, the son—in—law and afairly like jared kushner, the son—in—law and a fairly inexperienced person coming to the white house, to have so much control over america's policy around the world and for the secretary of state to be sidelined? highly unusual. presidential personnel office is the office that is designed to not only have the cabinet secretaries, but all those thousands of people, the assistant secretary and the key staff were looking at. to have someone like jared kushner, who has never worked for the american government have this amount of sway, it shows you that the secretary, if these reports are to be believed, why he is frustrated and he doesn't have assets around the world to american diplomacy. this clip is from john f. kennedy, a very different american president, in 1962. these are his views on the value of a free press, despite disagreeing with its recent tray little treatment of him. it came after the bay of pigs invasion. he once said you were enjoying it less. are you still as avid a reader of newspapers and magazines? i remember those of us who travelled with you on the campaign, a magazine was not safe around you.” with you on the campaign, a magazine was not safe around you. i think it is invaluable, even though it is never pleasant to be reading things that are not agreeable news. but it is invaluable. so i would think that mr khrushchev, operating ina think that mr khrushchev, operating in a totalitarian system which has many advantages in terms of being able to move in secret and all the rest, but it is a terrific disadvantage not having the abrasive quality of the press applied to you daily to an ministration. even though we never like it and even though we never like it and even though we never like it and even though we wish they didn't write it and even though we disapprove, there isn't any doubt that we couldn't do the job at all in a free society without a very active press. so that wasjfk, without a very active press. so that was jfk, under without a very active press. so that wasjfk, undera without a very active press. so that was jfk, under a lot without a very active press. so that wasjfk, under a lot of heat over the bay of pigs. he obviously sees the bay of pigs. he obviously sees the benefit of the fourth pillar, the benefit of the fourth pillar, the media. this president, not so. he sees the media as a threat. he's trying to make it into an enemy of the people. i have got to ask you about today's tweet. what do you make of it? i find that tweet to be so on make of it? i find that tweet to be so on present and shall, so beyond the pale of a person in a position of power —— so on in —— so unpresidential to use that social platform, how many times have we spoke on this show about how the president'sworse enemy is himself? in generaland in president'sworse enemy is himself? in general and in particular, using social media to say stupid things. in my view, this is one of those things that is undignified. you have had a numberof things that is undignified. you have had a number of members of congress on both sides of the political aisle in washington today saying this enough, stop it. i am just in washington today saying this enough, stop it. i amjust reading here from reuters that that presenter is saying trump did not go too far in his tweets on thursday. so you have the communications department backing him up!m so you have the communications department backing him up! it is absurd. president george w bush did not like speaking to the press. and did not get an easy time. sandra gal but it is fascinating, the clip we just saw of president kennedy. it is very important for the president of the united states to have that adversarial relationship with the press, so that the american people can have a sense that they are being told the truth. if president trump decides that he doesn't want the press briefings to be televised or he doesn't want to go on camera, it does a disservice to his administration. it will only raise more questions about, what are you going to hide and why would you not level with the adversarial press? ron,jfk level with the adversarial press? ron, jfk uses the word abrasive about the american press, but he usesit about the american press, but he uses it and says it is a good thing. it is not just uses it and says it is a good thing. it is notjust good for the country, it is good for the presidency. that is something that this president really doesn't feel. before we go, lovely ties, gentlemen! do come back again, ron christie. from me and christian, have a great weekend. we will see you here back on monday. hello. this is bbc news. the headlines: a meeting of kensington council about the grenfell tower tragedy is scrapped afterjournalists were allowed in. a retired appeal courtjudge will lead the public inquiry into the grenfell tower fire — he says it may not be as wide—ranging as some residents hope. mps have voted in favour of the queen's speech, by a majority of 1a votes. an update on the market numbers for you — here's how london's and frankfurt ended the day. more now on the appointment of the judge who is to lead the inquiry into the grenfell tower tragedy. sir martin moore—bick is a retired appeal courtjudge, and he's been asked by theresa may to produce an interim report as early as possible. our legal correspondent clive coleman gave us some insight in to his background. he has the sort of classic cv of a highly successful court of appeal judge. he is 70. he retired in december from the court of appeal. he isa december from the court of appeal. he is a man who sat in the commercial court initially. before that, he was a practising barrister who was involved in commercial and shipping cases. the reason that is important is that he would have been dealing with cases, big—money cases, but also cases where ship a collides with ship b or there is a fire on ship a. so he would have grappled with complex engineering issues that will be at the heart of the grand felling quarry. so he is qualified from that point of view. he is someone from that point of view. he is someone the barrister said is unfailingly courteous. he is a modest man and an efficient worker. he is held in high regard by lawyers who appear in front of him and also by thejudges who who appear in front of him and also by the judges who are his peers. and yet concerns have been raised about his appointment. they have. in one paper this morning, he was described as controversial. these concerns fasan on one decision he made in 2014. this was a judgment he gave in the court of appeal. it concerned a woman who westminster city council had... she was a homeless single woman with five children who was u nwell woman with five children who was unwell and because of the benefit cap, she was unable to meet her rent. so westminster city council wa nted rent. so westminster city council wanted to hauser 50 miles away in bletchley,