la la land. the team behind la la land had already started the victory speeches when the mix—up was uncovered. this is not a joke. moonlight has won best picture. moonlight, best picture. it's a moment i'm never going to forget. i don't think it's ever happened in the history of the oscars. it was quite extraordinary and i have to say a little awkward. plans to limit access to a key disability benefit should be be reversed according to mp5, including some conservatives. a change to personal injury compensation will increase car insurance for millions of drivers. and vintage nokia back with a vengeance — why the finnish mobile giant is relaunching an old model. it's five o'clock. our main story is the first public hearing being held today by the independent inquiry into historical cases of child sexual abuse. over 2.5 years after it was set up by the government, the inquiry‘s chairwoman, professor alexis jay, said it was an ‘important day‘ for survivors of abuse, who are expected to give evidence over the next five years. the first public sessions are focussing on the abuse of british children, who were sent abroad in the three decades after the second world war. my colleague jane hill is at the inquiry in central london. good evening. it wasn't really the start the enquiry team would have wanted, after such an incredibly difficult beginning as you alluded to, this afternoon the enquiry team had to issue an apology following a data breach. an e—mail had been sent to it is believed 90 people. these we re to it is believed 90 people. these were all people who had registered their interest, wanted to sign up to a survivor ‘s forum, and a victim ‘s forum, and when a group e—mail was sent out to anyone who had expressed their interest, it transpired that all the e—mail addresses had been revealed. the enquiry said this happened as a result of a mistake we believe by a junior member of staff. it has issued an apology and referred itself to the information commissioner. our home affairs correspondent reports now on this, the first day. this is an inquiry with the powers of a court to obtain evidence, and so many of these people are lawyers, for the victims and for those accused of responsibility. but it was for the inquiry‘s own barrister to set out the dark history of britain's child migrants. child migration programmes were large—scale schemes in which thousands of children, many of them vulnerable, poor, abandoned, illegitimate or in the care of the state, were systematically and permanently migrated to remote parts of the british empire. the liner asturias arrives at fremantle from great britain with 931 new migrants for this country. they were being offered a new life, and countries like australia what was described as white, anglo—saxon stock, but the inquiry will hear they were given little understanding of how their lives were about to change. many will say that they were taken without the consent or the informed consent of their parents or guardians. many will say that they were wrongly told that they were orphans, separated from their siblings, and deprived of basic details about their identities. but this is an inquiry about sexual abuse in places like the catholic school at bindoon in western australia. victims will come back to the land of their birth to give evidence. the international association will say that we were sent to what we can only describe as labour camps, where we were starved, beaten and abused in despicable ways, and all ties to our family and country were severed. the woman who uncovered the child migrant scandal in the 19805 will also give evidence. we want to know what's happened. we want to know who did it, and we want to know who covered it up for so long. of course we need to know about it, there are consequences for children today. of the long—term consequences... and it will be harrowing. david hill is a former child migrant who has extensively researched the history. we heard some very moving words indeed from david hill, who was mentioned there. he was sent to western australia, one of tens of thousands of young children for whom that happened. he was sent there with his twin brother and an elder brother affairs. this isjust some of what he had to say anything earlier. —— brother of theirs. long—term consequences and suffering. of those who were sexually abused. many never recover. and are permanently afflicted with guilt, shame, diminished self—confidence, low self—esteem, fear and trauma. it is evidence of that nature that the enquiry was set up to here. todayis the enquiry was set up to here. today is just the beginning of a very, very long process. this week and next week will be devoted to the appalling abuse suffered by those child migrants who were sent to australia and other colonies. we will be hearing an awful lot of very emotional testimony in the next couple of weeks. for many, it will be the first, the only perhaps, opportunity for victims full survivors, to tell their stories. and to be listened to. —— for survivors. we will have continuing coverage of course. for tonight, back to you. thank you very much for the account of events today. with me is gabrielle shaw, chief executive of the national association for people abused in childhood. at least it's underway? thank goodness. it's been a long time coming, ithink goodness. it's been a long time coming, i think over two years. three chair women have come and gone, multiple mishaps along the way. finally the day has come, the day that a lot of survivors and victims will have been waiting. white when people look at the enquiry, the wait has been set up and think about what it is meant to achieve, some people think it will achieve, some people think it will achieve form of. in terms of opening up achieve form of. in terms of opening up the storage much bigger audience, making people realise how many thousands of people affected. making people realise how many thousands of people affectedlj think thousands of people affected.” think introducing the scale and scope of this. people in our society at large in the uk are quite, don't quite realise just how many thousands and thousands of people have been affected by childhood abuse in institutional settings, it's endemic. the other thing is a chance for victims and survivors to come forward, to testify. it's a hackneyed phrase, to learn the lessons, but if the lessons have been land, we wouldn't have had other issues to this day. many survivors want this. i want to stop. they don't want to happen to anybody else. let us listen and learn their experiences. does it make sense to start, so much focus with offences and dreadful events which happened not in the uk, not in england and wales, in some cases australia and other parts of the former british empire. does that make sense quiz?” think yes. there were british institutions that failed them and send them to these places to be abused, so account must be made about. the other reason is one of time. some of these victim survivors who are still alive, this happened in the 19405 and 19505, we need to give them the opportunity quickly through the 5ynth enquiry to testify and come forward. so they don't lose their opportunity to come forward. a5 their opportunity to come forward. as we heard today, some powerful and moving testimony. it did happen, and it did happen in australia, canada and other places, but it was 5quarely and wholly a british initiative. that failed them ultimately. given the size of the enquiry, the manageability i5 underlined today, people talking about five years. and then of course about five years. and then of course a long time to digest all of that, and come to some conclusions. the proce55 and come to some conclusions. the process is very long. is it your 5en5e, process is very long. is it your sense, that it's not very manageable because of the extent of the material? it is very long, buti think it needs to be that long, over five years. because of the scale and 5cope five years. because of the scale and scope of what we're dealing with. these are not isolated incidents. these are not isolated incidents. these in5titute5 that cover every pa rt these in5titute5 that cover every part of our society. in the enquiry and alexis jay, who now chairs at, realise that. she has a very good grasp on that. we don't have to wait five years and then a report will be given. there will be many update5, the process will be transparent, interim recommendations will be made. it would be an ongoing, evolving enquiry. we know it works. the royal commission in australia is merely concluding its own enquiry of the same scale, and has done some fantastic work. we are finally on the way, and long may it continue. for those who have suffered, this enquiry will force them to confront it first time. lots of them haven't wa nted it first time. lots of them haven't wanted to go near this for reasons we can understand. is it possible to protect people in these circum5tance5, protect people in these circumstances, to give them the necessary circumstances, to give them the nece55ary 5upport? not tho5e only giving evidence, but those following evidence as well? this is something, the support we know at national a55ociation the support we know at national association for people abu5ed in childhood and other organisations helping survivors, we are not nearly enough. the enquiry doe5 helping survivors, we are not nearly enough. the enquiry does offer support to those who come forward to give evidence. like you say, it is tho5e give evidence. like you say, it is those people who have been abused who may not have been abused in institutional 5etting5 who may not have been abused in institutional settings but he may think, "this happened to me, or something similar happen to me". when they come forward, in which ever way, whether to the police to report or agencies for support, to give that to them. it's not going to stop. a final point, just to underline what today is about. it's a very significant day, the start of what will be a long process. but it's really a day the loss of people think is absolutely necessary —— lots of people, ifju5tice i5 think is absolutely necessary —— lots of people, ifju5tice is to be self. it is such an important day. despite the mishap5 and long time it has taken to get here, we are finally here. that should give, i hope, a lot of hope to victims and survivors. thank you very much for talking to us. the chief executive of national association for people abu5ed in childhood. a quick reminder that there is a full background to the enquiry on the bbc news website. if you look at that section of the love website, there are links to what is going on in the structure of the enquiry —— of the website. the accountancy firm responsible for overseeing the results at the oscars is investigating the mistake which led to the wrong film being named as best picture. the producers of the musical la la land were already in the middle of their acceptance speeches when the error wa5 rectified and moonlight was revealed as the real winner. pricewaterhou5ecooper5 has apologised for the mix—up. our correspondent david willis reports on what happened and the reaction. what should have been the climax of the glitziest night in tinseltown turned into a hollywood farce. warren beatty was about to announce the academy award for best picture... and the academy award... but seemed confused. ..for best picture... in the end, faye dunaway made the announcement. la la land! and la la land's producers were midway through their acceptance speeches when on came the man in the headphones, frantically trying to clear the stage. it turned out that la la land hadn't won the oscar after all — it belonged instead to the producers of moonlight, the low—budget underdog. this is not a joke, moonlight has won best picture. "moonlight, best picture." la la land producerjordan horowitz gallantly handed the oscar over as the audience looked on aghast. it was left to an embarrassed warren beatty to try to explain the producer's mistake. i want to tell you what happened... i opened the envelope and it said, "emma stone, la la land." that is why i took such a long look at faye and at you, i wasn't trying to be funny! moonlight, the drama of a gay black man growing up in miami, wa5 dwarfed by la la land in terms of nominations, but it ended triumphant in the most extraordinary of circumstances. very clearly, even in my dreams this could not be true. but to hell with dreams, i'm done with it because this is true! oh, my goodness! moonlight‘s triumph capped a record—breaking night for african—american talent, which the oscars have been criticised for overlooking. maher5hala ali. the star of moonlight, maher5hala ali, became the first mu5lim actor to win an academy award. viola davis was named best supporting actress for her role in fences. casey affleck was named best actor for his role in manchester by the sea, and la la land captured 5ix awards, 32—year—old damien chazelle becoming the youngest person in 05car5 history to be named best director. its 5tar, emma stone, picking up the award for best actress. i still have a lot of growing and learning and work to do, and this guy is a really beautiful symbol to continue on thatjourney, and i'm so grateful for that. but who won what was eclipsed by that extraordinary blunder over best film. is that the craziest oscar moment of all time? cool! my heart was a little broken but it was kind of, just like one of those things that gets thrown at you and you can kind of choose to lean into it or push away from it, and, as i said, it was a real honour to be able to give it to them. the blame seems to rest with the people who hand out the winners' envelopes, of which there are two identical 5et5 kept at either side of the stage. employees of the accountancy firm pwc hand them to the presenters as they walk on. in a statement, pwc 5aid it was trying to work out how the mix—up occurred. "the presenters had mistakenly been given the wrong category envelope pwc has overseen ballot counting at the oscars for more than 80 years. the fact that such an extraordinary episode was allowed to play itself out in front of an audience of millions around the world will no doubt be a source of soul—searching for quite some weeks to come. let's remember, it's just an award show! the british actre55 naomie harri5, who missed out on a best supporting oscar for her role in moonlight, spoke to our correspondent james cook after the ceremony. naomie harris of moonlight, wonderful performance. thank you. it really was, it was most enjoyable, if that's the right word, i mean 5lightly grim as well. yes. what about the end of those 05car5? it's a moment i'm never going to forget. i don't think it's ever happened in the history of the oscars. it was quite extraordinary and, i have to say, a little awkward. more than a little awkward actually. and i went up on stage with a gormle55 expre55ion because i didn't know what was happening when they finally said it was moonlight, i was just like 5tunned, shocked and even shaking in fact, it was a very strange moment. poor la la land? yes. actually, i hadn't actually thought of that. i was only thinking of it from our perspective. but you are right, poor la la land, yes. it's not a nice thing to have happened. they won best director. not everybody, but most of the movies got recognition. there was some really nice 5urpri5e5. it wasn't like one film 5wept it wasn't like one film swept the board. it was diverse in terms of the number of diverse representations. that's what people like as well, it gets a little boring when it'sjust one movie. it does. tell me, just about moonlight and why for you your piece of work won best picture? i think because it is such an honest, authentic and personal story, you know. the piece was written by tarell alvin mccraney because the writer's mother died and he was trying to recount his past and make sense of it. in that personaljourney that he penned, it actually is a universal story that appeals to so many people. ultimately at the heart what connected people is because it's about this yearning for connection and i think naomie harris talking to our correspondent james cook. joining me now from los angeles is our correspondent peter bowe5. fir5t first of all, the surreal nature of little. at you ever seen anything it? never, ever seen anything like it. 22 years covering the oscars, and this time woke up this morning with a collective thought, "you that really happen? wa5 with a collective thought, "you that really happen? was just a with a collective thought, "you that really happen? wa5ju5t a dream?" it's so extraordinary for such an otherwise organised, quite ridiculous organisation like the motrin picture academy to make such a monumental mistake like this —— motion picture. with the most prestigious of categories, it's inextricable. we have heard that the accountancy firm is conducting an investigation. there two people who know who the winners are. employees of the accountancy firm, one 5tunning each side of the stage, they have an identical set of envelopes with the names of winners which they hand to presenters depending on which side they walk onto the stage from, and the winners are read out. it seems that someone made a human mistake and gave warren the wrong envelope. that investigate goes on. what was your sense of the impact it had on the ceremony? after that happened, did it have a measurable impact on how the rest of it went? well, that was of course the end of the ceremony, so things wrapped up pretty soon after that. it was slightly longer because of all the fuss and confusion in that moment. to did do i think was, and clearly will do for some time, is overs ha d ow clearly will do for some time, is overshadow the achievement of moonlight. and it was quite an achievement. la la land with 14 nominations had been the runaway favourite for a number of weeks. i think there was a sense running into the oscars that moonlight could grab the oscars that moonlight could grab the award at the last minute, and it did. avery the award at the last minute, and it did. a very different kind of film, very gritty, about a young african—american gay man coming to terms with his sexuality, as opposed to the frivolity of la la land. initially that achievement has been overshadowed. with the passage of time, people will come to realise and perhaps appreciate the achievement of moonlight. good to talk to you, thanks very much again. the latest in los angeles after that oscars event. the government is facing calls from conservative mp5 to scrap plans to limit access to a key disability benefit. it's thought changes to the rules on who qualifies for the personal independence payment could affect around 160,000 people. vicki young is at westminster. what's going on? this isn't the first time the government have run into trouble on this issue, and it's a very delicate and highly sensitive issue. last year the then chancellor george osborne tried to cut the payments that were going to disabled people. he faced a massive rebellion and had to completely climb down because of it. this time around, labour say it is the same thing all over again. they say this is a sign that the conservative government is attacking the most vulnerable. they say it is hypocrisy for ministers. they say ministers, the government have talked about mental health issues, about parity between people with physical health problems and mental health problems. but labour say their actions don't reflect the concern. it is contradicting the government's past position in a tribunal in 2015. they are actually did the people with psychological distress should have the same consideration in the assessment. the fa ct consideration in the assessment. the fact that this was introduced on the same day as the by—election without any consultation of the government's own social security advisory committee, it's going to be enacted in three weeks' time, is an absolute disgrace. some conservative mps have voice their disquiet, saying the government should not try reverse what the court said. there are others like stephen crabb, who was last year eight cabinet minister, was opposed to what his government we re was opposed to what his government were trying to do. he now says courts have gone too far. he thinks they are interpreting the law in a way that wasn't intended to, making the eligibility for the benefit much broader and he says they shouldn't be doing that. nobody is stopping. this is not about preventing anybody from applying for personal independence payments. it is about drawing some distinctions between different kinds of people living with different illnesses and conditions. one of the tribunal decisions relates to people's mobility, moving around. we have always drawn a distinction between somebody for example who has trouble navigating because they are for example blind, from somebody with a psychological illness that prevents them from leaving the house. what them from leaving the house. what the tribunal has decided is that these should potentially be lumped together. we don't think that's right. we think that risks creating greater confusion in the law. on this occasion, i think it is right that the government comes back and brings greater clarity and precision to the law. there is a financial consequence all of this, because of what the courts have said. the government said over the next few yea rs government said over the next few years it will cost an extra £3] billion. ministers say that no one who is currently getting these payments will lose out. no one will lose out. that is what they say. that is not how many mps see it, and that could be trouble ahead for the government in the house of lords. thank you very much for the latest at westminster. average car insurance premiums could increase by up to £75 a year as a result of a government ruling. a new formula for calculating compensation payments for those who suffer long—term injuries has been announced by the ministry ofjustice. the association of british insurers called the decision ‘crazy‘. with me is our business correspondentjonty bloom. explain first of all what the thinking is behind this change? this is all to do with the fact that we've had a ultralow interest rates for a very long time. what that means is if you get a lump sum payment, a large one, to make up the fa ct payment, a large one, to make up the fact you've had a very serious injury and will be looked after for yea rs injury and will be looked after for years and years. the courts used to ta ke years and years. the courts used to take off 2.5% of that money on the assumption you would earn 2.5% interest every year when you invest that lump sum. with low interest rates, the government turns round and says the opposite is the case. the sum will shrink because inflation is higher than interest rates. that means the insurance companies will have to find millions and millions of pounds more for those very large lump sum payments. the consequences in practical terms for individual drivers are in terms of insurance premiums, not good news. for the average driver. that's properly going to be another £75 on their annual car insurance premium. for young drivers, could be as much as an extra £1000. the reason for that as they are more likely to have accidents, but also far more likely to have young people in the car. if they need looking after for 50 or 60 yea rs, they need looking after for 50 or 60 years, the payments are enormous. and they're going to get bigger. this also affects organisations like the mod and the nhs. they pay out large lump sum is an negligence claims and other things. they will also have to find the money for the nhs alone that is probably an extra £1 billion been so far? insurers are furious, they say it is unnecessary and unrealistic to saywhat is the reaction been so far? insurers are furious, they say it is unnecessary and unrealistic to say that a very large sum invested will lose money year after year after year. that investors there are also angry because this will hit insurance companies' province, a lot of their shares have fallen today. our business correspondent with the latest —— companies' profits. the bbc has ordered an investigation into reports tv licence collectors have been targeting vulnerable people — spurred on by an aggressive incentive scheme. a daily mail investigation claims bosses at capita — which collects the fee — promised bonuses of up to £15,000 a year to catch 28 evaders a week. in the past half—hour, the bbc‘s director—general said it is clear that has fallen short of the standards and wants an urgent response to the claims that have been made. that is from the director—general‘s offers in the past few minutes. we'll have the headlines in a moment, and the latest sport as well. but here is the weather. there is a concoction in the weather. we have had some rain, hail, snow, sunshine. we have had some lovely rainbows sent in as well. the mixture remains over a few days, wintry showers moving west to east on the wind. most of them will be further west. ice is a more widespread hazard and freezing fog patches thrown in. it will be cold night. temperatures close to or below freezing way have snow cover in the highlands of scotland for example, hence the risk of ice. we could see rain arriving in south—west scotland. that had its way into north—western parts of england and wales. it then goes into and across the country through the day. sunshine ahead of that and behind it. most reliable sunshine across central and northern parts of scotland. nowhere will it be warm. another chilly feeling particularly when the showers come along. further ahead through the rest of this week, be some day—to—day changes in the weather so watch this space. there will be some rain and sunshine and ongoing risk of snow across northern pa rt ongoing risk of snow across northern part of the k. back in half an hour. —— of the uk. this is bbc news at five. the headlines. after a long delay, the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse finally starts hearing evidence in public. the inquiry has started by hearing evidence from those children sent to australia, under a government—backed migration scheme, after the second world war. you will hear that these younger childre were the least protected, the most vulnerable and the most abused. plans to limit access to a key disability benefit, should be reversed, according to mp5, including some conservatives. and, a change to personal injury compensation, will increase car insurance for millions of drivers. let's cross to the bbc sport centre — and it'sjohn. italy's tactics in yesterday's six nations match with england continues to split opinion. today those who govern the game, world rugby say it's "too early to speculate" whether it will lead to a rule change. confusion reigned amongst the england' players as italy repeatedly chose not to contest the ball at the break down. and with no ruck formed, it allowed italy's players to move into what would normally have been an offside position. it nullified england's attack, and left head coach clearly eddie jones frustrated, despite his side's 36—15 victory. well, it wasn't rugby. let's face the facts. you've got to have an offside line to play the game. italy was smart and congratulations to their coaching staff and the players, they executed that and played brilliantly but it wasn't rugby. if i was the bbc i'd be asking the rfu for their money back because you haven't had a rugby game. we will have to go outside and train now so you get some proper rugby. what a night ahead for leicester city and the man in temporary charge since claudio ranierie's sacking last thursday. caretaker coach craig shakespeare leads the team into their match against liverpool later, with the premier league champions now in the relegation zone. andy swiss is at the king power stadium. and andy how do we think the fans will react tonight? well, it will be fascinating to see. i have got the programme here for the match tonight and in there is a message from the leicester owners and they say we made the most difficult decision. i don't expect eve ryo ne difficult decision. i don't expect everyone to understand it and i know that some people are angry that we have to think about the long—term interest of the club. they say it was our decision alone and it is unfair that our players who supported claudio fiercely are being accused of disloyalty. the owners trying to take some of the heat from the players but it will be interesting to see what sort of reaction the players get tonight. will they get hostility or will the fa ns will they get hostility or will the fans look at the table and see that leicester are in the bottom three and think we have to get behind them? either way the caretaker manager knows that his team have to find some form tonight. i would like my teams to play with flair, but also, obviously, i like a clean sheet as well. we playing against a very, very good team on monday night, so we have to be tactically aware. we know what their strengths are. i like to know what the strength of the opposition are. but i also like my team to go about theirjob in the right way. craig shakespeare knows a good result might can only enhance his prospects long—term of perhaps getting the job here at leicester city but plenty of other names still in the frame, among them roberto mancini, once a player here, and won the premier league title with manchester city a few years ago. nigel pearson, former leicester city boss, he was the predators are too ranieri, took them up into the premier league and help them to survive, but left amid acrimonious circumstances and goose heading has also been mentioned, he has been a stand—in at chelsea a couple of times, most recently last year when jose mourinho left the club. plenty of names being touted around, no news yet as to who will be the long—term successor. as far as the fans are concerned, it is all about getting the three points that would lift them out of the relegation zone. thank you. the kick-off is at eight o'clock tonight. huddersfield town boss david wagner has been given a two—match touchline ban and a £6,000 fine after his altercation with leeds counterpart garry monk. wagner sprinted down the touchline tojoin his players in celebrating their late winner before clashing with monk. monk has been given a one—match touchline ban and fined £3,000. and triple olympic rowing champion andrew triggs—hodge has retired from international competition. he was part of the great britain crews that won gold in the coxless fours in beijing and london, before helping the men's eight to victory in rio last summer. on twitter he said "it's over folks, this old body is hanging up the oar....it‘s been a blast." that's all sport for now. you can keep up to date with all those stories on the bbc sport website. i'll have more in sportsday at half past 6. the health secretary, jeremy hunt, has told mps that an investigation into the failure to deliver confidential documents to gp surgeries has found no evidence that patient safety has been put at risk. a private contractor paid to redirect the paperwork had stored it by mistake. labour says the patients deserve an apology. about half a million documents, including cancer test results, were mistakenly put in storage. let's hear some of the exchanges in the commons, a little earlier, betweenjeremy hunt and first labour's john ashworth. this is a catastrophic breach of data protection. over half a million patients data including blood test results, cancer screening results, biopsy results, even correspondence relating to cases of child protection, all undelivered, they we re protection, all undelivered, they were languishing in a warehouse on the secretary of state's watch, it is an absolute scandal mr speaker. there is no evidence so far that any patient safety has been put at risk. well, we have been through over 700,000 documents and so far having been through all of them, we can find no evidence that there are 2.5 -- 2500 that find no evidence that there are 2.5 —— 2500 that we are checking so that a second clinical opinion is being sought and so far of those, in nearly 2000 cases, we do not think there is any evidence and we are going through the remaining cases. those were the exchanges in the commons earlier today. our health correspondent sophie hutchinson is here. some background. what happened in terms of the structuring of this information system? this is 500,000 documents that contained some very important information for patients. some of them about test results for cancer and that sort of thing that we re cancer and that sort of thing that were meant to go to gps. now, they either had incorrect addresses on them or patients had moved gps and they needed to be re—routed. the nhs in england employed a private company for that job and for that purpose to redirect them and re—route them to the correct gps but it did not happen. those documents got stored somewhere and those patients and gps went without that information. that is what came to light in march and what was being asked in the commons is why are we only hearing about it now and the health secretary told the commons, his officials told him, there would be a type of inundation of gps of that was made public and it was better to focus on the most at risk patients, the most at risk cases to sort out the safety there and then to give the information later. when he said as he did in his statement that there was no evidence that patient safety was put at risk, is that an explanation that other people find credible, like doctors or the opposition? what has been the response? we have the responses before the statement in the commons and we know there has been double—checking of 2500 documents. in fact, 500 of them are yet to be checked but so far they have found no harm. there has been real concern from the patients' association who said, this was extremely serious and they said earlier in the day it had they said earlier in the day it had the hallmarks of an emerging scandal. jeremy hunt has said the processes we re scandal. jeremy hunt has said the processes were going on behind the scenes and he made a written statement to the commons injuly. the patients' association said this is not merely some bureaucratic bungle but a serious failure with real—life consequences and the royal couege real—life consequences and the royal college of gps has raised the point that they are concerned about the way contracts are given out to private companies and whether private companies and whether private companies and whether private companies are underestimating the complexity of the work they are bidding for. thank you for updating us on that. our health correspondent. iraqi government forces fighting so—called islamic state militants in mosul say they have taken control of a key bridge over the river tigris. the army said it could potentially establish an important route to bring in reinforcements and supplies. un aid workers say they're concerned by the humanitarian situation in the area. our correspondent wyre davies sent this report. iraqi government forces are fighting door—to—door and street—to—street as they slowly try to capture the western part of mosul from so—called islamic state. the fighting is brutal and both sides are taking casualties. this is the islamist group's last major stronghold in iraq, and, almost completely surrounded by government troops, they're putting up fierce resistance. iraqi forces say they've succeeded in pushing islamic state out of at least two districts, but is fighters are leaving behind dozens of improvised explosive devices, including booby—trapped cars. caught in the middle, thousands of civilians, thus far unable to escape the brutal grip of is, who have reportedly executed anyone accused of trying to abandon the city. young and old, they're leaving mosul as quickly as they can, almost three years after is took control of the city. some continue their escape on foot. those unable to walk are being taken to un refugee camps away from the frontline. more than a quarter of a million people are expected to flee mosul as the fighting continues. as they leave the city, many younger men are separated from the women and children for security checks. some are then allowed to rejoin their families, others are being detained forfurther questioning, which iraqi officers say is vital if they're to be sure that no is fighters are slipping through the net. but time is of the essence. there are 750,000 people still trapped inside mosul at the mercy of isis and under the threat of government shelling. wyre davies, bbc news, northern iraq. schools are facing their first cuts to funding since the mid—905 according to a report today. education spending has been examined. the national association of head teachers and the national association of governors has written an open letter to the chancellor of the exchequer and skin him to make schools are priority in the budget which is taking place next week. our education correspondent has more details. tunbridge high school in west sussex is struggling to make ends meet. according to the head, class sizes might have to get bigger and teachers may not be replaced when they leave. across england, heads are warning that rising costs mean there is less money to go around. now, in an open letter to the chancellor of the exchequer, heads and school governors say they need more cash. in the letter, they say governing bodies and school leaders are being forced to make impossible choices as a result of insufficient funding. it's a claim that doesn't surprise parents. we are facing an unsustainable funding situation in our schools, and the government is not listening. we felt that as parents we had to now enter the debate to make the parent voice heard, because nobody voted for these cuts and nobody wants to see school funding cut. there has been significant investment in england's schools in the past 20 years, but teachers say running costs are going up, as are pension contributions and national insurance. and they say balancing the books is becoming increasingly difficult. so while there will be cuts, that's after years of education being a priority. the cut to school spending per pupil over the next few years will be about 6.5%. that will reverse about 20% of the growth in school spending per pupil that happened over the 20005. so it's clearly a large cut, but it will still leave the big increase that happened over the 2000s there. the government points out its spending £40 billion on schools in england this year, the highest cash figure ever. i don't think that the next budget is going to be particularly good news if we are asking for a big increase in the total budget. but that budget only ten days away, schools will be competing against other public services to try and convince the chancellor to give them more money. atjust about a quarter to six, these are the headlines. the independent enquiry into historical child abuse in england and wales has begun hearing evidence from those sent to a stroller under a government backed migration scheme. the accountancy firm responsible for overseeing the results of the oscars is investigating a mistake which led to the wrong film been named as best picture. the government is facing calls from conservative mps to scrap plans to limit access to a key disability benefit. quick update on the market numbers. an update on the market numbers for you — here's how london's and frankfurt ended the day. and in the the united states this is how the dow and the nasdaq are getting on. nokia has launched a comeback bid launching smartphones last night before the start of the mobile world congress. the big annual meeting, but it was the reissue of the past handset that got the most attention as our technology correspondent explains. barcelona and, as as the mobile phone industry arrives for its annual jamboree, there is nostalgia in the air. they sing the nokia ringtone. nokia, a name that used the rule the mobile world, is making a comeback. for the finnish firm which has licensed the brand, this was its first chance to make a big splash and, along with a range of new smartphones, it unveiled something very retro, last on sale in 2005. let me reintroduce the iconic nokia 3310. you can't do much with this phone except make calls and play a game of snake, but the battery lasts forever — well, almost. we were listening to our consumers. we asked, "what is the most iconic device that you have ever seen from nokia?" and we thought, "why not? let's have some fun," and we created this device for the consumers. now this may be fun, but let's face it, it's a bit of a gimmick. if nokia is to become a majorforce in the mobile world again, it won't through the 3310 but for its new range of android smartphones. the company claims this model is already selling well in china, but competition in a market where all smartphones look much the same is tough. so perhaps it was smart to look back as well as forward. by bringing out this truly iconic device, which has got bags of nostalgia, for many people it was their first mobile phone, it catches their attention and people will know nokia is back. but will the new and old nokia appeal to the phone—buying public? maybe with my parents that would work, but i don't think with our generation that that would be something people would be interested in. i would switch my apple phone for that thing. reporter: even if it couldn't go on the internet? no internet? no. 0h! well, then, ithink i will change my mind! and here's another phone trying for a comeback. this is the blackberry keyone, launched by a chinese firm which has licensed the brand. two once—great names making an unlikely bet that they can be big again in our mobile future. rory cellan—jones, bbc news, barcelona. the past six weeks since donald trump was inaugurated has been marked by tensions between the new president and the judiciary, following his attempt to impose a travel ban on people from muslim states. his nominee for the supreme court criticised the president attack onjudges court criticised the president attack on judges and his choice of eternal —— attorney general is a controversial one. someone who knows the system like few others is the man who until lastjune was the us solicitor general. and i am pleased to say that he is with me now because you're on a visit to oxford tomorrow. it is good to be here. first of all, before we get to the current interesting state of play in the us, some thoughts on your time in office and the challenges you faced. people often bring up two things, obama care and same—sex marriage, because she certainly had a very big role in promoting those, what with the main challenges you face to? it was extraordinary to be the solicitor general of the united states during the period of time that i held the office. it was an unprecedented period in our history, maybe not totally, but one of the few in which year after year, major matters came before the supreme court, matters of great consequence that i was charged with arguing and as you have identified, affordable health care and marriage equality we re health care and marriage equality were probably chief among them and the challenge for me is that i was representing a progressive administration and defending progressive initiatives in front of a court that was by all historic measures one of the most conservative in american history and for me, that meant trying to find ways to express arguments in favour of the government's position in terms that more conservative justices would find to be neutral, rule of law terms that they would need to support, as opposed to progressive initiatives that they would have recoiled from. they really tried in those instances to try and find a way to speak in that kind of language from the court. the perception outside the us and in the uk, is that it is a highly politicised setup and for that reason, it is not all that clear how someone reason, it is not all that clear how someone forwards the kind of policies that you have been talking about in that kind of legal context. what is the secret, the trick to making progress? the justices themselves are keenly aware of that concern that they are perceived as partisan and are trying very hard to dissipate it and ifelt partisan and are trying very hard to dissipate it and i felt on partisan and are trying very hard to dissipate it and ifelt on my partisan and are trying very hard to dissipate it and i felt on my end, that i should try to reciprocate. i tried really to argue in rule of law terms and with respect to the affordable care act, rather than saying that this was a progressive initiative that was good for the people of the country, the argument that i advanced was one that said, this is about aquatic accountability, democratically accountable branches of government have made this choice and we ought to implement this reform of our health care system and it has legitimacy behind it and in that situation, the court, which in our system, the justices are situation, the court, which in our system, thejustices are not elected, should exercise restraint and respect for the democratic branches of government and that is a ofjurisprudence. drain on this concept, trying to take partisan sting out of it... had a wee square that with the experience of the last six weeks, you have the president coming forward with a policy he found controversial, and he found himself coming face—to—face with a judge who said, this is not going to work and then anotherjudge she said it would not work, where is the democratic accountability there?” think what happened there and obviously i have a point of view about this coming from where i came from, but i think what happened there is that you have a combination of two factors that made the situation disastrous by the incoming administration and the first one was administration and the first one was a widely shared perception that the executive order regarding immigration was not on the level in the sense it was not genuine to protect national security as reflected by the fact that there we re reflected by the fact that there were no serious consultations with the military or the intelligence community or with the state department. there was no serious effort to assess what kind of policy consequences would ensue and not even a serious effort to assess whether there was a genuine need given how rigorous the scrutiny was. you combine that with an argument that the administration took to court which was that the judicial branch has no role to play, but this is absolute discretion on the part of the executive and i think the problem was putting those two things together and it was about the least persuasive way to make a case to the judicial branch of the government. our system, the executive branch can amass great power and unless that power is checked by the institutions that are in place, the legislator, i don't think they will do much tagging in the current climate, the press and civil society which of course the administration is aggressively trying to undermine as well and most importantly, the judiciary, most importantly the courts, and i thought it was quite heartening that the courts in this first instance of an encounter with the administration said, not so fast, we have a checking function to play here. what was the impact on the legal community, people like yourself who served in senior capacities, of the president's own reaction, and outright attack on one of thejudges reaction, and outright attack on one of the judges and there have been other attacks as well, how was that received? that is a grave, if it continues, that is a grave threat to the functioning of our system, i think for the reasons i just identified. the role of the court is to check the excesses of executive power, whether it is the power exercised by a democratic or republican president. it is the way our system is designed and just as the administration is trying to undermine the press, and destroy the legitimacy of the press, when the press points out that they are not dealing honestly —— honestly with the american people, you see an effort by the president to undermine the legitimacy of the judiciary when the legitimacy of the judiciary when the judiciary the legitimacy of the judiciary when thejudiciary is the legitimacy of the judiciary when the judiciary is standing the legitimacy of the judiciary when thejudiciary is standing up the legitimacy of the judiciary when the judiciary is standing up and playing its role in our constitutional system. i hope it improves, maybe it will, but it certainly was an inauspicious start. what if he stays on the same line and does not depart from that, what are the implications?” and does not depart from that, what are the implications? i think from a practical point of view, if i were in their doing myjob for the administration, i would in their doing myjob for the administration, iwould hope in their doing myjob for the administration, i would hope to persuade the president and those around him that it is very counter—productive, because the more ofa counter—productive, because the more of a direct challenge to the legitimacy of the judiciary, the more likely it is that the judiciary will stand up and play its role in our system with its checking function but beyond that, it does call into question, the very basic knowledge on which the american system operates and it will be incumbent on the judiciary to play its role with courage and integrity and it will be incumbent on civil society institutions and on the press to play their role with integrity and courage, because a huge amount is at stake. final point, given your experience with the obama administration, what kind of co nta cted the obama administration, what kind of contacted you have, how much contacted you have that the administration and with the white house and this is maybe a rather crude question, did you come under pressure, is it a role under which you come under political pressure? it is interesting. the role of the department ofjustice, in our system, is unique and it is part of the executive and carries a policy but it also has a responsibility, of ensuring that the law is enforced in a manner that is nonpartisan and respectful of the rule of law values and that those transcend partisan interests and transcend how the president works and there were circumstances in which there was a desire on the part of leaders in the white house for the government to ta ke white house for the government to take a position on certain cases, where, with my team, when we analysed it, we felt it was not consistent with what the rule of law required and we were not going to do it. we said no, we cannot do this andi it. we said no, we cannot do this and i will say, in every instance in which we did that and there were not many, just a few, but every time we did it, the president was 100% respectful on thatjudgment. did it, the president was 100% respectful on that judgment. the question is are you confident that the same set of circumstances will apply this time? i think it will require a new solicitor general with integrity and with courage, because under the best of circumstances, one in that role has to stand up to the white house and this, i do not think is the best of circumstances but i am hopeful they will find a candidate with these traits. enjoy your visit to oxford. it is nice to see you. time for a look at the weather, here's john hammond. everything except the kitchen sink today. some rain, hail, snow and sunshine as well and weather watchers have done us proud. this nice shot from the highlands earlier. keep the variety going over the next few days. our real mottled look to things, the cloud producing the heavy showers but some gaps in between, nailing down exactly when those gaps will arrive will not be easy. bear with us. those gaps will arrive will not be easy. bearwith us. furtherwintry showers likely overnight, saddam spreading east over england and wales, ice is more widespread —— sun spreading east. it is going to be a cold one, temperatures close to or below freezing in many places, out of town in particular. by morning, a little clump of rain and hill snow machine she can across scotland and northern ireland, snow mostly over the higher ground, heading south—east through the morning and head of that a lot of sunshine. bright and sunny start for many, i would not rule out the odd shower evenin would not rule out the odd shower even in the east then. in bad but you will need a few layers because there will be a notable breeze and temperatures will fall when the showers come along, this little cluster of red ant hill snow tracking east across england and wales as we go through the day. behind that, it will brighten up and some of the best of the sunshine will be across the heart of scotland where it should not feel too bad. it will not be warm. when the showers come along, that it will fall by a few degrees. we say goodbye to this chap and as we head into tuesday, we will look to the south west for a feature coming in from the atlantic, ahead of that, a cold and frosty start on wednesday, the best of the sunshine in central and northern areas and this front will bring rain into the south west. another chilly feeling day particularly in the north. through the rest of this week, a strong jet stream will propel rain in our direction. the behaviour of the jet stream will determine how far north of the rain will extend later in the week with some snow mixed in as well. for the rest of the week expect the weather to chop and change, rain and shine and the ongoing risk of snow in the north. in the history of the oscars. for best picture... come on. la la land. first the favourite was given the best picture award. then... this is not a joke. moonlight has won best picture. moonlight. best picture. a mix—up of envelopes kept in matching briefcases was blamed, as millions watched around the world. the british firm pricewaterhousecoopers has taken responsiblity for the mix—up. also on tonight's programme... the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse, finally gets under way. it's first case, the post—war british children sent abroad, who suffered for years.