has told this programme that eu member countires have so far been discplined and prevented from making any meaningful pre—negotiations with the uk. he also confirmed it would not be possible to agree all of the issues during the two—year negotiation period, and he foresaw the distinc possibility of political and economic turbulence. we'll hear his interview with our diplomatic editor mark urban in full in a moment, but first, to our political editor nick watt. what are you hearing tonight? snp sources said that theresa may told nicola sturgeon that the uk government is confident they can do an overall deal within 18 months. so it means the future trading relationship. number ten doesn't believe the future trading relationship can be done and dusted them, it will need what it described as an implementation phase. but it shows that the uk is accepting the timetable by the eu, which is a greek it by the autumn of 2018 so it can be fully ratified. but the eu chief negotiator is saying, if you want to have that trade deal done at the same time, even in that sort of a transitional outline, you have got to get over two big hurdles, a greedy exit payment and secondly, agree the status of eu nationals. what a word is there on those eu payments? david davis on question time said the uk will not pay anything like the 60 billion euros that is mentioned in brussels, but he did say that the uk will meet its international obligations. that is a big thing the eu has been saying, it means the uk will be obliged to abide by its eu budget commitments that have been agreed by all member states and the twenty20, which means a third of the budget. but david davis also cited a recent house of lords report and it said if the uk leaves the eu without a deal, it will not, by law, have to pay a penny. he regards that as a great card to have in his back pocket. thank you very much. our diplomatic editor mark urban has been speaking to sir simon fraser who until 2015 was the foreign office's top civil servant. he began by asking how successful european leaders have been in holding the eu's 27 member states to the same negotiating position. i think there has been a lot of discipline. it came out of the commission first of all. coming out of the position across the eu. i don't think there has been a lot of informal behind—the—scenes discussion of the agenda or of the key issues yet. that will happen once we formally trigger and the two—year process begins. how likely is it that we'll get towards the end of that 18 month period that the eu has set for reaching the initial agreement with things unresolved on some key issues? i think personally it's certain we won't have resolved everything in the period before the expiry of the article 50 process. as we know, the eu side want to start with negotiating the terms of the separation. that's about money, it's about the rights of people living in other countries in europe. it's probably also about the borders, for example, in ireland. and the british side, on top of that, wants to move rapidly to discuss the future relationship with both political and economic between britain and the eu and that is a very complex second set of negotiations. there's no way, in my view, we are going to complete all that in two years, which is why we are going to have to think about transitional mechanisms, or what the british side calls progressive implementation of new arrangements. you've mentioned unity, so will the uk, do you think in that period, be trying talk to the poles or the czechs or whoever in order to maybe offer them money for infrastructural things that make deals with them on a bilateral basis, or try to change their attitude in the wider discussion? can that work, or will the unity of the 27 remain strong, do you think? i think they will try to maintain that unity, but what you describe is diplomacy. the british will of course talk to the different member states in the eu and try to understand their position and work on those positions and try to find ways of reaching agreement and possibly, you know, catering for the interests of some member states. that's normal, but in the end, the uk has got to negotiate with the eu as a whole through the eu's appointed negotiator which will be essentially led by the commission. and i think it will be a mistake to try and divide and rule because i don't think that will work. what are the chances of the uk ending up coming towards the end of the article 50 period without agreement in many areas, as you've predicted and there being economic turbulence, political turbulence, a very difficult end to this process? what i don't think is possible to do in that time is go through the whole negotiation for the future relationship. so there is a risk, nevertheless, that this breaks down or we get to an unsatisfactory outcome and there is political ill will and turbulence, both political and economic. i think it's in the interests of both sides to try to avoid that and if we have unfinished business, to find agreement on a mechanism, a smooth mechanism for moving forward through transition, so that the unfinished stuff can continue to be negotiated thereafter for economic relations and political relationship to continue. two years ago, a black human rights activist, rachel dolezal, was outed as a white woman, born to white parents in rural america. a huge scandal erupted — why had this woman been trying to pass as african american? how had she even done it? she was pilloried by white and black communities simultaneously, accused of cultural appropriation by some and of delusional misconduct by others. she maintains she never meant to hurt anyone, she genuinely felt culturally and socially black and changed her looks in subtle ways until others assumed she was. in her long—awaited book, in full colour, she rejects the concept of race, calling it a political construct and says she believes in racialfluidity. we'll hear the exclusive broadcast interview she gave to me from her home in a moment. first, a reminder of her story. this is rachel dolezal as a child — pale hair, fairskin, born to deeply religious, authoritarian parents in rural montana. in her book, she describes a miserable childhood, regular beatings and punishment. once, she explains, she was even forced to eat her own cold vomit. when she was an adolescent, her parents began adopting black babies, four in all, which she looked after and adored. as soon as she could, she headed to college in the deep south, lived in a mixed community and began to think of herself as black, modifying her appearance to reflect it. she worked for civil rights, gaining prestigious posts in african—american groups. she had stopped trying to explain her race, let others think what they liked. do you have a question about that? yes, ma'am. then, one day, as local head of the naacp, america's largest civil rights activist group, she was giving an interview on their work when she was asked a question out of the blue. are you african—american? i don't... i don't understand the question. the response went viral. her life was then to change beyond recognition. i identify as black. treated as a pariah, vilified by both black and white communities, she found herself fired from herjob, unable to find work, raising her children as a single parent on the bread line. she maintains she did nothing wrong. she felt black and to have said differently would have been to lie to herself. what to make of her story, then? a confused woman, product of a terrible infancy, perhaps, literally desperate to escape her own skin? or the start of a bigger conversation about whether people really can self—define their own race? i caught up with her in her home in spokane, washington state. in terms of your own story, you write, "as soon as i was able to make my exodus from the white world in which i was raised, i made a headlong dash towards the black one", so it was a choice for you to leave that white world and head to the black world? yeah, i definitely did not feel at home in the family and in the white world. it felt foreign to me, and it felt uncomfortable and awkward to be there. and it also felt oppressive, because i had to constantly mask and subordinate and repress parts of myself in order tojust, kind of, survive socially. you describe a pretty horrific childhood, one of punishment and negligence and very little love? oftentimes, when i was being punished, i was left wondering what i had really done to deserve that punishment because i felt like i had just been being myself, you know, i had just been creative or spontaneous orjust dancing or doing something that i hadn't intentially been doing something wrong or evil or terrible. it was just that i had stepped out of line. i hadn't, you know, done what a girl should do. and somehow, been immodest or sensual or something. and i had to be punished for that because i was being raised to believe that the only goal for me in life was to get married and bear children and be a good wife and mother. and as soon as you were able, you looked for a college, that headlong dash towards the black world? was it then that your appearance started to change? did you become more aware of wanting to become more black physically? well, when i was in college, i was constantly, you know, kind of trying to explain and defend who i was because a lot of people saw me as either mixed or albino or white skinned black. whether or not i had braids, like, regardless of my hairstyle, because i was in a black student union and i was always fighting for racial and socialjustice which was not typical for white southerners to do. so i was kind of glaringly not fitting the mould of whiteness in the south. and if somebody saw me and assumed i was black or mixed or white skinned, it was more comfortable because it was a box that i could be put in. when you started ticking the box that said black eventually, did you feel uncomfortable, did it feel like a lie? no, i mean, it didn't feel like a lie, for sure, it felt like... a true representation of who i am and what i stand for, because even though race is a social construct, and in america, there is a very clear colour line, there is a clear divide and you have to take a side, i mean, i stand on the black side of issues, philosophically, politically, socially, and for me to not check the box, i felt like would be some sort of a betrayal. of not only of who i am but the community i affiliate with. a lot of people might say, "i sympathise with everything the black movement stand for. yet i recognise my own ethnicity". you didn't? in that case, people would be agreeing with the idea that race is biological. the idea of race is a lie so how can you lie about a lie? the criticism that came was that you were trying to culturally appropriate a black experience that you could not have had, because you never lived through it. what is your response to that criticism? i understand that, given what was presented, i understand how people can come up with those conclusions. but i do feel like just because i didn't have a lived experience, being seen by other people as a black girl, a black young woman, for years of my life, i was seen as a white woman, as a white girl, that doesn't mean that i didn't have any experiences. i couldn't self define as chinese just because i had a passion for chinese culture. well, i think to some extent, that's right because we don't have a choice in how we are born and who we are. and so, to embrace and fully own who we really are, i think is something that we encourage from children's movies, to the most inspirational books, whether fictional or accurate. i think that we tell everybody, "be who you are, be proud of who you are", and this is truly who i am. but do you think you had a choice? did you have a choice to be black? i was born as who i am and that includes how i feel and also what i look like. and so i don't think i have a choice in that. you have drawn parallels with the transgender community, that you should be able to self define racially in the way that many trans people self define their gender. yeah, well, actually... many other people have drawn those parallels too. i kind of have seen it as somewhat useful, just because gender is understood, we have progressed, we have evolved into understanding that gender is not binary, it's not even biological. so you believe in the concept of transracial? well, i believe that the word transracial has become socially useful in describing racial fluidity in identity. do you think, though, that the world will come around to your way of thinking? or do you think you will always be viewed as the pariah, the white woman who wanted to be black? i don't know. i don't think that is for me to hope for or predict. i really don't know where we are headed. i would hope. describe for us now what life is like, day—to—day? you can't get a job. you don't have money. was that all as a result of this? yeah, definitely. it was as a result of me being discredited, basically, called a liar and a fraud and a con and people not trusting my work, not just my identity but everything that i did, including my resume was called into question. where was the worst criticism for you? what hurt the most? i would say that the biggest attack was from, of course, the parents and the white media and the white police, the white establishment at large really dealt the biggest blow, but the criticism that hurt the worst was from the black community because i still feel like that is home for me. and even if i had been evicted, pushed to the fringe, some people don't see me as part of that group, it is still where i feel like i fit and where i feel at home. so that hurts, it is painful because i feel like there is misunderstanding that i want to resolve. if i could resolve one group's misunderstanding, it would be the black community. rachel dolezal, thank you. thank you. with me in the studio is guilaine kinouani, who is an equality consultant and writer. you listened to that interview, what did you make of her? firstly, just to say it is the first time i have seen this interview, so lots of emotions, feelings and questions. but perhaps the first thing to establish is that what is called trans—racialism by rachel dolezal encompasses three different groups, namely black women, trans women, and people who find themselves at the intersection of the two, so i am going to speak to it mainly as a black woman. there are various problems with rachel dolezal‘s position. comparing transgender with transracial is a fallacy, a force equivalency, which in my mind, does not advance our understanding of race, of transgender issues, nor of black womanhood. stepping back for one moment from the transgender relationship that she made with her own position, can you sympathise or empathise with a woman who says she feels she has more in common, she feels she is closer to being black than white? i can absolutely empathise with her experience, particularly when it seems apparent that she comes from a background of abuse and neglect and perhaps she has come to associate whiteness with what might have happened in her past, so i can empathise with that. however, where i remain sceptical is in her inability to recognise and a knowledge her privilege as a white woman being able to occupy or inhabit the lived experience of black women. but even though, as you have just said, she did not have a life of privilege, she was, you know, as she describes, abused, punished and brought up in an authoritarian place, ostracised from a white community, for wanting to be black as much as from a black community who discovered she was white so why do you attach the idea of privilege to her background? i attach the idea of privilege to have a background the main reason is that she has white skin. so while it is physical for her to don a little tan and wear some braids and pass as black, the reality is that for the overwhelming majority of black people, we cannot occupy the lived experience of white people. so the question to me i guess would be, would a dark skinned pakistani woman wearing a hijab claiming whiteness, would that be a choice that society would accept? and i think a lot of people share that perspective but when you say pass as, obviously you describe it as if it is something she is trying to sort of pull the wool over people's eyes. what she said in the interview and to me was that she does not really believe in the idea of race. she thinks it is a political construct... it is. race was always set up to be a hierarchy of power. perhaps if you look at it from that perspective, then she is right, isn't she? we need to look at what has been done and reproduced over centuries. so we are talking about white woman who seems to be quite oblivious has been appropriated, has been... even though she worked in black actors, even though she made it her lives and works? absolutely because there is a hierarchy of blackness, so for example, her claiming blackness would shift people's understanding, firstly of what it means to be black and because of the privilege that she has been a white woman, what we would have is that she would have the power of defining what blackness is. we are coming to the end but let me ask you, she has been made a pariah, ostracised, unable to get a job. do you think she has become something of a target? there are many people that you good a more anger at than a woman who, as you say, and quite a traumatic childhood and found herself, perhaps, on the wrong side of a confused argument. does she really deserved to be treated in quite such a, sort of, vilified terms as she is today? i'm not sure whether i would agree with the premise that she has been vilified. certainly, she has been called to account. what i would say is that she has also had a book deal, so therefore, she has got some material gain from her experience. from that perspective, i'm not sure whether it is fair to say she is a pariah. she is someone who has had a book deal and has made a loss of money out of her experience. thank you forjoining us. the russian government has rejected calls by the european union and the united states to release hundreds of people who have been detained following sunday's anti—government protests. the nationwide demonstrations were the biggest show of defiance since anti—government protests five years ago. the man who represents russia's most vocal opposition to putin's as little surprise to a man who has endured a year of house arrests and previous detentions. joining me now, edward lucas, author of the new cold war: putin's russia and the threat to the west. thank you forjoining us. how important do these protests, firstly, look to you? is this a significant moment, a turning point? i think they are commendable. i think alexei navalny and his young supporters, many of whom have known no other russian leader than vladimir putin, deserve whatever support we can give them but i have to say, i don't think at the moment they have the momentum that would be needed to split the regime or topple it. because of him? does he seem to you the right revolutionary figure, if such a one exists? i've met in a couple of times and he's a very oppressive and forceful character. i think he is not a great unifier although he has a strong fan base but there are other people in the russian opposition, particularly the liberal wing, who worry that he is too nationalist. they also worry that maybe he has got some connections somewhere with the regime that he has been tolerated, to some extent, allowed to get away with things where other people have been closed down and yet now he is being closed down and he himself is imprisoned. i think there's a chance that this escalate and ripples across russia and turns into something really big but we saw this movie five years ago with much bigger protests in moscow and the regime could squash those, and i think they probably can do the same this time around. but he's been very clever at redirecting this away from putin personally and making it all about corruption, bringing out the stamps on the notes and stuff, to really sell a message that can have traction with the masses? yes, and i think that corruption is the regime's achilles heel. if you go on about democracy and human rights and freedom and so on, many russians look back to the 1990s and think, "we tried it and it did not work", whereas this gross corruption which involves hundreds of thousands of acres of grounds and ski slopes and duck ponds and things, that really grates... it is always the duck pond that tips the balance. yes, steer clear of the ducks, rulers but it is a good point and by going for medvedev, who is pretty unpopular, it is a good tactical move and it is not impossible that mr putin would throw his hapless prime minister overboard sometime this year. said he is no use any more, is that the sense you get? medvedev was quite useful for putin of years ago when he wanted to step down as president briefly and medvedev, his sidekick, kept his seat in the kremlin warm but he does not really like mr medvedev and i think he would not feel any compunction in serving him overboard and possibly saying he was shocked to find there had been corruption going on and that would blunt the edge of public anger, if these protests continue, or it mayjust fizzle out. you can see the west squirming at these reactions now, the protests, how far to get involved, what they can say, do they show support? the west does not really have any power at all here, does it? i think the west is one of the guilty parties here and this is one of the things alexei navalny said to him when i asked if he was andy west, and he said of course because it is in the west that the regime launders the money it has stolen from the russian people. i think the scottish paper today has a splash on the front page saying that scottish banks laundered £4 billion of dirty russian money. so we do sanctions but on the other hand...? we do sanctions which is good and i wish we did more but until we crack down on the bankers and lawyers and accountants who laundered tens of billions of dollars and cover—up the beneficial ownership of companies and so on, they won't take us seriously. there is a bill going through parliament right now which would give the government the ability to freeze the assets of human rights abuses, so that is a glimmer of hope but we need to do a great deal more. thank you forjoining us. one of the most contentious issues around our membership of the eu over the years has been the common agricultural policy, the subsidy payments given to farmers across europe. the british farming industry has a lot to lose with brexit, and farmers who depend on subsidies to survive will be relying on the uk government to help with the transition. our business editor, naga munchetty, and film—maker stuart denman, have been talking to farmers. to tell their story, they sought help from a familiar face. oh, hello! are you sitting comfortably? then i'll begin. once upon a time, there were four little rabbits. "now, my dears", said old mrs rabbit one morning, "don't go into mr macgregor‘s garden. your father had an accident there. he was put in a pie by mrs macgregor". the words of beatrix potter, author of the tale of peter rabbit and many other popular children's stories. in fact, it was her great success as an author which helped to finance her passion for farming. by the time she died in 1943, she had 4000 acres, including 1a farms, and her home here, hilltop, all of which she left the national trust. as a prominent farmer, we can only wonder what potter or maybe even her characters would have made of the eu, brexit and of course, the next, unwritten chapter of british farming. whom should peter meet but mr macgregor? peter was most dreadfully frightened. he rushed all over the garden looking for the brexit. he ran straight into a messy tangle of red tape. beatrix potter's farms can be found in the lake district, where resilience and innovation are as important as ever. there are farmers in scotland, in wales, here in the lake district, that really, really struggle. john watson is a tenant farmer at yew tree farm, which was one of beatrix potter's. he uses this to attract tourism to supplement his income. he voted to remain in the eu. life is very uncertain at the moment. what's happening with brexit is going to have a huge, huge impact on these sorts of farms. i don't make any money. i struggle, year in, year out, trying all different forms of diversification, to try and bring money in because i'm one of these idiots that actually loves farming. i love working with animals. i love being out in this beautiful countryside. as a fell farmer, i cannot survive without subsidy. there, i've said it! i need the subsidy. the common agricultural policy was designed to boost productivity. controversially, the subsidies are based on how much land is owned, not on what a farm produces. uk farmers received 3.1 billion euros last year. pickles ran the village shop and gave subsidies to the local farmers. while some people really liked pickles‘ payments, others got fed up with being told what to do and won't be dipping in to pickles‘ pot any longer. so far, the uk government has pledged to replace eu funding until 2020. now, at the grassroots, including here in exmoor, farmers must consider carefully how to survive in a dramatically changing landscape. it is being called the biggest farming conversation for a generation. before the eu referendum, the industry was largely divided but now it is united in looking for opportunities in a post—brexit world. one question for the farmers who did vote out is what is more alluring than free money? you can just leave that there. nothing in this life is free, and as we were discovering with eu payments, they were asking for more and more for their free money. the miltons voted to leave the eu, with the young especially keen, a different story perhaps to the national narrative, which suggested that many younger remainers were at odds with their parents and grandparents. i listened to some of the next generation and they were saying, "we need a few opportunities". and the only time opportunities arrive is when you have change. the way i looked at brexit was, what's the worst that could happen? we would have to sell the farm because we couldn't make it pay. but if you've got the right attitude, you will do something with it. i'll quite happily take a risk. i don't think they are going to like me for this. i don't want to kick older farmers out, but i think there's a lot there that don't want to let go. the cap has kept them in a farm, when they probably should have let a youngster take it over. the miltons all feel the burden of red tape, but accept it must be endured. they hope that after brexit, it will be better tailored to the uk's farmers. is the government doing enough to support you? no, there's a feeling not at the moment, and i feel the government has lost the focus on what the value of agriculture and the landscape has been. “119811, new zealand's farming industry was transformed when its government scrapped most subsidies. diversification and intensification were embraced and productivity increased. but there's also been criticism as many environmental rules were relaxed. in the uk, farmers are responsible for environmental upkeep. upland and fell farmers look after hedgerows, stone walls and watercourses. it costs roughly £15 per metre. it is an expensive occupation to maintain hedges. a cheaper alternative would be a wire fence. no aesthetic value, no environmental value, but like in new zealand, practical, does the job, keeps the livestock in. and those responsibilities are for the benefit of the public as well. so there's an expectation, if we are going to help you, just help us stay there to do so. i'd like to think we could do without any subsidy all. but that's, that's utter madness, really, if you want us to preserve the heritage of exmoor. you can't destroy exmoor because, as farmers, we all want to be millionaires. but some environmental campaigners say that farmers are not doing enough to justify the financial support they are asking for. we see very, very low productivity, one sheep per hectare, one sheep per two hectares, one sheep per five hectares, almost nothing being produced and yet, almost no wildlife either because sheep are a fully automated system for maximum environmental destruction. let them loose in the hills and they nibble everything away. trees can't grow. wildlife can't return. i'm not talking about taking away all sheep. i am just saying, let's stop paying for this damage. in the middle of a lake, there was an island. twinkleberry and his squirrel friends visited the island, which belonged to old brown the owl. "will you favour us with work, gathering your apples and cabbages? we are very efficient." james hook's hatcheries produce a third of the chickens eaten in the uk. he voted remain but he does not rely on subsidies. chicken and pig farmers don't get them. he relies on people. we employ 2500 people across the country in the hatcheries and on our farms. about 20% of those are coming from europe, quite a lot of eastern european people and that has made a massive difference to our business and enabled us to grow. i'm concerned that because of the devaluation of the pound, that the money is now is not as good as it was. people are not made to feel welcome. and more importantly at all, will they be allowed to come in? james has already closed two facilities because of a shortage of willing workers. will we have the labour to work on our farms? will our customers have the labour to work in factories? will we have the labour to help come and pluck the turkeys at christmas? because if we haven't got it, we can't continue. tommy brock was a short, bristly, fat, waddling badger. today, he was complaining bitterly about the scarcity of bananas with abnormal curvature. "i am quite sick of straight ba na nas!" membership of the eu spawned many a myth. now it is time to face the realities of leaving. ensuring food security is a priority. can enough be produced by uk farmers to feed the country affordably? peter kendall is an arable farmer who owns 2000 acres in bedfordshire and manages a further 3000. he voted to remain and is now concerned about an influx of cheap imports. there's a real nervousness that too many, i think, quite prominent politicians now, are advocating cheap food. if they think they are going to scavenge the world for the cheapest possible beef, lamb, grains, dairy products, i think you could see the british countryside massively changed. the environment would be damaged and we would produce a lot less food. article 50 will be triggered within days. then, the long wait for results. farming, like other industries, will need to toil hard to be heard during the government's negotiations. peter rabbit has been brought into the 21st—century and there's a desire for a new, shinier version of modern british farming. whether farmers voted for brexit or not, leaving could offer the industry the opportunity to make positive changes. we need to move to a world where we are seen to be entrepreneurial businessmen producing for the market, but we do have that reputation of being paid to do nothing. we've actually got a really short period to come up with a domestic policy that understands what farming in the uk is all about. they won't be throwing money at farmers any more. i do love the old—fashioned ways of farming. iembrace them. but i'm not stuck there. ican move. and that, dear viewers, looks like the end of our tale. but of course, it isn't. this story will go on... and on and on... and on... and on. naga munchetty reporting, with a little help from bernard cribbins. we did ask for a ministerial interview but it never came. just before we go, we thought we would show you the daily mail front page. ignoring what britain's most senior politicians said today. that's it for tonight. the winners of the world's biggest photography awards, the sony's, are being announced tomorrow. unless you're a newsnight viewer, in which case you can see them now. goodnight. music # we're ‘gonna rise. # feel the light on my face.# hello there. after a gloriously sunny weekend and start to this week, things are set to turn more u nsettled. week, things are set to turn more unsettled. still quite warm, pulling winds from the south and south—west. this area of low pressure will be encroaching from the atlantic, increasing cloud and rain and wind. seeing some showers pushing towards cornwall in devon, and even south wales. across the east, some low cloud moving in off the north sea into many eastern areas. more of a cloud cover generally. not quite as cold as the last few nights but the odd pockets of frost across north—west scotland and wales. tuesday, more cloudy than the weekend. showers from the word go on monday. pushing north and eastwards. some sunshine, the best of it in england and wales. the north—west of scotla nd england and wales. the north—west of scotland seemed the best of the sunshine. a cloudy day generally with some rain in the south—west. for northern ireland and northern england, some showers and sunshine. showers could be heavy with a rumble of thunder. elsewhere, some sunny spells. decent temperatures in the south—east, up to 20 degrees. increasing breeze over the south—west. the next belt of rain moving in on tuesday evening, pushing north overnight. have your birth mixed in across north and western areas. wednesday, more u nsettled. western areas. wednesday, more unsettled. more cloud, outbreaks of rain as well. quite a strong breeze. dry weather continuing in the east. top temperatures 16 degrees. wednesday to thursday, remaining u nsettled. wednesday to thursday, remaining unsettled. low pressure nearby, outbreaks of rain. in the south—east, some sunshine. taking some wind of the near continent. notice the orange expanding across east anglia and the south—east. quite a warm day, up to maybe 21 degrees. the further north and west you are, closer to the low pressure. outbreaks of rain and feeling a bit cooler. weather spreads across the country on friday, bringing slightly cooler air. fairly mild, country on friday, bringing slightly coolerair. fairly mild, a mix of sunshine and showers. the theme towards the weekend, north and north—westerly winds, turning cooler with a mix of sunshine and showers. turning more unsettled as the week wears on. good night. hello, everyone. i'm rico hizon in singapore. our top stories: hello, everyone. i'm rico hizon in singapore. ourtop stories: cyclone debbie sweeps towards north—eastern australia, bringing winds of up to 250km/h. america boycotts un talks on getting rid of all nuclear weapons, saying some nationsjust rid of all nuclear weapons, saying some nations just can't be trusted. is there anyone that believes that north korea would agree to a ban on nuclear weapons? i'm lebo diseko in london. guns, grenades and a place on the bus. syrian rebels begin to leave the city of homs after a four—year battle with government forces. for the rebels this amounts to surrender and for the rebels this amounts to surrenderand a for the rebels this amounts to surrender and a forced displacement. also ahead, we will look at