we start with the news that the uk dipped into a recession at the end of 2023. official figures show the economy shrank by 0.3% in the last three months of the year, following a fall in gross domestic product of 0.1% from july to september. gross domestic product — or gdp — is a key measure of economic activity — with a recession defined as two consecutive quarters — six months — of negative growth. despite this, the economy grew by 0.1% across the whole of 2023, but this is still the weakest economic growth since 2009 following the global financial crisis. today, the uk chancellor — or finance minister — jeremy hunt acknowledged the data, but defended the governments handling of the economy we always expected growth to be weaker while we prioratised tackling inflation — that means higher interest rates — and that's the right thing to do, because you can't have long—term healthy growth with high inflation. but also, for families, when there is a cost—of—living

crisis, when the cost of their weekly shop is going up, their energy bills are much higher, it's the right thing to do. the underlying picture here is an economy that is more resilient than most people predicted.

to the us now and the city of new york is suing the companies behind social media platforms snapchat, instagram, youtube and tiktok — accusing them of fuelling a mental health crisis in young people by exposing them to "a non stop stream of harmful content". the lawsuit alleges the companies intentionally design algorithms that manipulate young people into viewing content. new york city spends more

than $100 million on youth mental health programmes and services each year. here to explain more is our north america business correspondent, michelle fleury. so michelle, why is new york doing this? i think there is a growing chorus of people out there who are frustrated with social media companies and the lack of federal laws and so in response, they are turning to the legal system to try and address the problem. with new york city, the most populous city in america, the latest to join this fight. you had mayor adams a sickly accusing these companies of designing products that were described as addictive to young people and that this as a result was placing a huge burden in terms of motor health problems both on schools but also on the public health system —— mental health problems. they are now hoping for a

jury problems. they are now hoping for a jury trial and asking for unspecified damages. it is worth pointing out that the tech companies have responded saying that these charges are meritless. if you look at the statement from snap, they point out that from the very start, it your screen is a camera not a foetus and they are pushing back on this idea and we will hear more on that. it comes after this very flashy hearing we heard in congress a couple of weeks ago in which the ceos a couple of weeks ago in which the ceos of these companies were called to washington, had to testify and you may recall that is where mark zuckerberg, the ceo of meta, turned round and apologised directly, face—to—face to families who were in the audience for the harm that his products had caused.— the audience for the harm that his products had caused. michelle, thank ou ve products had caused. michelle, thank you very much _ products had caused. michelle, thank you very much for _ products had caused. michelle, thank you very much for that. _ products had caused. michelle, thank you very much for that. we _ products had caused. michelle, thank you very much for that. we will - products had caused. michelle, thank you very much for that. we will go i you very much for that. we will go over... life to listen to nato secretary—general who has just started speaking in brussels. it will allow ukraine to learn from

russia's war and will create a structure for ukrainian forces to learn and train alongside the allied counterparts. we will continue to stand with ukraine with ukraine security and hours. i will take a few questions. the wall street journal, here in the third row. dan michaels with the wall street journal. ~ , , , journal. whether ministers briefed at all on the _ journal. whether ministers briefed at all on the russian _ journal. whether ministers briefed at all on the russian space - journal. whether ministers briefed at all on the russian space launch | at all on the russian space launch that apparently _ at all on the russian space launch that apparently has _ at all on the russian space launch that apparently has nuclear- at all on the russian space launch - that apparently has nuclear weapons? yesterday, _ that apparently has nuclear weapons? yesterday, you — that apparently has nuclear weapons? yesterday, you talked _ that apparently has nuclear weapons? yesterday, you talked about - that apparently has nuclear weapons? yesterday, you talked about nato - yesterday, you talked about nato maintaining — yesterday, you talked about nato maintaining a _ yesterday, you talked about nato maintaining a credible _ yesterday, you talked about nato maintaining a credible defence, l yesterday, you talked about nato i maintaining a credible defence, i'm curious— maintaining a credible defence, i'm curious as — maintaining a credible defence, i'm curious as to — maintaining a credible defence, i'm curious as to whether _ maintaining a credible defence, i'm curious as to whether the _ maintaining a credible defence, i'm curious as to whether the ministerl curious as to whether the minister has talked — curious as to whether the minister has talked about _ curious as to whether the minister has talked about how _ curious as to whether the minister has talked about how nato - curious as to whether the minister has talked about how nato can - has talked about how nato can maintain — has talked about how nato can maintain its _ has talked about how nato can maintain its credibility, - has talked about how nato can i maintain its credibility, especially when _ maintain its credibility, especially when a _ maintain its credibility, especially when a significant _ maintain its credibility, especially when a significant number- maintain its credibility, especially when a significant number of - when a significant number of politicians _ when a significant number of politicians in— when a significant number of politicians in the _ when a significant number of politicians in the us - when a significant number of politicians in the us are - when a significant number of . politicians in the us are vocally criticising — politicians in the us are vocally criticising nato _ politicians in the us are vocally criticising nato and _ politicians in the us are vocally criticising nato and raising - politicians in the us are vocally . criticising nato and raising doubts

about — criticising nato and raising doubts about thank— criticising nato and raising doubts about... thank you. _ criticising nato and raising doubts about... thank you. [— criticising nato and raising doubts about... thank you.— about... thank you. i will not comment _ about... thank you. i will not comment on _ about... thank you. i will not comment on the _ about... thank you. i will not comment on the latest - about... thank you. i will not | comment on the latest reports about... thank you. i will not - comment on the latest reports which are referred to, not least in us media, what i can say is that in nato, we are constantly exchanging intelligence. that's between allies and we are, of course, always monitoring all potential threats in all domains from all directions. i have nothing more to say on that now. then on the issue of us support for nato, of course we are 31 democratic nations on both sides of the atlantic and as long as this alliance has existed, they have been different views and discussions also about nato, within nato allies. when you look at the opinion polls, there is a record high support for nato, both in north america, united

states, canada and in europe and i am confident that nato will remain the strongest and most successful alliance in history and i expect the united states to continue to be a staunch ally. that's for at least three reasons. first, it is in the national security interest of the united states to have a strong nato. second, there is actually broad bipartisan support for nato in the united states and thirdly, the criticism in united states is not primarily against nato, it's against nato allies not spending enough money on nato. and then actually, we have a very good story to style tell because for many years, it was a valid point. european and canada do

not spend enough from us side but things have really changed. we have increased defence spending across canada and europe and with no record high investments in europe and canada and more and more allies are meeting the 2% targets. it is in the us interest to have a strong nato because no other major power has anything like nato, there are more than 30 friends and allies. that makes the us are stronger. the us account for 25% of the world's gdp, together with nato allies, we account for 50% of the world's economic might and 50% of the world's military might. we have to remember also that the us have never fought alone in a war. they have always been there together with other allies, from the korea award to afghanistan. we have to remember

that the only time was the attack on the united states and hundreds of thousands of soldiers from canada and europe fought alongside us soldiers. —— korea war. some of them paid the ultimate price. it is in the national security interests of the national security interests of the united states to maintain nato as the most successful alliance in history and i'm confident us do so. to the bbc in row three. you history and i'm confident us do so. to the bbc in row three.— to the bbc in row three. you said earlier today _ to the bbc in row three. you said earlier today that _ to the bbc in row three. you said earlier today that you _ to the bbc in row three. you said earlier today that you expect - to the bbc in row three. you said earlier today that you expect the | to the bbc in row three. you said i earlier today that you expect the us house _ earlier today that you expect the us house of— earlier today that you expect the us house of representatives to approve the military aid package to ukraine. i the military aid package to ukraine. iiust_ the military aid package to ukraine. ijust wonder, what gives you that expectation pits is it more hope that you — expectation pits is it more hope that you have than expectation? and would _ that you have than expectation? and would you _ that you have than expectation? and would you go as far as to say that without— would you go as far as to say that without us — would you go as far as to say that without us military aid to ukraine, it could _ without us military aid to ukraine, it could prove fatal for its defences? we are seeing what is happening at the moment with russians— happening at the moment with russians making advances and surrounding a city and ukraine not

having _ surrounding a city and ukraine not having enough ammunition. | surrounding a city and ukraine not having enough ammunition. i expect us congress — having enough ammunition. i expect us congress to _ having enough ammunition. i expect us congress to agree _ having enough ammunition. i expect us congress to agree a _ having enough ammunition. i expect us congress to agree a package - having enough ammunition. i expect us congress to agree a package forl us congress to agree a package for ukraine because there is a broad majority in the congress for supporting ukraine. i listed the united states and spent much time also in the congress, meeting politicians from both sides of the line and they confirm the message that actually there is broad support for ukraine and i expect that this majority in the congress in one way or another will be reflected in the decision. i also met with the speaker of the house, mikejohnson, and we agreed a joint statement where it is clearly stated that president putin must not win in ukraine and that requires support from all nato allies because if president putin wins in ukraine, it is also a challenge for us, it will

be a message to authoritarian leaders that when they use military force, they get what they want. what happens in ukraine today can happen in taiwan tomorrow so this matters for our security, in taiwan tomorrow so this matters for oursecurity, it in taiwan tomorrow so this matters for our security, it matters for us security and therefore expect that the majority, which is in the us congress, in one way or another will be reflected in the decision. it is not for me to guarantee anything on behalf of an independent sovereign parliament or national assembly but based on the messages, based on the political reality and based on the us security interests of not allowing president putin to win, i continue to expect we will find a way to agree. then of course, the fact that the us has not been able to make a decision so far has already had consequences. it is impacting the flow of support to

some extent, this can be compensated ijy some extent, this can be compensated by increased support from allies and the european allies and canada are stepping up, are doing more and if we put together the military, and economic support, canada and european allies are providing more support than the united states but the united states has been by far the united states has been by far the biggest ally, it is vital that continues to provide support and therefore i continue to expect that they will be able to make a decision, hopefully as soon as possible. decision, hopefully as soon as ossible. ,, . ., , , ., decision, hopefully as soon as ossible. , . g . possible. secretary-general, julian smit said she _ possible. secretary-general, julian smit said she doesn't _ possible. secretary-general, julian smit said she doesn't expect - possible. secretary-general, julian smit said she doesn't expect natol possible. secretary-general, julian i smit said she doesn't expect nato to offer ukraine membership at the washington summit. what needs to happen— washington summit. what needs to happen for— washington summit. what needs to happen for ukraine to receive this invitation— happen for ukraine to receive this invitation and don't you think ukrainians who give their lives daily— ukrainians who give their lives daily for—

ukrainians who give their lives daily for security deserve joining nato? _