The House of Commons heard impassioned pleas on both sides of the assisted dying debate as MPs prepared for a landmark vote on whether to legalise the practice in England and Wales.

MPs recounted their personal experiences of illness and death, and the appeals they have heard from their constituents on assisted dying.

The Commons was voting on whether to give adults who are terminally ill and have less than six months to live the right to end their lives, subject to the approval of two doctors and a high court judge.

Proponents of the bill argued that it would empower people by giving them control over their deaths and would alleviate suffering while safeguarding vulnerable people from coercion.

Marie Tidball, a Labour MP who was born with a congenital disability that affects all four limbs, said she would vote in favour of the bill but push for considerable amendments at later stages.

She recalled her experience of having major surgery aged six and the extreme pain she went through. “I was in body plaster from my chest to my ankles, in so much pain and requiring so much morphine that my skin began to itch. I remember vividly laying in a hospital bed in Sheffield Children’s hospital and saying to my parents: ‘I want to die, please let me die,’” she said.

“That moment also gave me a glimpse of how I would want to live my death just as I have lived my life, empowered by choices available to me,” she told MPs. “So often, control is taken away from disabled people in all sorts of circumstances.”

Kit Malthouse, a former education secretary, rebutted the argument that assisted dying would add to the burden on the NHS and the courts. “Are you seriously telling me that my death, my agony, is too much for the NHS to have time for? Is too much hassle?” he said. “That I should drown in my own faecal vomit because it is too much hassle for the judges to deal with?”

Peter Prinsley, a Labour MP and surgeon, said he had changed his mind over his years in medicine after witnessing the “terrifying loss of dignity and control in the last days of life”.

“When I was a young doctor I thought it unconscionable. But now I’m an old doctor and I feel sure it’s the right change. I have seen uncontrollable pain, choking, and I’m sorry to say the frightful sight of a man bleeding to death whilst conscious as a cancer has eaten away at a carotid artery.”

Opponents of the bill said it would fundamentally change the relationship between the state and its citizens, and between doctors and patients. They argued the bill was rushed and the safeguards for vulnerable people were insufficient.

Jess Asato, a Labour MP, said that while she might one day want assisted dying for herself, protecting vulnerable people should be paramount. “Abuse surrounds us,” she said. “There is no mandatory training for judges on coercive and controlling behaviour, nor is there effective training for medical professionals … Those who are coerced are often isolated from friends and family. So if you are not required to tell friends or family that you are opting for assisted dying, who will raise the alarm?”

Florence Eshalomi, another Labour MP, recounted her mother’s excruciating pain with sickle cell anaemia and the inadequate care she received. Her voice cracked with emotion as she urged colleagues to vote down the bill, saying: “We should be helping people to live comfortable pain-free lives on their own terms before we think about making it easier for them to die.”

Meg Hillier, the chair of the Treasury committee, cried as she recounted the experience of her teenage daughter being admitted to hospital with acute pancreatitis. “I did not know for five days, in fact many months, whether she would live or die … But I saw what good medicine can do that palliated that pain.” She urged MPs to reject the bill: “If we have a scintilla of doubt about allowing the state that power we should vote against this today.”

Diane Abbott, the Labour MP and mother of the house, said that while she was not against assisted dying outright, she had “many reservations” about the legislation. “If this bill passes, we will have the NHS as a fully funded 100% suicide service but palliative care will only be funded at 30% at best,” she said.

​James Cleverly, the former home secretary, asked: “If this is such a good thing to alleviate pain and suffering, a right that we should be proud to pass, why are we denying it to children?”

In a statement to the Guardian, Ara Darzi, a crossbench peer and consultant surgeon who carried out a review of the NHS in England this autumn, said “this is perhaps the worst of times for the health service”.

“Is now the right time to make such a radical change when we know that high-quality palliative and end-of-life care is a postcode lottery?” he asked.

Kim Leadbeater, who is sponsoring the bill, urged her colleagues to give people “choice, autonomy and dignity at the end of their lives” and said it was “long overdue”. She recounted the stories of people who endured extreme suffering at the end of their lives and supported a change in the law.

She argued that the fact that four former directors of public prosecutions – including the prime minister – and two former supreme court presidents believed the law needed to change meant MPs had “a duty to do something about it”.

The Conservative MP Danny Kruger, who made opening arguments against the bill, said the safeguards built into it were inadequate and that “with this new option and the comparative loss of investment and innovation in palliative care, real choice narrows”.

Campaigners from both sides gathered outside parliament during the debate.

If the bill passes, it will go to committee stage where MPs can table amendments, before facing further scrutiny and votes in the Commons and Lords. Any change in the law would not be agreed until next year at the earliest, and during the process the government would need to publish an impact assessment of carrying out the change.

Leadbeater has said it would probably take a further two years after passing the law to set up an assisted dying service.

The House of Commons heard impassioned pleas on both sides of the assisted dying debate as MPs prepared for a landmark vote on whether to legalise the practice in England and Wales.

MPs recounted their personal experiences of illness and death, and the appeals they have heard from their constituents on assisted dying.

The Commons was voting on whether to give adults who are terminally ill and have less than six months to live the right to end their lives, subject to the approval of two doctors and a high court judge.

Proponents of the bill argued that it would empower people by giving them control over their deaths and would alleviate suffering while safeguarding vulnerable people from coercion.

Marie Tidball, a Labour MP who was born with a congenital disability that affects all four limbs, said she would vote in favour of the bill but push for considerable amendments at later stages.

She recalled her experience of having major surgery aged six and the extreme pain she went through. “I was in body plaster from my chest to my ankles, in so much pain and requiring so much morphine that my skin began to itch. I remember vividly laying in a hospital bed in Sheffield Children’s hospital and saying to my parents: ‘I want to die, please let me die,’” she said.

“That moment also gave me a glimpse of how I would want to live my death just as I have lived my life, empowered by choices available to me,” she told MPs. “So often, control is taken away from disabled people in all sorts of circumstances.”

Kit Malthouse, a former education secretary, rebutted the argument that assisted dying would add to the burden on the NHS and the courts. “Are you seriously telling me that my death, my agony, is too much for the NHS to have time for? Is too much hassle?” he said. “That I should drown in my own faecal vomit because it is too much hassle for the judges to deal with?”

Peter Prinsley, a Labour MP and surgeon, said he had changed his mind over his years in medicine after witnessing the “terrifying loss of dignity and control in the last days of life”.

“When I was a young doctor I thought it unconscionable. But now I’m an old doctor and I feel sure it’s the right change. I have seen uncontrollable pain, choking, and I’m sorry to say the frightful sight of a man bleeding to death whilst conscious as a cancer has eaten away at a carotid artery.”

Opponents of the bill said it would fundamentally change the relationship between the state and its citizens, and between doctors and patients. They argued the bill was rushed and the safeguards for vulnerable people were insufficient.

Jess Asato, a Labour MP, said that while she might one day want assisted dying for herself, protecting vulnerable people should be paramount. “Abuse surrounds us,” she said. “There is no mandatory training for judges on coercive and controlling behaviour, nor is there effective training for medical professionals … Those who are coerced are often isolated from friends and family. So if you are not required to tell friends or family that you are opting for assisted dying, who will raise the alarm?”

Florence Eshalomi, another Labour MP, recounted her mother’s excruciating pain with sickle cell anaemia and the inadequate care she received. Her voice cracked with emotion as she urged colleagues to vote down the bill, saying: “We should be helping people to live comfortable pain-free lives on their own terms before we think about making it easier for them to die.”

Meg Hillier, the chair of the Treasury committee, cried as she recounted the experience of her teenage daughter being admitted to hospital with acute pancreatitis. “I did not know for five days, in fact many months, whether she would live or die … But I saw what good medicine can do that palliated that pain.” She urged MPs to reject the bill: “If we have a scintilla of doubt about allowing the state that power we should vote against this today.”

Diane Abbott, the Labour MP and mother of the house, said that while she was not against assisted dying outright, she had “many reservations” about the legislation. “If this bill passes, we will have the NHS as a fully funded 100% suicide service but palliative care will only be funded at 30% at best,” she said.

​James Cleverly, the former home secretary, asked: “If this is such a good thing to alleviate pain and suffering, a right that we should be proud to pass, why are we denying it to children?”

In a statement to the Guardian, Ara Darzi, a crossbench peer and consultant surgeon who carried out a review of the NHS in England this autumn, said “this is perhaps the worst of times for the health service”.

“Is now the right time to make such a radical change when we know that high-quality palliative and end-of-life care is a postcode lottery?” he asked.

Kim Leadbeater, who is sponsoring the bill, urged her colleagues to give people “choice, autonomy and dignity at the end of their lives” and said it was “long overdue”. She recounted the stories of people who endured extreme suffering at the end of their lives and supported a change in the law.

She argued that the fact that four former directors of public prosecutions – including the prime minister – and two former supreme court presidents believed the law needed to change meant MPs had “a duty to do something about it”.

The Conservative MP Danny Kruger, who made opening arguments against the bill, said the safeguards built into it were inadequate and that “with this new option and the comparative loss of investment and innovation in palliative care, real choice narrows”.

Campaigners from both sides gathered outside parliament during the debate.

If the bill passes, it will go to committee stage where MPs can table amendments, before facing further scrutiny and votes in the Commons and Lords. Any change in the law would not be agreed until next year at the earliest, and during the process the government would need to publish an impact assessment of carrying out the change.

Leadbeater has said it would probably take a further two years after passing the law to set up an assisted dying service.

Abandoning Ukraine would jeopardise British, European and American security and lead to “infinitely higher” costs in the long term, the head of MI6 has warned in a speech that amounted to a plea to Donald Trump to continue supporting Kyiv.

Richard Moore, giving a rare speech, said he believed Vladimir Putin “would not stop” at Ukraine if he was allowed to subjugate it in any peace talks involving the incoming US Republican administration.

“If Putin is allowed to succeed in reducing Ukraine to a vassal state, he will not stop there. Our security – British, French, European and transatlantic – will be jeopardised,” Moore said during an address given in Paris alongside his French counterpart.

The spy chief was touted earlier this week as a possible surprise appointment as the UK’s ambassador to the US, though he is not thought to be pressing for the job. The former Labour minister Peter Mandelson is considered the frontrunner for a critical role at a delicate time in transatlantic relations.

Moore has served as the head of MI6 for four years in what is normally considered a five-year job. At the start of his tenure he overlapped with the Trump adviser Richard Grenell, who was the acting director of national intelligence and has now been identified as a possible US envoy tasked with trying to find an end to the war in Ukraine.

Trump has complained about the expense of supporting Kyiv and said repeatedly that he wants to end the war, claiming he could do so “within 24 hours”. JD Vance, the vice-president-elect, has suggested freezing the conflict on the current frontlines, and denying Ukraine Nato membership for an extended period.

“The cost of supporting Ukraine is well known,” said Moore. “But the cost of not doing so would be infinitely higher. If Putin succeeds, China would weigh the implications, North Korea would be emboldened and Iran would become still more dangerous.”

A key British argument to the incoming Trump administration is to try to link the war in Ukraine with US concerns about the rising military might of China, emphasising that the arrival of North Korean troops is bringing authoritarianism from Asia into what was previously a European conflict.

Moore emphasised the UK’s history of intelligence cooperation with France in a speech to commemorate the 120th anniversary of the Entente Cordiale, but he was also careful to emphasise that he expected UK-US intelligence cooperation to be unchanged regardless of any political tensions.

“For decades the US-UK intelligence alliance has made our societies safer; I worked successfully with the first Trump administration to advance our shared security and look forward to doing so again,” Moore told his audience at the UK embassy, a short walk from the Élysée Palace, the official home of the French president.

The spy chief’s public presence in the French capital reflects a wider political rapprochement between the British prime minister and the French president. After Trump’s victory, Keir Starmer met Emmanuel Macron in France where the two discussed Ukraine amid reports that the Republicans would like European soldiers to act as peacekeepers if a ceasefire was agreed.

Moore said Putin’s goal was to “challenge western resolve” and that western spy agencies had “recently uncovered a staggeringly reckless campaign of Russian sabotage in Europe” – a reference to a mixture of arson, assassination and kidnap plots, which included a fire at a DHL warehouse in Birmingham caused by an incendiary device hidden in a package sent at the behest of Russia.

Moscow has said its demands regarding Ukraine remain unchanged. Earlier this month, the Kremlin said its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 was the “direct result” of a Nato policy that aimed at “creating a staging ground against Russia on Ukrainian soil”.

Russia continues to demand “demilitarisation and denazification” of Ukraine, and in previous peace negotiations said Kyiv’s military should be reduced to 50,000. It also claims the territory of four eastern and southern Ukrainian provinces, Donetsk, Kherson, Zaporizhzhia and Luhansk, of which only the fourth is fully occupied.

Islamist insurgents have entered Syria’s second city of Aleppo in a shock assault, eight years after forces loyal to Damascus seized control of the city.

Fighters from Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) began a major offensive earlier this week from their base in the Idlib countryside, a slim strip of land in Syria’s north-west. It took only three days for the fighting to reach Aleppo, with insurgents capturing territory around the city’s outskirts for the first time in four years as Syrian government forces pummelled rebel-held areas.

Turkey’s Anadolu state news agency reported on Friday afternoon that the insurgents had entered Aleppo, while unverified images and video circulating online showed armoured vehicles and armed uniformed militants on its streets. The Associated Press said residents reported hearing missiles striking its outskirts.

The fighting over the last three days had killed 27 civilians, including eight children, David Carden, the UN deputy regional humanitarian coordinator for the Syria crisis, told Reuters.

The rebels have rapidly recaptured dozens of towns and villages in the Aleppo countryside, seizing a military base, weaponry and tanks from Syrian government forces, while some Turkish-backed Syrian rebel groups based elsewhere in north-west Syria joined the fighting.

The UN said Syrian government forces based in Damascus carried out at least 125 airstrikes and shelled areas across Idlib and western Aleppo controlled by the rebels in response to the offensive, killing at least 12 civilians and wounding 46 others, and displacing 14,000 people.

HTS said on Friday that it had captured four more towns including Mansoura, five miles from the centre of Aleppo. Syria’s state news agency said four civilians were killed inside student accommodation in the city when it was struck by projectiles from insurgent forces.

“The regime’s lines of defence have crumbled, I think they were taken aback. No one anticipated how fast the rebels would reach towards the edge of Aleppo,” said Dareen Khalifa, of the nonprofit International Crisis Group.

She added that it remained unclear whether the rebel forces would be able to hold the swath of captured territory, or how Russian forces backing the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Damascus may respond.

Turkey’s foreign ministry called for calm in the region around Idlib, demanding an end to the strikes on the area. “It is of utmost importance for Turkey that yet another and greater instability is avoided and civilians are not harmed,” it said.

A popular uprising against Assad’s rule in 2011 was violently quashed and descended into a bloody civil war that has gripped the country for more than a decade. Assad has maintained a fragile grip on power with backing from Russia and Iran. The battle for Aleppo in 2016, in which forces loyal to Damascus regained control of the city, marked a watershed moment for Assad’s control of the country.

A delicate balance of power in Syria has been increasingly tested over the past year, however, amid increasing regional fallout from Israel’s battle with the Iranian proxy group Hamas in Gaza.

Israel has dramatically escalated airstrikes against Iranian forces stationed on the ground in Syria, carrying out more than 116 strikes on Syrian territory, according to the UN, and killing more than 100 people, while recent fighting in Lebanon has forced 500,000 people to flee into neighbouring Syria.

The increasing Israeli strikes have put Iranian forces in Syria on the defensive, allowing rebels to exploit a moment where various proxy forces backing Assad are more engaged elsewhere.

Khalifa said Moscow remained focused primarily on the fighting in Ukraine. “The Russians are distracted in Ukraine. They are less invested politically if not military in Syria,” she said. “It’s difficult to tell what the result of this offensive is going to be. The rebels think the other side is vulnerable, and they have leverage.”

The Kremlin spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, said on Friday that Moscow regarded the rebel attack as a violation of Syria’s sovereignty and wanted the authorities to act fast to regain control.

Turkey, which backs rebel groups along Syria’s northern border but has sought recently to normalise relations with Assad, is yet to publicly intervene in the latest round of fighting.

HTS said it would target Iranian forces fighting alongside Syrian government troops as part of the latest offensive. Iran’s Tasnim news agency said a commander from the Revolutionary Guards was killed in western Aleppo late this week.

The fighting and airstrikes appeared to paralyse much of the fragile network of services across rebel-held territory in Idlib, forcing the closure of health services and other infrastructure that sustain millions seeking shelter there.

The restoration of Paris’s Notre Dame after its partial destruction by fire five years ago will give the world a “shock of hope”, Emmanuel Macron has said as he marked the medieval cathedral’s imminent reopening with a televised walking tour.

Alongside his wife, Brigitte, and the archbishop of Paris, Laurent Ulrich, the French president was shown around the rebuilt medieval cathedral on Friday morning by Philippe Villeneuve, the chief architect of France’s national monuments.

Inside the light-filled halls, Macron took in the Clôture Nord du Chœur, a sculpted wall depicting scenes from the life of Jesus Christ, and marvelled at the famous rose windows, now cleansed of the crud that had amassed in its corners over generations.

Inside Notre Dame’s most recognisable feature, the spire, Macron’s attention was drawn to marks in the wood that showed the craftsmanship that had gone into the restoration effort. The timber spire, also known as a flèche, rests on frames consisting only of wood, and rebuilding the structure involved applying carpentry methods dating back to the 13th century.

Three thousand wooden dowels had been painstakingly fashioned by a carpenter over four months, from oaks that had to match the wood of the structural beams. “Our heritage is so diverse and rich,” Villeneuve said. “Notre Dame has allowed us to reproduce the same techniques.”

In a speech in front of about 1,300 craftspeople, Macron said: “The shock of the reopening will be as great as that of the fire, but it will be a shock of hope.”

He thanked those who had contributed to the restoration effort with their labour and financial donations. “The blaze at Notre Dame was a national wound and you were the remedy, through your determination, hard work and commitment,” he said.

A special mention was given to the firefighters who had run into the flames and “saved this cathedral”.

On 15 April 2019, TV viewers around the globe looked on as flames tore through the building, destroying most of the wood and metal roof and the spire. The precise cause of the blaze was never established but investigators believed it to be accidental, started by either a cigarette or a short circuit in the electrical system.

Immediately after the fire, Macron promised the church would be restored “more beautiful than ever” within five years – a promise that was kept thanks to millions in donations and hundreds of specialist artisans using age-old skills. The total cost of the restoration is expected to be about €700m (£582m).

“Nous y sommes” (here we are), the French president said in a post on X on Friday morning alongside a video clip that showcased the rebuilt cathedral to the strains of Edith Piaf’s Notre Dame de Paris.

The cathedral officially reopens to the public on 7 December.

Before the fire, about 12 million people a year visited Notre Dame. Visitor numbers are expected to be higher after the reopening. While entry to the cathedral will remain free, visitors will need to book a dedicated time slot through an online ticketing system that will launch in early December.

The Israeli military will remain in Gaza for many years, fighting against fresh Hamas recruits in the territory and could be responsible for delivery of humanitarian aid there, a senior Israeli minister has said.

The comments by Avi Dichter, Israel’s minister for food security and a member of the Israeli security cabinet, confirm an emerging picture of a long-term deployment of Israeli troops inside Gaza, with no immediate Israeli plan for any other administration to govern the territory’s 2.3 million people and begin reconstruction there.

“I think that we are going to stay in Gaza for a long time. I think most people understand that [Israel] will be years in some kind of West Bank situation where you go in and out and maybe you remain along Netzarim [corridor],” Dichter said.

Reservists who recently served in Gaza have described to the Guardian the scale of the new military infrastructure built in the territory by Israel. This includes extensive new camps and roads across a swath of northern and central Gaza.

One recently demobilised officer said he had spent much of the previous 70 days demolishing houses to clear more ground for what had become a series of big military bases in Gaza’s Netzarim corridor, a military zone that has been established between the Mediterranean coast and Gaza’s eastern perimeter fence.

“That was the only mission. There was not a single construction left that was taller than my waist anywhere (in the corridor), except our bases and observation towers,” he said.

The eyewitness accounts confirm reporting by Israeli media of extensive construction by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) in the Netzarim corridor and elsewhere in Gaza.

So much explosive has been used to destroy buildings to the north and south of the Netzarim corridor that some units have run short, other demobilised reservists said.

“We are not again at the beginning … but we’re definitely not at the beginning of the end because we still have a lot of work to do,” Dichter said last Sunday in a press briefing in Jerusalem.

Israeli military strikes killed at least 21 Palestinians across the Gaza Strip on Thursday, medics said, as tanks pushed deeper into the north and south of the territory.

The escalation came a day after Israel and Iran-backed Hezbollah began a ceasefire in Lebanon, halting more than a year of hostilities and raising hopes among many Palestinians in Gaza for a similar deal with Hamas, which ruled the territory from 2007 until the current conflict.

Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, has repeatedly said that Hamas must be completely destroyed and Israel must retain lasting control over parts of Gaza. Months of ceasefire talks have failed and negotiations for the return of about 100 hostages held by Hamas are now paused.

Israel’s campaign in Gaza has killed nearly 44,200 people and displaced nearly all the territory’s population at least once, Gaza officials say. Most victims are civilians. Vast swathes of the territory are in ruins.

The Hamas-led militants who attacked southern Israeli communities 13 months ago killed about 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and captured more than 250 hostages.

On Thursday, six people were killed in two separate airstrikes on a house and near the hospital of Kamal Adwan in Beit Lahiya in the northern Gaza Strip, while four others were killed when an Israeli strike hit a motorcycle in Khan Younis in the south, medics said.

In Nuseirat, one of Gaza’s eight historical refugee camps, Israeli planes carried out several airstrikes, destroying a multi-storey building and hitting roads outside mosques. At least 11 people were killed in those strikes, according to health officials at al-Awda hospital in the camp. The Israeli military said its forces were continuing to “strike terror targets as part of the operational activity in the Gaza Strip”.

Israel has been accused of clearing parts of Gaza as part of a deliberate plan to permanently displace residents, but denies the charge.

Dichter, a former chief of Israel’s Shin Bet internal security service, said Hamas still had some military capabilities because Israel had not “reached every single place in all Gaza”.

“We know that [Hamas] recruited more people … They have less capabilities but they have new people,” he said.

The ceasefire in the north leaves Hamas – its capabilities already severely damaged by Israel’s offensive – to fight alone.

Khalil Sayegh, a Palestinian analyst, said the ceasefire could make Hamas even less popular in Gaza by proving the failure of its gambit that its attack on Israel would rally other militant groups to the fight.

“It’s a moment where we can see the Hamas messaging become weaker and weaker, as they struggle to justify their strategy to the public,” he said.

Antony Blinken, the US secretary of state, said on Tuesday that the Israel-Hezbollah ceasefire could help force Hamas to the negotiating table, but Hamas experts said this was unlikely. Hamas has said it will only release hostages in return for a full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza.

It is still unclear how Israel plans to administer Gaza if it remains in the territory. Netanyahu has repeatedly rejected proposals that a reformed Palestinian Authority would take power, but has made no other detailed suggestions.

Dichter confirmed that Israel was considering hiring private contractors to guard aid convoys against looters in what could be a prototype move, and also suggested that the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) may take on the role. Different solutions may work in different parts of Gaza, he said.

“Till now we haven’t found the answers but I believe that we should find a way … to make sure that enough food that is getting to every citizen in Gaza … and not allowing Hamas to be the unofficial governor,” Dichter said. “You don’t have to use the same system all around the Gaza, [but] Hamas will not run Gaza, so who is going to run, I don’t know to tell you now.”

The Israeli military will remain in Gaza for many years, fighting against fresh Hamas recruits in the territory and could be responsible for delivery of humanitarian aid there, a senior Israeli minister has said.

The comments by Avi Dichter, Israel’s minister for food security and a member of the Israeli security cabinet, confirm an emerging picture of a long-term deployment of Israeli troops inside Gaza, with no immediate Israeli plan for any other administration to govern the territory’s 2.3 million people and begin reconstruction there.

“I think that we are going to stay in Gaza for a long time. I think most people understand that [Israel] will be years in some kind of West Bank situation where you go in and out and maybe you remain along Netzarim [corridor],” Dichter said.

Reservists who recently served in Gaza have described to the Guardian the scale of the new military infrastructure built in the territory by Israel. This includes extensive new camps and roads across a swath of northern and central Gaza.

One recently demobilised officer said he had spent much of the previous 70 days demolishing houses to clear more ground for what had become a series of big military bases in Gaza’s Netzarim corridor, a military zone that has been established between the Mediterranean coast and Gaza’s eastern perimeter fence.

“That was the only mission. There was not a single construction left that was taller than my waist anywhere (in the corridor), except our bases and observation towers,” he said.

The eyewitness accounts confirm reporting by Israeli media of extensive construction by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) in the Netzarim corridor and elsewhere in Gaza.

So much explosive has been used to destroy buildings to the north and south of the Netzarim corridor that some units have run short, other demobilised reservists said.

“We are not again at the beginning … but we’re definitely not at the beginning of the end because we still have a lot of work to do,” Dichter said last Sunday in a press briefing in Jerusalem.

Israeli military strikes killed at least 21 Palestinians across the Gaza Strip on Thursday, medics said, as tanks pushed deeper into the north and south of the territory.

The escalation came a day after Israel and Iran-backed Hezbollah began a ceasefire in Lebanon, halting more than a year of hostilities and raising hopes among many Palestinians in Gaza for a similar deal with Hamas, which ruled the territory from 2007 until the current conflict.

Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, has repeatedly said that Hamas must be completely destroyed and Israel must retain lasting control over parts of Gaza. Months of ceasefire talks have failed and negotiations for the return of about 100 hostages held by Hamas are now paused.

Israel’s campaign in Gaza has killed nearly 44,200 people and displaced nearly all the territory’s population at least once, Gaza officials say. Most victims are civilians. Vast swathes of the territory are in ruins.

The Hamas-led militants who attacked southern Israeli communities 13 months ago killed about 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and captured more than 250 hostages.

On Thursday, six people were killed in two separate airstrikes on a house and near the hospital of Kamal Adwan in Beit Lahiya in the northern Gaza Strip, while four others were killed when an Israeli strike hit a motorcycle in Khan Younis in the south, medics said.

In Nuseirat, one of Gaza’s eight historical refugee camps, Israeli planes carried out several airstrikes, destroying a multi-storey building and hitting roads outside mosques. At least 11 people were killed in those strikes, according to health officials at al-Awda hospital in the camp. The Israeli military said its forces were continuing to “strike terror targets as part of the operational activity in the Gaza Strip”.

Israel has been accused of clearing parts of Gaza as part of a deliberate plan to permanently displace residents, but denies the charge.

Dichter, a former chief of Israel’s Shin Bet internal security service, said Hamas still had some military capabilities because Israel had not “reached every single place in all Gaza”.

“We know that [Hamas] recruited more people … They have less capabilities but they have new people,” he said.

The ceasefire in the north leaves Hamas – its capabilities already severely damaged by Israel’s offensive – to fight alone.

Khalil Sayegh, a Palestinian analyst, said the ceasefire could make Hamas even less popular in Gaza by proving the failure of its gambit that its attack on Israel would rally other militant groups to the fight.

“It’s a moment where we can see the Hamas messaging become weaker and weaker, as they struggle to justify their strategy to the public,” he said.

Antony Blinken, the US secretary of state, said on Tuesday that the Israel-Hezbollah ceasefire could help force Hamas to the negotiating table, but Hamas experts said this was unlikely. Hamas has said it will only release hostages in return for a full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza.

It is still unclear how Israel plans to administer Gaza if it remains in the territory. Netanyahu has repeatedly rejected proposals that a reformed Palestinian Authority would take power, but has made no other detailed suggestions.

Dichter confirmed that Israel was considering hiring private contractors to guard aid convoys against looters in what could be a prototype move, and also suggested that the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) may take on the role. Different solutions may work in different parts of Gaza, he said.

“Till now we haven’t found the answers but I believe that we should find a way … to make sure that enough food that is getting to every citizen in Gaza … and not allowing Hamas to be the unofficial governor,” Dichter said. “You don’t have to use the same system all around the Gaza, [but] Hamas will not run Gaza, so who is going to run, I don’t know to tell you now.”

In 2021, the serial paedophile Ashley Paul Griffith wrote a letter to parents of children at a Brisbane childcare centre, where he was employed as the director, addressing claims on social media the centre was “involved in a pedophile ring”.

“We want to reassure families that the wellbeing and safety of you and your family are of paramount importance,” wrote Griffith, who had set up a tripod camera inside the centre so he could film his sexual abuse of young girls from two different angles.

“We take child protection extremely seriously.”

On Friday, Griffith was sentenced to life in prison for 307 sexual offences against 73 victims, mostly young girls aged between three and five. Most of the offending occurred while he was employed at childcare centres in Queensland between 2003 and 2022.

Some victims and their families told the Queensland district court that they trusted and grew close to Griffith; one mother said she had “invited him into our home, into our life, and into our family”. Others are now questioning how, as Griffith’s abuse “escalated”, warning signs were missed.

In 2021, Griffith was the director of a childcare centre and notified authorities about an allegation that a female colleague had inappropriately touched a young girl. Police investigated but took no action.

About six months later, police interviewed Griffith in relation to another disclosure by a young girl. He denied the allegations at the time and was not charged.

• Sign up for Guardian Australia’s breaking news email

In early 2022, Griffith moved to work at a different centre. There, a three-year-old girl made disclosures that were investigated by police, who found they “did not meet the necessary threshold for a criminal investigation”. Griffith had his shifts cancelled, but he was not charged.

The Australian federal police eventually learned all three girls had been abused by Griffith. He had recorded himself sexually assaulting or raping them – and 70 others – over a period of almost 20 years.

Dark web user ‘Zimble’

Since 2013, authorities had been searching for a man named “Zimble”, a dark web user who had uploaded child exploitation material to a now defunct paedophile community. The server required users to upload content in order to gain access to other material.

Zimble was briefly active in the community. He posted several videos and made comments advising others how to offend against young girls. He said that he acted in a way that sought “a balance between minimising risks and seizing opportunities”.

Authorities spent almost eight years searching the globe for Zimble until a breakthrough in 2022 led them to Griffith. They identified in one of his posts a type of blanket that had been sold to childcare centres in Queensland. They matched videos to locations and searched staff lists. That led them to his Gold Coast home in August 2022 and the discovery of a trove of videos documenting his abuse.

The files on Griffith’s computer included class photographs and enrolment details of children he had offended against. In some cases he had spliced videos together. Files were named by the type of sexual activity depicted.

A psychiatrist told the court Griffith had a “paedophilic disorder” and that he lacked empathy to the victims.

Summarising the psychiatric report, the district court judge Paul Smith said Griffith “never tried to stop the offending because he did not have the courage to do so”.

He said Griffith’s offending “was chronic and escalated over time”.

‘Ignored the signs’

The court heard from more than a dozen people, including young women who were abused as girls and the parents of more recent victims. Some have chosen never to tell their children they were abused.

Some spoke about their anger at church organisations and childcare providers for not preventing the abuse.

Outside the court on Friday, the father of a victim addressed reporters on behalf of victims and said the verdict marked “the end of a long journey” that begin in 2022, when families were first notified about the abuse by the Australian federal police.

“There are businesses, staff and regulators who ignored the signs, who didn’t follow through on reports, and failed to supervise our children,” the man said.

“We hope that the Department of Education investigates these centres and holds those responsible accountable for their negligence. The community deserves to know that these people will never work with children again.”

Smith said Griffith was “depraved and has a high risk of reoffending”. He tendered a “letter of apology” to victims and sat silent and emotionless through most of the hearing, as family members of victims wept in the gallery behind.

Griffith will be 71 when he is eligible for release from the high-security Wolston prison.

• In Australia, children, young adults, parents and teachers can contact the Kids Helpline on 1800 55 1800, or Bravehearts on 1800 272 831, and adult survivors can contact Blue Knot Foundation on 1300 657 380. The crisis support service Lifeline is 13 11 14. In an emergency, call 000. International helplines can be found via www.befrienders.org

Bolivia’s highest court on Wednesday approved the extradition of the country’s former top anti-narcotics official to the US to face charges of trafficking narcotics.

Maximiliano Dávila Pérez briefly served as Bolivia’s top counter-narcotics official in 2019, before then president Evo Morales resigned. He later served as a police commander in Bolivia under the government of the current president, Luis Arce.

In January 2022, Dávila was arrested in Bolivia, and a month later the US justice department unsealed charges in a Manhattan federal court accusing him of conspiring to import cocaine from Bolivia and Peru into the US, and of using weapons related to the alleged drug trafficking.

The US state department offered a reward of up to $5m for his capture, accusing him of using his position to protect planes that transported cocaine. He was arrested by Bolivian officials that year.

In 2019, Dávila was the head of the Bolivian special forces for the fight against drug trafficking, the country’s equivalent of the US Drug Enforcement Administration, under then president Morales. After Morales resigned, a rightwing president took power and ousted Dávila.

When Arce – who had been aligned with Morales – then took the presidency in 2020, Dávila came back to work in the government, serving as a police commander overseeing a region where coca – the precursor to cocaine – is grown. That year, press reports said Dávila was at an airport in northern Bolivia at the same time as the departure of a plane carrying cocaine, which was later intercepted by Mexican authorities.

Dávila faces additional “illicit enrichment” charges in Bolivia and for allegedly having “certain links” to drug trafficking, Bolivia’s interior minister said. He was arrested in 2022 as he attempted to flee to Argentina.

Earlier this year, Morales and Arce became bitter political foes. Even though Dávila worked under both presidents, Arce supporters are using Wednesday’s ruling on extraditing Dávila to accuse Morales of wrongdoing. Morales is seeking to run for president next year.

In 2008, Morales kicked out the US ambassador and the DEA from Bolivia, limiting the US government’s drug war operations. In turn, the Bush administration also expelled the Bolivian ambassador. The US and Bolivia still have an extradition treaty, however, which was signed in 1995.

It is unclear when Dávila will be extradited. His lawyers, cited by the Associated Press, said the high court’s decision is a “serious violation of human rights”.

Pressure from an increasingly large bloc of countries has offered hope that a breakthrough at critical international plastic treaty talks could be in sight at last, after two years of deadlock. But some warned that fragile progress could disappear again in the last stages of negotiations over the weekend.

For some time, the talks have been split over demands for the treaty to include plans to reduce the amount of plastic that is being produced – a production cap. A draft text for a final deal published on Friday included language for a global target to reduce the amount of plastic made. But it also included another option for no text – meaning no action would be taken to reduce plastic production worldwide. The final text, which may use either of those options, will hopefully be decided this weekend.

Plastic production is increasing, and could triple by 2050, projections show, piling pressure on the environment and increasingly on human health. Plastic microparticles and plastic chemicals have been detected everywhere from human placentas to breastmilk, and research shows that global production controls are critical to bringing plastic pollution under control.

The talks, at Busan in South Korea, are the fifth in a two-year UN treaty-drafting process to address plastic pollution across its full lifecycle, with the aim to lock down a final text by Sunday. The ambitious wording reflects the growing momentum from 102 nations that have banded together over the last few months and days to demand that plastic curbs are included, led by the Pacific Small Island Developing States and Panama, and including the European Union’s 27 member states and 38 African countries.

Their collective voice on production signals “an important shift”, says Dennis Clare, a legal adviser for the Federated States of Micronesia. “This treaty is not about the negotiators. This treaty is about the people of today, the people of tomorrow. It’s not about the industries of the previous century. It’s about minimising human suffering.”

However, a small group of nations, nicknamed the Low Ambition Coalition by observers, have reportedly sought to derail any mention of production in the evolving treaty text. Delegates attending the talks are not at liberty to disclose who these nations are, because negotiations happen behind closed doors. But many public statements and documents shared by Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and some others show that these countries oppose production cuts and want the treaty to tackle pollution by managing waste. There is also concern that industry lobbyists present on their delegations are influencing their interests, and the ambition of the treaty overall.

Clare pointed out that there was no guarantee the final treaty would maintain an ambitious text on production cuts. “It’s just one of the options,” he said.

The process has been made more complicated because, as in many multilateral environmental agreements, countries have been trying to make such decisions through general consensus, which has proved impossible. The gridlock might have been resolved by a vote to move things forward with a majority decision, but that has been stymied by earlier disagreements over the voting rules, which have not been resolved.

In the face of this impasse, on Friday civil society groups in Busan staged a meeting where they called for “courage not compromise” and urged the ambitious cohort of countries to take the procedural routes available to them to get the treaty they wanted.

Speaking at a press conference, Panama’s delegation gave signs that the bloc could be willing to push back against low-ambition nations. “We seek their leadership, we want their leadership. But if they’re not willing to lead, please – leave it to the rest of us, and get out of our way,” said Juan Carlos Monterrey Gómez, the special representative for climate change for the government of Panama.

On Saturday, countries will meet again to discuss the recently released draft. With expected tensions, many decisions still to be taken, and the document yet to be legally drafted, some have expressed doubt the process could be completed by the Sunday deadline.

But after a dismal year of environmental agreements, there was a growing feeling among countries that this plastics treaty had to deliver something for the planet and people, said Sivendra Michael, the permanent secretary for ministry of environment and climate change for the government of Fiji. “I feel that we should be optimistic, even if my heart is giving up in those negotiating rooms,” he said.

The international alliances that had formed over the past few days were cause for optimism, Michael believed. “That’s what fuels my hope. Because there’s a great lot of countries that want to see the betterment of this planet.”

Louise Haigh was advised to resign by No 10 for a possible breach of the ministerial code, after she did not declare her spent conviction for fraud to the government when she became a cabinet minister.

Multiple sources said Morgan McSweeney, Keir Starmer’s chief of staff, delivered the message to the UK transport secretary on Thursday night that it would be best for her to resign.

They said Haigh had not declared the 2014 conviction for wrongly reporting a mobile phone stolen to the police, because she was asked only about unspent offences. She had pleaded guilty to fraud by misrepresentation and received a conditional discharge.

Three sources said Haigh had told Starmer about the conviction when she became shadow Northern Ireland secretary in 2020.

However, Starmer’s official spokesperson refused to confirm on Friday whether the prime minister knew about the conviction at any point.

In a briefing with reporters, the spokesperson repeated the same line that “following further information emerging, the prime minister has accepted Louise Haigh’s resignation”.

In a series of bizarre exchanges, the spokesperson gave the same scripted line when asked what the prime minister knew about Haigh’s spent conviction, what further information had emerged, and why he had appointed her to cabinet if he knew about the offence.

Pressed on what she declared, the spokesperson said there were “clear rules around declarations” that meant ministers must give a full account in writing of private interests that might give rise to a conflict, actual or perceived. He also stressed that ministers must adhere to the seven Nolan principles of ethical standards in public life.

A No 10 source said they did not feel that Haigh disclosed the full details to Starmer in opposition, and that it was not declared to the government when she became a minister. Her departure was more to do with a failure to be fully open than the original offence, they said.

Sky News had reported on Thursday two sources saying Haigh had made the report to police in order to gain an upgraded mobile phone from her employer, while the Times reported that Haigh was put under investigation by her then employer, Aviva, over another phone reported missing.

However, a source close to Haigh said it was “absolute nonsense” that she had reported it missing to get an upgrade, and that it had been an honest mistake.

They said she had come fully clean to Starmer about the episode when he appointed her as shadow Northern Ireland secretary and he was very supportive of her at that point.

However, she did not declare it to the government when she became transport secretary, because she was asked only about unspent convictions.

She is understood to have spoken to Starmer on Thursday night before McSweeney made clear to her it was best for her to resign.

Haigh quit the cabinet on Friday morning with a letter to Starmer saying that “whatever the facts of the matter, this issue will inevitably be a distraction from delivering the work of this government”.

In a statement, Haigh said that while she was working for Aviva in her mid-20s, she was mugged while on a night out. She gave police a list of items missing from her handbag, including her work phone, which she thought had been stolen.

Haigh was issued with a new phone but when she subsequently found her old work phone and turned it on, the police called her in for questioning.

In her letter to the prime minister published on Friday morning, Haigh said not informing Aviva straight away that she had found her missing work phone “was a mistake”.

Accepting her resignation, Starmer thanked Haigh for her work and “huge strides to take our rail system back into public ownership”. “I know you still have a huge contribution to make in the future,” he wrote. Downing Street later named the Swindon South MP Heidi Alexander as the new transport secretary, replacing Haigh.

Haigh, 37, who was the youngest person appointed to Starmer’s cabinet, has become the first person to leave it five months after Labour’s election landslide.

She thanked Starmer for his support in her resignation letter and said she took “great pride” in what Labour had achieved since the election.

She said she was “totally committed to our political project” but believed “it will be best served by my supporting you from outside government”.

“I am sorry to leave under these circumstances, but I take pride in what we have done. I will continue to fight every day for the people of Sheffield Heeley who I was first and foremost elected to represent and to ensure that the rest of our programme is delivered in full,” she wrote.

Wicked star Cynthia Erivo has joined the debate over whether it’s acceptable to sing along to the blockbusting musical in cinemas – and she’s fine with it.

In an interview with NBC during the traditional Thanksgiving Day parade in New York on Thursday, Erivo was asked about the issue, which appears to have split cinemagoers down the middle and came out as very much in the pro camp, saying: “I’m OK with it. We spent this long singing it ourselves – it’s time for everyone else to join in. It’s wonderful.”

Erivo plays green-skinned witch Elphaba opposite Ariana Grande’s Galinda in the big screen adaptation of the musical by Stephen Schwartz and Winnie Holzman, a Wizard of Oz prequel that itself is an adaptation of the novel by Gregory Maguire. Having been released on the same weekend in North America as Gladiator II, it broke box office records for Broadway musical adaptations and comfortably surpassed figures for the Gladiator sequel – with which it has been yoked, Barbenheimer-style, under the Glicked hashtag.

Whether fans should be able to sing along to the film’s musical numbers has provoked considerable debate. Erivo is echoing the words of Dwayne Johnson, voice star of Moana 2 who, when asked about the issue by the BBC said: “Sing! You’ve paid your hard earned money for a ticket, and you’ve gone into a musical, and you’re into it. Sing!” On the other hand, US cinema chain AMC cited its policy on audience disruption in issuing a warning saying, “No singing. No wailing”, while Australian author Patrick Lenton wrote in the Guardian that it was unfair and disrespectful to “inflict your voice without consent on the public. Who do you think you are to compete with the trained musical prowess of Cynthia Erivo, [and] Ariana Grande?”

However, rows over singing may become a thing of the past in a few weeks’ time – interactive “singalong” screenings of Wicked will be available from Christmas Day in North America.