the hills of scotland. temperatures six to ten degrees celsius for the vast majority. but then it could turn colderagain, perhaps, as we head into the start of next week. so, the low pressure will gradually clear away as we head through monday and tuesday. it's just pushing its way further northwards and eastwards. high pressure starts to build in, and we could start to draw in more of a north—easterly wind, perhaps, so largely dry through monday, tuesday and wednesday, temperatures dropping to the seasonal average. so feeling colder then turning milder, possibly drier, more settled into the start of next week. bye— bye.

could the disabled children whose mums took the anti epilepsy drug valproate finally be set to receive compensation? a report out tomorrow will call on the government to make payments of £100,000

to those harmed by sodium valproate because some women were not told of the risks taking it could pose. we'll talk live to these two women — mothers, between them, of seven children with physial and learning disabilities who have been fighting for compensation for 12 years. 12 years. also tonight. our own mark urban�*s despatch from ukraine. almost two years into the conflict — soldiers are exhausted. will the government s new recruitment plan provide the numbers needed 7 we'll understand it would be a very long war. 0ur soldiers have been fighting for two years. they are tired and exhausted so we cannot win. also — liz truss is back — today launching a new tory group called popular conservatism — what does she know about that?

conservatives have not taken on the left wing extremists. and the fact that wilkerson seems to be on the curriculum, we need to make the case for democratic accountability. britain is full of secret conservatives, people who agree with us but do not want to admit it. we'll debate the future direction of the tory party with a former advisor to liz truss, and former tory minister from the centre of the party. spina bifida, impaired hearing, autism, heart problems and reduced iq. those are some of the conditions children are living with, after their mums took an anti epilepsy drug called valproate. and many of these mums say they were not warned of the risks of taking the drug while trying to conceive or during their pregnancies — risks known as long ago as 1972. tonight the england's patient safety commissioner — who has been commissioned

by the government to look into compensation — says the sodium valproate scandal is "bigger than thalidomide" — referring to the severe birth defects caused by a morning sickness drug, which was licenced in the 1950s in the uk. here's kate. tonight the patient safety commissioner has called for the government to urgently set up a fund for those harmed by the drug sodium valproate. so lets talk about how we got here. it was back in the 1970s that valproate first started to be used. today tens of thousands of people in the uk take the drug to manage epilepsy, bipolar disorder and in a small number of cases migraines. and we have to remember valproate is an essential medication for many — for some it will be the only drug which controls their seizures. but even at this early stage there was data shared with licensing authorities which suggested valproate could affect foetal development in animals — indicating potential risks for pregnant women. this was passed on to medics.

when the first data sheet was published for those prescribing valproate it warned, "in women of child—bearing age, the product should only be used in severe cases or in those resistant to other treatment." by the 1980s academics had started publishing research looking at the effects on children born to those taking the drug. today it's suggested 11% of the children of women who take valproate during pregnancy have major congenital disorders. in the general population that figure would be much lower around two or 3%. and 30—a0% of children born to women taking this drug also experience delays in early development as well as poor language skills, memory problems and lower intellectual abilities. there's also an increased risk of autism spectrum disorder and adhd. here i'm going to skip forwards 20 years to talk about efforts to get compensation. because in 2004 a group of families launched legal action against the drug manufacturer. that case was due to be heard at the high court,

but families were devastated when in 2010 legal aid was withdrawn and the case discontinued. legal aid three weeks before the court case was due, that pulled the funding and after six years funding it we do understand why. as investigations into the risks posed by valproate continued and regulations were tightened, some countries did start to take further action on the issue of compensation. in 2016 french politicians voted to create a ten million euro compensation scheme for families. but a year later a minister at the department of health said there were no plans for the uk to follow suit. he stressed support for families with children born with a disability was already available. more recently, an independent review led by baroness cumberlege recommended a scheme should be set up to meet the cost of additional care for those who had experienced avoidable harm. a recommendation the government chose not to accept. instead the government said it worked with the litigation arm of the nhs — nhs resolution, to create a simpler gateway for those affected

to claim compensation. to succeed families would still need to pass strict legal tests including showing that the medics treating them acted in a way contrary to proper practise at the time. not always easy. between 1994 and 2018 the nhs received almost 120 of these claims — only six of which were settled. and this is the crux of the matter, making these legal claims can be an expensive, stressful and lengthy process, with no guarantee of success. which is why in recent years there have been louder calls for a simpler redress scheme. a health and social care committee report last year found families have already waited too long. which brings us back to tonight. and another independent review calling for urgent action to correct what they call a question ofjustice. let's get first reaction to the report from england's patient safety commissioner — two mums who've been campaigning for some kind of redress for 12 years. janet williams and emma murphy founded the group independent fetal

anti convulsant trust. between them they are mums to seven children who have physical and learning disabilities. welcome and thank you for being with us. janet you began taking valproate at 17 did any manic talk to you about the risks of potential harm to an unborn child? i about the risks of potential harm to an unborn child?— an unborn child? i never had that discussed with _ an unborn child? i never had that discussed with me _ an unborn child? i never had that discussed with me at _ an unborn child? i never had that discussed with me at all. - an unborn child? i never had that discussed with me at all. and - an unborn child? i never had that| discussed with me at all. and that was through _ discussed with me at all. and that was through the _ discussed with me at all. and that was through the first _ discussed with me at all. and that was through the first time - discussed with me at all. and that was through the first time you - was through the first time you conceived and what about the second time? we conceived and what about the second time? ~ ., ., , time? we never had anything discussed _ time? we never had anything discussed with _ time? we never had anything discussed with us. _ time? we never had anything discussed with us. both - time? we never had anything| discussed with us. both times time? we never had anything i discussed with us. both times i suffered with tall and was sent to the paediatrician and we thought we had gone there because of withdrawal. we were not told about it. �* , ., withdrawal. we were not told about it. and lee is now 33 and philip 31. the both it. and lee is now 33 and philip 31. they both have _ it. and lee is now 33 and philip 31. they both have fatal _ it. and lee is now 33 and philip 31. they both have fatal valproate - they both have fatal valproate spectral disorder, can you explain

what that means?— what that means? from a very early ace what that means? from a very early a . e the what that means? from a very early age they showed — what that means? from a very early age they showed developmental- what that means? from a very early l age they showed developmental delay which went on to nero developmental problems as they went through education. they both had education support statements at the time and had numerous operations. philip in particular had four operations. and the development and what they've gone through, poor working memory, not understanding the world, really. and how things work. you have to give them one instruction that at the time. so it is going to be hard for them as life goes on to be able to understand how things should really be. to understand how things should reall be. ., .,

to understand how things should reall be. . ., ., , ., really be. emma, all five of your children have _ really be. emma, all five of your children have been _ really be. emma, all five of your children have been impacted - really be. emma, all five of your children have been impacted by| really be. emma, all five of your. children have been impacted by this drug. chloe, lauren, luke, aaron and kane. i drug. chloe, lauren, luke, aaron and kane. ., , drug. chloe, lauren, luke, aaron and kane. ., ., drug. chloe, lauren, luke, aaron and kane. ., , kane. i was diagnosed with epilepsy aued 12 like kane. i was diagnosed with epilepsy aged 12 like janet _ kane. i was diagnosed with epilepsy aged 12 like janet and _ kane. i was diagnosed with epilepsy aged 12 like janet and thousands of| aged 12 like janet and thousands of others _ aged 12 like janet and thousands of others across the uk. there was no warning _ others across the uk. there was no warning despite questioning, despite asking _ warning despite questioning, despite asking the questions. it was always asking the questions. it was always a case _ asking the questions. it was always a case of— asking the questions. it was always a case of this is the best medicine to coniroi— a case of this is the best medicine to control the seizures. and i listened _ to control the seizures. and i listened to the health care professionals as thousands of us did. professionals as thousands of us did they— professionals as thousands of us did. they started, they were not reaching — did. they started, they were not reaching milestones, speech and language — reaching milestones, speech and language and walking delays and recurrent infections. and ijust knew— recurrent infections. and ijust knew something was not right with them _ knew something was not right with them i_ knew something was not right with them. i saw knew something was not right with them. i sananet on the news and that them. isananet on the news and that is— them. isananet on the news and that is when— them. i sananet on the news and that is when i made the link. it was a light— that is when i made the link. it was a light bulb — that is when i made the link. it was a light bulb moment and i knew that seeing _ a light bulb moment and i knew that seeing janet appealing for women to

come forward on valproate, i knew at that moment the children had been harmed _ that moment the children had been harmed. ~ ., , ., ., , that moment the children had been harmed. ~ ., , ., ., harmed. what year was that when you saw janet on local _ harmed. what year was that when you saw janet on local news? _ harmed. what year was that when you saw janet on local news? 2010. - harmed. what year was that when you sananet on local news? 2010. ok. i sananet on local news? 2010. ok. so what seems _ sananet on local news? 2010. ok. so what seems extraordinary is you have five children and nobody at any point? absolutely not. raising a question, what could be going on? that is the shocking aspect because although i do have five children affected, there are thousands of women up and down the country who have therefore children. you know, it is not a story that is unusual. it is very common. and there's no question it is about the link that you are taking this drug for your epilepsy? that is a fact? that is why they have been harmed?

absolutely. because we should make clear that this drug is vital for many people. it clear that this drug is vital for many pewte— clear that this drug is vital for many people. it is very effective for epilepsy _ many people. it is very effective for epilepsy but when _ many people. it is very effective i for epilepsy but when taken during pregnancy as you have been hearing it is devastating. flan pregnancy as you have been hearing it is devastating.— it is devastating. can you talk to us about the _ it is devastating. can you talk to us about the impact on - it is devastating. can you talk to us about the impact on you and | us about the impact on you and your family both in practical terms when you are looking after children with physical and learning disabilities and in the financial times? it is and in the financialtimes? it is very difficult. _ and in the financialtimes? it is very difficult. when _ and in the financialtimes? it 3 very difficult. when you have children with disabilities the impact is huge. notjust on the children and watching the children without disabilities is just absolutely devastating. it impacts the family as a whole. the mothers and families haven't done the country have been absolutely devastated by this syndrome and the guilt mothers feel is heartbreaking.

it has been difficult for women in particular— it has been difficult for women in particular because of the epilepsy as well_ particular because of the epilepsy as well so— particular because of the epilepsy as well so you have a lady suffering seizures _ as well so you have a lady suffering seizures and the side effect of medication and then has to bring up disabled _ medication and then has to bring up disabled children herself. what we really _ disabled children herself. what we really need to remember tonight is the father— really need to remember tonight is the father is because they do not really— the father is because they do not really get — the father is because they do not really get enough credit for what they do — really get enough credit for what they do. we would not be able to do what we _ they do. we would not be able to do what we do — they do. we would not be able to do what we do without her husband beside _ what we do without her husband beside us~ — what we do without her husband beside us. and my husband in particular— beside us. and my husband in particular had to give up work and become _ particular had to give up work and become a carer because of the seizures — become a carer because of the seizures i was having at the time and because the boys had problems. that was— and because the boys had problems. that was hard for him to have to do that _ that was hard for him to have to do that at— that was hard for him to have to do that. at that point then you have -ot that. at that point then you have got a _ that. at that point then you have got a full— that. at that point then you have got a full family or living on benefits— got a full family or living on benefits which is the reason it is so important for this. let benefits which is the reason it is so important for this.— benefits which is the reason it is so important for this. let me ask ou so important for this. let me ask you about _ so important for this. let me ask you about some _ so important for this. let me ask. you about some recommendations so important for this. let me ask - you about some recommendations that will come out of this report from

the patient safety commissioner doctor henrietta hughes, she recommended initial payments of £100,000 to be made to victims of sodium valproate and separately £20,000 to be paid to women injured by mesh implants which we have reported on in the past. your reaction to that sum of £100,000 as an initial payment? will reaction to that sum of £100,000 as an initial payment?— an initial payment? will we welcome that because — an initial payment? will we welcome that because it _ an initial payment? will we welcome that because it would _ an initial payment? will we welcome that because it would be _ an initial payment? will we welcome that because it would be a _ an initial payment? will we welcome that because it would be a huge - an initial payment? will we welcome j that because it would be a huge help for the families. they would be able to get the relief knowing that that support is there for them. even though it is only an interim payment. i think it is important as a family. that they feel they have been recognised as well. this a family. that they feel they have been recognised as well.- been recognised as well. this has been recognised as well. this has been known _ been recognised as well. this has been known about _ been recognised as well. this has been known about since - been recognised as well. this hasj been known about since 1973, the dru- been known about since 1973, the drug company warned the government about the _ drug company warned the government about the risk and they purposely concealed — about the risk and they purposely concealed the risk. and women were tied to _ concealed the risk. and women were

tied to and — concealed the risk. and women were lied to. and we have to remember that, _ lied to. and we have to remember that, that — lied to. and we have to remember that, that this is a state failure and the — that, that this is a state failure and the government should accept the responsibility with this and support the valproate children. a responsibility with this and support the valproate children.— the valproate children. a former health minister _ the valproate children. a former health minister nadine - the valproate children. a former health minister nadine dorries l health minister nadine dorries turned down a recommendation from baroness cumberlege who did a review into valproate and mash, turn down a recommendation from her for compensation and another health minister who came after nadine dorries, maria caulfield, commissioned this report from henrietta hughes and she says the government is considering the report. what would you message me to her? mr report. what would you message me to her? ~ ., ., , , her? mr caulfield has been very sympathetic _ her? mr caulfield has been very sympathetic and _ her? mr caulfield has been very sympathetic and we _ her? mr caulfield has been very sympathetic and we have - her? mr caulfield has been veryl sympathetic and we have worked with her, the government have obviously commissioned this report. it has been acknowledged now and in the words of doctor henrietta hughes, the government need to get on with it. we have been campaigning in westminster for 12 years. we feel in

a way that politics has let us down, let be valproate children down because it has taken so long despite the government knowing about this time, of the causation and theyjust need to accept responsibility. brute need to accept responsibility. we have had numerous meetings with the health— have had numerous meetings with the health minister, maria caulfield, on the issue _ health minister, maria caulfield, on the issue. and we did discuss at one point _ the issue. and we did discuss at one point about— the issue. and we did discuss at one point about some of these families think push— point about some of these families think push down nhs resolutions and we did _ think push down nhs resolutions and we did not— think push down nhs resolutions and we did not feel that that was right for the _ we did not feel that that was right for the simple reason that the majority— for the simple reason that the majority of these families, the chiidren— majority of these families, the children were born before the pregnancy prevention programme came into effect— pregnancy prevention programme came into effect in 2018 so the majority of families would not be able to go down _ of families would not be able to go down that— of families would not be able to go down that route. i think that was 'ust down that route. i think that was just some — down that route. i think that was just some sort of copout if you like to push— just some sort of copout if you like to push the — just some sort of copout if you like to push the families down. and then you at— to push the families down. and then you at the _ to push the families down. and then you at the time that was the wrong route _ you at the time that was the wrong route to _ you at the time that was the wrong route to take.

you at the time that was the wrong route to take-— you at the time that was the wrong route to take. the fact that you are here now on _ route to take. the fact that you are here now on the _ route to take. the fact that you are here now on the cusp _ route to take. the fact that you are here now on the cusp of— route to take. the fact that you are here now on the cusp of the - here now on the cusp of the recommendation from this report, the government has yet to take a decision whether they will pull the recommendations, how do you feel tonight? recommendations, how do you feel toni . ht? . , recommendations, how do you feel toniaht? ., , ., ., recommendations, how do you feel toniuht? ., , ., ., ., tonight? pleased that we have got this far, the _ tonight? pleased that we have got this far, the fact _ tonight? pleased that we have got this far, the fact of _ tonight? pleased that we have got this far, the fact of the _ this far, the fact of the interim payment, i think it is really important now that it does acknowledge these children will get some sort of what we call a care plan because we have to support them for the rest of their life as well but we welcome what has been said. thank you both for talking to our audience about this, we appreciate you making the effort to speak to us and good luck. you making the effort to speak to us and good luck-— now to ukraine. there's still a war on. and some ukrainians are beginning to demostrate in the streets about loved ones who've been fighting on the front line for two years solidly. plus it's becoming clear that military aid from america is going to be blocked indefinitely by republican leaders in congress.

ukraine says it's already running short of ammunition as a result. but there's another vital commodity they need to keep the war going too and that's hundreds of thousand of fresh soldiers. mark is just back from ukraine. how was the mood? inevitably as we come u- how was the mood? inevitably as we come up to — how was the mood? inevitably as we come up to this _ how was the mood? inevitably as we come up to this anniversary - how was the mood? inevitably as we come up to this anniversary people l come up to this anniversary people are reflecting on what they have to do and what still lies ahead, a water carrying on, unfinished, and this question as you have mentioned about who will fight this war going forward. in the early days hundreds of thousands of volunteers came forward, some of those people still on the front with no idea how they can go home. the volunteering has diminished and the big difficult question now for president zelensky is how far to compel people to call up is how far to compel people to call up hundreds of thousands, the army says it wants half a million soldiers to fight the war this year. it is clear president zelensky is

not willing to call up that many people. he peers the effect on the economy and it will make him unpopular, but all the time there are casualties and there are people who are no longer fit to serve, and this issue is coming to a head in a certain way, so we have been to ukraine to try and have conversations with people most affected by this and our report starts in a graveyard on the outskirts of kyiv. he sings. ukraine's struggle takes a daily toll. katerina skopje saw her husband off to war. he'd been called up. after just two months at the front, he was killed by a russian shell. his family and friends remember the brightest of spirits.

this family's tragedy speaks to the nations. faced with an invader who will not stop, they have no choice but to keep paying this price, even as many ukrainians flee the country or bribe people to avoid its search for more soldiers to replenish the ranks. that's about fear. that's about death. that's about funerals. and that's actually about the trust to the state and to the president, by the way. i think sometimes we are trying to avoid these questions. and that's why this issue started to be very sensitive. in kyiv�*s maidan, the war dead

are recorded with flags. ukraine has lost tens of thousands, and the army must replace them in a nation that's grown wearily familiar with death and russian attacks. this story of loss, continuing loss, and constant threat from russia has now produced a very sensitive national debate. which is the question about a new mobilisation, the army's need for hundreds of thousands of new troops, and the questions that poses for who is still willing to fight for ukraine. the first thorny issue is demobilisation. recent protests, including here at maidan by wives and mothers of soldiers, are demanding their return home. so far, the scale of this is small, but there have been protests in many ukrainian towns,

and there's public sympathy for those who sent their loved ones to war and currently have no idea when they'll come home. he's been serving for almost two years and according to the current law, they have to keep fighting until the end of the war. but as we see, two years passed and the war is not going to the end at all. and we all understand that it will be a very long war. 0ur soldiers who are fighting for two years, they deserve the time to be replaced by another one. and also one of my goals also is to win in this game, and we cannot win with harmed and tired and exhausted soldiers. and then there's the issue

of draft evasion. recent social media posts highlight angry public reactions to the army checking people's papers. this, and the demobilisation issue, are being amplified by russian social media bots. that hurts a lot because now people are being more emotional and more angry about this, and russian side definitely, definitely use this for their benefit. and i think that this pressure will going to grow. while many brigades are still advertising for volunteers, the army will struggle to get the 500,000 new soldiers it's asked for. it's one of the issues dividing president zelensky and his top general, because volunteering is down, and the government doesn't want to call up so many ukrainians. you know, i have a son who's 17 years old and he will turn 18 in a couple of months in april.

he's taking the military classes, shooting. and when we had lunch just two days, two days ago, we talked about it and i understand that he and his mates in the university, they all realise that they may also have to go and fight because this is their country and this is the country that they feel they have to defend. so in the end, generals always want numbers which impress people. but the most important element is different. the most important element is that as long as the people of ukraine believe that this country has to be defended, we will keep fighting. this is kyiv�*s mahila university. so far, people under 27

haven't been conscripted. the new mobilisation law would lower the age by a couple of years, mandate military training for students, and punish the more than 700,000 ukrainian men who remain abroad. and the students we spoke to are just fine with that. my position is really strict. i wouldn't say that i hate those people because, you know, like, we don't hate people yet. we, it's my attitude, my personal position, but they chose their own path. and i would say that it's illicit. five or ten years ago, you could avoid the army. and because we are so post—soviet country, it was okay because a little bit of corruption, a little bit of stuff like that, so it wasn't as frowned upon. but right now, because the trouble is literally knocking on your door and if you don't do something about it, you will meet the consequences, people

are treating it as a much serious matter. people who live right here who need to go through the mass missile attacks, who need to go through all those years of war, really horrible things, we have common ground. we understand each other. it's like if you do not even know each other, if you just met at the shelter, you still have this, you have something in common. the last big issue is the way the draft is run. places like this, the military commission in boryspil, a suburb of kyiv, are a relic of the soviet era. the process of running the call up is largely paper based and the summons to military service is meant to be served in person. so this whole process is really steeped in officialdom, a kind of old fashioned soviet officialdom. this draft office goes back to those times and a lot of ukrainians

are quite uncomfortable with that. it didn't matter in the days immediately after the february 2022 russian invasion, because there was a huge wave of national enthusiasm for signing up and volunteering. but now that that enthusiasm has ebbed a bit, the government has a real challenge on its hands in keeping the momentum of conscription and mobilisation going. many of those we saw here were seeking exemption. 0lexandr has been spared service so far because he has three kids, but worries that the new law could change that. attempts to pass the new law have met with several delays. so could ukraine be sure, i asked one of the mps working on it, of having enough troops forthe coming campaign? i would say no—one is confident. so they will get actually

the instruments. but again, ukrainians are not russians and ukrainians need respect and being valued. then in this case they will act differently. i think that's this rule, or this part of law it has to be teached by government, by office of president, by parliamentarians. and one thing i want to underline, that it's not about not willingness to serve in the army or to be afraid. yaroslava's husband has only had a few days leave since the war started. his daughter margarita is growing up. when might the army release him? even if the new law goes through, yaroslava doesn't think it'll be any time soon. and actually, they stated that you need to serve 36 months without any interruptions, and then you will have a right to sign this application for release.

and during the months it will be like your application will be processed during the month. but staff, all of the command... the higher command? the higher, very higher command, including zelensky, they can prolong these time lines. so they can say, "oh, we have very bad situation on the front line. we can release you in a year only." the political differences over that new law stem from a conviction that when it comes to fighting, ukrainians would rather be inspired than coerced. but after two years of war, that inspiration is not what it once was.

mark urban there. when a governing party loses a general election, it often sparks a feisty and wideranging debate about the future direction of that party. that debate appears to be happening within the conservative party now — a party that's still in office, and has been for 1h years. if the opinion polls are correct they are on course to lose the next election. anyway after the erg, the northern research group, one nation, common sense group, new conservatives, and the conservative growth group, today a new tory movement was born and its mission is about coming up with new ideas to try and make the conservatives popular again. the figurehead of popular conservatism — or popcon — is liz truss. when pop con was first announced on x by the former pm a couple of weeks ago, one former minister quote tweeted her and said — 'it worked so well last time she had a go. shut. full stop. up.

full stop.�* in a minute we'll debate the future of the tory party with a former conservative minister and a former adviser to liz truss. first here's nick. final preparations for a gathering designed to herald new beginnings. the star turn. then the main event with a surprise figure inspiring this new group on the tory right. so perhaps oddly, at an event such as this, i'm going to quote the late, great tony benn. his key questions to those in authority were... what power have you got? where did you get it from? in whose interest do you exercise it? to whom you are accountable? and how can we get rid of you? and if you can't get rid of the people who govern you, you don't live in a democratic system _ a socialist tony benn may have posed those very fair questions, but it will fall to popular conservatives to ensure the honest answers become very different in the years ahead. and then liz truss placing

herself at the heart of the debate by insisting there are still plenty of conservatives. now, britain is full of secret conservatives, people who agree with us but don't want to admit it because they think it's not acceptable in their place of work. it's not acceptable at their school. liz truss, are you undermining rishi sunak? this is a festival of ideas, we are told, here to help rishi sunak, not hinder him. most of the conservatives here, well, they wouldn't exactly mourn the departure of the prime minister if he were to leave office, but only a handful think that is a realistic prospect any time soon. a variety of figures from the right with one overarching theme — conservatism needs a reboot. lee anderson. are you here to help rishi sunak? yes, of course i am. but i mean, you're pretty much taking apart quite

a lot of his agenda, aren't you, on what you're saying about net zero is going far too fast? well, yeah. i mean, we all agree with net zero. we want to get there. it's just sometimes people, you know, people are struggling with the bills and stuff like that, but they're just a little bit... a little bit confused or a little bit disenchanted with the way it's going at the moment. we lose self—confidence as a party if we stop debating about our ideas and beliefs. it's very sad that it's all being seen against the background of soap opera, but that's today's politics. many of us are people like you, and some of my colleagues enjoy feeding you it! sirjacob rees—mogg, that was quite a radical agenda, scrapping the supreme court. isn't that just payback for them essentially cancelling borisjohnson's prorogation of parliament? it's putting them back in the house of lords where they always used to be and restoring our constitution. and you saw on the vote on rwanda, baroness hale voted against the second reading. now the house of lords almost never opposes second readings. that shows quite how political she is and how political she was.

you've been very clear that you think rishi sunak should go. are you hoping that message will be heard, or do you think he's here to stay? i mean, i don't think that message would be here today, i don't think they'll even touch on rishi because this is about policies. and, no, ijust like to see strong conservative policies, small state, low taxes, and let's get rid of this wokeism at every institution in the public sector. that's what i'd like to see. all eyes on one figure from outside the party. nigel farage, am i looking at a famous gb news presenter or am i looking at a future leader of the conservative party? well, number one, yes, of course i'm here with the gb news hat on. but number two, i've always been interested in ideas and the reason i left the conservatives and got involved with ukip is i like ideas, and i suspect much of what i'm going to hear this morning i'm going to agree with. and yet liz truss, jacob rees—mogg, lee anderson are an embattled minority within the conservative parliamentary party. but frankly, i think the way the conservative party are going,

rather than thinking about reforming them, i'd like to think that they might possibly even be replaced. focusing on the future and also pondering the present. let's speak to former downing street advisor under liz truss and before that borisjohnson, hugh bennett, and former conservative digital minister margotjames. thank you for talking to our audience. hugh bennett, what is popular conservatism? what audience. hugh bennett, what is popular conservatism? what was interesting _ popular conservatism? what was interesting about _ popular conservatism? what was interesting about the _ popular conservatism? what was interesting about the launch - popular conservatism? what was. interesting about the launch today was about trying to rebuild that connection between democratic accountability and the policies that are enacted in the country. what they are trying to reflect on its way 1a of conservative government doesn't feel that we've not really

had conservative policies. many people who voted conservatives consistently but in some areas of public life conservative dues are a minority and not heard and necessarily enacted through government. so trying to look at the reasons behind that and what needs to change in institutions and the wider civil service and other parts of the public sphere for conservative policies to restore that link between what people vote for and what is delivered.— for and what is delivered. margot jones, do for and what is delivered. margot jones. do you _ for and what is delivered. margot jones, do you agree? _ for and what is delivered. margot jones, do you agree? i _ for and what is delivered. margot jones, do you agree? i do - for and what is delivered. margot jones, do you agree? i do not, i l jones, do you agree? i do not, i think— jones, do you agree? i do not, i think the — jones, do you agree? i do not, i think the government need to get on with running the country responsibly and the _ with running the country responsibly and the people you heard from this afternoon _ and the people you heard from this afternoon at the launch of this event — afternoon at the launch of this event are _ afternoon at the launch of this event are all associated of course with the — event are all associated of course with the reckless mismanagement of the public— with the reckless mismanagement of the public finances that was seen under— the public finances that was seen under the — the public finances that was seen under the short lived liz truss government and people are still paying _ government and people are still paying the price of that with the higher— paying the price of that with the higher interest rates that we are

experiencing. sol higher interest rates that we are experiencing. so i do not think we need _ experiencing. so i do not think we need to— experiencing. so i do not think we need to revert to those individuals and the _ need to revert to those individuals and the policies they represent. i think— and the policies they represent. i think the prime minister is far better— think the prime minister is far better off trying to build on some of the _ better off trying to build on some of the successes he has had like with the — of the successes he has had like with the recent northern ireland resolution and start keeping the economy— resolution and start keeping the economy on track and not listening to all— economy on track and not listening to all these — economy on track and not listening to all these voices off. and in fact dealing _ to all these voices off. and in fact dealing with them more effectively than perhaps he has been doing to date _ than perhaps he has been doing to date. ., ., ., , date. you mean removing the whip from them? _ date. you mean removing the whip from them? i _ date. you mean removing the whip from them? i think— date. you mean removing the whip from them? i think it _ date. you mean removing the whip from them? i think it may - date. you mean removing the whip from them? i think it may come i date. you mean removing the whip from them? i think it may come to | from them? i think it may come to that, from them? i think it may come to that. we're — from them? i think it may come to that. we're only — from them? i think it may come to that, we're only talking _ from them? i think it may come to that, we're only talking about - from them? i think it may come to that, we're only talking about a . that, we're only talking about a small— that, we're only talking about a small number of people in parliament. which is one reason why this organisation is keen to promote the inclusion of people outside parliament because there are not enough _ parliament because there are not enough of— parliament because there are not enough of them inside parliament to make _ enough of them inside parliament to make a _ enough of them inside parliament to make a real— enough of them inside parliament to make a real difference. hugh bennett. _ make a real difference. hugh bennett, does _ make a real difference. hugh bennett, does margot - make a real difference. hugh bennett, does margot make| make a real difference. hugh| bennett, does margot make a make a real difference. ifilq�*u bennett, does margot make a fair point, why should anybody listen to liz truss when she frightened them market is just such an extent that

the pound fell against the dollar and forced the bank of england to intervene to save our pensions? ianthem intervene to save our pensions? when ou look at intervene to save our pensions? when you look at what _ intervene to save our pensions? when you look at what the _ intervene to save our pensions? when you look at what the focus _ intervene to save our pensions? tarnish you look at what the focus was to date of the event it was much less about what are the short term policies we need to do now before the election. it policies we need to do now before the election-— the election. it is actually about whether people _ the election. it is actually about whether people would - the election. it is actually about whether people would listen - the election. it is actually about whether people would listen to | whether people would listen to liz truss because of the disastrous premiership she had? the truss because of the disastrous premiership she had? the thing with 'udauin what premiership she had? the thing with judging what liz _ premiership she had? the thing with judging what liz truss _ premiership she had? the thing with judging what liz truss was _ premiership she had? the thing with judging what liz truss was saying, i judging what liz truss was saying, people should judge her on what she said today. hat people should 'udge her on what she said toda . ., ., _, said today. not on her record in office? wanting _ said today. not on her record in office? wanting to _ said today. not on her record in office? wanting to bring - said today. not on her record in office? wanting to bring back i said today. not on her record in | office? wanting to bring back the link between accountability. i’m link between accountability. i'm sure she link between accountability. i“n sure she would be the first to admit her term in office did not go the way she intended but that is not to say that the ideas being discussed today, i think trying to start a more serious conversation about the longer term institutional reforms we need and how we start to build a coherent policy platform instead of

just short—term fighting. from what i saw it looked like a much more serious effort to start a cohesive piece of work thinking about what a real programme of reforms looks like. and bringing conservative back into the mainstream. i5 like. and bringing conservative back into the mainstream. is it like. and bringing conservative back into the mainstream.— into the mainstream. is it not fair enou:h into the mainstream. is it not fair enough to — into the mainstream. is it not fair enough to have — into the mainstream. is it not fair enough to have that _ into the mainstream. is it not fair enough to have that debate - into the mainstream. is it not fair i enough to have that debate because right now the conservatives have a leader with what appears to be the reverse midas touch, everything he touches does not turn to gold and there needs to be some ideas? there are ideas but — there needs to be some ideas? there are ideas but i _ there needs to be some ideas? there are ideas but i did _ there needs to be some ideas? there are ideas but i did not _ there needs to be some ideas? there are ideas but i did not hear _ there needs to be some ideas? there are ideas but i did not hear any new ideas _ are ideas but i did not hear any new ideas today— are ideas but i did not hear any new ideas today from this group. a lot of hackneyed ideas that came up with, _ of hackneyed ideas that came up with. and — of hackneyed ideas that came up with, and they had the chance in government to pursue them and fail to do— government to pursue them and fail to do so _ government to pursue them and fail to do so i_ government to pursue them and fail to do so. i think the prime minister needs— to do so. i think the prime minister needs to _ to do so. i think the prime minister needs to do — to do so. i think the prime minister needs to do the solid hard yards of running _ needs to do the solid hard yards of running the — needs to do the solid hard yards of running the government and he does deserve _ running the government and he does deserve support from the majority of conservative mps in parliament. i

think— conservative mps in parliament. i think if— conservative mps in parliament. i think if he — conservative mps in parliament. i think if he would toughen his stance against _ think if he would toughen his stance against this very small minority of disruptive — against this very small minority of disruptive conservative mps he will stand _ disruptive conservative mps he will stand a _ disruptive conservative mps he will stand a better chance of broadening his respect— stand a better chance of broadening his respect among them, among the public _ his respect among them, among the ublic. ., ~' his respect among them, among the ublic. ., ~ ., , public. you think if he removes the whi from public. you think if he removes the whip from people _ public. you think if he removes the whip from people who _ public. you think if he removes the whip from people who are - public. you think if he removes the whip from people who are without | public. you think if he removes the | whip from people who are without a date like liz truss and check this week mark he might win the next election? i week mark he might win the next election? ., ., ~' week mark he might win the next election? ., ., ~ , ., , election? i do not think it is as that. election? i do not think it is as that- -- _ election? i do not think it is as that. -- jacob _ election? i do not think it is as that. -- jacob rees-mogg. - election? i do not think it is as that. -- jacob rees-mogg. i i election? i do not think it is as . that. -- jacob rees-mogg. i think election? i do not think it is as - that. -- jacob rees-mogg. i think he that. —— jacob rees—mogg. i think he has got _ that. —— jacob rees—mogg. i think he has got to— that. —— jacob rees—mogg. i think he has got to present the party as a united _ has got to present the party as a united front and the disunity dog in the party— united front and the disunity dog in the party is — united front and the disunity dog in the party is making it virtually unelectable. the public do not vote for divided — unelectable. the public do not vote for divided parties and when of course — for divided parties and when of course you have an opposition that is pretty— course you have an opposition that is pretty united and has faced down its left—wing demons, then the challenge is all the greater for the prime _ challenge is all the greater for the prime minister to build the conservative party into a more united — conservative party into a more united oppositionjust might appeal to more _

united oppositionjust might appeal to more voters at the next election.