the tories won their match? massive election victory. if you put your cross in the box for the tories, how happy are you with the way that things have panned out and a row has broken out about a wannabe green party mp who wants to be referred to as a woman, but who tory as a woman, but who the tory deputy chair women retweeted deputy chair for women retweeted a description of as basically a man in a wig. should we be compelled to describe people as women just because they ask us to? and get this right? over in france, a new plan would see parents whose children have committed have to carry committed crimes have to carry out community service . good idea out community service. good idea or not? should we follow suit . or not? should we follow suit. yes, indeed. i'll have to bet on all of that to come over the next hour. but first, let's cross live to polly middlehurst for tonight's latest news headunes. headlines. >> michelle, thank you. and good evening to you. well, the top

story from the gb newsroom tonight is that the co—chair of a group of conservative mps have said they cannot vote for the government's new rwanda bill. on its second reading tonight. that's after eight mps representing the dup in northern ireland earlier said they're considering voting against rishi sunak plan . it would swell the sunak plan. it would swell the numbers opposed to the safety of rwanda bill and mean even fewer tory mps will be needed to defeat the government . well, the defeat the government. well, the home secretary, james cleverly, has argued that both parliament and the british people support the initiative . the initiative. >> this government is stopping the boats arrivals are down by a third this year as illegal entry fees are on the rise elsewhere in europe . well the shadow home in europe. well the shadow home secretary, yvette cooper, told the house of commons in the same session that the rwanda asylum scheme is simply a mess. >> we've just got total tory chaos.

>> yeah , what a fine mess. this >> yeah, what a fine mess. this week prime minister has got them all into and got the country into as well, tearing lumps out of each other over a failing policy while they let the country down. we've had a home secretary sacked an immigration minister resigning and they've spent almost £300 million of taxpayer money on rwanda without sending a single person . and the sending a single person. and the home secretary seemed to confirm today that in fact, that is £400 million is. >> meanwhile, downing street today has said that migrants living on board the controversial bibby stockholm barge in dorset have had to be assessed for emotional trauma. it follows the death of an asylum seeker on board who's understood to have taken his own life. his body was removed from the vessel earlier. the home secretary promised the incident will be fully investigated. the first asylum seekers were brought back onto the vessel in october, so serial baby killer lucy letby has been stripped of

her nursing credentials after a panel ordered her to be struck off the register . letby had told off the register. letby had told the nursing and midwifery council she didn't object to losing her credentials, but said she maintained her innocence . in she maintained her innocence. in august. the 33 year old was sentenced to 14. a whole life orders after she was convicted of the murders of seven babies and the attempted murders of six others. the head of thames water has told mps the company doesn't have enough money to cover its ballooning debts. the uk's biggest water supplier has £1.35 billion of external debt to support with the first 190 million due in repayment next yeah million due in repayment next year. it comes days after interim bosses said immediate and radical action was needed to secure the company's financial future . more wet weather is on future. more wet weather is on the way with forecasts for hail, thunder and potential flooding. yellow weather warnings in place for south—east scotland and north—east england to cover central scotland as well until

the early hours of tomorrow morning. it follows a weekend of washout parts with storm ellen and storm fergus sweeping across the country , causing widespread the country, causing widespread disruption . a homeless charity disruption. a homeless charity today has been joined by a surprise royal guest at their christmas party dinner. prince william joined volunteers at the passage charity to help serve their annual festive meal to those the homeless charity supports. posting on ecs, they offered a special thank you to the future king for his encouragement and indeed his inspiration in that's the news on gb news. across the uk, on tv, in your car, on digital radio and on your smart speaker by saying play gb news. this is britain's news channel . britain's news channel. >> thank you very much for that, polly . well, i am michelle polly. well, i am michelle dewberry and i'm keeping you company right through till 7:00 tonight. alongside me , the

tonight. alongside me, the deputy leader of reform uk , ben deputy leader of reform uk, ben habib, and the contributing editor of novara media, michael walker. good evening to both of you. you know the drill as well on this programme, don't you? it's not just about us. it's very much about you guys at home. what's on your mind tonight? you can get in touch all usual ways. all the usual ways. vaiews@gbnews.com is how you email me. or you can tweet me at gb news. by the way, i do try and read all of my emails as best as i can. obviously not whilst i'm live on air, there's too many, but i did notice in my inbox on my way home last night, madeleine, you sent me message madeleine, you sent me a message yesterday was your yesterday saying it was your birthday you asked me to birthday and you asked me to wish happy birthday. i'm wish you happy birthday. i'm really sorry i didn't see it last but i'll do so last night, but i'll do so tonight instead. also went tonight instead. you also went on ben was on to say that ben habib was your favourite panellist. oh, wow. birthday wow. what a happy birthday present madeleine. and whilst present to madeleine. and whilst i'm thank you to i'm at it saying thank you to people, at this. you people, look at this. thank you very much, zoe, for sending me in that bauble. can see it? in that bauble. can you see it? she's a bauble me. how she's made a bauble of me. how many people will not a bauble, is it? it's christmas tree

is it? it's a christmas tree decoration. how people can decoration. how many people can say they've been turned into a christmas decoration? christmas tree? decoration? it's got it. it's got my spectacles on it. it's got my spectacles on it. it's got lipstick and everything. got red lipstick and everything. thank very much, thank you very much, dear viewers. it very viewers. i appreciate it very much. as well, lots of you much. also, as well, lots of you get in touch me and ask me get in touch with me and ask me about brown. say to me, about nick brown. you say to me, why nobody asking what's why is nobody ever asking what's going on with the former chief whip? high profile in whip? very high profile guy in politics. why is no one politics. you say, why is no one digging and digging into that story? and i always you that i've tried always tell you that i've tried digging multiple times digging into it multiple times to what's going on to to find out what's going on to no anyway, was an no avail. anyway, there was an update, course, today update, of course, today from nick lawyers that nick brown's lawyers to say that he is going to start not going to stand at the next election. he's also not going to continue within party when it within the labour party when it comes membership. comes to his membership. he says. really interesting says. lots of really interesting things. i'll implore you all to have that. but have a look at that. but basically he no trust and basically he has no trust and faith the investigation faith in the investigation process within labour and he says things have reached a very sorry past when the likely next party of government conducts cases of this gravity in a manner more akin to those of a missed managed golf club called

blimey. it's a corker of a letter and i'd advise you all to cast your eye over it. anyway, today it's a massive day, isn't it, for rishi sunak government. they lovely breakfast this they had a lovely breakfast this morning. apparently smoked salmon. that is your thing. salmon. if that is your thing. and the has continued on and and the day has continued on and on 7:00 is the crunch time for sunak. on 7:00 is the crunch time for sunak . of course, on the basis sunak. of course, on the basis of this rwanda bill. shall we cross live to christopher hope to get the very latest on where we are with that. christopher. good evening to you both our bnng good evening to you both our bring our viewers up to speed with exactly what we're expecting tonight. and there's been a lot of goings on today that will impact the way people vote. tell us more. yes >> yes. well, it wasn't , i'm >> yes. well, it wasn't, i'm afraid to say, i know you like your smoked salmon tubes. it was actually bacon butties for breakfast for the prime minister offered a group of 20 backbenchers. the new conservatives went into when to see him around 8 am. this morning. they they're one of the so—called five families of tory groupings on the right of the party there being wooed by whips

by the government to try and bnng by the government to try and bring them around to make sure they support this rwanda plan. the left of the the one the left of the party, the one nafion the left of the party, the one nation caucus, last night. the left of the party, the one natio approve ;, last night. the left of the party, the one natioapprove it. last night. the left of the party, the one natioapprove it. they st night. the left of the party, the one natioapprove it. they areight. they approve it. they are relaxed about measures that relaxed about the measures that have pushed forward here by have been pushed forward here by the prime minister to try and get these flights taking off from the uk, taking migrants who arrive illegally be arrive here illegally to be processed in rwanda. bill processed in rwanda. this bill says rwanda is a safe says that rwanda is a safe country, is meant to reassure courts anyone's taken there courts that anyone's taken there will be returned to where will not be returned to where they where they they may they where they where they may have fleeing that's have been fleeing from. that's the and why they the idea. and that's why they think going to they're think it's going to they're going point going to work from their point of but the tories on the of view. but the tories on the right, again, these so—called the family of right the five family group of right wingers, it's not wingers, they feel it's not enough to stop the boats. you've got to be much with the got to be much firmer with the human act be much firmer human rights act be much firmer with european courts . if the pm with european courts. if the pm goes too far down that route, he loses support of left. loses the support of the left. it's not the pm is it's not easy. the pm is balancing these two competing interests his party interests in his in his party now what's happening right now is these these groups of tory right wingers are meeting right now. we're expecting a statement

within 45 minutes when within about 45 minutes when they might indicate what their plan likely they will plan is. it's likely they will say can't support the say that we can't support the bill, but they may not oppose it. opposing it is the nuclear opfion it. opposing it is the nuclear option for an mp here. they might well lose the whip . they might well lose the whip. they could bring down the could even bring down the government because what could happen is voted happen if the bill is voted down? probably down? labour would probably propose a vote of no confidence this in the government, this week in the government, which government which the government would probably limp probably win. but would limp into very, very into christmas very, very damaged . and they lose that damaged. and if they lose that vote their confidence vote in their confidence conference, of course there'll be probably be an election probably in in february. lot to play february. there is a lot to play for. politics is never boring. if nothing else, i think brexit has given parliament its voice back power now residing back all power is now residing in westminster, in whitehall, in parliament, and that's made the stakes higher than before. stakes much higher than before. >> interesting stuff. christopher hope, thank you for that update, especially for clarifying. it bacon, not clarifying. it was bacon, not salmon. very important point. thank you very much . enjoy the thank you very much. enjoy the next hour or so . fascinating next hour or so. fascinating insight. right. there's all insight. look right. there's all these talk about these five families, these groups to

families, these groups going to meet this. this group is meet and do this. this group is going do that. this going to meet and do that. this other going to meet and other groups going to meet and do this. are people just a little too jumped up? little bit too jumped up? shouldn't the way shouldn't they just vote the way that boss essentially that their boss essentially tells them to? >> think they should vote >> no, i think they should vote in accordance with what their conscience tells them based on what they think is right for the country. and, know, is country. and, you know, this is the with the problem with the conservative it is, as conservative party. it is, as you very succinctly portrayed , you very succinctly portrayed, michel , a you very succinctly portrayed, michel, a schism of various different groupings and various schisms of different groupings . schisms of different groupings. and the one nation lot who probably would prefer smoked salmon to bacon butties, you know , on the on the sort of anti know, on the on the sort of anti rwanda because they find rwanda offensive and then what you might call the common sense group in the erg anti the rwanda bill because they don't think it actually does what it purports to do on the tin. and if they don't think that that's the case, then they should vote against it and they should signal to the nation that actually the prime minister which is what's going

which in my view is what's going on, to hoodwink us. on, is trying to hoodwink us. frankly, as you know from previous shows, i think the whole rwanda policy is a bit of a hoodwink no number of people going to rwanda is going to deter people from making that journey across, you know, uk because if you've made the journey from north africa into europe, you've made that arduous, much more arduous journey across the mediterranean. you've then walked across half of europe in order to get to calais. you've paid people smugglers for the opportunity to get to the fantastic treatment that we give them in the united kingdom . and them in the united kingdom. and you're not going to be put off by the small chance of the hopeless british judicial system somehow taking you to rwanda. you'll run that gauntlet. >> you're speculating that these people that are so they're choosing the uk. you're very right what you're saying. right in what you're saying. they're going through variety they're going through a variety of they're spending of countries. they're spending however because of countries. they're spending howevefinal because of countries. they're spending howevefinal destinationzcause they're final destination of choice this country. so no choice is this country. so no one really knows with any certainty that actually if you could find yourself, could potentially find yourself, you there to

you know, shoved over there to that country, no really, i that country, no one really, i would say, be a deterrent. would say, would be a deterrent. >> i tell what's more >> but i tell you what's more fanciful to think rwanda fanciful is to think rwanda would work to presume would would work to presume it would work and spend £300 million chasing down. chasing it down. >> but £300 million, everyone says, £300 million this says, well, £300 million this and million that. that's and £300 million that. that's barely what watch. how many barely what i watch. how many days of that is? 8 million. do the maths. you're a smart businessman. it's what, just over a month it? over a month or so, is it? >> a much. yeah but >> yeah, it's a much. yeah but what. yeah, but you're at full tilt. it's only 4000. they go to rwanda tilt. that's it. rwanda at full tilt. that's it. >> where are you all this. >> where are you on all this. >> where are you on all this. >> think agree this >> i think we agree on this point, which that this point, which is that this nonsense which is going on here, i as a soap opera, i think of it as a soap opera, you know, mark, francois wants a bit time in front of a tv bit more time in front of a tv camera. so he sort of says, i might reveal. and then we don't know if he will or not. but rwanda, reason why won't rwanda, the reason why it won't work because court work is yes, because court documents have suggested only 200 be sent a year. 200 people would be sent a year. as said, have as you've said, people have already massive risk to already taken a massive risk to get that would count as get here. that would count as a sort of 1% risk that you might get sent to rwanda. now, there's no who to have made

no one who is going to have made that will that journey but will be deterred by a risk of being deterred by a 1% risk of being sent to rwanda. so whole sent to rwanda. so the whole policy is bit of a joke. i policy is a bit of a joke. i think rishi sunak put it forward because he thought him because he thought it made him seem on migration. in seem tough on migration. in fact, makes him fact, it just makes him seem like he's completely out of his depth because this won't stop any i would object any boats. i would also object to you we them to you saying we treat them fabulously or fabulously when they get here or we do well, obviously ten times more fabulously than french. more fabulously than the french. >> is >> but the point i think is relevant that there is relevant here is that there is someone has their life someone who has lost their life today on the bibby stockholm. >> we think they took their own life. think the that life. so i think the idea that these are getting these people are all getting treated know treated fabulously, you know what, arrive in what, most people who arrive in britain want to do hold on because they have their decision britain want to do hold on becau quickly have their decision britain want to do hold on becau quickly ha�*getieir decision britain want to do hold on becau quickly ha�*getieir and ision britain want to do hold on becau quickly ha�*getieir and get| made quickly to get on and get a job and what we're is job and what we're doing is we're limbo for we're keeping them in limbo for months on end because months and years on end because the home office completely dysfunctional. >> mean, let's just >> but so, i mean, let's just pick up on this very tragic death within, you the death within, you know, the bibby stockholm suicide side. and know, and this is awful. you know, i really me, all this really saddens me, all this stuff. suicide apparently stuff. but suicide is apparently the under the biggest killer of men under the biggest killer of men under the in this country the age of 50 in this country alone. when at various alone. when you look at various different apparently different stats, apparently there's one suicide every 90

minutes. this is absolutely a monumental issue. so i do find it interesting that the it quite interesting that the tragic of person tragic death of this person aboard stockholm, aboard the bibby stockholm, none of ins and outs. of us know the ins and outs. none know the why. none of us know the reasons why. but people therefore but already people are therefore saying it's because of the government. it's the government's because government's fault. it's because this has been put aboard this person has been put aboard this person has been put aboard this accommodation and nobody knows that. yeah i mean we should always be careful when talking about any one individual suicide, attributing. but talking about any one individual suicjust attributing. but talking about any one individual suicjust broughttributing. but talking about any one individual suicjust broughttri uping. but talking about any one individual suicjust broughttri up .|g. but talking about any one individual suicjust broughttri up . you ut you just brought it up. you brought it in response to the brought it up in response to the way asylum seekers. >> well, because i think we were speaking carelessly there about how spoken, how how they are spoken, about how they fabulously. how they are spoken, about how they i fabulously. how they are spoken, about how they i think bulously. how they are spoken, about how they i think necessarily now, i don't think necessarily that we say, oh, this person that we can say, oh, this person definitely for definitely committed suicide for this reason , but it relevant. this reason, but it is relevant. i think that this summer i think that just this summer there were hundreds of people on there were hundreds of people on the stockholm of the bibby stockholm who sort of sent government sent a letter to the government saying how distressing it was being and many people had being there. and many people had considered suicide. considered committing suicide. we know that actually there was someone attempted suicide someone who attempted suicide after out that they after they'd found out that they were be. after they'd found out that they werpeople be. after they'd found out that they werpeople make. after they'd found out that they werpeople make a proactive >> people make a proactive choice don't choice to come here, don't they? i mean, they can't all expect four i mean, come

i mean, they can't all expect founow. i mean, come on how. >> on now. >> well, so what i think we should be doing is processing people think people very quickly. so i think the idea that we're putting up tens thousands of people tens of thousands of people in hotels is completely bizarre. processing failure of government. what should processing failure of goydoingznt. what should processing failure of goydoing is . what should processing failure of goydoing is makingiat should processing failure of goydoing is making at should processing failure of goydoing is making a decisionjld processing failure of goydoing is making a decision so be doing is making a decision so people go back people can either go back because they haven't a right people can either go back be stays they haven't a right people can either go back be stay herey haven't a right people can either go back be stay here or aven't a right people can either go back be stay here or theyt a right people can either go back be stay here or they can a right people can either go back be stay here or they can get �*ight people can either go back be stay here or they can get ohil to stay here or they can get on with and become with their lives and become productive with their lives and become pro butive with their lives and become pro but just just going to >> but just just going back to the about treating them the point about treating them fabulously, the french on average £5,000 per annum average spend £5,000 per annum per spend per illegal migrant. we spend £50,000 per annum per head, and thatis £50,000 per annum per head, and that is ten times as generous and of course we do have lots of is it ten times generous or is it ten times as generous or is it ten times as generous or is ten times more incompetent? >> right. because fact is >> right. because the fact is most they arrive most people, when they arrive here, want is here, what they want to do is they to on with life. they want to get on with life. they get job. they they want to get a job. they want to start living a normal life. they don't want to be held up hotel. but that's not up in a hotel. but that's not what asked that's what they've asked for. that's what they've asked for. that's what the government the implication we implication of because we haven't their claims implication of because we hatime. their claims in time. >> implication what >> the implication of what you're that we should you're saying is that we should have open border, you're saying is that we should havpeople open border, you're saying is that we should havpeople inopen border, you're saying is that we should havpeople inopenget'der, let people come in and get a job. but you've got to you've got them somewhere got to hold them somewhere while you determine. but you can once they shores, which

they land on your shores, which they should never do, in my opinion, in the first place. but once on your shores, once they're on your shores, you've got to have a you've got to have them in a holding pattern until you determine case. >> ? then $- ? then it can month >> and then it can take a month or it take two years. and it or it can take two years. and it happens to be the case that in this country it takes couple this country it takes a couple of because we've defunded of years because we've defunded the is the home office. i mean, it is taking way to taking way, way longer to process anyone's asylum claim in this country elsewhere this country than elsewhere in europe. take more this country than elsewhere in europe. seekers take more this country than elsewhere in europe. seekers than take more this country than elsewhere in europe. seekers than france.iore asylum seekers than france. france takes more asylum seekers than that than we do. so the idea that we're by we're somehow overwhelm armed by the number of people coming is misleading. that misleading. it seems to me that there sort of government there is some sort of government failure elsewhere here. you know, there's fine know, i, i think there's a fine line genuine line between what is a genuine asylum what is an asylum seeker and what is an economic migrant. >> and then to what you >> and i listen then to what you were saying about, you know, these to get these people. they want to get here want on here and they want to get on with life and get a job. you know, have thought that know, i would have thought that these people, if they are genuinely apparently genuinely being apparently persecuted unsafe, persecuted and they felt unsafe, apparently france. and apparently in france. and i would their would have thought that their first was is to first primary desire was is to feel safe when i when i hear things like people's primary desire is to get a job, which i don't knock, by the way, who

wouldn't progress their wouldn't want to progress their life and get a job and earn money? >> don't think those two >> and i don't think those two things inconsistent. things are inconsistent. >> not they're >> ponder whether or not they're economic asylum economic migrants or asylum seekers. economic migrants or asylum seekernot inconsistent. you that's not inconsistent. you guys, do you make to it all guys, what do you make to it all at also as well, let me at home? also as well, let me take time. four take you back in time. four years to the day. can you years ago to the day. can you believe it's that ago now? believe it's that long ago now? bofis believe it's that long ago now? boris johnson , of course, won boris johnson, of course, won a stonking majority. did you vote for him ? and if so, how do you for him? and if so, how do you feel years on? do you go, feel for years on? do you go, yes, i made the right decision or do you go, what a mess. yes, i made the right decision or do you go, what a mess . you or do you go, what a mess. you tell me .

listening to gb news radio . listening to gb news radio. >> hello there, michelle dewberry keeping you company until 7:00 tonight. i don't want to get all diva ish on you or anything like that, you know, but it's a miracle that i'm still keep you company still here to keep you company till 7:00 because i wish could till 7:00 because i wish i could show i mean, i don't show you the t. i mean, i don't think the that i have think i can. the t that i have been can oh, been served. can you? oh, i'm spilling you see the

spilling it now. can you see the colour? i've never seen anything like it. i'm going get like it. i'm going to get at colour up. that not colour chart up. that is not it's not good is it. >> well i think we should have champagne. understand champagne. i don't understand what's going on. >> oh, mean, in parliament >> oh, i mean, in parliament they stroke, they get salmon stroke, bacon butties here. i mean, i don't butties in here. i mean, i don't even know that but even know what that was. but anyway, habib alongside even know what that was. but anvaichaelhabib alongside even know what that was. but anvaichael habib remainside even know what that was. but anvaichael habib remains to me. michael walker remains to howard says where was the outcry when people like oil workers lived on the bibby stockholm? did they get assessed for emotional trauma due to their so—called living accommodation? mark said double the capacity, which i think is relevant there. thatis which i think is relevant there. that is a very good point, margaret says. why don't we press now for the introduction of id cards, ids? is that something that you would support, guys? peter says. how on earth do you actually speed up asylum application when many people have no documentation ? people have no documentation? what do you do? what would that look like? right. >> let's ask. well, we know we know what that looks like because they just wave them through or they wave them through. earlier

through. they did that earlier this year in to expedite this year in order to expedite 12,000 applications. >> an amnesty, >> yes, there was an amnesty, wasn't there was an wasn't there? there was an amnesty. very cross amnesty. yes you're very cross your like right your facts. i like that. right let's talk, shall we? politics, because you know. can't because do you know. i can't believe years to believe it. it's four years to the since the last election. the day since the last election. i ran in it. the day since the last election. iran in it. i'll never the day since the last election. i ran in it. i'll never forget it, frankly. anyway of it, quite frankly. anyway of course, tories did indeed course, the tories did indeed get a stonking majority of over 80 seats as it was then. were you somebody that voted for them? did they deliver? have they delivered so far on what you wanted them to? sandy says i won't vote for the tories ever again unless boris johnson is there wowzers . george there. leader wowzers. george says i voted conservative four years ago because they promised brexit. since then, not only do we not have a proper brexit, we don't have a proper conservative government. massive mistake voting for boris, fake voting for boris, the fake champion of red wall, says champion of the red wall, says richard. i feel very richard. susan says, i feel very disappointed. i did vote tories, but it's all been squandered , but it's all been squandered, she says. >> ben well , she says. >> ben well, susan and richard are spot on. you know, when bofis are spot on. you know, when boris won his 80 seat majority, he won it in no small part because the brexit party stood

down 317 candidates against the tories. and we all thought this was now going to be at least two terms of conservative government. actually, he became famous as the only prime minister in history not only to be evicted within the three years of taking office after such a thumping majority, but to be hounded out of the commons itself. i don't think there's a prime minister in history who has record and what he's has that record and what he's left is a legacy of complete disaster. so anyone who is still labouring under the illusion that boris johnson was some kind of churchillian figure , you of churchillian figure, you know, taking the united kingdom forward, you know, with aspiration and enthusing ism and ambition is very mistaken. he was he was a hopeless leader for this country . and the evidence this country. and the evidence is all there. and as some of your texts pointed out , he your texts pointed out, he didn't get brexit done, as he said he would. he promised that the country would leave the eu as one united kingdom. we didn't. we left northern ireland behind . he didn't. we left northern ireland behind. he promised us

didn't. we left northern ireland behind . he promised us that we behind. he promised us that we would take control our laws, would take control of our laws, our our fish . we our borders, our fish. we haven't. are still hitched at haven't. we are still hitched at the hip the eu in very the hip with the eu in very important policy areas. state aid competition in environment. this inexorable march towards net zero and employment. we're committed through the deal that he did to stay in the european convention of human rights. i know it has nothing to do with the eu, but that's the commitment we made in his trade agreement. and that's the agreement. and that's one of the things are arguing things that people are arguing about essentially in that rwanda deal >> nice. that was a best of applause, though. if you listen on the radio wondering what on earth was going on. michael, where on it? all where are you on it? all >> i mean, he get >> well, i mean, he did get brexit done. i don't think a harder brexit would have put britain in. it's a bad situation, but i mean, there's no a hard brexit. no such thing as a hard brexit. i think the biggest failure for bofis i think the biggest failure for boris johnson levelling i think the biggest failure for bmean,�*|nson levelling i think the biggest failure for bmean,�*|nsonwas levelling i think the biggest failure for b mean, 1nson was his elling i think the biggest failure for bmean,�*|nson was his big1g i think the biggest failure for bmean,�*|nson was his big message i mean, what was his big message when came to was when it came to 2019? it was one, brexit done. yes, one, yes, get brexit done. yes, brexit got although, one, yes, get brexit done. yes, brethe got although, one, yes, get brexit done. yes, brethe way, ot although, one, yes, get brexit done. yes, brethe way, i: although, one, yes, get brexit done. yes, brethe way, i do although, one, yes, get brexit done. yes, brethe way, i do remembergh, one, yes, get brexit done. yes, brethe way, i do remember a, one, yes, get brexit done. yes, brethe way, i do remember a very by the way, i do remember a very it looked like a very expensive advertising campaign. think advertising campaign. i think saatchi and saatchi, which was

all youtube for all over google and youtube for days, boris days, which was give boris johnson majority in johnson a big majority in politics, are sick politics, will end. are you sick of arguments then get get of arguments then and get get the tories in then we the tories in then what we had is three prime over a is three prime ministers over a very of time very short period of time because fought like because they just fought like rats sack. anyway yeah, rats in a sack. anyway but yeah, i levelling will be i think levelling up will be where failed on where he really failed on a policy issue. what he said is we will wealth around will spread the wealth around britain. looking britain. i was looking at bloomberg they say bloomberg today. they say actually regional has actually regional inequality has increased since 2019. so the gap between the productivity of workers london and the workers in london and the workers in london and the workers elsewhere. now, of course, of course, that's not a feature of the themselves. the workers themselves. it's what working what they're working with has grown tories came to grown since the tories came to power. they've done the power. so they've done the opposite up. power. so they've done the opp bute up. power. so they've done the oppbut then up. power. so they've done the oppbut then some up. power. so they've done the oppbut then some would say >> but then some would say actually they've sacked off a lot to which people can lot of the to which people can debate or not agree debate whether or not they agree with that. but on basis that with that. but on the basis that actually that actually you take a lot of that money invest it in the money and you invest it in the regions, particularly in things like infrastructure, so will that the proof is in the >> i mean, the proof is in the pudding, it? mean, pudding, isn't it? i mean, i would have gone for hs2 and then built think we should built a hs3. i think we should be shed loads of be investing, shed loads of money a high quality money in having a high quality rail network country. rail network in this country. i think that we start think the idea that we start planning then planning stuff and then

cancelling the is cancelling them all the time is a bit of a mistake. and i also think difficult to say that think it's difficult to say that cancelling that cancelling the bit of hs2 that went birmingham went from birmingham to manchester counts as manchester and leeds counts as levelling up. i don't really see the there, would have the logic there, so i would have said should have the logic there, so i would have said is should have the logic there, so i would have said is put should have the logic there, so i would have said is put their should have the logic there, so i would have said is put their putshould have the logic there, so i would have said is put their put theird have done is put their put their money their mouth is and money where their mouth is and properly around uk. properly invest around the uk. they to forgotten they seem to have forgotten about can be the judge >> well, you can be the judge of that you feel that that at home. do you feel that your area is levelled and your area is levelled up? and i'm fascinated by this. i'm always fascinated by this. what does levelling mean to what does levelling up mean to you? happy if house you? would you be happy if house pnces you? would you be happy if house prices i don't prices were levelled up? i don't know your houses started cost know your houses started to cost the london, the same as houses in london, for example. you want for example. would you want a piece that pie not? let me piece of that pie or not? let me know your thoughts on that. but also politics also before i finish my politics chat, to ask you about chat, i do want to ask you about this caught eye. this issue. it's caught my eye. there's row that's been there's a row that's been breaking out about the mp, rachel she's also the rachel maclean. she's also the deputy chair in the tory party for women. she's come under fire now saying a green now basically for saying a green party candidate who refers to themselves as a trans woman. she retweeted this tweet, basically, which describes this person as essentially a man who wears a wig and calls himself a proud

lesbian . i have to say that lesbian. i have to say that rachel did go on apparently to delete that tweet and issue an apology . well, the potential or apology. well, the potential or aspirational mp in question went on to the to bbc respond to that tweet. let's have a look and listen. >> without a shadow of a doubt, it is a transphobic comment. it's dog whistling at the finest . you know, it's gaslighting . . you know, it's gaslighting. it's everything. by attacking a minority , a minority group is minority, a minority group is just. yeah, you know, it's just i don't mean to be rude or disrespectful, but what i find gaslighting is me being expected to call that person a woman . to call that person a woman. >> benhabib, where are you? well, i'm completely behind rachel mclean, and i wouldn't have deleted the tweet. >> i mean, he's clearly a man . >> i mean, he's clearly a man. he's clearly wearing a wig. and >> i mean, he's clearly a man. he's cle he'snearing a wig. and >> i mean, he's clearly a man. he's cle he's not'ing a wig. and >> i mean, he's clearly a man. he's cle he's not ag a wig. and >> i mean, he's clearly a man. he's cle he's not a lesbian. and >> i mean, he's clearly a man. he's cle he's not a lesbian. ind i mean, he's not a lesbian. i suppose there's an error there. he's not a lesbian. he's heterosexual . he's a man dressed heterosexual. he's a man dressed up as a woman and he still fancies women. see, i'm just

showing on the screen what a woman is and the difference between a woman and a trans woman both deserve respect and freedom to live their lives. >> it's not transphobic to >> but it's not transphobic to say the same thing, say they're not the same thing, nor policymakers nor does it assist policymakers across care, education across health care, education and ers to pretend that and the ers to pretend that they michael where are you they are. michael where are you on this? >> well, i mean, i think the reason she's apologised is because she was quite because what she said was quite rude. i think she didn't rude. i mean, i think she didn't say that she retweeted. >> rude someone else said? >> i think it is n said? >> i think it is i mean, >> i think it is rude. i mean, i think as a society, we're sort of have really sort of we're yet to have really sort of we're yet to have really sort of to any kind of consensus of come to any kind of consensus on now, i have trans on this. now, i have trans friends who have lived their friends who have lived in their chosen long chosen gender for a very long time, to call them time, and i think to call them if they're a trans woman, to call a man would be very call them a man would be very offensive now. >> are men. you do >> but they are men. you do appreciate that. >> but they are men. you do appredon't that. >> but they are men. you do appredon't actually agree with >> i don't actually agree with that. do that is that. i do think that there is a fundamental difference between a man trans woman. i don't man and a trans woman. i don't think woman is a think a trans woman is just a man a woman. man who thinks they're a woman. i something very i think there is something very fundamental there. i think the point we decide someone point at which we decide someone is woman or when is treated as a woman or when they're woman

they're a trans woman is something still something that we still haven't quite on. quite found a consensus on. i think comes to sports, think when it comes to sports, when comes to prisons, it's when it comes to prisons, it's totally reasonable people totally reasonable for people to have i have a debate about that. i think, you know, i think most people will agree that use people will agree that we'll use the wants. the pronouns. someone wants. >> it is >> i don't think it is reasonable have a debate. reasonable to have a debate. >> else? >> anyone else? >> anyone else? >> don't think it's >> you know, i don't think it's a debateable issue. think a debateable issue. i think if you're a man. if you're a man, you're a man. if you're a man, you're a man. if you're biologically a man, you're biologically a man, you're man, you may have you're a man, you may have gender dysmorphia. you may be suffering a psychological problem, psychiatric issue . problem, a psychiatric issue. you with the way you identify yourself . but that doesn't make yourself. but that doesn't make yourself. but that doesn't make you a woman so well . you a woman so well. >> so it's not debateable. there's differences within. no, there is differences within the scientific community here because have sort you scientific community here bectscan have sort you scientific community here bectscan brains have sort you scientific community here bectscan brains and; sort you scientific community here bectscan brains and say't you scientific community here bectscan brains and say thatyou can scan brains and say that actually trans women, can actually trans women, you can sort that they're not sort of tell that they're not the same as as a cis man, for example. there a example. so there is a physiological thing going on, but also , i think the way you're but also, i think the way you're sort about it, you sort of talking about it, you know, women. it's know, they're not women. it's just a mental health problem. there's psychological there's a psychological are saying, people saying, yeah, but i mean, people said things gay said similar things about gay people right? i people in the past. right? so i do that understand of do think that our understand of this at this point, you know ,

this is at this point, you know, still quite primitive, still quite basic. and we need to keep an open mind about this, which i don't think you're really showing. no, no, you're not. you're doctor. showing. no, no, you're not. you're not doctor. showing. no, no, you're not. you're not adoctor. showing. no, no, you're not. you're not a matter of it's not >> it's not a matter of it's not a matter of keeping an open mind. >> i actually think that affirms people's choices and people's sort of choices and desires to gender desires when it comes to gender is case for them. and is the best case for them. and then if someone has then sort of if someone has taken that transition to then just the sex, just call them the other sex, i think is no , no, no, no, no, no, think is no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. no, no, no, no, no. »-|- no, no, no, no, no. >> i think his name was >> look, i think his name was michael. melissa, if michael. he's now melissa, if michael. he's now melissa, if michael me to it was, michael. he's now melissa, if ibmean, me to it was, michael. he's now melissa, if ibmean, in me to it was, michael. he's now melissa, if ibmean, in april1e to it was, michael. he's now melissa, if ibmean, in april 2022, it was, michael. he's now melissa, if ibmean, in april 2022, this it was, i mean, in april 2022, this person then ran as mattie . person then ran as mattie. >> mattie. >> mattie. >> sorry, not michael. >> sorry, not michael. >> this was in april 22. >> this was in april 22. >> yeah. so mattie now wants to be called melissa. that's fine by me . i'll be called melissa. that's fine by me. i'll call him melissa. but for me to have to recognise him as a woman is intellectually and biologically daft. it's challenging the english language to the point where it becomes meaningless on how you communicate a there's no such thing as a man who has all his biological parts as a man

becoming a woman. it just doesn't happen . doesn't happen. >> well, this person apparently reckons that they began to transition last year. but you see, because i know you're sympathetic to this, we've had conversations off air, quite long, conversations off air about this. but i always pondered this because to me, you're just not you. but when we get into that, when i look at that and that person's telling me i'm a essentially, i'm me i'm a woman, essentially, i'm the you, michelle i the same as you, michelle i think delusion and i think think it's delusion and i think it's untrue. and then i ask myself, where is the line myself, well, where is the line here? level? if here? where is the level? if that well, not that that person well, not that person. want to it person. i don't want to make it a aduu person. i don't want to make it a adult man a specific if a grown adult man in his head feels like he's a child, why would we go along with that allow that person with that and allow that person to attend a school? >> well think what that >> well well, i think what that camparis misses is that there is something which the medical establishment has recognised, which is gender dysphoria , which which is gender dysphoria, which lots people experience . it's lots of people experience. it's not just sort of one in a few. is that a mental health condition? >> that's what i that's what i volunteered that's what volunteered up. that's what i volunteered up. that's what i volunteered up. that's what i volunteered up. first time. volunteered up. it's first time. it's experience.

volunteered up. it's first time. it's so experience. volunteered up. it's first time. it's so justarience. volunteered up. it's first time. it's so just help :e. volunteered up. it's first time. it's so just help me understand >> so just help me understand that i'm trying i'm seeking that i'm trying to i'm seeking to is that a mental to understand is that a mental health you're describing? >> well, there's disagreement about i think it's an about that. so i think it's an experience have. experience that people have. it's diagnosis that people it's a diagnosis that people give but think mental give someone. but i think mental health comes with some health condition comes with some pnor health condition comes with some prior assumptions that either it's negative or it's abnormal. so, for example, prejudicial homosexuality used to be considered a mental health condition. so i can see why trans people don't want gender dysphoria a mental health dysphoria to be a mental health condition because it seems that you some way , you know, you are in some way, you know, not . and obviously it's not normal. and obviously it's a minority group, but i think it's an experience which is just as valid everyone i've got valid as everyone else. i've got the medical establishment recognises michael recognises that, but michael, i've sympathy i've got great sympathy with people not comfortable people who are not comfortable in their bodies. >> it. they're not >> i get it. they're not comfortable. i but that comfortable. i get it. but that doesn't woman just doesn't make them a woman just because they want to be a woman the woman. the same as a cis woman. >> are a woman. can >> they are a trans woman. can i hate word cis woman. hate this word cis woman. >> i hate. i don't know. i completely reject this as not trans. >> it's the same way that straight not gay. >> it's the same way that stréwhy not gay. >> it's the same way that stréwhy should not gay. >> it's the same way that stréwhy should not greferred to >> why should i be referred to as woman? as a cis woman? >> but people would hate this

group of men that have suddenly decided woman. decided that they are a woman. i mean. see, i think that you're. >> ta ena- t a loaded way of >> that's a very loaded way of putting don't think trans putting that i don't think trans women men who have women are just men who have decided i think decided to be women. i think trans tend to be, you trans women tend to be, you know, men who've experienced gender can't be gender dysphoria can't really be happy. gender dysphoria can't really be bappy- by happy. other than by transitioning. sort transitioning. and then so sort of as a choice i of framing it as a choice i think somewhat problematic think is somewhat problematic when trans. when it comes to cis and trans. i mean, it was case i mean, when it was the case that gay were to that gay people were allowed to get know, the idea get married, you know, the idea oh, not a oh, the straight it's not a straight it's straight marriage, it's just a marriage. it'sjust a straight marriage, it's just a marriage. it's just a way of saying not a gay marriage. saying it's not a gay marriage. right it's just when we have new categories, going to have categories, you're going to have to few more. categories, you're going to have to i few more. categories, you're going to have to i don't few more. categories, you're going to have to i don't wantnore. categories, you're going to have to i don't want alle. categories, you're going to have to i don't want all of a sudden >> i don't want all of a sudden i a woman. i'm a biological i am a woman. i'm a biological woman. and i just reject this nofion woman. and i just reject this notion now i've got what notion that now i've got what are you losing by being notion that now i've got what a|gripu losing by being notion that now i've got what a|grip on)sing by being notion that now i've got what a|grip on reality? being notion that now i've got what a|grip on reality? bis1g a grip on reality? there is a bafic a grip on reality? there is a basic grip on reality. when someone now to put this new someone now has to put this new label have label on, someone could have said same thing said exactly the same thing about say the idea that you've >> to say the idea that you've got a straight wedding. no weddings a man and weddings are between a man and a woman. saying gay woman. so saying there's gay weddings weddings, weddings and straight weddings, i'm harm. i'm not accepting that's harm. >> they? one gets hurt by >> do they? no one gets hurt by who but gets

who marries who, but who gets harmed called a cis man harmed by being called a cis man or declaring or you have women declaring themselves women and then themselves as women and then arguing for access to, for example, safe single—sex spaces. and to me it becomes a or women only prisons or wanting to go into women's. >> i'm agreeing with you that there is a policy debate to have when it comes to sports and prisons. but what i'm saying is that comes to language that when it comes to language change, i don't see change, you know, i don't see why we can't just be a more why we can't just be a bit more relaxed both relaxed about this than you both seem to be. i'm not relaxed. >> very different opinions. all them are equally valid >> all of them are equally valid and i want it open to you at and i want to it open to you at home. your view on it home. what is your view on it all? i want to talk to you after the break about whether or not parents who allow well or whose children commit criminal activity, should it be the parents that are on the hook for doing things like community service? that's what they're planning in france. don't forget, as well, got that forget, as well, we've got that huge rwanda bill coming up at seven. we'll have the latest on that don't go anywhere .

a very realistic prospect that the government will lose that

vote . vote. >> hi there, michelle dewberry with you till seven. deputy leader of reform uk, ben habib, alongside me as is a contributing editor of novara media. michael walker. beverly on twitter says for goodness sake, you guys stop. boris boris bashing cuts , spit that out. bashing cuts, spit that out. then she says he came to power in 2019, december , and she says in 2019, december, and she says almost immediately a pandemic hit. and he didn't get a chance. leave him alone. she says. what do you make to that now let's talk about parents basically , talk about parents basically, how much responsibility they should have when it comes to the acts of their children . because acts of their children. because overin acts of their children. because over in france , i found this over in france, i found this quite interesting. plans underfoot. there are what they're suggesting, of course, should be familiar, perhaps with the been a the fact there's been quite a lot over there. and lot of rioting over there. and french now , some would french ministers now, some would say very controversial. they were single parent were blaming single parent families and they're suggesting that actually the parents, if your children commit criminal

acts, that you, the parent, would be on the hook for it essentially and have to carry out community service. what would you to that? ben would you make to that? ben habib i think there are habib so i think there are a couple of things going on over here. >> the knee jerk reaction of adolescence don't adolescence and i don't think they're children. they're talking about children. they're of, they're talking about sort of, you through to 17 or 18 you know, 15 through to 17 or 18 year old type adolescence individuals, the knee jerk reaction perhaps is . to take it reaction perhaps is. to take it out on the parents. but there are two fundamental problems , are two fundamental problems, aims, i think, that are contributing to the riots from which this new policy emanated. the first is multiculturalism , the first is multiculturalism, which isn't working in france , which isn't working in france, pretty much in the same way, but much worse, actually, frankly, than it isn't working in the united kingdom. and the riots to which , you know, this particular which, you know, this particular policy from which this particular policy was born was when that algerian, young algerian was shot in paris. and there was kind of inter—ethnic violence all the way from

marseille to calais. and to put that down to a parenting issue , that down to a parenting issue, issue in isolation, i think is misdiagnosing the problem . and misdiagnosing the problem. and then the other issue here and it's a it's something that we're guilty of in the united kingdom is the breakdown in of core families and in the promotion of both parents going to work , both parents going to work, children ever increasing , going children ever increasing, going to childcare day centres younger and younger in the last budget, for example. jeremy hunt made funding available for mothers to leave their child in child day care at the age of nine months. so they could go back to work. you've got to break down in families. that's taking place in in the west and if you have a breakdown in families, it's the state that's bringing children up and without the kind of familiar protective blanket that children need in order to be balanced individuals as they grow up, you're going to get more of this . so i think it's

more of this. so i think it's a knee jerk reaction and one i don't wholly agree with to a problem that has much deeper roots both in multiculturalism and in breakdown in nuclear families , as i do find this families, as i do find this nofion families, as i do find this notion that if a parent works and their child goes to nursery, that somehow they're neglecting that somehow they're neglecting that child. >> and that is akin to a kind of family breakdown or a societal issue, what do you make to that at home? michael, your thoughts on it all? yeah i mean, i suppose to respond to a couple of said there. of things you've said there. >> think the idea of is >> i think the idea of france is a failure of multicultural ism is a bit odd because when is a little bit odd because when you at multicultural you look at multicultural policies, sort policies, france is often sort of opposite policies, france is often sort of uk. opposite policies, france is often sort of uk. they opposite policies, france is often sort of uk. they don't osite policies, france is often sort of uk. they don't sort�* policies, france is often sort of uk. they don't sort of the uk. so they don't sort of set straight and welcome different ethnicities the different ethnicities and the cultural symbols that come with that. follow laicite, which that. they follow laicite, which means sort of everything has to be secular. no is be very secular. no one is allowed religious allowed to wear their religious symbols . symbols to school, for example. and think the model it hasn't and i think the model it hasn't worked it? well, but that worked has it? well, but that isn't think isn't a model. so i think the model multiculturalism that isn't a model. so i think the modelhadnulticulturalism that isn't a model. so i think the model had nu this lturalism that isn't a model. so i think the modelhad nu this country| that we've had in this country whereby, , i went to a whereby, you know, i went to a very multicultural secondary school sung for eid, school, we sung songs for eid, for diwali , hanukkah,

for diwali, for hanukkah, you know, for everything, for christmas , course. i do christmas, of course. and i do think there was sort of think there was a sort of awareness and of cultural difference. and think that difference. and i think that came integration. i do came with integration. and i do think is think integration is much stronger this country it stronger in this country than it is because of our sort is in france because of our sort of multicultural policies, which i think have actually been, you know, a positive thing. i think also framing what also sort of framing what happened in france is inter ethnic a strange ethnic violence is a bit strange because i don't think there was one ethnicity fighting, another, which that which to me is what sort of that suggests. i mean, on the family point. we're point. so the article we're working from, i think from the times has a passage which i find somewhat interesting, the somewhat interesting, says the government somewhat interesting, says the go households with an absent to households with an absent father mother father and an overrun mother unable children from unable to prevent children from going out at night to set fire to buildings private to public buildings and private properties. saying properties. they're saying absent fathers, overrun mothers . absent fathers, overrun mothers. and then the response is to send the mothers to do community service. >> i don't see how that's going to help parents. >> it, it would >> as i understand it, it would be even the absent be birth, so even the absent father be back to father would be brought back to the household do community the household to do community describing broken family stability. >> huh? there describing broken families, aren't they? >> you mean, i found it

>> but you i mean, i found it interesting that you took it down the road of if send down the road of if you send your down the road of if you send youthat's example. >> that's an example. >> that's an example. >> so like, for example, my son goes nursery, but we're part goes to nursery, but we're part of parent family. my son goes to nursery, but we're part ofvery, parent family. my son goes to nursery, but we're part of very, very,ent family. my son goes to nursery, but we're part of very, very, veryimily. my son goes to nursery, but we're part of very, very, very loved my son goes to nursery, but we're part of very, very, very loved and on is very, very, very loved and i'm a very hands on. >> sure . >> i'm sure. >> i'm sure. >> and just find that quite >> and i just find that quite interesting , actually, as interesting, actually, as fascinating found that fascinating as i found that there's something else very there's also something else very fascinating going on. let's cross live to it, matt francois giving an update on the so—called five families and how they're going tonight. they're going to vote tonight. listen about seven minutes to. >> all right . >> all right. >> all right. >> on behalf of all five, all five. >> so and i'll make that plain. >> so and i'll make that plain. >> this is so ridiculous. >> this is so ridiculous. >> tell me when you're ready to go in the air. >> time. >> time. >> we can't really hear much of that. but anyway, that was mark. francois, if you're listening and not watching, he was flanked there by i mean, i've got to say , i don't mean to be insulting, but i do find this whole notion , but i do find this whole notion, as the five families in the wilson room , we had a very well

wilson room, we had a very well attended meeting. >> we had a very constructive and active discussion . all and active discussion. all colleagues were heard with respect , everyone's point of respect, everyone's point of view was given due weight and consideration as as a result of that , we have decided consideration as as a result of that, we have decided i'd collectively see that we cannot support the bill tonight . it support the bill tonight. it because of its many omissions. therefore while it's down to every individual colleague, ultimately to decide what to do collectively, we will not be supporting it. the prime minister has been telling colleagues today say he is prepared to entertain tightening

the bill with that aim at the committee stage . we will aim to committee stage. we will aim to table amendments which would we hopeif table amendments which would we hope if accept did materialise . hope if accept did materialise. we improve the bill and remove some of its weaknesses . for want some of its weaknesses. for want of a better phrase , you might of a better phrase, you might want to call it the cash amendment because he'll undoubtedly be helping to draft it. we very much hope that a committee on those amendments may yet be accepted. if they are not and the bill remains unamended in that way. not and the bill remains unamended in that way . again unamended in that way. again collectively, we agreed to reserve the right to vote against it at third, reading that that is what collectively we have decided . and i'll ask

we have decided. and i'll ask sir john hayes of the common sense group. just to amplify that, john hopkins yeah. so you will have heard over the last few weeks both the former home secretary and the former immigration minister say that the bill in its current form isn't fit for purpose. >> we are persuaded of that case. however we want to give the government a chance to listen to what they've said previously and what we're saying now . we believe that that now. we believe that that engagement provides. now. we believe that that engagement provides . the engagement provides. the opportunity to make this bill do what it says on the tin, which is provide the opportunity to affect the rounder policy and so fulfil the prime minister pledge. the prime minister pledge. the prime minister pledge to stop the boats to that end, we have come together as a group and united. it's absolutely right as mark says,

that people come to their own judgement. that's the way this place works . but we believe that place works. but we believe that because we've had those kind of discussion lines, we can act broadly in a collective way and we will consider what the government do next and what they do next will determine what we do next will determine what we do next. and that means as the third reading of the bill. thank you very much. >> and sorry there there are a few other things to hear and then we'll answer questions on behalf of the new conservatives. miriam cates, please. thanks mark. >> yes, just to echo really what mark and john have said , we all mark and john have said, we all agree that the bill is defective as it is. we don't believe it will stop the boats. there are too many opportunities for legal challenge, but we support challenge, but we do support the principle bill, is principle of the bill, which is to boats and do what to stop the boats and do what we've electorate. we've promised the electorate. so we have agreed to act collectively to not support the bill at this stage, but to be open to amendments from the government that would strengthen the . we at the bill significantly. we at committee stage third committee stage and third reading, collectively , reading, and so we collectively,

as said, reserve the right as mark said, reserve the right to vote against at that to vote against it at that point. if government not point. if the government was not willing our amendments willing to accept our amendments . is the fourth . but it is the fourth anniversary of the general election today. the new conservatives that conservatives group that i represent, most us were represent, most of us were elected for the first time on that day with a promise to take back we are very clear that day with a promise to take back at we are very clear that day with a promise to take back at the we are very clear that day with a promise to take backat the moment very clear that day with a promise to take back at the moment this( clear that day with a promise to take back at the moment this bill�*ar that day with a promise to take backynotie moment this bill�*ar that day with a promise to take backynotie motheit this bill�*ar does not offer the opportunity to control . but we to take back control. but we think could do with think it could do with amendments that's what amendments and so that's what we're pushing for. we're going to be pushing for. >> seen i've >> so you haven't seen it? i've seen it. >> t a e a second, sir. >> yeah. just a second, sir. jake, you're okay, right? thank you. so. so, jake, right. i think hopefully you've all listened to what we've said. we are not supporting the bill. so the bulk of us will abstain . do the bulk of us will abstain. do you have an idea of what sort of numbers you're talking about? >> yes . >> yes. >> yes. >> next question. can you tell us know, are you are you confident? look, you haven't got long with respect . wait, just to long with respect. wait, just to

say the votes will take place in a few minutes. say the votes will take place in a few minutes . the bells will a few minutes. the bells will ring. so none of you have got very late . i've got very long to very late. i've got very long to wait. but i've learned, having done this for a few years, you never predict numbers before a vote. it's nothing. it's nothing personal. >> what commitments have you had from the prime minister about what might happen after this? >> there have been a number of discussions in the course of today with number 10 with the chief with others, michael chief whip, with others, michael tomlinson, who is now the minister contz tacted us. shortly before our meeting and agreed that he is very happy to enter into discussions between the government's lawyers and the star chambers lawyers to see whether or not they and we can agree on a way forward. so there's been a lot of communication in the course of the day, but we are taking the prime minister at his word when he said he was prepared to see the bill tightened. and we now

need to explore the envelope for that. sorry i think i want to spread this around a little bit. who has not had a question yet? is this a defeat delayed by effectively you're saying you're staying about portugal, spain tonight ? tonight? >> it edges through if there's no changes were voted down i think to be fair, i think we've been very clear in what we were saying. >> so taking this up, one nation will vote against it and then it doesn't get through anyway, does it? let me put it like this . it? let me put it like this. when we booked a room this evening, we had to take the room that we could get. you know how busy these rooms are by chance , busy these rooms are by chance, we ended up in the wilson room . we ended up in the wilson room. harold wilson once famously said a week is a long time in politics. well, a month is a very long time . so let's pick very long time. so let's pick this up again in january , we this up again in january, we will table amendments and we will table amendments and we will take it from there. ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much indeed . much indeed. >> number 10 said that they're

working within parameters . is working within parameters. is that could go beyond that. but collapse the deal with rwanda doesn't sound like there's that much room. i'm going much wriggle room. i'm not going to negotiation that's to pre—empt a negotiation that's just about to start. >> you much . >> thank you very much. >> thank you very much. >> well, there you go. oh, how dramatic . a bit of drama. that dramatic. a bit of drama. that was mark francois speaking on behalf of the so—called five families, saying that they are essentially going to vote against or perhaps abstain. who knows? time will tell what they're all going to do, but they're all going to do, but they're not going to support rishi rwanda richard rishi sunaks rwanda bill richard tice uk what do you make tice reform uk what do you make to this? i see shorten isn't it them describing themselves as them describing themselves as the five families? >> michelle it's of like a >> michelle it's sort of like a contradiction terms. not extraordinary. >> weird. it's a bit weird, >> it's weird. it's a bit weird, i must say. >> it's weird. it's a bit weird, i mmps ay. >> it's weird. it's a bit weird, i mmps describing themselves as >> it's weird. it's a bit weird, i family describing themselves as >> it's weird. it's a bit weird, i family and ribing themselves as >> it's weird. it's a bit weird, i family and not|g themselves as >> it's weird. it's a bit weird, i family and not supporting'es as >> it's weird. it's a bit weird, i family and not supporting theis a family and not supporting the prime minister that's, that's the certainty of this. it appears that the bulk of the total number of mps within those five families were not actually sure how many mps that is in total, because there seems to be some duplication. but the maths

that i've done is that if ten mps vote against and about 37 abstain, then it would fail. if about 20 vote against and 17 abstain, then it would fail. so there's a sort of matrix here of numbers, assuming that everybody votes . and we know that some votes. and we know that some people have been flying from around the world to get back for the evening to vote and then disappear again. >> if you're sitting at home going, going going, michelle, what's going on? these five families, on? are these five families, what's the care in. i'll what's all the care in. i'll just you out. just let me just help you out. so you've got the new so erg, you've got the new concern the conservative concern gives the conservative group that of course was one group that of course was the one that after liz truss, that was formed after liz truss, the new conservative, of course , the new conservative, of course, the new conservative, of course, the red and then the common the red wall and then the common sense groups. they've got the new the erg, the new conservatives, the erg, the northern research group, the conservative and the conservative griff group and the common group. you're five common sense group. you're five families, ladies and gents. you're welcome. michael walker what do you make of it all? >> i just think the whole thing is i mean, you've is a joke. i mean, you've got the families getting advice

the five families getting advice from the chamber. like from the star chamber. it's like the godfather crossed with star from the star chamber. it's like the (andither crossed with star from the star chamber. it's like the (and they'reyssed with star from the star chamber. it's like the (and they're all d with star wars and they're all just arguing over a policy which everyone isn't to everyone knows isn't going to work because all work anyway because they all want time, want a bit of screen time, ideally. so they have a bit more leverage the tory leverage in the next tory election. a election. after they've lost a general i think the general election. so i think the whole is a joke. mean, whole thing is a joke. i mean, the elephant room is that the elephant in the room is that rwanda whether or not it rwanda policy, whether or not it passes, work, passes, isn't going to work, isn't have the desired isn't going to have the desired effect. is all just a effect. so this is all just a talking shop. and mark francois wanting like gangster talking shop. and mark francois wa on|g like gangster talking shop. and mark francois wa on live like gangster talking shop. and mark francois wa on live television. gangster on on live television. >> is extraordinary >> it is extraordinary grandstand. and as you say, i think country who think most of the country who focuses on this or listening at all forming their own common all and forming their own common sense doesn't sense judgement that doesn't think deterrent and think it's a deterrent and doesn't think, even if it passed, being third bill passed, being the third bill that would stop the that supposedly would stop the boats one really thinks boats and no one really thinks it will, except couple of it will, it except a couple of hundred of conservative mps. that's sort of strange that's the sort of strange situation we're in. and it is it's a it's a bizarre collection, isn't it , of collection, isn't it, of grandstanding egos is making everybody very good enough is what it is. >> people don't take to the polls and bearing in mind many people don't take to the polls

literally because they're not politically engaged. and when you politically engaged, the you are politically engaged, the last that you and you last thing that you want and you expect parties that you expect from the parties that you vote in—fighting and vote in is in—fighting and constant division and constant uncertainty and constant going around and around in circles. do you think this bill is going to pass ? pass? >>i pass? >> i think it will just pass . >> i think it will just pass. yes. i think that a lot of people are sort of grandstand ing and will abstain. so i think it will pass, but i don't think it'll make any difference at all. >> do em- em“ flan-— >> do you think it will pass? >> do you think it will pass? >> think it will pass. i think >> i think it will pass. i think they're fighting over the future of conservative party, but they're fighting over the future of one zonservative party, but they're fighting over the future of one wants lative party, but they're fighting over the future of one wants to ive party, but they're fighting over the future of one wants to go party, but they're fighting over the future of one wants to go into 1, but they're fighting over the future of one wants to go into 1, bl next no one wants to go into the next general election conservative general election as conservative leader. so they're going to leave it for rishi sunak. they'll lose then they'll let him lose and then they'll over the scraps they'll fight over the scraps afterwards. they'll fight over the scraps afterwarcjust advocate >> let's just devil's advocate then. pass, then. if it doesn't pass, what then. if it doesn't pass, what then is very, serious then that is very, very serious for minister because for the prime minister because he he will look weak. for the prime minister because he he's ll look weak. for the prime minister because he he's ll lo allneak. for the prime minister because he he's ll lo all confidence. his >> he's lost all confidence. his core the boats. core policy to stop the boats. one of his five pledges has essentially not got the confidence his own mps. he is confidence of his own mps. he is in deep, deep trouble. >> surely we can't have a we

can't i don't want to go all brenda from bristol and i certainly can't do the accent. my certainly can't do the accent. my accent is bad enough as it is , you know, we can't have , you know, we surely can't have another tory leader , surely. another tory leader, surely. >> well, so i think if he if he loses this then labour will call a of confidence but a vote of no confidence but probably they'll well rishi sunak because tory sunak will win that because tory mps want general mps don't really want a general election so i can't election just yet. so i can't see they're stupid enough see that they're stupid enough to another tory leader to have another tory leader before general election. >> i that is agreed. it >> i think that is agreed. it is. long, if he lost it, how is. how long, if he lost it, how long could he seriously hold a government for before government together for before having country ? having to go to the country? probably sooner rather than later. i think would herald more likely election. likely a spring election. >> what you think? do you >> what do you think? do you want are want to have an election? are you of them? that's sitting you one of them? that's sitting there saying actually, there at home saying actually, it's that is it's time for that? that is indeed what we want. i mean , indeed what we want. i mean, let's have look. i want to let's have a look. i want to bnng let's have a look. i want to bring my viewers rule bring in some of my viewers rule tonight . you are actually quite tonight. you are actually quite divided on this , mark francois. divided on this, mark francois. he basically is an attention seeker, loves to be in the

limelight of the five families. what do these guys think they are, the mafia? well actually, i do think it is that is where that whole kind of sentiment of being the five families. i think that descriptive term does somewhat hark back come from the mafia. just feel mafia. i mean, i just feel a little bit sad actually , because little bit sad actually, because i feel a lot of people that were not politically engaged and they did buy into this kind of momentous wave of boris johnson. you know, a lot of people , they you know, a lot of people, they did vote brexit because they wanted control of immigration action. and they will feel deeply frustrated by what many would argue just kind of the politics, internal politics, frustrating the will of the people. >> and the point is you've now got this is the third bill we've got this is the third bill we've got to acts that have been introduced by this government. the national nationality and borders illegal borders act, the illegal migration, an act that hasn't stopped . they then say stopped the boats. they then say this will stop boats and this will stop the boats and i think people just this will stop the boats and i thinitrust people just this will stop the boats and i thinitrust and people just this will stop the boats and i thinitrust and say, sople just this will stop the boats and i thinitrust and say, well,just this will stop the boats and i thinitrust and say, well, if;t this will stop the boats and i thinitrust and say, well, if you lose trust and say, well, if you can't get it right first or second time, why should i believe second time, why should i belwhy should believe

>> why should they believe a third what do think? third time? what do you think? >> think picking stop >> well, i think picking stop the boats one rishi sunak the boats is one of rishi sunak sort was sort of main priorities was always a mistake. one, because it's that people. it's not that many people. it's not the not a huge threat to the country. right. the big issue in terms of migration is illegal migration, which, by the way, is propping up our university system and our social care system. it seemed like system. so to me, it seemed like a silly target to begin with. and just and now this is just grandstanding. this is just them trying the trying to keep this in the headunes trying to keep this in the headlines don't headlines because they don't want about nhs, want us to talk about the nhs, the crisis, which is about the nhs crisis, which is about to the fact that wages to hit, or the fact that wages have 20 years. >> e says- e says. michel, it years. >> says. michel, it feels >> mark says. michel, it feels to me that this country is just not democratic country. many not a democratic country. many people asking, when not a democratic country. many peo the asking, when not a democratic country. many peo the mafia

talking on behalf of five families. the northern research group of tory mps, the common sense group, the new conservative group, the northern research group, and conservative future. now, those five groups met tonight. there's around 100 tory mps in that group who met now mr francois says as a group, we're going to abstain. the risk for the government right now will know in half an hour is if all those abstain on the all those mps abstain on the rwanda bill falls tonight. the government is defeated on the first six and reading in in parliament since 1986. it will be a historic defeat, a disaster for the prime minister and will probably lead to a vote of no confidence in the government. an opportunistic one, if you like , opportunistic one, if you like, from the labour party. that's where we are tonight at the 7 pm. on gb news. it's a big risk for the government. they've been they've been twisting arms all day . rishi they've been twisting arms all day. rishi sunak freshman covid inquiry yesterday has been meeting with people trying to work how can you round

work out how can you come round the meeting your dawn meeting the meeting at your dawn meeting with around 20 members of the new ? 2019 young new conservatives? 2019 young mps trying to find to reshape the party's future ? it's very, the party's future? it's very, very clear from interview i carried out earlier today for gb news with richard holden, the party chairman. they want to try and offer amendments to mps and that's what's tempted. the so—called five families grouping of right wing tories to not vote against the government, but simply vote to abstain . and that simply vote to abstain. and that means that when it hits, it gets to report stage probably next month. back in the house of commons behind me, they will offer amendments as they will offer up amendments as they will see it, to strengthen the bill. or the problem the pm's got is if accept those amendments if they accept those amendments to the bill, then to strengthen the bill, then it's going be then, then the it's going to be then, then the left party, one, the left of the party, the one, the one caucus, won't accept one nation caucus, won't accept it. highly risky , highly it. it is highly risky, highly dangerous. big ben chiming behind me at 7 pm. that means that votes are happening that the votes are happening now. we'll see three votes. the big result we expecting on gb

news at 7:30 pm. stay tuned . news at 7:30 pm. stay tuned. and a very good evening. >> yes, i'm not michelle dewberry. it's now 7:00. it's farage. and i'm richard tice. thank you christopher hope for that analysis. it is hard to keep up with what is going on. we can't even really know exactly how many members shapps tory mps are within this sort of mafia like sounding group of five families. for heaven's sake . we're trying to get all of .we're trying to get all of that throughout the evening . but that throughout the evening. but if the bulk of them abstain on like that, then we could be in for a bit of a shock this evening. anything could happen. first of all, before we get into my analyse all of my guests and analyse all of this , i'm to pass you to this, i'm going to pass you to polly middlehurst in the gb newsroom .