pressure to give back that £10 million. sunak is having none of it. but should he.7 should million. sunak is having none of it. but should he? should he give that money back or not? also, harriet hammond today is basically said it's time for diane abbott to be let back diane abbott now to be let back into the labour party, is it or not? and of course, we now know that kids will no longer be getting puberty blockers on the nhs. is that the right decision? and speaking of puberty, get this wales today on this a school in wales today on the advice of external agencies, held a puberty yes, held a puberty party. yes, indeed. to celebrate kids indeed. to celebrate the kids journey childhood journey from childhood to adulthood. years old. adulthood. they're 12 years old. is good idea or bonkers . is this a good idea or bonkers. your thoughts please. also, should foreign governments be able to own british media? the government of today said not. do you agree with that? and last but not least, migrants now will

be to £3,000 go to be given up to £3,000 to go to rwanda. mean, i'm starting to rwanda. i mean, i'm starting to laugh it literally laugh now because it literally is a joke. all this is just beyond a joke. all this now, isn't it? your thoughts on it please. indeed. so we're it all, please. indeed. so we're going to get stuck into all of that and more and more. but before we do, let's cross live for tonight's latest news headlines. >> good evening. it's 6:00. i'm sophia wenzler in the gb newsroom. your top story this houn newsroom. your top story this hour, diane abbott, the mp at the centre of a growing racism row, has accused the speaker of the commons of not serving democracy after she wasn't called to speak in parliament. it's after the conservatives biggest donor, frank hester, allegedly said that the former labour mp made him want to hate all black women and that she should be shot. sir starmer should be shot. sir keir starmer has prime has confronted the prime minister over the remarks, pressing rishi sunak to return mr hester's £10 million donation in today's prime minister's questions, the labour leader asked whether rishi sunak was proud to be supported by someone

making such offensive statements. >> weeks ago he marched them out like foals to defend islamophobia . and now the member islamophobia. and now the member for ashfield is warming up the opposition benches for them. he won't hand the money back. he won't hand the money back. he won't comment on how convenient it is that a man handed huge nhs contracts government is contracts by his government is now party's biggest donor. now his party's biggest donor. you have to wonder what the point of a prime minister who point is of a prime minister who cannot lead, and a party that can't govern. >> the prime minister acknowledged frank hester's comments wrong racist, comments were wrong and racist, but declined say his but declined to say his donations would be returned, instead calling out what he said were double standards in the labour i'm absolutely not labour party. i'm absolutely not going to take any lectures from somebody , from somebody, from somebody, from somebody, from somebody, from somebody, from somebody who chose to represent an anti—semitic terrorist group, hizb ut—tahrir , who chose to hizb ut—tahrir, who chose to serve a leader who let antisec autism run rife in this labour party. >> those are his actions. those

are his values. and that's how he should be judged. >> in other news, the first minister of wales has criticised bofis minister of wales has criticised boris johnson's leadership dunng boris johnson's leadership during the covid pandemic. mark drakeford former prime drakeford said the former prime minister like the absent minister was like the absent manager a team and manager of a football team and accused him of not taking the pandemic seriously . speaking at pandemic seriously. speaking at the covid inquiry, he said the covid inquiry, he also said mr johnson was deliberately unclear as to whether some rules only apply to england. the welsh conservatives accused mr drakeford of using the inquiry to attack his political opponents , and called for wales opponents, and called for wales specific inquiry . now the specific inquiry. now the defence secretary has warned vladimir putin to stop sabre rattling over nuclear war. it comes as the russian president warns that any us troops who venture to ukraine will be treated as interventionists. speaking on state television . speaking on state television. putin said that while moscow is technically prepared for nuclear war, the country is not rushing into it. grant shapps spoke

exclusively news during exclusively to gb news during a visit to poland to see uk troops taking in nato exercises. taking part in nato exercises. he said only way forward for he said the only way forward for russia to pull of ukraine. >> it needs to stop sabre rattling . it's irresponsible to rattling. it's irresponsible to talk like that, particularly about nuclear weapons. there is no threat to the russian state. the threat, i'm afraid, is to ukraine and to countries like poland that i'm in here to the west of them, because putin has invaded a democratic free society city and he needs to pull out. and then there's no issue whatsoever. >> an aristocrat accused of neglecting her newborn baby, leading to her death , has leading to her death, has defended her decision to house the child in a tent. constance marten, who's 36, went on the run with her partner, 49 year old mark gordon, in an attempt to keep their newborn baby. miss martin justified keeping her child outdoors in wintry conditions, telling the court that jesus survived in a barn. she also said she didn't agree with medical warnings against keeping babies outside , saying

keeping babies outside, saying that lots of children live without heating. baby victoria's remains were found in a supermarket bag near brighton in march of last year. miss martin and mr gordon deny charges of manslaughter. the case is continuing and andy macdonald has had the labour whip restored after he was cleared of breaking party rules by using a controversial slogan at a pro—palestine rally . the mp for pro—palestine rally. the mp for middlesbrough was suspended in october after he used a phrase from the river to the sea during a speech at a pro—palestine event. the words refer to the land between the river jordan land between the riverjordan and the mediterranean, which many find offensive because it appears to refer to all of israel. a labour spokesperson said mr macdonald had been reminded that elected representatives must be mindful of how their words are interpreted , and for the latest interpreted, and for the latest stories, sign up to gb news alerts by scanning the qr code on your screen, or go to gb news. com slash alerts. now it's back to . michelle.

back to. michelle. >> thank you very much for that. if you don't mind as well. >> i do just want to reflect on another story because sometimes i think as news outlets, news stories, they come and go, don't they? but you might remember this story. actually, we're coming up to a month ago now. that awful story about that two year old little boy that fell into the river soar. i mean, as i said, he went very sadly into the water on the 18th of february. now. so more than 200 officers have been searching for this little boy. you've had search and rescue teams . it's search and rescue teams. it's just absolutely tragic. and i cannot imagine what that little boy's family must be going through. absolutely breaks my heart, you know, i wish that we could kind of keep all the focus and the eyeballs and attention on this . and i really hope that on this. and i really hope that soon this little boy gets returned back to his family. because, as i say , i cannot even because, as i say, i cannot even imagine what they must be going

through. anyway, i'm michelle dewberry and i'm with you till 7:00 tonight alongside me, my panel keep me company and go panel to keep me company and go through news of the day, the through the news of the day, the pr alex dean, and the pr consultant alex dean, and the gb senior political gb news senior political commentator nelson. good commentator nigel nelson. good evening to you. makes evening to both to you. makes you sound very important, that title. do you think , he's very title. do you think, he's very important. i was reading it out there. i thought, oh, he sounds like a man not to be messed with. our nigel. although some of topics that we've of the topics that we've got coming i tell you now coming up, i can tell you now we'll be messing get messed with. yeah, going to get with. yeah, he's going to get messed i can tell you. messed with, i can tell you. anyway. i your thoughts on anyway. i want your thoughts on all of day. of all the news of the day. of course i'll coming on to that course i'll be coming on to that race in a second. that £10 race in just a second. that £10 million, should it be going back to came from or not? to where it came from or not? also, the puberty blockers story yesterday. get this a school yesterday. and get this a school today in wales has held a puberty party, strange puberty party, very strange goings on if you ask me. but maybe celebrate it and maybe you guys celebrate it and think a wonderful thing. think it's a wonderful thing. we'll explore that, the rwanda story three up story as well. three grand up to, to try and send over to, to try and send people over to, to try and send people over to why are we just to rwanda. why are we just tinkering around the edges? why

are we just dealing with the symptoms but symptoms and not the cause? but maybe that maybe you think, indeed, that this answer. your this is the answer. your thoughts? views at news. thoughts? gb views at gb news. com how you reach me. or you com is how you reach me. or you can tweet or text me at gb news. but of course it was today, but of course it was pmqs today, i say, rishi sunak got i got to say, rishi sunak got a bit of a kicking as to be expected. let's listen to what zacchaeus farmer had to say to the prime minister. >> proud to be bankrolled by someone using racist and misogynist language when he says the member for hackney north and stoke newington makes you want to hate all black women ? to hate all black women? >> yes, of course. and rishi sunak was having none of that. let's listen to his response. >> the alleged comments were wrong . they were racist and he wrong. they were racist and he is now, as i said, the comments were wrong. they were racist. he has rightly apologised for them. and that remorse and that remorse should be accepted. >> you just saw a clip there as well of diane abbott. she, a couple of times during pmqs, she kept rising up. she wanted to ask a question. she wasn't

called by the speaker to ask a question. she also was really not happy about that. you can see her, the kind of top right of your screen. then she's got that red jumper on. she's constantly trying to get up, and get that speaker's attention. but to no avail. i have to say, right. let's start at the beginning. i've got to say as well, some further comments, have been reported as well today, that this donor, frank hester, is who we're hester, this is who we're talking you this talking about, you know, this time was in relation to, time it was in relation to, allegedly relation to indians and where they should travel on and where they should travel on a train, etc. where do we even begin with this? >> so that latest part is news to me. but i wanted to talk about the things he's admitted he said, because that's that seems more straightforward and easy. right. the thing for me is that number 10 got there. in the end, the government got to the point that they should have reached, is what he reached, which is that what he said is racist and wrong. yeah. the trouble as so often the trouble is, as as so often we up with procedure we wind up with a procedure story westminster is that story in westminster is that members parliament has been

members of parliament has been sent to press without sent out to do the press without that position. >> feels like what you >> so it feels like what you want about mel stride, when want about like mel stride, when he out in the morning he came out in the morning yesterday yeah, it yesterday and he said, yeah, it wasn't nice thing to say, but wasn't a nice thing to say, but it wasn't based on gender and it wasn't based on race. so my point is that if you're going to make a concession, you should do it at beginning, it right at the beginning, rather allowing other rather than allowing other people arguments for people to take on arguments for you are unsustainable. you that are unsustainable. >> seems what >> because it seems to me what he said racist and wrong. he said was racist and wrong. and thing to do, and it's the right thing to do, therefore, to say so straight therefore, is to say so straight away as far as the money is concerned, this remarkable concerned, this is remarkable to me. people this world me. some people in this world seem think it's logical to seem to think it's logical to say that person's racist. say that person's a racist. let's million back. let's give him £10 million back. and far take the and i would far rather take the money use it for something money and use it for something else. >> do you think the tory >> so do you think the tory party should keep that money then? >> no, i would use the money for something. mean, the smart something. i mean, the smart politics to the money politics is to take the money and on the muslim war and spend it on the muslim war memorial, or to spend it on, anti—racism training, or take memorial, or to spend it on, antimoney1 training, or take memorial, or to spend it on, antimoney andining, or take memorial, or to spend it on, antimoney and spend)r take memorial, or to spend it on, antimoney and spend)r ontake the money and spend it on something that, demonstrates that way align that you'll, you in no way align with the views that have been described. don't the described. i just don't see the

merit giving £10 merit in giving someone £10 million remarks that million for making remarks that you racist. you agree are racist. >> well, the pushback to that would well, it that would be, well, it shows that the tory party, for all of its talk about, you know, divisions and this that and the other, and this and that and the other, the pushback would well, the pushback would be, well, doesn't that send a message then, party, they then, that the tory party, they put where the put their money where the mouth is and they you know what, is and they say, you know what, if are that kind person, if you are that kind of person, literally, we don't your involvement. >> no. because my point would be, money be, you don't use that money anymore for campaigning or for supporting candidates in elections. you use it for something that's demonstrably anti —racist. >> anti—racist. >> nigel, your thoughts on it all, the all, well, i find myself in the unusual position of agreeing with alex has with every word that alex has just are there you go. just said. are there you go. which is a bit strange. yes. i mean, firstly, that the money shouldn't for shouldn't be used for campaigning it campaigning either. give it back. what the back. i don't know what the grounds for making a grounds are for making a donation give to donation like that or give it to charity. build ten charity. you could build ten muslim for for the muslim war memorials for for the £10 million. >> way we do >> not the way we do infrastructure the uk. you infrastructure in the uk. you could have nigel. >> the budget. >> yes, that's the budget. i mean , the comments were racist. mean, the comments were racist. any kind if rishi sunak really did have the integrity that he promised when he became prime minister, he would either give

this money back or give it or give it somewhere else, but he wouldn't keep it for the tory party, but politics is cynical that, that hester's money makes up £0.20 in every pound of donations the tory party have got . they can't afford to give got. they can't afford to give it back. and so they're going to hang on to it and it doesn't sound very good. >> so that on that one, it's really interesting. people aren't willing anymore to support parties support political parties financially, generally. and specifically don't specifically they don't like giving general funds. but i giving to general funds. but i think if you go to donors and you say you can see the trouble we're help us? can we're in, can you help us? can you good this bad money you make good this bad money that and give us that we've got, and give us your good clean money? i think there are donors in this country who might be willing to support it. they'll be fine. having had a mine, a moment to mine, having had a moment to think it, i've realised. i think about it, i've realised. i think about it, i've realised. i think i would do think i know what i would do with money. i make a with this money. i would make a i demonstrate the point i would demonstrate the point about, that every about, the fact that every lefty who we should tax who says we should pay more tax and so forth doesn't actually voluntarily a payment, voluntarily make a payment, which i would were which you can. i would if i were the conservative i would

the conservative party, i would write £10 million to write a check for £10 million to hmrc. i don't hmrc. do you know what i don't think that money think you can do that with money like can't give like this, that you can't give it to the government. >> mean but cash it. it >> i mean but cash it. well, it was a donation to the tory party and and i presume there are and i and i presume there are a few attached to a few strings attached to a donation. no reason why few strings attached to a donicouldn't no reason why few strings attached to a donicouldn't give no reason why few strings attached to a donicouldn't give no recharity hy you couldn't give it to charity donations, i think no donations, i don't think no reason couldn't give to reason why you couldn't give to the i it would be the charity. i think it would be wrong government to take wrong for the government to take it then it into treasury it and then it into treasury coffers, because there's a difference between the conservative party, a campaigning and government organisation, and the government which and which governs for all of us and my point is, i think it would make useful to say this make a useful point to say this is our party political money is not our party political money we not to this >> we're not going to use this any we're going to give it any more. we're going to give it to the revenue. >> okay. well, i disagree >> yeah. okay. well, i disagree that you can give to the that you can give it to the government, there you go. government, but there you go. >> make >> well, i do have to make clear, course i do all of clear, of course i do all of the right boxes and i do have right boxes here. and i do have to say, of course, that of to say, of course, that lots of this is alleged at the this stuff is alleged at the moment, hester, has moment, frank hester, he has come he apologised. of come out, he has apologised. of course, he said actually, course, he said that actually, he he was rude and he admits that he was rude and all and shouldn't all the rest of it and shouldn't have those kind things. have said those kind of things. i quite i do think it's quite interesting, though, timing interesting, though, the timing of do need to be

of this, because i do need to be clear with everyone, this information here, these conversations that were apparently conversations conversations that were appewere/ conversations conversations that were appewere had conversations conversations that were appewere had these)nversations conversations that were appewere had these were ;ations conversations that were appewere had these were about that were had these were about half a decade ago. >> but reason didn't >> yeah. but the reason i didn't mention that to start with is that cares, right? this that nobody cares, right? this is political move, is obviously a political move, but well done. it's but it's been well done. it's been a well executed attack been it's a well executed attack on political on on the political on the conservative and once conservative party. and once that's you, the that's been done to you, the right thing isn't you can right thing to do isn't you can make point as a subsidiary make that point as a subsidiary point. made you've point. once you've made you've conceded were conceded that these remarks were were as the were racist and wrong, as the prime has rightly done. prime minister has rightly done. but can't that up front, but you can't put that up front, because end, is because in the end, politics is a game. put this a dirty game. whoever put this in their back pocket and waited for year it made for an election year for it made this rather well. this attack rather well. >> was only five years >> and it was only five years ago, and i'm surprised he actually continues as of actually continues as a ceo of a major company , i can't think of major company, i can't think of many ceos who actually many ceos who would actually have if they'd made have survived if they'd made comments like that. if one of us may made comment on air like may made a comment on air like that, we wouldn't be on air again. i mean that reaction again. i mean that the reaction to phenomenal, to these things is phenomenal, so it seems to be that the that the tories, as usual, get these things wrong in the first

instance, they wouldn't call him a call. the remarks racism yesterday. today they've come around to calling them racist. that's the right thing to do. but alex is right. they should get their act together and do it immediately. >> yeah . and i've got to say, of >> yeah. and i've got to say, of course, this fella, he apparently did reach out to diane abbott a couple of times and or to and apologised or tried to apologise there. says he apologise there. and he says he wants it that he wants to make it clear that he regards racism poison, regards racism as a poison, which has no place public which has no place in public life. he's certainly been life. and he's certainly been put through the ringer. this fella, i'm surprised that he's not do you know what? i'll not said, do you know what? i'll take money you take my money back, thank you very much. who knows what very much. but who knows what will next anyway, what will happen next anyway, what i found interesting as well in this harman. was this is harriet harman. she, was speaking let's just speaking about. let's just listen to her, actually, about diane abbott. >> very sad if diane >> it would be very sad if diane abbott were to leave parliament out. not as a member of the labour party. i would like to see it resolved, and i hope it can be resolved in a way which has diane abbott back in the party. >> so, jp, it's really interesting. >> i think it's quite if the

labour party had done what i thought was an obvious thing to do and put diane abbott, who, whatever you think of her, as being a symbol of cultural change in this country for the better in recent decades, if they put her in the lords, as i thought, merited, she she's i think , not the best possible mp think, not the best possible mp she could be at this point in the cycle, but she would be a perfectly respectable and legitimate member of the house of lords. they would have resolved this, but instead of putting her in the lords, they took her. they questioned whether they should get reselected. naturally reselected. she naturally fired up right, i'm going to up and said, right, i'm going to have a fight. i'm coming back. i'm going to fight again and again. and now they've wound up suspending you've suspending her. it is. you've got separate out the two got to separate out the two issues. the fact that this guy was racist her doesn't was racist about her doesn't mean slate mean that she gets a clean slate and anything she and is forgiven anything she does. she was in turn, guilty of voicing a particularly pernicious kind of racism, anti—semitism, which meant that the labour party rightly suspended her. and i don't think what said her what this guy said about her actually one bit. >> nigel, i think she should be.

she should be allowed back back into the parliamentary party. i think she should stand as an mp. i same thing about i think the same thing about jeremy be jeremy corbyn. he should be allowed as an allowed back in and stand as an mp . ooh, the situation with, mp. ooh, the situation with, with diane abbott is that she, made some clumsy remarks that seemed to be the beginning of a debate . there was never debate. there was never continued, because because she had to withdraw those remarks, which she did, in fairness, immediately doesn't excuse them, they were they were , on the they were they were, on the surface, anti—semitic, but but i think that the, the if you look at it a bit more closely, she she's now been suspended for some time. it was last year. she should be allowed back . should be allowed back. >> the thing is you've got to be able to in politics, i think you've got to be able to read the environment a bit. and it was obvious. making of was obvious. i'm making a bit of a point, a concession to your point, really, whether something really, about whether something is disproportionate. it was clear leadership to clear the leadership wanted to move regime move on from the corbyn regime with which not just corbyn but diane abbott were indelibly

associated. i'm saying they associated. i'm not saying they were an excuse, were looking for an excuse, exactly. the, the fact exactly. but the, the, the fact that diane abbott gets a bit less leeway people is obvious. >> yes. i mean, it's quite clear that keir starmer wanted both diane jeremy corbyn diane abbott and jeremy corbyn out, think that the out, correct? i think that the labour party is bigger than that, and it should be a broader church and which why i'd like church and which is why i'd like to them back. church and which is why i'd like to andhem back. church and which is why i'd like to and do1 back. church and which is why i'd like to and do you :k. church and which is why i'd like to and do you think just briefly church and which is why i'd like to a|shouldou think just briefly church and which is why i'd like to a|shouldou thibeen st briefly , she should have been called today a question today to ask a question or respond pmqs. respond or whatever in pmqs. >> actually >> yes, i'm actually quite surprised. speaker not surprised. the speaker not calling her on the basis that everyone's talking about her, she's there in the chamber. she has something to say. i think mp should have heard from her. >> i agree completely, i certainly think the optics of that certainly weren't good, were they? >> in, as i said, diane abbott was definitely not about was definitely not happy about not to speak , not being called to speak, dunng not being called to speak, during session. anyway, during that session. anyway, your views at gb your thoughts gb views at gb news is how you reach me. news comm is how you reach me. i want to bring you in on that, after the break, my inbox is lit up with that one. i can tell you i to talk to you as well. i want to talk to you as well. yesterday, it was confirmed now that giving, that the nhs will not be giving,

new puberty blockers to children. thank goodness common sense prevails is what i say . so sense prevails is what i say. so i want to look at that and get your opinion on it, but also as well today a school in wales hosted a puberty for party 12 and year olds to celebrate and 13 year olds to celebrate their journey from childhood to adulthood. this a wonderful adulthood. is this a wonderful thing or a bit weird? you tell me. i'll see you in two.

hi there. i'm michelle dewberry, and i'm with you till 7:00. pr consultant alex de nana gb news. senior political commentator nigel nelson. we've just been asking whether or not this £10 million that was given to the tories should be either given back or spent on different things, or what jenny says. the tories should definitely give back that cash. in fact , why on back that cash. in fact, why on earth is it even legal to make this size donation ? surely if this size of donation? surely if people give that much money, they something in return?

they expect something in return? i've got to say as well, it was two separate donations, from two separate donations, one from an one an an individual and one from an organisation. should organisation. i probably should make says make that clear, max says definitely money definitely not. this money should returned . he said should not be returned. he said these comments five years ago. this just politicking to this is all just politicking to try and make the tories somehow look racist party, which look like a racist party, which max says is obviously not true. debbie says why anyone out there asking why on earth it's taken half a decade for this to come out? some people just out? some people are just hacking, away , hacking, hacking, hacking away, trying to chip against the trying to chip away against the tories , this money then we were tories, this money then we were just saying, you know, i mean, there's nothing stopping this guy, l there's nothing stopping this guy, i presume, from saying, you know what? i'll take the money back. >> i imagine g i imagine he's a >> well, i imagine he's a wealthy and he be in wealthy man, and he might be in a position donations to a position to make donations to other even without the other parties, even without the 10 but better 10 million. but you better believe. if received believe. i think if he received the million, choose to the 10 million, he'd choose to give elsewhere. he might give give it elsewhere. he might give it philanthropic it to a philanthropic organisation, take organisation, or he might take it like, say, it to another party like, say, reform , here you go. and reform and say, here you go. and you better believe would make you better believe it would make a to minor a big difference to a minor party receive a £10 million party to receive a £10 million in response to your viewer. as

long have state long as we don't have state funding of political parties, which i would disagree with because calcify because it tends to calcify incumbents in place , then people incumbents in place, then people making donations to political parties is necessary to help people have democracy in any functioning way, and it's an important aspect of free speech. so i'm in favour of people making the donations. but i would also make the point to your who out how your viewer who pointed out how long was the conservative long ago it was the conservative parties spent parties almost certainly spent this five years. this money in five years. it's not of all the not like it's think of all the elections had. elections we've had. >> no, no, i don't think the >> no, no, no, i don't think the money was made money was the comments was made five money came five years ago. the money came in yeah. the in donations. yeah. the donations, separate donations, two separate donations, two separate donations 12 months. donations, two separate dor evens 12 months. donations, two separate dor even so, 12 months. donations, two separate doreven so, in 12 months. donations, two separate doreven so, in a 12 months. donations, two separate doreven so, in a 12 12 months. donations, two separate doreven so, in a 12 month)nths. >> even so, in a 12 month period, political parties and election spend money election cycles will spend money over period. it's over a 12 month period. it's not like gave yesterday, is it? >> indeed, paddy ? yeah, a viewer >> indeed, paddy? yeah, a viewer paddy around paddy doesn't beat around the bush. michelle, bush. he just says, michelle, it's clear. i'll you what, it's clear. i'll tell you what, if tories don't want this if the tories don't want this £10 million, tell them £10 million, can you tell them i'll yes, paddy, i'll i'll have it? yes, paddy, i'll be your details. be sure to pass on your details. i be a long i think there'll be a long queue, to say. anyway. queue, i've got to say. anyway. look did you catch this story? it yesterday. the it was announced yesterday. the nhs confirmed that it's nhs has now confirmed that it's banned for banned puberty blockers for children in good is what i say.

i would even question why on earth this was approved to be allowed to be given in the first place, i do place, sometimes i do wonder what earth our country is what on earth our country is coming to anyway. miriam cates. she was speaking out about this earlier on today. let's have a listen . listen. >> really pleased with this decision prescribing decision to stop prescribing puberty blockers on the nhs. we've got to this point now where it's a very sensible position, but i would say that it isn't. although it's going to be illegal nhs to be illegal for the nhs to prescribe these drugs, they are available privately, online and in private clinics. >> well, i've got to say this decision from yesterday only appuesin decision from yesterday only applies in england . and as applies in england. and as you're just hearing, then you can still get these medications on the well within the private sector. also in places like sector. and also in places like scotland. alex dean, your thoughts on this one? >> i don't think that we should give life changing medical treatments to children like this. you should give treatment to children, of course, to make them better. but that's not what this does. it assists you in

supposedly changing, changing your gender, which isn't actually possible, and what happens to children as a result of this is that they go on very often, unable to have children themselves, unable having their own sex lives interfered with quite significantly. and the point that whilst adults point is that whilst adults might freely choose, preferably, by the with own by the way, with their own money, rather than money, money, rather than states money, adults to do adults might freely choose to do something bodies . something to their bodies. children be able to, children should not be able to, because recognise in that because we recognise in law that children are bad decision makers. don't children makers. we don't let children choose drink or even choose to smoke or drink or even leave school whenever they want. choose to smoke or drink or even lea�*don't ool whenever they want. choose to smoke or drink or even lea�*don't allow1enever they want. choose to smoke or drink or even lea�*don't allow children hey want. choose to smoke or drink or even lea�*don't allow children tol want. we don't allow children to decide their own bedtimes. so why should children be able to take altering of take life altering amounts of medical they medical treatment? because they feel different in a certain penod feel different in a certain period of time? >> indeed, nigel, i'm in favour of this on the basis that what the advice was, the medical advice was that the that there's no evidence that these are safe and also, no evidence that that they are clinically the right

thing to do. >> so i'm prepared to go along with medical opinion on this. and if they're saying there is a question mark over whether or not they will harm children, i'm not they will harm children, i'm not convinced they will, by the way. but if there's a question mark over it, i'd prefer to take the advice of doctors than anybody else on this one. and i've got to say, there's been a lot of pushback from people that do think that these children should be getting these blockers, because i've seen a lot of it, people coming out and saying that the people that are in saying are in favour are saying these are safe, they're basically, you know, they don't cause harm. they don't cause lasting damage. and they actually think that it's going cause more damage it's going to cause more damage to the children that are gender confused , to actually allow confused, to actually allow their bodies to develop. and they would actually say, this is a very cruel policy, inhumane policy. and they would encourage people to fight people to be trying to fight this policy. >> stonewall, for >> well, stonewall, for instance, out today instance, has come out today against that's what against this, that that's what they're that be they're saying. and that may be true. the i'm making is true. the point i'm making is that get medical advice that if you get medical advice that if you get medical advice that is a idea

that this is not a good idea because we know enough because we don't know enough about it, i think that that that stage you follow the medical advice. as miriam cates pointed out, there's nothing to stop you going privately if you're determined to go and do it, you can you could go privately when it comes down to what children should and shouldn't do . i don't should and shouldn't do. i don't think you put age limits on whether a child might want to change gender. what you do is you deal with the individual circumstances of that child . circumstances of that child. >> so you could conceive of a child deciding to change gender at four or no, i'm not. >> i'm not putting putting an age limit on. that's point, age limit on. that's my point, because where we because that's that's where we get in difficulty is for the right age. probably not. is 15 the right age or should it be 16? you get into an into an area where it becomes difficult. if you talk to teachers who go through this. i mean, schools have dealing this for have been dealing with this for years , and they've dealing years, and they've been dealing with and they seem with it quietly, and they seem to they can get on to find that they can get on with it quite well. >> i there is room for >> i think there is room for agreement us to this agreement between us to this extent least, which that

extent at least, which is that when with state saying when faced with the state saying because is inadequate or because there is inadequate or no that this is safe, no evidence that this is safe, we're going to suspend it. in my view, correct response from view, the correct response from organisations stonewall, organisations like stonewall, we can right can argue whether it's right they've by this they've been captured by this interest not. but interest group or not. but anyway, organisation anyway, when an organisation like stonewall disagrees with it, my their response it, to my mind their response should be here is our reasoned, evidential case for why you're wrong and we will seek to campaign have changed campaign to have the law changed in favour. the in our favour. instead, the response certainly from response you get, certainly from the is various the online warriors, is various kinds bigots.transphobe kinds of bigots. transphobe you're . you you hate you're wrong. you you hate people. you want them to die. no reason , no attempt to turn the reason, no attempt to turn the case around, no attempt to say the decision has not gone on our way. our role is to try and change people's minds and convince them that we are right. >> there you go. come back >> there you go. i'll come back to in a second. but for to this in a second. but for now, nigel farage is up at 7:00. nigel, to nigel, good evening to you. >> hearing programme. >> could programme in >> could we get programme in here, please? >> could we get programme in her nigel, se? >> could we get programme in her nigel, can you me ? no. >> nigel, can you hear me? no. he cannot. i saw him, though, looking handsome and raring looking very handsome and raring to go. you can catch him at 7:00

tonight. you see, i'm a mom to a young one and this, kind of whole notion that our children are being told or encouraged to believe or supported to believe that they can change their sex is something which really concerns me because my, biological son cannot suddenly become a biological girl or woman just because he feels like he's been born in the wrong body. and there's something about this. like if a child came to an adult and said, for example, you know, i feel like i'm really overweight . and they i'm really overweight. and they were starving themselves and they were on the cusp of anorexia, a sensible adult wouldn't be going, oh yeah, you're fat. reduce you're really fat. let's reduce your weight. a child your your weight. if a child came an adult and said, you came to an adult and said, you know, really depressed know, i'm really depressed and i don't sensible don't want to live, a sensible aduu don't want to live, a sensible adult saying, oh, adult wouldn't be saying, oh, you let me help you you know, well, let me help you end life and on or so end your life and so on or so forth. but there's something forth. so but there's something about this notion that when a child adult child goes with sensible adult and i don't and says, you know, i don't think, don't i'm think, mummy, i don't think i'm a think i'm a girl. all a boy, i think i'm a girl. all of a sudden these adults start indulging saying, well,

indulging this and saying, well, maybe in the wrong body. maybe you are in the wrong body. let's give this treatment, let's give you this treatment, let's treatment. let's give you that treatment. let's this pathway. let's put you on this pathway. it's and very it's absurd to me. and very dangerous. dangerous and has the potential to absolutely, catastrophically end life. and it's based on a fallacy. you cannot change your biological sex. sex. >> sex. >> you're absolutely right. you can't change your biological sex, but you can change your genden sex, but you can change your gender. and that applies to people under the age of 18 as it appues people under the age of 18 as it applies to people over the age of 18. usually that it schools, which are the first places where if we're talking about children , if we're talking about children, that they come across it. so it may be the finest , the best may be the finest, the best result to come out of it would be a child saying, i want to change my gender and talking to their parents. is the best their parents. that is the best possible outcome. the second best is the child who is best outcome is the child who is who is not sure they can talk to their parents, but they'll talk to their teacher and ask their teacher to talk to their parents. well, speaking, the worst the teacher worst outcome is the teacher suddenly being faced with looking for a that night for

looking for a bed that night for a child who's been chucked out of home because of this and then going around trying to get social services or a church group to provide that bed, that's where the worst outcome comes. so yeah, but it's not about encouraging people. >> yeah, but i think that so many parents are put into this cleft where they're cleft position where they're told, you don't indulge told, oh, if you don't indulge this your child, child this in your child, your child might know, going might end up, you know, going down route of suicidal down to a route of suicidal thoughts whatever. and thoughts or whatever. and then it terrifies parents. i it terrifies the parents. and i just i'm not comfortable with that idea either. mentioned that idea either. you mentioned schools , though, and something schools, though, and something caught my eye that thought was caught my eye that i thought was very today there's very interesting. today there's a in wales, it's, a school in wales, and it's, it's puberty party. their it's held a puberty party. their words, not mine. a puberty party for their year eight pupils. so we're talking 12 and 13 year olds. and it's all about basically celebrating their journey from childhood to adulthood of course, i've contacted the school in question and asked them about this. they said that they're acting on advice agencies. advice from external agencies. well, course , i went back well, of course, i went back and, asked, who are these external agencies ? and i've yet

external agencies? and i've yet to receive a reply. i sent that request night . where are request last night. where are you these puberty parties you on these puberty parties for children? >> first all, let's keep this >> first of all, let's keep this in proportion, puberty party is far less harmful than giving children life changing amounts of medicine to try to change their gender. so you know, it falls into the bracket of, okay, if you want to, or else i wouldn't do it myself rather than that's terrible. and i think the state should intervene. but the reason that i disagree with on balance, disagree with it, on balance, i'm losing. i'm not i'm not losing. i'm not saying as the kinds saying it's as bad as the kinds of we've just been of things we've just been discussing, the reason i'm discussing, but the reason i'm against balance, that, against it, on balance, is that, on realises and on reflection, one realises and thinks at thinks children arrive at puberty different puberty at different points. some people puberty at 11, some people hit puberty at 11, some it a good deal some people hit it a good deal later to me and later, and it seems to me and some are even earlier some people are even earlier than and seems me that than 11, and it seems to me that imposing one size fits all imposing a one size fits all party on for kids who party on it for some kids who are going to be, very far down the track , and kids who the track, and some kids who really that this is really will feel that this is not yet , and accentuate not for them yet, and accentuate the that they're part the fact that they're not part of group that are going of that group that are going through feels to me through puberty. it feels to me like idea, that like a bad idea, but that strikes me as the point of it,

you're absolutely right. it could be that you'll have could well be that you'll have have there are going have kids there who are going through different stages. haven't started some some finishing. the fact that they can they can talk about it between them, share that information. the ones who haven't started asking, the asking, the ones who have what is it like, what to expect, what should i worried about? what shouldn't? >> why don't you talk to your mates about you? talk to your mates about you? talk to your mates about you? talk to your mates about that at school. you wouldn't need to attend a. and this the a puberty party. >> well, we don't know how what the even the teacher says. >> well, we don't know how what the i'm an the teacher says. >> well, we don't know how what thei'm not1e teacher says. >> well, we don't know how what thei'm not quite teacher says. >> well, we don't know how what thei'm not quite teethat says. >> well, we don't know how what thei'm not quite teethat the s. so i'm not quite sure that the word the right was the word party was the right was the right one. >> is where it's not mine? >> is that where it's not mine? thatis >> is that where it's not mine? that is direct and that is a direct quote. and i've. that's right. no it is. >> yeah, yeah, but but but the head not sure that head says i'm not sure that she's sure that was the she's not sure that was the right thing do. so we don't right thing to do. so we don't know what a puberty party know quite what a puberty party looks that >> but the trouble is that whatever dress it whatever you how you dress it up, having just to say up, having the event just to say event. yeah. having an event is a defined time, whereas a defined point in time, whereas puberty a process. and there puberty is a process. and there are some people who are going to be some people who reach defined point in time reach the defined point in time as, designated by their

as, as designated by their school, feel school, who have, who feel way behind cohort . we don't know. >> it's a one off event. there could be other events. there could be other events. there could be other events. there could be things the teachers are doing kids through doing to talk the kids through to what to expect, what they're going through. >> happens in your >> that is what happens in your personal sexual education classes and so forth. that's what in the course what happens in the course of a process where you process of a time where you teach rather say, teach people rather than, say, setting date saying, this setting a date and saying, this is puberty party, and i can is the puberty party, and i can guarantee you there'll be some people will be. it's people who will be. it's not it's just nice, pleasant it's not just a nice, pleasant process that, you describe process that, as you describe it, children well, it, some children are, well, some we've all been some people we've all been through not a nice through it and it's not a nice process. mean process. some children are mean to and you to one another. and if you aren't, if haven't really aren't, if you haven't really developed puberty the time developed in puberty by the time of party, you will of your puberty party, you will be by some of your peers. be mocked by some of your peers. >> that's why why the school be mocked by some of your peers. >> right:'s why why the school be mocked by some of your peers. >> right:'s whyto hy the school be mocked by some of your peers. >> right:'s whyto do the school is the right place to do something for that something like this, for that very that you've got very reason that you've got teachers make sure teachers around to make sure people mean each people aren't mean to each other, that they other, and the fact that they will, that kids will talk will, that the kids will talk about amongst other, about it amongst each other, that than that must be better than suffering that must be better than suf'welli that must be better than suf'well , like you can have the >> well, like you can have the final say on that. i've got to say, the head teacher basically

celebrates this as it's all about helping kids understand how to take care of themselves, do feel ask do things that feel good, ask questions talk what's questions, talk about what's happening etc. happening and get support, etc. with their mental health. they do say they've had quite a kickback on social media about this, so i've deliberately removed the school removed the name of the school just for reason. really, just for that reason. really, they concerning that they say it's concerning that many people who've many of the people who've commented media seem many of the people who've co have 1ted media seem many of the people who've co have misunderstoodnedia seem many of the people who've co have misunderstood what seem many of the people who've co have misunderstood what is�*em to have misunderstood what is meant the terms puberty. meant by the terms puberty. well, i've got to say, i completely understand what is meant by the terms puberty, but i think there's something i do think there's something a little about all these little bit odd about all these external suddenly external agencies suddenly getting these getting involved who are these external are getting involved who are these ext�*ofial are getting involved who are these ext�* of their are getting involved who are these ext�*of their agendas are are getting involved who are these ext�*of their agendas are justare all of their agendas are just taken in part. you can pick all these things, just one little isolated incident and sure enough, it's harmless. but when you piecing things you start piecing things together, wonder, what together, i do wonder, what actually goes on in all of these schools these days and whether or not it's moving in the right direction. i'm will direction. you, i'm sure, will have final say on that. gb have the final say on that. gb views is how you views gb news. com is how you can hold of me tonight. i'll can get hold of me tonight. i'll be bringing into the be bringing you into the conversation the break, conversation after the break, but i also want to ask you,

should foreign governments be banned uk media? banned from earning uk media? your see you in your thoughts? i'll see you in two.

hi there. i'm michelle dewberry, and i'm with you till 7:00 tonight, lots of divided opinion, i have to say, on those, topics that we've just been discussing, elaine says michelle, many children are autistic, they go on to this path , of the gender dysphoria. path, of the gender dysphoria. and it doesn't end well . is what and it doesn't end well. is what ladies perhaps suggesting. if i'm saying that right, michael says many people are already campaigning so that young children go private and access these drugs. you're absolutely right , that is indeed. neil is right, that is indeed. neil is questioning whether or not, these kind of medicines should even be a factor within an nhs. he's questioning , is this what he's questioning, is this what the is for? it about the nhs is for? isn't it about keeping you alive and healthy and well, i'll bring some more

of you into the conversation in a few minutes. but for now, it's looking like foreign governments will be banned now from owning uk organisations. is uk news organisations. this is all , we've had the all about, we've had the conversations about whether or not the uae, it would be a fund, basically backed in part by that government would be able to acquire the telegraph and the spectator here in this country. where are you on the decision that's been made today that actually answer to that actually the answer to that is no, shouldn't able to do that. >> i think shouldn't, and >> i think they shouldn't, and that support the that the so you support the government one. government in this one. >> i do, yeah. >> i do, yeah. >> on the basis that that, even if various editorial if you have various editorial controls you're always controls in place, you're always conscious of what your owner wants. used work for robert wants. i used to work for robert maxwell, and i know, when alastair campbell and myself were political editors on on mirror papers, the arguments we had with him to try and stop him doing mad things were constant. the same thing would happen if a government owns it and it's and it's much more serious with a with a government doing it on

the basis you might be tempted to toe the line that the government wants to give you a friendly government now might be a hostile government later, which is why it is a bad thing. nor should the british government, by the way, own any any british news media either. >> uk and uk >> oh, okay. uk and uk government not allowed either. interesting. alex, where are you? >>i you? >> i probably i'm a bit more free market than you i think. and think it falls. i respect and i think it falls. i respect of i your of course i respect your lifetime the media which in a lifetime in the media which in a professional lifetime in the media which informs your perspective . i for me perspective. but i think for me this into the kind of this falls into the kind of i don't like it, but i'm not sure the state should have to intervene should intervene. intervene or should intervene. perspective. two perspective. there are two relevant right? the relevant regimes, right? the first national first one is our national security act, security and investment act, under be under which something can be designated as something of designated as a as something of sufficient significance that it shouldn't be allowed to have foreign investment in. and those were used to be defined quite narrowly. and the risk is those the definition creep takes it out out and out until in the out and out and out until in the end deter investment from end we deter investment from overseas, wouldn't overseas, which i wouldn't like. and second, which seem

and the second, which may seem an comparison, but it's an unusual comparison, but it's worth making, is the export controls objects controls we have over objects of art, reason art, because the reason i mention that is we have the waverley criteria of whether you can sell a piece of art or something, you know, is it, aesthetically important, is it culturally significant so culturally significant and so forth . and it seems to me you forth. and it seems to me you could make those kinds of criteria them for media criteria change them for media outlets, a vigorously outlets, we have a vigorously competitive media environment in this country. it's not as if it's it would reduce competitiveness in the uk environment, it's going to inqu environment, it's going to insult the uae if we say you can't buy something like this, which i think is a relevant factor to, whilst on balance i'd rather. >> what do you think relevant about that ? about that? >> well, rather not go >> well, i'd rather not go around insulting foreign countries help it. countries if i could help it. i mean, on the other hand, it may be that we take the in the be that we take the view in the end that this would be that we think interfering so think there'd be interfering so much wouldn't allow them think there'd be interfering so mu but wouldn't allow them think there'd be interfering so mu but it wouldn't allow them think there'd be interfering so mu but it seems ouldn't allow them think there'd be interfering so mu but it seems to dn't allow them think there'd be interfering so mubut it seems to me allow them think there'd be interfering so mu but it seems to me they've hem to. but it seems to me they've put on their bid all manner of things about editorial independence forth. things about editorial indepe|pointa forth. things about editorial indepe|point there forth. things about editorial indepe|point there is forth. things about editorial indepe|point there is actually >> my point there is actually that don't that that, that they don't work that that, yes, everybody who takes takes

over a organisation often over a news organisation often says they won't interfere. they will leave the to job editors. yeah. and i've never known one that's worked completely like that's worked completely like that except the old times under lord thomson. >> isn't that an argument, nigel, against rupert murdoch owning media in this country, or indeed a foreign fund, a fund based in dubai, investing in this i i think this channel, i think i think it's worse when it comes down to a than an individual. >> yes. you're right. rupert murdoch also interferes constantly media constantly in his his media outfits . but i mean, we can't outfits. but i mean, we can't stop the human nature angle of it. if you've got a guy who owns a newspaper, say, it's very difficult to stop them wanting to play with that. what i'm saying, if you've got a foreign government involved, and especially if there an especially if there was an international crisis going on and the editor wanted to take one view, which would be against the interests of that country, it would make it very difficult for editor to do that also for the editor to do that also as well. >> people will say, well, hang on. a second outcome for foreign

governments shares in, governments can have shares in, say, an airport in this country or, , but there's no public or, yeah, but there's no public interest thing there with an airport . airport. >> an airport just sends planes backwards and forwards. no, but you were talking about about actually forming opinions. >> got a no. >> now michel's got a no. >> now michel's got a no. >> i'm talking about people will say people will say critical infrastructure. whether infrastructure. so whether that's making the that's water you were making the point extremis , right. point about in extremis, right. >> you you were talking >> you were you were talking about extremist. what if about in extremist. what if something goes wrong and we're at foreign owners at odds with the foreign owners of surely it's of this newspaper? surely it's as as as significant or more significant. were odds significant. if we were at odds with the owners a critical with the owners of a critical piece national piece of national infrastructure, airport or an infrastructure, an airport or an airline so forth, many airline and so forth, and many of the security issue, i'm talking about a public interest issue, is a paper forced issue, which is a paper forced to take a particular line on behalf of a foreign government, which is nothing to do with security and then finding they couldn't do it. >> that seems to me the danger and what you don't then get get is the plurality of journalism that you should have in this country. well what what we may

be getting to here is where people really do make a distinction, because of course, the spanish invest heavily in airport and aviation infrastructure. >> or may not welcome infrastructure. >>the or may not welcome infrastructure. >>the french r may not welcome infrastructure. >>the french backed ot welcome it. the french backed organisation owns the eurostar and infrastructure. the and train, infrastructure. the hauans and train, infrastructure. the italians go big on defence infrastructure and ownership. we may mean is that we don't like the uae and we feel less comfortable with them investing than we do with the european authorities that we've allowed to buy bits uk to buy bits of uk infrastructure. >> america , australia, >> prior to america, australia, glenn there's glenn says michel, there's barely a british company, he says. nowadays that doesn't seem to be foreign owned. he says surely one more won't make a difference. but there's a big distinction, though, glenn isn't there. it's completely different. a foreign different. having a foreign owner versus foreign owner versus a foreign government part government being in large part that owner. that's what i'd say to you. i do think as well, i should just mention that one of the original bidders, i think, for telegraph as was for the telegraph as well, was or is of the primary or is one of the primary shareholders here as well. shareholders in here as well. i do think michel, just do just think michel, just throw that distinction. that in the distinction. >> come to down for a >> i think we come to down for a lot of people that foreign lot of people is that foreign ownership, investment in

ownership, foreign investment in things united kingdom is things in the united kingdom is good. encourage good. we should encourage that. and the media and as usual, this is the media thinking unique thinking there is a unique status media which to be maintained. >> well, there you go. can >> well, there you go. you can have the final on that. the have the final word on that. the latest harebrained idea. now with what to do with a so—called asylum anywhere in this asylum seekers anywhere in this country now, is to offer them up to £3,000 move to rwanda . i to £3,000 to move to rwanda. i mean, this is now just becoming absolutely absurd , isn't it? or absolutely absurd, isn't it? or do you think this is a great idea? tell me and i'll see you in two.

hi there. i'm michelle dewberry with you till 7:00 tonight. pr consultant alex dean and the gb news senior political commentator nigel nelson . let me commentator nigel nelson. let me just try and squeeze one more story in, we all know now what's going on with the channel and the plans that are going around and around get sorted and around trying to get sorted when to rwanda. well, when it comes to rwanda. well, now, asylum seekers are

now, failed asylum seekers are set to be offered up to three now, failed asylum seekers are set to now ffered up to three now, failed asylum seekers are set to now to red up to three now, failed asylum seekers are set to now to voluntarily1ree now, failed asylum seekers are set to now to voluntarily move to grand now to voluntarily move to rwanda . i mean, i've got to say rwanda. i mean, i've got to say it's like a slight tweak on an existing voluntary return scheme that already exists. are you in favour of this ? is this going to favour of this? is this going to work? alex. >> failed. asylum seekers should be deported . be promptly deported. >> i think they should. >> yeah, i think they should. >> yeah, i think they should. >> where? >> but where? >> but where? >> and that. and there is the rub, right? of course. first of all, you think their, their country of origin , and if their country of origin, and if their country of origin, and if their country of origin is place country of origin is a place that in they face genuine that in which they face genuine danger and are fleeing from, then they would be real asylum then they would be a real asylum seeker. wouldn't be seeker. they wouldn't be a failed indeed. so failed asylum seeker, indeed. so i send back their failed asylum seeker, indeed. so i nation. back their failed asylum seeker, indeed. so i nation. the |ck their failed asylum seeker, indeed. so i nation. the second1eir home nation. but the second thing to do, and this is thing we need to do, and this is why membership of the echr why our membership of the echr it winds up being so troublesome, that should troublesome, is that they should be nation be returned to the safe nation from came, under from which they came, and under international you international law presently, you can't shouldn't be can't do that. they shouldn't be coming which is a coming from france, which is a safe nation, and then be able to claim asylum here. under current law, international law, they can. >> nigel, you've got 55,000 people who in this people who are stuck in this ludicrous that we've ludicrous position that we've created stay, created where they can't stay,

stay country, but we stay in this country, but we can't remove them either, in the event that some of those people who are getting pretty fed up with it, can get £3,000 and they fancy rwanda, i see no problem with that. with with doing that, it'll do nothing to stop the boats , the people who are coming boats, the people who are coming across on the boats aren't covered under this scheme that they'll still face force removal if the rwanda scheme ever gets off the ground , but it's going off the ground, but it's going to cost millions and it won't be the deterrent that they want it to be. >> i think some of that is correct. and just in case i've pleased anyone so far, let me make sure everyone disagrees with by end of the show. with me by the end of the show. in the of waiting the in the course of waiting for the decision process or decision on an asylum process or a refugee decision, i would allow those people to work to defray some of the costs, pay tax on the cost they can. after a year, would allow them to a year, i would allow them to work quickly. work very quickly. >> danger of doing >> well, the danger of doing that the moment you that is that the moment you allow them work, they have a allow them to work, they have a stake it stake in the country, and so it makes difficult to

makes it much more difficult to remove them. but if they've been stuck for a year because we haven't processed quickly haven't processed them quickly enough, if enough, auf wiedersehen, pet, if you have temporary you can have temporary workers in country invitation, you in a country by invitation, you can temporary can certainly have temporary workers on a millom more important the important to actually get the backlog down get them backlog down and then get them removed as quickly as possible, or granted asylum in this country so they can begin work immediately. >> surely both. >> surely both. >> but surely the key to all of this is to rewind and actually stop people making those crossings in the first place, because this is just tweaking. >> well, that's part of why i said treating symptoms. the said treating the symptoms. the responsibility sits with safe nafions responsibility sits with safe nations come. nations through which they come. and the status and at the moment, the status quo international law says quo under international law says that's and you last that's okay. and if you saw last week the basically week the french basically escorted just off escorted a ship from, just off their uk waters. now, their coast into uk waters. now, their coast into uk waters. now, the french have been much better of late , possibly because we're of late, possibly because we're paying of late, possibly because we're paying them a great deal of money better. but when you money to be better. but when you see sort thing, you see this sort of thing, you realise what farce realise what a farce international is. international law is. >> says. she's outraged, >> carol says. she's outraged, that is spending that the government is spending this money in this way. you think they've lost the think that they've lost the plot? the side of plot? i mean, the flip side of that, though, is when you that, though, carol, is when you think much it

think about how much money it would repeat, potential would cost in repeat, potential appeals costs appeals and hotel costs or whatever or up whatever else. three, 3000 or up to like cheap to actually seems like cheap at half price , lots of you. half the price, lots of you. i mean, lesley, as you're saying , mean, lesley, as you're saying, it just feels like we're constantly wanting to reward people who have entered the country illegally. mean, that country illegally. i mean, that sentiment is felt by many. but again, i come back to my point . again, i come back to my point. they're just not stopping these boats. until you do that, boats. and until you do that, you have all the harebrained you can have all the harebrained schemes it'll schemes in the land, and it'll make blind bit of make not a blind bit of difference . alan, of my difference. alan, one of my viewers says, have the viewers says, can i have the three he'd head to rwanda three grand he'd head to rwanda like flash. he's had like a flash. he says he's had enough of the uk, i think. and i worry, alan. i think there might be of people that be quite a queue of people that would the same thing would feel the exact same thing as you, and i think that is a real shame. but for now, nigel, thank for your thank you very much for your company, as well company, alex, thank you as well for and always, thank you for yours and always, thank you for yours and always, thank you for company for choosing to for your company for choosing to be with us at 6:00. don't forget, if you ever need to go out, you take it with you on out, you can take it with you on the radio as well. what a treat for anyway, for your ear lobes. anyway, look, next. i'll look, farage is up next. i'll see tomorrow night. see you tomorrow night. >> brighter outlook with boxt

>> a brighter outlook with boxt solar, sponsors of weather on . solar, sponsors of weather on. gb news. >> good evening. welcome to your latest weather update from the met office for gb news tomorrow. most of us will see some rain. it's going to be another very mild day, particularly across parts of england and wales. today we've had weather today we've had this weather front straddling the country. it's providing cloud and it's been providing cloud and outbreaks rain, very outbreaks of rain, some very windy conditions across northern scotland ease scotland that will slowly ease through the night, as will the showers. but this zone of damp weather will persist, staying pretty soggy over north wales, northwest england , the rain just northwest england, the rain just creeping northern creeping back across northern ireland into ireland and eventually into southern scotland. dawn, much southern scotland. by dawn, much of east of england of the south and east of england staying dry, very mild here, 9 or 10. low in towns and or 10. the low in towns and cities colder across scotland. a touch possible in the touch of frost possible in the countryside here, but we should start with some sunshine. still a few showers over the northern isles. rain spreading quickly through belt. a wet through the central belt. a wet morning ireland morning for northern ireland that pushes that rain slowly pushes

northwards showers over northwards a few showers over northern england, some heavy showers wales and southwest showers for wales and southwest england through the middle of the few getting further the day, a few getting further east of eastern east but much of eastern england, stay england, i suspect, will stay dry sunshine here we dry with some sunshine here we could reach 17, maybe 18 celsius. a very mild day here, but feeling colder with the wet weather scotland. some weather across scotland. some snow over the hills that's still around friday morning, but around on friday morning, but slowly it should start to pull away. then we're left with away. and then we're left with bright and showers for bright spells and showers for many. quite breezy. many. still quite breezy. and nofice many. still quite breezy. and notice coming down notice the winds coming down from the north across northern scotland, so a real chill scotland, so were a real chill here temperatures 6 here with temperatures only 6 or 7 again, no further 7 celsius. again, no further south. pretty mild for the time of year 15 or 16 degrees. >> looks like things are heating up. boxt boilers sponsors of weather on

gb news. >> well, the new rwanda plan is we're going to give you three grand to go to rwanda and five years free accommodation. if they think that's going to stop people crossing the english channel. i don't know what planet they're on. i'm joined by the of heritage the president of the heritage foundation, roberts. now foundation, kevin roberts. now they've a legal they've been launching a legal action try and find out. did action to try and find out. did prince harry lie on his visa forms about his drug taking? and it's ladies day? yes, it is at cheltenham at the festival. and yet it's no longer called ladies day. no, they've decided to give it a gender neutral tum. is nothing sacred? before all of that, let's get the news with sophia wenzler. >> nigel. thank you. it's 7:00. i'm sophia wenzler in the gb newsroom. your top story this hour. newsroom. your top story this hour . diane newsroom. your top story this hour. diane abbott, the mp at the centre of a growing racism row, has accused the speaker of

the