police scotland have issued for police scotland have issued a bizarre explainer video involving an animated hate monster. today, marks the coming into effect of the government's long overdue ban on puberty blockers for children, with some 5000 children on the waiting list for gender identity treatment. and do swastikas need to be taken in context? that's what a metropolitan policeman told a woman at this weekend's palestine march. plus, i'll be speaking to an evangelical priest live from jerusalem about what it's like celebrating easter in the holy land and especially during these times of war. so state of the nation starts now. i'll also be joined by an

exuberant panel this evening. new culture forum fellow and broadcaster emma webb, and the contributing editor to novara media, michael walker. despite jacobs absence, the email remains the same male mogg at gb news. com so let me know what you're thinking. but now it's time for the news of the day with sanchez . with tatiana sanchez. >> and thank you very much and good evening. the top stories campaigners in edinburgh have delivered coffin the delivered a coffin outside the scottish parliament, symbolising what they say is the death of free speech. it's after the introduction of a new hate crime law, which makes it a crime to stir up hatred against people with protected characteristics that includes disability, age, sexual orientation or people who are transgender. gender critical

author jk rowling said it risks authorjk rowling said it risks outlawing genuine debate over biological sex. while some police forces have raised concerns that complaints could be lodged for political reasons, the scottish conservatives say resources should be directed towards front line policing . towards front line policing. plans to find rough sleepers are provoking outrage, with more than 40 conservative mps said to be preparing to rebel the new criminal justice bill would allow police to fine or move on. so—called nuisance rough sleepers. it was intended to replace the vagrancy act from 1824, which currently criminalises both rough sleeping and begging. but reports suggest the new bill has been paused while ministers negotiate with mps who are concerned about the consequences of issuing fines to homeless people. the plans were introduced by former home secretary suella braverman, who branded rough sleeping a lifestyle choice . more than 5400 lifestyle choice. more than 5400 migrants have been intercepted crossing the english channel in

small boats during the first three months of this year. it's a record figure for that quarter, up 43% compared to the same in 2023, official same time in 2023, official figures from the home office show 442 people made the crossing in nine small boats yesterday. that's despite difficult weather conditions, with lifeboats scrambling to assist some of the arrivals. today's strong winds have now made the journey completely impassable . the head of the impassable. the head of the nurses union has accused the government of packing hospital corridors with patients, and says the quality of care is not only undignified but fatally unsafe. it comes as new estimates suggest more than 250 patients a week in england may have died needlessly last year because of long waits for a hospital bed, a report by the royal college of emergency medicine revealed. more than 1.5 million patients waited in emergency departments for longer than 12 hours last year. the department for health says. it

added thousands of hospital beds and insists it's making progress on waiting times , and energy on waiting times, and energy bills are due to fall to their lowest rate in two years after the regulator, ofgem, cut its price cap by 12.3. it means the average household bill for gas and electricity will fall by around £238 over the course of a year , or about £20 a month. year, or about £20 a month. however, around 10 million households are still being urged to submit metre readings to avoid overpayment . for the avoid overpayment. for the latest stories, sign up to gb news alerts by scanning the qr code on your screen, or go to gb news. common alerts. now it's back to . an. back to. an. >> well, the scottish government has hammered down the final nail in the coffin of freedom of expression. today marks the scottish nationalist hate crime act coming into full effect with

411 centres being set up across the region, whereby individuals can go and report their fellow citizens for allegedly stirring up hatred against a given social group . this law was actually group. this law was actually passed back in march of 2021, when the very little miss nicola sturgeon was still in power . but sturgeon was still in power. but the current first minister, yousaf, was then the humza yousaf, was then the justice secretary and very much behind this legislation. indeed, the legislation builds on existing uk law, namely the pubuc existing uk law, namely the public order act 1986. now, although i'm not a fan of the act, owing to its vagueness, at least it recognised one sensible principle that the law ought to protect private conversations inside people's own homes. but humza yousaf censorship law does away even with that. indeed back

in 2020, before the law passed, he explicitly said are we comfortable giving a defence to somebody whose behaviour is threatening or abusive, or which is which is intentionally stirring up hatred? are we saying that that's justified because it's in the home? so under humza yousafs tyrannical rule, not only are the freedoms of the public forum being eroded , but the freedom to say what you like within the four walls of your own home. but this law defines hate crime as any crime which is understood by the victim or any other person as being motivated wholly or partly by malice or ill will towards a social group. in other words , social group. in other words, impartiality is discarded, evidence is discarded , and all evidence is discarded, and all that matters is the perception of the complainant . already of the complainant. already we're seeing the looming

consequences of this legislation. just today, shevaun brown , the snp's community brown, the snp's community safety minister, suggested that jk rowling so—called misgendering of trans identifying individuals could be liable to prosecution. but humza yousaf really ought to be careful not to throw stones in the glass house of hollywood and hollywood. the words were malice or ill will towards a social group. so can i remind you of what he said in 2020? >> lord justice clerk white, every high court judge white, the lord advocate white, the solicitor general, white, the chief constable white, every deputy chief constable white, every assistant chief constable white, the head of the law society. white. the head of the faculty of advocates. white. every prison governor white and not just justice. the chief medical officer. white. the

chief nursing officer. white, the chief veterinary officer. white, the chief social work adviser white. almost every trade union in this country , trade union in this country, headed by people who are white in the scottish government , in the scottish government, every director general is white. every chair of every public body is white. >> oh, wouldn't it be a shame if someone were to take this legislation to its natural conclusion? and report humza yousaf to the police for a clear display of malice or ill will towards white people ? that towards white people? that scotland's ethnic makeup is actually 95% white seems completely lost on this scottish dictator. funnily enough , humza dictator. funnily enough, humza yousaf was reported to the police for breaking the snp's hate crime act when he said , hate crime act when he said, quite justifiably about a year ago that the transgender rapist isla bryson should not have been in a women's prison. and he said

isla bryson is a rapist who's completely at it. i don't think they're a genuine trans woman. i think they're trying to play the system. but how interesting that he insisted on referring to isla bryson as they. but it just goes to show that regular speech is not only undesirable, but it's also practically impossible. police scotland have promised to investigate every single complaint , investigate every single complaint, but investigate every single complaint , but with nearly 7000 complaint, but with nearly 7000 complaints between 21 and 22, it's clearly untenable or perhaps this pledge has something to do with police scotland have implemented a new trial to simply not investigate certain types of crime, with an estimated 24,000 offences a year no longer being allocated to front line officers. well, if you're confused by any of this from police scotland, don't worry, don't worry, they've issued a profoundly helpful explainer about hate crimes last year involving the hate monster

you make. >> you want to have a go at somebody , a neighbour, somebody somebody, a neighbour, somebody on the street on a night out, security guy on the door. some day in the chippy, your taxi dnven day in the chippy, your taxi driver, you make you want to vent your anger just because folk look or act different for you.the folk look or act different for you. the hate monster wants you to feel that you need to show you're better than them . then, you're better than them. then, before you know you've committed a hate crime . a hate crime. >> well, make of that what you will and do. let me know as well. at mail morgue at gbviews@gbnews.com. well, with me now to discuss this is the barrister discrimination barrister discrimination barrister robin moira white. welcome, robin. >> good evening anne. >> good evening anne. >> now let me tell you what really worries me about this piece of legislation. it's that the perception of a crime being committed is not based on whether that person intended to commit a crime or not, but whether the victim in inverted

commas or anybody else, for that matter, who happened to hear whatever we said, determines that it was motivated by malice or ill will. what sort of justice is that? >> well, there are a number of protections in the act, including a reasonableness test. so if a person unreasonably forms that view about why someone has done what they've done, now, if there's evidence that they intended to commit a hate crime , they they sent hate crime, they they sent someone an email before saying, we're going to deal with that disabled person that we hate around the corner , then that around the corner, then that would show intention. and if their actions reasonably show that that's what they intended to do by the way they act, then then liability is fixed. but it's not a completely free shot in the way that you suggest. >> well, isn't it? because if, i mean, if there's an email that does imply, i agree with you that that implies intent, but

most of these things come out in, in heated exchanges or in, you know, very casual exchanges . you know, very casual exchanges. and then somebody says, oh, i'm offended, or i'm hurt or i'm whatever, because this was clearly a malicious and it's against me as a black person or against me as a black person or a transgender or sexual or sexuality or whatever it might be. and somebody says, i perceive this to be, motivated by hate. now at that point, what is the reasonable test that anybody could apply as to what was in somebody's mind at the time? you don't know what i'm thinking now. i don't know what you're thinking now. why is it that crime can be committed on that a crime can be committed on the basis of what somebody is alleged to be thinking? >> well, that's also how discrimination often works because people have worked out these that saying something these days that saying something or sending an email, like when i received some years ago that said, let's go round her place

with and with pickaxe handles and balaclavas and see what we can do. now that's an email that was sent about me, and people have worked that you don't do worked out that you don't do that, but from the circumstance of what happens if racial taunts were being shouted, if taunts about someone's protected, protected characteristic were being shouted in the run up to what then happened , it would be what then happened, it would be pretty obvious that that was a hate crime. >> but we know, for example, that street preachers have been arrested merely for quoting the bible without actually bible and without actually intending , bible and without actually intending, you bible and without actually intending , you know, anything intending, you know, anything beyond that, on one occasion a cafe owner was visited by the police because he was just running consistently. the whole of the bible through. and, you know, people were looking to pick out particular verses that they could then say, well, you know , this is against our know, this is against our current seems me current law, it seems to me there's huge , huge, huge scope there's a huge, huge, huge scope for mischief. well you, correctly said that this this act is now, what, three years

since it was passed and it spent a long time working its way through the scottish parliament and some very specific protections were added in. >> i know the european convention on human rights is perhaps not a piece of legislation that gb news, viewers are great fans of . but viewers are great fans of. but article ten, which protects free speech, is written very specifically into this act. and so if what you're doing is intended to shock , or cause intended to shock, or cause someone distress or give offence, then that very specifically doesn't reach the level where a criminal offence would have been committed under this act. >> if j.k. rowling committed a criminal offence. >> fortunately, i don't . it's >> fortunately, i don't. it's not my job to determine that. if i think it's a it's been a pretty unimpressive 24 hours or so with people apparently attempting to get as close to

the line as they can and see whether anybody's going to suggest that their toes are across if people are across it. if people are demonising a particular group, then then that's quite concerning. but what is demonising? >> i mean, if you say, you know, biology is biology and somebody such as jk rowling, for example, doesn't believe that you can change what biology has decreed , change what biology has decreed, is that hatred or is that just a reasoned position ? reasoned position? >> well, let's take an example. that's a way it's sometimes useful to take examples that are away from the point at the moment. and if someone was putting out a message that said, here are all these people of colour who have committed criminal acts and from that you should draw an assumption about people of colour , we would people of colour, we would recognise that that's wholly a wrong thing to do . and if wrong thing to do. and if someone is doing that with another protected group and saying from this group of people, you should draw an implication about the whole group. >> but it's not saying you know,

this group of people is bad. this group of people you know shouldn't have rights is not saying simply saying saying that. it's simply saying that rowling , believes that she, j.k. rowling, believes that she, j.k. rowling, believes that change biological that you can't change biological facts. as a matter of fact, i believe that is what well, now, am i guilty of a hate crime ? am i guilty of a hate crime? >> if she's saying that, then no, plainly wouldn't be no, that plainly wouldn't be across the line into hate across the line into a hate crime. if saying that crime. but if she's saying that you differently you should act differently or inappropriately you should act differently or inappropriathat , then that because of that, then that probably would be across the line. >> robin, thank you very much for joining us tonight. thank forjoining us tonight. thank you . after the break, today you. after the break, today marks the official banning of puberty blockers being issued to children with more than 5000 in the uk waiting for so—called gender identity treatment. and don't forget, we'll be going live to the holy land to speak to an evangelical priest about easter in jerusalem

welcome back. i'm ann widdecombe , covering sirjacob rees—mogg's state of the nation and we've been discussing the death of free speech in scotland. and you've been getting in touch with your mail now, with your mail mugs. now, mick says free speech is slowly being crushed in this country . well, crushed in this country. well, not so slowly, maybe. thank goodness we can still fly ash swastikas without causing offence. the world has gone quite mad and patricia says great to see ann widdecombe on the show and how lovely she looks. oh thank you patricia. do keep mailing. now looks. oh thank you patricia. do keep mailing . now last month the keep mailing. now last month the government made the long overdue announcement to ban the use of puberty blockers for children being given so—called gender identity treatment. and it came after the controversial tavistock centre in north london was officially closed after an independent review led by doctor hilary cass heavily criticised its practices. today marks the

new opening of regional gender identity treatment clinics, which align themselves with the recommendations of the cass review . so, crucially, these new review. so, crucially, these new centres will not be issuing puberty blockers to children after the nhs recognised last year that there is , and i quote, year that there is, and i quote, not enough evidence to support the safety or clinical effectiveness of puberty suppressing hormones to make the treatment routinely available at this time. well, i'm joined now by joanne lockwood, founder and ceo of sea change happen, a diversity , inclusion and diversity, inclusion and belonging practice . welcome, belonging practice. welcome, joanne. so you. good evening. good evening. you can't buy a dnnkin good evening. you can't buy a drink in the pub until you're 18. why on earth you should? you be able to sign up for medical treatment that can be irreversible. and which you can

actually regret later on? >> well, i joined the royal air force at the age of 16 and was firing an automatic weapon before i was before i was 18, so we could do a lot of things, before we're 18. so i dispute the fact that being 18 means that we don't necessarily have the competency. gillick competency is around understanding a person's understanding a person's understanding of the decisions they're making. and i think people as young as ten, 11 years old have demonstrated gillick competency without a problem . competency without a problem. >> well, we've had the example, for example, of keira bell, >> well, we've had the example, for example, of keira bell , who for example, of keira bell, who says that she just didn't understand what she was doing, came to regret couldn't came to regret it, couldn't wholly it, and has wholly reverse it, and has suffered from that ever since. now, what is the harm in making sure that children have reached the age of majority and have become adults before they make life changing, and it is life changing decisions of that order of magnitude .

of magnitude. >> i think it's important to recognise that everybody develops their sense of self from a younger age than the age of majority, the age of 18, as you describe it, people are allowed to make decisions about their lives at the age of 16. we know that, young people have a fully competent understanding of who they are even earlier than that. so i think it's important that. so i think it's important that what we do is we listen to individuals, not make blanket statements, not make policy based on everyone. if we're if we're focusing on individuals, then we can provide specialised care and specialised support not only to the individual but also to their family to avoid distress and poor mental health. >> are you saying were you say there that that people under 18 can make, you know, decisions about their lives? i think you've missed out one very vital word irreversible decisions. irreversible decisions . now, is

irreversible decisions. now, is it reasonable that a teenager can do that ? can do that? >> well, the fact is that aren't irreversible. we we've been prescribing them through medical professionals throughout the world for the past 40 years, safely and effectively. it's never been proved that these are irreversible. you know, in fact, the world professional association for transgender health path still recommends this is the course of action that should be taken, even in the us , which we know is hostile the us, which we know is hostile to trans people. >> so hillary cass is wrong . >> so hillary cass is wrong. yeah. is that your view? hilary cass is wrong. >> i'm not a medical professional. i'm not saying hilary cass is wrong. clearly she is . and she thinks in support. >> well , she support. >> well, she thinks very clearly i >> -- >> yeah. >> yeah. >> hilary cass is a medical professional , and it >> hilary cass is a medical professional, and it is her view that prescribing puberty blockers for people under 18 is a dangerous path to go. but thank you very much for that, joanne. great to have had you on the program. well, now i'm

coming to my panel, new culture forum, fellow performer emma webb and michael walker, who is the contributing editor to novara media, i think. so you've heard what, what joanne had to say there. you've heard, presumably what hilary cass has to say after a very long time indeed. we've now arrived at this present state of the law whereby children under the age of 18 won't get that, so, emma , of 18 won't get that, so, emma, who's right? >> well, joanne mentioned w path there and we've actually just had a leak of the what has been referred to as the w path files. andrew doyle actually did a very good show on on this channel, good show on it on this channel, andifs good show on it on this channel, and it's very clear that joanne said that puberty blockers are not irreversible. well, actually , there are communications between staff , who are involved between staff, who are involved in what i think is, frankly,

experimental medicine on children that show that their their doubts about these things that this is this is using children as guinea pigs and that there have been cases as well where, after using puberty blockers at a young age, which i think you mentioned consent already , there is, without going already, there is, without going into gruesome detail, not enough material. >> emma, let me just bring in michael there, i think it's a genuinely difficult issue. i can see both sides of the argument. >> i suppose what many people are advocating or why many. and we should be clear, many people who adult and trans, they who are adult and trans, they look back at their past and they say, well, my transition would have been much easier if i started a bit earlier because started it a bit earlier because you've puberty blockers you've said puberty blockers aren't i know aren't reversible. now, i know there's medical debate there's sort of medical debate at tum impact at about the long tum impact of them. really to them. i don't really want to weigh but other weigh in on that, but the other thing that's reversible is thing that's not reversible is puberty. do want to puberty. so if you do want to live life trans live your life as a trans person, it much easier person, then it is much easier to sort of pass and be treated as the gender you've chosen to,

to live as if you haven't gone through puberty . so i i can through puberty. so i can i can see both here. my see both arguments here. my inclination is to leave it to the medical profession, because i don't think it's particularly helpful for anyone if this becomes a politicised becomes a highly politicised issue . issue. >> emma, don't with the >> emma, don't bother with the politics. to the medics i >>i -- >> i don't emma >> i don't think we can trust the medics now that we've seen the medics now that we've seen the conversation that have happened those, happened between, some of those, you or that were you know, tavistock or that were leaked in the w path files. but i just want to add to you i just want to add to what you said about not said there about puberty not being the being reversible. well, the reality somebody reality is that somebody who hasn't through yet hasn't gone through puberty yet is young to make that kind is too young to make that kind of decision. there are extreme concerns , owens, about, this concerns, owens, about, this almost being a form of conversion therapy that that young gay people who might be experiencing gender dysphoria or are just simply, you know, further down the line, going to turn out to be gay, are being, you know, they're you've heard the phrase trans ing the gay away, and that's why there are so many people from either

either lesbians or gays who are so outspoken against this because they're concerned that, like you say, puberty isn't reversible, but a young person doesn't have the faculties to be able to make such a serious decision. it's effectively sterilising the final point from you, mike. >> i mean, think there are >> i mean, i think there are arguments both sides. think arguments on both sides. i think this difficult this is a very difficult decision. you decision. and i mean, you can talk about uncertainty among the medical profession sort medical profession as a sort of reason this sort of reason why this is sort of conspiratorial unreasonable reason why this is sort of consirresponsible, unreasonable reason why this is sort of consirresponsible, unr

welcome back. i'm ann widdecombe, standing in for sir jacob rees—mogg on state of the nation. and we've been discussing the official banning of puberty blockers. and you've been getting in touch with your mailbox. cy says your guest was misleading. he served in the air force at 16, firing an automatic weapon neglected to mention parental consent. and you can't serve in the military under 18 without the consent of your parents. now, over the weekend, it was business as usual as the palestine marchers took to the streets of london with the typical calls of from the river to the sea echoing throughout trafalgar square. but then this happened to walk with me, because i can point these people out to you. >> and again, i was told when i asked that a swastika was not necessarily anti—semitic or disruptive to public order.

>> right to >> that doesn't seem right to me. >> everything needs to be taken in doesn't it? in context, doesn't it? >> it's a context of why. >> but it's a context of why. why does it? >> does this swastika need context? >> what exactly are you confused about? >> what was confused is how you don't. in what context? a swastika is not anti—semitic. this to this is what i want to know. because i suppose to some because again, i suppose to some i don't know how everybody would feel about that sign that has happened. >> i cannot i'm here working for the branch commander, and it is not my responsibility . not my responsibility. unfortunately, my role to walk down the road . down the road. >> so in a united kingdom whereby misgendering someone can leave you actually on the wrong side of the law, carrying a swastika through the streets of london on a palestine march ought to be taken in context. i really do wonder to which context the officer is referring. now i'm joined again by my panel new culture fellow for a new culture forum fellow

and broadcaster emma webb , and and broadcaster emma webb, and the contributing editor to novara media, michael walker. so, michael, what is a good context for a swastika? >> i mean, of course there is no good context for a swastika. i mean, i do have to say in a way i do feel a little bit sorry for that police officer because in his defence, he was basically saying, it's not my duty . dodi saying, it's not my duty. dodi as an operational frontline police officer to decide what is and what is not offensive. i get told that by my guard commander. i would also imagine so these social media videos sort of exist a lot, and i think what they probably weren't up to is went to like loads and loads went up to like loads and loads of and went up to like loads and loads of uploaded and went up to like loads and loads of uploaded the and went up to like loads and loads of uploaded the most and then uploaded the most embarrassing of course embarrassing answer. of course it a bad answer. a it was a bad answer. it was a bad answer. plain to see bad answer. that's plain to see for everyone watching. >> such a thing as >> can there be such a thing as a who doesn't know a policeman who doesn't know what swastika implies? what a swastika implies? >> well, so i assume the context he's talking about. so i've been on these demonstrations. i've seen of people very seen lots of people very concerned about people getting killed. sorry in what the

international court of justice thinks could be a genocide or war, right? i haven't seen any swastikas. if they were telling the truth. and it could be the case. know, we still haven't case. you know, we still haven't seen this seen evidence that this sign existed. it existed. i would imagine what it would doing would be would have been doing would be comparing the israeli government to i think that to the nazis. now, i think that shouldn't i think shouldn't be done. i think that's problematic. but you shouldn't be done. i think thatunderstand lematic. but you shouldn't be done. i think thatunderstand how tic. but you shouldn't be done. i think thatunderstand how as but you shouldn't be done. i think thatunderstand how as ayut you shouldn't be done. i think thatunderstand how as a police can understand how as a police officer, saying, officer, someone saying, i support the nazis and i think this government is bad and is a bit like nazis. those are bit like the nazis. those are two different contexts. two very different contexts. now, of those now, i think both of those contexts but there are contexts are bad, but there are different one contexts are bad, but there are diffebelt one contexts are bad, but there are diffebe shown one contexts are bad, but there are diffebe shown any one contexts are bad, but there are diffebe shown any context one contexts are bad, but there are diffebe shown any context in 1e can be shown any context in which swastika is not which a swastika is not offensive is not antisemitic. >> there is only one context, and that would be at something like hindu wedding, like a hindu wedding, and actually, seen police like a hindu wedding, and actthisy, seen police like a hindu wedding, and actthis little seen police like a hindu wedding, and actthis little rhetorical police like a hindu wedding, and actthis little rhetorical trickice do this little rhetorical trick before when they there was a banner being held up at a hizb ut—tahrir rally, now prescribed, prescribed in all sorts of other countries, an islamist group holding up banners talking about muslim armies and chanting jihad. and the police also said that in that particular context,

they were referring to spiritual jihad . of course not military jihad. of course not military jihad, seen another man jihad, we've seen another man who was arrested and then unarrested released without charge for holding up a poster that said hamas a terrorist, which is both a statement of fact and also the position of uk law. uk law. yeah, so we have seen time and time again the police behaving in a, in a way thatis police behaving in a, in a way that is , has been described as that is, has been described as two tier policing, it is enormously troubling for jews and i don't think it matters. so i think i believe that the person , you said that there's no person, you said that there's no proof that that existed. i think that person has now been arrested. but i do think it's very important to add to that that regardless of whatever the broader was of this broader context was of this video that was clipped, the way the police officer behaves in that video is unprofessional. and there is a senior police officer behind him that should have stepped in. michael final question. >> oh go on. yes if you were a

jew looking at that sign , would jew looking at that sign, would you have felt intimidated and unsafe ? unsafe? >> i think any sign with a swastika should not be waved in in in london, and that's the reason why. so yes, i mean, we haven't seen the sign, but i don't think people should be waving with swastikas on waving signs with swastikas on them waving signs with swastikas on the well, we've received a >> well, we've now received a statement from the met police which said this clip is a short excerpt of what was a ten minute conversation with an officer dunng conversation with an officer during the full conversation, the officer establishes that that the woman the person was concerned about had already been arrested for a public order offence in relation to a placard. anyway, rishi sunak is facing a revolt. what's new there? over the criminal justice bill, as critics say new powers given to police would effectively criminalise homelessness . the bill, which homelessness. the bill, which was announced by the former home secretary, suella braverman and is to be voted on before the

general election, could see could see rough sleepers moved on or fined up to £2,500 or jailed . so is the government jailed. so is the government tackling a serious problem that negatively affects the lives of the law abiding, or are we cruelly punishing people for falling on hard times? well i'm going to turn to my esteemed panel this time. i'm going to start with michael. so, michael, what sort of homeless sleeper can pay £2,500 in a fine? none >> well, i suppose unless we believe suella braverman, who thinks that being homeless is a lifestyle choice. but my response that was always response to that was always and why do people why does why do more people choose whenever why does why do more people choconservatives whenever why does why do more people choconservatives are vhenever why does why do more people choconservatives are inanever the conservatives are in government? because street homelessness go homelessness doesn't tend to go down labour government down when labour in government and the conservatives and go up when the conservatives are. i think the are. and so yeah, i think the idea fining homeless people idea of fining homeless people £2,500 grotesque , obviously £2,500 is grotesque, obviously it's not going to work. you're not going to get £2,500 off of someone homeless. can someone who's homeless. i can only that they won't be only presume that they won't be able to pay the fine, and then

we'll end up in prison, which is going to be an enormous cost to the taxpayer. >> emma, talked people >> emma, i've talked to people sleeping streets , sleeping rough on the streets, and do that in some cases and i do know that in some cases i've to point i've been able to point them directly not far directly to help not very far away, which immediately away, which was immediately available , and they've refused available, and they've refused it. so is there an element of choice there? >> i think there is. we do definitely have an issue with organised gangs and begging, which i think the government rightly wants to address. i think the issue of voluntary homelessness is quite complicated, because those people probably have mental health issues or drugs issues, and there'll be a reason why they're on the street , but i do they're on the street, but i do think that the conservatives who are rebelling against this are right, because, i mean, the proposal of the bill is to replace the vagrancy act , and replace the vagrancy act, and the idea that you could find somebody over £2,000 who's homeless is just is a ridiculous suggestion. it's not going to deal with the problem , deal with the problem, particularly in london. we have an enormous number. it's

obviously increased since the pandemic of rough sleepers, i don't think that this this proposal is going to do anything to alleviate that. i also think that there seems to be something that there seems to be something thatis that there seems to be something that is inherently wrong , with that is inherently wrong, with criminalising homelessness in general. that's the criticism of the act, is that it's too vague. yes. there are certain things that do need to be dealt with, but but we shouldn't be criminalising people who, through fault their through no fault of their own, whether , through mental health whether, through mental health or through circumstance, have ended up on the streets. >> michael. i mean, i think even if it is through no fault of that. i mean, i suppose you're saying people don't always make what would to be the what we would think to be the right now that's right decision. now that's clearly it'd be, right decision. now that's clea know, it'd be, right decision. now that's clea know, being it'd be, right decision. now that's clea know, being a it'd be, right decision. now that's cleaknow, being a being be, right decision. now that's cleaknow, being a being addicted you know, being a being addicted to drugs is also not a lifestyle choice you're you're choice because you're you're in a difficult situation. as a very difficult situation. as emma might mental emma said, you might have mental health help health if you're offered help and you and, know, immediate and you and, you know, immediate help, vague promise . help, not some vague promise. >> if you're offered immediate help refuse it , are you help and you refuse it, are you not making a choice?

>> well, i mean, there's an element of choice there. >> i suppose the reason is why have they not taken it has the reason they've not taken it because they're a addict because they're a drug addict and go into and they don't want to go into that accommodation that sheltered accommodation because be because then they they won't be able their, their habit. able to feed their, their habit. now that's they now obviously that's they haven't made a good choice there. sort of there. but it's sort of difficult necessarily to blame them choice we them for that choice because we know addiction works know how drug addiction works and how severe mental and we know how severe mental health is health problems work, which is that might not give you the that they might not give you the agency that, you know, we might feel that we have in our day to day thank panel for that >> i thank my panel for that one. coming up next, how one. but coming up next, how have christians marked the easter season in the conflict fidden easter season in the conflict ridden middle east and just why are evangelical churches recruiting in droves while the church of england numbers

? welcome 7 welcome back. ? welcome back. the 7 welcome back. the easter season

is still upon us. with commemorations of christ's resurrection still being commemorated by christians across the world. and nowhere is that more poignant than the site of the event itself . the holy of the event itself. the holy land. as we all know, the region is embattled in a territorial and religious conflict between the jewish state of israel and the jewish state of israel and the islamist group hamas. the jewish state of israel and the islamist group hamas . but the islamist group hamas. but the islamist group hamas. but the region's christians are embroiled in the disputes just as much as any other group. so just how are they commemorating this most sacred event in the middle east in their calendar, in the wake of the conflict and why are evangelicals growing in droves whilst the c of e numbers continuing to dwindle ? well, i'm continuing to dwindle? well, i'm pleased to say that i'm now joined from jerusalem by bishop doctor munib younan. who's the bishop emeritus of the evangelical lutheran church in jordan and the holy land. bishop. good evening . bishop. good evening. >> good evening. >> good evening. >> good evening. >> good evening, and thank you very much for joining >> good evening, and thank you very much forjoining us. can you tell me something about how

easter is going in the holy land ? >> well, 7- >> well, i ? >> well, i think, you know, when we are celebrating now, the western, you know , in easter, western, you know, in easter, still in five months, we will be celebrating the orthodox, which takes, of course , which of takes, of course, which of course is a calendar issue. now, this year it was a special one because we are living in the war situation. so the israeli authorities did not allow, you know, christians from the west bank to enter to, to, to jerusalem in order to celebrate, with other christians, for example, you know , the example, you know, the traditional, the traditional, palm sunday procession , which palm sunday procession, which starts from beit fajjar through gethsemani to saint anne. usually we have 30,000 this yean usually we have 30,000 this year, where only 3000 because christians could not, from the west bank, were not allowed to

participate in that, even though even with all these things, we have to bring the hope of the resurrection, the hope of the risen lord to our people, even in such a difficult and depressing situation in which we were in which we are today. depressing situation in which we were in which we are today . for were in which we are today. for example, we are celebrating also, the emmaus, the two disciples of emmaus who were really, going to emmaus and they met jesus christ, you know, and then when he broke the bread , then when he broke the bread, they could when he broke the bread, he understood. they understood that he is risen. and we live with this hope that he is risen. and this country that is risen. and this country that is suffering , you know, is suffering, you know, occupation, suffering, war, suffering, you know, violence , suffering, you know, violence, is, suffering dehumanisation will one day, you know, with the help of god , we will we will get help of god, we will we will get our justice, help of god, we will we will get ourjustice, peace based on justice for us and for every

bishop . bishop. >> thank you very much for that description. i'm sure we're all praying for christians and the holy land as we are praying for all those who are involved in this conflict , and it all those who are involved in this conflict, and it must be an extremely difficult time. can i just ask you something else in this country, the evangelical churches are doing really rather well. the established church in this country, the church of england , the congregations are england, the congregations are dwindling, do you know or have you any ideas why that would happen? why is it increasing in one area, decreasing in another ? one area, decreasing in another? >> well, we there are when you speak about evangelicals, there are three kinds of evangelicals . are three kinds of evangelicals. there are the mainline evangelicals like lutherans, anglicans , methodists, you know, anglicans, methodists, you know, presbyterians. yeah. there are also evangelicals like the baptists who are ecumenical and who join us also in world council of churches. and there are those who are really, they

are those who are really, they are the evangelicals or the evangelistic groups that are non ecumenical and, you know, they are spreading everywhere now , are spreading everywhere now, what is the reason for that? it's difficult. exactly what to say with the reason. maybe sometimes they have, you know, a clear a clear cutting , you know clear a clear cutting, you know decisions on certain social ethical issues which sometimes our churches in the mainline churches do not have like them. but at the same time, i would like really to tell you very clearly today we are noticing that growth of mainline that the growth of mainline churches are in africa and china , not in the western countries. and the future of christianity will be in africa and china. and that's the reason and that's the reason we have to see that the that for example, the two largest churches today for us

lutherans in the world are in ethiopia and in tanzania. in the past, it used to be maybe, maybe it used to be a sweden or sweden or or norway or germany. you can see that things are moving at the same time. we are not ashamed to preach , the gospel of ashamed to preach, the gospel of christ to every everybody at the same time. >> bishop, thank you very much. that's a very, very good note to end on about not being ashamed to preach the gospel. and i am very grateful to you for joining us tonight. however, i've still got emma with me now. emma, you're an anglican . i'm a you're an anglican. i'm a catholic. let me let me declare that right away. you're an anglican . congregations are anglican. congregations are dwindling in the anglican church. churches are being closed. some parishes are joining together they joining together because they haven't and haven't got enough in each. and yet evangelical churches are yet the evangelical churches are

growing now. i think the bishop hit the nail on the head right at the end there, where he said, because they're not ashamed to preach gospel christ. is preach the gospel of christ. is it that people it the question that people actually strong message actually want a strong message rather several hundred years ago? >> in short, yes, i think they want the truth and they want sincerity. and it's quite hard to find that in the anglican church broadly, particularly in the leadership , there the anglican leadership, there are many, great parishes and vicars, lay people who are still committed to the gospel in the anglican church, but they're being failed by the leadership of church. and by the of the church. and by the archbishop in particular. and i think that, the bishop touched on this there perhaps without necessarily meaning to when you look at state of , of look at the state of, of persecuted christians around the world and christians in the holy land or christians in africa, and also in china, where they are also persecuted, there is a forceful in arabic countries and absolutely particularly in the middle east, where christians have been all but wiped out. i

mean, if you look at the numbers , the dramatic decrease the , the dramatic decrease in the population in the population of christians in the countries where they were, their communities were originally founded, but just to say very, very briefly that actually that sincerity of belief, holding on to your faith against persecution. i think that when you contrast that to the anglican church, that has become the leadership has become extremely laissez faire , and, extremely laissez faire, and, and i think takes i think the word you're looking for is complacent. >> complacent. absolutely. >> complacent. absolutely. >> it's complacent. absolutely and that complacency has grown over the last 3 or 4 decades, this is an established church. you know, it can rest on that. it doesn't have to go out and it doesn't have to actually cringing rather than confident about the gospel. >> that's the church >> and that's what the church needs and they think needs to be. and they think that thatis needs to be. and they think that that is what dissuades young people. but actually it's what attracts young people is sincerity truth sincerity and truth and an uncompromising message. >> that is wrong. >> this is right. that is wrong. absolutely. archbishop absolutely. and the archbishop doesn't he certainly doesn't . >> oh, he certainly doesn't. >> oh, he certainly doesn't. >> thank you emma. well, that's

all from me. but up next is patrick christys and we shall shortly be finding out what is on the bill of fare this evening i >> -- >> and fantastic show. amazing stuff. look, i've got a big exclusive with a woman who accosted the police over swastikas on the streets of britain. get ready for tent cities full of asylum seekers right across the uk. the lord's prayer was read in urdu. is it time for the church to stop pandenng time for the church to stop pandering to other cultures? will labour really allow eu nationals our general nationals to vote in our general elections? accused of elections? they stand accused of rigging and i dare to rigging the deck and i dare to ask the question that nobody wants to when it comes to humza yousafs hate crime act, you'll have to tune in 9/11 to find out i >> -- >> and it's been a pleasure filling in for the right honourable sirjacob rees—mogg, honourable sir jacob rees—mogg, and i look forward to being back in his stead sometime soon. i'm ann whittaker and this been ann whittaker and this has been state of the nation, and i hope you've all had a lovely easter.

>> a brighter outlook with boxt solar , sponsors of weather on . solar, sponsors of weather on. gb news. >> hello there! welcome to your latest gb news. weather. over the next 24 hours or so we'll see the heavy showers fade away. it will often remain quite cloudy, but there will be some brighter spells into tuesday. low pressure dominating the weather pattern moment, weather pattern at the moment, but a slack area of low pressure, so we've some slow pressure, so we've had some slow moving , these moving heavy showers, these slowly fading through this slowly fading away through this evening do have evening time. we do have a frontal system as well across parts of scotland , the far north parts of scotland, the far north of england, giving some spells of england, giving some spells of rain the early hours. we of rain into the early hours. we could see some clear spells through central swathe of through this central swathe of the uk, and here temperatures dipping low single figures dipping into low single figures and some further showers running across southern coastal counties of england too. so it's a mixed picture for tuesday. some bright sunny spells across this central part of the uk wales into the midlands, for example , this

midlands, for example, this frontal system across eastern parts of scotland continues to give outbreaks of rain through the day into the afternoon. we'll see some showers bubble up for many areas, but there'll be plenty of sunny spells, some rain in the southwest. later temperatures in the sunshine reaching or reaching around 15 or 16 celsius. cold under the celsius. still cold under the cloud and rain for scotland into wednesday, the next area of low pressure moves in, pushing rain north and eastwards across the country. some of this could be heavy times behind it, some heavy at times behind it, some showers falling but also some showers falling in but also some brighter and towards the brighter skies. and towards the end week it turns wetter end of the week it turns wetter and windier, but with winds from the south, temperatures start to rise . rise. >> looks like things are heating up . boxt boilers sponsors of up. boxt boilers sponsors of weather on

news. >> good evening. the top stories this hour. campaigners in edinburgh delivered a coffin outside the scottish parliament today, symbolising what they say is the death of free speech. it's after the introduction of a new hate crime law, which makes it a crime to stir up hatred against people with protected characteristics. that includes disability, age, sexual orientation or people who are transgender. gender critical author jk rowling said it risks authorjk rowling said it risks outlawing genuine debate over biological sex. while some police forces have raised concerns that complaints could be lodged for political reasons . be lodged for political reasons. the scottish conservatives say resources should be directed towards front line policing . towards front line policing. plans to find rough sleepers are provoking outrage , with more provoking outrage, with more than 40 conservative mps said to be preparing to rebel, the new criminal justice bill would allow police to fine or move on. so—called nuisance rough sleepers . it was intended to sleepers. it was intended to replace the vagrancy act from 1824, which currently

criminalises