harm is costing england a massive £27 billion a year. that stuff like crime and nhs treatment . so who should pay treatment. so who should pay that bill? is it all of us, the general taxpayers? or is it the drinkers and a generation of women have been told that they can have it all, but it wasn't actually all that true. have those females been failed by feminism or . those females been failed by feminism or. not? we've got all that to come and more before seven, but before we get stuck in, let's cross live for tonight's latest news headlines . tonight's latest news headlines. >> good evening. i'm sophia wenzler in the gb newsroom . a 73 wenzler in the gb newsroom. a 73 year old british man has died after an aircraft was hit by severe turbulence on a flight from london heathrow to singapore. the plane was forced to make an emergency landing in bangkok. airport officials believe the man may have suffered a heart attack. more

than 50 people were hurt, seven of them critically. after sustaining head injuries. singapore airlines confirmed there were 18 crew and 211 passengers on board, 47 of which were from the united kingdom . were from the united kingdom. the prime minister has addressed the issue of illegal migration dunng the issue of illegal migration during a visit to austria. rishi sunak says eu countries are starting to recognise places like rwanda are essential in tackling the problem, with 15 states calling on the european commission to tighten migration policy. speaking exclusively to gb news, the prime minister says the numbers prove progress is being made in stopping small boats and thousands of illegal migrants are being returned to other countries. >> the numbers are down by around a third. they were down by around a third last calendar year as well. so we are making progress . and just this year, in progress. and just this year, in fact, we have returned 10,000 people back to other countries. that's 2000 people more than we did last year. so that shows the

progress we're making. and including within that are 1700 foreign national offenders. again, 400 more than last year. so yes, we are making progress. of course, there's more to do. i've been very clear that i won't stop until we have stopped the boats . the boats. >> meanwhile, the former immigration minister has criticised the foreign secretary for his apparent stance on controlling migration . controlling migration. >> ian, i preferred the former version of david cameron when he was prime minister and he set our manifesto at reducing illegal migration to the tens of thousands and along with nick clegg, he scrapped the graduate route . so i'm disappointed if route. so i'm disappointed if he's now campaigning to stop us from controlling migration and reducing the number of students coming into the country in this way. >> government documents have revealed that people living with hiv as a result of the infected blood scandal could receive more than £2 million in compensation. it comes as interim compensation

payments of £210,000 will be given to infected blood victims for the most urgent cases, while the final scheme becomes operational , jul cabinet operational, jul cabinet minister john glen told parliament the initial payment will be given to people living with the effects of contaminated blood within 19 days, 90 days starting in the summer. since the 1970s, starting in the summer. since the 19705, 30,000 starting in the summer. since the 1970s, 30,000 people were infected with hiv and hepatitis through contaminated blood products and transfusions. around 3000 have since died. in other news, a woman has died after a dog attack in a house in east london, with police seizing two xl bullies from the property . the metropolitan police says the victim was in her 50s and the victim was in her 50s and the incident happened yesterday. officers say she was pronounced dead at the scene and the two registered dogs were seized after being contained in a room from february the 1st. it became a criminal offence to only xl bully breed in england and wales without an exemption certificate, and the high court

has ruled that the regulation regulations which lowered the threshold for police intervening in protests were unlawful . civil in protests were unlawful. civil liberties group liberty brought legal action against the home office over protest regulations last year . the government last year. the government measures lowered the threshold for what is considered serious disruption to community life. they also allowed police officers to take into account any relevant cumulative disruption of repeated protests. in today's ruling, disruption of repeated protests. in today's ruling , two judges in today's ruling, two judges ruled for the group, finding the home office acted outside of its powers , and the high court has powers, and the high court has ruled that prince harry cannot broaden legal action against news group newspapers to include allegations against rupert murdoch. a judge has ruled the allegations against mr murdoch should not be allowed to be taken to trial, stating they added nothing material to the case. news group newspapers is accused of unlawful information gathering on prince harry since the age of nine, which it denies

. and for the latest story, 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. now it's back to. michelle. >> thank you very much for that. i'm michelle dewberry and i'm keeping you company till 7:00 tonight alongside me is back everybody. the cur deputy leader of reform uk ben habib. and the author and journalist ela whelan. welcome back everybody. if i had a pound for everyone that had got in touch with me saying, where's ben habib? really? i'd be skint. i'm flattered. no, you didn't let me get to the end of my sentence. i said if i had a pound for everyone asking where you'd been, i'd be skint. you jumped in halfway. sorry. >> sorry about that. >> sorry about that. >> i ruined my gag, everybody. anyway, welcome, everybody, you know, it is international tea day today. did you know that? >> no. >> no. >> did you know that? ela? no are you a tea fan? big fan? i'm a very big tea fan. this is the

colour. i don't think i can show you this. actually, without. i think i'm probably going to create more harm than i'm going to do. good. yeah. i was going to do. good. yeah. i was going to show you the colour of my tea, i think it's always fascinating how people have their tea, i fascinating how people have theirtea, i am a one fascinating how people have their tea, i am a one bag, two cup kind of girl. what about yourself? get in touch with me tonight. with everything. quite frankly, that's on your mind. there's a lot i want to get into. i want to talk to you about political violence in a second anti—semitism. i want to talk about booze as well. do you have one too many? have you got yourself into a scrape or two? and if so, who should pick up that bill? i don't know. what do you think about so—called drunk tanks as well? should we be chucking people into those things until they sober up the next day and then charging them, what would you make to that, anyway, get in touch with me all the usual ways you can email gbviews@gbnews.com. you can tweet or text me, or of course, you can go to the website gb news. commun corsair and join the conversation there wherever you are tonight, including the radio, you are very, very welcome. but first up then there's been a big report that's

been released today looking at political violence in this country and how on earth we get on top of it and protect things like our democracy. the focus, i have to say, of a lot of this report was indeed protesters and what they should and should not be able to do. let me cross live to our reporter charlie peters. charlie, good evening to you . charlie, good evening to you. good evening. michelle, bring the viewers up to speed with the essence of this report, if you will. >> well, it's focusing on sabotage, subversion, coercion and intimidation. those are the key verbs used by lord walney, the government's independent adviser on political violence and disruption to describe several what he describes as extreme protest groups, including just stop oil extinction rebellion, palestine action and a more recent group called youth demand that actually sprung up after the report was finalised. but it's still been included in the report. it has 41

recommendations in reaction to what he describes as the hijacking of democracy through these groups activities. there are several there, but here are are several there, but here are a few of the key ones that have been drawn out today in this discussion. in at the top is a blanket ban on face coverings at protests with the author john woodcock saying that several events like the pro—palestine marches have allowed criminal events to take place, avoiding prosecution from the police due to face coverings. also, a call for buffer zones around mps houses, some pro—palestinian protesters targeting mps in their constituency homes. tobias ellwood face that the former chair of the defence select committee last year, this has already done. buffer zones are already done. buffer zones are already in place through public order acts for abortion clinics, so it could be a copycat use of that legislation. we've also heard for a demand for a restriction on the ability of these groups to fundraise, and also to organise , and that would also to organise, and that would be achieved through a specific

new prescribing tool, not like terror groups , a sort of a less terror groups, a sort of a less harsh version of the prescription of terror groups such as hizb ut tahrir, a group that was proscribed by the home office earlier this year. and he's also called for an expansion of the defence of security and arms companies that work in britain. several factories associated with the defence industry have been attacked by pro—palestine protesters in the last few years. palestine action has been involved in that several trials going on, but but john woodcock, the independent adviser here, saying that those trials are insufficient criminal charges haven't worked because more and more of these protests are taking place. and what's been the response from those groups? well, just stop oil said it was shameful that lord woodcock was selected to do this report in the first place. palestine action also rejected the report, and extinction rebellion put out and extinction rebellion put out a similar message. we haven't

heard from youth demand. they're a spin off of just stop oil and also aligned with palestine action to target the ministry of defence. last month, spraying the building with red paint, james cleverly said that he will carefully consider the recommendations in his role as home secretary and the prime minister. rishi sunak has also written in the report saying that he will consider them as well. its 300 pages, hundreds of thousands of words, three years in the making. we'll see if any of those recommendations make it into law. >> indeed. and there you go. everyone at home, some bedtime reading for you. get yourself across it for all now. charlie peters, thank you for that update. i'm very tough on law and order. i am ben habib and by the way, people have absolutely missed you, but some of these proposals like this sound great. you know, stuff like, oh, you know, we're going to make these, protesters pay for the damage if you want to go and smash stuff up or paint on stuff or whatever, you're going to be responsible. now you're brilliant. high five. but then actually, when it comes to trying to police these and enact

some of these things, i'm not sure how practical some of this stuff would be, but what was your kind of key takeaways from this today? >> well, my starting point is, you know, why do we need more legislation, more authority be granted to the police in order to do a job which was perfectly capable of being discharged over the last few decades? it's only recently that we've had these issues, issues emerging at protests . and i do think, by the protests. and i do think, by the way, it is what suella braverman defines as, lacet , you know, defines as, lacet, you know, left anarchist single issue terrorists that have really promoted this kind of, this form of protest causing this knee jerk reaction. and i think what the government needs single issue. >> i've got to say, it feels to me i feel like it's completely the opposite. >> well, it's like people at soil, extinction rebellion. yeah, they start off campaigning about this stuff and then i'm sure that many of these people kind of go, oh, the next bandwagon is this, this cause or that's cause they're not single issue. >> they're almost like rent a mob, but they'll go out and

march on a single issue or protest on a single issue, and then they'll morph into, you know, pro—palestine marches at some point, no doubt. >> but i think the real issue here is what has gone wrong with british society. how is it that we've gone from a society that was, you know, generally, of course, we've had riots in the past, but we're not without riots, but gone to a position where we're now, you know, asking for extra surveillance, extra powers for the police, new laws to define stuff that should already. and in my view, largely been defined already. and i think it's because we have had this very large influx of immigration happen. we've had an agenda promoted by government of, you know, esg , the, the of, you know, esg, the, the catastrophe that will befall humanity if we don't save the planet instantly and that, you know, we must all make way for other cultures coming to our country, celebrating those cultures. if necessary, taking the knee to those cultures. and i and i think our law enforcement and judicial services are also encouraged in

that direction. so, you know, it's that side of the it's that side of the agenda, that side side of the agenda, that side side of, that it's on that side that the problem has been created. and so this is taking a sledgehammer to, to crack, perhaps not the appropriate nut. hello >> maybe a row about what immigration has to do with middle class people smashing themselves to government buildings is for another program, ben. >> but i was talking about the pro—palestine marches. >> well, even that i think the lord warning's report actually, to me is a real problem . it's to me is a real problem. it's within it. there's some it's kind of because it's so huge . kind of because it's so huge. there are some things which are worth unpicking. for example, one of the recommendation is that teachers would get protection from claims of blasphemy. that's in relation to the batley grammar issue . and the batley grammar issue. and you know, most people think, yeah, well there there should be some protection there, there should be something done there. so there's that. but then most of it is calling for just so there's that. but then most of it is calling forjust a of it is calling for just a naked crackdown on protests, which i think is a real assault

on freedom of expression. you know, charlie peters, your correspondent there, was talking about the fact of buffer zones being extended, not not just to police, politicians, houses , but police, politicians, houses, but to constituency surgeries, parliament and council chambers. i mean, where are you meant to protest your , local politician protest your, local politician or whoever it is, someone in the cabinet office? if not outside parliament? i mean that there's a real problem here. do you agree with the home thing, though? the home thing is pretty is pretty clear. but i mean, constituency surgeries and pubuc constituency surgeries and public public offices, you know, outside parliament that that seems to be a massive step too far. the you know, i think we have to really separate out the content of a protest from the abstract idea of the freedom to protest . i don't think i think protest. i don't think i think there's very few people left in there's very few people left in the country who have much sympathy, if any, for extinction rebellion, just people are indeed a lot of the sort of more extremist end of the pro—palestine marches, you know, the whole kind of shutting down

roads, spraying things, releasing rats in fast food chains, you know, all of it is at best irritating, at worst extremely disruptive . but extremely disruptive. but protest is meant to be disruptive and if you, as a citizen, don't have access to means to be able to, you know, draw attention to your cause, whether it's remember a few years ago , we were a lot of us years ago, we were a lot of us were on demos for invoking article 50 around brexit. you know, the cause that you think is really important if you can't express that freely in a supposedly free and democratic society, that's a problem. and i think this government is trying to look like it's doing something in relation to, in particular, the pro—palestine marches, by just throwing law at everything, creating new legislation, saying we'll just take down further, when in fact there's plenty on the legislative books , that can legislative books, that can already be used to deal with some of the nasty behaviour that we see on some of these marches violent behaviour, intimidation, harassment. there's laws already there for that criminal damage,

trespassing, blah, blah, blah. there's laws already there for that. the police just need to get better at doing their job, which is kind of what you were saying, ben. >> so what's behind this? and i mean, you mentioned all teachers being protected from blasphemy attacks based on blasphemy. well, we don't have blasphemy. blasphemy laws in this country. and teachers should already be protected from being harassed, having threats to kill, and all the rest of it. so all of this, when i read stuff like that, i do, you know, i obsess a little bit about this. batley thing, ben, because i think it's so shameful what's happened . the shameful what's happened. the fact that there is still a man in hiding and yet you have all this pontificate on paper going, oh, yeah, we'll create this new law and you won't be able to be in trouble for blasphemy. you don't have blasphemy laws in this country. you can't be in trouble for that already. so they tried to bring it back through making islamophobia illegal. >> indeed, labour has suggested it would do that. and of course, thatis it would do that. and of course, that is nothing other than a blasphemy law. >> what's going on then? so why are people saying if we all agree that actually there is a

lot of laws already that are perhaps not being enacted in the way that they should, what is going on? what is the driving force here? >> because, i mean, where l and i clearly disagree is on the causes of why we've ended up here. and i do think there has been a change in the way our society is functioning and the way it protests and the extremities used by people to protest in large part, i believe, because they've been indulged with a regulatory framework that almost gives them the protection for it, because the protection for it, because the government is through business, through institutions, education establishments, is promoting an agenda of climate emergency. we must reach net zero by 2050. the planet's going to burn up. so extinction rebellion just stop oil. they're emboldened. and similarly , and i emboldened. and similarly, and i do think immigration is an issue. and if anyone shuts themselves off to the extreme damage being done to our society through multiculturalism and the promotion of diversity , equality promotion of diversity, equality and inclusion, which, as i've said many times, is actually division , inequality and division, inequality and exclusion. the promotion of minorities over and above to the

detriment, if necessary, of the majority, if you turn your back on that, you are turning your back on the root causes of why we've got real civil strife emerging in the uk. all you need to do, by the way, to determine how it is we're going to move forward in our trajectory is look across the channel look at what's happening in france. it is turning into a police state with ever more draconian laws of the type that we've just discussed. more police brutality , but no end to their inter—ethnic problems. and the, you know, a year ago, france went up in flames because a 17 year old algerian was shot in paris, which is a well, you know, and you've got to face up to the causes of these problems. absolutely. >> 100% agree with that. and i think france is a really good example of, of, of looking at where sort of crackdowns from authorities, whether it's the police or government officials instituting new laws, doesn't work. it doesn't. i think part

of the problem with this government is it thinks that all it has to do is ban things, in particular in relation to the pro—palestine marches, the issue of anti—semitism . of anti—semitism. >> but what do you think the root cause is, ella, in relation to anti—semitism? >> you know, it's a kind of contemporary anti people think of anti—semitism as being sort of anti—semitism as being sort of you know, exactly like the 19305. it'5 of you know, exactly like the 1930s. it's sort of far right. or there's an easy explanation for it. but today it's sort of a heady mix of, identity politics from, you know, in particular the left, which has , you know, the left, which has, you know, you got this ridiculous situation which you've got, you know, queers for palestine and things like that, where you have this, this sort of myopic view of what identity politics means . of what identity politics means. and that allows, you know, the argument that jews are white and therefore they have white privilege. there's that. then there's the issue of growing issue of islamism, which is pretty much just nakedly jews should die is just outright sort of genocidal. do you agree? all of genocidal. do you agree? all of these. and then you have a lasting , you know, lasting sort

lasting, you know, lasting sort of vestiges of right wing anti—semitism and all that comes together and creates this quite complicated mix . together and creates this quite complicated mix. i'm together and creates this quite complicated mix . i'm not complicated mix. i'm not disagreeing with you on the immigration thing, but i think the question of how we deal with anti—semitism cannot be to just simply ban and to crack down on protests, which will have ramifications for us all for a long time. well, these things aren't going to get taken back off the statute book. >> well, let's try and answer that question, because i bet you've got some thoughts on that at herm. how do you think we do tackle anti—semitism? michael gove, he's been speaking out about that. i'll play you a clip after the break and we'll look at that. and also angela rayner, she's been speaking out today. she says basically never mind housing what we need to create next. everybody is essentially many more new towns. do you agree with that and would you want a brand new town? i don't know, popping up at the end of your street. give me your

hi there. i'm michelle dewberry ,

hi there. i'm michelle dewberry, and i'm with you till 7:00 tonight. alongside with the co—deputy leader of reform uk, ben habib. and the author and journalist ella whelan. we were talking before the break about anti—semitism . i can tell you anti—semitism. i can tell you now, michael gove, he's been speaking out this morning about that very subject. listen, no . that very subject. listen, no. >> now that it is genuinely dangerous for people to be openly , clearly, proudly jewish openly, clearly, proudly jewish near these marches at a time when we're all encouraged to be a whole , authentic selves, to a whole, authentic selves, to celebrate our identity, to be out and proud. there is only one group told that they and they alone can only be tolerated on terms set by others jews. >> indeed, he says, the uk risks descending into the darkness of anti—semitism . we were trying to anti—semitism. we were trying to get to the bottom of this. then how do you get to the root of it all? what what do you think to what? >> michael michaels clearly hasn't got a grasp of the problem, has he? because he talks about celebrating one's identity and being out and

proud, which is all fine. absolutely. if you're gay, you shouldn't feel constrained in any way whatsoever. but we saw the police the other day , the police the other day, requiring a jewish man to leave the area of a march because he was jewish in order to keep the peace. so this wasn't a far left group or a far right group having a go at this jewish gentleman. it was the police. and this is what i mean about the regulatory framework. they are the police are encouraged to promote ethnic minorities, and they don't see the jewish minority as an ethnic minority. they're encouraged, trained, led by the nose to promote ethnic minorities . and that's why minorities. and that's why i think the palestinian marches are given such soft touch policing in part, in part also because i think there's just no way they could control 300,000 people walking from hyde park to nine elms. but in part it's because they have been told this is the right way to police .

is the right way to police. we've got to celebrate these ethnic minorities. we've got to allow them their their opportunity to protest . and opportunity to protest. and indeed, gays for palestine and lesbians for palestine and everything else. and it's the regulatory framework that has to change. and people like michael gove say, oh, we don't want to get caught in a discussion on culture wars. it's not about a culture wars. it's not about a culture war. it's about settling our society. we cannot have a prosperous, settled united kingdom if we haven't got a broadly settled, harmonious society . we'll never reach society. we'll never reach utopia, obviously, but the direction we're heading in is extremely divisive and he just doesn't get the problem. no. >> is that fair? >> is that fair? >> it is fair. but i think that for me, the biggest problem with what michael gove said, i think he's correctly outlined the issue of anti—semitism , he's issue of anti—semitism, he's very right in the fact that he draws attention to the jews are the only people, the only group of people who are told to put their star of david away, rather than wearing their identity as a, as a sort of badge of pride.

and that's become very obvious over since the 7th of october. that kind of discrimination has just become pretty much commonplace for a lot of jews, but, you know, we have to put this his speech into context, which is that gove has got this bill that he really wants support for, that he's pushing, which will be about banning british public bodies from boycotting israel , from taking boycotting israel, from taking part in bds. now, i have no interest in bds. i don't support it. i think that at the very best, it turns a blind eye to some really nasty anti—semitism and at worst, it it actually openly promotes the sort of singling out of israel and a lot of the time of jews for, you know, unique treatment, bad treatment, but but banning british public bodies from deciding what they invest in with their pensions or make their political decisions, that is a step too far into the realm of state overreach . and i just of state overreach. and i just come back to this point, which is that we know that there's a problem with anti—semitism ism. we know that there's a particular problem actually within the causes of

anti—semitism being and maybe this is what you were touching on, ben, a sort of an an increasing influence of islamism, particularly on these marches, which has no interest in freedom, no interest in democracy is , you know, democracy is, you know, certainly no interest in sort of open discussion. but rather than saying, well, we are a country where we believe really believe in these things, tolerance free speech, you know, being able to freely express yourself whether you're a jew or anyone else, instead of making that argument and winning that argument, we seem to just want to hit the ban button. that won't convince these people to change their minds. it certainly won't convince people on the sidelines who then see these people on marches as free speech. we end up turning them into free speech martyrs who say, you know, i have been banned. i mean, i and that's, that's it's just such a gift to these people who don't care about free speech at all. i think we, you know, you end up making quite a painful argument, which is that standing up for freedom of speech, particularly if you are a jew suffering from anti—semitism , is a tall order.

anti—semitism, is a tall order. it'5 anti—semitism, is a tall order. it's a big ask. but that's in no denial. but it's something that i think we have to have the mettle to do. >> i mean, i completely agree with you, by the way, banning them district approach, all it doesis them district approach, all it does is create create more problems. it's not going to sort it out. and that's why i think it's critical that we address the root problem here. and by the root problem here. and by the way, i don't think it's just anti—semitic ism that takes place nowadays. i, you know, i wear i proudly wear this. i often feel threatened wearing a union flag on my lapel because people automatically assume you're far right. if you want strong borders for the united kingdom, you're far right. you want to reduce taxes. you're far right. well that friend, you've got a whole you've got collection. >> no, i'm not. >> i'm like coming, coming. come and get me. i'm going to. i'm going to wear this with pride because this is the united kingdom. and we've got to be much more robust in protecting and promoting that which is british. and it's got to start in the educational establishments, the institutions, the businesses, the police forces, armed forces. all of these institutions need

to understand what it means to be british and to promote that. but we have to decide. >> i complete agree i'm with you, but we have to decide what it does mean to be british. well, i'm pretty clear on the problem is that is. well, let them tell us that. >> yeah. go on. >> so what it doesn't include is castigating our forefathers all as slave traders , forgetting the as slave traders, forgetting the fantastic contribution we've made to the world, both in terms of peace and prosperity. the fact that winston churchill is not a white supremacist, but someone who won world war ii for the free world stood up against it. the fact that the united kingdom has a proud history in all sorts of spheres. we get repeatedly told that if we were to leave the european convention of human rights, we'd become a country without human rights. we established human rights, for god's sake. all of this narrative, all of it, is anti—british. it's all against this flag. and i was on this show to answer the question then, because the question was, what does it mean? >> would you ban that kind of

discussion? i mean, you know, i wouldn't ban it, but i would educate people to understand what it means to be british. >> what does it mean? >> what does it mean? >> well, it means we have we the contextual position that we hold right now comes from a very long line of fantastic contribution at every single level, both economically , legally, economically, legally, technologically and we have emerged as this fantastic , emerged as this fantastic, beacon, maybe not the greatest country on earth, but definitely the best, in my opinion, on earth and yet we beat ourselves up. yet we say it is important that we get immigrants to come into the country and do the jobs that we need done, that the brits aren't prepared to work, that we won't cut taxes on the working and middle classes, we'll dumb down. we'll dumb down aspiration in favour of dependency. the whole british psyche is being eroded and it's everywhere. >> i don't want to be cruel, ben. but you still haven't said what it is of set of british values would be. >> well, i just i think i have.

>> well, i just i think i have. >> no, you said what you don't like about the current slagging off of britain and i you know, i think most people would have. >> but if you can reverse, if you can reverse the current slagging off, you'll get to where i need you to be. >> but you've got you can't just say, well, you can't have it. >> you can't have an archbishop of canterbury putting £1 billion aside for a billion pounds aside for slave reparations, because what that is signalling l.a. what that is signalling l.a. what that is signalling. answer l.a. what that is signalling is that this country has to hang its head in shame. yes and i'm not ashamed. no. >> let's let responsible . >> let's let responsible. >> let's let responsible. >> and so you shouldn't be. i think that a lot of that, you know, whether it's the national trust or anything else sort of beating themselves about the past, doesn't help anyone. i also wouldn't want to be in a position where we are forced to be proud of our country in a way that's artificial. i think that, you know, there should be some nuance there. i mean, there's plenty that this country has done. i'm irish, there's plenty that this country has done that i will never be proud of. and i'm still remain very angry about. but i think that the more important thing is, and i think

how we'll win people over to having a sense of a collective identity, which is crucial. you have to in order. well, do you agree vie should be banned? >> yeah, yeah, i'd get rid of it. it'sjust it's >> yeah, yeah, i'd get rid of it. it's just it's that's a big step forward. >> it would be a and we've got a big fight to make that happen because it's sort of institutionalised. >> hang on. can i just say if anyone didn't know what that is it's diversity equality equality and inclusion. that's what he's talking about. >> it's those kind of, you know, those kind of interventions into your workplace that make, say your workplace that make, say you have to think this way. you have to do things this way. it's a terrible overreach. anyway, to get back to the issue of a national requirement, a national identity, i think should be if i was like prime minister tomorrow, i'd say that the british values are around a commitment to democracy, a commitment to democracy, a commitment to democracy, a commitment to tolerance, and a commitment to tolerance, and a commitment to tolerance, and a commitment to freedom of speech. and if you have that bedrock of society, if you have that that idea that we all agree that this is something that we hold dear and should defend, then you can have debates about decolonisation and british history . you can have history. you can have discussions about whatever aspect of the country. but you

always agree that that that bedrock. >> do you believe in, do you believe in strong borders? is their enforced borders ? their enforced borders? >> i believe i think that control is essential for a democratic society. that's what brexit was a lot about. people think that brexit was anti—immigration. i don't see it as that. i see it was about the idea that you would have control. once we have that control, i would argue as a sort of from a position of left internationalism, that we are liberal with our with the numbers and with our borders. but i wouldn't disagree with anyone that you would have absolute control and knowledge of exactly what was happening. i think part of the problem at the moment is that we don't have any control. the system doesn't work, but politicians are making it up on the hoof. >> do you not think to have a settled culture, you've got to have control of your borders because if you have immigration, that's what i said. >> control. but but i don't think, i think a settled. >> do you think our borders are controlled at the moment? >> no, no, i think that there's a big problem. but i think the settled culture thing that you're talking about, that's maybe where we disagree, because i don't have a problem . i have

i don't have a problem. i have a big problem with multiculturalism, which was the i think we were talking about the sort of institutionalised policy of saying to everyone, you have to get along and you have to be, you know, you have to do you have to integrate in this way. it's not no, it's not integrate. >> and it's not that you've got to get along, but it's that we've got to take the knee to other cultures. >> yeah. but i think perhaps what you've got to get a little bit better at, ben is explaining, i'm going into teacher mum mode is to is because i think this is where we're where people are not being won over is the distinction between control and a sense of national identity. and you know, anidea national identity. and you know, an idea of what it means to be british that doesn't slip into saying there can't be any kind of difference, or there can't be any kind of other cultures. and, you know, i want to live in a world where we all have there's lots of difference and whatever, but we have a sense of what it means to be a citizen of this country and the responsibilities and rights that you're afforded as a citizen. >> i can hear you at home. you will be yelling at your screens,

and i want to know, do you have and i want to know, do you have a succinct way of articulating what does it mean to be british? if you do, i'm going to be reading some of those out when i come back from the break. there's a lot i need to get through before the end

hi there. i'm michelle dewberry with u tools seven ella whelan and ben habib remain alongside me. we've just been trying to get to the bottom of what it means to be british. alan says being british is being proud of our flag , our culture, our our flag, our culture, our freedom of speech and our border control. well, there's not much of the latter going on. i've got to say there, alan, clive says, it's not also just about being proud to be british. it's also proud to be british. it's also proud to be english as well. jess says, i'm proud to be engush jess says, i'm proud to be english and british, and i feel no shame about our past. adrian says being british means protecting our borders and

totally stopping the boats arriving. i'm not really sure that we're getting to the nuts and bolts of what actually being british means. i think it perhaps, is it hard to define own? get in touch and tell me your thoughts, because i want to ang your thoughts, because i want to bring you in more on that last conversation. but i also want to talk to you about housing. angela rayner, she's been speaking out about that one. listen to what she had to say. >> not for the first time. we're taking inspiration from that 1945 labour government that built homes for heroes of the ruins of war. in that spirit of clement attlee, our approach to house building will be both proactive and strategic . sukh. proactive and strategic. sukh. as secretary of state, i will empower our regional and local leaders to deliver as labour councils and mayors do in west yorkshire. together we can build beautiful new settlements right across the uk. >> i don't know what's going on everybody, but i was listening to that house nodding, nodding along, because i actually do think that one of the most biggest, one of the biggest

problems we've got at the moment is people being able to afford decent quality homes. the workers, the grafters , it's an workers, the grafters, it's an absolute struggle, isn't it? anyway, ben, the people's laughing through that, well, there. why? >> angela's got it. first. sounds like i've got all the answers, but she's got it wrong , answers, but she's got it wrong, hasn't she? because post—world war ii, the reason there was a massive building spree was because building regulations were . and planning regulations were. and planning regulations were. and planning regulations were both relaxed in order to make way for a, you know, huge building programme to rehouse people who had been bombed out of their homes. people who had been bombed out of their homes . and we needed of their homes. and we needed those homes, but we did it through deregulation , the labour through deregulation, the labour party under tony blair and then gordon brown made planning and building regs an absolute nightmare. and it's become even worse as a result of the drive to net zero, because now every building has to be effectively net zero compliant. you know , an net zero compliant. you know, an energy performance certificate rating of at least c by 2027, b by 2030. all of this is heaping

cost on the creation of new housing. so if she thinks she's coming into office, the labour party who created these problems in the first place, who are completely net zero nutcases, and they're going to come in and they're going to liberate the development of new, new housing. she hasn't got a clue what the government absolutely needs to do is deregulate, planning director plate building regs make brownfield development and redevelopment much more cost effective than greenfield development and encourage the reusing of existing stock. there is lots of vacant housing in the endoderm already. >> there's loads actually, and i don't think people actually realise just how much of that stuff there is. ella whelan where are you on it? >> well, i, i agree with the scepticism of labour's inability to tackle the planning issue . to to tackle the planning issue. to be fair to them, they have, i think i remember wes streeting and some others acknowledging the fact that the current uk

housing planning, you know, laws and permissions and all of that are, are stifle any house building. so they're open to that conversation. you would hope that pressure for having them in government, they'd do something about that. we remain to see whether or not and i share your scepticism. but in the abstract, let's think about the abstract, let's think about the idea of building not just a few housing developments around the outskirts of towns, but whole new towns. this is labour's her announcement. the idea of new milton keynes everywhere. i just think that's a fantastic idea . i think that a fantastic idea. i think that you have to have the not laughing at it. >> he's sitting laughing away. >> he's sitting laughing away. >> but this, you know, because we don't just need housing, we need the infrastructure of neighbourhoods , roads and of, neighbourhoods, roads and of, you know, areas where people live in order to make quality of life good. you know, for people to have an enjoyable lifestyle, to have an enjoyable lifestyle, to have an enjoyable lifestyle, to have the things that are nearby that they need, the shops, the parks, you know, the access to jobs, the sort of community feel, all of that needs to happen. and that can happenif needs to happen. and that can happen if you have a grand

project of building not just houses, but of towns, you know , houses, but of towns, you know, i think we've got to be just absolutely hardline on this, which is that take no nonsense from any nimbys anymore. you mentioned at the top of the programme, michelle, how would you feel if this sprung up at the end of your, street? i think we've got to get a lot harder on people who it's particularly it's a particularly an issue in the south where a lot of, conservative voters who are very nimby ish , i think we've got to be. >> so you buy a house, it's your house. it's you've saved up, it's your home. you've got a nice little lookout over. i don't know, whatever, a field or whatever. and now all of a sudden, their proposed building, this, monstrosity, this massive tower block not far away from your kitchen window, and you're going. well hang on a second. that's not the deal. that's not what i bought. and they're just going to go a tough look. now you've got your tower block. you wouldn't be cool with that, ella. come on now. >> i think that politically we have to prioritise the building of houses over people's views out of their kitchen window. i do think we've got to be

hardline about that. and to be fair, what labour, what rayner has said is that they've got to institute this. new towns code will demand characterful design. >> suella if you, if you bought a nice detached house, i don't know in the little quiet cul de sac, you've got these little kids and you have these dreams that they're going to play out on this street, and it's a quiet little area. that's why you buy your home. it's next to this little school or whatever. then all of a sudden they decide that they're going to knock down whatever it is, some empty factory in the background, and now they're going to build this sprawling new town. so now your quiet little cul de sac that was nice and safe for your kids. it is no longer now because now you live on a through road. this massive new town. would you honestly be cool with that? >> i might be aggrieved about it, but i don't think i should have the right to stop it. but i don't because i think because otherwise this is what's happened. this is just. sorry, ben. i'll shut up now. but this is what's been happening. you've got nimby behaviour stopping housebuilding. >> oh, i'd be there on my placard. i'd be up and down my. you said you care about housing building. i do, but not at the end of my back garden. thank you

very much. everyone says from brownfield redevelopment and bringing derelict properties back into use, there's so much of it. >> brownfield on the greenery everywhere. >> bill, bill, bill no no no. >> bill, bill, bill no no no. >> and we've got to stop immigration because the demands on housing from immigration are vast. >> i am very, very, very, very passionate about affordable housing for people. but i will also be honest, i would not want also be honest, i would not want a brand new, town popping up at the end of my road. would you honestly tell me the truth? look, what are you doing at 8:00 tonight? if the answer is anything other than watching jacob rees—mogg's programme, then you are in the wrong place. mps then you are in the wrong place. mp5 get a kick in frequently. but, look, he's got a really fascinating exclusive. you weren't want to miss it, look. >> starting to feel just a little bit unwell. and beyond that i'm out of it and gone and put into a coma and gosh, didn't come round for another 16 days. >> this really is an inspiring story. 8:00 tonight, i promise you, you won't want to miss that one. look, for now, i'm going to take a break. when i come back, do you think as women we've been

filled? we was told we could

hi there. this is dewbs& co with me . michelle dewberry ben habib me. michelle dewberry ben habib and ella whelan rahman alongside me. michael says britishness is about responsibilities, not rights. it's about fairness, not entitlement. it's about looking after your neighbours and not exploiting them. valerie says . exploiting them. valerie says. for her, britishness is also about enterprise . as, philip about enterprise. as, philip says, being british means you respect all and you pay your tax without complaining and you say thank you. well thank you for your thoughts. an article stopped me in my tracks today. it was, long story short, suggesting that there's a lot of women now who have ended up in their 505. yes, their fantastic career, career women. but they are alone. they have no husband. they have no children. it sparked up a conversation about whether or not feminism has failed a generation. ella your

thoughts? i think that it has, but not quite for the reasons petronella wyatt states . petronella wyatt states. >> i mean, women should be able to have it all or they should have be able to have it all in the same way that men do. and we still don't. whether it's abortion, access to abortion rights, whether it's issue of childcare, which is just unbelievable at the moment, dysfunction, extortionate, all these issues haven't been solved by feminism, which is over the last sort of 20, 30 years, pretty much been about a kind of professional, middle class girls club smashing ceilings, ceos, boardrooms, things that don't matter to the vast majority of normal , matter to the vast majority of normal, sensible women out there. so i think feminism has had its day. it has failed. it has. it's not interesting to most women, but a women's liberation movement, which looked at what women actually want and need is, i think , more want and need is, i think, more necessary than ever. and i would get i would fly my flag with that , but leave the f word behind. >> so you wouldn't describe yourself as a feminist either ? yourself as a feminist either? >> no, i'm a women's libber, ben.

>> well, i think it was necessary to have a form of progressive discrimination in favour of women coming out of the 19th century into the 20th century, for and most part of the 20th century. but i think we have now probably got to a point where, just like with all other things, we've got to shelve progressive discrimination, shelve the therefore promotion of women over and above and if necessary, to the detriment of men and just head towards everyone is equal. you know , everyone is equal. you know, women have come a long way. i certainly am not aware of anyone in my work environment or around me, that is in any way discriminatory towards women. i'm not. i'm not aware of it. so the need for feminism, i think, is greatly diminished. i'm not saying there aren't prejudiced people around. i'm sure there are misogynists, but you don't make a rule for, you know, a very small number of people. and i think we've got to just head towards a more even when it comes to women, i think we've got to head towards a more sort of level playing field. >> and i think the way you do

that is, you know, the one feminism likes to talk about lots of different issues. you know, in particular, it fixates on the idea that there's lots of sexist men out there who are mean. there are there are plenty. but i think the key issue for women, mainly where we, you know, women in their 20s and 30s, outearning men doing better than men in university and things like that. what you really get kicked when you have kids. and i think we need to deal with the issue of the discriminatory nature of treating women when they get pregnant. and you know, that sort of pregnant then screwed issue. that's where we need to talk about. >> and that can be and that can be a topic i am sure, for another day. lots of you, alex says. michelle, all of us are nimbys. he says, why would anyone be happy if a new housing development, which meant more traffic, more noise, less school places, longer doctor waiting times, etc. was built near us. we don't want any more houses near us. yes, he says, we do want more houses. and he ends by saying nimbyism is surely common sense. what do you make of that at home, talking about what is to be british. don't threaten violence to change someone's opinion. don't lie or cheat or break the law, says christine. jane says it means being proud

of our country, a sense of fair play, justice and live and let live and a pinch of humour. thank you guys for all your company tonight and you at home. don't go anywhere. farage is up next. night >> a brighter outlook with boxt solar sponsors of weather on . gb news. >> hello. good evening. welcome to your latest gb news weather update. it's going to be another cooler day on wednesday with some very heavy and persistent rain. for some of us, we do have weather warnings in force for a large swathe of the uk through out wednesday. that's as this weather front approaches from the south and east, wrapped around an area of low pressure through this evening, so some very heavy rain to come through this evening across southeastern areas of england in particular. we could also see some thunderstorms for the first few hours of this evening across the west as well . but that rain will west as well. but that rain will become more confined to the east coast just throughout tonight. we'll turn a little bit drier elsewhere, but there will be a lot of cloud around by tomorrow morning, so it will be another fairly mild start to the day.

but some drizzly rain will start to affect parts of the east coast, just as that weather front starts to approach to the east coast of scotland could see quite a lot of low cloud around, but the northwest of scotland could see some brightness first thing, but that rain will arrive later on in the day across northern ireland. some showery rain, but it's not expected to be as heavy as it has been through today. but it's across parts of north wales, the midlands, north eastern england in particular, where the rain will be the heaviest first thing and that will continue to persist throughout the day. so as the day goes on, i think any impacts from the rain will become more likely as more weather warnings come into force. as that rain pushes up into scotland , we've got another into scotland, we've got another weather warning in force for scotland. we could see up to 100mm, perhaps more, fall over the 24 hours between wednesday and thursday, particularly across parts of north wales into northern areas of england, so that could bring some major travel disruption. and temperatures are going to be disappointing for the time of yean disappointing for the time of year, with plenty of cloud around. rain continues into thursday, particularly across the north and west. it's this

north area of wales where there's the most potential for some disruptive heavy rain , but some disruptive heavy rain, but it will turn more showery as the day goes on and across the south it will start to turn a little bit brighter by the afternoon . a bit brighter by the afternoon. a mix of showers as we head towards friday, and by saturday, a chance of some sunshine and temperatures climbing towards 20 degrees. >> looks like things are heating up. boxt boilers sponsors of weather on

gb news. >> gb news fly with the prime minister. rishi sunak to austria , where he tells us exclusively that we've deported 10,000 people in the last year. and we're supposed to be impressed by that. tonight, i will give you some historical comparisons to show you . that is a very, to show you. that is a very, very low figure indeed . the

very low figure indeed. the international criminal court issued an arrest warrant for the prime minister of israel. that and at the same time as the united nations security council, stand up for a minute's silence for the butcher of tehran. i asked the question , just how asked the question, just how much trouble is israel in? and has everybody forgotten about the horrors of october the 7th? and the government tell us they're going to set up unemployed boot camps to get people back to work? it must be an election year before all of that, let's get the news with sophia wenzler. >> nigel. thank you. good evening. i'm sophia wenzler in the gb newsroom, a 73 year old british man has died after an aircraft was hit by severe turbulence on a flight from london heathrow to singapore. the plane was forced to make an emergency landing in bangkok. airport officials believe the man may have suffered a heart attack. more than 50 people were hurt , seven of them critically,

hurt, seven of them critically, after sustaining head injuries. singapore