you, do you like what i'll ask you, do you like what you see.7 was anything missing, or was there anything in there that you feel perhaps shouldn't have been? and are you like sir keir starmer tonight, feeling optimistic that a new era has begun ? ben habib and aaron begun? ben habib and aaron bastani will be keeping me company to get stuck into all of that. but first, let's grab tonight's 6:00 news headlines. >> michelle, thank you, and good evening to you . well, mps have evening to you. well, mps have been discussing the king's speech in the house of commons today. the prime minister, sir keir starmer , promised national keir starmer, promised national renewal after what he called 14 years of tory chaos and it comes after king charles officially opened the new session of parliament, setting out the government's planned programme of new laws. in total, 40 pieces of new laws. in total, 40 pieces of legislation were announced, with promises to get britain building, deliver greater

devolution and enhance employment rights. the speech also proposed a football regulator, house of lords reform and a plan to tackle organised immigration crime. sir keir saying his government will solve problems, not exploit them. >> the last king's speech was the day when the veil of his choices slipped and we all saw a party. his party content to let our country's problems fester, content to push aside the national interest as they focused almost entirely on trying to save their own skins. but i defy anyone on those benches or elsewhere to look at the ambition and purpose of our intent, and to not receive a return to the serious business of government. no more wedge issues, no more gimmicks , no issues, no more gimmicks, no more party political strategy masquerading as policy.

>> the prime minister speaking there, well , conservative leader there, well, conservative leader rishi sunak, now the leader of the opposition, vowed to hold the opposition, vowed to hold the government to account on all its promises. >> it is right to begin by congratulating the prime minister on his decisive victory in the election. he deserves the goodwill of all of us in this house as he takes on the most demanding of jobs in the increasingly uncertain world in which we now live. now the party opposite has successfully tapped into the public's desire for change. but they now must deliver change. and we on this side of the house will hold them accountable for delivering on the commitments that they made to the british people in the national interest. we will not oppose for the sake of it. but when we disagree with a government, it is our responsibility as the opposition to say so. >> rishi sunak well, the latest economic figures show that inflation held at the bank of england's 2% target last month. all eyes now on whether or not the bank will cut interest rates this summer. the government says

the data is welcome. news but pnces the data is welcome. news but prices are still high because of the economic chaos they inherited from the conservatives. the shadow leader of the house of commons, though chris philp accused labour of shameless spin and suggested the party will introduce what he's calling sneaky tax rises . calling sneaky tax rises. >> this stuff the rachel reeves has been saying, claiming that the fiscal position is worse than she expected is obvious nonsense. the obr obviously assess our fiscal position. they pubush assess our fiscal position. they publish their own forecasts a few months ago that she obviously saw, and we've seen today's inflation figure staying down at 2% on target lower than the eurozone , lower than the the eurozone, lower than the usa. growth topped the g7 . usa. growth topped the g7. >> now it's emerged that a little boy has died at polmont young offenders institution , young offenders institution, after the government promised to stop sending underage teens there. 17 year old jonathan beadle died on saturday. no further details about his death , further details about his death, provided it's understood he was previously in a secure children's unit before being moved to polmont in march 2022. the scottish government vowed

that under 18 would no longer be sent to younger offender institutions . now the family of institutions. now the family of a nine year old girl who was shot in east london say she may never walk or talk again. detectives have released new images of the prime suspect, 49 days after the lone gunman on a motorbike opened fire on a restaurant from the road. three men sitting outside were hit by the gunfire, but they weren't injured seriously. the nine year old remains in a critical condition and is feared. two british men reported missing in sweden may have been killed. police have launched a double murder investigation after two bodies were found in a burnt out car in malmo on sunday, local media is reporting. they were shot. local police are still working to identify the victims here. a former army general has admitted disgraceful conduct of an indecent kind after being accused of sexual assault . james accused of sexual assault. james roddis pleaded guilty to the lesser charge at bulford military court in salisbury in

wiltshire. the court was told the complainant indicated she had been content with the count. roddis was made an m.b.e. and also earned two queen's commendations for his service . commendations for his service. he'll be sentenced in september. prisoners of war have been exchanged for an agreement between ukraine and russia. 95 soldiers from each side were returned to their homelands. the ukrainian men appearing emotional as they left this bus. if you're watching on television , if you're watching on television, you can see them getting off the coats and shaking hands with those welcoming them. finally, on home soil , those welcoming them. finally, on home soil, many of them sobbing. president volodymyr zelenskyy says all of the freed prisoners were from the armed forces, and he thanked the uae, united arab emirates for its part in facilitating the deal. it's the third swap in seven weeks. those are the latest gb news headlines. for now, i'm polly middlehurst. i'm back in an hour for the very latest gb news direct to your smartphone , news direct to your smartphone, sign up to news alerts by

scanning the qr code, or go to gbnews.com >> forward slash alerts . >> forward slash alerts. >> forward slash alerts. >> thank you very much for that, polly . i'm michelle dewberry and polly. i'm michelle dewberry and i'm with you until 7:00 tonight. alongside me, i've got the former deputy leader of reform uk, ben habib, and the co—founder of novara media, aaron bastani. good evening to both of you. you're very welcome tonight as each and every single one of you are at home to. you know the drill. it's not just about us. it is about you. so what's on your mind tonight? you can get in touch with me all the usual ways you can email gb views @gbnews. com you can go to the website gbnews.com/yoursay. i'll be hopping on there in a second. say hello to you. or of course you can tweet or text me, but of course it's a big day to day at the king's speech. a bold new era according to sir keir starmer . without further ado, starmer. without further ado, then let's cross live to our

political editor, christopher hope. good evening to you , hope. good evening to you, christopher. anyone that's not been following the twists and turns of the day bring us up to speed. >> hi, michelle. yeah, great to be on your show tonight. yeah it's a king's speech. it's a two year programme for government at around 40. draft and actual bills will be considered by mps over the next two years or so. the last king's speech of course, by the tory party last november. lots of interesting themes in there. i've counted themes in there. i've counted the words brexit six times back in november , king's speech this in november, king's speech this time zero. no mention of brexit, but the eu european union was mentioned 15 times. i wonder if that's a kind of idea of where we're going with this government to get closer to the eu, not further away. we heard, didn't we, from sir keir starmer. he said in his prepared remarks that the snake oil charm of populism may sound seductive, but it drives us into the dead

end of further division and greater disappointment. so clearly this is a king's speech designed to reassure and show the country that the government has changed in a kind of steady way. i would argue that if you're a labour activist, you might wonder if this is it. you've waited 14 years for a labour government, and it's quite a lack of ambition in many of the measures. the most striking left wing measures. i'm not sure if aaron bastani might agree with this, but the most striking ones probably are the employment rights bill. so anyone signing up to join a company can get immediate access to parental leave and sick pay, rather than waiting a few months before you're signed up. i wonder whether that might mean that companies may be reluctant to give full employment rights and be reluctant to hire people in future. at the risk of having to pay up front costs that they weren't expecting. also, an engush weren't expecting. also, an english devolution bill. further powers for our metro mayors

renationalising the railways gradually, as those franchises come up for grabs, they'll be handed back into state control. aaron might like that, as i say. and, further, further areas on better buses. suddenly jeremy corbyn did, but they have pulled back on some areas. house of lords reform. they're going to get rid of 80 or so hereditary peers, but not kick out anyone aged over the age of 80, like alf dubs in his 90s. quite a legend in many, many people's circles. he came over on the kindertransport from nazi germany. he can carry on being a peer , so they're pulled back in peer, so they're pulled back in some areas, votes at 16. that also is not is not here. and there's a draft bill which will be controversial, that's to try. and that is called the draft equality race. and disability bill, forcing companies to say what they play. people of colour, black people against white people, and also whether able bodied people are paying more than those who are disabled, in the same way that the gender pay gap is published by big companies. so that's a

draft bill. they may not happen for two years, but that's the direction of travel. but i think i just wonder whether the where's the actual beef here. if you're a labour supporter, you've been waiting 14 years, a long time, a generation even for a labour government. is this enough or is it to safety first? for many people? i think we'll see that emerge over the next five days of debate about the king's speech. and then, of course, the pmqs debate between, sir keir starmer and rishi sunak next week. >> thank you very much for that, christopher. herb, look, it's very much about you guys at home as well tonight. how do you feel about some of the priorities , about some of the priorities, rob, you're not feeling very optimistic . rob, you're not feeling very optimistic. he's rob, you're not feeling very optimistic . he's been rob, you're not feeling very optimistic. he's been in rob, you're not feeling very optimistic . he's been in touch optimistic. he's been in touch and said there's nothing in labour's plan that makes me feel anything other than terrified for the future. really. there's nothing at all that you're happy about, many people are asking about, many people are asking about some of the house building, situations there. you might have heard some lines today about it's going to be not

about if we build, but how we build and all of this kind of community involvement about what and where is getting built. yes, you will get a say, but not perhaps when it comes to vetoes in the way that perhaps people might have been expecting or perhaps have been used to, another of my viewers says labour's time in office will be very short, based on what we've seen today. so i want some optimism from some of you guys at home. is there anyone out there that feels good? because one thing that you can't deny is a new era . things absolutely are a new era. things absolutely are going to change. you got a shout out quite a few times there from christopher. hope you are of the left, a labour supporter. do you feel optimistic today? >> well, i'm certainly on the left. i'm not always a labour supporter. i'm a i'm a critical friend at times i thought it was actually quite underwhelming. right. but at the same time, michelle, you were saying that comment from one of your viewers, he's terrified. if you're very rich and you've been reading for several years about

how labour is going to destroy you, come after you , you'd you, come after you, you'd probably be looking at this and thinking, is that it? so you know, it works both ways. they don't want to. they don't want to scare the horses. and i think in doing so they've been ultra cautious and they've not done very much. i would also add they've got fewer than 10 million votes. if they'd got 13.5 million votes, i think they would have been a bunch of stuff in there that isn't in there, because they know there isn't a huge mandate. like what? >> so give me one thing that you think if they got more of the vote share or whatever, what's what's the big thing that jumps out to you? >> i think they'd be more adventurous on something like 16 to 18 year olds getting the vote. i think you might have seen something like hs2. i think scrapping the welfare, the benefits cap, for two kids. i think that would have gone. i think that would have gone. i think you would have had a couple of things like that. it wouldn't have been fundamentally different. but this is the most cautious possible version of the king's speech. and i think if, like i say, things have played out a little bit differently on july the 4th, they had a bit more of a mandate from the public. i think they'd be a

little bit less risk averse just to be clear, 1 in 5 registered voters voted labour, so 1 in 3 voters voted labour, so 1 in 3 voters voted labour on the night. but of course we had a very low turnout, 1 in 5 registered voters voted labour and you could take a step back and you could take a step back and think, well, actually that's not a mandate for the kind of changes that the country needs. i personally think that which is why i support pr. >> one of my viewers is also pointed that out and said, michelle, please can you remind people that ultimately 80% or there or thereabouts, of the people that are entitled and able to vote didn't actually vote for this government and their priorities? i think you make an interesting point . but make an interesting point. but of course, aaron says, quite rightly too, the turnout was very low. so of course people are sit there now and say, well, we didn't vote for this. did you vote for anything at all? because if you didn't, some would say you kind of lose your right to complain about it anyway. ben habib, just the bigger picture. and don't worry, we're going to get into some of these areas as we progress through the show. but face value, top level. your thoughts? well i'm impressed that aaron thinks it's an underwhelming set of measures and that christopher

hope similarly said the same. >> i mean, i'm horrified by them . >> i mean, i'm horrified by them. i'm i have the privilege of being well off, but it's not the taxation side of it that's going to come first. it's going to come all the damage to the economy and to the and the, constitutional structure of this country is what's embedded in this document here. and, i mean , this document here. and, i mean, just starting at the top, you know, they talk about the need for growth, but every aspect of this document heaps on more regulation, more regulation for employers , more regulation to employers, more regulation to make sure we have equal outcomes on ethnic minorities, more regulations in terms of handing over powers to devolved authorities, making it even more complex in the way that this country is governed. and then the creation, the continuance of the creation, the continuance of the hollowing out of our democracy that i say continuance because blair started it . and because blair started it. and the way he did it was to create lots of quangos, give them lots of power, remove political

scrutiny from the way the country is governed, and right at the top of the top of the list there, there's going to be legislation passed to ensure that the office of budget responsibility gets to sign off effectively on the finance aspects of what government does. there are two aspects to governance. it's the creation of regulations, and it's the imposition of taxes . and if you imposition of taxes. and if you have to get the obr sign off, you have actually just stripped away from parliament and from government one of the biggest levers that they have. so when you vote for rachel reeves, if you're mad enough to do that, what you're voting now for is the obr , not for the labour, for the obr, not for the labour, for labour's policies. so i see this as a stepping stone the entire project that's described in the king's speech as a stepping stone towards greater regulation , stone towards greater regulation, less energy security. we haven't touched on that . a further touched on that. a further hollowing out of the constitution and our democratic rights as people and the next

step, in my view, will be much higher taxation, because the damage this will do to the economy, to our ability to get energy cheaply, to , operate energy cheaply, to, operate businesses profitably will be vast, >> i'll bring in another reaction , instant reaction reaction, instant reaction actually, to this. so, liz truss, do you remember liz truss? well, she took to twitter or x with quite, i thought it was quite interesting. i'll get it up on the screen actually, and i'll show you it. it was quite a considered and, well mocked up graphic, which that was the first thing that caught my eye, and it said liz truss in big, bold letters, it says starmer's king's speech shows that labour has no idea about the change that britain needs. instead, it expands the power of the unelected state and increases red tape on families and businesses. and then it goes on, she says. the bad policies include giving more powers to a failed obr , reintroducing failed obr, reintroducing stalinist housing targets rather than as earnings system. she talks about conversion therapy

ban, which will be misused by gender ideologues, and a counterproductive and un—conservative un—conservative smoking ban. the results of these policies will be further economic stagnation and cultural decline. >> well, i agree with that. i think she's got it right. she she missed out the democratic, the damage to our democracy that this will do. but she started off with that. she hinted at it with the obr. >> i just thought it was i mean, maybe i'm making a little bit too much of this, but just the way it was, this kind of typed up within a graphic with this logo and with a big name at the top, i thought, what is that? what are you trying to be? what what's your ambition? what's your aspiration? it struck me as just a little bit odd. why not just a little bit odd. why not just write a tweet? >> well, she was the prime minister for about 44 days. >> was it? >> was it? >> i think i said ten minutes, but it was 40. no, it was a good memory. >> four days, i don't know, maybe i was reading something into it. i just saw it and i just saw how what an odd kind of, state of affairs we

sometimes have. it's this whole ego that surrounds politics. >> can't possibly be going for the leadership of the conservative party. >> well, this is what i was thinking. i was just looking at it. >> i was just thinking, what is it? what is that about? am i overthinking this? >> i think she probably looks at tony blair. he's got, you know, his little tony blair institute with several hundred million dollars and little. >> it's massive. yeah. it's the but changing the world. the tony blair won in europe for changing the world no less. >> so she's so she's like well you know what? i can i can make up a nice tweet. >> oh, maybe she's got a lot of time on her hands. enough time to do graphics. what do you think to that, look, beth says, michelle, i am i am in no way rich by any stretch of the imagination, but i want to say that i am terrified for the next few years, too. so listen, your challenge, everyone. i want you not just to tell me that you're terrified. i want you to tell me why. what particularly is it that you're seeing that you like or you don't like? one of my viewers on the website says, i really like the notion of stopping the hereditary peerages. absolutely, tommy. he's got in touch and said,

michelle, i am on a zero hour contract, but it feels to me that i will now be on full time benefits. see, this is an interesting thing. we'll come on to the workers rights in just a couple of minutes, actually, because, banning, zero hour contract. catherine here, she says, why would labour want to ban these zero hour contracts if they work for some people? i don't get it. where is the choice? and this is a key thing that's coming through from many, many viewers. some of you, it seems zero hour contracts are working for you. will that choice has gone. is that a progressive step or not? so let's get into that. the workers rights reforms then after the break, give me your thoughts. but remember, tell me, don't just tell me you like it or you don't like it, or you're petrified about the future. i want details. we've got until 7:00 to get into it all, so i'll see you in

hi there. i'm michelle dewberry. i'm with you till 7:00 tonight.

ben habib and aaron bastani remain alongside me now. i'm asking you your feedback tonight on the king's speech and the new priorities for the new labour government . what do you like? government. what do you like? what don't you like? and how do you feel? are you optimistic? pessimistic, but critically? please tell me why specifically, what about it that you like or you don't like? lots of people getting in touch and talking about these new reforms to workers rights , employment workers rights, employment rights. many people have been suggesting things like the zero hour contract that labour with an outright ban of that is the wrong thing to do because it removes the personal choice. there's lots of other things on here about flexible benefits to employees, potentially right from day one, increased unionisation, powers and so on and so forth. i've got to say, the federation of small businesses, they've said, that small businesses were, i quote, increasingly worried about the proposals driving up costs and risks of giving people jobs. you're a business man, ben habib. where are you on these?

>> well, i completely endorse it. one of the complaints, of course, what i those views that actually what you paradoxically when you seek to protect a particular class of, people in this case workers. and there's another example of this in the king's speech when it comes to people who want to rent property. but when you put in regulations to protect that class of people, paradoxically, what you do is create additional cost of entry cost of operation. and when you create those extra costs , you tend to deter people costs, you tend to deter people in this case employers, from actually employing people. and when you deter employers from employing people, you obviously create problems within the employment market. the labour market. we've already got a broken labour market with up to 6 million, around 6 million people claiming universal credit. and by making it more expensive, more difficult for employers to employ people, paradoxically, you're going to get less employment . and one of get less employment. and one of my complaints about the brexit deal that boris johnson did,

i've got many complaints about it. but one of the complaints was that he hitched us at the hip to eu regulations on employment law. so there's a kind of minimum floor below which we can't deregulate . and which we can't deregulate. and actually, if we want to get the united kingdom's economy moving forward, if we want lower taxes, the taxes, which arron said he was expecting, the tax rises, he was expecting, the tax rises, he was expecting, the tax rises, he was expecting to see in here, if we want lower taxes, if we want to avoid higher taxes, what we've got to do is deregulate so that businesses can can operate with less friction, less difficulty and then you have a prosperous economy and when you have a prosperous economy, wages go up, businesses prosper, and they employ more people . and so they employ more people. and so this move towards greater regulation actually in many cases and i would argue over the last 27 years, has been used relentlessly as a tool that is damaged. you know, uk plc in just about every, every business in the united kingdom. >> neil, one of my views on the website, he says these new

labour laws will strangle business and enterprise and thus growth more growth. at musgrove, he says in the economy does come from the small and the medium sized businesses, not from the large giant corporates, these smes, they can't bear any more costly regulatory burden. aaron bastani, where are you on some of these? >> well, the biggest cost for business, which which has gone up substantially in the last several years, is of course, energy. and then on top of that, you're going to have increased costs of credit because of interest rates. so the idea that this is somehow, you know, the major cost, that's been imposed on businesses over the last five years is inaccurate. what i would say is britain is very good at creating jobs. it has had very low unemployment for a very long time. we have a major problem, which is more people are in poverty who work than who don't work. we have lots of in—work poverty. we all view that as bad , right? let's start that as bad, right? let's start where we agree. >> i disagree with a number of things you've already said, but i'm holding my tongue. well we agree that in—work poverty is bad. yeah, but i disagree that

we have low unemployment. we have very high unemployment. it's just that unemployment figures official unemployment figures official unemployment figures only look at those people who are actively seeking to find a job which is around 1.5 million. we've got 4.5 million people who aren't even looking for a job by the standards. >> okay, then let's look at employment, not unemployment. employment rates. by the standards of the european union, britain is pretty good at creating because of the thatcherite reforms of the 80s and the 90s. it's pretty good at creating new jobs. and generally speaking, you can find a job quite easily that has some upsides, that has some downsides, but that's just a feature of our economy. the big problem is, at the same time, we have lots of people who are in work who are also poor, if you look at, for instance, child poverty, the majority of kids in poverty, the majority of kids in poverty have a parent in their household who works . now the household who works. now the question is, and again, we'll agree on that's a problem. we should try and resolve it as a country. how do you fix that? labour's proposal is to change some features of the labour market in terms of changing rights. from day one, when you

enter work now, you as a businessman know this somebody, when they start their contract, you know this as well. they'll start their contract at work. they're on probation anyway for the first 3 or 6 months. yeah. but and that's not changing, ben. so if somebody starts playing silly buggers, the employer can still get rid of them. the idea that this is a really radical change. and from day one, you're lumbered with this awful employee. you can't get rid of them. that simply isn't. >> but you've got to look at the direction of travel. when i started in work, it was two years probationary period before you had to have a reason to fire someone. now it's 12 months. so and let me tell you, you don't know the character of an individual until you work with them for some time and problems arise and suddenly you're you're hamstrung. so you're very nervous of employing. we now have to statutorily provide pensions for employees, which we didn't have to do. and the way i addressed that when that statutory thing came in was to tell employees, i'm sorry, you're not getting a salary rise because we're having to do this. we're having to do pension contributions instead so that you strip away the opportunity for employees to choose how they

spend their money. you you actually what you do is you make it a much more rigid, less manoeuvrable, less free wheeling economy. you look at the us where they have many fewer employment laws than we do, and the economy has grown immeasurably compared to us. waleses has been stagnant for 20 years, roughly our economy, the us is growing year in, year out, partly to do with their energy policy as well, partly to do with some other things, but they have a very free wheeling approach to employment and they have very high levels of employment. and we desperately need to break away from that european model, need to break away from that european model , that socialist european model, that socialist model of, in the pursuit of the protection of the employee. we kill the employer. it's bad for business. >> i just fundamentally disagree. i mean, it depends are perfectly affable, man, but i just fundamentally disagree. i don't think britain's major issue is that we have two strong protections for employees. you're absolutely right. you might employ a wrong'un and this is on the left. has to grasp businesses shouldn't be punished

for making a bad hiring decision because ultimately that doesn't help anybody. you want a productive business, you want happy employees. i appreciate all of that. i would simply say what's being proposed here is it's not that big a shift. >> i am very nervous of employing people because of the difficulty of getting rid of them, but that's already on the statute book. yeah. and this is going to make it worse. not really. yeah. zero hours contracts allow some businesses. i'm not a great fan of zero hours contracts by the way, but zero hours contracts does does afford those hospitality businesses that have very large peaks and troughs to be able to oscillate in and out of the employment market without any, without any cost. otherwise, you've got to take a full time employee on keep them working 365 days of the year through all the seasons, even when you may not have any custom and that's bad for business. >> can you just give them a temporary three month contract? i mean, that's, you know, well, there's a via media, there's a middle way here, isn't there. well you give them a six month contract. >> what we want, what we desperately need. we've had 27

years of regulatory impositions on the united kingdom. one of the great benefits of brexit should have been that we could throw away those regulations that have held us back in this country from the eu, and we haven't done it. and this and this. this king speech takes us further and further towards that kind of overregulated nanny state, state interventionist, controlling , top down form of controlling, top down form of economic management, which is so damaging , so economic management, which is so damaging, so damaging to the anglo—saxon way. we've got to get back. is that as that brilliant tweet texter said, you know, we're a country of 96% of businesses in this country is small and medium sized enterprises. we need them on their front foot, large, lots of regulation suits, big corporations because they can navigate the regulations. smes can't . can't. >> i, i agree with that entirely. >> they haven't got the wherewithal. >> i agree with that entirely. what i would say is, well, just

quickly on liz truss, she was highlighting all these awful things. smoking ban, tory policy, housing targets , tory policy. >> well gove got rid of them didn't he. >> well i know, but there was a house. it was 300 then. it was 200 i can't remember. it's always changing. and then, you know, she's saying that giving more power to the obr. i agree by the way. that's bad news. the tories created the obr. george osborne created the obr in 2010. so well george osborne was part of the blair regime wasn't he. well we can bash the labour party and their king's speech. but look liz truss is criticising the conservative party of 2010, of 2019. actually in some of this, just as much as she's criticising the labour party. >> and what about so there'll be things that you do like sir, the whole principle of fire and rehire labour have pledged to get, you know, do away with that. do you like that. >> well, ironically, labour have actually used fire and rehire to get rid of their own staff in the past. but there you are, i think they'll tell people about that. >> that might not be familiar with that. >> so labour got rid of a bunch of employees after keir starmer came in. his preferred general

secretary, david evans, came in. and of course, like any organisation, you have a change of management. they want to do things their own way. they got rid of a bunch of staff and then they rehired a bunch of staff and they, they, they effectively got rid of staff on the weakest contractual conditions. many of those actually weren't particularly robust contracts at all. they shouldn't really they weren't congruent with quote unquote labour values. so you see lots of you see lots of let's say contradictions here rather than double standards. but but i mean, it's a really good example of that. >> so this is what they're banning is the, businesses firing someone on certain terms and conditions, then immediately offering them a job on a lower salary or whatever. that's being banned. so what what that means is they're going to fire those people and they won't rehire them because they're going to have to fire them anyway. >> i think you know what? it'll they'll just be more quote unquote restructures. there are always , like you said about the always, like you said about the major businesses, there will always be ways around this stuff. and i agree with you, by the way. small businesses are less able to navigate that. >> and when you have to find a

workaround, there's a cost associated with it. you've got to get an accountants advice or a liquidators advice, or you've got to do a, you know, an insolvency or whatever it is. and all of that is a burden on business. and we've got to take the burden off business. the private sector is on its back foot. we had covid lockdowns for on and off for three years, which has decimated our private sector, our hospitality sector. it needs a leg up. i would say it's that quickly. >> the biggest problem for business other than rampant energy bills and very expensive, which is also a consequence of lockdowns. access to credit. yeah, we agree expensive energy is definitely a bad thing, but a major problem, especially for hospitality, is there is not enough money in the consumer's back pocket. now, labour again would say that's precisely why we want to create better working conditions, because my father's a taxi driver. for instance, if more people have more money in their back pocket, it means they can take a taxi. but why didn't they go out for dinner? they can go to a hotel. >> why didn't they reduce tax on the working class? why didn't they cut already? >> quite low, to be fair.

>> quite low, to be fair. >> no, it's not the threshold at which tax is paid. 12,500 has been held there for the last three years, is due to be held there until 2028, unless labour change it. and that has caught millions and millions of people in the tax net. and one of the reasons we've got 6 million people. this is where i disagree that there aren't many people unemployed. there are many, many millions of people unemployed in this country is because actually it doesn't pay to work. and part of the problem here, which we haven't discussed, is immigration. the very low skilled , cheap, imported labour, skilled, cheap, imported labour, which is undermining wage growth. so there's a multiplicity of issues, but you don't solve it through overregulating. >> well, let's come on to that issue because many people are saying how much of a mention did immigration get in this bill? we'll look at that. i also want to talk to you about housing as well. michael on the website says, michelle, can i ask a question, how many private sector jobs will labour create? he says, i just seem to see more pubuc he says, i just seem to see more public sector jobs, in things like obe in rail energy , like obe in rail energy, quangos, etc. he's concerned that that would lead to more unionisation, more strikes over pay unionisation, more strikes over pay and the public held to

ransom. is that a concern that you guys share at home or not? tell me your thoughts. the conversation continues in two.

hello there. i'm michelle dewberry, and i'm keeping you company until 7:00 tonight. alongside me , i've got ben habib alongside me, i've got ben habib and aaron bastani . welcome back and aaron bastani. welcome back everyone. look, we're unpicking the king's speech tonight, and i'm asking you, how do you feel about it? are you optimistic, pessimistic or what? one of my viewers has got in touch saying, michelle, leave liz truss alone. there was nothing wrong with her response. i consider myself told.i response. i consider myself told. i consider myself a rat on the hand and i'll pack it in, adrian says. please can you tell ben habib would be a great prime minister for this country? vicki says care homes and care workers do zero hour work, what about

those people? i've got to say, i think if labour were here, i think if labour were here, i think they would say that what they're trying to do is ban what they're trying to do is ban what they would call the exploitative zero hour contracts. so many people are picking up the zero hours, one that you're saying to me that it works for you and you want to keep them, kayla, you ask a question, say , michelle, ask a question, say, michelle, when it comes to child, child poverty, how is that even determined these days? is it defined as a don't have a playstation, a mobile phone, or is it as they can only have beans on toast for tea? well, this two child benefits cap. this has come under a lot of scrutiny because many people were hoping that it would be in this king's speech, and it would be nailed on all the rest of it. it wasn't. and that's caused quite a lot of debate today, where are you on this? do you think they should have scrapped it? >> i think they should have. yeah.i >> i think they should have. yeah. i mean, it's going to cost about £25 billion a year. so right now you have this two child benefit cap, which means fundamentally if people on universal credit they can't claim benefits after two kids.

now i've heard so many personal testimonies of a family with, say, three kids, the dads passed away and all of a sudden the mum is up the proverbial without a paddle. and i just think that's so unfair. we need to incentivise large, healthy, happy families if that's what people want and what we're basically saying is if for whatever reason, one of you disappears, somebody might fall sick, they can die. anything can happen. they might leave, there might be family break up, whatever. all of a sudden the other parent is penalised and those kids are growing up in really, really hard conditions. so for me, as somebody who wants to incentivise families , i think to incentivise families, i think it's a ridiculous policy. you might say, well, 2.5 billion is a lot of money. i actually think hundreds of thousands of kids growing up in poverty is going to cost lots of money in the long, so you'd get rid of it. >> where are you? >> where are you? >> i would absolutely get rid of it. >> i'm afraid i would get rid of any support for having children. >> i mean, having to be. >> i mean, having to be. >> i mean, having to be. >> i absolutely would. i think you bring children into this world. you've got to take it incredibly responsibly. it's a it's a voluntary decision. it's not a decision that you're

obuged not a decision that you're obliged to fulfil. but you have story for the economy, though, isn't it? >> because if you don't reproduce but you don't pay, you don't pay people benefits on the bafis don't pay people benefits on the basis of how many children they've got. >> if you want to bring children. >> right. we're discriminating against people for how many kids they've got. that's the problem. what do you mean? so the universal credit, you get universal credit, you get universal credit, you get universal credit, blah blah, blah. the second you have more than two kids involved, you're not getting anywhere. yeah, but you get you get cash based on the first child and the second child. >> and i would scrap that. i think you, you you have if you aren't able to have the confidence in yourselves to look after the children that you wish to bring into this world, then you shouldn't bring children in into this world. it can't be up to the state to step in and mollycoddle you through. having made a decision which is entirely your own decision. >> do you think that we do need to incentivise, child having child rearing? >> yeah, but you can do that in many other ways. for example. >> so for example, what you don't do is what jeremy hunt did a couple of years ago, which was

to reduce the age at which a child has to be in order to provide social care , extra provide social care, extra social care payments to a mother. what you want is big, strong family units. and actually what we've done as a nafion actually what we've done as a nation over the last 7080 years is progressively hollow out families hollow out, local communities hollow out infrastructure, local community infrastructure, local community infrastructure, which gives succour and results in procreation and, you know, healthy families and into sort of families that all work together and support each other. what we've done is the state has sucked everyone into the tax net by incentivising them to work earlier when they've got, you know, younger and younger children, incentivised mothers against having children, made it almost, a kind of a thing of virtue if you don't have children, you know, if mothers who are working there somehow given a bigger status in society than mothers who stay at home,

you know, if you're a stay at home mother, it's like, oh, you're a stay at home mother. no, you're providing a fantastic function. what we need to do is give married couples specific tax breaks . we have got to make tax breaks. we have got to make the economy more, more vibrant, more. we've got to grow the economy. we've got to champion the united kingdom and if you do all of that kind of stuff, people will procreate anyway. what you don't do is create and embed further the dependency culture, which is so rife already in the country and saying, well, you can have children, you can do it irresponsibly. and guess what? the state will step in and look after you. >> strong words. ben habib. any response to them? >> well, like i say, there are very there are personal testimonies from people where they do work. there are two parents. if one of them dies, i don't understand. we are actively discriminating against large families who fall on misfortune. we have a birthright in this country of about 1.5. at the moment in scotland it's 1.2 the moment in scotland it's1.2 and london it's 1.34. we are and london it's1.34. we are headed for a fertility rate below one. i think this decade there was a report out, i think, from a major bank saying by the

end of the 2030s, i think it's soonen end of the 2030s, i think it's sooner, but that's because we've broken the family unit. well, you say that, but look, birth rates are low in japan. they're low in russia, they're low in iran, they're low in india. >> some family units need to be broken because there's a heck of a lot of domestic abuse that goes on. i'm not talking about it used to be the case that you really did stay together because you were a family unit, and the wife in that environment was getting, you know, really badly , getting, you know, really badly, badly treated. and now, you know , badly treated. and now, you know, i'm not advocating that, obviously, you know , obviously obviously, you know, obviously there have got to be protections in place for women who are being abused by their husbands or, or vice versa . vice versa. >> but the principle of a strong family unit that is given the existence of which is supported by government policies through the taxation taxation regime for example, is a much better approach than the dependency regime, which is wealth redistribution. >> it's not dependency. i know couples in london earning great

money. they have very expensive mortgages and their child care a month is £3,000 a month. the idea that, oh , and why have they idea that, oh, and why have they got child care? because they're both at work. >> yeah, because they're both at work. this is what i'm saying. >> mortgage is three grand a month. you both have to go to work. >> so what you've got to do is have an economy that's doing well where where you can provide the tax incentives for one. one of the parents to stay at home, the other to work, and to have it to me. >> what? that doesn't seem realistic. in 2020. >> it worked for centuries. >> it worked for centuries. >> so you're saying, you know what, let's scrap this. we're going to half the labour market tomorrow. just men work. i mean, i know i didn't i didn't say that. >> you're not saying that. >> you're not saying that. >> i didn't say that. that's the logical endpoint, isn't it? >> oh, i could carry this on all night long. ladies and gents, at home. you guys will have really strong opinions on this. i want to hear from you. i'll perhaps touch back on it after the break, but i also want to explore other aspects. our commitment to ukraine. that was in the king's speech. i want to

look at if i've got time. housing. there's so much i want

hi there . michelle dewberry with hi there. michelle dewberry with you till seven. ben habib. aaron bastani remain alongside me. goodness me . this conversation goodness me. this conversation about child rearing, child benefits. and so on. i could spend all night on this. joanne says there's something wrong though, michelle. when it's lower income families that seem to have the most children and middle income families sit there and plan their family and stop at perhaps 1 or 2 children because they simply can't afford it, she says, are you saying , it, she says, are you saying, michelle, that the only reason to lift child benefit cap is in case somebody dies, in which case, why wouldn't you just give a bereavement benefit? and that would solve the problem. fred said, what about having child benefit for working families only? but that would defeat the object. fred because what ben is saying is, what about having a parent that can stay at home? the flipside, as aaron says, is

how do you afford to do that in this day and age? honestly, this conversation, could carry on mixed as it's not just child benefits that need looking into the whole benefit system needs upheaval. there's far too many people on easily obtainable benefits. look, i just i just want to quickly touch on another point. keir starmer , he said, he point. keir starmer, he said, he reissued our commitment to ukraine and said he wants to be a leading role in enabling their nato membership. ben habib so i've got a real problem with the way the west has absolutely underwritten president zelenskyy, >> of course russia should not have invaded ukraine. that's a given. but the blank check that both the united states and the united kingdom, and indeed many countries in europe are prepared to give zelenskyy is wrong. we've had far too many foreign interventions, you know, intervening in afghanistan, for example, in the 1980s where we armed up the mujahideen again, pretty much without any thought of what the consequences might

be, and then live for decades to regret what we did in afghanistan . we're making the afghanistan. we're making the same mistakes in ukraine. and one of my the biggest criticism i've got of our whole intervention there is that we're not asking ourselves two questions. what is our war aim and our war aim can't be just to do whatever zelenskyy wants and what is in british national interest in being involved in ukraine. and we're not asking those questions. and it's a problem . aaron. problem. aaron. >> well, i wanted to talk about very quickly the new commissioner for the armed forces that keir starmer wants to. >> i loathe that as well, i loathe that. >> well, there you go. we agree on some stuff. >> yeah, >> yeah, >> i think we've got far too many commissioners. we need to scrap lots of them. but this was interesting. they're saying we're not recruiting enough people. therefore we need to create this new role very quickly. there's defence council, defence board, people committee, defence management group, defence delivery group, chief of staff committee, defence safety and environment committee and yet none of these people apparently can recruit properly for the mod. but we're going to hire this one person and apparently, you know, that's

going to be the game changer in terms of recruitment for this organisation. with a budget of tens of billions of pounds, it's not serious. it's not serious. and i think this this fetish for more quangos, for more bureaucrats, more commissioners is deeply problematic. and we need to move beyond it. >> and if the commission's given too many powers, our armed forces are now going to be not at the behest of our political leaders, but unelected bureaucrats, this is how our democracy is being hollowed out, and this is how the nation is being put in danger. that's why i don't see this as an underwhelming set of proposals. i mean, that's a really good one. you picked on aaron this is a deeply worrying set of proposals from keir starmer. >> just tell me before i finish. yeah. is there anything you liked? >> there was there was a hint that he would ban conversion therapy. right. i didn't and i would have to see the bill because it's not in keeping with his belief that 1% of women have a penis. so i need to understand how he's managed to come to terms with his own peculiar set of beliefs. >> oh, ladies and gents , we open >> oh, ladies and gents, we open a whole new can of worms with that one, don't you? stuart says i am optimistic for the future.

following this speech, and terry says, i'm optimistic. let me ask you a simple question. why would it ever be wrong to give workers more rights? surely that would create a more productive economy. were you not paying attention to the first ten minutes? watch it on catch up. but for now, that's all i've got. aaron. ben, thank you for your company. thank you at home. up your company. thank you at home. up next martin daubney. i'll see you tomorrow night. night >> a brighter outlook with boxt solar, sponsors of weather on gb news >> time for your latest weather update from the met office here on gb news. good evening to you tomorrow. fine with sunny spells and a bit warmer than today across most of england and wales, but for scotland and northern ireland things will be a little different. there's high pressure sitting across england and wales, low pressure and weather fronts just eking in from the west, bringing cloud and patchy rain at the moment across western scotland and northern ireland. but that rain is going to pep up overnight. it

could turn heavy for a time across the west of northern ireland and along the west coast of scotland. a few showers for nonh of scotland. a few showers for north wales, maybe, but for most of england, wales, southern and eastern scotland are drying out. quite a warm night, eastern scotland are drying out. quite a warm night , temperatures quite a warm night, temperatures holding up in some towns and cities at 15 or 16 degrees onto thursday, and a dull, damp start, certainly for northern ireland and western scotland. but in the south, mostly fine. could be some morning fog patches around they may take a couple of hours to clear away, but generally plenty of sunshine across the south. a bit more cloud in west wales , north west cloud in west wales, north west england 1 or 2 showers here and a dull , damp england 1 or 2 showers here and a dull, damp morning for northern ireland and a good part of scotland seeing cloud and outbreaks of rain , maybe parts outbreaks of rain, maybe parts of the east coast escaping largely dry. but even here a few showers may drift up as we go through the morning. so it's a bit of a north south split with the weather. certainly to start with, i'm hopeful that parts of southern and eastern scotland will actually turn a bit drier through the morning and stay largely fine. some brighter skies likely to develop across the murray coast through the

afternoon. northern ireland western scotland do stay pretty dull and damp. most of england and wales seeing plenty of hazy and wales seeing plenty of hazy and pretty warm sunshine. 28 in the capital. many places in the mid 20s across the south by friday that heat could build further. we may reach 30 celsius across the south—east in the sunshine again , quite a bit of sunshine again, quite a bit of cloud at times for scotland and northern ireland, but generally a dry day for northern ireland. it will be late in the day before this rain starts to creep in 1 or 2 showers elsewhere, but most places set fair. as i said, hotter still with maybe 30 celsius in the south—east >> looks like things are heating up . boxt boilers sponsors of up. boxt boilers sponsors of weather on

>>a >> a very, very good evening to you. it's 7 pm. on wednesday, the 17th of july. i'm martin

daubney, filling for in nigel farage. well, parliament is officially open for business. the king's speech was the most legislative heavy speech for nearly two decades. the government has pledged to be builders, not blockers, as it lays out its stringent plans to get britain building again by reinstating housing targets. but can the prime minister bash down the wall of mps already opposed to his plans? well, we'll talk to his plans? well, we'll talk to a nimby and a yimby. to his plans? well, we'll talk to a nimby and a yimby . labour to a nimby and a yimby. labour has pledged to halve serious violence over the next decade, with shoplifting at an all time high. will they succeed in bringing back more bobbies on the beat? and the prime minister has even resurrected rishi sunak's smoking ban bill, preventing those born after 2009 from smoking in their entire lifetime. however, the next generation's liberties simply gone up in smoke .

gone up in smoke. >> good evening. the top