space has now been activated as the criminal justice system creaks under the weight of recent arrests. but could some criminals walk tree.7 and does britain have a benefits blame culture? work and pensions secretary liz kendall says it's time to end the tories divisive rhetoric that blames people on welfare. is she right? plus, more than half of brits believe britain is moving in the wrong direction under the new labour government, just 22% believe we're moving in the right one. could there be some buyer's remorse and flags related to protest or hatred will be banned from this year's last night of the proms, but what exactly is a hate flag or indeed a protest flag? and what does this say about the state of our society ?

about the state of our society? well, stay with me. that's all to come in the next hour. so stay tuned to dewbs & co. i'm stay tuned to dewbs& co. i'm with you till 7:00, but first, let's get the latest news headunes let's get the latest news headlines with sophia . headlines with sophia. >> emily. thank you. good evening from the gb newsroom. it's just gone 6:00. your top story this hour. one person has died and six are missing after a super yacht carrying british passengers sank off the coast of sicily. the british registered 56 metre. bayesian had 22 people on board when it went down after being struck by a tornado. the yachts , owned by the family of yachts, owned by the family of british tech entrepreneur mike lynch, who is believed to be among those unaccounted for. divers are now combing the waters as search efforts continue around the wreck. 50m underwater so far , 15 people underwater so far, 15 people have been rescued, including the

wife of mike lynch and a one year old girl. as we look at these pictures of the recovery effort, let's hear from meteorologist jim dale, who told us earlier the weather in the area was treacherous. >> it was a danger zone, so i don't know what what the situation was on this particular yacht, whether they had a meteorologist on board or anybody who was was , was, was, anybody who was was, was, was, was trained. but sometimes these things do occur, particularly this, this type of event. a waterspout is quite unusual. so if it hit directly then it would have been a little bit of a let's just say a catastrophic impact. and obviously it has been back in the uk in manchester. >> a 43 year old woman has died and two are in a critical condition following a triple stabbing. a 22 year old man, believed to be known to the victims, has been arrested on suspicion of murder. greater manchester police are appealing for witnesses as they continue their investigation into what they say is an isolated incident .

they say is an isolated incident. meanwhile, there will be no punishment for anyone handing zombie knives and machetes into police stations ahead of a new ban. restrictions come in next month. the government stopped short of making ninja swords illegal, but insists that will happen soon. policing minister dame diana johnson says the pubuc dame diana johnson says the public should do the right thing and surrender any dangerous weapon . prisons minister lord weapon. prisons minister lord timpson claims he's inherited a justice system in crisis as plans to address overcrowding in jails are activated in northern england. operation early dawn will see defendants who are remanded in custody waiting for a court appearance held in police cells for longer. it's separate to the early release scheme for some offenders, which kicks in next month too. meanwhile, a young mother pushing a pram has become the latest defendant to appear in court after widespread rioting across the uk. 21 year old nivi smith, from oldham, will be sentenced in september for

violent disorder outside an asylum hotel while she was pushing her child in a pram . and pushing her child in a pram. and more than half of people think britain is heading in the wrong direction as an opinion poll suggests, a drop in support for the new labour government. an equal percentage of adults have a favourable or unfavourable view of sir keir starmer, with 38% on both sides. rishi sunak and the conservatives ratings, though, haven't changed since the election. the tories deputy chairman, matthew vickers, has resigned. he stepped back from the role to support robert jenrick as the next conservative leader. he says jenrick is the standout candidate with a compelling vision for rebuilding the party. the prime minister insists support for ukraine is unwavering after volodymyr zelenskyy suggested that uk backing for aid is slowing down. it comes after ukrainian forces destroyed a second bridge in the kursk region as forces continue their incursion into russian

territory. it's thought the moves aimed at creating a buffer zone between the two countries. dufing zone between the two countries. during an overnight address, the ukrainian president praised his troops efforts and also called for the removal of restrictions on donated weapons used against russia and the democratic national convention kicks off in chicago later today, where kamala harris will be officially announced as the party's nominee for the us presidential election . for the us presidential election. last month, donald trump was confirmed as the republicans pick, just a few days after he survived an assassination attempt. americans will head to the polls in november. our us correspondent steve edgington is in washington, dc for us. he says the dnc will be a critical test for the party. >> this is unprecedented. there has been democratic primaries or votes for their candidacy for the last, you know , decade, a the last, you know, decade, a few decades. and this time around , kamala harris has not around, kamala harris has not won any democratic primaries. she's been installed as the

candidate by, essentially, president biden and barack obama. so this is a real key test for the democrats. she's almost certainly going to get the candidacy. and she's also chosen her vice president nominee, tim walz . nominee, tim walz. >> those are the latest gb news headunes >> those are the latest gb news headlines for now. i'm sophia wenzler more in an hour for the very latest gb news direct to your smartphone, sign up to news alerts by scanning the qr code or go to gbnews.com forward slash alerts . slash alerts. >> well, welcome to dewbs& co this evening with me emily carver. i'm standing in for michelle this monday. now joining me until seven is my panel joining me until seven is my panel, alex dean , conservative panel, alex dean, conservative commentator and doctor lee jones, professor of political economy and international relations. thank you very much indeed.thank relations. thank you very much indeed. thank you forjoining me indeed. thank you for joining me this evening. now, as always, as jubes always says, this show is

about you. so get your views in gbnews.com/yoursay is the way to get in touch . lots of you get in touch. lots of you already are getting in touch, particularly about this operation early dawn. it's something we've seen before, but it's being resurrected very much in the light of all these arrests due to the violent disorder. so we're going to get straight stuck into that one. so labour triggered operation early dawn. this is an emergency measure to essentially avoid prison overcrowding as hundreds of people involved in the recent violent disorder are fast tracked through the criminal justice system. so this will lead to defendants charged with a crime and waiting for a court appearance to be held in police cells rather than prison cells, or bailed until a prison space is made available somehow. but is made available somehow. but is this the right approach? and could we actually, as a result of this, see fewer criminals arrested ? if instead of prison arrested? if instead of prison cells being used, police cells are being used with suspects, then what happens if there are further arrests? where are all these people going to go and

should labour politically be adopting a tory plan? they previously criticised? this has been done before under the conservatives. so let's get the views of my wonderful panel. alex, can you help us make sense of what's happening here? is this a direct response to the huge numbers of arrests we've seen with relation to the violent disorder and the like in the immediate term? >> yes, unambiguously. it's because we're arresting hundreds of people in one go. interestingly, the government models how often people are going to be arrested at what times. and august tends to. so crime is always with us, but is seasonal and august is supposedly a time when fewer crimes proportionately, or at least fewer people are committed, are caught committing crimes . and this year there's crimes. and this year there's been many, many more of them. it has a knock on effect throughout the whole system . and so the whole system. and so immediately, yes, it is about the riots in the longer term, it's because we haven't been building new prisons and haven't been extending existing prisons at anything like the extent to which, anyone responsible for

the prison estate has been warning for some time. we needed to. so whilst yes, in the immediate term, it's about the riots in the medium and long term, going back indeed, year after year, the prison system has been under significant strain. i mean, i stopped practising in the criminal bar in 2009, and this was already an issue. >> and do you think it's right that, those who were involved in the violent disorder, be that onune the violent disorder, be that online or offline, in real life, have been fast tracked in this way? i don't know about the onune way? i don't know about the online part, but in the riot parts , in in civil disorder, in parts, in in civil disorder, in unrest on our streets, society coming apart at the seams with people openly defying any basic nofion people openly defying any basic notion of social norm or law and order. >> yes, absolutely. i think when it comes to riot, government has to deal with it immediately and demonstrate that that it won't, that it won't , and differently that it won't, and differently and demonstrate that it won't continue. and i'm talking a lot to say one one other thing, the it would be a bit rich of any conservative as i am to make too much of this, given that it's

precisely what the operation early dawn. i mean, it's precisely what the conservative party said we were likely to have to do this summer as well. >> yes, this is a long standing problem. no doubt, lee, do you share that assessment just initially that the reason we're initially that the reason we're in this situation is because there's been a huge number of arrests , particularly in the arrests, particularly in the north and north of england. but in other areas of the country, across the country , really. and across the country, really. and that's put a massive strain on resources. and essentially we're having to now ration prison cells. >> well, there's a particularly acute problem arising from the riots, like alex says. but even with the riots not to happen, the prisons are at bursting. they're bursting at the seams. so they're massively overcrowded. and as of friday in england and wales , in total, england and wales, in total, there were only 1300 places left in prisons. so. and they had about another 330, 340 people arriving for incarceration at the end of the week. so the prison system is already bursting at the seams. so even without the riots , there's no without the riots, there's no doubt that whatever party was in

government at the moment would have to be doing early prisoner releases and probably activating this operation. early dawn, which was already activated back in in may, i think. so, as alex says, the problem is we've got by sort of european standards, quite a punitive justice system that likes to put quite a lot of people in prison rather than, for example, community sentencing, which is used more, more frequently in places like the netherlands and the scandinavian countries. but then we don't invest in prisons. >> but is that really true? because there were some shocking statistics that were revealed from neil o'brien, conservative mp, and he did an foi with the ministry of justice, and he found for some crimes such as burglary, assault of police officers, you have to have multiple, multiple, multiple convictions of the same type of crime in order to spend any time in jail. you've also got at the same time shocking statistics about the number of crimes that are ever actually solved in this country by the police, down to 5.5%. i mean, can we really talk

about being tough on crime when those statistics seem are there for everyone to see? >> the question is, what does tough on crime mean? i mean, is it is it effective in suppressing crime? no, but do we have a system that incarcerates people at a higher rate than some of the european countries? yes, we do. we have we have a system that's very bad at punishment . system that's very bad at punishment. partly system that's very bad at punishment . partly people are punishment. partly people are not being sent into prison because judges know that the prisons are full. so they'll try to do anything they can to avoid compounding this problem . but compounding this problem. but we're also very bad at punishment, and we're extremely bad at rehabilitation in this country. so those are two different debates. >> the one that you were just rehearsing into one. the first is how we treat people once they're caught, prosecuted and convicted. and the second, perhaps more important for the general public is whether people are caught in the first place. and no amount of punitive treatment of those who are caught and convicted will ever deter someone if they think they won't get caught in the first place. and indeed, this is now circular, actually, because that's part of why it's so important to deal with riots in

the way that the government is to, because people will have conducted themselves in the way we've seen on the streets of britain, smashing stuff up, setting fire to buildings, so forth, in part because they thought nothing would ever happen to them. they thought there were so many of us. it's going to be so hard to identify. it's going to be so hard to catch us that we can do what we like. and it's actually a very important message to send that that's not true. >> yeah. i mean, it's something that concerns i think it's now the top two issue in this country for people when they're surveyed about what they care about. immigration and crime are unsurprisingly very high, 1 in 2 as a result, maybe. or, you know, in the same context as these riots and things, it's brought all these issues to the forefront, the crime. but do you worry that people look at how things are working right now and you see arrests made relating to the violent disorder go straight through the criminal justice system. you see people banged up. yes, some for facebook posts. yes, for very inflammatory and sometimes racist facebook posts that actually call for violence. but facebook posts nonetheless. you see that and you see people

who've thrown bricks at the police go straight into a prison cell. quick justice. why can't we have that for every crime? >> i suspect a lot of people will feel that way. i mean, i think alex is right that the government probably has no choice but to act very harshly against the rioters because if they don't, it it will be seen that you can basically do what you like with impunity and then the police would be overrun. but to come down particularly harshly on the rioters, a lot of people will be saying, well, what about the problems that i'm far away from any of these riots, right. they're very localised. they're very distressing to people caught up in them. but they're very localised. whereas for lots of people there are crimes that are plaguing their their communities, like burglary for example. so the latest statistics on burglary are in the past three depress us more. in the past three years the police have failed to solve a single burglary in 48% of areas. i mean that is appalling . so i mean that is appalling. so less than 1 in 25 burglaries result in a charge. and so lots of people will be asking that question. you know, why can't

you come down harsh on the crimes that are affecting us in our communities? >> yeah, and it does start with antisocial behaviour. if the police don't turn up for basic anti—social behaviour issues , anti—social behaviour issues, then the trust is gone and criminals become more and more, you know, emboldened. in my view, i think psychologically that that must happen. alex, i'm interested to know your thoughts. it's something that martin was talking about. we heard from keir starmer. he's in northern ireland and he was talking about some of the riots that happened over there in belfast in particular, he came out and he said racist thugs essentially. and a double down on that. yeah. do you think it is as clear cut as that? of course we did see the most egregious examples of targeting of for example, muslim owned businesses. yeah, we saw some muslim people's homes being targeted. but do you think he's lazy in not drawing, differentiating between those who go after, you know , who go after, you know, individual muslims and their businesses and this and that ?

businesses and this and that? and, you know, someone standing with a placard saying , enough is with a placard saying, enough is enough, get immigration down. >> i'm not in the business of defending rioting. and so i'm not going to demur from criticism of those who have been rioting. the difficulty for me isn't there where people can have their own, you know, is it mindless thuggery? is it people with no sense of responsibility to others anymore? is it racism? you can put lots of different causes into the people who actually go out and throw bricks and set fire to stuff. none of that. they're indefensible, in my view. the trouble for me isn't that the trouble for me is the it seems to elide between those who are violent and those who were not violent, who went because they wanted to demonstrate their deep concern about our country and its condition, and took part in peaceful protests and the enthusiasm for which the post, appalling events in southport, the enthusiasm for which this government has just criticised everyone when they were at pains dunng everyone when they were at pains during and after black lives matter and at pains after george

floyd, to say largely peaceful, mostly okay if fringe lunatics , mostly okay if fringe lunatics, fringe unpleasantness. >> people see that. people see that i mean, lee, do you think that i mean, lee, do you think that keir starmer should try more to differentiate the sort of racist actions of a small minority of people with other people who might turn up to a protest about illegal migration, or do you see them all as being the same thing? >> well, i don't think it's just about keir starmer. i think the extent to which the sort of ruling elite and the commentariat have sort of closed ranks around this issue and done exactly what you're, you're talking about is that they don't want to solve the underlying issues or they find it too sensitive to talk about the underlying issues , where these underlying issues, where these riots are just the tip of the iceberg. it seems cowardly. well, it's you can understand the reaction against the unrest because it was quite shocking. and clearly, you know, i would say there's three different kinds of groups of people that

were involved in the unrest. protests slash riots. right? so there were undoubtedly far right agitators who were stirring up trouble. and these people involved, you know, some of these people will be kind of crypto fascist, nazis, racists, etc. no doubt. the second group, i think, is just a kind of opportunistic, thuggish element that just likes to create mayhem and have a fight with the police just joining in. anyway, the third were, as alex says, you know, people worried about the state of the country, the state of their communities and a state, a ruling elite that has largely just abandoned them and is not listening to them anymore. and there's deep frustration now. only, you know, a few few hundred people turned out in each town. but there's many more thousands, millions of people who broadly share that sentiment and want something done about these problems. and it's much easier for the political class to just say, all of these people are totally beyond the pale, so we don't have to talk about these issues. >> and sure, if we look past these immediate events, my concern is that you take the all the concern about right, right

concern about rioting. and so forth, and you wind up instituting new laws which effectively say anyone who's concerned about migration, anyone who's concerned about boats coming from from france, your far right, you're racist that that's the government overreach. i'm worried about. >> well, it also doesn't chime with what the labour government was saying in the run up to the election. only a few short weeks ago. talked quite tough on illegal migration. if you can cast your mind back that far, lots of you getting in touch, williams says. if you want to free up prisons, stop jailing people for facebook posts or tweets. deport all foreign criminals and arrest actual criminals and arrest actual criminals like thieves and killers. that's williams solution, collins says. when i got burgled , i rang the police got burgled, i rang the police and was given a crime number. nothing else happened. no one came, just a crime number for the insurance . i mean, that is the insurance. i mean, that is just so depressing. i mean, i'm sure many of us have a similar experience, michael says. so joe pubuc experience, michael says. so joe public suffering with crime rates, anti—social behaviour like we've never seen before. starmer the clown. he says idea is let them out, knowing prisoners are 75% proven to go

on and commit crimes within the first two years of being released. fantastic logic. i don't know about that 75%, but i wouldn't be surprised if that were the case, and stephen says once again, the police to be used as prison officers to guard prisoners in unsuitable , prisoners in unsuitable, overcrowded accommodation, leaving even fewer police on the streets. starmer's administration is a very expensive train crash. well, there you go, john says . prisons there you go, john says. prisons are too nice to be in. well, there's a difference of opinion. they're overcrowded accommodation versus too nice to be in. which one is it? all i know is that prison guards, i mean, a lot of admiration for them. it must be a very, very difficult job considering all the violence and drugs and whatnot. anyway, coming up, nearly half of you think britain or half of brits think britain is moving in the wrong direction under labour. what is the new prime minister doing wrong? only 22% are happy with the direction of travel. we'll have more on that

all. right. welcome back. it's 624. this is dewbs& co with me. emily carver. i'm standing in for michelle this evening now, keeping me company until 7:00. is alex dean, conservative commentator and doctor lee jones, professor of political economy and international relations. thank you very much indeed for staying with us. now, this is, perhaps this won't surprise you at home. i'm not sure. let us let us know what you think of this. more than half of brits now think that the country is moving in the wrong direction under labour. just 22% say this country is moving in the right won. now the election campaign for the labour party was all about change. it was all about how awful the conservatives 14 years of failed government were for absolutely everything from the economy to the nhs to crime to whatever else. that was what it was all about. but it looks like people aren't particularly happy now either . this aren't particularly happy now either. this is according to a new poll by ipsos. now, at the same time, popularity for the prime minister has plummeted. just 38% of people are in favour of sir keir starmer. so what's

going on? is britain moving in the wrong direction? is it fair to blame sir keir starmer, who's only been in the job for, what, six weeks? about six weeks, something like that. maybe seven weeks, so it's not a long time to judge him on. but alex, what do you think? >> in the interests of fairness? look, he's entitled to have a go. he's, lord knows, labour won a majority at the election, and many conservatives lost , myself many conservatives lost, myself included, so it's still early days , but this is reminiscent days, but this is reminiscent for me of nothing so much as liz truss in government. too far, too fast, overreaching on issues that you think of as really ideological and the totemic one for me on that is the strikes policy that labour has announced and removing the requirement for 50% of union members to vote. and that just smacks of deep labour ideological views, which was the opposite of what they tried to present. going to the pubuc tried to present. going to the public on that, i thought they might. >> i genuinely thought they might rethink the, the private schools tax on private.

>> instead, they've doubled down when so many people came out and said, no, this is the wrong policy. >> it's not going to do what you want it to. >> it's not actually about outcome. it's not about outcomes on the school one. it's about an ideological message and punishing people who are of a certain type and or class as they see it. but look, the slip in opinion polling was likely always likely to happen because he's the least popular leader of the opposition ever to have become prime minister. it's just that he was fighting an election against a government that was even more unpopular. he'd he had very he was very lucky in his opponents. so on the one hand, it was always going to be like this. on the other hand, it does seem to me the speed with which they've done things like botching the negotiations over strikes. okay, you have 22% pay rise. oh my gosh, other people want more. who could have seen this coming. yeah that the speed of that is remarkable to me. >> i'm glad you mentioned that because i think now the tories have been saying labour got absolutely played by these trade unions, particularly the train drivers. so they get offered their 15%. it sounds like they're going to take it

immediately announced a new series of strikes on a different line, granted, but it is very much, you know, you give you give an inch and they take a while. and labour fell into that trap, don't you think, lee? no. >> well, i think you know, people are absolutely sick and tired of having public services paralysed by strikes and something had to be done to try to settle it. but i also wanted to. >> it's easy to settle an industrial dispute if you just say, oh, all right, have what you want. >> well, in fact, they've not given the strikers what they want because the demands, for example, among junior doctors are for much more substantial pay are for much more substantial pay rises. and arguably they deserve it. they've not they've not been given what they want. but what i wanted to do is to put your introduction on this polling into context. so i'm no particular fan of this government, as people might realise. but in terms of when you ask people, is the country moving in the wrong direction or is it moving in the right direction? since april 2021, more people have felt it's moving in the in the wrong direction than the right direction than the right direction and the number of people polled saying the wrong

direction has been hovering around 50% of the population for at least a year , and only about at least a year, and only about 20% think it's moving in the right direction. so this is not a staggering poll outcome. it's not really a reflection on keir starmer. >> okay, well hang on, we had a huge election where everyone was told that this was going to be the opportunity for change. you would have thought if people were happy with the result and they'd got the right result, and it was the government that they elected that maybe that would shift. >> i think that's a misunderstanding of the election that we've just had, because let's remember , only 20% of the let's remember, only 20% of the citizens of this country actually voted for the labour party, right? and of them when they were polled. what's your reason for voting? labour, the top reason, 48% of them said it's to get rid of the tories. 2% said they like their local mp, 1% was keir starmer's leadership and 1% was. they care about ordinary people. so this is a deeply unpopular government and i think it will become less popular over time. >> a huge majority, but a fragile one. not that many people actually did vote labour

proportionately. agreed. >> but let's let's try a different question, which is why is it moving in the wrong direction and so quickly? because i think it's very interesting with this government, what they've done with all of the pay awards that we've been discussing, the conservative party and people on the right generally think that the right generally think that the labour party and people on the labour party and people on the left generally are misguided, whereas they think we're evil. so they spent the time in opposition saying, oh, this government business, it's really easy. just press the do right button and then it'll all be fixed. if you just press that. that's what we'll do when we get in. then they get in and they find there isn't a do right button. they find. in fact, the government is quite complicated and difficult. and if you just give people what the unions wanted, which is or approximating what the unions wanted, or far further than the government wanted to, then it has all manner of effects that you weren't expecting or should have been expecting, but weren't because you didn't think it through. and so i think we're going to have a long, hot, bad summer and autumn and winter where we get held to ransom by more and more of these unions. whatever. lee thinks, i'm afraid your question was right. these unions saw keir starmer, sir

keir starmer coming a mile off. >> i mean, and we have got, you know, the gp's are going to ask for more. we've got the border force also threatening strike again. i believe that's already in the diary. you've got aslef again. i mean who knows. the junior doctors may decide that, as you say, 22% isn't enough to agree on that one. i mean, it could spiral out of control because if you give people a pay offer with no strings attached, which is what keir starmer has done with the aslef, with the train drivers there, then there's, you know, you've lost there's, you know, you've lost the bargaining power, haven't you? as a government i mean, i think most people believe that more money has to be spent on pubuc more money has to be spent on public services. >> in fact, you know, you talk about the liz truss government, for example, when tory voters were polled, when liz truss was running for to the be conservative leader, do you want more money to be spent on public services or do you want tax cuts? >> yes. more people, more people wanted either higher taxes or taxes to remain the same because

they want better public services. >> so you're only talking a moment ago about people's sense that things are broken, things are falling apart. the prisons are falling apart. the prisons are full. the police are not doing their job. if you don't invest in public services. and fundamentally, that means investing in people who is going to actually deliver when questions are posed in that way with no sort of, when questions are posed in that way, you're obviously going to say, yes, do the knife. >> you're not going to say, no one wants public services to be funded properly, but the flip. >> hang on, hang on, hang on. >> hang on, hang on, hang on. >> so a lot of people don't pay much tax in this country. >> so the flip side is if you are going to give out pay awards like this, it has to come with the quid pro quo of improved productivity, because in our pubuc productivity, because in our public sector, productivity is in the toilet. in fact, there's been no such, guarantee or even attempt at that. through these announcements and negotiations. so i'm afraid we are very likely to see much more of this. i think under labour and the unions and the interesting comparison, we're all interested in history in different ways. ted heath went to the country in 74, when the unions were really powerhouse and said, who runs

britain and the electorate decisively said, not you, ted, but, you know, so the labour party were put back in, but it was still the right question. and when thatcher came in in 79, effectively asking the same things, it was because the unions had been so strong for so long against an ineffectual and unpopular labour government. if we're looking for a precedent for what keir starmer is shaping up to be, for me it's that i just think i just think we don't want union bosses to be running the country, you know, running bosses, running the country is an absolute it's looking like it isn't it? >> in many ways, union power is at an all time historic. >> doesn't look like it in this country. >> and they're going to make it easier to strike. that's what it's looking like getting rid of that trade union act so that we may see. >> now, don't need over 50% strikes. so we now we now have a government in power that 20% of the citizenry voted for and has a two thirds majority in parliament. that's fine. but when a union wants to go on strike, you've got to have over 50% of members voting and a majority of the strike. >> oh, hang on, don't we? we had a vote. >> i voted for the alternative vote. we had. we had a

referendum on it and my side lost. and i accept the result of that, of that vote. whereas because you were interested in polling amongst party members today we see that yougov i think, was reporting a majority of labour party members think it's right for a for a union in order to go on strike, should have a vote to have that strike and a majority of their of their members should vote to go on strike before they do it. but members of the unions as well, they may lose work . they may lose work. >> they may lose money as a result of these, and they may not want to go on strike. not everyone who's a member of a union wants to strike all the time anyway. jonathan says, well, look what starmer has achieved in six weeks. think what he can achieve in five years. ponder that in the break because coming up, do we have a broken benefit system and will labour be the ones to fix it? do we need to be nicer about people who are welfare? that's what kendall thinks.

okay, well welcome back. i'm

standing in for michelle dewberry this evening for dewbs & dewberry this evening for dewbs& co keeping me company until 7:00. alex dean, conservative commentator , doctor lee jones, commentator, doctor lee jones, professor of political economy and international relations. thank you very much indeed. now we're going to turn to something a little bit different, because the work and pensions secretary, liz kendall, has spoken out. she's calling for an end to the so—called blame culture and also divisive rhetoric around benefits or those on benefits, those claiming benefits , hitting those claiming benefits, hitting out against the conservatives as she pledged to end the salami slicing of the benefits bill as she trails or considers major reforms to the system. so do we have a bit of a benefit blame culture? i mean, alex, i do remember years ago you would most of the front pages of the tabloids would be about, i don't know, a single mother who was had eight children and her benefits bill was more than the average train driver. >> and of course, that would have been before the two cap limits that this government has

interestingly said its three cap limit. now the government's going to keep, notwithstanding the views of many of its , the views of many of its, members of parliament, who that's why they've got seven suspended members of the labour party at the moment in the new parliament. look, on the one hand, when we introduced universal benefits and said one of the universal credit and one of the universal credit and one of the universal credit and one of the big changes is that the state would periodically check in with people to see that they were still of the same condition, and that their position hadn't changed so that they could return to work. just announcing that that was going to happen meant tens of thousands of people came off benefits because they started seeking work again and secured it. so signing people off work for life is bad for their it's bad for policy, it's bad for them. it's the soft bigotry of low expectations. here's a little chip that says the state will look after you forever. go away and don't worry about anything. and i would hope we can agree on that policy on that point. across left and right, the trouble is it's very specific. we've had benefit debate in this country for decades. we've now got an

explosion of people on benefits post—covid. and a very significant chunk of it is mental health related. and most people who are being signed off because of that reason are signed off indefinitely. right. and that's the problem one way we treat mental health and two, saying that it's indefinite. and we've actually shown already how we've actually shown already how we can deal with it, which is checking in as a state to start with to make sure you still have that position. >> i mean, we've got to we've got a big problem here, don't we? we've got 9.5 million or roughly thereabouts. people not working or not and not looking for work. so that's a huge chunk of our potential workforce, of working age adults who simply aren't interested in working. now, they may have enough money to last them for the rest of their lives. then they don't need to work. but that's a bit potentially for some of those. thatis potentially for some of those. that is a bit of an economic drain for us. or at least we could be getting some use out of them if we want to look at everything in economic terms. but add that to the 2.8 million people who are now out of work due to long term sickness, some of that will be mental health

related. some of that will be physical health. and then you've also got the number of children now on disability allowance for things like adhd and anxiety are through the roof again since the covid lockdown. i mean, this is a this is a recipe for disaster, isn't it? >> well, i think i'm not sure about the 9 million figure, the figure that i've heard is closer to 8 million, but 9.5 is the figure that came out this week. and that would include lots of people who, for example, are still at school or university. students are carers for disabled or elderly people or taking time to raise a family or so on. so, so i don't think it's very helpful to focus on the total number who were not economically active. the figure that does concern me is the 2.8 million people. >> it is when you've got lots of spaces in the labour market that aren't filled and you're relying on very high migration levels in order to try and plug some of those gaps. those things are whilst those things are connected, housing issues and those things are connected, but it's rather absurd to suggest that 9 million people are just living off their saying, oh, hang on. no, i just said that

some of them will be. i don't suggest that all of them, hardly any, basically. >> so the figure that we should be focusing on is the one that alex has pointed out, which is 2.8 million people on long term sickness, so described as unfit, unable to work. and that figure has risen by about 700,000 since 2019 after a long term decline. yeah, it shot up and it's very persistent. and there's two big groups where this is happening. firstly among young people, there's been a very sharp rise among young people under 24, and then a very large number of people over 55. and the two big things that are showing up is one, mental health that's showing up in 69% of workplace capability assessments and musculoskeletal disorders. so people who've just broken down by work, that's showing up in almost half. so i think this is almost half. so i think this is a this is part of a kind of long term legacy of, first of all, treating people with difficulties as if they're ill and putting them onto long term disabilities is not a new

problem. this is what happened with millions of people who were rendered unemployed by deindustrialisation in the 19805. deindustrialisation in the 1980s. they were shifted on to incapacity payments. >> so what exactly are you saying? do you think too many of these people are on long term sickness, are judged, not fit to work, do you think that there has been a culture of blaming people for being on benefits when it's not actually their fault? >> i think it's a complex mixture of different things. so there are there are some people that are just facing a lot of difficulties in their life and are struggling to get on. and for young people, if you think about what they've been through , about what they've been through, these are people that i'm in contact with a lot through my own work right? my students, they've massively struggled in recent years. the lockdowns were an absolute disaster for young people. it took a massive toll on their mental health. their life prospects are pretty bleak at the moment in terms of, you know, underemployment of graduates , in terms of their job graduates, in terms of their job prospects, in terms of their ability to ever get onto the housing ladder and so on. we have had decades of therapeutic education that encouraged people, yes, to recognise mental

health difficulties, but also to frame everyday problems as mental health problems . yes, mental health problems. yes, that's an interesting point. we've had massive under—investment in mental health services, so demanding you raise that roof well, that's what supply of mental health services has absolutely collapsed. but that's interesting. >> you say that because this is something that, a board member, a non—executive nhs england director, professor sir simon wessely. yes, he said that actually all of this awareness that we have all the time about mental health may not actually be beneficial, not not necessarily always a good thing. >> it's very bad luck for liz kendall that she's awful. no, it's very bad luck for liz kendall that she's taken this position on benefits. the same week that professor sir simon wessely, until recently president of the royal college of psychiatrists, who we think you know something about it says that yes, there's been this explosion in mental health issues. people report much higher rates of mental poor mental wellbeing and mental health problems. when you push into what that is and you dive into what that is and you dive into what that is and you dive into what the actual things are, they talk about things like concerns about loneliness ,

concerns about loneliness, homesickness, stress , concerns homesickness, stress, concerns about climate change. many things that you might think people need to be able to put up with as part of the warp and weft of everyday life, or as sir simon puts it, the things that don't really respond to the kind of psychological treatments we're able to give people. >> also, these are just normal things that people experience. >> so we are medicalising that which as otherwise as was being said, are part of the everyday challenges of life that we have to deal with. and when you go down the route of telling people that, you know, we want to explore awareness and we want you to talk about your mental health a great deal and have no issue about it. this is the flip side of the kendall thing. she was saying we shouldn't feel any shame about talking about being sick or being on benefits and that's all right. but it's not something to go around boasting about either. there are some younger people who think, well, if i haven't got a mental health condition to report at the moment, i'm pretty uncool, right? i need to have something that makes you demonstrates i'm

part of modern society and i'm in. and what's in at the moment is having a mental health issue or having a poor mental having bad mental wellbeing. i need to have an issue and my anxiety is such that and so forth. and so simon frames his arguments in the context of the nhs not having the resources to look after all the people reporting things that wouldn't, two years or three years ago, be in a mental health problem. let's look at it the other way round. think about the people who could be happier, productive members of society, but now think they can't hold down a job because they're concerned about climate change, or they're anxious and they're told you're sick, they're told you're sick, they're told you're sick, they're told they're sick. >> yes. and they may wish to believe it, or they may may not, but they may be pushed in that direction. but it is quite striking. i mean, it is staggering, these statistics that we saw just a few days ago that we saw just a few days ago that came out official statistics on the number of children or the parents of children or the parents of children that are claiming disability allowance for things like adhd and also autism. now, of course , autism. there's of course, autism. there's a massive spectrum. same with adhd , massive spectrum. same with adhd, but the surge since the lockdown. absolutely incredible. and the cost of that of course

will balloon to. and you know it's a it's an absolutely huge burden on the taxpayer. i mean peter says some forget or don't know that benefits are paid by other taxpayers, danny says too many people in this country will blame anyone they can think of for not getting benefits. there is work for these people, melanie says. emily, i'd much rather my taxes go to british people on benefits than those coming on the boats. fair enough, richard said. we must be the only country in the world where you can have £200,000 in the bank, 2000 a month pension and still get benefits . well, i and still get benefits. well, i don't know which benefits you're referring to. perhaps the state pension or the winter fuel allowance , although of course allowance, although of course that's being scrapped quite a bit at least, and anthony just says abolish unemployment benefits, force them to work harsh . anthony, i'd like to see harsh. anthony, i'd like to see how that might work in practice. if you're absolutely, you know, got a disastrous, disastrous you've been in a disastrous car crash or something like this and can't physically work . but can't physically work. but anyway, coming up, protest flags are banned from the last night of the proms. what exactly does

a protest flag mean? also, flags of hate are also banned. that's as the bbc buckles down on rules and the classical music event. see you there is

lots of you getting in touch about the state pension. i referred to it as a benefit , but referred to it as a benefit, but it it is a benefit. that doesn't mean i want to take it away or i'm going to campaign to take it away. it is. yes. you can argue well paid into it. >> i'm not sure you're going to win this with you're not going to win it. >> i'm not going to win it. but what i will say is i'm not trying to scrap it. i admire you trying to scrap it. i admire you trying to scrap it. >> i think your persistence do. >> anyway, this is dewbs & co. >> anyway, this is dewbs& co. i'm with alex dean and of course i'm with alex dean and of course i am also with doctor lee jones, who's been with us since 6:00. so we'll finish on a rather bizarre one. now, last night of the proms, there's usually a hoo ha about the songs that are sung

that there are jingoistic or two patriotic, and the like that usually causes a stir, but this time it's a protest. flags. they're being banned because audience members are being told that they might be confiscated if they decide to wave a flag of protest, a flag of hatred, and potentially other types of flags. but, alex dean, what do you think ? what do you think you think? what do you think they're trying to avoid here? >> sure. well, consider the flag spectrum, right? i think there are some that are obviously okay. our own. i hope it's okay. >> one is that a protest flag? >> one is that a protest flag? >> the british flag . okay. and >> the british flag. okay. and there are some that are obviously not you know, isis flag i think is probably not going to be welcome at the royal albert hall. i should just make a disclaimer. by the way, royal albert hall was a client of mine in the past, so not that i haven't prepared this flag spectrum, but i should point out i worked with them before, and then the question for them is what's in the middle? it seems to me what the hall is probably trying to say, but can't say directly is please, no palestine and israel flags. i imagine that's what they are trying to

say, but they're in a tricky spot.i say, but they're in a tricky spot. i rather preferred the last night of the proms, when it was just a sea of union jack flags. but of course the european union obsessives went and spoilt that, didn't they? yeah, they really did. once that happened, all bets were off. >> they really did. and one could argue that the eu flag is now protest. i agree, because we've left. we're not in it. so why would you be waving it unless you wanted to rejoin, which is i guess is some form of protest a protest, but that's probably the truth, isn't it? they're probably trying to avoid some kind of confrontation between israeli flag wavers and palestinian flag wavers. >> i think that's right. i mean, it seems like a kind of sensible security precaution to take, but i don't think anyone's going to turn up with an isis flag, are they? no, i think when they talk about a flag of hate or they actually talk about proscribed organisations, which is clearly a reference to hamas, which is regarded by the uk government as a terrorist organisation. so that's it's a it's a reference to that. what they don't want is, you know , rival israeli and is, you know, rival israeli and palestinian flag wavers coming to blows in the middle of your party. >> reasonable. you're supposed

to say you're supposed to say freedom of expression . anywhere freedom of expression. anywhere is a place of protest. people should have the right to wave whatever flag, whether it's the, i don't know, the pride flag or the palestinian flag or the eu flag. >> the issue is, are the rules going to be applied equally? so if a protest flag just means a palestinian flag, but it's perfectly fine to wave an israeli flag, then people are going to say this is about suppressing freedom of speech, because some people are allowed to wave their flag and i'm not allowed to wave my flag. it's better to say nobody can wave any flag at a music event apart from, well, apart from the union church. there you go. >> there we go. everyone's. everyone's happy now. i think that should be the rule. >> the only flag. i mean, would you rather saint george's cross? i mean, that's seen as a bit of a flag of protest. >> you've always seen 1 or 2 welsh flags and scottish flags at the last night of the proms. >> i wouldn't mind that either. >> i wouldn't mind that either. >> oh, well, there you go. it can be of the nations that make up the united kingdom or the union flag. i think that's a good compromise, but i don't

think they'd be as explicit as that on the on the website of the of the proms. but there you go. we're going to have to end it there. thank you very much for keeping the debate going this evening, it is i'm not sure who's covering tomorrow evening, but it's been a pleasure nonetheless. perhaps jubes is back. who knows, but yes, i've been emily carver. jubes is back. she'll be back tomorrow to be back on her show to and host it. so until then, it is gbn tonight with christopher hope this evening. so he'll be taking you through the next hour. i've been emily carver. this is dewbs& co >> a brighter outlook with boxt solar sponsors of weather on . gb news. >> hello. very good evening to you. here's your latest gb news weather update brought to you by the met office . plenty of the met office. plenty of showers as we go through tomorrow, and some blustery gusty winds too. but before then there's a lot of cloud. there's a lot of rain because of a frontal system that's already made its way in from the west. and as we go through the next 12 hours or so, it's going to

continue to push east and southeastwards, bringing quite a wet story across many parts of england and wales for a time. with that rain feeding into the southeast as we go through the early hours of tomorrow morning behind it, there will be some clear skies around, but also some showery bursts, especially across parts of scotland. temperatures not dropping a huge amount. in fact, in the southeast it is going to be another warm night, some places only falling to lows of around 17 or 18 celsius as we go through tomorrow morning, though, there will be some hefty rain across the far east of scotland and the northern isles also plenty of showers feeding into western parts of scotland into western parts of scotland in between. something a little bit drier and brighter for some, but also more showers across northern ireland. some parts of northern northwestern england and in fact down the western side of england and wales. there will be some showers feeding in something a little bit drier and sunnier for more central eastern parts of england, although in the far southeast that front will be lingering here for a time. so a grey, damp start to the day for some before that front clears away by the afternoon behind it. for many, it is going to be a showery day

and some of those showers will be heavy and there are some gusty, blustery winds to watch out for too, especially in the northwest, making it feel a little bit cooler for some. but there will also be some sunny spells and in the east southeast in the sunshine, feeling quite warm with temperatures in the low to mid 20s. wednesday gets off to a fine start for many of us, but some very wet and windy weather is going to feed in from the northwest as we go through the northwest as we go through the day, particularly affecting scotland and perhaps too . scotland and perhaps too. northern ireland now the rain is going to be quite heavy and will last as we go into thursday, and it's all due to the remnants of what was hurricane ernesto, the other side of the atlantic. i'll see you again soon. bye bye. >> looks like things are heating up. boxt boilers , sponsors of weather

gb news. >> good evening. i'm christopher

hope and this is gbn. tonight is the relationship between unions and labour mps. a healthy one? it emerged today that since the election. yes since the election was called in may, 213 labour mps received £1.8 million in donations from union leaders. this comes after the government has been offering inflation busting pay rises to millions of pubuc busting pay rises to millions of public sector workers, many of whom are members of unions, and it emerged today that the labour government is looking at a new law to ensure that trade unions will be free to strike, even if most of their members do not vote for one and a small, peaceful anti—immigration protest prompted officers from five different police forces, including the met, to swarm to bournemouth town centre. is this adequate resourcing or a knee jerk reaction? after the riots which followed the killings in southport? and as part of labour's plan to overhaul workers rights, employees