this would never happen that this would never happen under his watch .7 and will ed under his watch? and will ed miliband's eco friendly great british energy cut our bills? plus, the home office is now under fire for a tweet . they under fire for a tweet. they suggest that all rioters, all those involved in the riots who've been arrested could be guilty. and what about those found guilty of other crimes out there? well, there's no room for them in our prisons as the overcrowding crisis rumbles on and labour chancellor rachel reeves insists she will not hand the unions blank cheques despite approving countless inflation busting pay deals. and guess what? the unions are now pressuring labour to repeal every single anti—strike law introduced since thatcher was prime minister could industrial action spiral out of control? and has the education secretary caved into cancel culture already? that's the accusation. as academics rally against her plans to revoke the tories free speech act . okay, well that's

speech act. okay, well that's all to come in the next hour. so do stick with me. i've got a wonderful and very intelligent panel coming up, so stick with us. but first, let's get the latest news headlines . latest news headlines. >> emily, thank you very much. and good evening to you. just after 6:00. and the top story of the day today, the family of mike and hannah lynch, who died after a luxury yacht sank off the coast of sicily , have said the coast of sicily, have said they are devastated and in shock. 18 year old hannah became the final missing passenger to be recovered from the wreckage of that superyacht, and family have also released this photograph of mr lynch and his 18 year old daughter before that trip on the boat in sicily. six bodies have now been found in the search of the wreckage, taking the total number of confirmed deaths to seven. there are concerns that more families

could fall behind on their energy bills because of a price cap rise. it's going up by 10% from october for millions of households across england and scotland, and in wales, they face an annual average bill of £1,700, which ofgem is blaming on higher wholesale costs. energy secretary ed miliband says he does understand why people are concerned. >> i know this will be really worrying news for lots of families who will face even greater struggles this winter , greater struggles this winter, andifs greater struggles this winter, and it's a direct result of our country's exposure to international gas markets that are controlled by dictators. and thatis are controlled by dictators. and that is a legacy left to us by the last government. that's why this government has a plan to do something about it. our mission for clean , home—grown power that for clean, home—grown power that we control in this country. >> ed miliband there, speaking earlier. well, elsie dot stancombe, who was killed in the southport knife attack, has been

remembered today with balloons and one of her favourite taylor swift songs at her funeral in the town. the seven year old's parents have described her as a truly unforgettable daughter. deputy chief constable of merseyside police, chris green spoke at the service on behalf of the emergency services . of the emergency services. >> in a time of such great sorrow, the resolve and spirit of this community has provided a source of comfort and reassurance through the many acts of kindness and solidarity. it is evident that southport is not just a place , it is your not just a place, it is your home and it will forever be el—sisi home. >> magistrates in england and in wales have been told to stop jailing people for several weeks to try to ease overcrowding in prisons. offenders likely to serve time behind bars are to have their sentencing hearings postponed days after an emergency measures kicked in. it allows defendants to be held in custody for longer. last month, an early release scheme for some

inmates was also announced . inmates was also announced. well, some news just into us from the middle east. it's reported that president joe biden has asked the israeli prime minister to pull back israel's troops. that request to withdraw israeli forces from gaza's border with egypt would be part of an initial phase of a ceasefire deal so that talks can continue. news outlets in the us reporting tonight that benjamin netanyahu has partially accepted that request from president biden , and agreed to give up biden, and agreed to give up military positions along one part of the egypt, gaza border . part of the egypt, gaza border. meanwhile, at least five secret service agents who were responsible for protecting donald trump at the rally where he was shot in july have been put on leave, to according sources in the us. the exact number, though, of secret service agents isn't known at this stage, and it's also not clear whether the investigation into that shooting has now concluded or not. you may remember the assassination attempt on the former us

president took place during an outdoor event in pennsylvania last month . and back here at last month. and back here at home, three stages at leeds festival have had to close today after strong winds brought by storm lillian. gusts of up to 80 miles an hour are expected in northern parts of england, and in wales. the storms also caused wide disruption, with roads blocked and a number of flights cancelled at heathrow . those are cancelled at heathrow. those are the latest headlines for now. i'm sam francis. up next it's . emily. >> well good evening. welcome to dewbs& co with me, emily carver. i'm standing for in michelle dewberry this evening and with me is my panel until 7:00. we have conservative life peer in the house of lords, daniel moylan and the former labour minister, bill rammell. thank you very much indeed for joining me. good evening this evening. and please do as always as, michelle always says, this show

is not just about us. it's also about you at home. so please do get your views in gbnews.com/yoursay. we've got a lot to talk about today. from energy bills to prison spaces to the home office messing up on twitter. but first, something perhaps a little lighter or perhaps a little lighter or perhaps a little bit humorous. some very important news indeed. jeremy clarkson has banned sir keir starmer from his new pub. now this is the first person he has barred from his establishment since opening. i believe it actually opened today. there were four hour queues outside his pub now he says the prime minister is hopeless. bill, i'll start with you as the labour voice in the room. is that fair ? he room. is that fair? he apparently he doesn't understand the rural economy. bill, i think he's had a really good start. >> but it's interesting. 50 days now. 50 days. yeah. which is a day longer than liz truss, it's interesting .jeremy's day longer than liz truss, it's interesting . jeremy's got day longer than liz truss, it's interesting .jeremy's got his interesting. jeremy's got his pub open. tremendous. in a former life, i was actually a licensee. i don't i don't think jeremy is the licensee of that

pub, which means he doesn't have the legal authority to ban keir. >> he's not the licensee. >> he's not the licensee. >> i would be very surprised if he was the licensee, because a licensee has to spend 80 to 90% of the working hours on the premises, and i don't think jeremy will be doing that. >> oh, well, that's very interesting indeed. well, perhaps jeremy clarkson will be able to persuade the licensee not to, because the bill is entirely caught up with the blair reforms to licensing, >> it's all very different now . >> it's all very different now. i can't remember the details, but i used to have something to do with it. oh, well, we'll have to fact check that one won't be a jeremy to ringing designated person. i don't know whether he's entitled to ban him or not. i'm generally not in favour of banning people or banning arguments or banning views, but i can see why, you know , with i can see why, you know, with queues of four hours or whatever it is outside the door, why mr clarkson might want to be prioritise people. and if sir keir was in that queue, i don't know if he was. i suspect he wasn't. if he was in that queue moving him out might have made

some space for some other people. more appreciative of mr clarkson's views. well, yes, i'm sure. >> i mean, before the election, jeremy clarkson wrote in the sun, he said he claimed that the manifesto labour's manifesto, contained just 87 words on farming, which shows that, well, he says, which when translated into english, basically says we hate you , you meat eating rural hate you, you meat eating rural halfwits , which that's what halfwits, which that's what jeremy clarkson thinks of the labour party, which is presumably why, you know, a significant number of people in rural areas voted labour just 50 days ago. >> i think the other thing is, i've spent my political life trying to really not like jeremy clarkson. but my 34 year old son said he's really funny, read one of his books and i read it and i thought, oh, it is funny. >> it's quite funny. and people do love his programme clarkson's farm. i mean, he does get stuck into everything and anything really, but shall we move on? he did get in hot water about an article about meghan markle, didn't he? that almost got him cancelled. that almost got him cancelled. that almost got him cancelled. but no, he's opening a pub and he's actually

cancelling sir keir starmer. so there you go. shall we move on to more substantial matters? because today ofgems energy price cap, we now know that it will increase by 10%. so that's from £1568 to £1717. and that's to come in from october the 1st. those figures are for a typical household in england, scotland and wales . and of course, more and wales. and of course, more controversially, this all comes at a time when labour is planning to scrap the winter fuel allowance, worth up to £300 for some pensioners, millions of pensioners may well go without that this winter. pensioners may well go without that this winter . so question, that this winter. so question, lord moylan , daniel, is labour lord moylan, daniel, is labour penalising pensioners with this? what do you say about this? is it fair to pitch this price cap hike, with well, to present this as an attack on pensioners, in your view ? your view? >> well, the winter fuel allowance withdrawal is an attack on pensioners. and of course, there are some rich pensioners. we all know that, it's not being means tested

properly because they're doing it in a way that, depends on applying for pension credit. a lot of pensioners who are entitled to pension credit haven't actually applied for it. some are rushing to do it now. many of them won't have it in time. so they're not really they're going to struggle with means testing this properly, and they could have done it in a different way. they could have said, we'll make it taxable and add it to your pension. then better off pensioners would pay tax on it, but they've chosen to do it this way. and it is going to be a real disaster for quite a lot of pensioners. in terms of the price cap, i never understood myself. the point of a price cap that goes up when pnces a price cap that goes up when prices go up. i mean, the point of a price cap is to cap things, isn't it, but this was introduced by mrs. may. i always thought it was a lot of window dressing. i generally don't approve of it, in any event, but there is a price cap. it goes up. what really upsets me, though, is having ed miliband on the telly, which you had just a few minutes ago on the news, saying that this is because we're in hock to foreign gas produced by dictators, when we could have our own home—grown gas coming out of oil fields and

gas coming out of oil fields and gas fields in the north sea under our own control. unless you think sir keir star, he's talking about sir keir starmer as a dictator. i don't know, we could have it, but he's stopped that. could have it, but he's stopped that . he's could have it, but he's stopped that. he's made us more dependent on foreign gas. should we have a little dictators? >> should we have another little look at what ed miliband had to say? >> no, this will be really worrying news for lots of families who will face even greater struggles this winter. and it's a direct result of our country's exposure to international gas markets that are controlled by dictators. and thatis are controlled by dictators. and that is a legacy left to us by the last government. that's why this government has a plan to do something about it. this government has a plan to do something about it . our mission something about it. our mission for clean home—grown power that we control in this country , and we control in this country, and it's why we've hit the ground running in just seven weeks. consenting new solar power overturning the ban on onshore wind precisely to give our country the energy security we don't have at the moment .

don't have at the moment. >> home—grown gas , new home >> home—grown gas, new home grown gas fields, planning , new grown gas fields, planning, new home—grown gas fields, no licences. yeah. >> new licences. not the existing ones are going to be in the mix for decades to come. yeah, but no new licences, no new licences on that. >> it's complete hypocrisy on his part to be saying that. well i've just brought you ed miliband. we produce, we have home—grown gas. he wants home—grown energy that's not controlled by dictators. we need gas. we've got it. and yet he is the one who's forcing us to import more from international markets. yes. >> i think it's out of the question that we'd ever see, we will get new licences in the nonh will get new licences in the north sea, and it's out of the question that we'd ever frack now in this country. i didn't even mention either. but let's have a look at keir starmer, what keir starmer had to say. bill, just two years ago i understand i completely understand i completely understand why so many people are frustrated at the government. >> that's not doing anything about their energy bills, that's

dhhenng about their energy bills, that's dithering and delaying just like it did at the beginning of the year. it did at the beginning of the year . in the it did at the beginning of the year. in the end , politics is year. in the end, politics is about choices , and this about choices, and this government is choosing to protect the profits of oil and gas companies. unexpected profits of oil and gas companies, rather than sticking up for and helping hardworking families and struggling businesses. i hope that just as we did earlier this year, we can force them into a u—turn because under my leadership, labour is on the side of working people. >> i mean, he's right, bill, keir starmer is right that government is about priorities. and it seems to me that the priority of this government is to give train drivers big pay increases to cut the winter fuel allowance for pensioners who most need to heat their homes. er and energy bills are going up in any case. >> well, the priority is to get

the country working again, which is what settling the strikes was about. but look this, this will come back for more strikes. this energy increase is due to the international energy market, geopolitical pressures and the extreme weather conditions. but even with this increase and it's regrettable and i think let's wait for the budget to see what more the government can do. but even with this increase, people are still going to be paying about £117 a year less than last october and about £800 a year less than the peak of the energy pnces less than the peak of the energy prices and you talk about the winter fuel allowance. let's give the historical context to that. that was brought in in the late 1990s because of a one off pension increase of £0.75 a week, i'm amazed it hasn't been means tested before now, which both labour, some labour and some conservative politicians have called for. the reality is, since then , some charities, some since then, some charities, some charities are saying that this winter will be the hardest. >> that pensioners have

experienced for decades. you could see they could see their their bills rise by £500. a lot of pensioners will simply not be able to afford that. i've had so many emails coming in today. earlier when i was doing good afternoon britain, coming in saying, i am seriously worried that i'll have to spend all my time in one of the rooms in my property, literally under a duvet cover, trying to keep warm . duvet cover, trying to keep warm. people are very, very worried and they wouldn't expect it from and they wouldn't expect it from a labour government. that's what they're saying. >> and look, that is a concern and let's see what more can be done. but the reality is, since the winter fuel allowance was created, we've had the triple lock which has been brought in and, you know, that's subsidised pensioners at the expense of young people. and people in work. and the reality. >> sorry, no, it hasn't, no it hasn't daniel. >> the reality is pensioners are less likely to be in poverty than people in the working population. okay. >> well let me would you like to come back to that? i just want to say if you are dependent on the state pension, the triple the state pension, the triple the triple lock has given you

over a lengthy period is a state pension that is around about £12,000. >> now, anyone who thinks that, you know, pensioners are living high on the hog on £12,000 a yeanis high on the hog on £12,000 a year, is one of the lowest pensions in europe. and the whole idea that that is a subsidy and that it's being given to them at the expense of young people, is inflammatory language designed to divide people. but you need to recognise the fact i know there are rich pensioners. i've already said you should tax the winter fuel allowance if you want to get something back from it, but you've got people living on £12,000 a year and they are not rich, they are struggling and they are going to lose . many and they are going to lose. many of them will lose the £500. even if they could have got it, because they won't even get registered for pension credit. >> so if you're on the basic state pension, you don't just survive on £12,000 a year. there's a whole host of other support and benefits that you are entitled to. look, i'm not saying that this is without difficulty, and i think there has been a case for means

testing the winter fuel allowance. i think if i'm honest, the decision that was taken is a bit too crude of just tying it to the pensions credit level. and i think when we come to the budget in october, there may be some tapering brought in so that people are protected higher up the income scale. >> there might be a bit of a clean up process because at the moment it's pretty damaging for the i would say in the manifesto. no, not in the manifesto. no, not in the manifesto. a lot wasn't in the manifesto, nor were some of these pay settlements. they weren't in the manifesto public finances. >> it's hardly in the tory manifesto. >> it's hardly surprising that the government has had to borrow 3.1 or £32 billion more than they thought they were going to over the past month or so. but just quickly before we go to the break, gb energy, is this the way forward? lots of people are supportive of this idea. in theory, more green, technology, people like that . people like that. >> ed miliband is in charge of it. secondly, it is just a huge bottomless bucket into which pubuc bottomless bucket into which public money is going to be poured to create inefficiently. almost certainly, because it's government owned inefficiently, a large amount of subsidised

so—called clean, renewable energy, which will be more expensive than gas. and that is the fundamental thing. and our bills are going to go up and up and up and this is going to happen. >> this is going to happen anyway. >> under government policies, whether you use gb energy or not, it's not gb energy causing this. it'sjust not, it's not gb energy causing this. it's just that that's the vehicle they've chosen, that's the bottomless bucket that's they've chosen into which they're going to pour this, pour our money to deal with the facts. >> fossil fuels have been subsidised £20 billion more than renewables since 2015. >> absolutely untrue . >> absolutely untrue. >> absolutely untrue. >> there's a house of commons. >> there's a house of commons. >> it depends how you define subsidy. it's not a subsidy. >> it is for exploitation and other measures. that's been the level of subsidies always given with something like an oil field, where you have to spend a huge amount of money up front, and then you get your revenues later on. >> it's always been possible to get tax concessions on big businesses like that, and that's a public subsidy. it is not a pubuc a public subsidy. it is not a public subsidy. it's a public you collect your tax 75% tax.

once the oil is flowing, that's what they're collecting. >> if you if you look at all the money research on this comparing like for like there is a much more substantial public subsidy for fossil fuels than there is for fossil fuels than there is for renewables. >> well, we all know how much oil and gas is taxed. they're paying oil and gas is taxed. they're paying 75%, know how much it's taxed. and it's a huge tax take from that. we're going to get to some views after the break. but coming up the home office is in a bit of hot water. regarding what one might call a bit of an inflammatory tweet. and also we're going to have a look at the courts because they're delaying locking up criminals , delaying locking up criminals, apparently to help with prison overcrowding. could that possibly be the right move? see you

soon. right. welcome back. this is dewbs& co with me . emily carver. dewbs& co with me. emily carver. i am, of course, standing in for michelle dewberry and keeping me company this evening. is

conservative life peer in the house of lords, daniel moylan, who's just suffered a paper cut. i'm very sorry indeed. and the former labour minister, bill rammell. i'm sorry if you didn't want me to tell the nation that, but it's a hazard of the job. no, no, no, it's a hazard of the job. >> i'm willing to expose my frailties to my global audience, >> well, we were just at the start of the show . we were start of the show. we were discussing jeremy clarkson and his decision to bar keir starmer from his pub. we got into a bit of a disagreement over licences. well, never in the world has got in touch, she says. you don't have to be the licensee to bar anyone from a pub any more. any of the staff can refuse to serve anyone without giving any reason at all. yeah. well there you go. >> we've been told by a huge revolution in licensing brought in by tony blair to make us all more continental. >> you can boot anyone out if you fancy it. and on the issue of gb energy, rex got in touch says it's a weird ideological fantasy. it will own no assets but will spend billions from the taxpayer and pension funds. a

great white elephant. i guess that's similar to what you were saying about the bottomless bucket. >> yeah, the bottomless bucket . >> yeah, the bottomless bucket. >> yeah, the bottomless bucket. >> but kevin says i'm all for green energy if it makes us self—sufficient. well, i don't think anyone would disagree with that. it'sjust think anyone would disagree with that. it's just about how you get there, isn't it? and how long we are going to be dependent on things like gas and oil. of course it's going to be dependent on them forever. >> do you think? >> do you think? >> forever? oh yeah. >> forever? oh yeah. >> because when the wind isn't blowing and the sun isn't shining, you have to have a backup. what about nuclear? well, nuclear is great for what's called your baseload. the stuff that's always on. but but what you need is something you can ramp up when the wind stops blowing and ramping up and ramping down nuclear power stations is not advised . no, stations is not advised. no, it's best to run them in steady state to cover your the stuff that's always switched on the baseload . baseload. >> but having a ban on wind farms isn't a really sensible way to go forward, which is what we had under the last government. >> no, onshore, i wouldn't ban a wind farm, i wouldn't ban a wind farm, even though now we're going to have more expensive ones out at sea. right.

>> well, shall we move on? because the home secretary, yvette cooper, has been accused of suggesting that everyone, everyone arrested in connection with the riots must be guilty. yes. campaigners have urged the home office to delete this tweet, which referred to more than a thousand people being detained by the police and it refers to them as criminals. now this comes as magistrates are being ordered to delay locking up criminals to ease prison crowding . i guess the question crowding. i guess the question is here. should the home secretary apologise? i mean, this tweet has been left up for quite a while now, but is she presuming these people guilty before they've had a fair trial bill? >> no, i mean, this is a phoney story. i mean, one, it wasn't a tweet. yeah, it wasn't a tweet from yvette. it was a home office. >> well, she's the boss, isn't she? in a way, it didn't say that. >> all those arrested are guilty. it did not refer to any individual cases or any legal proceedings. no, but it gave a number. yeah, but on the on the broader point, i in terms of, you know, do we have sympathy for what happened a couple of weeks ago? i've got a very clear

view that immigration is too high and it needs to be reduced. and people should be able to debate and discuss that . but i debate and discuss that. but i have no sympathy for the people who were firebombing hotels, who were throwing bricks at the police and who were storming mosques, and we had to tackle that. >> well, i don't think anyone well, obviously there will be some people, but i don't think many people out there have any sympathy with that. the question is whether this is a responsible tweet from the home office, which yvette cooper runs, >> well, i agree with one thing on bill. i'm sure yvette cooper ihope on bill. i'm sure yvette cooper i hope yvette cooper isn't sitting in her office designing her own tweets and sending them out on. >> we're going seriously wrong. if she is on behalf of the home office, that would be a serious waste of her time. >> but, she is nonetheless, as you say , responsible. and it has you say, responsible. and it has stayed up a long time despite the objections. the fact of the matter is that for those people who are pleading guilty, this doesn't matter either way. but for those who will be choosing and there will be some who are

pleading not guilty, this clearly threatens to prejudice, a fair trial because if the home office is actually going out and saying effectively that anyone who's arrested is a criminal, which is the implication here, andifs which is the implication here, and it's more than the implication. it's very clear is a criminal, that is that is, going against the presumption of innocence, which is a sort of foundation of english law and of our freedoms. yes. if she said, you know, if i were if i've been arrested wrongly and i was nowhere near any of the riots , nowhere near any of the riots, i'm glad to say. but if i was arrested wrongly, and i was brought in front of a court and i pleaded not guilty, i'd be arguing seriously. i'm not even convinced i can get a fair trial as a result of this. and that's what the. that's why you need to be so careful about the language you use . and the home office has you use. and the home office has become this sort of thuggish organisation that puts out pub talk effectively. and she could have easily stepped in and said quietly to her colleague, to her

staff, look, just take that down and reword it. but she hasn't done so. i wonder why, in terms of criticisms of the home office, i'll trade blows with you. >> i think john reid once described the home office as unfit for purpose, and i think under successive governments, that's been the reality for far, far too long. but the first responsibility of government is to maintain law and order. >> no, i'm with you on that. >> no, i'm with you on that. >> i'd lock them all up. you've had a go, daniel. let me finish my point. you know, a couple of weeks ago, we came the closest i've seen to completely losing control of the situation in this country. and if the government, with the police, with the judiciary , hadn't acted judiciary, hadn't acted incredibly swiftly , got people incredibly swiftly, got people into court and started jailing them, i think the situation would have got completely out of control. the fact that we did, i actually think was a measured success. >> success. >> okay, well, this disagreeing in any of that, this is all irrelevant. >> the question is, when people come before the court, should the home office be pleading not guilty? should the home office have already predetermined that they are guilty and put that out? >> and if you look at the detail

of the words, that's not what the home office is. >> exactly what these criminals next to a number of arrests. >> if they'd just written criminals, it will be it doesn't refer these criminals, which makes it it doesn't refer to any specific cases or any refer to a specific cases or any refer to a specific case, isn't it? >> it's a it's a tweet. it's a tweet. what? it's doing, i think i think it's quite clear that it's not a suitable tweet for the home office to be putting out, and i am genuinely surprised that the home secretary hasn't said you know what, let's delete that one, because it's been up there for days. >> but this brings us on to the issue of overcrowding in our prisons, because yes, the criminal justice system has been very swift indeed, hasn't it, to lock up people involved in riots, whether it's online or in real life, throwing things at the police, going after mosques, whatever it was, whatever it was, they will be banged up. we know that, if they haven't already. however, at the same time, we know that on september the 10th we're going to have 2000 criminals released early. we know that on october the 22nd, we're going to see another

1700 people, criminals released early. we know magistrates courts are now being told, actually, don't bang people up yet because there's no space in prison. we are becoming less safe as a result of the situation in our criminal justice system and in our prisons. what on earth is the solution? >> i don't think there's evidence that we're becoming less safe as a result of that. >> what we've done there is we've just had a convicted child rapist escaping jail. the judge said, because of the crowded prisons, he'll get a suspended sentence . sentence. >> yeah. i don't i don't think that's a threat. >> surely . >> surely. >> surely. >> yeah, it is potentially a threat. but the fact is that everyone i'm looking now, not at the people being released early, what we've done is made prison sentences longer and longer and longer and longer over the last 20 years, without any real benefits to public safety. from that you might say, oh, well, there must be. we must be safer because they're in prisons. they can't be doing anything to us. but in fact, crime isn't isn't we aren't getting any safer. and the violent and dangerous crime

that we're really worried about here, we're not talking about accountancy fraud and so on, but the violent and dangerous crime we're talking about has not significantly improved. and it doesn't. if you bang people up for longer and longer, every every person who goes to jail, with the exception of the ipp prisoners, i've been campaigning for every person who goes to jail has an end to their sentence. there is a date on which they're they're going to come out. sometimes it's after 50%, sometimes it's after 70%. sometimes it's after 100%. now, for some people who are not thought to be threatening, it will be 40%. the moment when they come out, they come out whether they're dangerous or not. that's how it works. that's how the system works. you serve your sentence and you come out and it doesn't matter how dangerous you are. you walk out through that door that so we shouldn't be worried and we shouldn't be worried and we shouldn't be worried at all about prisoners being released. >> only 40% of the way through their sentence . we may as well their sentence. we may as well just close all, i don't think well, i don't know what good prison is actually doing, and i

think there's a lot of rethinking that should be done about prisons. >> but the fact is, we are going to release them anyway in a matter of weeks. in some cases, whether we release them at the end of 40% of their prison sentence or 50%, because most of these prisoners serve 50% of their sentence. if we're going to release them at the end of 40% rather than 50%, we're going to have to face this risk at some point in the very near future. i do not think there is a material addition to risk. >> well, that's fine in theory, but if i were the victim, if i were the victim of a crime and i saw the perpetrator of that crime being let out of prison early, or not even making it into a prison cell because of overcrowding, i'd be coming in furious and i. >> i think you'd be right to be concerned. and there are real concerns in this situation, but this is emphatically the responsibility of the last government. rishi sunak was told repeatedly by alex chalk, the justice secretary, that he had a choice. you either override local objections and build more prison places, or you agree to

early release. sunak shamefully did neither of those and just left it in the in—tray for the labour government to pick up when we came to power. now we are tackling it. i think the only alternative we had at this stage was early release . daniel stage was early release. daniel is right, there is always early release and part of the reason you have early release is to manage the prison population, that if you don't give prisoners an incentive to behave through early release , then you lose early release, then you lose control in the prisons. but, you know, reluctantly, we've had to agree to moving to 40%. there's agree to moving to 40%. there's a whole series of safeguards in place. but i wish we weren't here, but is the only job of prison to stop reoffending. >> i mean, a lot of people see it as as punishment and just to keep people off the streets, if there are a hazard to the rest of us. >> but there's a trade off, isn't there ? i mean, you can isn't there? i mean, you can punish people by saying jail for 30 years. you can punish them by saying to jail for ten years. now that has there's another side to that as well, which is the cost and the cost of

maintaining them in prison. that's the first thing. so there's a straightforward expenditure that you're saying we're going to lock somebody up for 30 years for a crime that, you know, a couple of decades ago they'd have got ten years, but now they'll get 30 years. so the first is you're going to have a huge cost on the public purse, which manifestly we're struggling to afford. and rachel reeves would be the first to probably to acknowledge that we're struggling to afford things. but the second thing is you're not doing any good to them, particularly from a punishment point of view. and you have to ask yourself about re—offending. most people who do violent crime, most of them tend to be young males. and there comes a point where you know you're in jail, you've done your ten years, you're 50, you're not a young male anymore. and the longer you stay in jail, all that's happening is you're becoming less and less fit to be returned to society. in situation. >> i take your broader fair point, and the reality is that about 30% of prisoners go to on reoffend when they leave prison. we've got to tackle that longer term. >> yes, but i think i think

we're almost talking cross purposes, because my point is that if you go through the criminal justice system and then you don't find yourself in a prison cell, how can that be working if under normal circumstances you would have been put in prison? i'm not sure. community orders suspension. >> and that's where i agree with you. this is a crisis. it's not a crisis of this government's making. >> they're the ones who are going to have to sort it out. they wanted the job. they wanted the job. and i do worry i'm agreeing with bill about this, in case you think there's any argument. >> i mean, labour did not create this these circumstances. they have inherited them. this is the one of the few things that you unlike the public finances, which were public perfectly transparent, rachel reeves knew everything about. but they did inherit this. they knew it was coming, but they did inherit it. and there was inaction on the part of the previous. >> and you can't build new prisons overnight and you can't build a prison overnight, i grant you all of that. >> but but i'm simply saying that that this measure, which i think is inevitable, is, is not going to should not cause public anxiety. and the second thing i'd say is it ought to give us

pause to think about whether we really have achieved anything by having longer and longer prison sentences over the last. >> i'm not sure. are you saying it shouldn't cause public anxiety is going to work? >> most of the people are going to stop people. most of the people being let out are not violent criminals. >> well, i hope not, i hope not. >> well, i hope not, i hope not. >> that's true. but also, daniel, you said at the beginning of this section that there's not a relationship between locking people up, and levels of crime, and that crime keeps going up. the reality is , keeps going up. the reality is, for about 30 years, across all categories of crime, with the tragic exception of knife crime, crime has generally gone down in this country, so, you know, i'm not sure is having some impact. >> i'm not sure about that. police only only solve about 5.5% of crimes. of course , some 5.5% of crimes. of course, some of those will include lesser crimes, but a lot of those will be serious crimes. and you know, there are huge problems. people call up the police and they don't get a proper response. people give up. you know, we have the recording of crime, but

that doesn't show all of it, does it? but coming up, are people sympathetic with labour's big pay deals with the trade unions? according to polling? many of you think they're totally unaffordable . dale totally unaffordable. dale vince, the eco tycoon and also big labour party donor. he thinks the way to solve all this is to tax the rich bankers more. we'll debate this

well welcome back. this is dewbs& co with me emily carver tonight standing in for michelle dewberry. thank you very much for joining us and keeping me forjoining us and keeping me company. is conservative life peerin company. is conservative life peer in the house of lords, daniel moylan and former labour minister bill rammell. thank you very much indeed. i want to get on to the trade unions because chancellor rachel reeves has said that there will be no blank cheques for public sector pay,

no blank cheques written for the trade unions. however, that is probably difficult for her to say, just as the train drivers have been offered about 15%. and just as the junior doctors have been offered 22%, which was much higher than a lot of people would have been expecting . are would have been expecting. are those payoffs to be? but she insists, no, they're going to be very sensible about these pay offers. but another difficulty for the labour party is that the unions, i think they can sense that perhaps they've got some strength in numbers at the moment and perhaps they can. they've got the ear of the labour party because they apparently now want to repeal or want the government to repeal every single anti—strike piece of legislation brought in since margaret thatcher. what would that look like? >> well, before margaret thatcher, you could have life life offices of trade unions, which you frequently did. you did not need a ballot in order to hold a strike. and you could

undertake secondary picketing. so you could actually bring, to bring, to bring to a halt the business of a firm that you were not in dispute with because you were trying in some way to put pressure on them, to put pressure on them, to put pressure on the firm that you were in dispute with. those are the main things that you would be bringing back straight away. and the main things that margaret thatcher changed, actually, i think most people, if you talk to young people nowadays and you say, you know , nowadays and you say, you know, you could have strikes with no ballots, they think it's normal to have a ballot before you have a strike. it's an exercise in democracy. if you said you could have a life president of a trades union who never had to be subject to, they'd say, well, that sounded like something from a tin pot dictatorship, because it does. so many of the reforms brought in by mrs. thatcher were really quite modernising and moderate. the big one was on that. they really objected to was secondary picketing, but people felt that was genuinely very, very unfair because if you were being picketed and you've got nothing to do with the dispute, there's nothing you can do. your business is being

brought to a halt, but you're not in dispute with the trade union. you can't settle with them. you can't negotiate a solution. and most people felt that was terribly unfair. so she had a lot of support for these changes. and i don't think people will want to. >> i mean, would that be madness? i mean, this is the fire brigades union. yeah. this is that is mostly blowing hot air before he gives up his at the congress. a lot of people would be in support of that sort of thing, wouldn't they? i mean, margaret thatcher is the devil to some of these people. >> well, look, the fire brigades union is at the leading left position amongst trade unions. >> do you think mick lynch would like that? >> let me be absolutely clear. there is no way, shape or form this labour government is going to agree to the repeal of the reforms that daniel has just outlined. you know, i had an uncle who worked on the factory line at vauxhall in luton and i remember the fear and intimidation he felt when strike decisions were taken by a show of hands in the factory yard. we are not going back to those days, certainly not under this

labour government. >> you'd be well dealt with. >> you'd be well dealt with. >> yeah. sent to coventry is the politest way of putting it. but in terms of these strikes, i mean, one, they're not inflationary. you talk about the rail dispute. that's 14.25% over rail dispute. that's14.25% over three years. >> you don't think that's generous with no strings attached. >> well hold on, it's less than inflation for those three years. and we had a come on bill. >> these are highly paid people. >> these are highly paid people. >> an economic imperative to settle these strikes. they had dragged on and on. you take the rail dispute. >> haven't been settled. if they'd been settled. and that was it done and dusted for you know, several years to come. okay, fine. you'd have an argument . but immediately we had argument. but immediately we had aslef announcing another series of strikes. we've also got border force saying the same. we've got the gps also speaking out. i mean, is there enough money really? hold on. >> there's a process of rebalancing, rebalancing taking place. what always happens under tory governments is you suppress pubuc tory governments is you suppress public sector pay that hits recruitment, retention and morale. >> so there's no recruitment problem amongst train drivers. >> hold on. let me finish. so

there is a rebalancing taking place. but i would not expect these level of pay rises in future years. but had we not settled them i think you know, the rail dispute had cost the taxpayer £850 million. we allow that to drag on hitting economic growth. no, we don't. and if you look at the polling evidence and that's what this story is based on, do you know what's costing the railways and the taxpayer? >> the fact that we have to subsidise them so much because people aren't using them? meanwhile, keir starmer says, oh, spend, spend all your time at home, don't go into the office. i mean, who's going to pay office. i mean, who's going to pay for the railway? >> emily, if you look at the polling evidence on which this story is based, at the core of it, a majority of people think the government was to right to settle the disputes. >> yes, it's a mixed picture. it's certainly a mixed picture. a lot of people concerned that these pay offers simply aren't affordable. some people saying labour has handled the problem well. 34%, 25% only say they think the deals would make future strikes more likely. i think there is a concern, though, that the government have

been too quick to give in to some of these pay demands , and some of these pay demands, and therefore that might make some of the union bosses or union members feel like every time they want something, they can just say, we're going to go on strike. and labour will just instantly give in. and you have to think the history, the history of the labour party and the history of labour governments is that we disagree with the trade unions from time to time and that will be the reality going forward. >> and there is no blank check, nothing to worry about. no, i'm nothing to worry about. no, i'm not saying there's nothing to worry about, but you know, you've got to handle this responsibly. and i think that's what the government has been doing. and the imperative was to get the country moving again. okay >> we're going to have to leave that there. but coming up, i'll come back to you after the break, i promise, i promise. but coming up, jack daniel's parent company, that's the whisky brand i believe is under for fire scrapping diversity targets all together. were they right to do so? and should other companies follow suit? stay

us. well, welcome back and jubes tavern has opened. i've got a nice glass of wine. cheers to you all. thank you very much. now, daniel, before the break, i rudely interrupted you because obviously bill was was going off and he wasn't letting anyone. he wasn't coming up for air propaganda. >> the fact is that labour had this plan. it wasn't in the manifesto. they had this plan beforehand. they had a donation of 100,000 from aslef. the first thing they do when they get into power is they send that woman with the red hair off to talk to them. the professional negotiators are pushed to one side. she's a take charge of the negotiations. they see her coming ten minutes later. she walks out and she's given them everything they want. if that isn't a blank cheque, i don't know what it is. rachel reeves saying there is no blank cheque. they've been given a blank cheque. and of course, it turns out they have another dispute that they've been festering away, that of course they're still on strike about. and she hadnt still on strike about. and she hadn't even twigged that, and the same will be true. i said at the same will be true. i said at the time, what will happen when the time, what will happen when the rmt the other big rail union, hear about this? well, of

course, we found out the next day they're they're threatening to go on strike over pay and conditions as well. so i think it was very foolish the way they went at it. >> do you know what, daniel? i'm actually in favour of public funding of political parties. so neither the labour party or the trade union or the tory party are reliant on donations. right? >> i do very quickly, very quickly before we end the show because i did say we were going to talk about jack daniel's because their parent company has become the latest business to ditch its diversity targets altogether. they're also going to stop taking part in the annual rankings of lgbt friendly companies. clearly, they've just decided unilaterally that this doesn't serve them. this is quite interesting, isn't it? because lots of people will be saying, oh , this is a backward saying, oh, this is a backward step. this is this is backwards. and you know, not progressive, but is it just common sense? >> look, the reality is that discrimination against black people and women over decades was totally unjust. well, jack daniel's got to do with it. oh, hold on and therefore, a variety of measures were taken to tackle

that. whether it's monitoring, pay that. whether it's monitoring, pay and publish it, whether it's discrimination legislation and those are good things. i think however, there needs to be by private organisations and public organisations a better explanation of where these policies come from and what their intention is. and i say that because there's fascinating polling by the more in common group that once you contextualise these policies and put them within the context of the workplace, 7 in 10 people support them. >> do you know what i think jack daniel's wouldn't be able to do this in this country. i don't think they'd be able to ditch all the dei diversity and inclusion stuff . it's very much inclusion stuff. it's very much regulated in this country. you know, i read somewhere that we have the most diversity and inclusion officers in per capita than any other country in the world in this country. well it's a massive industry, jack daniel's and so on. >> it's part of a private company, and generally i'd let private companies, have their own policies, do what they want,

and then people can judge them and then people can judge them and decide whether to buy their sickly sweet products or not, the, what worries me is that we're now getting regulators in this country , in regulated this country, in regulated industries, stretching out the financial conduct authority at the moment is consulting on how to put in place diverse diversity and inclusion policies. interestingly, they don't have equality in the financial services industry. but diversity, diversity , diversity diversity, diversity, diversity and inclusion policies and how to strengthen and impose them on the banks and the financial sector with no parliamentary backing for this at all, that i can find out . they say it can find out. they say it contributes to stability. there's no evidence of that . and there's no evidence of that. and it's all being pushed now by government agencies without any proper parliamentary backing or discussion. and i think it's got completely out of hand. because these policies, if they were working , they wouldn't be working, they wouldn't be needed, but they were working. >> they wouldn't be needed. do you know what? we've run to the end of the show already. it's been an absolute pleasure. bill

rammell and of course, lord daniel moylan with us this evening. thank you very much indeed.thank evening. thank you very much indeed. thank you. cheers to you and to everyone at home. i hope this has been a nice start to your weekend. i hope you have a lovely one. if you're if you're celebrating the weekend this weekend, have a wonderful one. i believe it is now. lee anderson who is up next, so stay tuned for that . for that. >> a brighter outlook with boxt solar sponsors of weather on gb news. >> good evening. welcome to your latest gb news weather update, brought to you from the met office through this weekend. it's going to remain fairly cool and wet for many of us on saturday. drier and a little bit warmer through the rest of the weekend though it's been a disruptive start to the day with storm lilian that's now moved away into the north sea. behind it is a clearer picture . we're it is a clearer picture. we're starting to pick up more of a southwesterly wind that will drag in some showers to parts of southwestern scotland, many western areas of scotland, in fact, as well as northern ireland through the first part

of the night. but over to the second part of the night, the early hours of saturday, we look to the south, where a band of very heavy rain moves into many southern counties, lots of cloud pulling in from the south as well. ahead of that across the wales, wales and the midlands. now there is a rain warning in force for many eastern areas of england, particularly the south and east, where we could see around 60mm of rain falling throughout saturday morning and with lots of people travelling around, there could be some disruption on the roads and delays to travel further north. a slightly drier picture, but still some pretty heavy showers are likely for parts of scotland and northwestern england. a dner and northwestern england. a drier picture over the far north of scotland, as well as the north and east across parts of aberdeenshire and the moray coast, and here it should stay relatively dry and bright through much of the day, but showers will continue to affect the north and west, as well as some areas of wales and southwestern england . now the southwestern england. now the heaviest rain will clear away to the far south and east, but showers will likely move into these areas later on in the afternoon. so a pretty mixed picture for most of us on saturday with quite brisk winds

still through the day. it's still through the day. it's still going to feel on the cooler side of things. we could see temperatures sticking around in the mid teens for many of us on sunday it looks a little bit warmer. there will be more in the way of sunshine, particularly through the morning across parts of england and wales, but the next batch of rain will spread into parts of the north west. it doesn't look quite as heavy, but will introduce quite a lot of cloud and some quite widespread drizzly rain. more widely dry as we look ahead to monday and temperatures will start to rise much closer to average. and we're looking at the mid 20s by tuesday. >> looks like things are heating up. boxt boilers

gb news. >> welcome to lee anderson's

real world. and tonight i'm joined by matthew stadler and political commentator, the former ukip leader henry bolton. broadcaster and journalist alastair stewart, and tiktok sensation jessie lefteri. but first, let's go to the . news. first, let's go to the. news. >> very good evening to you. back to lee in just a few minutes. first, though, a look at the headlines tonight and the top story hannah lynch, the final missing passenger to be recovered from a sunken superyacht , is being described superyacht, is being described tonight as cheeky, endlessly caring and unintentionally hilarious. her sister has paid tribute to her after a body believed to be that of the 18 year old daughter of tech tycoon mike lynch, was brought to shore. family have also released this photograph of mr lynch and his daughter. it comes as six bodies have been found in the search of the wreckage, taking the total number of confirmed

people to have died to