there. all have our suspicions there. former conservative and ukip mp douglas carswell will join me to discuss why we are seeing what is an apparent spiralling of anger across the country. north and south—east and west. and us podcast host kim iverson will join me to discuss the us democratic national convention. the spectacle that was as kamala harris promises, a new way forward. all of that and more coming up. but first, an update on the latest news headlines . on the latest news headlines. >> very good evening to you. back to neil oliver in just a few minutes. first, though, a look at the headlines at 6:00. german prosecutors have named the man suspected of carrying out a knife attack that killed three and injured eight others as isa al—haj. the 26 year old

syrian national is accused of being a member of a terrorist organisation overseas and of sharing islamic state ideology. he's also been charged with three counts of murder and attempted murder. the suspect, who had applied for asylum , who had applied for asylum, reportedly handed himself into police following that attack. well, a church service has been taking place today in germany to remember and to pay respects to those who lost their lives. the victims include a 56 year old woman and two men, aged 56 and 67. four of those wounded are still in a life threatening condition in hospital to the middle east, and officials from hezbollah insist the militant group isn't looking for a full scale war. that's after a rocket and drone attack against israel earlier this morning. they say it was in retaliation for the killing of a top commander last month. israel has launched pre—emptive strikes on southern lebanon in what it called an act of self—defence. israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu says

israel would take all measures necessary to defend itself, and today's attacks come as egypt is hosting a new round of talks aimed at ending the conflict between israel and hamas . a between israel and hamas. a british man is missing, feared, buned british man is missing, feared, buried under rubble after a russian missile hit a hotel used by journalists in the east of ukraine. he was part of a six strong team from the reuters news agency. the ukrainian and a us national were also injured in that strike. reuters have released a statement. they say they are urgently seeking more information, working with the authorities in kramatorsk and supporting colleagues and their families. back here at home, the prime minister is set to warn that things will get worse in the uk before they get better. in a speech on tuesday this week, sir keir starmer is likely to say that there are no quick fixes to remedy what he'll call the rubble and ruin left by the conservatives. he'll also continue to argue that the last government concealed the true state of public finances, though

the conservatives have responded and accused labour of fabricating a financial black hole to clear the way for tax rises. they're also calling on the prime minister to reverse cuts to winter fuel payments, arguing it would leave pensioners out in the cold. immigration enforcement officers have detained 75 suspects suspected of illegal working, in part of a long crackdown this week. officers visited more than 225 businesses in the past week, particularly car washes, with over 120 receiving civil penalties for employing illegal workers. the home secretary says the government will ensure that those who break the rules face the full force of the law. businesses found to be employing people illegally can face fines of up to £45,000 per worker for the first offence, and then up to £60,000 per worker for any repeat offenders . those are the repeat offenders. those are the latest gb news headlines for now. i'll be back with you at 7:00. now though, it's back to

neil 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 . forward slash alerts. >> it's getting more and more like the hunger games out there. you know those movies and the novels that came from about a dystopian post—war america run by an utterly corrupt, all powerful government presiding with impunity over the lives of the populations of 13 communities where starving people live as slave labour. and every year must send children to fight to the death as the fodder of reality tv entertainment. the elite of the so—called capital, the seat of power where life is altogether different, are obscenely rich in powdered wigs and outrageous garb. caricatures of vanity and wealth, ogling the gladiatorial combat of other

people's children, feigning empathy and emotion while they do so. the first hunger games novel was published in 2008, and the first film came about four years later, and they were surely meant as satirical comment on the absolute corruption indulged by the absolutely powerful . by now, i absolutely powerful. by now, i say it's getting harder and harder to watch the real world elite caricature , politicians, elite caricature, politicians, billionaires, shameless movie villains, peacocking, preening and pontificating , apparently and pontificating, apparently for their own amusement. how can we be expected to watch the show, have our noses rubbed in the shameless, all but declared corruption without wondering when satirical fiction became indistinguishable from the reality we're living in or living through. many times in recent years, i've offered my opinion that the world is held hostage by those determined to centralise power bent on imposing an anti—human agenda, an agenda born in the main of their fear and loathing of

regular people , an agenda that regular people, an agenda that will lead to death on an unthinkable scale, and the enforcing of lesser hobbled lives for the rest . when i've lives for the rest. when i've said anti—human, i've been thinking about individual people, individual faces at threat of death or hardship. by now, my view has changed until it's humanity itself that seems to me in deadly peril. it's humanity itself that seems to me in deadly peril . whatever to me in deadly peril. whatever survives into the future, whatever populations persist after agenda 2030, and the rest may not be the humanity we've known. i'm so troubled by the plight of humanity. i bothered to look up the etymology of the word itself since the 14th century or thereabouts , century or thereabouts, humanity. the word has encompassed notions like kindness, graciousness , kindness, graciousness, consideration. for others, it refers to life on earth, to the capacity for pity. it means the whole human race, all colours, all creeds. it's about humane conduct. it's about philanthropy and not the full philanthropy

that only further enriches the billionaires who only give to receive, speculate, to accumulate . humanity refers to accumulate. humanity refers to the essential quality of being human. it also takes in the thought of politeness, which is a word that comes from the jewellery trade and means to poush jewellery trade and means to polish and complete, to make the best of something rare and precious. the sickening spectacle of what seems like real life hunger games has been before us, not only but also in gruesome, dehumanising technicolour. at the democratic national convention, a veritable cavalcade of ghouls taking turns on stage to say things surely even they themselves can't believe, even as their lips and tongues are shaping the words along with every other currency, the truth is utterly devalued . the truth is utterly devalued. now. the truth is merely whatever the powerful say, it is, and whatever it is today, it will likely be something else. tomorrow so pay attention. there was space and time made for the

effective humiliation of president biden. t—shirts and placards. on the one hand declaring we love you, joe, while the blood from his having been stabbed in the back by his own party metaphorically puddled on the floor at his shuffling feet, getting for on four years of joe biden's presidency, four years of democratic party government over the united states of america and of much of the world besides, to all intents and purposes. and yet, one by one, the democrat old guard seemed able to make out as though it had really been their nemesis, donald trump in the white house all along . how else white house all along. how else to explain why or how everything wrong from the illegal migrants flooding across the nation's southern border, the state of the economy, the state of health, the standing of the united states in the wider world, everything is apparently still trump's fault. how can that be.7 if still trump's fault. how can that be? if we're supposed still to believe that the truth counts for anything at all? hillary clinton, that bloodiest of old hawks actually said, and i'm not making this up,

hawks actually said, and i'm not making this up , that biden had making this up, that biden had brought decency, dignity and competence back to the white house. so how come you kneecapped him then? one of the opening speakers said a trump administration would. and again, without the faintest whiff of irony, weaponize the judiciary against political opponents. this was spoken with all apparent sincerity from the heart of a democrat party that has jail time hanging over trump's head. a sword of damocles even as her eyes blazed and her fists clenched in righteous anger, michelle obama actually said, with no discernible trace of irony, that kamala harris is, quote, the most qualified person ever to seek the office of the presidency , one of the most presidency, one of the most dignified, the embodiment of stories americans tell each other about america . i couldn't other about america. i couldn't say for sure, but i doubt if even kamala harris's own nearest and dearest actually believed any of that. i watched all the way to democrat anointed and crowned candidate kamala harris's speech , and listened to harris's speech, and listened to

more empty promises of utopia jam tomorrow from someone who's beenin jam tomorrow from someone who's been in the white house for four years, and yet done none of the things she's pledging now all form and zero substance, a clickbait speech based on falsehoods welcome only for the faithful who so fear the truth. they would rather stick with the lies any reasonable person looking on would surely draw the conclusion that the path into the future offered by the democrats is paved only with the lies of the past, lies and fear are all they have to offer. i challenge anyone to watch these people, maybe with the sound off, maybe with the hunger games on a screen alongside and tell the difference between the two. and lest anyone might feel sorry for biden, bear in mind at 291 page report published following work by three house committees, alleges the biden family and its associates are $27 million ficher associates are $27 million richer on account of peddling access to the so—called big guy while he was vice president to

barack obama. talk about elites mired in obscene corruption. it's not just the us, of course. it's not just the us, of course. it's not. but nobody does it better. i say again that we've arrived as a species at the edge of the abyss. it's humanity itself that's teetering. we've reached a point in our journey reached a point in ourjourney together when we must ask and pardon the tortured grammar, who even are we in the hunger games? the poor, which is almost everyone, are daily threatened with death and starvation . bread with death and starvation. bread features as a symbol of the essential stuff of life upon which the poor must depend. the fundamental foundation all around us are signs , around us are signs, intentionally placed or not, that humanity must remember fundamental things all over the world and here at home, to more and more people evidently feel the absence of, and therefore the absence of, and therefore the need for meaning in their lives above and beyond hollow promises. man can kind, cannot live by bread alone. but the elite even have their eyes on that as well. their hands grasping after the land, the arable land . billionaire arable land. billionaire philanthropist bill gates the

bill gates, who is no farmer in the same way that he's no scientist, no virologist, no immunologist, no doctor that bill gates holds well over a quarter of a million acres of farmland in the us. why? he has all sorts of plans from the food we might eat, the seeds we might sew . all across europe, farmers sew. all across europe, farmers are in open revolt against the elite eu intentions to force them off their land , and them off their land, and therefore out of the business of growing food . in india, it's growing food. in india, it's been reported that increasing numbers of farmers are taking their own lives out of desperation at their inability to scratch a living by growing food . environmental activist food. environmental activist vandana shiva has fought for decades to safeguard that most humble and yet that most potent fundamental symbol and promise of life being the seed . quote. of life being the seed. quote. everything comes from the seed, but we have forgotten that the seed isn't a machine. we think we can engineer life. we can change the carefully organised dna of a living organism, and

there will be no wider impact. but this is a dangerous illusion. close quote 60% of the world's seeds are sold by just four countries. four companies. the monoculture forced upon the farmers and farmland of india. seed patented as yet more property might be a warning of the fate awaiting all life, humanity included in a future where technology rules and people are dispensable. this much is true, not just of seeds, but of us, of humanity, soil fertility is falling, failing all over the world. no farmers means no food, no food means no people . the sustained and people. the sustained and deliberate attack on humanity, what it means to be human has come down to the most basic fundamentals of life itself all life, as well as destroying the fertility of the soil from which comes our food, our own natural fertility is in steep decline as well. i've lost track of how many times i've talked on here about how nation after nation across the world is failing to produce enough babies, even to keep their indigenous populations going . that one

populations going. that one nafion populations going. that one nation after another is on the path to literal extinction. and yet back at the de facto real world hunger games, where that old ghoul hillary clinton, told her audience straight faced that her audience straight faced that her own presidential hopeful, kamala harris, cares about children and families, a mobile abortion and vasectomy clinic provided by planned parenthood . provided by planned parenthood. great rivers was doing brisk trade close by. abortion is a controversial subject, demanding serious consideration, but it seemed hardly surprising that the presence of a mobile unit offering such services trivialising life and death at such a time alongside such an event, drew accusations from commentators that the american political left so called left, is shadowed by a death cult . the is shadowed by a death cult. the only policies you hear harris talk about are abortion and the rights of the lgbtq lobby . rights of the lgbtq lobby. inside and outside the venue are thousands and thousands of people wearing the blue face masks. those still trapped in the covid era. more lies. i

mentioned the idea of maybe watching those political speeches alongside clips of the elites of the hunger games, and it might also be instructive to review images of detainees at guantanamo bay. those captured dunng guantanamo bay. those captured during the war on terror that never ends. like all wars. now. and notice how blue face masks were mandatory. they're part of the demoralising and dehumanising of those others. the state wanted to break and brainwash into submission . brainwash into submission. here's the thing for so long we've been told wrong is right. down is up. lies are truth. the dnc was slick and polished as any oscars, and the oscars were abandoned as fakery. long ago. the hollowness, the falsehood, bare faced from the highest levels has cut millions adrift from the truth. what humanity is, it's more important than ever that we question the script every word. because in the real life hunger games, it's our lives that are being played with. my guest, my panellist , my

with. my guest, my panellist, my chum tom buick, with me for the duration of all of this, tom, you've heard me bang on. i don't know how many times i've got all sorts of things, but in this one i would say basically all form and no substance at the dnc, to put it mildly. and no substance at the dnc, to put it mildly . were you did you put it mildly. were you did you buy it ? buy it? >> hi, neal. good to be back on with you, i have to say, as, as your monologues go, that was definitely one of the more pessimistic monologues i've heard from you. yes, it was about what's going on in american politics, but there was a lot there going back to the 14th century about human progress. and just in case anyone tuning in that thinks, you know, the four horse of the apocalypse is about to descend on them . i mean, we're both keen on them. i mean, we're both keen historians. i do think it's just worth reminding ourselves that the last hundred years that we've lived in objectively, economically and socially, probably one of the most progressive century for any human civilisation to have lived through. and i say that in terms of if you go back to 1209 real incomes only went up once after the black death in the 13th century, the population of this

world has grown by a hundredfold. and i just thought , hundredfold. and i just thought, listening to your monologue there, you sound a bit like thomas malthus. you know that we're about to own the world is about to never let anyone, never let anyone in american politics. >> i think too few people are the problem. and i would stand. i would man the barricades against the malthusians good. >> because i, you know, i think you and i, in terms of the technology , over the last sort technology, over the last sort of 50 years. i mean, you know, 1900, the average life expectancy was 32 years old. globally. it was 47 in the united states and britain. so you and i wouldn't be around if we were to see the changes now. >> so fast. tom, look at what's happened so quickly in terms of loss of liberty, loss of freedom, contraction of rights and the demonising of world population. you know, one powerful, strong voice after another says there's too many people. and agenda 2030 is the only way to save the planet. and to hell with the people that have to be sacrificed along the way. >> just briefly coming back to them, the democratic national

convention point. i mean, i agree with you. i mean, look, these anyone who's tuned in over these anyone who's tuned in over the decades to these conventions, both for the republicans and for the democrats, i mean, they are showbiz par excellence. i mean, there's nothing new about that. but i think what you're really getting at and this is something we've discussed on the show and you have with your guests many, many times, is there's a sort of crisis really in our liberal democratic polis and in our elites, we were brought up to believe that those who we put into power serve us, and if we don't like what they do, we can get rid of them. and when you look across the pond, as indeed here, we had with our recent general election, the reason why people talk about uni parties or as, you know , also described as as, you know, also described as two, two sides of the same backside, shall we say, in terms of our politics, people are frustrated that they don't have the kind of agency that they thought they believed they have by exercising that choice at the ballot box, don't you think? >> to me, it seems there's a

there's a shift again where we all know we grew up knowing that politicians would say anything and sell their granny for tuppence to get into power. you know, that's not new, but i think it almost feels now as though the people , the camps, though the people, the camps, the bases of be it republican or democrat, labour or conservative, are actually buying into the fact that they're being lied to and that we've actually been or so many people have been trained not to care that you're being lied to . care that you're being lied to. >> but you look at our political class across the west, they don't trade anymore on big visions and big ideas about where they want to take the population and take the country. if you think about even our recent past, you know, the welfare state, people can disagree with whether it's effective or not. but it was a brilliant vision to get rid of ignorance, squalor, poverty . ignorance, squalor, poverty. john f kennedy, people at heart. >> agenda 2030 has the planet and the future at heart. yeah because again, it's bakhmut. >> i mean, frankly, i would argue some of those people are very malthusian in their view about the future of the world because, you know, they they treat climate change, the

so—called climate emergency, again, like the four horse of the apocalypse. and, you know, we're all going to sort of collapse in a heap of a boiling planet tomorrow. and that is not the case. even when you look at the case. even when you look at the scientific data. but i'm back to this sort of idea that we no longer have political leaders who can give us a sense of what will life be like for me and my children and my grandchildren in ten years time? name me a single politician that you listen to that gives you that kind of vision. >> but i think, i think they don't care that we know that they are lying , which i find they are lying, which i find most troubling of all. we're on to the first break, after which i'll be speaking with andrew doyle gb news own andrew doyle about whether there is an ongoing erosion of freedom of speech in britain . you're speech in britain. you're watching the neil oliver show on gb news

welcome back to the neil oliver show. now let's talk about free speech and i'll make no bones about it. it's something that's very close to my heart and it's a topic that i often try to grapple with on here, my next guest is gb news presenter and host of the show free speech nation. andrew doyle. and andrew has by now spent years years discussing debating , cogitating and arguing debating, cogitating and arguing about this important topic. thanks very much for joining me about this important topic. thanks very much forjoining me , andrew. >> thanks for having me, neal. >> thanks for having me, neal. >> i, i listened again , i >> i, i listened again, i listened for the second time to a speech that you gave, i think, at one of the oxford colleges. i'm not quite sure. and it was about freedom of speech. and you cited, milton and paradise lost . cited, milton and paradise lost. i wonder if you could, just, develop that thesis a little bit for us just now,

>> well, the reason i was talking about john milton is because people obviously know him for his poetry, for paradise lost, one of the greatest epic poems in the english language, but he also wrote a very important tract on freedom of speech called areopagitica, which was a response to the state attempting to license, as in censor, all printed publications. the idea was that all printed publications would have to pass by the state, and he was effectively writing a treatise on freedom of the press and, by extension, freedom of speech“ and, by extension, freedom of speech,. and he made lots of terrific arguments about why freedom was so important and why liberty generally is so important. and i was talking about that because i wanted to explain that there's been a long history of great thinkers in this country attempting to defend free speech, and that actually you don't have free speech, and then you've got it forever. every successive generation has to keep on arguing it, and that's why i like to draw on thinkers such as milton or john stuart mill, who have done this, who have been

here before and from what's happening at the moment in this country. we have to have these arguments again. i don't think it's ever been more urgent. >> i also in, in preparing to talk to you, i rewatched relistened to rowan atkinson's what i thought was an excellent ten minutes that he that he gave relatively recently touching on many things about the importance of the crucial importance of freedom of speech. but he also made a point of saying that there ought to be, there needs to be. there must be freedom to be offensive, which i thought was, well, yeah, absolutely, absolutely . absolutely. >> so the major problem that we face at the moment is that there is a new, ideological movement whose core belief is that language shapes our perception of reality. and therefore you need to kerb language that can cause offence. and the idea is that words and violence are effectively therefore, the same thing. and that's an ideology that has caught on in all major

political parties, and it needs to be challenged, because, i mean, this is, i think, what the current labour government are doing in terms of their crackdown on on free speech. you know, a lot of the people tweeting and posting things on social media are saying really vile things. but there is an assumption that those vile things incite violence , lead to things incite violence, lead to violence, that words and violence, that words and violence are the same, that assumption has been tested over many decades of research. it's called media effects theory. we know that the public doesn't, in fact, act on cue to the words that they read online. it's simply not true. there's no evidence for it. and that really disturbs me. so i think we need to have a real a serious conversation about this assumption that there is a causal link between people saying horrible things, which is the price you pay for free speech and actions that are taken by people who read those things. >> now, as you see, andrew, there is a long history of people seeing the need to challenge any threat, any threat

to freedom of speech. but nonetheless, it keeps on happening. and at the moment, as you, as you rightly touch on this idea of people being jailed, given substantial custodial sentences for posts on social media. and so clearly there is i wonder if i wonder if our generation's fight for freedom of speech and you've been , you of speech and you've been, you know, you're a principled campaigner in all of that, flagging up the threat to freedom of speech. it feels as if we're just losing the battle that we're clearly not doing enough. >> i think part of the reason we're losing the battle is that this is not a left right issue anymore. you know, i think, the conservatives implemented a lot of policies and laws that i deem to be threatening to our liberty. for instance, they introduced the police crime and sentencing bill, where they wanted to give the police the power to arrest protesters if they were noisy, which, of course, most protesters are , and course, most protesters are, and then you had the online safety bill, which was a conservative, legislation which now the labour

party are revamping. they're making it even more draconian than it currently is. and as you say, we seem to be losing it because successive governments across the world, particularly the western world, are implementing the most draconian hate speech measures. we've seen it with the hate speech bill in scotland. ireland actually has a definition in its in its new bill, its proposed bill. the definition of hatred is hatred. so it's a completely circular definition, which of course can be applied and exploited by any future government. this is the key question that i think people aren't reckoning with. we see these horrible things online and we think, oh, i just want those to go away . i wish those the to go away. i wish those the people who said that they're obviously repugnant people. what's wrong if we lock them up? but you're asking the wrong question. they're the question. they're the question that you should be asking is, which is preferable? which is safer? having a society in which people are free to say whatever they want. and that includes people saying really, really despicable things on the one hand, or on the other hand , empowering the the other hand, empowering the state to imprison its citizens

because of what they say. and anyone who knows anything about history will know about the dangers of that latter option. that's the argument that we need to be having. it's not the argument that we are having tom buick with me in the studio here. >> what, is it is it is it sinister? you know, is it sinister? you know, is it sinister? this despite all our efforts on here and many people andrew doyle lots of people all around the world are flagging the threat to freedom of speech. and yet there's this in this constant, constant pressure upon that precious freedom. >> absolutely. and andrew hit the nail on the head when he said, we're not necessarily asking the right questions around this debate. i mean, someone that's obviously from the education world. i'm very disturbed by what bridget phillipson, the new secretary of state for education, has done by, in effect , state for education, has done by, in effect, suspending a law that was going to come to in protect free speech on campus. again where's her evidence that

this is going to be a burden on higher education? all we're asking for is to ensure that academics are not hounded out of their jobs, either by other academics or , more likely, by academics or, more likely, by students. because of legal opinions that they hold and what i struggle with this debate because i would describe myself as a free speech advocate, not necessarily a free speech absolutist. in other words, you know, i do think there's a concept of a limit to free speech after the break, former conservative and ukip mp douglas carswell will join me to discuss whether we are seeing a spiralling of anger across the uk. >> i think we are. the question is who's driving it

welcome back to the neil oliver

show. next i want to discuss the anger that we see all around us, in in the public square in relation to riots which have been all across the country. and to ask what it shows about whether there's a deep rooted frustration amongst the public. i would say there certainly is. and the question that i'm particularly interested in is who's driving it? joining me to discuss this is former conservative and ukip member of parliament douglas carswell. thank you for joining parliament douglas carswell. thank you forjoining us parliament douglas carswell. thank you for joining us from mississippi . mississippi. >> hello, lovely to be on your show. thank you for having me. >> no, it's a pleasure to hear from you. i'd like really simply to kick off by having you give us your take on the clearly spiralling unrest up and down the country, north and south—east and west. what's your what's your interpretation of it ? what's your interpretation of it? >> a lot of it is justified anger because the british people

have been lied to systematically. they have been lied to over immigration, both about the numbers and about the consequences . on numerous consequences. on numerous occasions, the british people have voted to reduce mass immigration. they did so in 2010. they did so in 2015. they did so in 2017. they did so in 2019. and far from controlling immigration, the conservative government allowed immigration to get out of control to the point where today in britain, one in every 27 people has arrived. in the past year. the year to date from june 2024, the previous year, the government allowed in over 1.1 million long term settlers through the visa scheme . and that's only scheme. and that's only legitimate legal migration . legitimate legal migration. that's not to not even taking into account the large scale illegal migration such as that that comes across the channel every day . so i think there is

every day. so i think there is justifiable anger that the composition of the country is being changed demographically in a very short space of time. now, the second great lie about immigration is that immigration is a benefit. now immigration can be a benefit. i myself am talking to you from the united states where i'm a migrant. i should say a legal migrant. but legal migration can be very beneficial to a country. but you need to take into account not only the skills and the net value of the migrants . you need value of the migrants. you need to take into account questions of cultural compatibility. and the truth is that if you accept large numbers of people into the country who have values that are not western, that have values that conflict with western assumptions about knowledge and the role of orthodoxy in society, you're creating long term division in society , and term division in society, and people know this, and they can see the evidence with their own eyes and they're fed up with it. they've been lied to. and i think the anger is really fuelled by the idea that somehow

there's something illegitimate and untoward and immoral about them complaining about this. douglas, i'm also, i think people have every right to feel angry. i don't think it's intentional. i think the stupidity and the naivety of western elites in believing in cultural relativism is the root cause of , of the problem, cultural relativism is the root cause of, of the problem, in terms of why we can't get to gnps terms of why we can't get to grips with migration, it's not quite true that, i mean, there are tens of millions of people around the world who would like to come and live in, in the west, and there are tens of millions of people around the world who've got very good justification for wanting to abandon their rather horrible lives in tyrannical third world countries and want to move into the west, but we simply can't accept them all. we cannot be a lifeboat for everyone in the world who wishes to come here, because they've got a horrible government, if you were to accept people simply because they're looking for a better life or trying to escape from tyranny, the west would become unrecognisable in a very short space of time. it's also not quite true to say that people from all backgrounds are moving. what's happening is people from non—western societies are trying

to get into western societies. and i think this gives a lie to the western elites idea that somehow all cultures are the same. no clearly people are voting with their feet and leaving those parts of the world that have bad political cultures that have bad political cultures that produce bad outcomes . and that produce bad outcomes. and they're moving to western. and i would say anglosphere societies. this is the reason why people are moving from france to the uk, because western and particularly anglosphere culture is more conducive to a happy, successful life. so i think we need to recognise. >> bear with me, douglas. tom buckin >> bear with me, douglas. tom buck in the studio. do you think do you think that do you accept that stupidity and naivety are enough of an explanation? this is a this is a this is a tsunami that's been building for a long time. do you agree with douglas carswell that it's just been generational naivety. >> there's no doubt that our political class has lied to us over the last two decades about migration. i think douglas is absolutely right on that. i think where i sort of depart from his narrative and actually

people who are generally perceived to be on the on the right of this debate is i don't think all the explanations are purely cultural. i think they're also economic in the sense that take this country, why actually have successive conservative governments not been able to bnng governments not been able to bring net migration down? why? because we have a treasury orthodoxy that prizes labour supply as a means of growing labour supply. to grow the size of the cake gdp. in other words, we've got governments , we've got governments, successive governments that are not interested in growing the productive capacity of the british people, ensuring that they get a fair wage from the profits that get produced by our companies . they're on the side companies. they're on the side of big business often, and employers generally, who can see the benefits of, frankly, what's known as global labour arbitrage, where effectively you hold down the real incomes of people in this country and in other western countries in that way. so i, i look at this more through an economic lens than a

cultural lens, because, you know, someone that's lived all over the world, i think in general, people of all cultures, faiths and creeds do want to live side by side with their neighbours. >> douglas carswell, do you do you see the merit of tom buick's economic emphasis, in addition to the point that you were making about about about about culture and, and so on? >> i think tom makes a very good point. and adds a further layer of explanation. and i think he's absolutely right. if you look at the atrocious productivity growth in britain over the past 20 years, part of it is because, as he says, big business, big corporate interests and the treasury have wanted to import cheap labour into this country, and during the referendum campaign on brexit, interestingly , the leader of the interestingly, the leader of the remain campaign at one point came close to admitting that if britain were to leave the european union and limit immigration, it would be a bad thing, he suggested, because big business might have to pay british workers more so i think we can clearly see, corporations

and the treasury have an interest in importing cheap laboun interest in importing cheap labour, undoubtedly, but i don't think we can separate the economic from the cultural. i would argue that actually , would argue that actually, economic success is contingent upon cultural variables and there's a reason, you know, not not all cultures are the same. and not all cultures are capable of producing successful free market economies, and that you can't ultimately separate out the economic from the cultural. but i, i don't disagree with much of what tom says. >> douglas carswell i'm just running short of time right now, but you're going to be joining us to pick up to and develop this conversation in the online continuation of this show. so but thank you very much for the contribution you've made so far, and i'll look forward to picking the conversation up a little bit later. another break, after which us podcast host kim iverson will join me to discuss the us democratic convention. the spectacle that was .

welcome back to the neal oliver show. it's now time to allow our eyes to be drawn like those of magpies to that bright, shiny, sparkly thing that was the dnc. the democrat national convention. another healthy dose of us politics. and for that purpose, i'm joined by us podcast host kim iverson. kim are you there? i mean, where do we begin ? what did you make of we begin? what did you make of the whole spectacle in its entirety as a piece ? entirety as a piece? >> well, it was a spectacle. that's that's a great way to phrase it. that it was just a giant, sparkly spectacle because there was really no purpose to

it except to fundraise. except to rally the troops. the democratic voting troops. that's what it was about. this wasn't an actual convention where a where people actually cast their votes and a candidate is selected. this was all ceremonial. kamala harris was already, you know, they did the vote a couple of weeks ago dunng vote a couple of weeks ago during a virtual roll call. so this was all just pomp and circumstance at this point. so it was just a way to fundraise. that's what they were doing. they were trying to present their vision for america. i, you know, their vision was we don't want donald trump. it's pretty much the same vision that they've been presenting since 2016. so nearly ten years now of we just don't want donald trump. we're not going back. was the message, which i thought had a strange ring and cadence to it. >> somehow this we're not going back. but i was struck particularly by the way in which you would have imagined you'd have been forgiven for thinking that, kamala harris was speaking as someone trying to oust an incumbent president. it was as

though she wasn't in power and was trying to get into power. and you think, well, apart from four years, for the last 12 years, you guys have had all the levers of power , right? levers of power, right? >> right. yeah, yeah, they're very much still running on. we have to defeat donald trump. and so they are, rather than focusing on their own record . focusing on their own record. but you could understand why they wouldn't be their record does have you know it's a bit spotty and it's not exactly something that people can point to. now i don't in fairness, and i'm not a fan of either party, quite frankly. but in fairness, i do think that the future will kind of tell what happened dunng kind of tell what happened during the biden administration. i think a lot of the policies that biden and harris put really beau biden well, that biden and harris put really beau biden well , actually, that biden and harris put really beau biden well, actually, i don't even know. i, i would say it was biden, but i'm not actually sure who's been running the government for the last four years. but the policies that they implemented, i don't think we're going to see the fruits of those labours until way later.

and i mean, the infrastructure projects that might actually end up being beneficial for america. but a lot of the other stuff, the stuff that is that's imminent, the stuff that we can point to, that has immediate consequences have been not so great. the economy is not doing well, even though they're trying to claim that it is. crime rates are up, even though they're trying to claim crime rates are down. there's we have massive inflation. they're trying to tell us everything's just fine. you know, there's a lot of them telling us things are fine, don't worry about anything. but the reality for americans is we're seeing the changes with our own eyes. we're experiencing it in our daily lives. so their record right now is not that great. so you could understand why they would instead run on rather than, hey, look, in ten years you might see those infrastructure projects that we implemented. that's not really something to run on. instead, they have to say, we've got to defeat donald trump. he's the bad guy. but you're right. it sounds like he's the one who's beenin sounds like he's the one who's been in power. you know , been in power. you know, according to them and why things are so bad and they're going to

turn things around. >> what did you make of the commentators on the mainstream in large part, who seem to be parroting this notion that it was it wasn't about that. >> it was about vibes and not policies, which, when you're talking about someone coming in to be the leader of the of the free world, that it's just vibes and no policies. are you serious? >> yeah. it's all joy. it's just joy- >> yeah. it's all joy. it's just joy. everything's so everybody's joyful. this is all joy is what we keep hearing over and over again. it is almost like a gaslighting campaign. rather than actually focusing on policies, harris hasn't put forward really any policies, she did mention a couple of policies. those have been ridiculed. things like price controls, but otherwise there have been no real policies put forward. it'sjust have been no real policies put forward. it's just we don't want donald trump. we're not going to go back to the to the years of donald trump. but americans were actually prosperous in the years of donald trump. so a lot of americans want to go back to that. they say, all right, i put up with the guy. he might tweet

some weird things here and there, and he might be crass, but at least my life was better. and i wasn't experiencing the type of struggling that i'm experiencing now. so americans are feeling this struggle. and yet harris is trying to tell us, and the democrats and all the pundits, i mean, they've all rallied around harris. it was the biggest coup. i mean, we experienced a coup in this country straight, you know, plain and simple. it's like they took joe biden out back and they put him out to pasture, and they brought in harris, and they're claiming to be the party of democracy. no one cast a vote, no one voted for harris, and no one's ever wanted her to be president or even the nominee for that matter, in 2019, 2020, when she was running, no one voted for her. she had to drop out of the race. and here we are, kim iverson. >> you're going to stay with us. you're going to go into the second hour. we're going to pick up this conversation. but if you bear with me just while i make that transition, that's it for the tv hour of the neil oliver show. but please stay tuned. up next on your channel will be the brilliant free speech nation

coming up in the next hour, i'll be going in depth with us politics with kim iverson. we'll be discussing the spiralling anger again in the united kingdom with douglas carswell and lecturer and commentator and thinker ralph schollhammer will join me to discuss the concept of moral licensing. and tom will be picking up on all of that also. you're watching the neal oliver show on . gb news. >> a brighter outlook with boxt solar, sponsors of weather on gb news. >> hello there. welcome to your latest gb news weather forecast from the met office. there's an

improvement in our weather as we head into monday, a bank holiday. for some of us, there will still be some showers around, but more in the way of sunny spells and it will just feel a little warmer. low pressure moving off the sea in a brief ridge of high pressure moving in ahead of the next weather system, which does come in late monday and into tuesday , in late monday and into tuesday, but an improvement anyway through the rest of the day. overnight into monday morning, there's still quite a lot of cloud across the uk. this band of cloud across northern ireland, southern scotland into northern england will continue to give some showery rain elsewhere. mixture of clear spells and showers and temperatures milder than they have been of late, generally staying in the mid teens. so a mixed start to monday morning. bright skies across much of scotland with scattering of showers, particularly across the north and the west. bias towards aberdeenshire on the fresh side. temperatures around 9 to 11 celsius. this northern ireland seeing a mixture of sunny spells and showers, but this cloudier zone across northern england into wales, giving some showery

outbreaks of rain in places brighter for the rest of england, but some showers across southeast england initially clearing away along with a brisk, brisk breeze. here but then generally through monday. winds falling light. we'll see a scattering of showers through the day , largely across the the day, largely across the northern part of england, into northern ireland, north wales, southern scotland, elsewhere dry but some sunny spells and with lighter winds it will feel warmer temperatures lifting to the high teens to low 20s, up to around 23 across southeast england on tuesday. wet and windy weather spreading in across the north and the west of the uk. some of this rain will be heavy at times, but further south and east we'll start to import some warm air winds coming in from the south. plenty of sunny spells and temperatures lifting towards the mid 20s, perhaps even higher by wednesday. approaching 2829 celsius before turning cooler again on thursday. >> that warm feeling inside from boxt boilers sponsors of weather

on . gb news. good afternoon on. gb news. good afternoon britain, your lunchtime update on the stories that matter across the uk from breaking news and insightful analysis, inspiring stories and lively debates, you're comparing yourself to a former prime minister. >> which is it? stay informed, stay updated. stay entertained. i just don't know how anyone would not want to be there every weekday from midday we are. good afternoon britain. only on gb news. >> britain's news channel way, way. >> if you want your news to be straight talking, this is the nightmare for the conservatives. >> again, down to earth. it's not just nottingham where this is happening is it? and most importantly, honest, hard working middle class taxpayers. they'll get the book thrown at them. they catch me martin daubney monday to friday, 3 to 6 pm. on gb news. britain's news channel >> other newspapers getting you down. >> my wife didn't divorce me that month , struggling to that month, struggling to

separate the wheat from the chaff. >> i know that it's a bit of a circus at the best of times. >> well, don't worry, headliners has got you covered. we'll take the burden of reading the day's news. and if we get depressed, who cares? it's an occupational hazard. frankly that's headliners on gb news from 11 pm. till midnight. and the p.m. till midnight. and the following morning, five till six. a m on gb news, the comedy channel. now join me nana

will >> very good evening to you. you're with gb news free speech nation. up next. first though, a look at the headlines at 7:00 and we start in germany, where prosecutors have named the man suspected of carrying out a knife attack that killed three and injured eight. as isa al—haj , and injured eight. as isa al—haj, the 26 year old syrian national, is accused of being a member of

a terrorist organisation and sharing islamic state ideology. he's also been charged with three counts of murder and attempted murder. the suspect, who had reportedly applied for asylum in the country, handed himself in to police following that attack. a church service, meanwhile, has been taking place today in germany to remember and pay today in germany to remember and pay respects to those who lost their lives. the victims include a 56 year old woman and two men, aged 56 and 67. four of those wounded remain in a life threatening condition in hospital . officials from hospital. officials from hezbollah insist the militant group isn't looking for a full scale war after a rocket and drone attack against israel earlier this morning, it was in retaliation for the killing of a top commander last month, israel launched pre—emptive strikes in return on southern lebanon, in what it called an act of self—defence. an israeli prime minister, benjamin netanyahu, says israel will take all measures necessary to defend

itself . we're also hearing