gb news. >> good evening. as small boat crossings in the english channel reach a new record, we ask, can keir starmer's government actually stop this? and all of this. on the day that our prime minister is in berlin and he says he wants to turn a corner on brexit, does that mean we're heading for brexit in name only? and a controversial book claims that the truss government were thinking of cutting cancer treatment on the nhs as a means of saving their political skins after the budget. all of that, and much more after the news with tatiana sanchez . with tatiana sanchez. >> nigel, thank you very much and good evening. the top stories. gb news can exclusively

reveal that more than 20,000 migrants have crossed the engush migrants have crossed the english channel illegally so far this year. the milestone was reached this morning as hundreds more made the journey in small boats from france. this, after 526 people arrived illegally in uk waters in eight dinghies yesterday . in other news, the yesterday. in other news, the prime minister says a new uk germany treaty will be part of a wider reset with europe. sir keir starmer has been in germany to launch negotiations on a new bilateral treaty, which hopes to boost business and increase joint action on illegal migration. speaking during a joint news conference with the german chancellor in berlin this morning, he described it as a moment of opportunity to deepen links between the uk and germany. the ministry of justice says the immediate pressure on spaces in men's prisons in england and wales has eased significantly in the last 24 hours. the latest comments come following the release of new

figures yesterday, showing there are just 100 spaces left in male prisons across england and wales. it comes after the activation of early dawn, where defendants in active court cases are kept in police cells until standard prison spaces open up. three people have died in a road collision in a welsh coastal town. north wales police says it responded to the incident in the town of beaumaris shortly after 2:45 pm. this afternoon. police attended alma street, close to beaumaris pier, along with ambulance and air ambulance crews. officers say works are continuing to establish the full circumstances of the incident. local conservative mp in wales, virginia crosbie, says my thoughts and prayers go out to the victims. their families and their loved ones . the prime their loved ones. the prime minister has condemned the violent scene at notting hill carnival, which left over 60 police officers injured. the prime minister says i'll condemn anyone using violence that says anyone using violence that says a man has been charged with

attempted murder over the stabbing of a mother at notting hill carnival. 20 year old shaquille tebow has appeared in court today charged with the attempted murder of 32 year old shay maximum. she's in a coma in a life threatening condition and may have to have her leg amputated. two other men have been charged in relation to the same incident. the three men are brothers , and a 28 year old man brothers, and a 28 year old man has been handed a suspended prison sentence after throwing items at nigel farage during his general election campaign. video from the incident showed mr farage shielding his face whilst items believed to be coffee cups were thrown towards him. appearing at barnsley magistrates court, josh greeley was sentenced to six weeks in prison, suspended for 12 months and ordered to carry out 120 hours of unpaid work. and ordered to carry out 120 hours of unpaid work . and those hours of unpaid work. and those are the latest gb news headlines. for now i'm tatiana sanchez. now it's time for farage 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 . gbnews.com forward slash alerts. >> good evening. well, i hate to say i told you so, but i did say back in 2020 that unless we started deporting people that illegally crossed the english channel illegally crossed the english channel, the numbers would simply go up over the course of the last two days. 1100 people have crossed the english channel. there was a moment this morning during which there were 11 dinghies. at the same time out in the english channel. we've gone through 20,000 for the year that is higher than we were at this point in 2022, which was the previous record year that finished up with the total number of 48,000. so that's the trajectory that we're on over the course of the next

week. we've got 1 or 2 spells of very calm weather. there's no doubt more boats are going to come. interesting. keir starmer has changed the language. i say illegal immigration. oh no no no.cant illegal immigration. oh no no no. can't say that anymore. irregular migration is the phrase that the prime minister is now using, as if to say, well, it's not really a huge problem now, is it? but i wonder , problem now, is it? but i wonder, can labour stop this? because, you see, i don't think we can unless we get back to where we were under the last labour government, under the last labour government, if you came to britain illegally, you were gone. you were deported. blunkett, other home secretaries didn't mess about. we were deporting tens of thousands of people a year under the last labour government. but since then, my view is that the european court of human rights has become much more activist in terms of the way in which it behaves. but the prime minister is wedded to it. this was him in the house of commons in his second speech after becoming

prime minister. >> let me be clear. there is no need to withdraw from the european convention on human rights. that is not consistent with the values of that blood bond. and so we won't withdraw. not now, not ever . not now, not ever. >> well, of course, they both used to say that about european union membership. i have a feeling this is an issue that will become a hotter political one, as the course of the next few years go by. but you tell me, can labour stop this from happening? want your views? please? farage gb news. com or tweet or x as it now is hashtag farage on gb news. i'm joined in the studio by bill rammell, former labour mp and of course former labour mp and of course former foreign minister under gordon brown and kwasi kwarteng, former conservative member of parliament and of course former chancellor of the exchequer. bill, i must start with you. i

mean, you know, sir keir was in berlin today. we'll come to some of the other aspects of that. but he did say, he says we cannot smash the smuggling gangs who perpetrate this vile trade without the help of our partners . without the help of our partners. but my argument is this the financial rewards are so enormous that a gang operating out of dunkirk or calais can make a net profit of a couple of million euros in a calm week in the summer. even if you smash one gang, aren't they just going to be replaced by another? >> well, look, net migration as a whole is far too high and is unsustainable, and we need to bnng unsustainable, and we need to bring it down. and part of that is tackling the gangs and reducing the boat crossings. but nigel, this is day 53 of this labour government. it took the tories 14 years to triple net migration. it is going to take time to bring it down. but part of the way we tackle it is much stronger cooperation with our partners in the european union. it's getting returns agreements

with the european union, it's intelligence sharing and police co—operation to go at the gangs at source. but all of that is going to take time. >> but but my response to that bill would be that they can't stop huge numbers crossing the mediterranean. why on earth are they going to help us in the channel? >> well, and that's where i think there needs to be some genuine cooperation and burden sharing. you know, keir talked a couple of weeks ago about us actually working with the europeans at the southern border. and in return for that, we get greater cooperation and we get greater cooperation and we potentially get greater cooperation with the french. >> well we'll see. quasi, quasi. i mean, you guys in government. >> yeah. we made a whole mess of it. >> i mean, you put my hand up and say, you could have made this a big, big statement. we're going to stop the boats. one of rishi's key priorities. and not a single person, not a single person, went to rwanda against. so. >> so when he came out, i think it was in january 2023, he came in. he said his five pledges,

you know, inflation, growing the economy, all of that. and then he said, stop the boats. and we were amazed because it was obvious that he wasn't going to do that. and we were thinking, why has he said this? and actually it's i think it's got worse in the last year. so that was a complete disaster for the conservative party. but i think the problem that labour have is that if keir starmer is saying we're not under any circumstances, going to leave the european convention on human rights, all that's going to happenisif rights, all that's going to happen is if these people get deported, they'll they'll appeal to the echr and they'll win and we have to bring them back. >> but kwasi what is going to happen? kwasi you know, you can talk.i happen? kwasi you know, you can talk. i mean, i firmly believe that the echr has become more activist. yes. you know, there was a ruling against the swiss government not long ago on meeting net zero targets, etc. but your party has i mean, the conservative party has no position on this. >> look, so. so we were at sixes and sevens, you know that during the last government, it's very striking that the leadership candidates generally actually left the government on this issue and said very openly that

unless we're serious about leaving the echr, we're not going to solve this. and tugendhat recently, rather surprisingly, because he's seen as being more on the left of the party, said, we've got to we've got to put that on the table. so clearly the leadership contenders realise, as i think you do, that if we're in the echr, we there's very little we can do. >> well this is the i mean bill, you know, i made the point earlier that, you know, that last labour government, i mean, you i mean, if you came to britain illegally, your feet didn't touch the sides, you were gone.i didn't touch the sides, you were gone. i was part of it as a minister. >> yeah. so you look at the situation in 2005 and asylum numbers had got out of control. we then threw the kitchen sink at it. yes, and, you know, i was at it. yes, and, you know, i was a foreign office minister meeting every week with my home office counterpart to pressure push officials to do everything possible to drive the numbers down. you need that kind of. and you did it. we did. and you need that kind of serious. >> so why can't that. but my argument, bill, is that the echr

was not as active in these areas back in, but i still think i still think you can do it. >> and the real contrast i would make forgive me, kwasi, is with the last conservative government that was interested in gestures and stunts, which is what rwanda was, which was never going to seriously bring the numbers down. >> so i think rwanda was if the party had got behind it and if we'd got it through, i think it would have it could have been effective. but unfortunately for whatever reason, percent of people, unfortunately, for whatever reason. well the idea was even if a few thousand went, it would act. >> it would have been a certain deterrent. >> but they're clever enough to know if you come thousands of miles across the world and you've got a 2% chance of being sent there, that's not deterrent. >> how bill rammell were you able to deport people then and you can't now? >> well, i think you can do it now. and, you know, watch this space of the way that we're going to work on this over the coming months and years and we cannot go into the next general election with net migration. no it was 685,000. >> but okay, let's draw a distinction here. i mean, you're absolutely right. the figure

that really matters and impacts people's lives is net migration at unsustainable levels. i think we all understand that whether it's housing, gp services, infrastructure, whatever, and it already looks like through a series of changes, the numbers are going to come down quite significantly. >> the stuff that, to be fair, rishi sunak did bring in some measures to do that belatedly. yes okay. >> i mean, you know, the idea of students coming, bringing dependents in the end, the whole family in the end, some of that was dealt with and things that people like kemi badenoch actually campaigned for. but we'll come to that another evening when we talk about the tory leadership contest. but but isn't the point here really isn't the point here really isn't the point here really that if a court in strasbourg has the ultimate say over who can and cannot be deported from our country, we effectively have lost control and the point is, bill, even though you're right about net migration figures, the angeris about net migration figures, the anger is on the channel and it's perceived to be unfairness, you see. i mean , how is it if the see. i mean, how is it if the labour government are not going to put people in hotels but put

them in social housing? how is it that my son is on a waiting list? >> well, it's not going to be in social housing. you know, the. >> well, you say that that's on the table. >> no. because because the local authority powers to give priority to local residents will exclude in almost all circumstances, migrants coming here. >> well, we'll have to see. but, bill, my point is, this is the thing that angers people. there is a sense of injustice. there is a sense of injustice. there is a sense of injustice. there is a sense of unfairness. and if your government doesn't tackle it or isn't able to tackle it and is smashing the gangs, is going to take years. >> no, i'm not saying i'm not saying it's going to take years, but we need, you know, and part of what keir has been talking about with schultz in germany today is getting a much better relationship with our european partners, which is at the heart of tackling this problem. i also think moving people out of the hotels. you say that the boats are a real bone of contention. i think sticking people in hotels and costing over £5 billion a yearis and costing over £5 billion a year is a huge bonus. well, it is, but it is. >> but that was huge. >> but that was huge. >> that was huge. >> that was huge. >> but equally, i mean, at one point, i think 420 hotels were

being fully occupied at a massive cost around the country. 1 or 2 hotel groups making very big money. that's right out of it. >> and actually that was one of the big issue as a constituency mp until about two months ago. that was that was a massive issue as an mp. i mean, you all remember this. i mean, obviously i don't think it was as acute when you were there for the reasons we've discussed, but for mps now, it was a huge issue. >> but if you kwasi, if you don't put them in hotels, but you put them in private rentals or you put them in social housing, either or you're forcing up rental prices . that's right. >> so that's why we tens of thousands of people, that's why we were very keen to try and set up third party, third country areas to deal with this stuff. >> but they've got to be the right ones. look, when i was a minister, we looked at third countries, but they had to be the right ones and not open to the right ones and not open to the kind of challenge. and criticism that rwanda. >> rwanda cost £700 million because that's a claim that's been made from the frontbench. is that right? 700 million. >> that's my understanding. i don't think it was, but actually, if you were, you were the chancellor. >> how much was it for?

>> how much was it for? >> seven weeks. it wasn't that much. what kind of come to that? >> but the three days ahead of you. >> but the actual issue, the actual issue was, was the was actually the cost of housing them here was billions. i mean, that's one of the problems. i mean, obviously we dealt with ukraine. we dealt with lots of people who were legitimately seeking asylum. but the actual cost of that is, is, is way more than than the rwanda bill, actually. >> well , in actually. >> well, in short, bill rammell can labour stop the boats ? can labour stop the boats? >> i'm not i'm not going to say you stop them. i think that was one of sunak's mistakes. the slogans on stopping the boats. i think we can significantly and dramatically reduce the numbers, but it's not going to happen overnight. >> no kwasi are they going to suffer politically as much as you think they will? >> i think this is a big issue that's not going to go away. i think the echr is a massive albatross around your neck because if you deport them, they'll just appeal and come back and i don't see it. would you leave echr? i think you've got to put it on the table. i would, i wouldn't ask that. no, no, you've got to say this and

this doesn't happen. we're going to we're prepared to leave. you can't just say, oh, we're we're never going to leave, and we'll just take whatever they say willy nilly. that's not a credible policy. >> all the noise around this, over two thirds of british people support membership of the eec. >> they might do. but that's because it's not closely associated. i don't that's what the polling evidence says. >> bill, we haven't had a proper national debate on it. i think that's perhaps the point that status quos tend to have majorities until you have a debate. eu membership perhaps was a little bit like that. dare i say it? we'll come on to it. well, i'd love to see a referendum on echr membership. >> and also it's closely allied with this. do you know what? if brexit has taught me anything, it's that referendums are one of the worst innovations in the british system. >> you may very well say that, bill rammell, but here we are governed by a massive labour majority. >> you only got a third of the vote. i'm not so sure i quite like referendums, but in a moment we will discuss starmer's visit to berlin today, where he wants to have a new treaty. well, there's going to be a new treaty renegotiation next year anyway . but are we treaty renegotiation next year anyway. but are we heading for brianna ghey? are we heading for brexit in name only? all of that

in a couple of

a couple of your reactions from home, mandy says not a case of canny. he doesn't want to. he just wants growth and cheap laboun just wants growth and cheap labour. but he'll get neither, just more crime. strong views there. and wayne says mark my words , starmer will use the words, starmer will use the illegal boats problem to take us back into the eu via the back doon back into the eu via the back door. well, some strong opinions out there

door. well, some strong opinions out tthat sounds to me like we're now that sounds to me like we're going to be mirroring single market rules without actually being in the single market, which logically a year or two down the road leads to an argument with for accepting the rules . why don't we consider rules. why don't we consider rejoining bill rammell? you have been a lifelong pro—european union supporter and very passionate and open and honest about that. is that the path we're going? i mean, effectively this will be brexit in name only, won't it? >> do you know, there's part of me that wishes that were true, but it's emphatically not. you know, the, the seismic shock that brexit had to the labour party to our voting base. we accept that there is no turning back. but do you really? yeah, i really, really do, you know, certainly in my lifetime you're not going to see that, you know, maybe 40, 50 years down the

road, there might be a different outcome, but certainly not dunng outcome, but certainly not during the lifetime of this labour government or my lifetime. but we need a better deal than the botched deal that bofis deal than the botched deal that boris johnson. >> but what would that better deal look like? >> it would involve , closer >> it would involve, closer working with the european union. it would involve, for example, a veterinary agreement. it would involve mutual recognition of qualifications. it would involve removing the double documentation. so harmonisation basically. well if it's in our national interest then yes. >> well see there we are. kwasi the whole point as brexiteers, you know , the point was not to you know, the point was not to harmonise . the point was to be harmonise. the point was to be more competitive. >> but, you know, for whatever reason, i think they're softening, you know , they're softening, you know, they're preparing us essentially for a brexit in name only. they're never going to say , let's join never going to say, let's join the customs union for reasons that bill says. >> but they'll you mark my words, they'll come up with something and they'll call it the goods exchange agreement or some such formula.

>> and it'll be exactly the same. so they're not they're not so stupid as to say , we're going so stupid as to say, we're going to rejoin exactly the same institutions with the same name, but they'll construct something that's similar , branded slightly that's similar, branded slightly differently, which in effect will be, but i could argue quash will be, but i could argue quasi, that it's actually rather easy for them to do this because your governments didn't take us away. no >> so we've stayed with rafts of eu legislation, most of our commercial life. >> the big original sin actually was the 2017 general election, because i remember that was called, and the whole purpose of it was to give theresa may a bigger majority. and she said, strengthen my hand . and once we strengthen my hand. and once we lost our majority, that was where the treaty that the draft treaty that was drawn up had all this stuff with northern ireland, the northern ireland protocol, all of that, and had she actually won a majority in 2017, i think we'd be in a very different place. i think we would have got better after brexit. >> well, bell argues. bell argues it's a botched deal . i argues it's a botched deal. i don't think even lord frost

would argue he was given a very bad hand of cards. yeah, i mean , bad hand of cards. yeah, i mean, we i don't believe this bilateral treaty as such. i think i think what this is, is the beginning of a negotiation for next year. >> this is about confidence building with the european union, germany. germany is a vehicle for that. so that when it comes to the renegotiation of the brexit deal in 2026, we can get something much better. >> and i think that's manifestly germany is a member of the eu. they can't unilaterally do things. no no no no no that's the whole point. no. >> but they are the powerhouse within the european union. >> well there were some there were some other nonsense talk today which i'll get to. but do you accept the basic point that bill makes that actually the deal we've got isn't a very good one.the deal we've got isn't a very good one. the idea, the idea that it was oven ready was nonsense. no was oven ready was nonsense. n0 no. >> look. so. so to be fair to bons >> look. so. so to be fair to boris and the government that came in in 2019, of which i was a member, we could only deal with what we had and what we had was essentially the skeleton of theresa may's job of theresa may's deal. and as i said earlier , kwasi and as i said earlier, kwasi and as i said earlier, kwasi and as i said earlier, lied to people. >> i remember him talking to

business people in northern ireland, and he said, if there is a border in the irish sea, you come back and say, actually, actually the dup conference. >> yeah. >> yeah. >> so he went, that's what he went and said it. >> so there was no way that he could unpick what theresa negotiated in the time that he had . and that's why we ended up had. and that's why we ended up where we were. but as i said , where we were. but as i said, the original sin in all of this was the 2017 general election, where we didn't have a majority. and for those of us who sat through that parliament, we couldn't get anything done. there was two years of agony. it's funny, there was no way we could get anything through. >> whatever you guys call early general elections, it doesn't seem to work out very well, does it? moving on, moving on. one of the biggest nonsenses pronounced by starmer today was on eu defence. and i've long been very worried about this. i've been worried about this. i've been worried about this. i've been worried about the emergence of the european defence union, because i don't see how we can because i don't see how we can be in that. and nato. i've never believed we can serve two masters. but starmer said today and as nations with the highest

defence expenditure among european countries , as if to european countries, as if to say, well, this deal with germany . germany say, well, this deal with germany. germany is only just now paying 1.5% of its gdp on defence. yeah, but what is starmer on about in terms of direction of travel? >> you compare germany today to, say, five years ago and it's moved significantly and it is now. it is now leading the pack alongside the french within the european, within the european union. >> poland's miles ahead. >> poland's miles ahead. >> we need all eu countries to spend more on defence. >> if we want the americans to be our friends and allies, which is vital. you know, it's pretty clear, you know, when trump says you guys should be paying the 2%, he's got a point, hasn't he? >> yeah, he has, but it's grotesque in the manner he makes it. and when he says to russia, you know, if they don't, if they don't pay ian, pay the dial, come and get them. but it shifted. that's frankly atrocious. >> but isn't that just the way trump negotiates? isn't he right that in a world that's much more dangerous than it was compared to five years ago? 2%? i mean,

surely it should be more than that, shouldn't it? >> technically, he's correct. we need, you know, we're aspiring to move back to 2.5% of gdp, which we had under the last labour government , which was labour government, which was slashed, to be fair by the tories. we need all european union countries to get to that level. but because we do live in a much more dangerous. no, we do. >> and kwasi cut in 2010 under osborne in the treasury. it was because because we had to consolidate the budget. you know, we were running $160 billion deficit. >> it's all about in order to do that, it's all about priority. >> and we have now we've slashed our armed forces. you're right. we've got a new priority. but i think going back to the trump point, he did actually force the germans through his crude methods. you can say that they weren't very sophisticated. >> i think the secretary—general stoltenberg rather liked trump because he did actually help people pay a bit more money. definitely. >> but kwasi shifted the dial back to the political point here. >> am i right to be concerned about the emergence of a european defence union? can it run in parallel? can can brussels have two command centres? >> i don't see how it can. i mean, as you said, you can't

serve two masters. and essentially, given our nato commitments, i don't see how they can sit squarely with this eu defence, bcu, you can have much greater intelligence sharing. >> you can have much greater five eyes logistics, the logistics cooperation. and give me a for instance , where me a for instance, where european defence cooperation has come up in contradiction to nato. i can't think of one. >> well, that well , that's >> well, that well, that's because it's still emergent. you know, it's been emerging for about ten years. >> yeah. >> yeah. >> and it's been very slow because of the reluctance of european countries to put any money in to their defence budgets. i mean, so can i just budgets. i mean, so can ijust make an intelligence point? >> the effective instrument, if you like, the effective machinery of intelligence, is through five eyes. it's through our cooperation with australia, with the us , canada and those with the us, canada and those powers . the eu in with the us, canada and those powers. the eu in terms of intelligence gathering is not particularly effective. >> but that's really good. but it's not mutually exclusive. >> no, no, i mean, look, i think that's right. i think cooperation, you know, sharing

things that can be all to the good. my concern, and you're right, it's been incredibly slow. my concern is a fully militarised arm of the european union. i think the americans say, you know what, you guys, good luck. get on with it. we'll come back to this and debate it for years to come. in a moment, you chuck cement at nigel farage. not a problem. absolutely not a problem . you absolutely not a problem. you don't go to prison, say something nasty or intemperate on facebook and you will get locked what's happening with our

so there i was, innocently going about my business in barnsley early in the general election, and we were on the bus and i could see a bloke fairly unkempt, and i saw him take a cup. and by the way, don't believe the news. when they say

they threw paper cups at me. you can throw as many paper cups at me as you want. and anyway, they wouldn't go across the street. that story is utter rot. that's been published. what he did, it was a bit of a building site and he filled up a big coffee cup with cement and chucked it at the bus. and you can see me here in the picture on top of the bus. boom. now this guy did this with intent and intent to harm . with intent and intent to harm. believe me, i can take the rough and tumble of politics and i don't mind it. one little bit. but when it threatens me physically or it threatens people around me physically, then i think something has to happen. then i think something has to happen . because that was the happen. because that was the second time in three days. two days before that, i had had a milkshake physically chucked in my face, and if we get to a point where people can't go out and campaign for what they believe in and yes, be held to account by a crowd in a street

or whatever it is, we've got a real problem. and i must admit, after barnsley, even i began to think , how am i going to get on? think, how am i going to get on? what am i going to do? how do i walk around street markets? what do i do? well, it turns out that 28 year old josh greeley today has got a suspended sentence and a fine of a massive £85, and i'm sorry, but i think there needs to be some sort of disincentive. so we'll begin this section on law and order with guys that have stood for election taken more than their fair share of abuse. something wrong here, isn't there? >> i'm really genuinely shocked by this decision. you know, it's not a popular view, but i actually think, violence against mps ought to be a particular crime . 13 years as an mp, i was crime. 13 years as an mp, i was only fearful for my safety once. it's now an everyday experience for mps and i think it's got to be clamped down on really, really hard. and i think £85 and

a suspended sentence is utterly wrongheaded. >> i mean, the speaker is very aware of this. >> yeah. look, i think i think bill's 100% >> yeah. look, i think i think bill's100% right. >> yeah. look, i think i think bill's 100% right. i >> yeah. look, i think i think bill's100% right. i think he got worse. i mean, i was elected in 2010. by the end, by 2024, it got a lot worse. and i didn't know jo cox i mean, she came in after i entered the house and she was very popular. and of course, that appalling crime. and then the person i did know quite well was david amess. he was a friend he didn't have. he didn't have an enemy in the world. one of the most easygoing, easygoing figures, very popular. and i remember six weeks before the attack, i remember speaking to him, and his ambition was to be father of the house, and we were joking about that. and then six weeks later, this attack happened. and that really changed, shifted my view. joe, in 2016 and then davis david in 2021, two colleagues had been murdered. and i think things have got to change. and if and if they don't change, we've got to think along the lines that the public are very unsympathetic to all this

stuff. >> yeah. but i would say to you at home who you know, are not very sympathetic about public money being spent protecting mps, don't at the same time moan about the quality of people going into politics because you can't actually have this both ways. moving on from that, moving on from that . we had moving on from that. we had consensus there, which is very dangerous, and we can't be doing that on this show for a moment. moving on from that, we have hate crimes. we have the proposal that labour may toughen up on it. we even have non—hate crimes which are still recorded by the police. if josh greeley had written something beastly on facebook, he would be in prison. and i've seen so many double standards over this. the riots in southport and elsewhere were unforgivable. but equally 61 police officers being assaulted at the notting hill carnival. i don't think there's any difference, frankly, between those two sets of crimes and i do worry, bill. i do worry that it just seems the mood music from starmer and from labour is

there's going to be a cracking down on free speech. however, we define that . define that. >> well, i've got some concerns about this. look i'm a strong champion of free speech as a university vice chancellor, i championed it as higher education minister. i stood up for the right for the oxford union to invite nick griffin of the bnp to the oxford union , the bnp to the oxford union, because i think the best way that you challenge and expose extremism is through free and open debate . i also learned open debate. i also learned overseeing the prevent strategy , overseeing the prevent strategy, that in defining a line of what's acceptable and unacceptable violence and advocacy of violence is the only line you can draw because anything else unravels and is unsustainable. >> yeah. i mean, look, there are things that are being i mean, i do agree to a large extent that what is said on facebook or wherever it is should be the same as us talking and incitement is above and beyond, but do you just get the feeling kwasi that free speech? i mean, we've had you know, we've had the boss of telegram arrested by the boss of telegram arrested by

the french authorities. are you worried about this? >> because i am about it, because i think the problem that we have is that you've got a government. i'm not saying it's a labour government or any government. it's any government who are basically making the rules and the suspicion out there is that people are just essentially just going to promote the views that they think are acceptable and de—platform effectively cancel the views that they don't agree with. and that's the suspicion. and that gets to a very dangerous place, because essentially you're bringing in censorship, and it is a form of control that is used in totalitarian dictatorships. and that's the thin edge of the wedge. i'm not saying we're going down that route, but look at a rate of knots, inconsistencies and double standards, frankly, in all parties. >> you know, the tory party is in favour of free speech and open platforms until it's someone that they disagree with. then who did they disagree? >> who did we cancel? >> who did we cancel? >> well, well, you know, the strong campaign that anyone and i disagreed with them. but chanting pro—palestinian slogans on a demonstration, that was an incitement. >> i mean the issue there that

you the point you very carefully made is that incitement to violence is one thing. >> well, from the river to the sea. exactly. you know, is unacceptable. >> i fundamentally disagree with it. if you if you actually, however, believe in free speech, i think people have a right to hold that view. but how it's wrong. >> well , hang wrong. >> well, hang on, it's not disagreeable. >> i mean, i mean, from the river to the sea. how is that not violent? how is that not implied? it's the abolition of israel and the people within it . israel and the people within it. >> yeah, i fundamentally disagree with it. but how is that not violent? >> you made the point. >> you made the point. >> but hold on. you've got a right to, you know, express that view. >> but you drew a line which was between incitement to violence. yeah. and that to me is incitement to violence. i think. >> and this is where it's subjective otherwise. one last point on this topic. yesterday we were to down 100 prisons spaces for adult males in the whole of the country. and it seems that prison sentences are getting shorter and shorter. we learned of 147,000 potential crimes in the year up to march. who just got community notices. do we need to build more prisons? >> yeah we do. and look, you

know, we can debate about what the inheritance of this labour government is. but prison places is emphatically the responsibility of the last government. alex chalk, the justice secretary, went to sunak virtually every week, saying, i need to build new prison places or i need early release . and or i need early release. and sunak disgracefully just sat on the problem. >> i think bill's got a point. >> i think bill's got a point. >> look, i think i think you're right. i mean, you will know. i mean, you mentioned the fact that i was chancellor, but one of the big challenges is public expenditure and building prisons costs a lot of money. and you can see why sunak, who had been a chancellor, really did that. >> is there no political advantage in building prisons? >> i think i think there is. but you don't get to see. the problem is you can't just build them overnight. so if you have a prison building programme, you're committing a lot of capital in the short term, but you only get the places in the longer term. >> was there the money was allocated the bigger problem was nimbyism of the government, not the then government not being prepared to override local objections to the building of. >> so i think it was there was there were capital constraints and we had all this business. well, again, it's about choices. >> again, it's about choices. all these things are. do you

think, bill? i mean presumably labour are going to have to build prisons. yes it's just going to have to happen. >> and one of the ways we're going to do it is by making this a national infrastructure priority, which can override local objections . local objections. >> well, it'll be interesting to see whether the same will apply to housing as well. yeah because we desperately need more homes. >> be interesting to see where the money comes from. i mean, you know, we're going to have a budget in the autumn. we'll see exactly what the tax take will be, and it'll be very interesting to see what spending choices are made. >> exactly. well i'm going to say thank you to bill rammell for joining us. and engaging and forjoining us. and engaging and energetic debate. i'm keeping this kwarteng fella here because i'm in detention. am i? well, you will be, no question about it , because there's been a book it, because there's been a book published overnight making accusations that the truss government considered cutting nhs cancer treatment to save their own political skins in the dock in just a moment's time, is the man who was chancellor of the man who was chancellor of the exchequer at that moment did quasi intend to cut

care on the . we'll ask .we'll ask him in just a

what do ? in a new book is out what do? in a new book is out truss at number 10. how not to be prime minister. and it's written by a political biographer , anthony seldon. it's biographer, anthony seldon. it's a 330 page book, which is a pretty excoriating account of truss's days in downing street. now, what i want to make here is that anthony seldon has a very big reputation as a political biographer, and that is why what has been said here is being taken very seriously. after the budget, there were some enormous problems in the markets, etc. you all remember the accusation is it's about meetings that are going on in downing street. at that point, they were joined by

fellow special adviser alex boyd , fellow special adviser alex boyd, who was told that truss and kwarteng were thinking they could still sort out the black hole with severe cuts . we've hole with severe cuts. we've been told they're looking at stopping cancer treatment on the nhs now. i found this quite extraordinary. what i heard it this morning, but when it comes from the pen of anthony seldon, a renowned biographer , i a renowned biographer, i thought, wow, can this really be true? and quasi is there is there just a scintilla of truth in this , though, considering in this, though, considering that you were in a hole, you had to make cuts? that's right. things were difficult. that's right. some some issues in the pensions market had erupted all of that. >> and we did look at savings. we did look at expenditure. so where did you look? but we did not look at treatment. where did you look? we looked at, you know , you look? we looked at, you know, general capital projects, transport projects. i think the prime minister was very keen on

general government. i mean, this happened under boris. we looked at the civil service numbers and things like that, but i don't i not that i don't remember. i can categorically state we never talked about reducing cancer treatment. i mean, it would have been absurd politically to have done that anyway , earlier on done that anyway, earlier on today you said i wasn't involved in any conversations about restricting healthcare. >> that's true . but that doesn't >> that's true. but that doesn't mean the prime minister and her team didn't discuss this. you're chucking her under the bus? no i'm not. yes, you are. yes you are. >> i'm not doing that. i'm saying i'm being very careful, i think so i was very careful in my wording. >> it didn't look very careful to me. >> it was i said i didn't have any of those conversations. but if those conversations took place in other bits of the government, i wasn't privy to them. i wouldn't. i didn't know about that. that's what i'm saying. >> i mean, seldon is a renowned biographer. this is quite a claim, isn't it? >> yes. i'm surprised that he made that claim. and also it wasn't sourced. i mean, i think the official that they or the

special adviser they quoted said we were looking at expenditure cuts.i we were looking at expenditure cuts. i don't think he said that we were specifically looking at reducing cancer treatment, which would have been an outrage. i mean, it would have been morally wrong and politically stupid, so i don't. >> are you going to fight back harder against this? >> well, i've said i didn't have those conversations and that's all i can say. i can only speak for myself. i didn't rule out the conversations in the wider government, but i'd be very surprised if they they took those conversations took place . those conversations took place. >> we have a budget coming up. end of october, i thought the thing's going to get worse. speech that we saw yesterday from the prime minister. what do you think they're going to do? >> i think they're going to, they're going to try and do two things. they're going to try and reduce expenditure, but that will be very difficult given the pubuc will be very difficult given the public sector wage. so you can freeze. they'll do all the things with the thresholds , things with the thresholds, they'll freeze the thresholds and taxes are going to go up, and taxes are going to go up, and they're going to try and freeze spending. but to be brutally frank, if the

conservatives had won the election under the hunt, sunak conservatives had won the election under the hunt, sunak sunak hunt administration, they sunak hunt administration, they would have been looking at doing would have been looking at doing fairly similar things, because, fairly similar things, because, i mean, we wouldn't have done i mean, we wouldn't have done the deal with the unions. i the deal with the unions. i don't think that would have don't think that would have happened. but, you know, if happened. but, you know, if growth rates are at 0.5, 0.7% growth rates are at 0.5, 0.7% even and your public sector even and your public sector expenditure is going up five, expenditure is going up five, six, 7%, you've got to cover six, 7%, you've got to cover that somehow. and if you go to that somehow. and if you go to the obr, they will say, you the obr, they will say, you know, ladies and gentlemen of know, ladies and gentlemen of the government, you have to the government, you have to increase taxes. and that and increase taxes. and that and that , i think increase taxes. and that and that, i think was one of the that , i think increase taxes. and that and that, i think was one of the things that we tried to get out things that we tried to get out of that doom loop that liz truss of that doom loop that liz truss and i and she called it the doom and i and she called it the doom loop. we tried to get out of loop. we tried to get out of that. we had to grow the that. we had to grow the economy. we have to grow the economy. we have to grow the economy. >> starmer says starmer says his economy. >> starmer says starmer says his priority is growth. priority is growth. >> yeah, of course he does. it >> yeah, of course he does. it has to be because if you don't has to be because if you don't grow the economy, all you're grow the economy, all you're going to end up with is rising going to end up with is rising taxes, which in their turn kill taxes, which in their turn kill economic growth. so that's the economic growth. so that's the doom loop. it's a vicious cycle . doom loop. it's a vicious cycle . doom loop. it's a vicious cycle. >> i mean, jeremy hunt, who doom loop. it's a vicious cycle. >> i mean, jeremy hunt, who followed on from you , seemed to followed on from you , seemed to

followed on from you, seemed to launch a war the followed on from you, seemed to launch a war on unearned income. and we discussed this with john redwood and others last night. we saw the conservative government bringing in rules about non—doms we're seeing and we saw under a conservative government, young entrepreneurs, people in their 30 somethings leaving the country being tempted by tax deals in milan and lisbon and all over the place . yeah. why was the place. yeah. why was the conservative government doing that? >> so look , we tried to do >> so look, we tried to do a different path. the markets reacted badly . i different path. the markets reacted badly. i think we weren't steady enough. i think weren't steady enough. i think we panicked and essentially we threw dare. i used the expression the baby out with the bathwater. so instead of actually going down a pro tax cutting route, we ended up with the opposite. and the consequence of that is around we can see what's happening . we can can see what's happening. we can see that entrepreneurship is being discouraged effectively through higher taxes. younger people are going abroad. they're leaving . yeah, because they can leaving. yeah, because they can earn more money or keep more of

the money. they earn abroad. and once they did,

happened with myself and liz and all of that , was very much all of that, was very much framed by the obr , framed, dare framed by the obr, framed, dare i say, by officials. and it was very striking to me that we brought in we'd argued against abolition of non—dom status for 12 years, 13 years, and then we brought it in. so that said to me, well, hang on a sec, who's driving this? is it is it the ministers or is it the officials in the department? and i think labour will argue that they're just continuing from what, the last two years of the conservative government was, maybe what starmer has done by saying we're all doomed is the tax raising won't be quite as bad as we feared, i think so, i think. >> isn't that the plan? >> isn't that the plan? >> isn't that the plan? >> i definitely think there's expectation management, which we didn't do. i mean, when i was chancellor of the exchequer, we had that leadership contest and we didn't do that. and that was a cause of the problems. one of the causes of the problems we had.so the causes of the problems we had. so he's managing expectations. he's saying that, look, i've got a big stick and i'm going to raise your taxes and be very mean. and then in the event he can say, look, it wasn't that bad. i just raised your taxes a little bit.

>> i think that's the game >> i think that's the game they're playing. and kwasi, i do they're playing. and kwasi, i do absolutely believe you when you absolutely believe you when you say you weren't going to cut nhs say you weren't going to cut nhs cancer care, but it was worth cancer care, but it was worth debating and arguing. and jacob, debating and arguing. and jacob, i'm sure you're thrilled that i'm sure you're thrilled that we're getting closer to the we're getting closer to the european defence union. oh, european defence union. oh, delighted . absolutely delighted. delighted . absolutely delighted. delighted. absolutely delighted. >> well, what's so interesting delighted. absolutely delighted. >> well, what's so interesting about the beginnings of this about the beginnings of this government is that you can't government is that you can't believe a word that keir starmer believe a word that keir starmer says, and he does u—turn after says, and he does u—turn after u—turn. >> so when he says that he has u—turn. >> so when he says that he has no plan to take us back into the no plan to take us back into the european union, and then you see european union, and then you see him sucking up to the german him sucking up to the german chancellor with lots of european chancellor with lots of european flags flying, you know that he's flags flying, you know that he's trying to do exactly the trying to do exactly the opposite of what he's opposite of what he's pretending. >> bill rammell was on the show pretending. >> bill rammell was on the show earlier and argued that that earlier and argued that that actually, even if we align actually, even if we align ourselves , rejoining at this ourselves , rejoining at this ourselves, rejoining at this stage is not an option. ourselves, rejoining at this stage is not an option. >> you tie yourself in so >> you tie yourself in so closely that you might as well closely that you might as well be actively a member. and then be actively a member. and then you argue, we're a member you argue, we're a member without a vote and they'll without a vote and they'll rebrand it. >> i made this point earlier. rebrand it. >> i made this point earlier. >> i made this point earlier. >> they won't call it a customs >> i made this point earlier. >> they won't call it a customs union. >> what else are you discussing, union. >> what else are you discussing, jacob? well, that's that's going jacob? well, that's that's going to be the first thing. to be the first thing.

>> then. illegal immigration, >> then. illegal immigration,

brought to from the update brought to you from the met office. thursday will be a breezy and showery day for northwestern areas. elsewhere, though dry and feeling fairly warm in the sun. but it is going to be a fresher day tomorrow compared to today as as this weather front is expected to clear away to the south and east throughout tonight , taking with throughout tonight, taking with it some rain which will affect northeastern areas of england, some eastern areas of scotland. through this evening. still a few showers across the north and west, but for many of us it will turn much drier and clearer overnight tonight. so that does mean it's going to be a fresher night. temperatures will fall away into single figures. rural towns and cities just about in double digits. so fresher but bright start to the day for many areas. however across the north and west there will still be some quite frequent and potentially quite heavy showers across many southern areas, we could see a few patches of mist and fog developing , particularly and fog developing, particularly across western counties of england. a few showers pushing into parts of wales potentially as well as northwestern england and northern ireland. but i think the most frequent and heaviest showers will affect the

western isles, the highlands through thursday morning. the likely linger through much of the day. a drier start across eastern areas of scotland. those showers will progress eastwards to affect these areas later on on thursday, as well as some eastern areas of northern england too. but elsewhere, as i said, it should be a relatively dry and fine day and it will feel fairly warm in the sunshine. as i said, it is a fresher day tomorrow compared to today. we'll lose that humid feel so temperatures just about 23 or 24 degrees at best in the south and east, widely in the high teens or low 20s. however, that's about average for the time of year. now, friday, we've got high pressure centred across the uk, so more widely settled day, plenty of sunshine through the day, away from the very far north of scotland, and it will feel fairly warm in the sunshine, but it could be another fairly fresh start. and that theme continues into the weekend. however, as we head towards sunday, a risk of showers does develop across the south and east. see you again later. bye bye. >> a brighter outlook with boxt solar, sponsors of weather on

gb news. >> hello. good evening. it's me, jacob rees—mogg on state of the nafion jacob rees—mogg on state of the nation tonight in an attempt to escape the sinking slough of sleaze , the prime minister has sleaze, the prime minister has escaped to germany to announce a reset of his relations with the eu. as he begins the great brexit betrayal, as he pledges to crack down on illegal migration, which surpassed the 20 000 mark earlier today. we will be revealing how starmer has actually abolished the very idea of illegal migration across the english channel, not only is there a slough of sleaze, but also a hovel of hypocrisy. one minute the labour party promised to crack down on shoplifting and the next it acts as community service plans for offenders. and make no mistake about it, labour will increase your taxes. the question is which one? find out

in a moment. state of the nation