gb news. >> hello and welcome . this is >> hello and welcome. this is calvin's common sense crusade . calvin's common sense crusade. with me, the reverend calvin robinson on your tv online and on your wireless. today, we will be reacting to the controversial online safety bill. we'll also discuss the astonishing figure showing that half of pregnancies in under 25 seconds are now ending in abortion . and in the ending in abortion. and in the duel ending in abortion. and in the duel, my panellists will be discussing whether the laws around the age of consent should be reassessed . and emma, your be reassessed. and emma, your initial thoughts .7 initial thoughts? >> i think that there is a good argument for a staggering approach so that between the ages of 16 and 18, those people can consent among each other. >> but i also think that there could be good arguments for keeping it the same or for raising it to the age of 18. so i can be convinced. >> okay. and steven, i think

morality is more important than the calendar and i think we have to actually work on people's motivation is not simply the age that something can the that something can happen the day after your 16th birthday. >> leave it as it is, okay. >> but before all that, it's the news with tatiana sanchez . news with tatiana sanchez. >> calvin, thank you and good evening. this is the latest from the newsroom . a woman arrested the newsroom. a woman arrested after a land rover crashed into after a land rover crashed into a prep school in south london, killing two children has been rebailed until january. the 46 year old was arrested at the scene on suspicion of causing death by dangerous driving. it happened at an end of year tea party at the study prep school in wimbledon in july , 16 people in wimbledon in july, 16 people were treated at the scene of the crash. several including a seven month old girl, were taken to hospital with non—life threatening injuries. boris johnson has warned rishi sunak against delivering a mutilated version of hs2. the former prime minister says curtailing over

cost with a height of insanity and desperate, treasury driven nonsense . he's urged the prime nonsense. he's urged the prime minister to deliver on the tories 2019 levelling up pledge . the government has refused to deny reports claiming the birmingham to manchester route will be scrapped . david cameron will be scrapped. david cameron has also raised concerns. according to reports in the times, which claims the planned line to the east midlands parkway could also be under threat . meanwhile, rishi sunak's threat. meanwhile, rishi sunak's considering plans that would effectively ban cigarettes for the next generation. it would entail steadily increasing the legal age for consuming tobacco . as reported in the guardian . . as reported in the guardian. if implemented by 2026, it would mean anyone aged 15 and under now would never be able to buy a cigarette smoking costs society £17 billion, according to government research, with 2.4 billion to the nhs alone . billion to the nhs alone. ministers are also understood to be drawing up plans to ban disposable vapes anti—monarchy

campaigners have staged a protest inside of buckingham palace . members of public staged palace. members of public staged that protest inside the grand hall. they unveiled t shirts which spelled out not my king. six of the activists involved were briefly detained by security before being escorted out of the front gate . out of the front gate. meanwhile, hundreds of activists marched to whitehall in london earlier today , calling on the earlier today, calling on the government to u—turn on brexit and return to the bloc . clusters and return to the bloc. clusters of metropolitan police officers monitored that demonstration as protesters in blue and yellow handed out flyers. the uk voted to leave the european union in a referendum in 2016 called by the then prime minister david cameron , and finally, nearly cameron, and finally, nearly a third of patients have suffered long term organ damage as a result of covid 19. that is according to findings of a new study , which also found study, which also found abnormalities in the lungs were almost 14 times higher in those

who'd had the virus. abnormal findings involving the brain and kidneys were three and two times higher, respectively . the extent higher, respectively. the extent of the damage was often influenced by the severity of their infection. their age and other diseases in the body . this other diseases in the body. this is gb news across the uk on tv, in your car, on digital radio and on your smart speaker. by saying play gb news now it's back to calvin . do we or do back to calvin. do we or do we not live in a democracy? >> innocent until proven guilty used to be a core tenet of a democratic state. we seem to have done away with the entire facade. the accusations against russell brand are coming in thick and fast. it and it should be noted, if they are true, it is absolutely awful and he is if he is proven guilty in a court of law, we should expect him to face a severe consequences. but thatis face a severe consequences. but that is just the point, isn't

it? even a man like brand deserves due process. mainstream media has become judge jury and executioner. it leaves one wondering what is their motive nafion wondering what is their motive nation in the instance of russell brand, channel 4 and the times teamed up together in a massive takedown and character assassination that has taken over the headlines of the legacy media for over a week now . why? media for over a week now. why? well, he has amassed an audience bigger than both channel 4 and the times combined . independent the times combined. independent media like that is a threat to the establishment, especially when you start talking about things. the establishment would rather you not like this , have rather you not like this, have an economic system in which pharmaceutical companies benefit hugely from medical emergency laws, where a military industrial complex benefits from war, where an energy companies benefit from energy crisis . benefit from energy crisis. >> as you are going to generate states of perpetual crisis where the interests of ordinary people. >> well, yes , and separate from >> well, yes, and separate from the interests of the elite . the interests of the elite. >> the times is paying to advertise their story on social

media. so if the accusers turn out to be victims, as the times is paying to promote their trauma, if the accused is innocent, the times is paying to promote a lie. surely this highlights why the correct place for accusers to go is to the police and not to the mainstream media. and it seems they didn't go to either. actually, it's the media who sought them out. i cannot wait for the times and channel 4 to collaborate again this name the names of this time to name the names of high individuals high profile individuals on epstein's list . i wonder when epstein's list. i wonder when they'll be airing dispatches they'll be airing the dispatches special epstein's island , special about epstein's island, but i won't hold my breath . but but i won't hold my breath. but this goes much further than legacy media. our democrats elected parliament has been getting involved too, in an incredible case of state overreach . rumble a pro free overreach. rumble a pro free speech alternative to youtube made it known this week that they had received a letter from they had received a letter from the chair of the culture, media and sport committee putting pressure on rumble to cut brand off from his revenue stream. tiktok twitter and apparently youtube all received the same. here we have a case of uk

parliament engaging directly in cancel culture. the very people who should be protecting the presumption of innocence have done away with it and are actively seeking to ruin a man and leave his family to fend for themselves again. we must ask why . caroline? caroline why. caroline? caroline dinenage, the chair of and her full title is the right honourable the lady lancaster of kimbolton. her husband is major—general the right honourable the lord lancaster of kimbolton . major general kimbolton. major general lancaster was deputy commander of the 77th brigade from june 2018 until july 2020. the 77th brigade is the uk government's disinformation unit. brigade is the uk government's disinformation unit . they use disinformation unit. they use social media to manipulate the british public through psyops and propaganda, cancel culture is their modus operandi . dame is their modus operandi. dame dinnage also wrote to us to my boss at gb news to complain about one of our presenters, bev turner. she claimed bev was not

showing impartial charity. how ironic . this is a showing impartial charity. how ironic. this is a nonsense. bev turner and andrew pierce co—presented on the programming question and both strongly disagreed on this matter. there was a balance of opinions . dame was a balance of opinions. dame dinnage has sent numerous letters of this type to media companies well beyond remit companies well beyond her remit . the question is, was she acting alone as chairman or in knowledge of the entire committee ? i say that dame committee? i say that dame dinnage needs to apologise , rise dinnage needs to apologise, rise and resign effective immediately , and perhaps the entire committee needs to be disbanded to . the worst thing about all of to. the worst thing about all of this is that the accusers cannot get justice. this and the accused cannot get a fair trial. if the accusers do turn out to have been victims of a crime, they are unlikely to obtain justice because the establishment, both the mainstream media and parliament, have interfered beyond belief. i hope the accusers were not victims . and if they were, that victims. and if they were, that they are able to find relevant support . likewise, russell brand support. likewise, russell brand cannot get a fair hearing when

the establishment has already determined his guilt . determined his guilt. establishment overreach has undermined the presumption of innocence . this parliament has innocence. this parliament has run roughshod over his civil liberties and i've never actually been a fan of brand personally , although it does personally, although it does seem he has grown out of his crass, degenerate stage and i hope he has repented. but regardless of all of that, it's clear that this an clear that this is an orchestrated character assassination and we assassination attempt and we have to keep asking the question why . why. this week we've seen increasing calls to reassess the age of consent laws and social norms. it's in light of allegations against the comedian and actor russell brand , including a woman russell brand, including a woman alleging that the star sexually assaulted her when she was 16 and he was in his 30s. mr brand denies any wrongdoing. which bnngs denies any wrongdoing. which brings me to this week's duel .

brings me to this week's duel. now obviously we won't be speculating with regards to the allegations against mr brand, but we will be talking about the topic in general. and joining me more broadly to discuss this matter of the age of consent laws should we reassess laws and should we reassess them, have the uk director of them, we have the uk director of common sense society, emma webb, and former labour party mp and the former labour party mp stephen pound. stephen let's start with you because emma's a bit sloppy on this this topic. it seems the age of consent . it seems the age of consent. should we reassess it? >> no , we shouldn't. we have to >> no, we shouldn't. we have to have a line . but look, the have a line. but look, the single most important thing is there the individual morality there is the individual morality of the and the family. of the person and the family. what that mean? what it what does that mean? what it means is that i think i think everybody would accept the fact that promiscuous the that promiscuous sex under the when teenager and when you're a teenager and you're 14 or is bad, you're13,14 or 15 is bad, i think we can accept you're 13, 14 or 15 is bad, i think we can accept that. it's physically bad. mentally physically bad. it's mentally bad. in this bad. i think everyone in this room that. but room would accept that. but i don't think everyone if we can don't think everyone if we can do so the idea is that do that. so the idea is that when this legislation went through the house and i was there time, decided there at the time, we decided

that absolutely that it wasn't absolutely a purely a manichaean black and white there were certain white issue. there were certain points, teacher points, for example, a teacher who with who has sexual relations with a student may over 16 is student who may be over 16 is still the law because still breaking the law because he or she, in in many he or she, in some in many cases, in fact, she is in a position of authority. so we do act. law is sufficiently act. the law is sufficiently nuanced to with those nuanced to deal with those strange cases, think, if i may strange cases, i think, if i may say so, without insulting you, you're very well balanced. exegesis earlier subject exegesis on the earlier subject actually the sometimes actually shows how the sometimes we law haste and we can make law in haste and repent, obviously in leisure . i repent, obviously in leisure. i think in this particular case, for various reasons, if you look at the rest of europe, i mean, it's what, 14 in portugal, you know, even younger poland, it's what, 14 in portugal, you knorknow,1younger poland, it's what, 14 in portugal, you knorknow,we'veger poland, it's what, 14 in portugal, you knorknow, we've got poland, it's what, 14 in portugal, you knorknow, we've got an’oland, it's what, 14 in portugal, you knorknow, we've got an agreement you know, we've got an agreement in this country and think in this country and i think 16 is reasonable age with the is a reasonable age with the exceptions for people in a position of authority. and if we start changing it either upwards , you know, it's unenforceable. we're to going have a police we're not to going have a police officer the bedroom. it's not officer in the bedroom. it's not going to be enforceable we going to be enforceable if we take the other direction. take it in the other direction. i'm sorry. that me. i'm sorry. that worries me. >> agree. not >> i agree. it's not enforceable, but i think it's about setting a societal standard. emma, i think we're

raising of raising we raised the age of buying from was it 15 buying tobacco from was it 15 before? 18. was the age before? it's now 18. was the age to drive? is 17. the age to dnnkis to drive? is 17. the age to drink is 18. when should we not be raising the age of sex to a similar matter? >> it obviously is a problem that there is a disparity between the age of consent sexually and the legal age of becoming an adult. right the reason why i know that you said that this is being sloppy, but i think it's being prudent and realistic. i don't think that there will be a lot of appetite amongst the british public given that the age of consent has been 16 for time now. and 16 for some time now. and that is something is established is something that is established in people's minds. i don't think that there would much that there would be much appetite for actually criminalising young young people between the ages of 16 and 18 for having sex with one another, for having sex with one another, for i think that there is when i saw this suggestion in this week's press , yes, i think that week's press, yes, i think that there is a reasonable argument to be made for that sort of staggered approach. it seems sensible to me that you that

that consent could be sort of like bracketed off 16 to 18 and then above . right. and i can see then above. right. and i can see how you might be able to as stephen was saying, there's already some nuance in, in the original legislation on this that there could be some grounds to extending that provision for not allowing consent between , not allowing consent between, say, a 16 year old and somebody in a position of authority like a teacher or somebody who's in some other kind of position of authority over them, extending that to all adults over the age of 18. so it's also about balancing this with the fact that people have already got the age of consent at 16. very much baked into their minds. age of consent at 16. very much baked into their minds . what is baked into their minds. what is it that you think that the british public would be likely to i don't think the to accept? i don't think the british public would be likely to accept the wholesale blanket criminalising sexual criminalising of sexual relations between the ages of 16 and 18. but i do see where you're coming from, kelvin, which is that we should be discouraging . and i think and discouraging. and i think and i

don't think it's something for the law. i think that it is a much stronger case to try and make the case through culture for that people under the age of 18th may be even people under the age of 20 should not be engaging in promiscuous activity with one another. that it's unwise to do so. but i don't think it's something that you can, you know, use legislation as a tool try and but one as a tool to try and but one thing that you're absolutely terrified was a governor of terrified i was a governor of a primary school for many, many years. primary school for many, many yeathat's, you know, children >> that's, you know, children from up to the age of 11. from 3 or 4 up to the age of 11. i saw ten year old children looking at hardcore their looking at hardcore on their telephones, a hardcore i mean, looking at hardcore on their tele isones, a hardcore i mean, looking at hardcore on their tele is reallya hardcore i mean, looking at hardcore on their tele is really nastycore i mean, looking at hardcore on their tele is really nasty stuff. mean, looking at hardcore on their tele is really nasty stuff. and n, this is really nasty stuff. and inevitably they thinking, inevitably they start thinking, you know , can we participate in you know, can we participate in this? think we have a real this? and i think we have a real issue.i this? and i think we have a real issue. i used to say, are issue. i used to say, where are the parents where are the parents in this? where are the parents in this? where are the this? you know, the guardians in this? you know, where religious leaders? where are the religious leaders? you who is actually you know, who is actually helping these children? because if simply if you allow people simply to actually take that path of instant gratification, then you cause a lot of hurt. and we already number of already know this huge number of unwanted pregnancies very, unwanted pregnancies in very, very children, women very young children, young women , 15, 16, 17

, women in their 15, 16, 17 years old. i think it's really very difficult. it's very easy for a person of my age who's, you know, if you've got an age of age of consent, i'm probably past age of participation past the age of participation to be perfectly but, you be perfectly honest. but, you know, for someone like know, it's easy for someone like me pontificate, but i think me to pontificate, but i think i have the right, just as father robinson to actually say, robinson has to actually say, look, this where i stand. look, this is where i stand. i can do other. this is my can do no other. this is my position morality. and position of morality. and i think cannot that think i cannot believe that anybody honestly, actually believes that legal, sexual actions age of actions between under the age of 16 are in anybody's interest. >> you make a good point, and we'll come to this topic later. but that age bracket of 16 but of that age bracket of 16 year of pregnancies year olds, 60% of pregnancies actually abortion at actually end in abortion at the moment . so there's certainly an moment. so there's certainly an issue along issue to be raised further along the we will get to the lines. but we will get to that. plenty more to come on this show this afternoon on my common sense crusade. next up, though, be discussing though, we'll be discussing implications of the controversial safety controversial online safety bill with the free with brynn harris from the free speech union. don't go

radio show.

on mark dolan tonight in my big opinion, the civil service is teaching its staff that men are women and other bonkers woke ideologies are. >> the civil service needs a complete overhaul in my take at ten, prince charming has been axed from cinderella on the grounds of sexism . i'll be grounds of sexism. i'll be making the case for the handsome prince. plus, the world renowned professor with the key to happiness , my top pundits. and happiness, my top pundits. and tomorrow's papers. we're live . tomorrow's papers. we're live. at nine. >> welcome back to the common sense crusade. with me, the reverend calvin robinson on your onune reverend calvin robinson on your online and on your wireless. this week saw a controversial new law passed by peers aimed at making social media firms more responsible for users safety on their platforms . the online their platforms. the online safety bill has taken years to be agreed and will force firms to remove illegal content and potentially harmful material.

children's charity. the nspcc said the law would mean a safer onune said the law would mean a safer online world, but critics argue it will allow a regulator and tech firms to dictate what may or may not be said online. the chief legal counsel at the free speech union, dr. bryn harris, joins us now . dr. speech union, dr. bryn harris, joins us now. dr. bryn harris, thank you for joining joins us now. dr. bryn harris, thank you forjoining us. thank thank you for joining us. thank you. this has been has been in the works for around six years. it's been in parliament for a long time, back and forth, back and and we achieved and forth. and we have achieved some successes, haven't we? first foremost. first and foremost. >> right. it's been first and foremost. >.long, right. it's been first and foremost. >.long, gruelling ght. it's been first and foremost. >.long, gruelling process been first and foremost. >.long, gruelling process .)een first and foremost. >.long, gruelling process . there a long, gruelling process. there was a period when michelle donelan was in the hot seat at dcms and she did strip out some of the particularly offending provisions. now the tories is one that many of us were concerned about and certainly at the free speech union was a requirement to remove, in effect , legal but harmful content. so this is content that's not in breach of any law, but might be

harmful to adults . so this was harmful to adults. so this was something obviously that was, you know, utterly vague and could lead to the restriction of completely innocent , legitimate speech. >> right? so what is harmful? >> right? so what is harmful? >> well, exactly . well, the i >> well, exactly. well, the i mean, the bill's answer to that is that what is harmful is harm. it's one of those circular definitions that a woman is a woman. right. exactly the got us nowhere. so you're right that thatis nowhere. so you're right that that is that was progress. and the better for the the bill is better for the removal that provision . removal of that provision. right. however i think it's likely that the way that the bill will play out, it's still going to result in tech companies taking down stuff that isn't illegal. but they think it might be. it looks harmful. let's play on the safe side. >> well, let's talk about some of the things that have been left in that are concerning. so this there has to be this idea that there has to be an automated system to remove content that is reasonably likely to infer that could likely to infer that it could be illegal. this me sounds illegal. so this to me sounds like already see with like what we already see with the takedowns people the dcma takedowns that people can that's copyrighted, can say, oh, that's copyrighted, remove it. and there's no real

checking process. it's just gone straight which means that straight away, which means that people's taken people's livelihoods are taken away too. away straight away too. >> exactly and i mean, >> yeah, exactly. and i mean, i think a problem with this illegal content duty as well is that it's not simply a duty to remove illegal content or allegedly illegal content that they're notified of. there's also a proactive duty to prevent illegal content from from getting there in the first place. now again, i think it's important to be fair that as the bill was going through parliament, safeguards were added. parliament, safeguards were added . so, for instance, now added. so, for instance, now it's a dubious safeguard. so now providers will have to say , is providers will have to say, is there a defence to this alleged illegality ? what is the required illegality? what is the required intent for this to be an offence , which i think is relevant and a safeguard ? but you've got to a safeguard? but you've got to ask, you know , how good are ask, you know, how good are people at twitter going to be at essentially, you know, carrying out assessments that , you know,

out assessments that, you know, the police and the cps struggle in that britain who's going to be regulating this? well, i'm afraid it's ofcom, which which. and that brings us on to the next the next round of fun and games, which will be seeing how ofcom goes about its regular regulatory duties . there's going regulatory duties. there's going to have to draft codes of practise. so there's an awful lot more busy body work to do. certainly the fsu is going to be, i hope, very engaged in holding the feet to the fire. i mean, i'm you know, i'm willing to take an optimistic punt that michael grade is fairly sensible guy at the top of ofcom. the question is at the sort of middle echelons is there going to be that same level of common sense? and we'll have to wait and see. >> experience will tell me otherwise. but let's let's wait and see because they are going to setting the guidelines to be setting the guidelines and how to police how they're going to police those aren't they? those guidelines aren't they?

essentially one which essentially one of which could be online be age verification for online aduu be age verification for online adult content ? yeah. what does adult content? yeah. what does aduu adult content? yeah. what does adult content? yeah. what does adult content mean? >> well, they've they've introduced a new provisions and a special regime for content. i mean , i'm well, sorry. there are mean, i'm well, sorry. there are two things. i mean, there's so there needs to be verification to see. okay, is it a child user who's seeing this and if so , who's seeing this and if so, then special duties apply to prevent children from harm, which is a good thing. prevent children from harm, which is a good thing . which is which is a good thing. which is a good thing. exactly. and we've never had any any problem with that. i think there are questions to be asked about how well our providers are going to be able to say, okay, this is a this is a child using the net now and we can surgically see, you know, just restrict what they see. what you might see is , is a sort of an over cautious approach that says, let's just at be safe as a whole to make sure we don't accidentally expose children to harmful

content . and this is the general content. and this is the general problem with the bill that the act as it is now, the incentives and the risks , it incentivises and the risks, it incentivises extreme overcaution to avoid these sort of swingeing cuts . these sort of swingeing cuts. yes, sorry, swingeing fines by by ofcom. so but but generally, yes, i think you're right. the steps that the bill takes to protect children, i think are absolutely fine. at one point it was possible that the government would have seen sense and realised all we need really is a is a children's safety bill, you know, and i think that would have been sort of a lot of the problems. exactly but unfortunately didn't win through. >> so because this might take away anonymity and make people have some of have to provide some kind of identification for a lot of onune identification for a lot of online websites, not just, but in general to go on the adult internet, might have sign in general to go on the adult intiwith, might have sign in general to go on the adult intiwith a might have sign in general to go on the adult intiwith a passportt have sign in general to go on the adult intiwith a passport orave sign in general to go on the adult intiwith a passport or ae sign in general to go on the adult intiwith a passport or a photo gn in general to go on the adult intiwith a passport or a photo id up with a passport or a photo id or of some kind, which i think a lot of freedom lovers might be against. >> i want to get my panel's thoughts on this because it is a tncky thoughts on this because it is a tricky area. there is a bit of a grey ground because i'm assuming

that you are against. yes >> yes. >> yes. >> okay. so we do want children looking at it or appearing in it. >> stephen, i'll start with everything derailed immediately derailed . derailed. >> we want to protect children from harmful and adult content. >> however , we also want to >> however, we also want to protect adults anonymity online as such. >> so i agree with what bryn said there, that this should have been from the beginning. i think it should have been a child safety bill. and we've seen this time and time again with with large pieces of legislation that are almost too broad parliamentarian to broad for parliamentarian to properly scrutinise and it has some good bits, some bad bits, but it's not specific enough to be a good, effective piece of legislation that doesn't have all sorts of unforeseen negative consequences is one thing that i was concerned about, particularly this week. coming to the privacy point, which is that the home secretary , just as that the home secretary, just as this bill was passed, the very same day it was in the press that the home secretary was trying to put pressure on meta to not go ahead with their plans

to not go ahead with their plans to encrypt some of their other apps. so whatsapp is already encrypted, but this would bother you and so i, i think it's extremely concerning knowing that you can see how this could easily be used. there's obviously a connection between privacy and free speech because we've seen attempts in the past with other legislation, such as previous bills like previous drafts of bills like the scottish hate crime bill, trying to encroach on private speech speech private speech, speech in private dwellings . so you can see how dwellings. so you can see how this could start to affect the privacy of adults that this could have ramifications on the freedoms of adults that are not doing anything illegal. >> let me let me ask bryn about that before i go to stephen, because this has raised another point that whatsapp messages signal messages. et cetera. they are encrypted. however, ofcom will access to be able will require access to be able to scan private messages, which means might, as uk means that we might, as uk citizens forced to download citizens be forced to download some of that enables some kind of app that enables them to scan the messages before they're them to scan the messages before they' mean, them to scan the messages before they'mean, my understanding that >> i mean, my understanding that the that raced

the bills that have raced through parliament its final through parliament in its final stages , my understanding is that stages, my understanding is that there backtracking the there was backtracking from the government encryption . and so government on encryption. and so the of it has been averted the worst of it has been averted . but i think you're absolutely right that there's a serious there's this very strange thing we have a burgeoning privacy law in this in this country. and then these complete blind spots where we say that people's whatsapp messages , especially if whatsapp messages, especially if you're saying something offensive, you know, are fair game all the time. yes it's exactly. so it's that is worrying. i mean, i think the thing that got completely right and i wholly agree with is that i mean, this bill is sort of philosophically flawed. it treats as as this sort treats the web as as this sort of specific dangerous phenomenon like dangerous dogs or e—scooters. and it says, and we can have a law that regulates all of it, right? well you can't because the web just a place because the web is just a place where we live our life and do all sorts of things. and what all sorts of things. and so what you've this behemoth, you've got is this behemoth, monstrous that regulates monstrous bill that regulates a vast of activity. i

vast range of activity. and i think it's going to make our lives, our daily lives, more regulated, intruded upon by regulated, more intruded upon by rules, because we live in a very authoritarian state. >> i want to end with stephen brown's thoughts. >> it's hard to think that. i mean, i was in the house when this bill started. this was about six years and what we about six years ago. and what we were talking the time were talking about at the time was, not so much about. was, in fact, not so much about. it about particularly it was about a particularly horrific scale of suicides that had encouraged by people, had been encouraged by people, you there's you know, and apparently there's places web where people places on the web where people actually people actually encourage people and they get they say, are you going to get they say, are you going to get the tonight? and they people the bus tonight? and they people actually kill themselves. and i'll honest, that horrified actually kill themselves. and i'llin honest, that horrified actually kill themselves. and i'llin ho house.|at horrified actually kill themselves. and i'llin ho house. and orrified actually kill themselves. and i'llin ho house. and thered actually kill themselves. and i'llin ho house. and there was us in the house. and there was this the worst that this awful the worst thing that a can say is a politician can say is something be done, because something must be done, because quite best to do quite often it's best not to do something. the assumption something. but the assumption that we had when this bill came before house that before the house was that we could something about could do something about it. well, can't control well, we can't we can't control the dark web. we can't control the dark web. we can't control the evil. so what we can the really evil. so what we can hopefully control is a standard for people who be for the people who might be drawn into that. and i think the real problem i have is the old

who judges the judges, who guards, you know , and the point guards, you know, and the point is, somebody is going to say is, if somebody is going to say that content that this particular content is so so egregiously awful, so foul, so egregiously awful, that not only should you not be allowed to see it, but you should actually be penalised and punished. makes that punished. who makes that judgement then who judges judgement and then who judges those judges, right. because that the that i still don't see the answer. may all hear as answer. we may all hear as reasonable people here in london, we may say these are our standards. this is our morality. not everybody has that standard. not everybody has that standard. not morality not everybody has that standard. i\and morality not everybody has that standard. i\and worried morality not everybody has that standard. i\and worried if�*norality . and i'm just worried if somebody is simply somebody somewhere is simply going to say, no, no, no, yes, we'll well, don't we'll allow that. well, i don't give them the right to do that. who does? >> amen. thank you very much, stephen thank dr. stephen pound. thank you. dr. bryn free speech bryn harris from the free speech union. plenty more to come this evening. common sense crusade, including the staggering new stats that half of gen stats showing that half of gen z pregnancies end in abortions. before that , though, let's see before that, though, let's see how the weather is looking . how the weather is looking. >> a brighter outlook with boxt solar proud sponsors of weather on . gb news.

on. gb news. >> hello there. welcome to your latest gb news weather forecast. i'm craig snell. well, looking ahead to sunday, a very different day compared to today. spells of heavy rain, especially across northern half of the across the northern half of the uk. let's all courtesy this uk. let's all courtesy of this area pressure. it will area of low pressure. it will move the area of high pressure away towards the continent, giving unsettled day for giving a very unsettled day for some of us may hang on to the largely conditions at largely settled conditions at times south—east. but times across the south—east. but as into tonight, you can as we go into tonight, you can see this area of rain gradually working way eastwards across working its way eastwards across many of uk. heaviest many parts of the uk. heaviest of rain across scotland, the of the rain across scotland, the south—east just remaining largely dry with the clearest of the skies. but for all of us, a milder then last night, milder night. then last night, we will lows falling, not we will see lows falling, not much lower than around 10 to 12 degrees. but do start sunday degrees. but we do start sunday off on a rather wet note across parts wales into the midlands parts of wales into the midlands , this area of rain will gradually its gradually work its way northwards go through the northwards as we go through the course the day, turning quite course of the day, turning quite heavy parts northern heavy for parts of northern ireland scotland. ireland and scotland. a thoroughly come thoroughly wet afternoon to come here, it will turn brighter here, but it will turn brighter and drier across the south. so some to the day

some sunshine to end the day here warm. 21 here feeling quite warm. 21 degrees down towards the southeast. elsewhere, the temperatures somewhat temperatures tempered somewhat by that strong wind into monday. the overnight rain clearing really leaving a mixture of sunshine and scattered showers. some of the showers potentially quite heavy and thundery across the northern half of the uk with the northern half of the uk with the best of the sunshine down towards the south. but the unsettled weather is set to continue as we go into next week, potentially turning very wet wednesday day . wet and windy on wednesday day. >> a brighter outlook with boxt solar proud sponsors of weather on .

>> you're listening to gb news radio . radio. >> welcome back to the common sense crusade with me, the reverend calvin robinson, on your tv online and on your wireless. now, last year, half of all viable pregnancies for generation z. that's women under

25 years of age ended in elective abortion. that's according to christian concern, who have been delving into the figures from both the ons and the department . of health figures from both the ons and the department. of health and social care. moreover for the pregnancy rate for young women and girls aged between 15 to 24 has been falling year on year. let's discuss this then with michael phillips from the christian legal centre . michael, christian legal centre. michael, thank you for joining christian legal centre. michael, thank you forjoining us. this thank you for joining us. this is such a sensitive topic and i appreciate you guys have put a lot of work into this. can you just give us an outline of what this actually means for our society? yes >> so what we've seen happening is this is that over the course of the last 40, 50 years is that we've gone from a situation where abortion was legal and still is technically illegal to a situation where it become a form of birth control . we've had form of birth control. we've had 8 million abortions since 1977, and every year, unfortunately, it just goes up and up and up. >> wanted it up my year at the

same time, we're seeing we're seeing viable pregnancies drop as well . as well. >> is this a direct correlation 7 >> is this a direct correlation ? yes. yes there's a direct correlation because what happens is this is that we are told that abortion is good, abortion is safe. >> but in fact, what is happening is this is that it results in adverse mental health consequences for women. it there is a chance that future pregnancies will be adversely affected by previous terminations of pregnancies. it has knock on effect throughout a woman's life and throughout society. doesn't just stop with the termination of pregnancy , the termination of pregnancy, the termination of pregnancy, the ramifications. it's like throwing a stone in the water and the ripples go out and out and the ripples go out and out and out and affect so many other things . things. >> right. i think there's a slight difficulty with your sound, so we'll come back to you shortly. >> i want to bring my panel in on this mob . we i spoke in the on this mob. we i spoke in the last segment that teenage girls around the age of 16, 60% of

their pregnancies are leading to abortions at this at this stage. so that's the vast majority. what do you think's changed or affected society to make it reach that point ? reach that point? >> well, firstly, i think that this is really sad. i think that we live in a society that is becoming increasingly culturally anti—marriage , anti—family. it's anti—marriage, anti—family. it's kind of default assumption. i think, for people who are under the age of 20, particularly that if you end up getting pregnant, it's an unplanned pregnancy , it's an unplanned pregnancy, then you have an abortion. and that's just the way that things go that there's not really another option there for people . i think because of the way that pro—life activism has been demonised, i think that it's become less likely that younger people will be exposed to the other options that might be available to them. but fundamentally, i think that there are a lot of pro—choice activists or people who have a

pro—choice opinion who would look at these numbers and still think this is terribly sad because they're not you know, they don't hate babies. they don't women to not be don't want women to not be having babies that they might otherwise want to have. >> and that's important >> and that's an important point. this isn't point. this isn't this isn't a pro—life pro—abortion pro—life versus pro—abortion debate. conversation debate. this is a conversation about are so many young about why are so many young women terminating . women terminating. >> are some people and >> but there are some people and you see a lot of them on the internet, on tiktok, on social , internet, on tiktok, on social, online, social platforms , online, social media platforms, who are just pro—choice, who are not just pro—choice, they are pro—abortion. they'll do things like we saw recently a trans person posting saying that they wanted to be the first trans woman to have an abortion and people posting cakes that are celebrating their abortion day and things like this. so i think young people are being exposed to a culture that is just is increasingly anti—child. it's increasingly anti baby culture. it's seen as something that will utterly destroy their life. and there is no other opfion life. and there is no other option before them. >> okay . i'll go back to michael

>> okay. i'll go back to michael before i go to stephen, because i understand, michael, you're back there. does what emma has just said, does that correlate with your research? >> does . and i think the >> yes, it does. and i think the problem is this, is that people need to be told right from the very when they're at very get go when they're at school, when they're at school, even when they're at church, because these things are school, even when they're at chu even ecause these things are school, even when they're at chu even being; these things are school, even when they're at chu even being taught things are school, even when they're at chu even being taught at ngs are school, even when they're at chu even being taught at church not even being taught at church anymore, that life is sacred and from three weeks of age, you have a heartbeat. at six weeks, you have brainwaves. at eight weeks, you have unique fingerprints. and so you are unique. you are a person and the right to life is the only unqualified right that there is in the european convention of human rights. and this is it is absolutely sacrosanct and we must celebrate it. and that's the problem not only do we not understand the science involved, but don't celebrate but also we don't celebrate life. we don't we don't celebrate big families anymore. and we are moving towards a culture of death in our society where, you know what is celebrated is what is material. and children are seen as a drag. and children are seen as a drag. and so it's very sad that this is this is really something

which is the ultimate out the manifestation of what we now believe as a society. so we have to celebrate life. we have to celebrate children. we have to celebrate children. we have to celebrate families. >> phillips from the christian legal centre. now, i want to bnngin legal centre. now, i want to bring in stephen pound. again, this is not about whether we're pro—life or pro—choice. this pro—life or or pro—choice. this is fact that the vast is about the fact that the vast majority pregnancies in young majority of pregnancies in young women being ended. no, women are now being ended. no, it's you're absolutely right to make that distinction. >> and i have to say, i initially i do feel a reluctance as a to actually be talking as a man to actually be talking about and know this is a about this. and i know this is a controversial thing, but i mean, this is obviously it doesn't affect personally, but it affect me personally, but it does me a human being does affect me as a human being and me as individual and affects me as an individual who respect life. and who has respect for life. and i tell you what, really infuriates me like to know me about it. i'd like to know a bit more about the data, by the way, it's views, way, whether it's gb views, europe, whatever, we're europe, whatever, because we're not sure. here's not entirely sure. but here's the thing. if somebody treats an abortion as of abortion as a form of contraception , then they contraception, then they are trivialising human life, they are trivialising and in many

ways showing contempt for the greatest that god has given greatest gift that god has given us, life. and if you us, the gift of life. and if you actually say you can have a actually say that you can have a one night stand, but it won't matter you can have matter because you can have abortion the morning, what abortion in the morning, what does your does that say about your morality? but all, what morality? but above all, what does say about that child? does it say about that child? read wes streeting new biography. if biography. i don't know if you've because his you've read that because his mother going to abort him mother was going to abort him and she didn't because she had a fry that morning. and it's fry up that morning. and it's called two bills up, called two bills and a fry up, you and so somebody like you know, and so somebody like wes you know, it's wes streeting, you know, it's just of millions people just one of millions of people who is on earth. when who is on this earth. and when you think of the millions you think of all the millions who because of an who aren't, because of an abortion, think, abortion, you start to think, you old beethoven you know, the old beethoven thing, beethoven would thing, you know, beethoven would have abortion nowadays. have had an abortion nowadays. but look, it's the that but look, it's the idea that a human life can be something which actually dealt with in which is actually dealt with in a frivolous, contemptuous way. you know, i can't be bothered to take precautions . can't be take precautions. i can't be bothered even avoid sexual bothered to even avoid sexual activity. it's all going to activity. but it's all going to be all right because i'm going to pop down to clinic in the to pop down to the clinic in the morning they're going to morning and they're going to switch on the suction. i'm sorry. trivialises human sorry. that trivialises human life is anti life. it's

life and that is anti life. it's not pro—choice or anti choice. it anti life. not pro—choice or anti choice. it andi life. i'd like to see >> and what i'd like to see these statistics, you asked where from. they're from where they're from. they're from the the dhs. see, i'd the ons and the dhs. see, i'd also like to see a breakdown of the ons and the dhs. see, i'd alsc statistics ee a breakdown of the ons and the dhs. see, i'd alsc statistics becauseakdown of the ons and the dhs. see, i'd alsc statistics because we )wn of the ons and the dhs. see, i'd alsc statistics because we don't the statistics because we don't know many these abortions know how many of these abortions are for medical reasons, are claimed for medical reasons, but know vast majority of but we know the vast majority of these were elective. so these ones were elective. so that again, it that stands out. but again, it wasn't on pro—life life wasn't a debate on pro—life life versus pro—choice. just versus pro—choice. it was just looking if looking at the statistics. if this is happening in our this is what's happening in our in society, unfortunately . in our society, unfortunately. but before take a break, but before we take a break, let's have look what you've let's have a look at what you've had say about today's topics had to say about today's topics so far on the duel topic, on whether we should review the law of the of consent that of the age of consent that hannah says , while i do think hannah says, while i do think everyone is innocent until proven guilty, i think the rules around the age of consent are way blurred. there should be way too blurred. there should be some sort of law that means you can't have relations with anyone under age of 18 unless you under the age of 18 unless you are also the same age or near enough. i think that's pretty much trying much what emma was trying to say. hannah. richard say. thank you, hannah. richard goes i think the goes on to say, i think the trouble is every situation is different when it comes to an

age difference relationships different when it comes to an aplus,:ference relationships different when it comes to an aplus, timese relationships different when it comes to an aplus, times have alationships different when it comes to an aplus, times have changedips different when it comes to an aplus, times have changed a; different when it comes to an aplus, times have changed a lot . plus, times have changed a lot in 10 to 20 years. what was once acceptable is no longer and this is the big problem when it comes acceptable is no longer and this is historicaloblem when it comes acceptable is no longer and this is historical allegations| it comes acceptable is no longer and this is historical allegations forcomes to historical allegations for this reason, i do think consent laws need to be looked at. thank you very much for that. and then in terms of online safety, carl says, i've been feeling very torn on this online bill. on the one hand, i'm a big advocate for free speech, so i have concerns that will lead to more cancel culture. however, as a parent, i really worry about what my kids have to online and on have access to online and on balance, the latter is my priority. see, i'd rather my children weren't at risk by children weren't put at risk by the side of internet. the dark side of the internet. i think with you on one think i'm with you on that one call protecting kids is the priority. now on the topic of high abortion rates in under 25, angela says as a woman in her 60s, i don't having my 60s, i don't regret having my first aged 21. however first child aged 21. however over these days, i would not want this for any young woman. yes, abortion rate under yes, the abortion rate in under 25 gone but we've just 25 has gone up, but we've just heard the pregnancy rate in girls aged 15 to 25 has gone down, should celebrate the

down, which should celebrate the fact young girls are focusing on their studies and careers rather than we shouldn't, than childbirth. we shouldn't, angela, because we'll die out as a society if people stop having children. should celebrate children. we should celebrate people children. we should celebrate peajle children. we should celebrate pea perfect age that. well is a perfect age for that. well done, you, derek says. i'm afraid my abortion is afraid my view on abortion is augned afraid my view on abortion is aligned with my view on free speech. pro—choice. good for you, derek. although i strongly disagree for obvious reasons. every life is sacred. now, coming up in the final part of my common sense crusade, this week, we'll be discussing why are benefit if are in economy may benefit if marriage rates return to 1990s levels. don't go away .

welcome back. i'd like to thank emma webb and stephen pound my duellists this week. thank you both very much for joining me. and on to the next segment. and now on to the next segment. it won't be a popular view for left wing thinkers and universities , but a powerful new

universities, but a powerful new book shows that two parent families are better. it boils to down simple economics. according to influential american economist melissa s kearney, who says a traditional family has a huge impact on economic outcomes. in her brand new book, the two parent privilege. so it is woke anti—family ideology destroying british prosper pretty well. who better to discuss this than tony rochinski from the coalition of marriage ? from the coalition of marriage? tony, thank you so much for coming on today to talk about this very important issue. well, thank you for having me. >> and thank you, by the way, for the stuff you do, not for all the stuff you do, not just on gb news but outside of gb news supporting organisations like the like mine up and down the country your own free time. country on your own free time. it's work. thank you. it's great work. thank you. thank you. >> well, through this. >> well, run us through this. how is woke destroying the family? well. family? well well. >> information this family? well well. >> is information this family? well well. >> is nothingnation this family? well well. >> is nothing new.n this family? well well. >> is nothing new. calvinis book is nothing new. calvin everyone that growing up everyone knows that growing up with dad with your married mom and dad is a super predictor for you doing well in life and that's been

known for a long, long time. but for some reason, we don't seem to be talking about it. we won't talk it, is the talk about it, which is the ironic thing. and the problem is. you mentioned your is. so you mentioned in your intro that marriage rates intro there that marriage rates have fallen about have fallen. they fallen about 40% in the uk since the 90s. and you might think so what? well, actually , so what is because it actually, so what is because it affects kids, it affects children's outcomes, marriage. so institute of family studies just this past week have shown again that marriage is the best predictor of happiness. who knew marriage is the best predictor of kids doing well in school, of kids having good mental health, of kids doing better financially in life, of kids having good physical health. so many different things. marriage for some reason, growing up with your married biological mom and dad has impact and makes dad has an impact and makes a big difference. but it's not just that. you see, when you look at so the marriage rate has fallen across, across the place, across, across the western world. yeah but world. really? yeah but the impact different . world. really? yeah but the impact different. it world. really? yeah but the impact different . it so if impact is different. it so if you look at marriage foundation did some research 90% of the

richest mums are married, only 20% are the poorest mums are married . now that's a massive married. now that's a massive difference . and so the people, difference. and so the people, the less well off in society who could really do with the benefits that marriage brings us both to them as adults to and kids are not getting married and suffering because of it . and yet suffering because of it. and yet we'll talk in schools and we'll talk in the media. anything but marriage. and the irony is, of course, that the what matthew goodwin might call the elites, you know, the kind of liberal elites, university graduates, blah, blah, blah, those people are more likely to get married and live good lives. you know, i'm talking absolutely right. and it's like , you know, they'll and it's like, you know, they'll they'll talk left, but walk right, if you like. from that point of view. and so my question is coalition for marriage , the uk's largest marriage, the uk's largest pro—marriage organisation representing tens of thousands of individuals and groups who promote man woman marriage. yeah, we got we got supporters from all faiths and none. and

the question is how? how do we get to a place where where we can promote this this thing which is good for individuals , which is good for individuals, it's good for kids, and it's actually great for the prosperity of a nation . and i prosperity of a nation. and i get that . some people are get that. some people are offended by that concern . but offended by that concern. but and, you know , we can go into and, you know, we can go into that if you want to. and even, you know, it's not a question of you know, it's not a question of you recognise that sometimes marriages don't work. you know, adultery, abuse, abandonment, and no one should have to put up with that stuff. but on the whole, on a population basis, marriage is a really, really good thing. how do we overcome , good thing. how do we overcome, um, our little stuck in a rut place now where we can talk openly? we teach kids about the benefits of marriage and that actually growing up and being married and having kids, it's the, it's the most fulfilling thing you can do to is an objective good is an objective good. >> so people can talk about alternative lifestyles as much as they want, but you should still able to promote. still be able to promote. >> and that's the key thing. family this a value

family this isn't a value judgement, this isn't judgement, right? this isn't saying, value this and saying, oh, my value is this and your this is looking at your value. this is looking at the data, at stats, the data, looking at the stats, and a close run thing, and it's not a close run thing, right? growing up with your married dad, it's married mum and dad, it's immense in terms of the outcomes and the benefits. yes there's always both sides always examples on both sides where it doesn't work and it does. a population basis does. but on a population basis it's most important question it's the most important question in society you know, in our society today. you know, karl marriage is karl truman says marriage is at the of our culture war, the heart of our culture war, and absolutely is . and as an and it absolutely is. and as an organisation, our question is how do we get get the conversation back to that? not because it's a preference or it's an ideology, but because it's an ideology, but because it's good for a nation. >> well, in 1970, in this nation , 84 out of 1000 men were married. yeah now, today, seven out of eight men are married. yeah, right. how do we flip that back around? >> well, so there's loads of things, i mean, and there's loads of contributory factors to this. one of them is, this. and one of them is, you know, about men know, you're talking about men there. you know, it there. well, you know, it appues there. well, you know, it applies to women, too. so we've got whole the whole of the got the whole the whole of the organisation our economy organisation of our our economy really. and society is against

marriage. you know, if you look at people at the poor end of the socio economic if socio economic spectrum, if they're and they they're on benefits and they move together, a mother and a move in together, a mother and a father, they lose benefits. so you're to get you're punishing people to get there's know, for people there's you know, for people who get and stay married, get married and stay married, there's in the tax there's no benefit in the tax system whatsoever. other countries at these countries are looking at these things. the idea things. you've then got the idea of, so one way would be to of, well, so one way would be to legislate favour of the legislate in favour of the family. yeah. i mean, family. well, yeah. i mean, i suppose the thing to do suppose the first thing to do would be to, recognise would to, be to, to recognise the fact that actually promoting young man, woman marriage is a good idea. >> that's a good starting point. and i think if people want to learn more, they should go and check out the coalition for marriage. you much, marriage. thank you very much, tony, joining us. thank you. tony, for joining us. thank you. through each on through that. now, each week on the like to end with the show, i'd like to end with our closing this week is our closing prayer this week is the for the 16th sunday the collect for the 16th sunday after trinity . o lord, we after trinity. 0 lord, we beseech thee, let thy continual pity beseech thee, let thy continual pity cleanse and defend thy church . and because it cannot church. and because it cannot continue in safety without thy succour, preserve it evermore by

thy help and goodness , through thy help and goodness, through jesus christ, our lord. amen. you have been watching calvin's common sense crusade with me, the reverend calvin robinson. i'll be back with you next saturday at 7 pm. next up, it's darren grimes and his liberal friends. but before that , here friends. but before that, here is the weather. have a good weekend . god bless you, desmond i >> -- >> that 5mm >> that warm feeling inside from boxt boilers proud sponsors of weather on . gb news. weather on. gb news. >> hello there. welcome to your latest news weather forecast. i'm craig snell. looking ahead to sunday, a very different day compared to today. to sunday, a very different day compared to today . spells of compared to today. spells of heavy rain, especially across the northern half of the uk . the northern half of the uk. let's all courtesy of this area of pressure. move of low pressure. it will move the area of high pressure away towards the continent, giving a very unsettled day for some of us may on to the largely us may hang on to the largely settled times settled conditions at times across the southeast. but as we settled conditions at times acrinto:he southeast. but as we settled conditions at times acrinto tonightheast. but as we settled conditions at times acrinto tonight ,aast. but as we settled conditions at times acrinto tonight , you but as we settled conditions at times acrinto tonight , you can: as we settled conditions at times acrinto tonight , you can see we go into tonight, you can see this area of rain gradually working its way eastwards across many of uk. heaviest many parts of the uk. heaviest of across scotland, of the rain across scotland, the

southeast just remaining largely dry with the clearest of the skies. but for all of us, a milder night. then last night, we will see lows falling much lower than around 10 to 12 degrees. but we do start sunday off on a rather wet note across parts of wales into the midlands , this area of rain will gradually its way gradually work its way northwards as we go through the course of the day, turning quite heavy northern heavy for parts of northern ireland and scotland. a thoroughly come thoroughly wet afternoon to come here, but it will turn brighter and drier the so and drier across the south. so some end the day some sunshine to end the day here quite warm. 21 here feeling quite warm. 21 degrees down towards the southeast. elsewhere, the temperatures tempered somewhat by strong wind into monday. by that strong wind into monday. the overnight rain clearing out, really leaving a mixture of sunshine , fine and scattered sunshine, fine and scattered showers. some of the showers potentially heavy and potentially quite heavy and thundery the northern thundery across the northern half of the uk with the best of the sunshine down towards the south. but the unsettled weather is continue as we go into is set to continue as we go into next week, potentially turning very and on wednesday very wet and windy on wednesday day . day. >> that warm feeling inside from

boxt boilers

gb news. well. it's saturday night and this is the saturday five. >> i'm darren grimes along with ben leo, emily carver , lewis ben leo, emily carver, lewis oakley and patrick christys . oakley and patrick christys. tonight on the show, sunak finally delivers common sense and stands up to the green extreme. >> why cry—baby ramonas need to get over brexit and get on board with making the country great again. >> rishi sunak would be mad to implement new zealand's bonkers smoking ban in this country. >> need forced age >> we need forced age verification checks for channel migrants and my radical solution to fixing the housing crisis. >> it's 8:00 pm and this is the >> it's 8:00pm and this is the . saturday five. welcome to the saturday. five

cheers