?is it what do you make to this? is it a cynical ploy to gain votes or, as i said, just good old common sense? finally prevailing? and get this, 1 million children apparently experienced destitution in the uk last year. what's going on? who's to blame? and let me ask you this. the whole notion of destitution, what does that even mean to you ? what does that even mean to you? and that's what this name makes me do. shamima begum of course i'm talking about her yet again. back to the court of appeals we go. do you think she should ever be allowed back in this country? your thoughts on all of that . your thoughts on all of that. yes, a lot to get our teeth into tonight. keep me company for an hour of the feistiest debates. but before we get into all of that , let's cross but before we get into all of that, let's cross live but before we get into all of that , let's cross live to but before we get into all of that, let's cross live to polly middlehurst for tonight's latest headunes.

middlehurst for tonight's latest headlines . michelle thank you. headlines. michelle thank you. >> good evening to you. well downing street today confirmed 12 british citizens were killed dunng 12 british citizens were killed during the hamas terror attack in israel. another five remain missing and that comes after an 85 year old israeli hostage released by hamas last night described the hell have been taken into what seemed like a spider web of tunnels under gaza. york covid also said she was treated well and seen by a doctor during her ordeal . hamas doctor during her ordeal. hamas say she was returned along with another female israeli , nurit another female israeli, nurit cooper on humanitarian grounds. their husbands, though , are their husbands, though, are still being held hostage as well. javid's daughter, sharon , well. javid's daughter, sharon, who's a british citizen, translated her mother's description of her abduction dunng description of her abduction during a news conference earlier i >> my mum is saying that she was taken on the back of a motorbike with her body, with her legs on one side and a hide on another side that she was taken through the ploughed field with the men

in front on one side and a man behind her, and that while she was being taken, she was hit by sticks by shabab. shabab yeah, shabab people . al—qaeda until shabab people. al—qaeda until they reach the tunnel there . they reach the tunnel there. they walked for a few kilometres on the wet ground . publish my on the wet ground. publish my name later . there are a on the wet ground. publish my name later. there are a huge , name later. there are a huge, huge network of tunnels underneath it looks like a spider web . well in a new spider web. well in a new development this evening, the israeli security agency has released full of interviews with captured hamas fighters . captured hamas fighters. >> one of them says they were promised huge rewards for capturing hostages during their attack on israel on october the 7th. the in gaza, whoever brings

the kidnapped gets a bonus . the kidnapped gets a bonus. >> how much is the bonus they give an apartment and $10,000 for each person captured? >> yes . >> yes. >> yes. >> who told you this? >> who told you this? >> that's how it works in al—qassam brigade. the commander told you this? >> yes. >> yes. >> the company commander. >> the company commander. >> each captured, you get an apartment? >> yes. because they wanted as many kidnapped as possible . the many kidnapped as possible. the goal our infiltration for goal of our infiltration for them was to capture and kidnap as many we could . as many as we could. >> well, that comes as central israel has faced its largest rocket barrage since the attacks of october the 7th. local media is reporting tonight that multiple rockets fired from gaza were successfully intercepted over tel aviv and that's after israel's prime minister said hamas must be destroyed at the same time warning the war may take some time. in addition to that, the palestinian health ministry has said today more than 700 people were killed in the last 24 hours, bringing their total to nearly 5800. israel's prime minister has also

said today after the war, though, no one will live under the tyranny of hamas . the tyranny of hamas. >> we are doing everything we need to do to destroy hamas in gaza. need to do to destroy hamas in gaza . we will dismantle its gaza. we will dismantle its terror machine. we will dismantle its political structure. we will make every effort to release our hostages and will make every effort to keep palestinian civilians out of harm's way. it's important to understand hamas is committing a double war crime . it's not only double war crime. it's not only murdering our civilians , murdering our civilians, targeting our civilians, doing unspeakable war crimes. they're also hiding behind civilians , also hiding behind civilians, their own civilians . their own civilians. >> benjamin netanyahu speaking there. now in news here at home, there. now in news here at home, the number of hotels being used by the government to house asylum seekers is now being reduced . the immigration reduced. the immigration minister confirmed today 50 will be exited their words by january and that process will begin in the coming days. the government hopes the move will alleviate some of the public anger over

the small boat crisis and the daily cost of hotels, which has hit £8 million a day. robert jenrick spoke in the commons earlier on. >> these hotels should be assets for their local communities serving businesses and tourists , serving businesses and tourists, hosting the life events that we treasure, like weddings and birthdays is not housing illegal migrants at unsustainable cost to the taxpayer. so we took immediate action a year ago to reduce our reliance on hotels as we significantly increase the amount of dispersed accommodation and have increased funding for local councils. we reformed the management of the existing estate robert jenrick now a man who died after his car was swept away in water near aberdeenshire during storm babet , has been named as peter pelling. >> meanwhile, two women who died in a crash have also been named by police. today, cheryl woods and sarah smith from caerphilly . and sarah smith from caerphilly. the mother and daughter were involved in a five vehicle

collision on the m4 last friday. well, the met office is warning of more bad weather to come this evening with a yellow weather warning now in place. an alert for heavy rain and that's been issued for the south—east of england from now until 10:00 tomorrow morning. we'll keep you up to date on the effects of possible flooding across the uk on that one right here, gb news. across the uk on tv in your car. on digital radio and on your smart speaker by saying play gb news. this is gb news, britain's news. this is gb news, britain's news channel . news channel. >> thanks for that, polly. our michelle dewberry with you till 7:00 tonight alongside me. till then, communications officer at then, communications officer at the institute for economic affairs reem ibrahim and the former editor of labourlist , former editor of labourlist, peter edwards. good evening to both of you. you know the drill, don't you, as well, on this programme. it's very much about you guys at home as well. what is on your mind tonight? i like

to involve you, so get your thoughts and feelings all the thoughts and feelings on all the topics in. topics coming in. vaiews@gbnews.com. i'll tell you what i really like as well. if you ever hear things from the panel that you agree with or you disagree with you're disagree with or you're thinking, second, why thinking, hang on a second, why is not asking them is michelle not asking them this? tell me, because i this? well, tell me, because i do nothing more than do like nothing more than putting questions directly do like nothing more than puttingpanel.questions directly do like nothing more than puttingpanel. sostions directly do like nothing more than puttingpanel. so getns directly do like nothing more than puttingpanel. so get involvedy do like nothing more than puttingpanel. so get involved in to the panel. so get involved in my programme anyway top my programme tonight. anyway top story been hearing my programme tonight. anyway top stowell, been hearing my programme tonight. anyway top stowell, the been hearing my programme tonight. anyway top stowell, the tory been hearing my programme tonight. anyway top stowell, the tory brexiteer'ing as well, the tory brexiteer quite a prominent brexiteer. many you will remember, of many of you will remember, of course, baker , he has course, steve baker, he has claimed now that perhaps brexit should not have been allowed to happen the way it did. i mean, we're all familiar by now with the statistics , aren't we? 48 the statistics, aren't we? 48 versus 52. he is suggesting, looking back all mr eyed with hindsight, saying perhaps they should have been a super majority so—called of 60% in order for it to have passed . order for it to have passed. what do you make to that? and also, if you ask someone that's shouting, yes . at your shouting, yes. at your television set, does that mean then future then that for every future referendum , 60% is the threshold

referendum, 60% is the threshold ? and you tell me, ryan, what's your thoughts on it all? yes. well, i suspect that steve baker sort of said this as a result of his opinions on the constitution. >> he sort of believes , as >> he sort of believes, as i think in in democracy and believes that ultimately individuals should be able to make those choices themselves . make those choices themselves. he is, however, very much so understood about the impact of brexit and the positive impacts of brexit. ultimately, brexit has allowed us to open up to free trade . we have non tariff free trade. we have non tariff and no and no quotas with trade, with the eu and much to the obfs with the eu and much to the obr's surprise , actually brexit obr's surprise, actually brexit has actually resulted and yielded some very positive impacts constitutionally , i impacts constitutionally, i don't think that we should be saying that we need a supermajority in referenda superm ajority in referenda because supermajority in referenda because ultimately what that would mean is with the brexit referendum, it would favour the remain we didn't have this remain and we didn't have this kind referendum when we kind of referendum when we entered lisbon treaty. entered into the lisbon treaty. i don't think that we need to be requiring two thirds of the country to agree with something. i we need a simple

majority. m ajority. >> majority. >> yeah, and i mean, it's interesting that you say that it wouldn't happened because wouldn't have happened because it have happened it wouldn't have happened with the the way the turnout on the votes the way that were. would be that they were. but i would be intrigued if people knew. right. is 60% turnout, perhaps some of those home voters they those stay at home voters they might compelled might have been more compelled to and maybe that 60% to turn out and maybe that 60% may have been reached. who knows how? a wonderful , how? hindsight is a wonderful, fascinating thing. where are you on it, peter? >> with steve baker. for those who know him, he was one of the chief instigators successive chief instigators for successive prime ministers causing them problem problem problem after problem prime ministers on own side. and ministers on his own side. and he's someone who talks he's also someone who talks openly about his christian faith, which is quite unusual. and he's he's shown moments of regret about how much he pushed his government and how hard and how many splits he caused with some very tough rhetoric. so he's very honest in some ways. but in other ways, you have to look why he's suggesting this. now brexit cause has now when the brexit cause has won, the brexit vote, it potentially locks it in for generations, makes it harder for those on the opposing side to

have another referendum and win it. so i credit him for candour, but you have to look under the bonnet as to why he's suggesting this so your suspicion is that you think perhaps if there were to be a rejoin eu referendum , to be a rejoin eu referendum, um, you'd think then that people would then be arguing for the threshold to be higher . yeah, threshold to be higher. yeah, i'm not predicting that and i'm not demanding that, i keep not demanding that, but i keep saying, i think we've saying, you know, i think we've had two referenda about 40 years apart. might another apart. so there might be another one lifetime. um, but, but one in my lifetime. um, but, but i don't think we're talking about that's to about something that's going to happen next decade. happen in the next decade. >> and of course the >> yeah. and of course he's the northern ireland minister now, >> yeah. and of course he's the no people reland minister now, >> yeah. and of course he's the no people rela talking ster now, >> yeah. and of course he's the no people rela talking about)w, so people are talking about potential, you know, should there referenda, um, there ever be a referenda, um, when say irish when it comes to say irish unification would then a supermajority be imposed supermajority need to be imposed on that? this is the thing on that? if this is the thing that steve baker is suggesting now. yeah >> i as northern ireland >> i mean, as northern ireland minister over the past year, he has overseen some of the most difficult relations difficult sort of relations within northern ireland. he's overseen the way in which the implementation of that deal of this brexit deal has occurred in

many ways. you know, giving northern ireland this kind of uncertainty over the past few years has been a very , very years has been a very, very difficult decision for the government. one that i didn't support. i do think that steve has sort of seen that as a result of , you know, his time as result of, you know, his time as a junior minister and also overseeing these kind of relationships be overseen. i do think , however, when it comes to think, however, when it comes to superman priorities, effectively what that would do is it would favour the existing rule. so because we were in the european union requiring a supermajority, favours remain and i think that's wrong to you . that's wrong to you. >> we had conversations. there was a couple of by elections, as most people remember a few days ago, and there was lots of talk about turnout , but not only about turnout, but not only turnout , about turnout, but not only turnout, but one of the about turnout, but not only turnout , but one of the seats at turnout, but one of the seats at least was one with like a third of the vote or something. and some and i think some of my viewers and i think even 1 or 2 of my panel members since then suggested that since then have suggested that could there be like a threshold when it comes to, you know, you've these by—election when it comes to, you know,

you'vand these by—election when it comes to, you know, you'vand �*reallny—election when it comes to, you know, you'vand “really mostection when it comes to, you know, you'v and “really most ofion when it comes to, you know, you'v and “really most of the wins and if really most of the people like really most of the people like really most of the people are staying at home, not even bothering to turn out, should that election therefore be so these are be null and void. so these are thresholds about thresholds we're talking about them referendums. what them with referendums. what about by elections or even general elections ? general elections? >> cuz i'm very sceptical about that because think reform that because i think any reform that because i think any reform that it harder for elected that makes it harder for elected heads to have their voices heard would be hard to justify and it'd be very unpopular to. and i know you're not necessarily suggesting this, but but look at america. i think it was a 2000 general election. obviously, american are more american elections are more complex have districts complex where you have districts and states and vote and so on, and states and vote and so on, and then their votes are added together, not in the millions, but smaller numbers as part but in smaller numbers as part of coalition of of this weird coalition of counting. but the 2000 election between gore and george bush between al gore and george bush junior was ultimately decided in the courts . and first past the the courts. and first past the post in britain has many problems. is simple . it problems. but it is simple. it is easy to exercise , easy to is easy to exercise, easy to participate and easy to decide . participate and easy to decide. >> and yeah, i mean, peter, you're one of my viewers

already. you got in and said suggested applying that rule over to the general election . over to the general election. how would you enforce that? i'm always fascinated when people say, let's apply whether it's a turnout threshold or a minimum vote threshold or whatever . how vote threshold or whatever. how would you apply that so many people out there, they are politically disengaged. and i would blame the state of politics for that rather than anything to do personally with those voters. so how would you get them out ? how you get them out? how would you incentivise force them incentivise them or force them or way it is to get or whatever the way it is to get to ballot box? you tell me. to that ballot box? you tell me. >> australia they have >> well, in australia they have compulsive free voting. >> indeed. >> they do indeed. >> they do indeed. >> it's interesting, >> i think it's interesting, obviously has been implemented in countries. i don't in other countries. i don't think right. i don't think that's right. i don't think that's right. i don't think morally right think it's morally right to force ballot and force people to a ballot and it's there with a fine, it's enforced there with a fine, isn't it? yes, it is. yes, it's enforced with a fine. i'm not sure the exact amount is, sure what the exact amount is, but think ultimately we but i think ultimately we i think i think think that's immoral. i think forcing ballot box forcing people to the ballot box is immoral. i think you're absolutely actually is immoral. i think you're absolthat actually is immoral. i think you're absolthat people actually is immoral. i think you're absolthat people feelially is immoral. i think you're absolthat people feel apathetic think that people feel apathetic because the state politics because of the state of politics currently. we haven't got a lot of choice. i mean, there isn't a

huge of difference huge amount of difference between the labour party and the conservative party at the moment. conservative have moment. the conservative have overseen the highest burden overseen the highest tax burden since world war. so since the second world war. so really you are a voter and really if you are a voter and you're to, you know, tick you're going to, you know, tick blue red, there isn't blue or tick red, there isn't a huge well yeah. blue or tick red, there isn't a hugand well yeah. blue or tick red, there isn't a hugand i, well yeah. blue or tick red, there isn't a hugand i, i well yeah. blue or tick red, there isn't a hugand i, i havewell yeah. blue or tick red, there isn't a hugand i, i have toll yeah. blue or tick red, there isn't a hugand i, i have to say,ah. blue or tick red, there isn't a hugand i, i have to say, i]. blue or tick red, there isn't a hugand i, i have to say, i hear >> and i, i have to say, i hear that coming through time and time again from the viewers at home well. i really home as well. i am really uncomfortable with this notion of, better of, michelle, you better get yourself box and yourself to that ballot box and yourself to that ballot box and you you tick you better, even if you tick none the above or spoil your none of the above or spoil your ballot paper, you better or else i'll be taking some of your wages off i hate that wages off you. i hate that principle i think, principle because i think, as i've saying, if you i've just been saying, if you want because no one's want me because no one's entitled to be voted for, if you want me to get up, get off my chair, out in the rain and chair, get out in the rain and put my cross in somebody's box or whatever on paper, or draw whatever on the paper, you've engage me as you've got to engage me as politician means you've to politician means you've got to galvanise you've got to work galvanise me. you've got to work for vote. you've got to for that vote. you've got to connect to me. you don't just connect to me. you don'tjust come massive stick and come up with a massive stick and batter balance make batter my bank balance and make me there and do it. yeah me go out there and do it. yeah i mean, i think in australia, rhiannon was correct to call it

compulsory voting, but i think rhiannon was correct to call it compitsory voting, but i think rhiannon was correct to call it compit actuallyng, but i think rhiannon was correct to call it compit actually is, but i think rhiannon was correct to call it compit actually is, is1t i think what it actually is, is compulsory attendance . compulsory attendance. >> long as you turn up, >> so as long as you turn up, you can still. right. none of the paper, the above on your ballot paper, but draw a pretty picture. but you draw a pretty picture. >> do you agree with that? >> do you agree with that? >> very sceptical >> no, i'm really very sceptical about it because i think it's i don't think it's seeing people with a big stick, but it's forcing them to do something, taking money off them if they don't comply, that's a stick. well, it's more nuanced than that because people that because because people can turn and none of the turn up and write none of the above. but obviously i'm not really keen, . on forcing really that keen,. on forcing people unless it's people to do things unless it's to a harm to someone to prevent a harm to someone else. and not voting doesn't involve a harm for people. involve a harm for other people. so thing is it'll so the other thing is it'll never because none of the never happen because none of the mainstream in britain never happen because none of the maigoing m in britain never happen because none of the maigoingm write in britain never happen because none of the maigoing m write down ritain never happen because none of the maigoing m write down then are going to write down the manifesto. more state manifesto. we want more state control your ordinary lives control over your ordinary lives in such a well way that voting you say that. >> i mean, look at the way the policies that have just been announced over the past few weeks. we're seeing on weeks. we're seeing a ban on smoking the generation. smoking for the next generation. we're seeing governments continuously intervene in our lives constantly. i share your

sentiment. i don't want to see the government intervening in our in this way. but our lives in this way. but i don't think that the government are to look the are scared to look at the lockdowns, way in lockdowns, look at the way in which government have always which the government have always intervened lives. intervened in our lives. >> think you're >> if i may, i think you're being very cheeky, comparing voting smoking . mean, voting to smoking. i mean, there's benefit smoking. there's no benefit to smoking. >> stop . absolutely. there >> full stop. absolutely. there is. are many people is. there are many, many people that incredible amounts of that see incredible amounts of benefits a of smoking. benefits as a result of smoking. now, smoking is bad for your health. smoking is bad for health. well, smoking is bad for your but many people your health, but many people enjoy it. many people enjoy smoking. don't think that smoking. and i don't think that we from that. we should shy away from that. i'm advocating for people to i'm not advocating for people to smoke. what saying is that smoke. what i am saying is that people able choose people should be able to choose well, smoker ? well, are you a smoker? >> is of your small >> is one of your small pleasures life. i'm pleasures in life. i'm interested to hear that. interested to hear from that. lots of you , particularly on my lots of you, particularly on my twitter. having any twitter. you're not having any of it. twitter. you're not having any ofit.jan twitter. you're not having any of it. jan says. steve baker needs to wind neck in. a lot needs to wind his neck in. a lot of win elections by the of mps win elections by the slimmest of majorities, rob says. can you just says. michelle, can you just call it is? baker just call this what it is? baker just trying to what you're trying to appeal to what you're calling the remainers at the next general election call.

blimey keep me, keep me informed as to what you're thinking on that topic. vaiews@gbnews.uk com. another one that i found fascinating . i know you will fascinating. i know you will too. these migrant hotels. finally, it looks likely that some of those contracts are set to be finished. common sense or again political manipulation. when we come up to a general election, you tell me . when getting a good night's sleep is a struggle, try nytol herbal. made with natural plant extracts that have been used for decades... owl hoots ..nytol herbal is used to help you drift off gently. for a refreshing, restful night's sleep, say "good— nytol".

israeli hostages. >> you're listening to gb news radio . radio. >> hello there, michelle dewberry. till 7:00 tonight. communications officer at the institute for economic affairs. reem ibrahim and the former editor of labourlist, peter edwards, alongside me, lots still to come. honestly, this even just this name, it it makes me shudder. shamima begum of course i'm talking about her. before the end of the programme. back in court. should she ever be allowed in this country ?

be allowed in this country? something tells me there'll be strong opinions on that with you guys at home. but look, i want to talk to you about migrant hotels. the government is set to end contracts with up to about 100 hotels that are hosting these migrants. the majority of these. so we're led to believe will be in key battleground will be in the key battleground seats when it comes to the next general election. so of course, anyone any. right thinking individual would think it's basic, common sense that these hotels are finally being wound down. i mean, why we've had channel crossing people in four star hotels in this country. it is literally it beggars belief. but there we are so is this basic common sense or is it a little bit of cynical electioneering now closing these? >> i do think it's electioneering , but what's electioneering, but what's particularly interesting is by ending. so they're looking at ending. so they're looking at ending the use of about 100 migrant hotels. the reason why they're doing this is because they're doing this is because they're very aware of the cultural impact that these migrants housed these migrants being housed in these

hotels actually has to local communities. i mean, we've seen the , we've seen the way the videos, we've seen the way in which these migrants are sort of stuffed and packed into these hotels very sort of un hotels in very, very sort of un untampered with, dare i say, areas . and ultimately what this areas. and ultimately what this is doing is it's the government saying, no, we hear you, we hear the cultural impact that is the cultural impact that this is having. end it. having. we're going to end it. but question is listening but my question is listening very loud, because have very loud, because people have been for so long, been saying this for so long, and that's why they're doing it. they're doing it for they're absolutely doing it for the election. but my question is, these people going is, where are these people going to the asylum to go? because the asylum backlog already increased backlog has already increased from summer over from 100,000 last summer to over 170,000. year. where are 170,000. this year. where are these people going to go and what are the home office doing? why are they getting off and why are they not getting off and actually doing those that actually doing those things that are processing are actually processing those applications? because ultimately , are here , whilst these people are here in , they're not going to in limbo, they're not going to be they're just be deported and they're just going staying here going to be staying here twiddling thumbs. going to be staying here twiddl i g thumbs. going to be staying here twiddli can thumbs. going to be staying here twiddli can sense|mbs. going to be staying here twiddli can sense where going to be staying here twiddl i can sense where you're >> as i can sense where you're going, you're going to be one of those that those people that tell me that they be allowed to work. they should be allowed to work. >> i do think they should be allowed to work. i would prefer

that applications that the applications are processed quickly, processed and done very quickly, but the but clearly that's not the case at the moment. rather them at the moment. i'd rather them not taxpayer money, not take our taxpayer money, actually them them work. actually let them let them work. there plenty of vacancies there are plenty of vacancies available, in the gig available, especially in the gig economy, deliveroo. economy, i.e. deliveroo. there was reports was actually some reports recently people recently that some people had been. these people on been. so some of these people on the backlog had been the asylum backlog had been illegally working for the gig economy well. illegally working for the gig eco there's well. illegally working for the gig eco there's something illegally working for the gig ecothere's something the illegally working for the gig eco there's something the air, >> there's something in the air, you so many people you know, because so many people seem be suggesting that when you know, because so many people seem comingjgesting that when you know, because so many people seem coming onsting that when you know, because so many people seem coming on my; that when you know, because so many people seem coming on my panelwhen you know, because so many people seem coming on my panel these they're coming on my panel these days about letting people work and i always throw it to and i always throw it open to you for the final you guys at home for the final say it. but peter, your say on it. but peter, your thoughts on these hotels? >> well, it's about 12. the labour said about 12% are labour party said about 12% are being closed. so actually a great them, the great chunk of them, the majority are not being closed. and the times newspaper, which is not particularly a cheerleader labour cheerleader for the labour party, exactly you cheerleader for the labour party, that exactly you cheerleader for the labour partyjthat theictly you cheerleader for the labour partyjthat the hotels you cheerleader for the labour partyjthat the hotels are you cheerleader for the labour partyjthat the hotels are being said, that the hotels are being picked in election picked are in election battlegrounds or swing seats. so that allows us one to be that i think allows us one to be a little bit cynical about the motivations it. but but let's motivations on it. but but let's lose from that, which lose zoom out from that, which is spending about £8 is we're spending about £8 million a on hotels. robert million a day on hotels. robert jenrick, is a conservative jenrick, who is a conservative immigration minister defending

his own government, says the government policy is unacceptable. yeah i've got a tiny little clip of him. >> actually. i think in the commons today i can play you that these hotels should be assets for their local community cities serving businesses and tourists hosting the life events that we treasure, like weddings and birthdays, not housing illegal migrants at unsustainable cost to the taxpayer . taxpayer. >> so we took immediate action a year ago to reduce our reliance on hotels. we significantly increase the amount of dispersed accommodation and have increased funding for local councils . we funding for local councils. we reformed the management of the existing estate . existing estate. >> sometimes when i hear tories speaking, i do sometimes think i'm i like weird parallel universe when they say , you universe when they say, you know, these hotels, these beautiful four star country hotels should be assets of the local community. i feel like saying, you guys, it's your policy ensured they were policy ensured that they were not guys ensure that those not you guys ensure that those beautiful hotels, the weddings

of which you speak , the of which you speak, the christenings of which you speak of all have cancelled. of all have been cancelled. nonetheless, was you nonetheless, it was you guys that that. honestly, that did that. honestly, sometimes i think, i just sometimes i think, am i just living some strange parallel living in some strange parallel universe? but anyway, it's particularly interesting, especially with 13 years of conservative government the conservative government when the conservative government when the conservative government, to conservative government, so to speak, complaining about the speak, are complaining about the current situation. >> well, who's been >> it's like, well, who's been in it has been guys. in power? it has been you guys. i think when comes i do think that when it comes across the with regard to across the board with regard to migration, been a very, migration, it's been a very, very difficult situation for the government themselves. the home office, civil servants have resulted in some resistance as well. >> and credit where it is due to the tories, right, because they have been trying to put people, whether it's on places like the bibby stockholm whatever , bibby stockholm or whatever, send to rwanda and send them over to rwanda and every single time they try and get away from the policy of the hotels to do things like just discuss the discuss it is people from the left immediately set up discuss it is people from the left crying mediately set up discuss it is people from the left crying abouttely set up discuss it is people from the left crying about human up discuss it is people from the left crying about human rights, start crying about human rights, start crying about human rights, start crying about floating pnsons start crying about floating prisons and all the rest of it, and they scupper the tories at each corner. well you use a phrase parallel reality and i

thought that when i heard jenrick say immediate action on your rt just now , when the first your rt just now, when the first big migrant crisis in recent times was 2016. >> and so seven years is his definition of immediate in terms of the bibby stockholm, which i think was disastrous policy think was a disastrous policy implemented what implemented disastrously. what about it was very sensible. >> it's not happening. >> it's not happening. >> wasn't lefty lawyers, me , >> it wasn't lefty lawyers, me, keir woke brigade keir starmer, the woke brigade or was public or anyone else. it was public safety inspectors and the fire bngade safety inspectors and the fire brigade said everyone's brigade that said everyone's going to have to come off bibby stockholm well , was stockholm well, it was legionella or whatever it was that wasn't it? that they found, wasn't it? >> is the thing. >> and this is the thing. sometimes i want to shake people because i think surely, surely before i before you board, i mean, i would it. i do would have checked it. i do confess. i do not. i know nothing about u—bends or whatever. testing that whatever. and the testing that goes surely it is very goes on, but surely it is very simple that you make sure that all your checks are done and complete you have the complete and that you have the results back before you load people on to accommodation . people on to that accommodation. an especially in this time of intense scrutiny . so sometimes intense scrutiny. so sometimes i don't know who is who are making

these kind of decisions and who is advising people . but is advising people. but sometimes i do. i just want to go in and shake them. i said, what are you doing? >> i mean, really, it's a perfect example of government failure, isn't it? >> well, yeah. and allen's saying, echoing your point, reem, are you going put reem, where are you going to put people then? often people reem, where are you going to put peo;be then? often people reem, where are you going to put peo;be talking often people reem, where are you going to put peo;be talking about'ten people reem, where are you going to put peo;be talking about you've)ple reem, where are you going to put peo;be talking about you've got will be talking about you've got all of protests now, all of those protests now, scampton and all the rest of it, because the other side because the other flip side of this parachute this is let's just parachute 2000 these people these 2000 of these people onto these bases. 2000 of these people onto these bases . yes. some people say that bases. yes. some people say that live absolutely miles away. but if you lived next door to one of those said mass accommodations, would you still think it's a goodidea?i would you still think it's a good idea? i bet you wouldn't if you looked in the mirror and were you looked in the mirror and werand there are airborne >> and there are airborne diseases manston well. so diseases at manston as well. so legionella on a prison ship or scabies in scampton. >> oh, prison ship. i'm not going to i'm not going to write. it's not a prison ship. but look, do you know what that conversation, as always, will rumble on. million uk rumble on and on. a million uk children apparently were destitute does destitute last year. what does that mean? i'll see you .

likely to do the same thing, won't it? >> you're listening to gb news radio . hi there . radio. hi there. >> michelle dewberry with you till 7:00. communications officer at the institute for economic affairs. reem ibrahim and the former editor of labourlist, pete edwards. alongside me, i want to talk to you about what is destitution even in this day and age, but also before the end of the programme. shamima begum i'm goodness gracious that name programme. shamima begum i'm goodnjustgracious that name programme. shamima begum i'm goodnjust makes; that name programme. shamima begum i'm goodnjust makes me that name programme. shamima begum i'm goodnjust makes me goiat name programme. shamima begum i'm goodnjust makes me go ,t name programme. shamima begum i'm goodnjust makes me go , ooh,1e alone just makes me go, ooh, anyway, should she ever be allowed back into the uk with that citizenship restored , i'd that citizenship restored, i'd get in touch with your thoughts on that. but for now, more than 1 million children in this country apparently did indeed experience destitution last yean experience destitution last year. this is a new study which has basically found that these circle rates have doubled , well, circle rates have doubled, well, more than doubled actually, in the last five years. apparently a combination of benefit cuts and a cost of living crisis. i

shall start with you on this one, reem yeah . one, reem yeah. >> so i think it's interesting with the way that they define destitution , because ultimately destitution, because ultimately we're talking about them arguing that there's been an increase right now this year. my colleague at the iea, christopher snowden , had won a christopher snowden, had won a bet with a notorious left wing academic, jonathan portes, where effectively, i think he was about five years ago. jonathan said that child poverty was going to go up right. chris said, i don't think that's going to be the case. and they bet i think it was over a grand on this on this argument. >> why do people place bets on how poor kids are? >> that seems so weird. it's because it's about the statistics. and basically statistics. and he's basically saying child is saying that all child poverty is going significantly going to significantly increase. it went down. it went it didn't. it went down. it went down it's interesting down to 29. so it's interesting that these are sort that these statistics are sort of line with that, that child of in line with that, that child poverty has in decline over poverty has been in decline over the past few years. it's been in decline result of the decline as a result of the fantastic products of free fantastic products of the free market have able to provide market have been able to provide died meant died effectively. it's meant that actually lot of these

that actually a lot of these individuals have able individuals have been able to develop products and develop those products and obviously mean that it's much cheaper for those families . now, cheaper for those families. now, of there are many, many of course, there are many, many families facing families that are facing horrible horrible situations horrible, horrible situations at the moment . the cost of living the moment. the cost of living crisis impacting people. but crisis is impacting people. but overall the wider trajectory, overall in the wider trajectory, children are much better off now than they were ten years ago or 20 years ago or 30 years ago. >> do you agree with that? >> do you agree with that? >> no. and it shows you can find often find statistic to back up any statement. however outlandish. i mean, i think the cost of living crisis does not come out of nowhere. of course, there are some international factors like the awful war in ukraine. there's also government policy decisions. we know that the tories have consistently not uprated benefits in line with inflation, and i look back at one stat today, so the resolution foundation, a think tank, said since 2010, the real value of benefits for people out of work has gone down by about 10. so if you're a household

where the main breadwinner, man or woman is out of work, you are worse off as a result of the last 12 or 13 years. and you know, there's always been poor people in society and i've done voluntary work around the uk and it's even in even in the boom times, there are poor people. but but it is getting worse now. and talking about children and we're talking about children being is being destitute, which is lacking energy, toiletries i >> -- >> the definition here that they using means that families cannot afford adequately afford to adequately feed, clothe their children clothe or clean their children or keep them warm. now i don't want to become one of those weird old people that looks back or misty eyed, but i do remember when i was a child and i'm not going to do smallest violins and worries me , but i was packed in worries me, but i was packed in a bedroom with my siblings, my bed. i got the short straw. i was in the bay window. i used to wake up with all these fluffy blankets we used to have and the net curtains were iced to the window. there was certainly no heating used pull net heating used to pull the net curtains off all the curtains off and all the patterns iced onto the, the patterns was iced onto the, the windows. frequently went windows. my mum frequently went without order to us

without food in order to that us kids could eat . without food in order to that us kids could eat. and it without food in order to that us kids could eat . and it was just kids could eat. and it was just kind of way it was. would kind of the way it was. i would never , ever describe my never, ever describe my childhood as being one of destitution and you know, all the rest of it. and now i just don't know if is it a case now where so many people just think, you know what we do have now these rights to these increased living standard , and if we don't living standard, and if we don't get them , then something get them, then something somewhere, someone is to blame for that. am i missing something? >> well, i think someone is partially to blame, which is the government. >> and but i don't want to keep hammering on about party politics. let's talk about the government then, because one of the candidates i'm just looking at the tamworth by—election andrew cooper, apparently andrew cooper, he apparently got into of trouble because he into a bit of trouble because he shared something on facebook like was like the premise of which was somewhere along the lines it somewhere along the lines it some graphic which said, some kind of graphic which said, can feed kids? can you feed your kids? >> it was an a graphic that says, do you have a tv or sky? do you have a phone contract and all rest it. and i think all the rest of it. and i think the point and he's absolutely

right. he's right. oh i think he's absolutely right. >> i mean, so the graphic that he shared facebook. to he shared on facebook. sorry to interrupt is effectively said that have if you can that that if you have if you can afford a phone, if you can afford a phone, if you can afford a phone, if you can afford a tv, then you can afford to children. and i do to feed your children. and i do think there's an element of complacency here. now, i don't again, want away again, i don't want to take away from the that there are from the fact that there are many, many people that are really, really struggling in this are this country, but there are absolutely on absolutely too many people on benefits in this country. there absolutely too many people on ben5.3s in this country. there absolutely too many people on ben5.3 millioni country. there absolutely too many people on ben5.3 million people 1. there absolutely too many people on ben5.3 million people]. toutl absolutely too many people on ben5.3 million people]. tout of are 5.3 million people on out of work and i think that work benefits. and i think that peter right. the peter is absolutely right. the amount individuals amount that those individuals receive is nothing. and of course, it's going to be horrible, hard to horrible, horribly hard to be able live on that amount in able to live on that amount in the current climate. but in the wider scheme of things, that money is not being used effectively . and when we're effectively. and when we're counting up amount of people effectively. and when we're counare| up amount of people effectively. and when we're coun are currently mount of people effectively. and when we're coun are currently on unt of people effectively. and when we're coun are currently on out of people that are currently on out of work benefits, is far too work benefits, it is far too many. what do you make of that nofion many. what do you make of that notion that if you've got a telly and you've got sky or telly and if you've got sky or whatever it is you've then whatever it is you've got, then essentially you're not prioritised right, as prioritised eating right, as opposed poor. opposed to being truly poor. >> it was madness and >> i thought it was madness and really the tory really offensive. and the tory madness it in tamworth.

madness about it in tamworth. well first of all seemed to well first of all he seemed to lack real experience of lack any real experience of being parent, especially a being a parent, especially a single parent in tough circumstances how circumstances and also how much things i think my things cost. i mean, i think my television household is cost £100 and the idea that people on benefits are kind of frittering away vast sums on household luxuries is not true. and if you're a single for parent example, you can't you can't be with your child 24 hours a day. if you need to have a shower or do cooking, go of the do cooking, you go out of the room. there is nothing at all. in fact, it's a positive if you're a parent having a tv and not all is rubbish, it's not all tv is rubbish, it's completely reasonable. and i think reason why think the other reason why i dislike graphic tweeted by dislike the graphic tweeted by this tory candidate or put on facebook was because it's not just but it moral just wrong, but it was moral judgement well. down judgement as well. looking down at people for being poor and calling them stupid . calling them stupid. >> i don't think he was calling them stupid. i think what he was saying is that at the moment, and do believe this and i genuinely do believe this to this be true at to believe this to be true at the moment, too far too many people who believe that they have of right to other have some kind of right to other people's don't think

people's money and i don't think that's at all. now, again, that's fair at all. now, again, i preface this. there i want to preface this. there are people struggling in are clearly people struggling in this there also this country, but there are also far too many people that expect the government to them the government to give them money. to money. expect the government to provide the means provide them with the means to live. ultimately, fact live. and ultimately, the fact that are we currently that we've we are we currently have 5.3 million people on out of work benefits of working age. this is absolutely outrageous. again many of those people probably need to many of those people will probably have very, very reasons to be able people will probably have very, ve work. reasons to be able people will probably have very, ve work. butasons to be able people will probably have very, vework. but lions to be able people will probably have very, vework. but i guarantee be able people will probably have very, vework. but i guarantee you able to work. but i guarantee you there are many people that don't. and actually , can we be don't. and actually, can we be honest, it's huge waste of honest, it's a huge waste of human there are human potential. there are people could people that could be contributing society , that contributing to society, that could contributing to the could be contributing to the economy that be economy, that could be productive and earning more money and earning more money for their children and for their families and living incredibly successful they're successful lives. but they're not. and the reason they're successful lives. but they're not.is nd the reason they're successful lives. but they're not.is becauseeason they're successful lives. but they're not.is because then they're successful lives. but they're not.is because the government) not is because the government system, way the system, the way that the incentives have set up, the incentives have been set up, the system against them. and system is against them. and i actually think that we need to be people be encouraging those people to get into and actually get back into work and actually fulfilling human potential carol. >> she's been in touch saying

the sad fact of reality is can anyone survive without a mobile phone these days ? i think not. i phone these days? i think not. i think you can. i think you survive without a mobile phone . survive without a mobile phone. of course you can. what am i missing? >> i think it's much, much harder because the state for quite understandable reasons, but pushed people but the state has pushed people into interacting via websites and for things like and smartphones for things like gp appointments, government gateway , registering your gateway, registering your entitlements to social security , entitlements to social security, dodi and i think that goes exactly to the point i'm making and against what reem says , and against what reem says, which is there are certain basic things in life you need , however things in life you need, however poor you are. and i think a mobile phone has become one of those in a way it wasn't 30 years ago and it's not largesse or profligacy to have a mobile phone or a tv . phone or a tv. >> i totally disagree. one of my colleagues is in his 60s. he's still to this day, does not have a mobile phone. he comes into the every morning, leaves the office every morning, leaves at the end the day, and if we at the end of the day, and if we need we just talk to him. >> has he got school age

children? >> he does not have children? no well, i actually don't know. sorry. i know if he sorry. i don't know if he has children, but i can say is children, but all i can say is that he is an adult that works in london, that doesn't have a mobile phone because he's actually kind against them. actually kind of against them. i think doesn't really like think he he doesn't really like using them. i think as a company, actually buy him company, we did actually buy him a mobile phone and he lost it. many people don't many people live mobile phones or many people don't many people live peoplenobile phones or many people don't many people live peoplenobiimyhones or many people don't many people live peoplenobiimy mom's r many people like my mom's partner be watching this. >> hello, michael. they forced to have mobile phones by their families grasp families and they don't grasp the them. they don't the concept of them. they don't realise that you take these things with whenever you things out with you whenever you try hold of some people try and get hold of some people on mobile they on their mobile phones. they just kitchen side, what just on the kitchen side, what is point in that? i want to is the point in that? i want to know your thoughts on that because interesting because it's such an interesting conversation. where stand because it's such an interesting corthatation. where stand because it's such an interesting corthat whole nhere stand because it's such an interesting corthat whole notion stand because it's such an interesting corthat whole notion of stand because it's such an interesting corthat whole notion of poverty?1 on that whole notion of poverty? gb views a gbnews.com. not gb views a gbnews.com. do not go anywhere. bringing anywhere. i'll be bringing your responses also responses into that. also though, shamima should though, shamima begum, should she be

hello, i'm michelle dewberry here till seven. the communications officer at the institute for economic affairs reem ibrahim alongside me as is the former editor of labourlist, peter edwards. blimey, i'll peter edwards. cor blimey, i'll put amongst the pigeons put the cat amongst the pigeons in the break. i just a in the break. i just posed a casual question to my panel, which really got them talking. maybe this maybe i need to have this debate a day. asked a different day. i just asked the question if indeed someone is in poverty and has to live on benefits or whatever, should that when deciding that be a factor when deciding whether to have more whether or not to have more children? that's created quite an interesting debate . maybe one an interesting debate. maybe one for day. your thoughts for another day. your thoughts on some of that stuff, though? get in really not get them coming in really not a lot of sympathy and love for the migrant hotels , b&bs, i think it migrant hotels, b&bs, i think it is in leeds . you sent a really is in leeds. you sent a really interesting one in your daughter had a bridal business, which she's now sadly had to close because all of the hotels in that area that were doing those big bridal wedding events, of course, that business stopped. so you see there is quite a big knock on effect to some of this stuff. darren says when talking about poverty, the fact of the

matter is michelle, there are many people who simply do not want go out and work. philip want to go out and work. philip says, your guest is right. i don't know which one you mean. philip iphone, sky smoking and etcetera. how can you do that whilst pleading poverty? people's should people's priorities should always be simple, basic food and shelter and all the rest of it first, gary says there's no destitution in this country whatsoever . some of the facts whatsoever. some of the facts and stats, though, would say othennise. alex says, speaking as a single parent, there are too many people who think that they are owed by the taxpayers . they are owed by the taxpayers. if you incentivise people to stay at home and not have to work, many people will work, then many people will indeed have to choose to do that, says. my message is that, steve says. my message is very simple. can everyone please just being lazy ? i think just stop being lazy? i think many people would actually say, i mean, i do have to say as well, lots of people, their circumstances change in life, don't they? maybe they'll a don't they? maybe they'll have a family. might be married family. they might be married and forbid their and heaven forbid their their partner, their spouse partner, their their spouse might very sadly die and now

you're left. you've got children to care for. you can't go out to work. and circumstances do change. that we change. i do believe that we should have a safety net for anyone truly it. but anyone who truly needs it. but there course, always that there is, of course, always that conversation about whether or not it's used by people that perhaps me perhaps don't. now, let me talk to name you'll all to you about a name you'll all be familiar with. shamima begum. remember her? would you ever remember her? how would you ever forget, she forget, quite frankly, 24 she is now . legal challenge is all now. her legal challenge is all about whether or she should about whether or not she should have and be to have citizenship and be able to return the uk. that is return back to the uk. that is set to reach the court of appeal. now, a three day trial apparently is looming. should shamima begum be allowed to be let back in? >> so i think this is interesting. i think that shamima begum is a horrible individual. i think she's a criminal. i think she's a traitor to this country. she, however, she is a british criminal. and i think it's very , criminal. and i think it's very, very important that we don't start using taking away somebody's citizenship and making them stateless as a reason for as a crime. as a punishment. sorry for a crime.

what the reason why i think this is important is if person a british person, their family are british, they've got heritage here for the past 100 years, commits a crime and i commit a crime. that very same crime i could have my citizenship, citizenship removed even though i'm only british, only have citizenship removed even though i'm on|citizenship.only have citizenship removed even though i'm on|citizenship. but have citizenship removed even though i'm on|citizenship. but my�*e british citizenship. but my father has egyptian citizenship. so i have the potential for egyptian citizenship. i don't have it. this is the reason why my sajid javid when he was home secretary time, was able secretary at the time, was able to remove citizenship to remove her citizenship because the potential to because she had the potential to gain citizenship . gain bangladeshi citizenship. and i don't think that's right. effectively what that means is that second class citizen that i am a second class citizen in some respects to other people who have had heritage here for the last 100, 200 years. >> it doesn't mean you're a second class citizen. it means that if you've the that actually if you've got the opfion that actually if you've got the option the moral of the option i mean, the moral of the story in all of this, everybody is basic don't seek is very basic is just don't seek to the terrorist to join the terrorist organisations that want to destroy the very citizenship that you claim to that you that you claim to desperately want to be a part of it. that is the moral of the story. but i don't think it's

treating people as second class citizens. what it is, citizens. what i think it is, it's using additional options that are available to the government of the day, isn't it? peter i think what shamima begum did was utterly wrong and wicked and the terrible events of the last two weeks should remind us daily about the appeal falling impact of terrorism on so many innocent people around the world. >> having said all that, i think sajid javid, the then home secretary, ms handled this completely because people that do bad things as shamima begum did, are still entitled to a proper legal process and in rendering her stateless because she didn't have another passport or another country in rendering her stateless, sajid javid called to parts of the media and tory right and deprived her of the right to a fair legal process. so it was a terrible decision and i can't predict the outcome of the court of appeal, but i suspect they'll look very closely at what is the legal

basis for rendering someone stateless. >> don't worry about depriving them. that them. do you think that she should country like should be in this country like in your heart when you look at that individual? yeah, i think she should be put on trial in a court in the uk. >> i think she should be rotting in a british prison. >> i think ultimately michelle, i else's problem i mean, who else's problem is she? she went to a british school. she went to the british school. she went to the british school system. grew with school system. she grew up with british friends. she grew up in this country. she she's a british criminal. she's not british criminal. if she's not our who else's problem our problem, who else's problem is okay. born and bred, >> okay. born and bred, whatever. you go to this school, all the things that you've just mentioned. yet despite all of that, still thought was that, you still thought it was a goodidea that, you still thought it was a good idea to join terrorist good idea to join this terrorist organisation that seeks to destroy country our way destroy this country and our way of the fact that you of living. so the fact that you went school, got all went to school, you got all these british mates and all the rest, i couldn't care less. quite frankly, that just demonstrates to me despite quite frankly, that just derthat, rates to me despite quite frankly, that just derthat, she; to me despite quite frankly, that just derthat, she stillne despite quite frankly, that just derthat, she still was despite quite frankly, that just derthat, she still was so despite quite frankly, that just derthat, she still was so anti )ite all that, she still was so anti this country. and what makes me laugh is that people will laugh is that many people will make actually, because make me laugh, actually, because they it's quite they actually think it's quite sad. people will sit sad. so many people will sit there oh, she was there and say, oh, but she was only child. she was so

only a child. she was so innocent. and young at 16. how did know what she was doing? did she know what she was doing? and then in the very next breath, they'll go, yeah, did you see that 16 year old girl there that reckons that she's now a boy yet? definitely sensible enough chop their sensible enough to chop their own and take own breasts off and take hormones and all the rest of it? >> i think there's >> well, i think there's a legitimate question to be asked about she and other about whether she and other teenagers have been groomed or brainwashed. >> but that to me, however important the important it is, is not the question before the court. the question before the court. the question is, should a british citizen that does a bad thing be depnved citizen that does a bad thing be deprived of their legal rights? and i say anyone who and i should say anyone who believes in justice say people that do things should be put that do bad things should be put on and they should access on trial and they should access their rights. their legal rights. >> well , shouldn't just a their legal rights. >> well, shouldn't just a bad >> well, shouldn't just do a bad thing, not like a rampant thing, should not like a rampant shoplifter. she did something that in direct fact that was in direct fact contravention to the facts that a contradiction to the fact that this country. why would this country. >> but we put wants to blow it up. >> well we put murderers on trial. >> we put irish republican terrorists on trial. why should

we not put her on trial? >> what are you guys think to this at home? really interested, william says she should never be allowed to return to the uk again for any reason. andrew has the exact same view as an absolute out and out no for her. sue says. the minute i heard you say her name, michelle, you made my blood boil. never ever allow her but derek says, her back in. but derek says, michelle, what's wrong with you? all you cannot do this. you cannot take the citizenship of a person born here and take it away again. you are quite split on this . mike says supreme court on this. mike says supreme court decided that her citizenship should be revoked. that is the end. why is this farce allowed to go on? because we do have appeal courts in this system , appeal courts in this system, hazel said. who on earth is paying hazel said. who on earth is paying for this person's continue ? jude legal appeals . continue? jude legal appeals. dawn said you started your program talking about referendum . let the public decide . i mean, . let the public decide. i mean, really , how well do you think

really, how well do you think that would be literally having referendums every five seconds if we were responsible for making the decisions like that, would we not? mike says absolutely , positively, absolutely, positively, definitely. no, no , no, glenn definitely. no, no, no, glenn says this woman should stay in britain . really? she will be britain. really? she will be seen as the poster girl for the number of people who live in our communities, who support isis. number of people who live in our communities, who support isis . a communities, who support isis. a few of you, again, have that sentiment that i think it was you that were just saying about bnng you that were just saying about bring her back into this country and face proper justice. and let her face proper justice. i mean, what do we call proper justice or what? >> well, i think i think it's about current justice system about the current justice system and system. and the current court system. ultimately, think peter is ultimately, i think peter is absolutely hit the nail the absolutely hit the nail on the head can't take head here. you can't take away somebody's without somebody's citizenship without a proper legal trial. proper right to a legal trial. and ultimately , we you know, and ultimately, we you know, he's absolutely right . we tried he's absolutely right. we tried terrorists. we try murderers , we terrorists. we try murderers, we try rapists. this individual, shamima begum, has committed one of the most horrendous crimes

against this country. of the most horrendous crimes against this country . she of the most horrendous crimes against this country. she is a traitor to this country and should face the consequences in this country to which she was born in. >> i just why should all of these hard working men and women , why should their tax money be going on putting this lady who she doesn't want to be here apparently, apparently this country is absolutely appalling was her mindset once upon a time. what's alternative, time. so what's the alternative, though? >> i don't care. >> i don't care. >> but if you i know you might think i'm a little bit harsh. not your problem if you are not a uk citizen, not not your problem anymore. so why would care? >> currently stateless. so in a refugee camp, as i understand it, so would one leave her there forever? yeah how is that any interest of justice? >> do you know what >> well, do you know what i imagine, hope that imagine, slash? i hope that your life. which life. that her life. which wherever she's currently living, it is quite unpleasant. and then what actually happen is what might actually happen is that all these people that wander the streets of the wander around the streets of the uk radicalised, think uk getting radicalised, i think it's wander around it's all right to wander around the of uk chanting the streets of uk chanting jihad, jihad, knowing that actually the met police will

turn a blind eye, making out that means something that it means something else. all they all those young people, they might look at shamima might actually look at shamima begum this horrendous begum living this horrendous life camp life in this awful camp somewhere and it might make them think about it, because think twice about it, because all these people that think that the uk such a horrendous the uk is such a horrendous place leave but michelle somewhere , if i may say somewhere else, if i may say you're advocating punishment without a trial. you're advocating punishment witinot a trial. you're advocating punishment witino ,a trial. you're advocating punishment witino , i'm al. you're advocating punishment witino , i'm advocating. >> no, i'm advocating. >> no, i'm advocating. >> if you don't if you hate this country and you want to blow it to smithereens, guess what? get on a plane and go and live somewhere else. maybe my view is a little bit too simple. you tell me. but for now, it's all i've got. time for peter reem, thank you for your company. thank you. at home. see you tomorrow. >> hello again. it's alex burkill here with latest gb burkill here with your latest gb news weather update. for some, it will little bit chilly it will be a little bit chilly overnight , but the south we overnight, but in the south we have heavy rain arriving have some heavy rain arriving that's association with an that's in association with an area of low pressure. currently just to the south—west. but this is going skirt its way is to going skirt its way eastwards along the english channel go through the channel as we go through the night into wednesday. that will then bring a significant amount

of parts. of rain across southern parts. the heaviest rain likely to be in the south southeast . and here in the south southeast. and here we see some disruption to we could see some disruption to travel, localised travel, perhaps some localised flooding elsewhere towards travel, perhaps some localised flooeast elsewhere towards travel, perhaps some localised floo east of elsewhere towards travel, perhaps some localised floo east of scotland e towards travel, perhaps some localised flooeast of scotland . towards travel, perhaps some localised flooeast of scotland . bitvards travel, perhaps some localised flooeast of scotland . bit wet the east of scotland. bit wet and quite cloudy, but further west northwest, some clear skies, so turning a little bit chilly . a touch of frost chilly. a touch of frost possible across some parts of western scotland. a very wet start. southeast on start. then in the southeast on wednesday morning could cause some the morning some problems during the morning rush the rain should rush hour. but the rain should clear away then it's a drier clear away and then it's a drier picture across many parts of england, wales, into northern ireland as we go into the afternoon. but cloudy and wet across parts of scotland across eastern parts of scotland . rainfall . some significant rainfall possible here. temperatures near normal for the time of year, highs around 14, possibly 15 celsius. as we look towards thursday, it's going to be quite an unsettled, wet day. we have a band of rain that will push its way north eastwards as we go through the morning behind it. then showers are then some hefty showers are quite likely notice some towards the coast and perhaps the south coast and perhaps in the south coast and perhaps in the far well . and it's the far east as well. and it's going to be quite blustery to

say unsettled theme say the unsettled theme continues through continues as we go through friday saturday and friday into saturday and temperatures likely near temperatures likely to be near normal year

>> good evening . it's the >> good evening. it's the natwest files, to mark i will tell you how the bank genuinely believed i was being funded by the russian state. i will tell you how fake news develops and the damage do . we look to the damage it can do. we look to france today where the interior minister says he's simply going to people who to start deporting people who are anti—semitic and he'll worry about the european court of human rights aftennards . maybe human rights aftennards. maybe we should take a leaf out of their book. and we've returned to one of my favourite themes, hs2, but it's just getting worse and worse. it would appear that hs2 management deliberately and wilfully misled the country

about what the costs were . and about what the costs were. and remember, this was your money. i wonder, should they all be in court pretty soon? but before all of that, let's get the news with polly middlehurst . all of that, let's get the news with polly middlehurst. nigel thank you and good evening to you. >> well, the top story from the gb newsroom is that downing street has confirmed 12 british citizens were killed during the hamas terror attack in israel on october the seventh. another five remain missing. that comes after an 85 year old israeli woman was released by hamas last night and she described the hell of being taken into a spider web of being taken into a spider web of tunnels under gaza. yakov also said she was treated well and seen by a doctor during her ordeal . hamas says she was ordeal. hamas says she was returned along with another israeli woman, nurit cooper, on humanitarian grounds. their husbands, though , are still husbands, though, are still being held hostage . yakov's being held hostage. yakov's daughter, sharon, who's a

british citizen, translated her