street petitions to downing street today to try and get labour to stop their planned changes to private schools. will it work? should labour change their plans? and speaking of campaigners, a victory today for those who have spent many months trying to stop the former raf base scampton being used for so—called asylum seekers, we'll cross live there tonight . all of cross live there tonight. all of that and more. i also want to ask you about the house of lords ask you about the house of lords as well. hereditary peers, is it time to get rid of all of them? but first, let's get stuck into the 6:00 news headlines. >> good evening. i'm sophia wenzler with your headlines at 6:00. the prime minister has said he is deeply saddened by the death of a member of the royal navy after a merlin helicopter ditched in the engush helicopter ditched in the english channel. the incident occurred during operations with hms queen elizabeth. no other

fatalities or serious injuries have been reported. the ministry of defence has confirmed the family has been informed and a full investigation is underway . full investigation is underway. the home office has confirmed it will not use raf scampton to house asylum seekers. labour has scrapped the former conservative government's plans to house asylum seekers at the former raf base in lincolnshire. home office minister dame angela eagle said the plan, which has already cost £60 million, fails to deliver value for money for the taxpayer . meanwhile, it's the taxpayer. meanwhile, it's being reported that germany is considering their own rwanda migrant scheme using uk facilities. germany's special representative for migration agreements, joachim stamp, said the eu could use facilities set up the eu could use facilities set ”p by the eu could use facilities set up by the last uk government. labour cancelled the rwanda scheme, which was intended to deter migrants planning to cross the english channel in small boats when they entered office.

downing street said it would not comment on the discussions between two foreign governments . between two foreign governments. water bosses could face up to two years in jail under new laws aimed at cracking down on pollution in england's rivers, seas and lakes. the government claims the new water bill gives regulators more power to fine executives or face time behind bars if they fail to protect water quality. environment secretary steve reed says the previous government was too weak. >> instead of protecting our waterways, water companies were allowed to pay out multi—million pound bonuses and billions in dividends. and the conservative government was too weak to stop them . the result? this year's them. the result? this year's annual annual boat race here in putney was overshadowed by health warnings telling rowers not to enter the water due to high levels of sewage. we've inherited a broken water system that affects us all from the health and happiness of

communities to the quality and resilience of our food system and the natural environment. these are systemic issues that require a proper reset with a reformed water sector . reformed water sector. >> now, the government has admitted not all buildings with the same dangerous cladding as grenfell tower have been identified. that's following the damning findings published this week. the prime minister has pledged to review all 58 recommendations from the grenfell inquiry, with a full response due within six months. the report heavily criticised firms like arconic and kingspan, with families and survivors calling for swift punishment for those found guilty. meanwhile, the metropolitan police are continuing to investigate potential criminal charges, which could take up to 18 months. the crown prosecution service says it's dropped two indecent assault charges against harvey weinstein. it was alleged the disgraced hollywood producer

had assaulted a woman, now aged in her 50s, in 1996, in london. however, the special crime division, which continually reassesses cases, says it found no realistic chance of conviction. in a statement, the crown prosecution service have reiterated their commitment to prosecuting sexual assault cases and encourage any potential victims to come forward and report to police . olympic report to police. olympic marathon runner rebecca cheptegei has died after being set on fire by her boyfriend. that's according to the head of uganda's olympic committee. the 33 year old, who competed just weeks ago in paris, suffered burns to over 75% of her body in the attack. she's the third female athlete killed in the country since 2021. the ugandan president called the attack cowardly and senseless and condemned violence against women and presenter jeremy kyle has and presenterjeremy kyle has defended his former tv programme at an inquest into the death of

steve dymond, who died after appearing on the jeremy kyle show in 2019. the 63 year old from portsmouth reportedly took his own life just a week after failing a lie detector test on the programme, which accused him of cheating on his partner. the inquest has revealed that dymond had a history of mental health issues, including multiple suicide attempts, and had been rejected initially by the show due to his depression. despite the findings, he was later allowed to appear after providing a gp's letter. those are the latest gb news headlines. for now, i'm sophia wenzler more in an hour for the very latest gb news direct to your smartphone , sign up to news your smartphone, sign up to news alerts by scanning the qr code, or go to gbnews.com forward slash alerts . slash alerts. >> hello there, i'm michelle

dewberry . this is dewbs& co. dewberry. this is dewbs& co. we're with you till 7:00 tonight alongside me, my panel, kelvin mackenzie. the former editor of the sun, and tom buick, the visiting professor of education at the university of staffordshire. good evening, gents, to both of you. you're very welcome tonight , as are very welcome tonight, as are each and every single one of you. today too, you know the drill. so you can get in touch with me all the usual ways. email gb views @gbnews. com go to the website gbnews.com/yoursay. or of course you can tweet or x me or take me on your radio. whatever suits your fancy. tonight you're very welcome , wherever you are. lots welcome, wherever you are. lots to discuss. house of lords is it time to get rid of hereditary peers? private school vat petitions are being lodged there, teenage criminals . there, teenage criminals. anonymity. it's all coming up tonight. scampton, raf scampton. i'll be crossing live there as well. but first, water firm bosses. look, we all know the absolute state, the disgusting state of water in this country. we've just been hearing about it in those headlines. well, now bosses could be banned from

potentially receiving bonuses and could even face up to two years behind bars, if they don't comply with investigations and so on and so forth. this is all to do with some new laws. now proposed by the government, which will give more powers to regulators. kelvin mackenzie, where are you on this, >> they don't need. i'm not a water activist, but the water activists tell me they don't need more powers, or they need to do is enact the ones that they have. and the other issue i'd like to raise is the water. i'd like to raise is the water. i don't i don't go in for i don't swim in rivers. you know , don't swim in rivers. you know, swimming pools are fine and actually i am not interested in swimming in rivers. and i don't swimming in rivers. and i don't swim in the sea either. so i am not really affected by this. so there we are, lower the lifeboat i'm in. but my issue about this is if you look back 10 or 20 years and perhaps you know this, tom, because you're older than me. if you look back 10 or 20 years, were we in a worse state or a better state than today? so i'd like to hear about that. look, i'm not in favour of

excrement floating down the thames or any other, any other river. and if these people have actually been taking money out, which i very much doubt, certainly not true of thames water taking money out to which they weren't entitled, rather than investing in, in in making sure that our water water was clean when it rained . but if clean when it rained. but if somebody could prove to me how you can produce a water system when it buckets with rain and there is nowhere for the water to go but to go out to sea, could somebody explain to me how thatis could somebody explain to me how that is going to be changed, no matter whether it's labour, green, reform or the afd running the country? well, i can't explain anything now because i'm all discombobulated with images of you and your speedo in the local leader. >> over to you, tom. >> absolutely. i think there'll be people having their tea and watching this, thinking , i'm so watching this, thinking, i'm so glad that i don't have to watch kelvin mackenzie and his budgie smugglers getting attractive site. actually, me, i'm sure body shaming him in a minute. >> i'm sure it is. yeah. >> look, gavin, i mean, you put

the challenge down to me about what is water privatisation delivered. it happened in 1989. i think it's one of the most botched privatisations that happened. shareholders have taken £85 billion out of the industry in terms of dividends since that time, and actually investment in the water industry has declined. and i fact checked this earlier by £5.5 billion. in other words, there's a certain group here within the water companies that's having rather a good time. but the fact that they're running a natural monopoly , i'm pro—market. you're monopoly, i'm pro—market. you're pro—market. but the thing about water a it's a daily essential. b you and i can't shop around for the water. like we can decide which supermarket we want to go to. i think if there's a case, frankly. and i'm disappointed, actually, steve reed today, the new environment secretary, never mind announcing something which i don't think will ever happen. i don't think a single director of a water company will end up being charged and prosecuted and convicted because there are so many loopholes in terms of putting sewage into our rivers and our lakes. he should have

been announcing that the labour government plans to bring these water companies back into public ownership can you explain to can you explain to me, tom, any organisation you have ever seen which has actually got better? >> when the government says, i've got a good idea, we'll run the damn thing, right? i remember the railways. right? if you think the railways are bad today, you you go back 20 odd years. when they were, when they were, when they were all nationalised. >> i was going to be talking about kelly sandwiches. whenever we talk about british rail. everyone gets in touch to tell me about kelly's sandwiches. i read your emails. don't worry. >> well, they're not eating curly sandwiches in northern ireland, where it's a publicly owned water utility. scotland also have a neutral. >> have they got problems? have they got problems we have with with excrement floating down their rivers. i'm sure they have. there is when a bucket of water falls it has to go somewhere. normally it goes out to sea or the rivers. that's quite normal. the issue is i don't doubt for a second that they haven't invested enough money. okay, thames water looks as though it's going to very likely or possibly go back into

pubuc likely or possibly go back into public ownership. do make me laugh. then after that, because when that happens, you will find the same excrement floating down the same excrement floating down the river, and then somebody will be saying, i've got a good idea, why don't why don't we privatise it? >> yeah, but my point is, if these companies are going to go bust, the government should wait for them to go bust. move in. the shareholders take a haircut. no, that is true. at least then these. these. that is true. >> but when the when the government run it. all i'm arguing is that these turds will continue to float down the river. oh, lovely. >> and by the way, when you talk about shareholders taking a haircut, don't forget, of course, that many of your pension funds will be invested in some of these utility firms. but anyway, look, whatever happens, you can bet your bottom dollar that it is you, we the consumers, that will end up picking up the tab. let me know your thoughts on all of that. look, a few stories we have been talking about recently when it comes to young people, children essentially committing some of the most horrendous crimes. i mean, there's a boy, i think he's aged 14, he's been up in court today. he hasn't yet been found guilty. i have no idea if

he will be. so i can't get into the specifics of that case. but it just got me thinking about anonymity in this country of course, when you've got a child thatis course, when you've got a child that is accused and then found guilty of a crime, the starting point would be for many different crimes . anonymity as different crimes. anonymity as you're starting point of that child is that the right starting point? kelvin mackenzie? >> absolutely not. and what's happenedis >> absolutely not. and what's happened is that kids have grown up a lot , and happened is that kids have grown up a lot, and some of their some of the charges that they face today, including that 14 year old and the victim in that charge was 80 year old. and there is a there's a couple of kids up now charged with the murder of a 13 year old. we have a situation now where the knife has taken the place of the fist . has taken the place of the fist. and these kids know what they're doing . they're peddling weed. doing. they're peddling weed. they're they're killing people . they're they're killing people. they're they're killing people. they are carrying out anti—social behaviour to the to the nth degree. i do not believe it's right that that families in the area don't know that that

kid comes from this street. right? >> families in the local areas. i mean, if you've got an absolute wrong and that's been convicted of a murder or whatever, at the end of your road, the local community will know that is, weren't they? >> so at the end of that road, at the end of that road, but not in the wider area, and i think shame is part of the judgement as well as the actual sentence itself. and we're not getting that. and somebody try and tell me that these 14 or 15 year olds, for instance, i'd like to hear from some teachers, right. if any of them are at home from school yet. right. to say to me, what is it like to teach 14 and 15 year old louts in their class ? 15 year old louts in their class? they have absolutely no control over them. they're violent as hell and yet nothing can be done. and these kids go on to carry out crimes. and these crimes , they should be crimes, they should be identified. i want to know why . identified. i want to know why. why should it be? there should be some cut—off at 17. i can understand it. 11 or 12. perhaps you're trying to tell me 11 to 17 year olds don't know right

from wrong. why shouldn't they face the same problem that a 25 year old faces when they knife somebody, or they half strangle somebody, or they half strangle somebody, or they do something absolutely horrendous in a park in leicester? you tell me. well, there you go. >> and just to be clear, we're not talking specifically about ongoing live cases. this is a broader conversation about youth offenders that are found guilty, tom, on that broader , case, tom, on that broader, case, michel, about age of criminality, then, i mean , as it criminality, then, i mean, as it is, england's got one of the lowest ages of criminality. >> it's ten and england, wales, it's actually 12. in scotland, it's actually 12. in scotland, it's 14. in it's actually 12. in scotland, it's14. in iceland, it's 15 in sweden. and of course it's been lowered. and the reason why i'm in favour of this policy of anonymity is because in practice, what happens even when in the past, before the law change in 2016, obviously there are people watching and listening to this who remember that horrendous case of the toddler james bulger , who, you toddler james bulger, who, you know, who was led by no one will ever forget that case, ever know. and you know, i mean, it

lives on, doesn't it, in the memory. but the point is, the british public and the judge named those two individuals at the time, and all that ended up happening when they were let out on licence in 2001, is they were given another identity. and, you know , an injunction was put on know, an injunction was put on any newspaper or publication naming the new identity and individuals . so in a way, i see individuals. so in a way, i see multiple new identities by venables, like a yo—yo. >> that was venables did. >> that was venables did. >> and indeed, i understand that a celebrity also outed the new identity a few years ago and received a non—custodial sentence for doing that. but my point is , even if you and i do point is, even if you and i do understand your sort of visceral reaction, because what's happenedin reaction, because what's happened in the last few days, we're not getting into the case. but of course, you know, it really hits a raw nerve. and, you know, in a society built on law and order and justice, there's always this sense of if you've committed something, then you've committed something, then you should be accountable to your peers. but given what i'm saying to you about the fact that what always ends up

happening anyway, when these people do get out eventually on licence, even for the most heinous of crimes , they get heinous of crimes, they get given a new identity anyway. so l, given a new identity anyway. so i, you know, i don't really see the value, frankly, i wonder naming these individuals i want to see, i want to see. >> i want to see their pictures. i want to see their background. i want to see their background. i want to know as much about them as i do, as i do as a 18 year old or a 21 year old to what he's asking you to. >> what end? >> what end? >> well, you could argue that i don't accept that argument because on the basis of that argument, why, why why would you identify any criminal, right? what is the point of identifying people at all, allowing them to have their age? what i'm saying is the point of accountability in our country in order for a pubuc in our country in order for a public trial to take place, is it should be. i don't know whether it's ten. i certainly think the age of criminality. what i'm saying is, i would certainly make it 12 or 13 or 14, but i'm saying that these these kids are louts and they are men , right? they are big are men, right? they are big people. ask teachers , ask social

people. ask teachers, ask social workers about this kind of thing. they'll tell you that they are violent and uncontrolled . uncontrolled. >> no one's disagreeing with you on that. and no one's, by the way, saying that they shouldn't face some kind of if you want to look at it in this way, punishment and retribution for what they've done, what i think, why should it be a why should it be anonymous? tom yeah, but the debate here is, if you like, an age of criminality. it's quite low in england compared to other jurisdictions. and actually, i think the way to term it is, is an age of accountability. and i think when you look at the cognitive development of a ten year old compared to an 18 year old, yes, they've got 20,000 words in vocabulary. yes, they should know right and wrong. if they've been brought up right by their parents. but the thing is, if you go for the age of accountability and therefore name and shame them, front page of the sun and all the other tabloid papers, that's what i'm saying in a practical sense. all that's going to happen when they get out on licence. >> it's not, it's not. >> they'll get a new not a tabloid. i'll go and live somewhere else. tom, this is not a tabloid argument. >> this is an argument about

knowing what kind of people we have in our society. because at the moment, what happens is a kid gets a very serious, very serious charge , goes to court, serious charge, goes to court, haircut suited , weeping parents haircut suited, weeping parents side by side. and then out the doom side by side. and then out the door, right out the door. nobody knows. it doesn't have to be. it doesn't have to be a sentence. they don't even have to go off to go to off the equivalent of whatever their prison is. but whatever their prison is. but what what will happen to them is that nobody knows. so an anti—social, antisocial behaviour, for instance, it's . behaviour, for instance, it's. thanks very much. i want to know. i want to know who they are. i want to know where they live and i want to be part of the fact that i. i can avoid them in the future anyway, that's just locally, nationally. i can't do anything about people being jailed for drunk driving. right? but i being jailed for drunk driving. right? but i know all about them. why should we suddenly say that at 14 or 15 you are entitled to have a life without anybody pointing out to you? oh, there goes tom. he's a burden, you know, and all the rest of

it. but what is wrong with that? >> yeah, but we're also talking about the most heinous of crimes. what about the 1011 year old gets caught shoplifting or there's some other crime? why would they put their name and shame and actually their employment record, their chance to actually turn over a new leaf and be a new person? all that goes out the window. >> i, tom, i accept at 10 or 11 or perhaps even 12, although you tell me, when you look at your own kids, you know, you know whether they know right from wrong, right ? they don't know wrong, right? they don't know right. if they do know right from wrong, then i'm afraid they should face the same justice as anybody aged over 17. >> of course, there is an argument here that if you know who the child is, that shame will then extend to the parents as well. and many of you at home will be saying, well, do you know what? actually some parents do such a diabolical job that actually they could benefit from actually they could benefit from a little bit of a spotlight being put on that, but you'll have very different opinions on that, i'm absolutely sure. and i do just want to say that earlier on today, i actually spoke to a little ten year old boy on a q&a that i did, and he was

absolutely fabulous. so there's many, many great kids out there as well. so let's not all be doom and gloom about all kids, but tell me about those criminal ones. what do you think to that? also, speaking of schools , house also, speaking of schools, house of lords debating private school vat campaigners handing in petitions to downing street today to try and get labour to change their plans. let's look at that. let's also look as well. after the break with a hereditary peers in the lords. is it time to get rid of them? you tell me. they go to

hello there. i'm michelle dewberry with you till 7:00. kelvin mackenzie, former editor of the sun, and tom buick, the visiting professor of education at the university of staffordshire. look, there's been lots of conversations recently about this whole vat raid when it comes to private schools. now, in the house of lords today. and i'll come on to

them in just a few moments. but lord lexden, he was debating this today. listen, one mother writes to me that my child sat and watched an interview with rachel reeves in which she stated that she is concerned with the 93% of children in state schools and not the 7% in independent schools. >> my child turned and asked why the lady doesn't care about me. is that not a truly heart rending comment? i beg, i beg to , rending comment? i beg, i beg to, is it heart rending? >> do you care about the children that are in private schools? tom buick i have very strong opinions on this. where are you on it? >> well, parents clearly care about their kids in private schools. that's why they've made a democratic choice with the resources that they've got to put them into private schools. and just to actually contradict something there that lord lexden said, i mean, it's not about the labour government saying that the 7% of people who go to our private schools don't matter, because actually, if you look at the civil service today, 54% of

the civil service today, 54% of the permanent secretaries advising these labour ministers, most of whom went to state schools , are from the private schools, are from the private sector. so it's a if you can afford to send your kid to a private school, the opportunities and the life chances you'll get will be, on average, a lot better than those that go to state school. that said, i do think labour's policy on this is quite confused. look, as you know, i'm passionate about education. michelle i don't think we should be taxing education like this through vat. and actually, you know , i can and actually, you know, i can see the moral argument here that this is a double tax on those parents who, after all, have not put their kids in a state school. so let's say you've got two kids, that's about £12,000 that the state would have paid if they were inside a state school. if you put them in a private school, you're now going to have to pay another £12,000 in vat on top of the fees. that's what i mean by it's a double tax. so i'm afraid this is a result of the fact that now dunng is a result of the fact that now during elections, because political parties feel they've got to put in a fully costed

manifesto because of the political points that will be scored against them. this is a policy that was made before the election to raise £1.5 billion for 6500 teachers. there are 4000 secondary schools in this country, so that's what just over 1.1 a teacher in each school. i mean, big deal. when you think of some of the challenges that our secondary education system faced. so i'm afraid, you know , labour has got afraid, you know, labour has got himself into a terrible muddle on this. there are other ways, frankly, they could have raised that money. one way would have been actually to tax put a one off levy on the endowments, about £18 billion across private schools and universities as a one off charge. that would actually probably would have been fairer and it wouldn't have resulted actually in the parents, some of whom struggled quite a bit to get their kids into something we're not talking about the eton and harrow. we're talking about, you know, these other schools. just one final thing. i think the only saving grace, frankly, about this policy, which is where the government appears to have listened, is that it is making, vat exempt. those parents who have children with special educational needs and

disability, including local authorities, if they've got one of these education and how few of these education and how few of them actually do have. but if they have minute, but if they are sent. well, i think you'd be surprised. actually, the rise in the number of these plans i used to oversee these things a few years ago, but i think the point is, you know, we're not penalising those parents who, frankly, need that kind of support in the private sector and that includes local authorities who buy in this support as well. but, you know, it's a it's a small silver lining , i it's a it's a small silver lining, i have to it's a it's a small silver lining , i have to say, on what lining, i have to say, on what is really a botched policy. yeah. >> look, it's just class war. the truth about that billion odd that they're going to raise. they gave more more than that away to the to the train drivers. you know they don't they don't they don't give a stuff about it. they just enjoy the fact that we're going to lower the lower the numbers that go to private schools. because obviously financially, if something goes up 20%, it's going to affect a lot of people. one of the things that i'm in favour of here in this is actually being free from socialists, being able to use this argument about the vat

argument against against private schools. and i would be very much in favour of those people that have done well out of their education and in life. and there are a lot of them , because are a lot of them, because obviously, if you have massively ambitious parents who are prepared to throw money at your education and you do better, you're likely to do better. that is unanswerable. the argument is that the endowment side of funding your old school through either wills or gifts or whatever, i am massively in favour. so we end up in the american position of colleges where huge amounts of money go in like that for instance, i went to alleynes, which is a very well known school. now i was paid for by the london borough of southwark because it was under direct grant. so those lefties actually paid for my education. i repaid them by getting one gcse and actually i repaid them actually by. i also then went to lambeth school of building, which was a college afterwards and got no gcse. so i took 16 gcses and i got one. so

there's , there's for those of there's, there's for those of you out there, you play your cards right , you out there, you play your cards right, you can be a failure like me and end up as editor of the sun. but anyway, putting that putting that to one side. so i am in favour of endowments actually now funding these schools. so vat i, i'm not in favour of the vat but actually these guys, they've got actually these guys, they've got a massive majority and they're going to carry out more class things. so see what happens to cgt, see what happens to inheritance tax. anything that inheritance tax. anything that in which the middle classes have done reasonably well, they're going to take that away from you and they're going to give it to the skint and the dim. >> you watch their favourite phrase, skint and the dim. how would you, fund a £22 billion black hole in the public? >> i don't believe there is a £22 billion. okay. they've added 10 billion. they've added 10 billion of it themselves through payments to their state employees. so they say they've got 20. they have they have a policy plan which will be expensive. they want to fund that and that there would have been money which had been unspent by the conservatives. i

totally accept that. but they in fact, 22 billion. honestly, we are in for five years of nightmare of every year saying, oh, it's the tories, it's the tories. and by the way, you, you the plumber, the brickie, the electrician, watch your taxes go up. watch your knee go up. it's going to be a nightmare. >> many people at home will be celebrating this addition of the vat on the fees , and things like vat on the fees, and things like tinkering with the business rates and things like that that schools will be paying. they will think it's wonderful . and i will think it's wonderful. and i would ask all of those people you mentioned, the send pupils, those people with special educational needs , and we're educational needs, and we're talking about the statistics here, the amount of children. so 20% of private school, pupils receive support for send and of those, less than 7% of them have one of these plans that you were just referring to. and i just think this is such an awful policy, and i think it is borne purely out of envy. nobody has managed to convince me of any

other position on this, because yes, you can talk about small sums of money. you can talk about 6500 teachers. we have a retention. we have a recruitment problem in school teachers at the moment we cannot even fill all the vacancies that we've got. so how all of a sudden are we randomly going to find this magic tree of desperate to be teachers, people just waiting for this 6500 jobs? you will hurt people, children who are strivers, their parents are strivers. the wealthy don't care. the wealthy aren't bothered. they come back off 20% in a blink of an eye. so all you're going to do is if you're so bothered about the gap between the rich and the poor, the haves and the have nots, you're going to make your private schools even more elite, and then you're going to have this sea of children that now have to leave their educational setting be a burden on the state, bigger class sizes on the state, bigger class sizes on the state for what? so a few random people, random adults can high five themselves because they think that they've affected the rich. i think it's absolutely shameful. look, did you want to make another point? >> well, i need to say, look, i

mean, i wish it was a policy that was going to tackle the fact that we've got elites in our society who on the whole are privately educated and our military and our judiciary. but military and ourjudiciary. but as you say, michel, it won't tackle that issue. >> it will make it more elite. >> it will make it more elite. >> it will make it more elite. exactly. >> get this is basics. i do. i just think the politics of envy. and i'm always open to having my mind changed. if you sit there and think she doesn't know what she's talking about, it's not politics of envy. convince me nobody yet has managed to convince me of any proper business case where the numbers actually stack up, which would mean it would make any real difference at all, and it would not have the exact opposite effect when it comes to the gap between rich and poor, many strivers will be hurt by this. we should applaud striving. we should applaud people prioritising the right things for their children, as opposed to battering them so that we feel good about ourselves. hereditary peers. let me try and squeeze this one in before i head to a break. is it time to get rid of these 92 hereditary peers in the lords? >> yes. they've had they've had a fantastic run. the fact that that henry the eighth, you know,

made to love your wife and gave you 8000 acres of the new forest, i think is not a reason for you to decide whether i should whether my vat or income tax should be improved. so thank you very much indeed, earl of leicester. and good night. >> it's not just 92 of them that should be given their equivalent of a royal pay. i think all 700 of a royal pay. i think all 700 of them that are appointed this house of cronies that we've got, which never mind henry the eighth. i mean, this goes back to edward the third when the then house of commons were you were there represent? well, i'm sure an ancestor of mine was there at some point. obviously one one of the burghers from the shires who would have been in the commons and not, one of the barons as part of the nobility. look i mean, so get rid of them and do what? well, this is well, two things on this. one is this is an absolute anachronism. we just talked about class envy and getting rid of elitism in our society. australia, canada, new zealand have parliamentary

systems. they have house of commons in the case of canada, they don't have lords and ladies and all the rest of it, they have senators. and actually, when keir starmer was running for the leadership of the labour party back in 2020, he was one of a succession of labour leaders actually going all the way back to the early 1900s that promised that we would abolish the appointed house of lords and replace it with a semi elected senate of the nations and regions. i think he called it, which actually just coming back because you've discussed this on the show very many times about the show very many times about the proportionality. how in the first past the post system, in the commons, you can get x share of the vote like reform and the green party got and only a handful of mps. actually, if you put the proportional system into a second chamber, reform would have about 54 mps. >> nigel farage would actually be dominant party, he'd be dominant and that would be almost worth kind of pay per view, wouldn't it? >> some of the scenes that might unfold off the back of that. what do you think to the house of lords or indeed the private

schools conversation? get in touch and let me know. look, coming up after the break, what do you do with all these so—called asylum seekers? one plan used to be let's stick thousands of them in former raf bases. no, said the locals , bases. no, said the locals, there now there's plans then, because raf scampton is not going to be used for that. so then you've got operations scatter, which basically means that people will be dispersed right up and down the country into all the boroughs. right up and down the country into all the boroughs . which into all the boroughs. which approach do you favour? we'll go to raf scampton after

break. hello there . michelle dewberry, hello there. michelle dewberry, kelvin mackenzie and tom buick until seven. we were just having a little set to in that break. then because, tom is one of those people i think she should equalise capital gains with income tax or we've been going around that circle again. i don't think i'll open that can of worms on this show again tonight, because he got quite a lot of abuse last time, look,

margot says i am so cross about this private school policy. we send our child to private school and we go without. we pay double, we pay for state education, and we also pay for our own private education. this is disgraceful politics of envy . is disgraceful politics of envy. that sentiment is really coming through thick and fast. steve says, you do not make the poor rich by trying to make the rich poon rich by trying to make the rich poor. that is levelling down, not levelling up. lots of support from people on that earlier topic about naming and shaming child criminals, but i'll put tom's question to you. to what end? what is it you're hoping to achieve, if you think that you know that elizabeth, she's got in touch and says she completely disagrees with the removal of anonymity because it would basically just lead to the pubuc would basically just lead to the public taking revenge, trying to punish them , vigilantes and so punish them, vigilantes and so on and so forth. and she said, thatis on and so forth. and she said, that is a downward spiral. so she definitely doesn't support that policy. look, raf scampton, that's been in the press a lot

of, column inches over the last years, months. why? well, let's cross live to our correspondent will hollis. he's there now . will hollis. he's there now. will. good evening to you. can you bring any viewer that has not followed the story of raf scampton up to speed? start kind of as much at the beginning and bnng of as much at the beginning and bring us up to speed as you possibly can as rapidly as you can go. that's your test. >> yes. well, to say that the move to bring 2000 asylum seekers to the former raf base scampton was controversial is a huge understatement. for a year and a half there have been protesters at this gates who are angry and upset about the move to bring asylum seekers here, but tonight you can see that they're celebrating. this was originally announced by the former conservative government as a way to stop hotels being used, which were approximately £7 million a day. being spent on hotels for asylum seekers. and

an answer, as the former government thought, to solve the migrant crisis and the use of small boats to bring people here. and as i said, it has been controversial . there was a move controversial. there was a move at one time to dig up the bones of guy gibson's black labrador dog. that was one controversial thing. there have been police down here on many occasions. people have been arrested. but what's happened today is the new labour government, as they had originally promised, have decided to close raf scampton immediately for its intended purpose of housing asylum seekers. not a single asylum seekers. not a single asylum seeker has stepped foot into this former dambuster raf base, but £60 million worth of work has taken place here in the year and a half since the plans were announced and the new labour government have decided that the £122 million, approximately that would have been spent on the former airbase to house asylum

seekers between now and the year 2027, failed to deliver value for money for the taxpayers. it has been a very noisy place to report from over the last two years. i found it very difficult dunng years. i found it very difficult during this time and i imagine your viewers can struggle to hear me as well. but tonight it has been noisier than ever as people that are passing this particular part of lincolnshire celebrate the cancellation of the use of raf scampton to house asylum seekers. >> well, i probably owe an apology then, will, because i pass up and down past scampton quite a lot and i've been one of those people that very energetically toot my horn as i go energetically toot my horn as i 90 by energetically toot my horn as i go by to show my kind of support to the peaceful protesters that have tried to defend their local community. that site was earmarked for hundreds of millions of pounds of investment that would have benefited the local people. opportunities jobs, so on. tell us more about that.

>> yes, well, it's £300 million worth of investment. that was earmarked for raf scampton when the raf said that they would be closing this particular base. the plan was to sell it to local investors who would invest in essentially a magnificent museum with aerospace technology really celebrating the role that 617 squadron the dambusters squadron played during the second world war. really taking the fight to germany. and it was only a day or two after the announcement had been made that there would be a secure deal for raf scampton to be turned into this, visitor attraction that the then conservative government particularly under sir robert robert jenrick , the former robert jenrick, the former immigration minister, when he announced in the houses of parliament in march 2023 that this would be used as that base . this would be used as that base. now, what we've just heard from west lindsey district council is that they still intend to follow

through with that investment, but now they have to actually buy the place. >> well, let's hope actually that the plans do come to fruition and that the locals actually benefit from this facility. this isn't just about scampton, though. this is a much wider policy. and i'll come into that with my panel after the break. but just tell me you've been speaking to the people that are there tonight. how are they feeling? what are they saying? what is the sentiment? do you want to grab anyone and ask them to have a few words ? to have a few words? >> well, well, they're quite happy. they're celebrating right now. they've got their england flags. they've got their union jack flags as well. i think right now they're just quite happy to be here. if you want to come back to me in a few moments, i'm sure that we could bnng moments, i'm sure that we could bring somebody for you. live on gb news dewbs & co. gb news dewbs& co. >> there you go. well thank you very much, will. and i do apologise if i ever have tooted my horn loudly in your ears. but thank you for all of your coverage on this story for a very long time. look, this isn't

just about raf scampton. this is panel into this con\about)n after panel into this con\ about rafter panel into this con\ about raf scampton. this about a strategy of what we do just about raf scampton. this is about a strategy of what we do with so—called asylum seekers, with so—called asylum seekers, because if it's not going to be because if it's not going to be scampton or places like that, scampton or places like that, operations scatter as it's been operations scatter as it's been commonly known, basically will commonly known, basically will now be the strategy of this now be the strategy of this government, which means that government, which means that these so—called asylum seekers these so—called asylum seekers will be dispersed up and down will be dispersed up and down the country. is that then the the country. is that then the right move ? personally, i hope right move ? personally, i hope right move? personally, i hope that everyone that says refugees right move? personally, i hope that everyone that says refugees welcome and attends those welcome and attends those protests. i hope that they are protests. i hope that they are the areas where these people end the areas where these people end up. i worry up. i worry not. i'll not. i'll bnng panel into this bnng panel into this conversation after conversation after

shut up, you two. they're nattering away . they don't nattering away. they don't respect my breaks and my timings. you know, i think they're just. they just have such good debate. it could carry on this program with these two until about 12:00 tonight, look, lots of you guys getting in touch about that conversation there. we've just been having

pat on twitter, says it's a great win for lincolnshire. that scampton will not be used in that way . the noise that you can that way. the noise that you can hear right now is all of us yellowbellies, he says, cheering away. that made me smile, on the vat one carol on twitter says michelle, ultimately sending your child to private school is a choice. it's a choice that you choose to make. no one forces you to make that state school children. they don't have a choice in what they can and can't do and where they can and can't do and where they can and can't go. what do you think, to all of that, get in touch and tell me. but let's carry that conversation on kelvin mackenzie and tom buick alongside me, because we've just been talking about scampton, the fact that thatis about scampton, the fact that that is now not going to house all of those asylum seekers, so—called, that it was originally planned to. well, it caught my eye that tony blair, he has been speaking out about the influx of immigrants in britain during his premiership. he acknowledges the strain that so many numbers has placed on communities. i mean , i don't

communities. i mean, i don't want to i don't want to say something that would get me into trouble, but i mean, come on now. it's not that very difficult to have spotted the strain on communities, is it? many people have been warning about this for a very long time. look, there's a few things going on here when pick whatever you want, because there's also some interesting stuff going on in germany on this topic as well. whatever angle you want. kelvin. >> well, going, i mean, the fact that that very kindly sir anthony blair has decided to agree that him and brown opening the floodgates for, immigration into our country has led to a strain on communities. if anybody wondered why, nigel farage is going to do stunningly well, for instance, coming up in the welsh elections, let alone what happened here, and probably in the general election, it's to look back at that decision . so look back at that decision. so that was a poor decision. he knew what he was doing. but we did have the only thing i would say about blair is we did have

an economy which could withstand it. today. we don't have an economy that would stand it, even taking into account anything else. but the other aspect is don't come to germany yet. >> hold your horses, actually respond on blair, and then we'll bnng respond on blair, and then we'll bring germany. you won't believe you won't believe. honestly, i just think sometimes we live in an absolute clown world. the german aspect of this story i'm about to tell you will just kind of reiterate that. but come on, the blair thing. >> yeah, i mean, in terms of blair's interview, i mean, he's basically trying to get it out there that because he was prime minister between 2004 and 2008, 2009, before brown came in, that somehow he's not responsible for a country the size of sweden that's moved here in terms of net migration. i mean, actually, i checked the figures earlier, you know, britain's population growth is about 60% more as a result of that. now, as it happens , i'm pro migration, happens, i'm pro migration, i think, as you say, we needed those people for our economy. >> we needed people anyway. >> we needed people anyway. >> yeah, but we should have been also training our own. that's that's my other point. >> and there you go. >> and there you go.

>> are we capable of training our own? are our people too dim and too idle to actually do work? no, i'm asking the question because something is going on in our nation. we have loads of people who are suddenly sick following a covid and honestly, we need people to work. we need we need competition for jobs. we need people to work hard and all we hear all day long is, oh, take it easy. four day week. oh, by the way, if you're sick, you can take next year off. well, there you go. >> he's on his soapbox. you will have strong opinions on that. but i do want to move on because i'm almost out of time. but our germany, everybody look, we live in a clown world. this is just further proof of it because everyone's been crying about the rwanda plan in this country. so much so that the labour government, of course, have scrapped all of that. now you'll never guess what. tell them, kelvin. >> well, germany has now opened negotiations with rwanda to take over the very buildings which our taxpayers, you and me and everybody watching this, everybody watching this, everybody watching this show have actually funded . and that have actually funded. and that is honestly a new low. there's been a series of low the labour

refused to believe that it would be a deterrent if we sent even 30 people to rwanda, right, no matter what the cost. so they said we're scrapping it. we will now never know. so labour look more humiliated than even the tories for spending sort of three quarters of a billion on it. reaction. >> kelvin. here's my prediction. there will be more members of olaf scholz, centre left coalition party that will get on a plane to go and inspect those facilities in rwanda, than they'll ever be able to deport people out. and that's the fact of it, because germany is also a part of the human. the european court of human rights. and there will be a pyjama. so it never happened. going out never happened. >> well, and they'll pick up more money. the clever people are the rwandan finance department. they made a fortune out of this. >> honestly, it's just enough to make your eyes water, isn't it? honestly we do. we live in a clown world. that's the only way i can kind of describe it these days. and as for rwanda, at this rate, you'll have queues of british pensioners wanting to be sent over there. they won't be

able to heat their homes over here. and goodness only knows what this winter, rwanda will sound like a decent prospect to many of them. i'm sure. but look, how about using scampton for the homeless? that's an idea. that's all i've got time for. thanks, gents. see you tomorrow. up next farage night. >> a brighter outlook with boxt solar, sponsors of weather on . solar, sponsors of weather on. gb news. >> hello again. welcome to the latest update from the met office for gb news. it's been a miserable end to the day for the south and southwest and we'll see further spells of heavy rain dunng see further spells of heavy rain during the next 24 to 48 hours around this area of low pressure that's sitting over the continent. that's pushing some weather fronts up into the south, but they are tending to stall. having said that, overnight, the heaviest of the rain will tend to fizzle away for a time. still, some heavy showers around towards the south—east wales for a time, but otherwise a lot of cloud across the uk, especially in the south and the east, that low cloud will lead to a misty start in

places on friday morning, and a mild start 15 to 17 celsius. a muqqy mild start 15 to 17 celsius. a muggy night to come for many of us, but it's not going to be cloudy everywhere, certainly towards western scotland . we'll cloudy everywhere, certainly towards western scotland . we'll towards western scotland. we'll see blue skies first thing on towards western scotland. we'll see blue skies first thing on friday. plenty of sunshine out friday. plenty of sunshine out there and already a warm start there and already a warm start to the day. it's going to get to the day. it's going to get warmer as the day progresses. warmer as the day progresses. northern ireland seeing some decent sunshine, particularly northern ireland seeing some decent sunshine, particularly towards the west. likewise for towards the west. likewise for southwest scotland, cumbria , southwest scotland, cumbria , southwest scotland, cumbria, lancashire, north wales these are the areas where we didn't southwest scotland, cumbria, lancashire, north wales these are the areas where we didn't see much summery weather during see much summery weather during the summer , but on friday and the summer , but on friday and the summer, but on friday and saturday we'll see plenty of the summer, but on friday and saturday we'll see plenty of warm sunshine. instead. the warm sunshine. instead. the midlands, east anglia , some midlands, east anglia , some midlands, east anglia, some sunshine for a time, but across midlands, east anglia, some sunshine for a time, but across south wales into the south of south wales into the south of england, mostly around the m4 england, mostly around the m4 corridor and southwards, corridor and southwards, there'll be thick cloud and there'll be thick cloud and they'll be heavy outbreaks of they'll be heavy outbreaks of rain on and off through the day, rain on and off through the day, increasingly focused across increasingly focused across parts of somerset, devon and parts of somerset, devon and cornwall that could cause some cornwall that could cause some issues. localised flooding and issues. localised flooding and transport disruption, that sort of thing. but elsewhere we've transport disruption, that sort of thing. but elsewhere we've got the sunshine 25 to 27 got the sunshine

gb news. will >> good evening. would you believe it? a german government proposal that they might send people to rwanda to the very same buildings that you, the taxpayer, have paid for already. and in france, in an attempt to break the impasse, president macron has appointed a new prime minister. it is eu fanatic michel barnier. you really couldn't make this stuff up. the

remaining 92 hereditary peers are to be kicked out of the house of lords. but is this really the kind of reform that we need for the lords, or should we need for the lords, or should we be going a lot, lot further? because i think we ought before all of that, let's get the news with sophia wenzler. >> nigel. thank you. good evening. i'm sophia wenzler with your headlines just after 7:00. the prime minister has said he is deeply saddened by the death of a member of the royal navy after a merlin helicopter ditched in the english channel. the incident occurred during operations with hms queen elizabeth. no other fatalities or serious injuries have been reported , the ministry of reported, the ministry of defence has confirmed. the family has been informed and a full investigation is now underway. the home office has confirmed it will not use raf scampton to house asylum seekers. labour has scrapped the former conservative government's plan to house asylum seekers at

the former raf raf base in