including workplace health and motifs that will stop you getting ill in the first place. but is your blood pressure? your bossis but is your blood pressure? your boss is business plus , could boss is business plus, could nigel farages much loved gb news show be under threat? well, labour's new modernisation committee is swinging an axe in the direction of mps second jobs. would that be a welcome for change you? and three, two one it was lift off. a billionaire was rocketed into space today thanks to elon musk. but when we can't get clean water to half of the world, is this morally justifiable? and widows or even just single people? beware, labour might be after you because it's this time. it's a single person's discount on council tax . all

discount on council tax. all that in the next hour. first, though, the very latest news headunes though, the very latest news headlines with lewis mckenzie . headlines with lewis mckenzie. >> good afternoon. it's 6:00. i'm lewis mckenzie in the gb newsroom. sir keir starmer says the nhs is broken but not beaten , the nhs is broken but not beaten, delivering a stark message after a report into the health service. the review highlights ballooning waiting times, a&e delays and poor cancer care. speaking earlier, the prime minister warned there will be no more money without reform and says big shifts are needed to secure the nhs future. >> only fundamental reform and a plan for the long term can turn around the nhs and build a healthy society. that won't be easy, it won't be quick. it will take a ten year plan, not just the work of one parliament, but i know we can do it .

i know we can do it. >> the uk's prime minister has had her belongings stolen from a hotel where she was giving a police superintendent association speech in the conference speech. dame diana johnson says the labour government had inherited an epidemic of anti—social behaviour , theft and shoplifting behaviour, theft and shoplifting from the conservative government. warwickshire police are investigating the theft and the home office has confirmed no security risks were identified . security risks were identified. harvey weinstein has been hit with new criminal charges as the disgraced movie producer gears up for a possible retrial. his 2020 rape conviction was overturned in april after a judge allowed testimony from accusers not formally involved in the case. prosecutors in manhattan are now investigating new sexual assault claims as more women come forward. he

continues to deny all allegations . the 17 year old boy allegations. the 17 year old boy has been arrested as a part of an investigation into a cyberattack on for transport london. the national crime agency says the teenager has been detained on suspicion of offences under the computer misuse act. it comes as tfl says some customer names and contact details have been compromised in the security breach, which was started on the 1st of september. some oyster card data may also have been accessed, which could include bank account details . in include bank account details. in a sign that major changes could be ahead for the uk's workforce , be ahead for the uk's workforce, health and care work visas applications have plunged by 83% for the year april to august. this year. new figures from the home office reveal department visa applications also dropped by 73%. meanwhile, student visas saw a i7% drop, but dependents

of students took a sharper hit with 83% decline in contrast, applications for skilled workers visas rose by 18% over the same penod. visas rose by 18% over the same period . and taking space period. and taking space exploration to new heights, two civilians just completed the first ever commercial space walk. billionaire jared isaacman and crewmate sarah gillis floated out their spacex dragon capsule 400 miles above earth, using experimental spacesuits without the usual safety of an airlock. the daring duo tested life support systems in the vacuum of space. now the hatch is closed and the pair are safely back inside . how nice. safely back inside. how nice. those are your latest gb news headlines. i'm lewis mackenzie. more from me at 7:00. >> for the very latest gb news direct to your smartphone , sign direct to your smartphone, sign up to news alerts by scanning the qr code, or go to gbnews.com

forward slash alerts . forward slash alerts. >> welcome to dewbs & co. well >> welcome to dewbs& co. well done to lewis brand new newsreader today. good job. now i am here for michelle dewberry this week's bev turner on my panel this evening reem ibrahim acting director of communications at the iea and tom buick , visiting professor of tom buick, visiting professor of education at the university of staffordshire. evening. both. good evening. good evening. want to hear from you at home as well. gbnews.com/yoursay. so let's kick off with the nhs. it's been a huge story today. a report by a former new labour health minister, lord darzi , health minister, lord darzi, described the nhs as dire and he said that the failings in care have led to the deaths of thousands of patients a year. but he says it could be turned around. here he is. >> big picture finding is the nhs is in a serious, critical condition, but the vital signs are normal, which will suggest

that we can do something about this. to do it well, we need to engage the whole staff, patients, the public, the political leadership all aligned to make that change happen as quickly as we can because we. >> keir starmer responded with a speech that used more clinical health metaphors than you can imagine. here he is. >> lectures may be in a critical condition, but it is vital. signs are strong and we need to have the courage to deliver long term reform. major surgery, not sticking plasters . sticking plasters. >> there you go. i told you. now, some of the solutions could be health mots in the workplace. perhaps regular weigh ins in the office, and maybe privatising more of the nhs than is already privatised at the moment . but privatised at the moment. but would it be a threat to civil liberties, particularly reme? let me start with you. it didn't really tell us anything. we didn't already know this report. it only took lord darzi nine, nine weeks to come up with this,

which i thought was great because i'm sick of reports taking 12 months and costing millions. i like his common sense approach to this, and he's worked in the nhs for years, so he knows what he's talking about. did you see much in this that was new or does it feel like a different direction to you with starmer's response? >> it's really interesting. i think that the overton window, so the idea that actually criticising the nhs , recognising criticising the nhs, recognising that the solution to the nhs woes is not just spending more taxpayer money, is actually starting to shift now, this report, i think , is one sign of report, i think, is one sign of that. could you imagine in the pandemic somebody saying that the nhs was broken or the nhs was a disaster, let alone it coming from our prime minister and right after the election, the secretary of for state health wes streeting. now, i think that the solution to the national health service is surprise, surprise, not spending more of our taxpayer money. actually, we're currently on par with a lot of other european counterparts. what we need to implement is a i think , quite implement is a i think, quite radical change, but something that will be quite needed, which

is a social insurance healthcare model. so we're looking across europe. there are so many different examples that we could seek to emulate, and they allow for competition and choice. so patients can choose where they get their healthcare from , and get their healthcare from, and providers can compete with one another. and if they don't do very well because people stop going to them , they fail. going to them, they fail. ultimately, that's how a market should work. >> just give us an idea of how that would work in actuality, then, it's not quite the american model of healthcare that you're talking about. just describe it for us. so everyone would pay a little bit per month. >> yes. so effectively you'd have a social insurance premium. so instead of paying national insurance we could we could take that off or you'd have a reduction of your income tax bill. some of that money you'll be compelled, compelled by the government to pay some of that as a social insurance premium. and what that would mean is that you get to choose where you get your healthcare from. you have all of the choice at the moment with the national health service. if you don't like it, you can't go anywhere else unless you then go to an entirely different system in the private sector.

>> and what do you means? test that so that if you were a low income earner, you wouldn't have to contribute as much, but you'd still get the same service. >> so some countries do that, some countries do contribute more, but ultimately i think that it should be on a level playing field. so if you are earning more then that means that you do pay more, similar to how national insurance works, right? it's on your it's on your payslip. so if you earn more then you do pay more of that premium. >> tom buick that sounds very sensible. and i think re makes a really interesting point that we're not just talking about the nhs now as this sort of sacred cow that you can't ever criticise, you know, which reminds us of the pandemic when we all clapped and knocked our pans and it was all about save the nhs and, when actually the nhs is there to save us. what's your perception of this problem now and how do we solve it? >> well, i agree with both of you. i mean, it's £165 billion pubuc you. i mean, it's £165 billion public service, and we should look at it as a public service. and to be fair, lord darcy, obviously a former labour health minister, but importantly, a clinician from within the health service, he knows what he's talking about . and, you know, talking about. and, you know, just putting aside obviously,

the prime minister's clinical puns today, actually, i do think we learn a lot of things that were new. of course, there are people who are watching and listening to this. we're all after all, beneficiaries of one kind of the health service. and actually, i'd encourage people to read the 16 page letter that lord darcy wrote to wes streeting because he made this point up front. i think it goes to your point, bev, that the nhs. n0, to your point, bev, that the nhs. no, it shouldn't be a national religion, but it is there in the best of times for us. i remember the birth of my three wonderful children, but it's also there in the most sorrowful of times as well , sorrowful of times as well, whether it's close ones or relatives. so we all care about this national health service. i don't agree with him that just switching the financial system or quasi privatising the health service actually will deal with the problems around falling life expectancy. 1 million people waiting on their community waiting on their community waiting lists. no it won't. well, look at other countries. >> so the uk currently have the second highest avoidable mortality rates in all of europe

after greece. that is disgraceful. the national health service is a disgrace . i think service is a disgrace. i think that we need to look at other countries with better systems and the reason why they work better is because if a provider is doing a bad job, people can leave. it's about allowing adults, allowing families, allowing patients to have the choice and be empowered across europe. they do that. there is an exact reason there are many reasons why no other country has a national health service. >> look, i'm not going to sit here and try and defend a health service. indeed lord darcy's pointed out these figures today on cardiac and cancer rates. the truth is, you know, we've increased hospital staff by 18% over the last few years, but we haven't seen that translate into outcomes. so there is an issue between inputs and outcomes , between inputs and outcomes, though i think what you're arguing, if we go down the american route of essentially european or even the european route, where they still have high numbers and there are lots of copayments that are involved that poor people can't necessarily afford it all sounds very rosy and very easy. and yes, by the way , i would like to

yes, by the way, i would like to see tax breaks for those in work. i mean, it's ludicrous at the moment. it's this form called a p11 or something that those who get occupational health benefits a year get taxed on that, even though they're paying on that, even though they're paying national insurance and paying paying national insurance and paying income tax. that is crazy. i would like to see, like you've seen in sweden over the years, incentives for people who can afford occupational health schemes to pay into those. but it should be on a non—profit basis. you know, we don't want american style healthcare companies. well, because we've seen already the prime minister mentioned £5,000, a shift to bnng mentioned £5,000, a shift to bring somebody in from a private workforce agency to cover for someone who's off sick. that's what happens. >> it costs us £192 billion a yeah >> it costs us £192 billion a year. this service, and a lot of thatis year. this service, and a lot of that is already going to private businesses who are making a profit within the nhs at our expense. exactly. >> this entire notion, i think this is really silly, this entire notion that profit is a bad thing, that profit is terrible, that anything that is needed, anything that is sort of a essential service , shouldn't

a essential service, shouldn't have a profit motive to it. and that's just completely wrong. it's not about profit. it's a really good example of this. sorry tesco. when tesco recorded record profits, everybody was up in arms saying this is terrible, why are they, why are their profits so high? i think it's the complete opposite. i think it's brilliant. it shows that these companies are so excellent at what they do that people are voluntarily giving them money. the difference between private healthcare companies and the national health service is that we are forced to give our money to the nhs. to the n hs. >> to the nhs. >> look, this is the point. those supermarkets are not operating a monopoly. healthcare and education, by definition they are monopolies. don't have to be. we have seen what's happened with the water companies. look at the dividends that have been siphoned off to private shareholders. no, the thing to do bupa is an excellent non nhs company. it makes surpluses on its healthcare provision, but it ploughs that money back into healthcare. i think if we want a democratic revolution actually around our healthcare, because again, another thing lord darzi mentioned today is that the patient voice is missing so often in our healthcare system. i would like to see a mutual

healthcare system where, as i say, you can incentivise occupational health schemes, but we should. every penny that is raised from treatment should go back into improving treatments. we don't want shareholders siphoning off dividends like we've seen in the water companies. >> that's absurd. so just to answer your first point, the reason why utilities and utility privatisation has failed is because they were government created monopolies that were then sold off to the private sector. healthcare is a monopoly at the moment. yes it's a government owned monopoly. we don't. it doesn't have to be. look across europe, there are competing providers and it means that we get to choose where our healthcare comes from. >> i just want to go to my local gp. i want to get an appointment on time. this, this, this crazy notion. i'm going to shop around europe for a gp service. >> ridiculous has an nhs. we are the only ones that have one. and this kind of strange emotional affinity to it is killing people. >> one of the one of the recommendations in the report is that we get more care in the community. so you've got a better chance of seeing your your gp or there's more local

provision. so people aren't ending up in hospitals. how would the system that you envisage reme do that? one of our viewers has said what would happen to the eu with a system like this. we probably wouldn't get insurance even if we could afford to pay, we'd get some form of credit for what we paid in our lifetime. maybe we, i worry, would be discarded and forgotten. >> yeah, this is interesting. so of course, the transition to the system is really where the questions come up. the idea is actually publishing a paper very, very soon on exactly how an implementation of this process could look. czechoslovakia did it after the second world war. east germany did it where they actually transitioned to a social insurance model. these central european countries have developed these systems over time. now, i'm not saying tomorrow we're going to transition the national health service to a social insurance model, but i think if we start to introduce these mechanisms slowly, we can actually allow adults in this country allow families in this country allow patients in this country to receive the health care that they deserve. >> i mean, in a sense, whatever model we enact or whatever changes starmer makes, this report does point out that we

all have to start getting fitter as a country, that we have to start taking responsibility, that we're already in a pandemic of obesity. we have been for 20, 30 years. tom are you comfortable with that happening in the workplace? as per one of the suggestions, you'd go in with your little nhs app. your boss would take your blood pressure, stand you on the scales, say, oh, tom, you've got to stay off the pies. i'm afraid you have to punch all your data in. it goes into the system. are you okay with that? >> well, someone who's old enough to have had the health mot a few years ago. now, i don't have a problem. actually, it's back to this point about. we should be incentivising more occupational schemes, not less . occupational schemes, not less. of course, there's an issue about privacy. i wouldn't for a minute suggest that nhs data, patient data should be shared with employers. but we've got this crazy situation at the moment that employers and employers are sharing your data with the nhs. with the n hs. >> with the nhs. >> it's even more chilling than that, tom. >> well, that can be regulated, i think. but the important thing is should we be taxing people who go to work and get gym memberships and free bike schemes and all the rest of it?

that's currently seen as a taxable benefit if it goes over a certain threshold. so i think we need some common sense. there where we've got enlightened employers with committed employees that care about their health, because after all, this is a this is a productivity issue. and lord darcy really honedin issue. and lord darcy really honed in on this point. today we've got an nhs that in real terms, we've put about 1% more money in over the last decade. we should have been really putting about 3% in, but we're not getting the outcomes, including productivity. so this shows that this isn't just about more money, it is about getting more money, it is about getting more for the money, and that's about technology. but i also do think it is about linking up the a&e. the hospital , think it is about linking up the a&e. the hospital, primary think it is about linking up the a&e. the hospital , primary care, a&e. the hospital, primary care, gp commissioning and the workplace in a more holistic health strategy for the country. >> you slightly dodge my question though, in a way about whether this should be happening in the workplace, whether why not? >> i'm not dodging it. i'm saying yes. i think the workplace, i think the workplace, i think the workplace, i think the workplace, i mean, after all we've got what, 800,000 people who've been parked on long term sick since the pandemic. these

are 800,000 people. >> are i think, well, whatever the figures. >> well, some are on the golf course, by the way, because they've retired with very healthy occupational pensions. but the point is they're not in work. and meanwhile we're having this this, this parallel debate about migration levels, about the population explosion, which is all also about labour supply. we see today that the skilled visa numbers have gone up again. we're not making the most of the human resources we've got. and a big part of human resources is healthy human capital. just on your first point, there are 5.3 million people out of work benefits across the country. >> so it's a fifth of the adult working population in manchester are on long term sickness benefits. i think that's a discrete in itself, and i don't believe that all of them are. >> it's also a tragedy for them, long term sick. >> but it is a tragedy. it's a waste of human potential. on the second point, regarding how this would actually work, and actually, if we think it should happenin actually, if we think it should happen in the workplace, i think it should be up to employers. and i think that the most employers are employees, employers are employees, employers and employees. it should absolutely be an opt in, opt out system. nobody nobody should be forced to hand over

their data without their own permission. >> stand on the scales in the office. >> no. it's disgusting. that is. thatis >> no. it's disgusting. that is. that is a complete violation of privacy, a complete violation of individual liberty. is that what's being proposed, though? >> seriously? yeah. >> seriously? yeah. >> seriously? >> seriously? >> seriously. >> seriously. >> i do believe that it will ever be implemented because, my god, could you imagine in the city that ever working at all? that would be absurd. but i think that what's interesting about these kind of measures is it's the government still saying we have a role in people's healthcare outcomes. now, i actually disagree. i think if people want to remain fat and want to remain unhealthy and want to remain unhealthy and want to remain smokers, they should be free to do so in a free country. but they should be paying free country. but they should be paying more for their healthcare. >> but then we you also, if we are prepared, if that's the mindset that that you know, we all believe in, then we have to accept that the nhs just won't exist anymore. it will be unrecognisable. possible. and you're okay with that ? you're okay with that? >> i don't i have no emotional affinity to a health service thatis affinity to a health service that is failing people, right? >> do you have an emotional affinity to the health service? let me know. gbnews.com/yoursay i'm going to have a quick look at your messages, but after the break, why might. nigel farage

is much loved gb news show be under threat due to a new government committee? don't go

welcome back to dewbs & co with welcome back to dewbs& co with me. bev in for michelle this week i have got with me in the studio reem ibrahim acting director of communications at the institute for economic affairs and tom buick, visiting professor of education. right now, this story is a bit close to home, isn't it? nigel farage could be banned from hosting his gb news show as labour looks to crack down on mps making paid media appearances. the parliament's new modernisation committee that makes my blood run cold today published a report looking at the tightening rules on second jobs, so should mps have second jobs? should media appearances be banned ? media appearances be banned? tom, i think second jobs for mps

paying tom, i think second jobs for mps paying significant amounts of money because actually they're taking a significant amount of their time should be banned. >> that said, you know, we need to remember that in part, this whole idea of mps having outside interests, a bit of a relic of the 19th century, actually, at a time when mps were not paid, the chartists made sure that working class representation and mps could be paid. but these are people on what, £94,000 a year now with allowances? look, i know someone that has both stood for parliament and failed, but also been an elected local councillor. where you know, it is expected that you will have a job alongside that job, just how much bandwidth, how much personal investment you have to make in your constituents. there's a huge amount of casework, housing, immigration. so whether it's nigel or indeed any of these other mps, some of whom, to according this report, £233 an hour across the board is being made for those outside parliament. it's a lot more than other parts of the labour force

that have second jobs. so yes, i would outlaw the kind of paid media, second jobs that we've seen, but i would allow some exceptions, like for example, military service , being a military service, being a special constable, volunteering, andindeed special constable, volunteering, and indeed being able to write books. i mean, we'd never have had tony benn's diaries. would we, if it wasn't for the fact he was scribbling away in his diaries after a day in parliament. >> what's the difference, then, between a job in the media, which mps, politicians have done forever and being, you know, and any other kind of job? is it just about the amount of money that they make? is it about the influence they can exert? >> no, this is about public service. now. nigel's been, i would argue nigel's show is pubuc would argue nigel's show is public service. well, yeah, but it's. well, just look at what he's just registered in the members interests in the house of commons. is that something we know? >> so it's irrelevant, isn't it? your opposition to it is the amount of money they're making. this is just the politics of envy. i think it's excellent that politicians are able to do as they wish in their free time. and i think that nigel's show is

absolutely excellent and at the same time, this whole notion that they shouldn't be earning this huge amount of money, i completely disagree. i want my politicians to have some real life experience. i want them to have second jobs. i want them to understand what it's like in the real world. i want them to have board member positions at businesses and presenter positions @gbnews i want that because i want my politicians to because i want my politicians to be real people. well, real people. >> but reem, with respect, being with the real people would be nigel four nights a week in his constituency in clacton, where there are 58,000 people in that constituency that he now represents, had the privilege of being elected, that have got all sorts of problems . they lack sorts of problems. they lack inward investment, they lack educational opportunity, a member of parliament should be focused on those issues , focused on those issues, representing them in parliament. >> but hang on. but they voted him in knowing that he had this job and they voted him in, knowing that he is a very popular man. that is in demand in various other areas. >> i hear that bev, but he's also the leader actually of an insurgent party with its own

ambitions. and i've got every respect as a democrat for his ambitions, for example, to replace the conservatives on the right of politics. but that won't happen if you're trying to, frankly , moonlight in all to, frankly, moonlight in all these other different jobs. it will happen by a concerted attempt to represent the people of clacton, first and foremost in parliament, to represent the hundreds of thousands of members in reform. but also the million, 4 million plus people voted for reform. they need a leader of their own party. that's focused on taking that party from four mps to the future . mps to the future. >> but this has got to be because it's nigel, because david lammy had a job on lbc. yeah, he had £49,000. >> i say this about david lammy, i say about all of them but this is silly. >> it's only become a problem because it's nigel. this is the thing. and i mean, i completely disagree with you, tom. i think that it's i think it's a excellent that these politicians have outside jobs, as i've just said. but i also think it's entire notion that these politicians need to be, from what we think need to be in their constituencies, 24 over seven. i'd actually argue that

nigel is doing a lot more for the people of clacton on his show, or indeed when he's in parliament or doing these speaking appearances, he's doing so much more. and ultimately it is only up to the voters in clacton to decide whether or not they believe that nigel farage isindeed they believe that nigel farage is indeed a good representative. >> i agree with that. okay good. >> i agree with that. okay good. >> but does it does it matter about the type of jobs as well? because i would be so interested to see what this modernisation committee concludes when they've looked into this, it's arbitrary. it does feel very arbitrary. it does feel very arbitrary . and i don't think it arbitrary. and i don't think it is. it shouldn't be about the income that you make because you could be a lawyer defending people who need your services whilst also working as an mp, and you could get paid very well for that. now they might conclude, well, that's good work , conclude, well, that's good work, that's good work. so we'll let you do that. >> what is good and what is bad? who decides? it's so arbitrary. >> that's something that the modernisation committee will need to look at personally, where i draw the line on second jobs is around whether or not it counts for public service or not, or frankly, public service mean. well, i'll tell you what it does mean. and this was a

slogan, actually, that nigel and his party stood on during the 2019 election for the brexit party, about changing politics for good. there's a deep cynicism in our country, of our pubuc cynicism in our country, of our public representatives. they're seen as technocratic. they're seen as technocratic. they're seen like they've got their noses in the trough. it seems like they go up. they go up to westminster to be part of the uni party and enjoy the whole gossip that comes about as the westminster bubble, what the british people want to see actually, are people focused on the things that they care about housing, educational opportunity, transport. that's i'm not just saying this about nigel. i'm saying about all 650 mps would do wise to focus on the people's priorities. well, what about on their own pockets? >> well, what you will find, what you might find is that people who are well—paid outside of politics, like nigel, might decide that they have a lifestyle which doesn't allow them to be an mp on £91,000 a yean them to be an mp on £91,000 a year, which is not to be sniffed at, let's be honest. but a lot of chief executives of companies in this country earn a lot more than that. if you want the very best people to go into politics,

you've got to pay them well. would you like to see an mps bafic would you like to see an mps basic salary doubled? >> i do, i do think that mps need to be paid more, and the reason for that is because if you are a incredibly successful, as you said, ceo of a company, you work in the city, you are going to have to take a pay cut if you enter into parliament. now, of course, your earning potential after you leave parliament significantly increases. but actually, i think that if we want to ensure that members of parliament a are much less likely to take bribes and be much less likely to do work, thatis be much less likely to do work, that is absolutely nothing to do with their public services. you said that actually we should be paying said that actually we should be paying them even more. >> tom, would you like to see mps salaries raised the majority? i wouldn't put anything past keir starmer. he's taken it off the pensioners. i wouldn't be surprised if he doubles it. >> yeah, i mean there is all i was saying. yeah, of course it would look bad. it would look really bad. i would take a wager that the vast majority of people watching this and listening to this are on somewhere between 26,000 and £33,000, which is the thatis 26,000 and £33,000, which is the that is the median wage. >> and it includes teaching assistants. it includes nurses. it includes a lot of managers.

it includes a lot of managers. it includes a lot of people in the private sector who frankly, their effort and their value and their effort and their value and their skills is not often valued enough. you know, the idea that £91,000 a year, which is under the 100,000 threshold, so they're not paying that marginal 60% income tax rate. but i do come back to this thing about you go into politics for public service. if you go into it for some professional kudos and for lots of money, there are other professions. you're quite you're quite, quite right. you've got think tanks, we've got lawyers, we've got, you know, private sector, we've got the city do not pay. >> well. no, they don't not, not the rank and file people. >> they don't. but yeah, that's the point bev, isn't it. you know, there are those ceo jobs out there. go for those if you want to have that kind of lifestyle. but that's not what the role of a member of parliament is. >> yeah. okay right. thank you both. let us know your thoughts. gbnews.com/yoursay sue has said they are and soon will be terrified of nigel and reform. of course you take away show. it's a way of shutting nigel farage up, isn't it? maybe that's what labour want. do you

think that's what's going on? let me know. still to come, a billionaire was blasted into space today on one of elon musk's rockets. we're going to be debating is that morally justifiable? see you in a

we carried on that conversation dunng we carried on that conversation during the outbreak. i hope you did, too. we were kind of concluding that probably this modernisation committee will conclude, and we were saying that maybe mps just can work fewer hours. >> yeah. i mean, i think that what these restrictions are going to hurt labour mps just as much as they're going to hurt reform or conservative or even lib dem mps. so i suspect they will be incentives from everyone to want to not restrict it too harshly. >> well, if it is only restricted hours, nigel owen does three hours a week on gb news. if you're watching nigel, i know you work much harder than that. and what do you think the outcome will be, tom? just if we speculate what they might finally conclude these mps. i

think ryan makes a really good point. they'll work out how it's going to affect labour as much as any other party. more than. >> exactly. and, you know, we've had these modernisation committees before actually in the house that talked about modernising , overhauling the modernising, overhauling the procedures and the working hours and actually it hasn't really changed that much. i mean, i think what they go home a few hours earlier, i think the all night sittings had, you know, not as great as they used to be. so yeah. wait and see what lucy powell comes up with. yeah. >> well, it will be fascinating. maureen got in touch from home and said the top and bottom of it is purely that labour fear nigel. they want to get him off our screen because he's so popular. they're trying to control this country. i'm sick of it, bev, she says. and andy says nigel was going around the country every week with a show that involved normal people asking three questions, not selected, like on bbc's question time. it is. it is a compromising of free speech. i feel that it could be if they take down mps from going on the telly. right. spacex has completed its first private space walk. what do you mean you

don't know what i'm talking about? billionaire jared isaacman became the first non—professional astronaut to walk in space this morning. it was live on britain's newsroom. i didn't know what i was watching. here's his reaction. judnh watching. here's his reaction. judith raanan btec . judith raanan btec. >> back at home, we all have a lot of work to do, but from here, earth looks like a perfect . world. >> so that was him coming out of his little capsule. he was attached to the capsule by what they call the umbilical , by they call the umbilical, by a cord. and that was the obviously the earth in the background that was live this morning while andrew pierce and i were on tv. i've never worked so hard on tv in my life. i did not know anything about spaceships. we were massively winging it, but not as much as them. it does raise the question though, tom, doesn't it? can you justify the expense? we don't know the true figure that that cost to get that spacecraft into air and to have this billionaire up there, we don't know. but let's just

say it's in the hundreds of millions at least. how do you justify it when we can't get clean water to half the planet? >> indeed, 712 million people are in extreme poverty, but just to demonstrate that i'm not engaged here in the politics of envy, i mean, this is a private company spacex, elon musk is a private individual. he's attracted these, fees. if you like to go up into space. so absolutely. this is a plutocrat on a joyride in space. that's been over the news all of today. but i do think there's a wider point. i don't want to sort of personalise this just to jared, but the fact is, 81 billionaires in this country, not a country in this country, not a country in this country, not a country in this world, account for half of global wealth. so i think there's a broader issue here about instead of joyrides in space, actually, we should be solving, as you say, the water challenges, the educational challenges, the educational challenges, the educational challenges, the malaria challenges, the malaria challenges in part of this world, and indeed the challenges in our own country, with a

quadrupling of the number of people that are visiting food banks just in the last ten years or so. so there are lots of plenty of social problems. if entrepreneurs and billionaires have got money to give away, to throw away, they should be putting them into solving those very human problems on this planet. and not going, as i say, on joyrides into outer space. >> how did i know you were going to say that? >> reem ibrahim that is absurd. i mean, so a this is his own money as you said, he is a tech billionaire that has worked incredibly moving towards being a trillionaire, which is amazing. how wonderful is it that people in this world are doing excellent things that people want to give them money, you know, in the private sector , you know, in the private sector, the best thing about entrepreneurs is that if they are successful, in order to be successful, they have to do something and create something that other people want. nobody is forcing anybody to give money to elon musk . is forcing anybody to give money to elon musk. people do it because they like what he provides. this is the beauty of the free market and the beauty of entrepreneurship . as soon as of entrepreneurship. as soon as we start having this conversation about saying, well,

how can we justify it, i'll tell you how we can justify it because it's moral, because ultimately, entrepreneurs and adults that have chosen and actually worked for that money should be completely free to spend it however they like. now, the question about poverty, the only way that we can solve poverty, the way that we have solved poverty, the way that we have alleviated poverty, the fact that now there are less people in in desperate poverty than there ever has been in the history of humanity. the reason why that's happened is because of entrepreneurship, is because of entrepreneurship, is because of free trade . the reason why of free trade. the reason why people are better off now than they were 100 years ago is because people have been able to get jobs. people have been to free exchange with one another. freer trade is the only way to alleviate poverty. >> yeah, and that's a great advert for the institute for economic affairs and everything, everything that you believe in. so well done on that score, well on that score. but let's but hold on a minute. let's just look at what's happened actually around the world in the last hundred years. the reason why life expectancy has doubled is because actually, governments

through the state, through people's representatives, have provided elementary education, then secondary education and then secondary education and then health. in other words, as we came together as a community, we came together as a community, we were able to actually ensure that all the boats in the harbour were lifted at once and not just rely on this trickle down economics, which is an absolute bankrupt ideology that does not work. look i am looking at the world in which people have been able to be alleviated from poverty, is from getting secure jobs, is from innovating all of the technological advancements. >> you mentioned education, you mentioned healthcare. the advancements that we have, the way in which things have been able to access. >> so why have we got a billion people living on less than a dollar a day? why? why isn't the market solving that problem? >> it is solving the problem every single day. there are significantly less people living in abject poverty now than there ever have been in the history of humanity, so don't give me that the best way. i think the best example of this is mobile phones. the best equaliser of technology. the free market has meant that i have the same

mobile phone as tech billionaires, and that for me is a perfect example of equalisation through the market. >> but that means you're just a slave to whatever they tell you. on that, though, doesn't it? >> it's not a safe ai. nobody forced me to buy that phone. i chose to voluntarily the difference between the state and business is that nobody forces you to give your money to businesses. however, the state forced you to give. >> you give them money every day. >> do you know what the irony is? right? this trillionaire would not be doing that spacewalk today if it wasn't for john f kennedy. if it wasn't for the soviets who actually invested billions of pounds of their people's own money in even engaging in the space race in the first place. in other words, thatis the first place. in other words, that is actually how market economics and the state co—evolve together. this idea that there's this sort of magical world of entrepreneurs that just create all the wealth that just create all the wealth that funds all the public services, it's absolute nonsense. public services know the market and the state co—evolve together we create money is through the profit motive is through entrepreneurs creating and innovating. >> governments don't create innovate, but you do make a good point. the soviets did invest

huge amounts of their own money at the same time as their people were starving into the space race to compete on international politics. that doesn't take away from the fact that the way in which we alleviate poverty, the way in which we advance society andindeed way in which we advance society and indeed the world is through free trade. can i explain why very quickly, but just, just just on the idea. >> because what you're proposing here is this trickle down economics, this idea that it's trickle down, is it not trickle down? >> it is. no, that does that mean. well what does that mean? >> what it means is you create the wealth at the top and eventually it will make its way down. >> it's business across the world. this this entire notion that the sort of society is like a pyramid. >> well, look, 81 people in the world own half the world's wealth. >> if that's not a pyramid structure, i don't know what is it? >> are you okay with that? are you also okay? we've had the biggest transfer of wealth in history in the last four years. since the pandemic. it made a very small number of people extremely wealthy and a lot of people very poor. >> what i am uncomfortable with is billionaires and large businesses lobbying governments for special privileges. so i think it's unfair, for example,

that unions have special privileges. i think it's unfair that businesses have special privileges. big companies like google and amazon that often lobby the government for tax breaks. and that creates an uncompetitive advantage because the government have coercive power. i think the government should absolutely stay out of those things and allow people to choose where they want to give their money. >> okay. all right. right. it's time to take another quick break. we're going to sit here and work out how to make a billion between us. my money's on you're coming up in a minute. we're going to telling you how could be hitting single pensioners in the

welcome back. it's dewbs& co with me. bev turner in this week for michelle reem ibrahim is still here of the iea and tom berwick , visiting professor of berwick, visiting professor of education. so the government has refused to rule out the prospect of scrapping a council tax discount, which is currently available for people who live alone. abolishing the single

person discount could raise £3 billion a year, but doing so would impact 8.4 million people. half of those half of maybe you who are watching at home are retired. is this fair? is it just another example of labour going after pensioners? >> rhiannon it's it is a very good example of labour going after single people and going after single people and going after people that live at home. but ultimately this is labour trying to increase revenue for local councils. now my friends over at the taxpayers alliance do some really great work on actually showing and showing the transparency around the fact that so many councils just waste our money. they spend huge amounts of money on cycle lessons and actually in action day last year in guildford, guildford council , where one of guildford council, where one of their buses had £600,000 in remuneration in a single year. this is absurd. councils certainly don't need any more money and they are not spending the money they already raise

very well. you'd think, given how badly the winter fuel payment has gone down. >> i mean, it's been a pr disaster. labour are very quickly becoming seen as the nasty party at the moment. they can't surely, tom now say if you are a pensioner, if you are a widow or widower and you live on your own in a nice big house, and you pay a lot of council tax, we want 25% more council tax, we want 25% more council tax now, we're not going to let you off for that because we need that money. >> well, it was the conservatives actually under osborne that initially cancelled the 100% exemptions that used to exist across the board on council tax for those on low incomes, including single pensioner households. so we shouldn't forget that. look, i think there's two key issues here, bev. one is look, in an ideal world, yes , i would ideal world, yes, i would support universal benefits like we used to have universal child benefit that's been taken away from high earners. and of course, universal fuel allowances because actually they're easier to administer than means testing. but the

issue here is , whether you issue here is, whether you believe it or not, there's a £22 billion in—year financial black hole that the government faces, and there are difficult choices. and when we have in this country 1 in 4 pensioner households that are on paper, at least millionaires, then that's why the government has taken the decision to remove winter fuel allowances to those people. now, what happens when you do that, of course, is you catch a lot of people who are not the 1 in 4 pensioner household millionaires, and they're equally not the people who are eligible for pensioner credit. so what i would like to see is a very pragmatic solution where effectively the central government should be empowering local councils, as it did with the transitional arrangements for the council tax, where actually it should be increasing these hardship funds. and finally , really more finally, really more importantly, and i checked with the treasury figures earlier, there are 880,000 pensioners in this country that are eligible for pension credit. but don't take it out that they're not taking it up. and by the way, if they did, that would cost the

treasury £2.1 billion. and guess what? that's more than the £15 billion that they're going to pay- >> so a question about this 22 billion and whether it actually exists, i don't know if you've seen this story today. >> there's been a freedom of coal about this, this 22 billion black hole, freedom of information request by the financial times. they won't the government won't. >> yeah. there is a reveal the information. >> why? well someone that's worked in central government. >> it's to do with the fact that this is an in—year underspend overspend. i should say . and so overspend. i should say. and so there are some very delicate negotiations going on now between the treasury and those spending departments, as they call them, where these budget overplays have happened. so this is just, overplays have happened. so this isjust, i'm afraid , overplays have happened. so this is just, i'm afraid , about the is just, i'm afraid, about the treasury, not i think it's about 8 billion, by the way, that's not accounted for within within the 22 billion according to that financial times article. and it's that 8 billion that effectively what the treasury officials are trying to do with the departmental officials is get some of that money back to plug get some of that money back to plug that particular gap. they

don't want to reveal their hand in public yet, but i can tell you this come the budget and the obr, they'll have to reveal in the red book what the figures are. >> yeah, i think i think you're right. i think we're probably going to see a horrendous tax raid in the october budget. i think it's absolutely ludicrous that throughout the election period, labour were saying we're not going to increase taxes on working people, whatever that means , and then suddenly saying means, and then suddenly saying we are going to increase taxes, but it won't be on working people. it'sjust but it won't be on working people. it's just absurd. but it won't be on working people. it'sjust absurd. it's for the birds. this idea that you can increase taxes and not hurt anybody if you increase vat, if you increase corporation tax, it trickles down back to trickle down does go back to consumers. and ultimately actually a lot of the time if you increase corporation tax, the cost ends up going to wages for employers for employees. and indeed also in higher prices. so we end up footing the bill anyway , on the point about, sort anyway, on the point about, sort of regarding the way in which this looks in the long term, i actually think that this black hole needs to be and it probably does exist. it needs to be filled by cutting spending. we spend silly amounts of money on silly things.

>> we tried that, you know, in 2010. that was the whole osborne new age of austerity . new age of austerity. >> so you know what didn't happen? >> austerity is actually a lie. >> austerity is actually a lie. >> no, no , no. >> no, no, no. >> well, i don't really say that because, you know, i was a local councillor at the time and i saw sure start centres close. to i had close down those centres, libraries closing, you know the, the rough sleeping problem getting even worse. the idea that austerity didn't happen, it did happen. but the thing is, it didn't work. and what happened instead? the tories doubled the national debt. we've got a debt pile in this country of £2.5 trillion, of which we're spending £60 billion more than the schools budget on interest payments alone. there was also a report that came out today that said, if any government doesn't do something about the doom loop that we find ourselves in, 60% of our national income is going to have to be spent on public services within 50 years, or the government's going to have to either raise or cut £40 billion in annual expenditure just to just to stay still. >> it's really interesting. i think this might be an area we

agree that actually the fact that a lot of that money is being spent on people that are already quite wealthy, now, pensioners are part of that. a quarter of pensioners are asset rich millionaires. of course, that's not cash they have in their bank accounts or indeed physically, but it's normally in their bricks and mortar. >> we have run out of time. >> we have run out of time. >> we have run out of time. >> we could have gone on for two hours. >> we probably could. >> we probably could. >> our inbox. loved both of you tonight. they loved you a little bit more than they loved you, tom. >> you might be used to that, >> you might be used to that, >> tom berwick and reem ibrahim, thank you so much. i've enjoyed it. right. | thank you so much. i've enjoyed it. right. i will be back on tubes tomorrow night at 6:00. up next though, no. up next. now, it's been a long day. he's with us. nigel farage. >> a brighter outlook with boxt solar, sponsors of weather on gb. >> news . >> news. >> news. >> hello. good evening. it's going to be a very cold night tonight with a chance of frost , tonight with a chance of frost, particularly across northern areas, but also a chance of spotting the aurora or the northern lights across parts of

scotland and northern england. we've got cold arctic air at the moment, but that will be replaced by atlantic air as high pressure builds in for the last day of the week into friday. so that will develop clear skies quite widely. so a good chance of spotting the aurora. aurora as far south as northern areas of england, parts of northern ireland, too few showers still clipping the coast of east anglia overnight tonight, but for many of us it's going to be a clear, dry and cold night. chance of frost rurally just about anywhere away from the very far south—east towns and cities should be above zero by tomorrow morning though, and it will be a fairly bright start to the day on friday. the sunshine still got some warmth to it and the winds will be much lighter tomorrow morning, so it should still feel fairly pleasant. first thing across coastal areas there is still a risk of the odd shower and more in the way of cloud, particularly as we look further north and west to parts of western scotland, northern ireland, where there is a greater risk of a few showers first thing tomorrow as those westerly winds are bringing in the next weather front through friday afternoon. that will

spread into parts of northern ireland, western scotland turning the sunshine much hazier as we head towards lunchtime. but elsewhere across the uk it's going to be actually a dry and fine day, a much more settled day to come tomorrow compared to today. less of a risk of any of those showers rattling through. it won't feel too bad in the sunshine. temperatures are still below average, but it's definitely warmer than it has been lately and it will become even warmer as we head into saturday as well as we pick up that westerly wind more widely. still potentially a fairly chilly start, though across parts of england and wales, but it's quite windy and wet. weather will push into parts of western scotland, northern ireland through saturday and we'll see the rain persist here all the way through until saturday evening, and then when it will sink further south into more central areas, with further wet weather to come early next week across the north by. >> looks like things are heating up . boxt boilers sponsors of up. boxt boilers sponsors of weather on gb

>> good evening keir starmer gives a very big speech today and says about the nhs it's reform or die. is he right? does labour's war on pensioners continue? because that might mean that the discount individuals get on council tax of the living on their own , of the living on their own, might go in the budget because he refused to deny it yesterday. and leader of the commons lucy powell, now appears to be launching an all out assault on myself and lee anderson being members of parliament and also appearing here on gb news. i haven't said a dicky bird on this all day, but tonight, let me promise you i will. all of that comes after the . news. that comes after the. news. >> thank you very much, nigel. i'm lewis mckenzie in the gb newsroom. sir keir starmer says the nhs is broken but not beaten, delivering a stark message after a report into the