to me that ask how they proved to me that they are transgender, but know this for sure. >> you have nothing to prove to me. i am here to help you and to make your life happy and safe. >> the census was rigged to say there are more trans people than there are more trans people than there actually are, and another rotherham grooming gang, this time they're sentenced to more than 100 years behind bars. are our authorities too scared to call out the real issue? also are low skilled migrants are costing you the taxpayer, £150,000 each? has the economic case for mass migration been shattered? >> plus, things are worse than we ever imagined . in the first we ever imagined. in the first few weeks we discovered a £22 billion black hole in the public finances. >> labour refuses to release details of that £22 billion black hole. are they lying about

it to justify crippling the pensioners and once i've made myself a nice cup of tea, i set up my bag, which i will need later. >> i log in to the computer and see what's been booked in with me . me. >> gp's are threatening strike action, but you will not believe what they've already stopped doing for their patients. >> watch out massive fatties. the lard police are in town . the lard police are in town. >> obama wants to ban junk food adverts. are our freedoms being sacrificed to help the failing nhs? and what happens next? here no . on my panel tonight is royal no. on my panel tonight is royal journalist sarah—louise robertson, gb news star alex armstrong and ex—mayor of middlesbrough, andy preston. oh, and can you guess why david lammy has caused so much controversy online? get ready britain. here we go .

britain. here we go. the transgender lobby gets exposed . next. exposed. next. >> patrick. thank you. the top stories. the prime minister and the us president will hold a bilateral meeting to discuss ukraine's request to use western weapons on russian soil. sir keir starmer and foreign secretary david lammy visit to washington earlier comes as the prime minister backed ukraine's right to defend itself, after russia's president suggested his country would be at war with nato if the west allows long—range weapons to be used against it. well, the white house has since said the united states is not planning to announce any new policy on ukraine and the use of long—range missiles today , seven long—range missiles today, seven men who committed a string of child sex abuse offences against two teenage girls in rotherham

have both been jailed for a total of 106 years. the men were all convicted after a nine week trial, which was the result of an investigation by the national crime agency called operation stovewood. the victims, aged between 11 and 16 at the time of the offences and were both in care, were groomed and often pued care, were groomed and often plied with alcohol or cannabis before being assaulted . the before being assaulted. the prison population in england and wales has dropped by over 2000. in just one week following the start of the government's early release scheme. today's figures are the first to be published since labour's plan took effect, reducing the number of prisoners to just over 86,000, down from a record 88,500 under the scheme implemented this week. about 1700 inmates were freed who'd served 40% of their sentences and stranded nasa astronaut barry wilmore and sunita williams say they feel grateful to spend more time in space.

despite difficulties. the two gave a news conference about their experience of being stuck on the international space station for months. they arrived on the es in june and have been unable to get home because of a problem with the boeing starliner spacecraft, which returned to earth earlier this month uncrewed after the journey was deemed too risky for astronauts. nasa's say wilmore and williams will be brought back to earth on a spacex dragon craft next year , and those are craft next year, and those are the latest gb news headlines. for now, i'm tatiana sanchez. more from me in an hour for the very latest gb news direct to your smartphone, sign up to news alerts by scanning the qr code or go to gbnews.com forward slash alerts . slash alerts. >> good evening . the transgender >> good evening. the transgender agenda has been exposed today. it's been revealed that the

number of trans people in britain who probably was probably grossly exaggerated in the latest census because of the office for national statistics asked a confusing question and the suspicion is that the wording of that question was set by a pro—trans lobby group. the ons is now facing allegations that it fudged the numbers , that it fudged the numbers, inflated the amount of trans people in britain which empowered the trans lobby, who want to teach gender ideology to young children in schools. so the question that they asked in the question that they asked in the 2021 census was this is the gender you identify with. the same as your sex registered at birth. now, this is actually genuinely quite comical. what appears to have happened is that migrants in britain didn't understand that question, and accidentally said that they identified as trans. so people with a foreign first language were four times more likely to say they were trans than those who have english as their main language. and again, quite comically, areas with big, religiously conservative migrant populations such as britain ,

populations such as britain, kent and newham in london were found to have higher numbers of trans people than brighton , an trans people than brighton, an area with a notoriously high lgbt population. so what they should have asked is this do you identify as trans ? anyway, the identify as trans? anyway, the result of that census was that roughly 0.5% of the population was supposedly transgender. well, it turns out that the reality is that an even smaller number of the population are actually trans. now oxford professor michael biggs raised the alarm over this . he thinks the alarm over this. he thinks that the ons close relationship with stonewall, a trans lobby group with a tremendous amount of power and another trans pressure group, pressed for change, might have led them to being captured by the trans ideology. now they deny this, but the ons was a member of stonewall since at least 2006, and a member of their diversity champions group until 2022. of course, the year the census was done with 2021, so the ons is

not alone. numerous government departments , quangos, etc. have departments, quangos, etc. have all signed up to stonewall. so what this means is that they can enter a thing called the workplace equality index, which basically ranks organisations on how inclusive and diverse they are now. in fact , stonewall's are now. in fact, stonewall's experts in lgbtq+ inclusion have even created a quote , even created a quote, sophisticated scoring system. so it's quite easy, isn't it, to see how that might make those companies or those government departments or those organisations behave in a way that overtly promotes trans ideology. the ons has now downgraded the trans population stats from accredited official statistics to official statistics to official statistics in development. now, this begs the question that if even fewer than 0.5% of the population are actually trans, why is there such a big push to force this ideology onto children? let's get our thoughts on my panel. now. we've got royal journalist sarah—louise

robertson. we're joined by political commentator and gb news star alex armstrong and the former elected mayor of middlesbrough. it's andy preston. sarah, i'll start with you on this. when we factor this in and it's even less potentially than 0.5% of the population that are actually trans . why is there so much fuss trans. why is there so much fuss that's made about this ? why is that's made about this? why is it being taught in schools, etc? >> i think in this case we i mean, it is embarrassing for the office of national statistics that this is obviously this information has now come to light. >> but i think in terms of the trans lobby themselves, you know , trans lobby themselves, you know, we don't want to increase hatred against them . i mean, in terms against them. i mean, in terms of like the trans population of the uk , there's been the uk, there's been discrimination and bias towards them. we've seen that now we've dropped on the index for trans people to, to, to live freely without discrimination and bias. in europe, we've dropped right down in the index there. so i

don't want to say something that's going to stir up whip up more hatred towards them. but with these statistics themselves, i think we've shown that obviously it is. it is a small amount. the figures obviously is going to be lower than what it is, but i don't know if it is necessarily stonewall. i just think we live in times where people, you know, do, do live in fear of, you know, saying the wrong thing and well , clearly, alex, on this well, clearly, alex, on this though, you know, the trans lobby appears to have had this vise like grip on power behind the scenes in government departments. >> whether it comes to education, whether it comes to just the corporate world. and i don't think there's much need for that. if it's something like 0.3% of our population. >> yeah. well i mean, the reality is, is that i think you nailed it in your in your opening statement there, patrick, is that the more people that identify as x, y, z, in this case trans, the more money that floods in the more important these indexes become to say, oh, there's a growing trans population, we must do more in the nhs, we must do more in xyz.

>> cabinet office must have more money to do that. and to me this is all about a sphere of influence , power and money influence, power and money circulating amongst these very small quangos that have become extremely powerful to the extent they're influencing our census, our census, and we are one of the very few countries in the world, i couldn't quite figure out how many there are, but it's very few that even ask a question like this in the first place. and the way it's written is so clearly biased and it's so easy to misinterpret that if your english isn't quite right, and i think i think you nailed it at the start, that this is all about money and power shifting between these quangos. yeah indeed. >> i mean, i do wonder, andy, whether or not this should serve as a massive pushback now for people who are desperate to teach this to primary school age children, whether or not they've been born on the wrong body. i mean, how many people are they really representing when they're teaching that stuff? >> i think the tide is turning. >> i think the tide is turning. >> look, this was three years ago now. this question actually appeared. why it was in there. who knows? maybe it was pressure. maybe it wasn't . but pressure. maybe it wasn't. but the bigger issue is actually that organised pressure groups

of any kind, this isn't just a trans issue. can terrify, terrify politicians , businesses, terrify politicians, businesses, quangos and achieve what they want. if they're organised and scary enough. and think of the. as i say, i actually think the conversation has moved on. but the poor lady kathleen stock, the poor lady kathleen stock, the professor down in brighton, who said nothing that anybody sensible would disagree with, was hounded out of her job, hounded out poor woman. and she's one of hundreds. so to me, this is all about the pressure that tiny groups of organised activists, they can hold a country to ransom. and it's madness. >> and i call that group of people the trans mafia , because people the trans mafia, because you look at the way that they've gone after the likes of jk rowling, for example, for saying indisputable fact, which is that women are women, right. and if you deviate from that at all, then you can get cancelled. you can get threatened with court action, you can have your career ruined. obviously, they can't cancel her because she's massive and wealthy, right? but someone else, it's just to try to silence people. >> yeah, it makes it even more tragic to see what we're doing in things like places like the nhs and maternity ward, saying

you have to ask, are you a man or a woman? to a pregnant woman, it's absolutely ridiculous. and it's absolutely ridiculous. and it makes all of those things that we've seen, all that wokeness that's been forced into the nhs , one of the most the nhs, one of the most critical bodies in our country. even more despicable. and there's that trans mafia has become extremely powerful in our country and places like stonewall are absolutely perpetuating that narrative . perpetuating that narrative. >> yeah. i mean, well, i was just going to pause on this , just going to pause on this, this, this headlong thing towards, you know, we've got to you know, i mean, i interviewed women who are nurses in the nhs who were forced to share a changing room with a man who identified as a woman who was simultaneously trying to get his wife pregnant. and they were saying, look, you know, can we stop this? we don't feel safe and particularly comfortable. and the nhs said to them, well, no, you've just got to, you've just got to deal with it. >> i think we need to go back to the actual embarrassing. how embarrassing this is for the office of national statistics. and the question that we need to be looking at going forward, taking it away from just trans is actually there's no legal requirement for these surveys to be carried out . what purpose do

be carried out. what purpose do they actually serve? as i say, there's no legal requirement for us to know someone's ethnicity, someone's sexual gender, someone's sexual gender, someone's sexuality . it's really someone's sexuality. it's really it's the politicians. it's the government that is using this to put the public into boxes as a way to define us and control us. so i think we need to have pushback on these actual surveys because they're not actually helping the general population. and actually they're not helping the trans population because all it does is, is whip up hysteria and hatred towards a very, very, it does is, is whip up hysteria and hatred towards a very, very, very small minority of people very small minority of people who should be able to live their who should be able to live their lives as, as they so wish. lives as, as they so wish. >> you might be right there. >> you might be right there. >> you might be right there. >> so but the problem with >> you might be right there. >> so but the problem with these, with these surveys is these, with these surveys is that they're happy to use them that they're happy to use them when it's when it works for when it's when it works for them. but if we talk about the them. but if we talk about the national crime statistics, we're look, hysteria national crime statistics, we're not allowed to bring ethnicity not allowed to bring ethnicity or anything like that into it. or anything like that into it. all of a sudden that's not all of a sudden that's not allowed. but when it comes to allowed. but when it comes to woke sort of topics, they're to woke sort of topics, they're to happy utilise that, that like happy utilise that, that like the thing like the trans lobby, the thing like the trans lobby, for example, to get more money for example, to get more money out of it and to say , actually, out of it and to say , actually, out of it and to say, actually, no, this is part of our agenda. out of it and to say, actually, no, this is part of our agenda.

look, there's a growing amount of trans people in the country, but if we were to say crime and ethnicity is on a similar trend, we wouldn't be allowed. and that's my problem. >> and andy, on this, you know, things like things like the ons, you know, we use all the time is used in politics. journalists used in politics. journalists use it. i mean, we literally rely on this stuff. this is supposed to be, you know, beyond reproach, beyond any kind of reproach. i think the, the, the insinuation that and they deny this the ons. but, you know, signing up to things like the stonewall, whether it's called charter or however they phrase it, it does beg serious questions. if that can be leant

get the politicians to start being braver. i fear, patrick, that we're a long way from that happening. we're a long way from that happening. i agree with you. and it will. >> it won't improve drastically, but but where does that fear come from? >> and this is the point that we raised earlier on that it's the fear of cancellation. it's the fear of cancellation. it's the fear of cancellation. it's the fear of being called a bigot. it's a fear of being ostracised from your friends and family. it's that fear of being called a transphobe. whereas actually, if you had reliable data, which and this is the point, is now we don't know. but let's say it's 0.3 or 0.2 of the population of a population of 70 plus million people in britain. it would it would give people much more weight. when they say, hang on a minute, do we have to have a charter in every single corporate business? do we have to have it enshrined into our education system? do children from a very young age need to know, do we have to have these maternity wards where you have to ask if someone's a chest feeder or not before, because actually it affects a small number of people. yeah it's an extremely small i mean, it's obviously smaller than we thought it was as well, which makes all of this nonsense even more wild.

>> i mean, you're seeing young people being forced to put pronouns into everything. this is part of that ideology, right? and it even goes into things like social media and linkedin. you have to display whether you're he, him or she her, and it's penetrated millions of ordinary people's lives. it is. and it's out of fear. i speak to my younger brothers. they're in their early 20s and they're going into the workplace and if they don't seem to be an ally of any of this, then they're shut out. >> well, that's the problem. and, sarah, just just final point on this. you know, i obviously don't want to see any hate. and i don't think anyone wants to see any hate to think about what happened to that lovely young girl, brianna. >> absolutely. >> absolutely. >> of course. and those things are desperately awful and wrong, but you can't. well the facts are facts when it comes to numbers . and when it comes to a numbers. and when it comes to a lot disproportionately women who speak out about this and whether they feel safe in their own spaces, etc. very often they get called terfs, they get called, you're a turf and you're cancel. i mean, a lady who was a labour mp who was desperately trying to be on the on the board for women and equalities, who said that her main mission was to was to oust terfs. and all this, i

think you also see people who maybe, maybe lean to the right and a pro—brexit and all that, you know, vilified as quote unquote gammons. you're all gammons, you're all this. it seems like there's a lot of mean language being thrown about. they're not actually entirely towards trans people. >> i do take your point, but i think a lot of this is really within the metropolitan media bubble. and actually, if you go outside of that and you speak to ordinary people who are going about their lives, this probably hasn't even registered with them. they don't really care what the office of national statistics says. they probably don't care if george wants to be georgina. i think most people just want people to live their lives if it's in the census. >> sorry to interrupt crime and well, i agree with you, but if it's in the census and you're having to fill a form out at work, it is in your life, isn't it? >> and you start to normalise. i think that's the issue. >> i agree, as a population we need to stop filling in these surveys. that's what we need to do. if they can't, if they can't collect the information that they're trying to get and they don't get the results, then they can't actually do anything. >> with tyranny of the minority in this country. >> we need to stop answering

these surveys. >> there is a mass tyranny of minority in this country, and normal, ordinary people are scared. people are losing their jobs over it. in some cases, but don't engage with it. absolutely agree with you, sarah. we should stop engaging. >> yeah, okay. we could stop engaging or we could rely on the people that we are supposed to trust to actually ask the correct questions. and we also currently have to rely on politicians. >> patrick. well, the yeah, we also currently have a government . also currently have a government. >> and this is not just this government. this is the government. this is the government before. so it's a problem with with, i would argue, a wider political issue or a wider governmental issue, which is when it comes to trying to get hold of stats for things like what is the benefit situation when it comes to people who just arrived in this country and they refuse to engage with us on that? that's a problem. why don't you just put it out there in the open so we can have a more informed debate? because either that you either do that or you stop having a go at people who put out quotes on quotes, misinformation, because if you don't give us the information, it becomes very difficult. but we're going to have to we're gonna have to whiz it on. great start. thank you very much. and now the office for national statistics regulation, which examined claims over the 2021 census question, said this. some users

have raised concerns that ons has been captured by interest groups, leading to a lack of objectivity . we found no objectivity. we found no evidence of this form of bias to any of our work. we consider it regrettable that the ons defensiveness has created an impression of bias to some external observers. so you can make of that what you will anyway , in a massive screeching anyway, in a massive screeching gear change. now it's time for the great british giveaway and the great british giveaway and the biggest cash prize we've ever given away. £36,000 could be all yours. that is like having an extra £3,000 tax free in your bank account every single month for an entire year. here's all the details that you need to make that money yours. >> there's an incredible £36,000 to be won in the great british giveaway. that's like having an extra £3,000 each month to play with. and because it's totally tax free, you get to keep every penny and spend it however you like. we could be paying for your entire year until 2025. how amazing would that be for another chance to win £36,000 in tax free cash, text cash to

632321. entry cost £2 plus one standard network rate message or text bonus to 632325 entries. cost £5 plus one standard network rate message. you can enter online at gbnews.com/win . enter online at gbnews.com/win. entries cost £2 or post your name and to number gb08, po box 8690. derby d19 dougie beattie, uk only entrants must be 18 or oven uk only entrants must be 18 or over. lines close at 5 pm. on the 25th of october. please check the closing time if listening or watching on demand. good luck . good luck. >> okay, so still to come. not content with slashing the number of appointments available by a third or refusing to refer, patients on gps are now threatening to take their industrial action one step further and walk out completely. but should family doctors even have the right to strike? doctor bhasha mukherjee thinks that they should, and she'll join me live very, very soon. but up

next, over 80,000 people lose their lives every year because of smoking. >> that's a preventable death. it's a huge burden on the nhs . it's a huge burden on the nhs. >> keir starmer is not backing down. he's going to plough ahead with his widely panned outdoor smoking ban and introduce a ban on tv junk food ads in a bid to ptop up on tv junk food ads in a bid to prop up the crumbling nhs. but should brits , ordinary brits should brits, ordinary brits really have to sacrifice their freedoms and their way of life for the nhs? going head to head on that, our communications officer at the institute of economic affairs, reem ibrahim, and the chair of the national obesity forum, tam fry. that's .

next. welcome back to patrick christys. tonight. we are only on gb news and it is time now for the head to head . report for the head to head. report into the nhs. keir starmer is preparing to quote face down nanny state critics and introduce a raft of policies aimed at preventing illness and easing pressure on the nhs. junk food ads will be banned from tv before 9 pm. from next october, and online ads for products high in fat, salt and sugar will be banned. totally plans to ban kids from buying high caffeine. energy drinks are also expected

to be announced next month. starmer is expected to plough ahead with his plan to ban smoking in some outdoor settings, like pub gardens, a policy that was absolutely , policy that was absolutely, absolutely slammed right across the political spectrum when it was first mooted just a few weeks ago. i mean, that's a far cry, isn't it, from the keir starmer that stood on the steps of downing street just a few months ago and promised the nafion months ago and promised the nation this you have given us a clear mandate and we will use it to deliver change, to restore service and respect to politics, end the era of noisy performance, tread more lightly on your lives and unite our country. don't forget that this is all being done to protect our beloved nhs. so our brits now sacrificing their freedoms for the sake of the failing health service. let me know your thoughts gbnews.com/yoursay. tweet me @gbnews. make sure you go and vote in our poll. but going head to head on this now

the communications officer at the communications officer at the institute of economic affairs, reem ibrahim, and the chair of the national obesity forum, tam fry, both of you, thank you very much. reem. i'll start with you. i mean, for me, this is just an excuse to control our lives so that we put less of a burden on the nhs. instead of sorting out the nhs. >> you're absolutely right. although it actually won't reduce the burden on the national health service. this entire notion that actually restricting advertisements for junk food will have any kind of effect on calorie intake , or effect on calorie intake, or indeed on obesity levels, is totally for the birds. there is absolutely no evidence for it. let's be very clear . absolutely no evidence for it. let's be very clear. this was a policy that was initially floated by the boris johnson premiership and then subsequently was delayed and then delayed again because of these fears for a broadcasters. but b the hospitality sector. now, we know that this is going to have a disastrous effect on those sectors, but it actually will only have a very, very minimal effect on actual obesity levels. so all this really is, patrick, is effectively pandenng patrick, is effectively

pandering to the public health lobby. now of course, today the policy hasn't even been implemented yet. however, the british heart foundation have already decided on their next new incremental increase on the nanny state. they've now said they want this to be expanded to other areas of the internet , and other areas of the internet, and indeed, they want higher sugar taxes and higher taxes on our foods. >> ridiculous. tam, look , i'll >> ridiculous. tam, look, i'll bnng >> ridiculous. tam, look, i'll bring you in now, as the chair of the national obesity forum, we pay a lot of tax for the nhs to look after us, not for us to look after the nhs . tam are you look after the nhs. tam are you there? tam, are you expecting? >> yeah . i'm there? tam, are you expecting? >> yeah. i'm here. i didn't hear your question because . your question because. >> are we doing too much to look after the nhs instead of the nhs looking after us? >> well, my, my take on it is it's nothing to do with the nhs at all. this is to all do with the amount of people , children the amount of people, children and adults who consume food

which is less than healthy. and therefore, if you're going to consume that, why advertise it? what really should be done is that we should clean up the food as opposed to banning the advertisements. the advertisements. the advertisements are anathema. banning the adverts advert. banning the adverts advert. banning the adverts advert. banning the advertisements are anathema to the food industry and i understand their point of view. but what we should be doing is to tell the food industry if you actually cleaned up your food, we wouldn't have to consider a ban at all, >> okay, but but sorry, some people, some people like fish and chips, some people like chocolate, some people like doughnuts. i mean, you can't just ban reme. we can't just ban people from looking and thinking the problem will go away if no one ever looks at a chocolate santa. >> absolutely. >> absolutely. >> i mean, as i as i said earlier, there is absolutely zero evidence that banning junk food advertisements will have any meaningful effect on obesity rates at all. there's also an element of the fact that the actual obesity rates that the

government seem to be using to cite this kind of evidence is actually quite false. i mean, they're saying that one fifth of children as they go into primary school are obese. now anybody that's looked at any child or any school knows that that's just not true. the reason why they're saying this is they're using metrics that are used for adults, are they're using bmi to measure children. now, don't get measure children. now, don't get me wrong. obesity is a very big problem that needs to be tackled. but this entire notion that it's there to save our nhs is absolutely absurd. the way the reason why the nhs is failing is not because there are too many obese people. it's because the national health service itself is riddled with inefficiencies. we spend just below £200 billion a year on the national health service, and yet we get absolutely nothing for it. we have the second highest mortality rate in all of western europe. this is a failure of the health service, and we need meaningful reform, not nanny state measures that control people's lives. >> yeah. tam, the next step to this surely, is controls on the amount of calories you can buy

in your weekly shop. i mean, this is authoritarian, isn't it? >> no, it's not. it's good advice. >> we now have to . >> we now have to. >> we now have to. >> it's there. you're forcing them. that's not advice to shut up a bit. >> okay? we have two thirds of the country. >> all right, tam, i'm going to i'm going to i'm going to i'm going to stop you there. i'm not having you talk to a guest in that way. i won't have someone tell someone else to shut up on my show. so, tam, goodbye from you in the middle of an answer. >> and she interrupted me. >> and she interrupted me. >> but there's a way of talking to people and that falls below that standard. i'm afraid for me, tam. so goodbye. i'll just. i'll just stick with rain for this on now. so, look, i suppose what tam might say, just to put the other side of this up for him in a slightly more respectful manner, would be that actually, we do have children who are overweight. there is a problem with our health service when it comes to things like diabetes, etc. and maybe some people need a bit more help being educated into what is healthy and what is not healthy. >> yeah, so this is the exact point, patrick. there's a difference between education and advice as as the guests would,

would have put it and outright bans. and that's what this is. the british heart foundation this week have also said that they want to extend these bans. so the government are also considering the ban on advertisement of junk food dunng advertisement of junk food during the period before watershed. so before 9:00 pm, organisations like the british hean organisations like the british heart foundation want this to go much further. they want an additional sugar tax, they want additional sugar tax, they want additional high rates on our foods, which ultimately do just hurt the poorest in society. but the point is, we all know that obesity is a bad thing. we all know that it's harmful for us. we all know that it increases our risks of heart disease , of our risks of heart disease, of various different cardiovascular diseases across your life. and we all know that kfc and fish and chips is bad for us. but the point is that we need to be educating people on having a balanced diet, not telling people what they can and cannot do so that people can get treatment for it, etcetera, etcetera. >> lorraine, thank you very much. that's communications officer at institute of economic affairs. reem ibrahim there and briefly, the chair of the national obesity forum. tam fry. so who do you agree with? are brits now sacrificing their

freedoms for the nhs? mel on x says we don't exist to protect the nhs. their problems are for them to sort, not us. i do agree with you mel, very much so. stephen says labour will probably ban meat as well. they'll claim it's a win win as it fulfils their net zero eco lunacy and saves the nhs . lunacy and saves the nhs. lazarus on x, who has presumably just risen from the dead , says just risen from the dead, says i'm sympathetic to these measures. too many people are dying from preventable diseases. thatis dying from preventable diseases. that is very much the other side of it, isn't it? your verdict is now in 85% of you agree that brits are sacrificing their freedoms for the nhs, 15% of you think they aren't coming up . think they aren't coming up. it's emerged today that low skilled migrants are now costing you the british taxpayer, an astonishing £150,000 each over the course of their lifetimes. so is britain's small boats crisis making us all poorer and had the economic case for mass migration just been shattered. i'll be joining. i'll be joined by straight talking former tory mp jonathan gullis in just a few moments time. but first, let's slash the number of appointments by a third and stop referring

patients on to hospitals, which i think is quite shameful really. but apparently that's not enough for gps who are now threatening to walk out completely, given the dire state of the health service. should even be allowed strike. doctor bhasha mukherjee thinks that

next. this is patrick christys tonight only on gb news. now coming up, is britain's migrant crisis actually making us poorer? but first, gps have today gone to

war with wes streeting warning that they will go on strike unless the health secretary starts listening to them. what does that really mean? family doctors across the uk are currently taking industrial action in a long running dispute with the government over funding. the number of appointments available has been capped and in some instances gps have even refused to refer patients on or share data with hospitals, which i find remarkable. but speaking earlier today, doctor katy bramwell stainer from the british medical association, has suggested that family doctors could even go further. she said if the government don't listen to us, if we don't see rapid action quickly enough, my worry is that the employed gps or other employed members of staff, such as practice nurses, may decide to ballot to undertake industrial action and potentially even strike. i'm joined now by junior doctor, former miss england winner as well . bhasha mukherjee basher, well. bhasha mukherjee basher, thank you very much. great to have you on the show. i don't think doctors should be allowed to strike, should they gps? i mean, what was the case for it?

>> i mean, i want to say that no doctor really ever signs up to a strike when they go to work. this is always a last resort, and it sounds like the labour government is following suit with what the tory government set a precedent for in terms of responding only to strike motion. you know, we have been having this conversation about the gp funding for months now. there was conversation about collective action over a month ago, and even before that, the vote was set. even before that, the conversation was going on. but unfortunately, as it has been seen, the government just doesn't want to act fast. >> can i just ask, can i just ask on this because you there? yeah, because there was there was quite a prolonged period of time where people couldn't go and see a gp because we had to shut down for the coronavirus crisis and all of that stuff, which was done to protect our beloved nhs, etc. it's now not maybe the time for gps to pull their finger out a bit and help us all get better . us all get better. >> well, i want to just correct you there. that gps weren't just sitting there not doing anything. they were trying to

conduct most of their appointments over telephone, video consultation. they weren't just not doing anything. and also you mentioned earlier that they're not they're refusing to refer patients on. that's not true at the moment. there are so many different referral pathways. there's so much extra paperwork that is required of each different pathway, each different setting. gps are directly just referring patients without filling out the specific forms. they're just writing a letter and sending patients forward. and that's the same with sharing information. >> but isn't this then default of only? you've hit the nail on the head there though surely because that to me seems like a much more efficient way of doing it. the problem is not the government, it's the people who are the people who are managing that there is. >> there is absolutely a lot of red tape in the nhs, a lot of waste of time , hundreds and waste of time, hundreds and thousands of different forms to , thousands of different forms to, to say the same thing essentially, which absolutely makes the job of a gp much harder. and it wastes time. it

wastes time that could be spent seeing patients. and the truth is, this is all burning gp's out. we are seeing this reflected in the number of suicide rate that's going up, the number of gps that are now going off sick , going on. going off sick, going on. >> that's the fault of nhs managers, basha, isn't it? that's not the health, that's not wes streeting fault. he's not wes streeting fault. he's not in charge of how many forms a gp has to play. it's what a lot of people who are employed by the nhs are paid a lot of money to sort out. isn't it? >> and this is exactly what wes streeting did claim before he came into, you know, the government essentially, that they would take away some of the red tape, but it hasn't happened. and also the funding we're talking about the overall nhs pie gp see much. many more patients than hospital doctors see each gp, as is seeing many more patients now than they were a few years ago. there is a lot. we are the front line of the nhs. if the gp system doesn't function, the hospital system will absolutely break the nhs will absolutely break the nhs will break and we're seeing then if you go on strike.

>> but this is the problem, isn't it. so then if you're out on strike, then the nhs breaks according to you and people will die. now the point is not to strike. >> the point is to act before we are absolutely pushed to the point of striking . we have been point of striking. we have been speaking to the government. we have been putting forward our pleas as gp's to say that this is what we're struggling with. we're struggling to employ people, we're struggling to keep the lights on. gp surgeries are shutting down. this means other gp surgeries have to take on extra patients . each gp has to extra patients. each gp has to see more patients. each gp has a shorter time to see each patient where we're having to type at the same time as seeing patients. you tell me when you see your your gp, do you like it that your gp is like off facing the computer to save time and where the question of seeing less patients come in, they're just going to be having 15 minute appointments rather than ten minute appointments. >> so what do they want to get five minutes extra of their gp time? i get all of that. so what is it that they want? is it a

pay is it that they want? is it a pay rise or is it more funding for their practices? is it both ? for their practices? is it both? >> it's a bit of both. it's not a pay >> it's a bit of both. it's not a pay rise as you know , gp a pay rise as you know, gp surgeries run independently. however, it's about the pay what they get per patient rate that is paid per gp practice and also, the extra funding overall , also, the extra funding overall, not just about paying the staff but the overall pot . there's but the overall pot. there's quite a few , you know, things quite a few, you know, things that, that, that has been requested of wes streeting. but i think what gp's really want is to be heard and to be pushed to the point of striking is essentially not being taken seriously. >> and feeling like you're not being heard. >> and i think that's what's happening here. >> well, one thing that i think, i think we both agree on was the point you made earlier, which is that clearly people have seen that clearly people have seen that strike action has resulted in whopping great big pay rises or whatever else dished out by this government so far. and the

fear for a lot of people was that other people might then decide to strike and try to get that as well. and there is a question mark there over. well, if you're going to give it to junior doctors and you're going to give it to train drivers, then why shouldn't you give it to gps? that is a problem. unfortunately. now for this labour government, given the way they've acted before. thank you very much. we are out of time. i do appreciate you coming on, especially on a friday night for us. you take care. i'll chat to you very, very soon. that's bhasha mukherjee those junior doctor and former miss england winner as well. coming up at seven, men have been jailed for a total of 106 years for a string of disgusting child sex abuse offences against two girls in rotherham. but gb news is the only channel reporting on this sickening case. where's the outrage and where were our authorities as well? why were they too scared to call out this problem? i'll give you my take at ten. but next. well, low skilled migrants are now officially costing the british taxpayer £150,000 each over the course of their lifetime. meanwhile, keir starmer has just scrap winter fuel payments for

millions of british pensioners as the economic case for mass migration has been well and truly shattered. i'll be joined by former

welcome back to patrick christys tonight. now, coming up as seven rotherham child abusers are jailed for more than 100 years after harrowing crimes against girls. i will be asking are the authorities too scared to call this issue out? and where were the other media outlets at their sentencing? but first, it's been revealed that low skilled migrants cost the taxpayer more than £150,000 each by the time they reach state pension age. that's according to new analysis from the office for budget responsibility . the cost could responsibility. the cost could rise higher to £500,000 each if they reach the age of 80. in comparison, the average british born worker contributes £280,000 by the time they reach the state pension age of 66. so is

britain's migrant crisis frankly making us poorer? joining me now is the former deputy chairman of the conservative party, jonathan gullis. jonathan, thank you very much. as the as the economic case for mass immigration been shattered here. >> well, absolutely, patrick, for far too long we've allowed the treasury orthodoxy to keep pursuing this notion that somehow, by allowing more people into the country, that adds to gdp. but we all both know and you've been banging on about it for ages, which i'm proud to be here on gb news is that actually gdp per capita, per head essentially is not going in the right direction with mass migration. on top of that, there's a huge strain on public services. we know that between 2010 and 2020, 7 million new gp registrations took place due to migrants who had come to this country and therefore registering obviously, to have access to their local gp in stoke on trent, where i am proud to live and was proud to represent. we know there's a huge pressure on our schools in some schools, multiple teaching assistants needed with multiple

different language specialities in order to converse with the children , whilst also the children, whilst also the teacher trying to obviously teacher trying to obviously teach british students in that class as well. from stoke on trent, it is totally unsustainable. >> you know, i really don't want to make this a kind of us and them issue, right? but when you do see things being rolled out at the moment, like the cuts to winter fuel payments or whatever else, and you see that pensioners who have undeniably contributed into british society for an incredibly long time , but for an incredibly long time, but kind of by definition, the vast majority of them having to now make sacrifices. and then you see the idea that people who've just arrived here could rack up a bill of at least 150 grand over the course of their lifetime for me, that looks like another example of how ordinary british citizens are pushed to the back of the queue. >> well, totally. i mean, let's not forget the health and social care visa route. what did we see? 51% of all visas issued were for dependants , not for were for dependants, not for actually people coming to work in the care system. when we look at, obviously the fact that when

we did put out the call for hgv drivers after public pressure and the conservatives, i think should have pinched their nose and held their nerve, because ultimately, even though we put out that massive call, i think less than 100 people actually took up the visa offer. but the solution was actually found from the industry themselves, finding new terms and conditions with their employees and increasing their employees and increasing their wage offer for those type of jobs, which meant that in cases, again , i saw them first cases, again, i saw them first hand at brown's distribution here in stoke on trent, where their workers were happy to get back on the road as soon as possible. you make a good point there. >> this is this is this is the point, right? which is and unfortunately for you, really, this is a point that the conservatives can't swerve. all right . this might now be the right. this might now be the labour government's problem because they are in power and it is very much their problem. and i remain unconvinced they're going to do anything about it. however, it became a problem under the tories watch. and you know, this really is not your fault personally, but it is the tories fault that we're having this conversation, isn't it? >> well, patrick, i think you heard me say on your show

multiple times, and we've certainly conversed behind the scenes as well, that if the conservatives didn't get a grip both of illegal and illegal migration, that we would suffer the consequences at the ballot box. and lo and behold, our vote share went down by 7 million votes, labour by half a million. lib dems down by a quarter of a million. reform uk up 3 million. on what the brexit party achieved in 2019 and obviously a huge drop in turnout to conservative voters either went to reform or sat at home to lodge a protest vote that sadly allowed this labour party, who have undone some of the work that was done by rishi sunak. yes, at the bitter end. but still, when it came to raising the salary threshold for spouses in order to come to this country, are obviously not scrapping the shortage occupation list, which is something the conservatives should have done where employers and it suits them, gets a 20% discount on what they would pay a british worker. and yeah, you're right, the conservatives talk, talk and didn't walk the walk. and that's why it is so important that whoever takes over as leader gets a grip of this issue and gets us credibility. >> we're going to be doing a

segment later on about how labour are trying to the currently anyway, hide what on earth is financial black hole is whether or not it exists. to the extent that they've said it, they're trying to hide other figures as well, such as the amount of welfare or benefits payments that we give to people who have just arrived in this country. they try to hide the crime stats. to be fair, the tories also did that from us. was desperate to get those stats on this show, and i just wonder whether or not it's because the figures that we do have are so that it could actually lead to some kind of social unrest. we see the percentage of the population based on religion that are unemployed, not pretty reading for people who believe in multiculturalism is our greatest strength. we also see that £8 billion a year goes on, goes to paying unemployed migrants, for example. i mean, that's the black hole, isn't it ? that's the black hole, isn't it? >> well, patrick, i think it's quite disturbing that. and again , quite disturbing that. and again, i was on your show when you said this, that gb news is to prepared pay the ministry of justice for their time and their hours. they need to work in order to get hold of that information. and yet the ministry of justice wouldn't take up that offer . and you do

take up that offer. and you do have to question why that is , have to question why that is, because i can't see any good reason why that information wouldn't be readily available for the public when other countries around the world are willing and able to publish such information. so you're correct information. so you're correct in thinking that rightly, until we get the clear evidence, until we get the clear evidence, until we actually have this serious debate with all the stats and facts presented before us, it's only going to allow, sadly, the extremists in society to perpetuate some of the fake news that grows around social media and therefore radicalise young minds in our country, which is i don't want to see. i want, as you do, a common sense debate on an important topic without resorting to mudslinging or creating a them versus us. but unless we have the data and the stats and the facts, we can't do it.then stats and the facts, we can't do it. then sadly, we can't do it. >> all right, jonathan, thank you very much for your time this evening. all the best. you take care. that's former deputy chairman of the tory party, jonathan gullies there. right. coming up now, in the next few minutes, i very specifically asked the prime minister.

>> will he now publish the impact assessment? >> well, keir starmer today admitted that he didn't do an impact assessment into the winter fuel payment cut. he's also refused to reveal any details about that so—called £22 billion black hole. so our labour just lying to justify hitting the pensioners hard. but next, seven men have been jailed for a total of 106 years for a string of disgusting grooming gang offences. where's the outrage ? outrage? >> that warm feeling inside from boxt boilers , sponsors of boxt boilers, sponsors of weather on gb news >> hi there and welcome to the latest forecast from the met office for gb news. following a topsy turvy week of weather, it's been a reasonable end to the working week for many of us, and it stays clear over the next 24 hours in the south. a chilly start to the weekend. there, but further north there will be an increase in the cloud overnight as this weather system moves in. that's going to bring the

thickest cloud and the more persistent and at times , heavy persistent and at times, heavy outbreaks of rain to western scotland through the evening and northern ireland. however, the rain does turn lighter and more patchy through the night and by the end of the night, even in the end of the night, even in the north it will be mostly dry, albeit cloudier and milder compared with how we started things on friday. the clearest skies will be further south and again temperatures approaching zero, so a bit of a chill in the for air southern counties of england, parts of south wales into the midlands and east anglia. i think in main towns and cities. temperatures at 8 or 9 celsius in sheltered rural spots, more like the low single figures. however, for northern ireland, northern england, parts of scotland. a very different story first thing saturday. 10 to 13 celsius with an awful lot of cloud out there and some outbreaks of persistent rain and drizzle over the hills of western scotland. otherwise, actually eastern scotland seeing good shelter from that and some brightness coming through, and it's going to feel milder with

the winds picking up from the southwest. meanwhile, for much of england and wales, a bright, albeit relatively cloudy afternoon to come, the best of the sunshine will be in the south with lighter winds, 18 or 19 celsius feeling perfectly pleasant. now the rain that will increasingly arrive in the northwest on saturday night will spread south by sunday so that it's across cumbria, north and west wales during the day. still, some sunshine to be had in the south and southeast, and some brighter skies for scotland and northern ireland, albeit with a few blustery showers around monday. starts off drier for many of us and then increasingly sunny and increasingly sunny and increasingly warm through next week . week. >> looks like things are heating up. boxt boilers sponsors of weather on gb

>> it's 10 pm. on patrick christys tonight . another christys tonight. another rotherham grooming gang scandal

this time they're sentenced to more than 100 years behind bars. are the authorities too scared to call the problem out? >> so can the prime minister explain to britain's low income pensioners why he has taken money away from them? whilst at the same time giving more to money highly paid train drivers ? money highly paid train drivers? >> labour has not done an impact assessment on scrapping the winter fuel payment and things are worse than we ever imagined . are worse than we ever imagined. >> in the first few weeks , we >> in the first few weeks, we discovered a £22 billion black hole in the public finances. >> they are simultaneously refusing to reveal details of this mysterious £22 billion black hole. are they lying about it to justify crippling the pensioners? and what happens next . here? no oh, yes. and also next. here? no oh, yes. and also tonight .

tonight. >> and i will assess going forward. >> what? >> what? >> what? >> what powers need to be enforced and what additional powers we might need going into the future. >> so this story emerged just before we came on air. it's been revealed tonight that the government could be about to ban kids from social media completely. i've got all of tomorrow's newspaper front pages with royal journalist sarah—louise robertson. gb news star alex armstrong and the ex—mayor of middlesbrough , andy ex—mayor of middlesbrough, andy preston. oh, and can you guess what david lammy has caused so much controversy about online? any ideas? get ready britain, here we go . here we go. have we just found britain's worst ever grooming gang? next. >> patrick. thank you. the top story. sir keir starmer and the us president are currently

holding a bilateral meeting in washington to discuss the ongoing conflict in ukraine. it's after president zelenskyy expressed his frustration at the continued restrictions on the use of western weaponry against russian targets. sir keir starmer has said this evening he believes the uk and us are strategically aligned, as they began discussions this evening, while the russian president, vladimir putin, earlier warned against such a move, saying it would represent nato's direct participation in the ukraine war. seven men who committed a string of child sex abuse offences against two teenage girls in rotherham have been jailed for a total of 106 years. the men were all convicted after a nine week trial, which was the result of an investigation by the national crime agency called operation stovewood. the victims, aged between 11 and 16 at the time of the offences and were both in care, were groomed and often plied with alcohol or cannabis before being assaulted or raped . now, what would have

or raped. now, what would have been the uk's first coal mine in 30 years is now in legal limbo as planning permission has been quashed by the high court. climate campaigners argued the decision to grant planning permission for the whitehaven coal mine in cumbria contradicted the uk's climate commitments. the government had withdrawn its defence, but developer west cumbria mining still contested the claim. however, in today's ruling, the judge said giving the go ahead for the development was legally flawed and two men have been charged after a banksy painting was stolen from a london gallery. larry frazer and james love were arrested and charged with burglary following the theft. the girl with balloon painting, which partially self—destructed during a £1.1 million auction, was recovered and will be returned to the gallery. banksy's artwork has recently faced a string of threats, with several pieces moved for safekeeping. the 47 year old and 53 year old will

appearin year old and 53 year old will appear in court next month, and those are the latest gb news headlines. for now, i'm back in an hour for the very latest gb news direct to your smartphone, sign up to news alerts by scanning the qr code or go to gbnews.com forward slash alerts . gbnews.com forward slash alerts. >> i'm afraid that i'll have to start this hour with a warning. what i'm about to say some viewers and listeners will find deeply distressing , but i've deeply distressing, but i've made a judgement call that these details need to be out there. there is a special place in hell for these grooming gang monsters who abused a girl as young as 11 years old. today, mohammed omar yasser rajab mohammed zamir sadiq mohammed sayyab abid sadiq tahir yasin and ramin bahri were sentenced to a combined total of

106 years in prison. what they did is absolutely disgusting, but you know what else is disgusting? the lack of media coverage gb news is charlie peters was the only broadcast reporter present yesterday as the brave survivors gave their statements. the bbc didn't want to know. not for the first time. one of the girls was groomed near a primary school where they pued near a primary school where they plied her with drugs and alcohol. they ferried her around the country so other predators could use and abuse her and others. one said i was only 11. you made me do a test to see if i was still a virgin or not. at that moment, my abuse started. you made it sound like it was a crime to be a virgin. you made me feel ashamed of being a virgin. that same day, you sent me off and forced me to commit a sexual act. and my innocence was stolen. you started to pass me around as if i was a fresh piece of meat. man. to man city to city. all five of you played a

massive part in exploiting me, my little child like body. i was 12, in the back of a taxi to you. it didn't last long. to me, it lasted a lifetime. i was scared when you raped me. you made sure you did it properly. i've never felt pain like that before in my life. another survivor says that she still wakes up screaming in the night. you know what else i find? absolutely insane about this? the families of the scumbags who did this were in court, and apparently they were crying, tutting, shaking their heads and moaning when their relatives got long. prison sentences like they were the victims here. apparently some of the female relatives were crying . one lad relatives were crying. one lad shouted, i love you dad as his monster of a father was led away. another stormed out, slammed a door. their relatives are behind bars, but it's their victims who have the real life sentence . maybe they should sentence. maybe they should think about that. this has been going on in rotherham for decades. these victims had to wait about 22 years for justice.

why well, south yorkshire police previously admitted to not acting on reports of crimes because they didn't want to stoke racial tensions. now, the way i look at that is that some people somewhere decided that it was more preferable for young girls to be raped and abused than to run the risk of being called a racist. rotherham, rochdale , aylesbury, derby rochdale, aylesbury, derby oxford , newcastle the list goes oxford, newcastle the list goes on, and on and on. this is just another one of those issues in britain that we can see happening right before our eyes. but politicians and the establishment media don't want you to talk about it. well, not on our watch. let's get our thoughts from our panel this evening i'm joined by royal journalist sarah—louise robertson. i've got political commentator and gb news host alex armstrong and the former elected mayor of middlesbrough, andy preston. and i'll come to you first on this, alex, you know , this is just absolutely know, this is just absolutely vile from start to finish. i am

going to go in a bit. i think really, on the idea that none of the other media outlets appear to be interested in a case as horrific as this. >> yeah, well, it's completely shocking, isn't it? and i think it shows the extent to which these institutions seem to be completely aligned on ignoring this topic completely. they hate talking about it because they are complicit in in not reporting it and therefore not making this the number one story in this country today. there are so many victims of this scandal. it goes so deep. we have still barely scratched the surface. the national crime agency, i think, was saying this is going to go until 2027. we're going to see more of these gangs up until that date. that's how far this they're saying this goes. one, they're saying this goes. one, the jay report that was released in 2014 said there was 1400 children they predicted were victims. so god knows how big this is. and i just remember the words of john o'brien. he was the secretary to the independent inquiry, and he said there needs to be a culture change in our

institutions if we're going to avoid this happening again. and he he he deliberately took out the piece on the racism stuff. he said, we've got to stop being afraid to record ethnicity data. if we really do want to start seeing the links here and where these where these grooming gangs might be, might be still operating. i'm absolutely disgusted to hear of this poor that this poor girl when she was 11 years old. it is shocking. it's disturbing to my core today. hearing your preamble at the start there, patrick. it's a shame on our country. >> yeah . >> yeah. >> yeah. >> why is this happening? so often and in so many pockets around ? why are we not quicker around? why are we not quicker to clamp down on this? i mean, i know south yorkshire police came out a while ago and said, you know, they were afraid of stoking racial tensions, >> okay. so this still goes on, by the way. by that, what i mean is the sensitivity. so i'm not surprised that the bbc and others aren't there because they're scared of being seen to be biased, offending, provoking

any angst or anger. we touched on that earlier. it's this it's the same issue. but what i want to make clear so my sister is involved with a charity in the north of england. it's called the halo project. brilliant charity award winning. they work with victims of domestic violence and in particular they focus actually on people from an an asian background, people of pakistani heritage . and there pakistani heritage. and there are there's honour, violence , are there's honour, violence, there are honour killings. and they work in this field. they are constantly pushing , are constantly pushing, cajoling, demanding that the police take this stuff more seriously. because when victims of domestic violence from ethnic minorities go to the police , the minorities go to the police, the police are treading on eggshells. they're terrified of getting involved in case it might be seen to be acting one way or another . they often don't way or another. they often don't put the victim first. they do it . put the victim first. they do it. they're not doing this maliciously, but they want to do what's right . maliciously, but they want to do what's right. but what maliciously, but they want to do what's right . but what they're what's right. but what they're doing is they're risking the lives and the safety of victims for fear of offending. >> i think they're making it,

which is what's happening with the media. >> i'm very sorry about this, but i feel like they make a judgement call and it's a judgement call and it's a judgement call and it's a judgement call that i simply would not be able to live with the idea that, oh, i wouldn't want to be called a racist. so i'm, you know, i'm not going to do everything i can. so when you think about when you hear the testimonies of what is going on with these girls up and down the country, how can you sleep at night? i wouldn't care what names anyone called me if i felt i was, i was i was doing something about this. i mean, you know, we've got 106 years now combined total, sir, for this lot . but i'm convinced it's this lot. but i'm convinced it's still happening and i remain unconvinced that we're doing everything that we can to stop it. >> i think what you said earlier about it's the victims that carry the life sentence in this, and my thoughts is almost always, always with them. those poor girls who are now women, what they've gone through, they've had their innocence robbed from them, their childhoods robbed from them. the damage is untold. what's happened? so first and foremost, that and it is a stain on our country. but it's a stain on the home affairs committee because

their decision was based at the time. and i'm just going to read out this fact here on cps guidelines at the time , which guidelines at the time, which suggested a jury might see victims as unreliable if they had come forward. some time after the offence, if they had deviated or changed their accounts, made use of drink or drugs, or had subsequently come back to the perpetrator. so the blame really is on the cps. there for not following it through, because they felt that they didn't have sufficient evidence at the time, and that is that is something that needs to be examined at massively, because there's a huge fault there with our cps. >> oh, i could not agree more with you, sarah. i want to just go back to this point on police bias for a second, because let's let's look at some other incidents lately that haven't had a lot of attention have disappeared. the manchester airport attacks, we obviously have heard little about that. there was a massive protest as soon as that happened that was saying the police were racist. and again, they they sort of appeased that and pushed it down appeased that and pushed it down a little bit. we're not going to deal with that today. we'll deal with that another time when

things calm down. and again, i think you're right, patrick. i am convinced this still goes on today. and i worry with new islamophobia laws coming in, this will be even tougher for victims to come forward. it will be even tougher for police units to make statements that might be overtly seen as islamophobic or, or ethnically driven, and that is my concern. we feel like we're going down the wrong path. >> what i will say to that, and this is not me trying to be overcautious or anything. it's true. we live in a majority white country and therefore it stands to reason that the majority of child sexual abusers are white. and, you know, i don't want to try to paint a picture that we've had some unbelievably high profile cases. you've got jimmy savile and all of that stuff. right okay. so that exists. but i do worry, andy, when it comes to cases such as these and disproportionately speaking, vulnerable young, working class, white girls who seem to be taken from care homes is there's the tried and tested, monstrous method of grooming. these girls. and you do see numerous different cases where it is

disproportionately british pakistani men doing it. why can't we call that out? have we got a problem with calling that out? i think we do their cultural sensitivity. >> i think it's statistically proven. there is an overrepresentation of pakistani men of pakistani heritage involved in this kind of crime. as you say, we need to make it really clear that the majority of crimes like this are committed by white men. however there's an overrepresentation of perpetrators and of people in prison for these crimes, it's a cultural issue, a very high profile barrister , nazir afzal, profile barrister, nazir afzal, chief prosecutor. he's been involved in prosecuting people for sex crimes. he had said himself that many of the pakistani men in the country need to start acting like citizens and not like immigrants, and lots of other people have spoken out too. there is there is categorically a cultural issue. and instead of confronting it, we are hiding from it. there are people within that community that want us to confront it , but that community that want us to confront it, but as a country we are hiding from it. we need to be honest and that's how we get on better and fix problems. it's an honesty issue.

>> yeah, because there's a point of saying multiculturalism is important in our country, but there are limits to what we would say multiculturalism should , should, should reach. should, should, should reach. quite frankly, we should all be very , very clear and say this is very, very clear and say this is not something we want in our country. this is not something that we should ever inherit or ever allow. >> and i think if there's a sense, if there's a sense that working class white girls from a very, disadvantaged background with maybe a few other issues going on that are in care, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera , etcetera, etcetera, etcetera, vulnerable, if they are seen as lesser than by a particular group of men, then that i would argue in itself is racist, actually. and i suspect that there is quite a bit of that that goes on, i suppose the one one good thing to come out of this is that this lot have been hammered for the most part with with pretty long sentences, and i don't know how well their crimes or people that perpetrate those crimes do behind bars. >> but the sentence is, i'm just i'm just checking there because it was 106 combined. yes,

combined . and how many was it combined. and how many was it that was sent down? seven. seven. okay. >> so i know that people will be screaming at the television screen. now going back to what you're on about, you should lock them up and throw away the key. yeah, i was going to say i do think that. >> but because it's the victims that carry the life sentence, you know, these people are probably going to get out early, aren't they? >> that's the thing. >> that's the thing. >> the important thing is that they are not slipping out early. >> that's what's so important. >> that's what's so important. >> that's what's so important. >> that doesn't happen. >> that doesn't happen. >> and there needs to be. this is why it's so important. >> that's that's what i'm fearful of. >> you know, it's sickening. >> you know, it's sickening. >> and that's why stations like gb news will cover it. >> because this must never happen. they must never be released early. and when they are released eventually, as they will likely be, they need to be monitored by the police consistently. nowhere near schools, nowhere near anybody, quite frankly. because these are evil, evil people who've committed the most heinous act on innocent young girls . i can't on innocent young girls. i can't say that more strongly. >> it's remarkable that their families stood by them to the extent that they appeared to do. isuppose extent that they appeared to do. i suppose charlie peters, who again, you know, did the reporting for us on this, he was in those court rooms when the sentencing was being handed out and when the victim's impact

statements was being dished out. he was the only broadcast reporter there, and he fed that information back to me. he's put it in a report. you can read onune it in a report. you can read online about the way that the families went about this, apparently, you know, pretty frustrated at the sentences that their that their male relatives were getting, which, you know, does make me question really, but that's almost i think, you know, you, you sort of raised questions there, don't you think. >> well, they victims of coercive control, is it like stockholm syndrome that they maybe almost like sort of standing behind them, but through fear, maybe because they're frightened still to speak out and go against the possibly the grain? >> i don't know, but there we go. well, look, i thought it was an important story to, to bring to us and to get it out there. i appreciate that it is incredibly depressing, but, you know, it is a story that no one else seems to particularly want to cover, so. 50. >> so. >> well, we shouldn't ignore it. >> well, we shouldn't ignore it. >> no, we should we shouldn't ignore it. i've got loads more coming your way. i'm going to be talking a bit about the £22 billion black hole, why labour aren't revealing the truth behind that potentially. what is it that they're trying to hide from us and this increasing nanny state situation? a story that landed just before i came on air, which was about this

idea. now that young teenagers could be banned entirely from social media, i know there are mixed views on that online, ironically, but i think that's a step to a kind of authoritarian approach. but before we do all of that, it is, of course, time for the great british giveaway. we're going to give you the biggest cash prize that we've ever given away. so far. 36 grand could be yours. it's like an extra three grand tax free in your bank account. every single month for an entire year. here's all the details you need to make that money yours. >> there's an incredible £36,000 to be won in the great british giveaway. that's like having an extra £3,000 each month to play with. and because it's totally tax free, you get to keep every penny and spend it. however you like. we could be paying for your entire year until 2025. how amazing would that be for another chance to win £36,000 in tax free cash? text cash to 632321. entry cost £2 plus one standard network rate message or text bonus to 632325 entries.

cost £5 plus one standard network rate message. you can enter online at gbnews.com/win. entries cost £2 or post your name and number to gb zero eight, po box 8690. derby d19, double two, uk. only entrants must be 18 or over. lines close at 5 pm. on the 25th of october. please check the closing time if listening or watching on demand. good luck . watching on demand. good luck. >> well, coming up, i'll have the very first look at tomorrow's newspaper front pages. and can you tell me, please, what happens next . here? please, what happens next. here? no no indeed. no, indeed. but up next, it is now important that the house understands the full consequences of the government's choice . choice. >> so can i very specifically ask the prime minister, will he now publish the impact assessment? >> well, he can't, because it

turns out he never did one when it came to the winter fuel payment cut. and the government's also refusing to reveal the details of that so—called £22 billion black hole, which is largely behind the winter fuel payment cut. so it does beg. the question is labour lying to justify crippling the pensioners? the director of the popular conservatives, mark littlewood, joins me live in his next stay tuned

okay. welcome back. so coming up, i've got the very first look at tomorrow's newspaper front pages. but first, the prime minister last night admitted that he hadn't been given a report by civil servants on the impact of scrapping the winter fuel payments for millions of pensioners that came just hours after the government refused to reveal the details of this so—called £22 billion black hole in public finances that starmer has repeatedly blamed on the winter fuel payment cut because of the tough decisions that we're making to stabilise the economy, we can make sure that the triple lock shows that increases in pensions will outstrip any loss of payments, but before, before he complains about us clearing up his mess, perhaps he'd like to apologise to the £22 billion black hole. joining me now is the director of the popular conservatives. it's mark littlewood. mark, thank you very , very much, look, thank you very, very much, look, he's got to reveal if he's going

to blame everything on the £22 billion black hole. he's got to tell us exactly what that black hole is and where that's come from. surely >> patrick, i think that's right. >> in any school, mathematics examination, you will be asked to show your working, show how you've got to a particular number. and keir starmer and his government seem extraordinarily reluctant to show their mathematical workings here, and how they got to the £22 billion number. but i think it's worth pointing out, even if this number is dubious, it's also pretty trivial. obviously, £22 billion is a colossal amount of money, but within the context of total government expenditure, it's a bit less than 2% of annual government expenditure and tax receipts and government expenditure are impacted by a whole range of things that are very difficult to forecast . what very difficult to forecast. what do you think the growth rate is going to be over the next 6 or 8 months? what do you think interest rates will be over the next 6 or 8 months? do you think that labour's vat on schools

will raise money, or do you think it may even cost the taxpayer money? so the real issue here is actually not this, i think slightly fabricated or confected 22 billion. is that overall, our public finances are unsustainable over the long run , unsustainable over the long run, and unfortunately, politicians aren't willing to point that out. >> the only bits of this black hole that we know about really so far are the massive overspend on asylum, the massive overspend when it comes to the taxpayer subsidies of people who are here legally. >> so they've kind of low skilled migrants and also what they've paid the unions. i mean, do you think there is a chance that they're covering up that actually a lot of this £22 billion black hole is their own? >> yes. because i mean , as i was >> yes. because i mean, as i was just saying, there's so many things that affect public finances on a day to day basis. you know, the labour party at the last election said we've got a fully costed manifesto. you know, every last penny is accounted for. but of course, they didn't tell us the generous

offer that they were going to make to the to a good number of trade unions so that has added to the overall black hole as well . so as i say, to the overall black hole as well. so as i say, i'm pretty dubious about the number. i think this is more of a political statistic than an economic statistic. but the big, big challenge. i mean, the real number to strike fear and horror into us all, patrick, was the obrs into us all, patrick, was the obr's projection that the government's debt over the next 50 years will rise to being 270% of national income. at the moment, it's about 100% of national income. if all we did for a year was to clear the debt, we could do it. if we didn't spend anything on anything else. but that is ballooning. if we carry on on the present trajectory. so to believe that this 22 billion is really the fundamental problem with the state of the public finances is completely wrongheaded, and bigger cuts are going to have to be made. >> well, yeah, but this is it. and in order to do anything to get rid of some of that debt anyway, it's got to be growth, growth, growth. he spoke a lot about growth before the

election. he stood in front of banners with growth behind him. have we seen anything that suggests that he's going to go for growth ? for growth? >> no. i mean, i think that's what's so disappointing . you're what's so disappointing. you're right. it has been the mantra of this government. and while they were in opposition, that they're going to be laser focused, laser focused. that's what keir starmer sold us on economic growth. but economic growth doesn't really appear to be a particularly high priority. if you look at a whole range of policy announcements from them, they're prioritising other things. i mean, there's going to be a ban on junk food advertising after 9:00 at night. well, you might support that for pubuc well, you might support that for public health reasons, but it won't help economic growth. so if you want economic growth, you've got to get public spending down taxes down and regulation down. and i haven't heard any sort of proposals from the labour government in any of those three areas. >> no, indeed. and when pensioners this winter have to some of them have to choose between heating and eating, then they have a right. i think , to

they have a right. i think, to ask well okay, fine. but but where why have you made this decision. give me. because maybe some old people might go, okay, well, all right, for the greater good because i can see now on this spreadsheet that you've given me that we have to do that to fund the nhs. we must do that. but you don't tell them that. but you don't tell them that. i'm sorry, but it does start to look like a lie. >> yeah. no, that's right, patrick. but of course, even if there isn't a black hole or however big this so—called black hole should be, politics is all about making choices . you could about making choices. you could find £22 billion of savings without having to touch pensioners, or the winter fuel allowance you could for example, reduce defence spending, be less generous on public sector pay, reduce the national health service budget, sell off some state assets , find some state assets, find some efficiencies. so it's a political choice to make to make sure that what they will say, mark, what they what takes up the slack. you know, i mean, look what they will say. >> what they do indeed say is not just that the tories left

them in an economic mess, but they're also cleaning up the mess from liz truss, etcetera. thatis mess from liz truss, etcetera. that is a big thing that labour are saying and they will no doubt be saying for the next five years. all right. and, you know, there has to be an element of truth to that, doesn't there ? of truth to that, doesn't there? >> no, i don't think so. i mean, in fact, to listen to the labour party, you would have believe that liz truss and kwasi kwartengs mini—budget led to a global spike in interest rates across the world, quite why the federal reserve in america would have increased their interest rates based on the mini—budget. i think is a complete fantasy. so she you may say that she didn't carry out the economic policy that particularly adept fashion some people suggest, but the real truth was we were going to return to normal interest rates at some point in time. we're pretty much there now. back to interest rates being modestly higher than inflation. that's a sensible and normal place to be. and the mere fact that we'd had 10 or 15 years of getting drunk on cheap credit wasn't the fault of liz truss. we all got rather more used to it. so reality is back. interest rates are back to normal. that

means our debt repayments are colossal, expensive. best part of 100 billion a year. when i last looked and sooner or later the labour party, the conservative party, any party that wants to form a government is going to have to have a much more serious conversation about finding savings and reducing expenditure far beyond £22 billion a year. >> patrick. mark, thank you very much. as ever. great to see you again. mark littlewood there is director of the popular conservatives. right. coming up, the very first look at tomorrow's newspaper front pages. they've just landed. oh, and yes, of course, i will reveal why david lammy has caused so much controversy online. there's a video to go with it. i'll be playing that for you. all that and much more in just

welcome back to patrick christys. tonight i've got the very first look at tomorrow's front pages for you now. so let's do that, shall we? we're going to start us off with the

times zelenskyy putin burns our cities as west delays. volodymyr zelenskyy has issued another call for us to hurry up and let him fire british manufactured missiles into russia. let's go to the i surge in private uk health care as record number of people turn away from the nhs. there is a strong case here that people who can afford it should go private . i think the problem go private. i think the problem is that people who can afford it feel they have to go private at the moment if they want to be seen, and there is potentially a bit of a discrepancy there. let's go to the daily telegraph. secrets of how five tory mps were felled. now this is an interesting article here. so it's sir graham brady who was for a long period of time, the chairman of the backbench, 1922 committee, who's now got a book out because he decided not to stand for an mp again, which means he's now releasing some quite salacious details, including a remarkable quote by david cameron, earlier on which he revealed to camilla tominey in the daily telegraph, which was david cameron saying that his life would have been a lot easier if an excuse me now for what i'm about to say is life would have been a lot easier if his mps had paid their expenses

on time, stopped doing cocaine and entering into sexual relations with each other. it was not. he was not as polite as that about the word he used to describe what kinds of sexual relationships, but anyway. anyway, this one now secrets of our five tory mps. sorry, pm's were felled so he's going into detail about how they managed to get rid of them. all right. okay. so those are the first round of front pages. but a story that i'm going to get stuck into right now is in the times tomorrow. and it's the uk could follow australia in banning social media for young teenagers. this is kind of in my view, nanny state latest right . view, nanny state latest right. but ministers have said they're open to a complete ban on children using social media, as a senior government adviser warned that inappropriate content online was likely fuelling a mental health crisis. peter kyle, the science and technology secretary, said that he was looking very closely at a move by australia to set a minimum age for children to access platforms like tiktok , access platforms like tiktok, snapchat and facebook. the australian government is to test age verification technology. it wants to bring in an age limit

likely to be between 14 and 16. this year. well, kyle said that there was considerable evidence that social media was harming vulnerable young people, and he added that he was going to keep everything, including a ban on the table. alex, your thoughts? >> yeah. look, i'm not for a complete ban on social media. i think that would really restrict the amount of information young people, first of all, can get. alternative opinions are really important now more than ever, with schools pumping out a lot of ideology and agenda, where will they get their alternative opinions from, if not social media? frankly, but i do understand the concerns of people, particularly as we were talking about this during the break, that china is a big influence on tiktok. and i get that i'm up for certain bans on some of those platforms, but i do see it being a slippery slope once you start banning it for 14 and 16 year olds and you raise it to different ages, do you start saying this kind of content here is an acceptable we need to ban that as well. and i just feel like that's nanny state at play, and we should

give parents the power to decide what their children watch. yeah. >> why can't parents just decide? i mean, i don't want every single child in britain only getting information from bbc bite size, you know? >> i as a parent. >> right. so i've got two teenage sons. one is 19, one is 16, and i've seen them grow up with social media. none of us, none of us knew anything about social media. 15 years, it's come out of nowhere . every come out of nowhere. every single thing i read says that it is potentially really damaging , is potentially really damaging, especially to young people. plenty much for adults too . we plenty much for adults too. we protect young people from alcohol, from cigarettes, from all kinds of things. yet we let social media run completely free. and i agree with you. we don't want any one source of information, but we don't want a thousand sources of information peddung thousand sources of information peddling nonsense that we can't control either. we categorically have to bring something in now , have to bring something in now, whether australia is doing it right, i don't know, but we have to do something and restrict this. >> the argument that holds more weight for me than banning it for 14 or 16 year olds would be,

i think, the potential national security threat that tiktok poses. security threat that tiktok poses . i security threat that tiktok poses. i imagine tiktok security threat that tiktok poses . i imagine tiktok would poses. i imagine tiktok would deny this, but that, for me, would be a case for getting rid of tiktok . i don't personally, i of tiktok. i don't personally, i don't agree with 14 and 16 year olds being kind of taken offline completely, but i don't know. what's your views on this. >> well, i actually agree with what australia is doing. i think it's a very sensible policy for me. social media among teenagers is a pernicious, evil and damaging force. it's brought no good. it's brought desperation, as you mentioned there with teenagers mental health. and i was just saying to you guys earlier , it's damaging in the earlier, it's damaging in the way that young girls are pressured. we've seen it . pressured. we've seen it. basically. it's another form where we've seen a rise in. the clips that are shown on there, young girls at school, you know, are really being opened up to things that they shouldn't be opened up to. this is what so, so, so desperately sad and worrying. and i just think that we do really need to look at it

and think, actually, is it is it serving our young people any good?i serving our young people any good? i don't think it is. it's dumbing down society. they're being fed absolute tosh. i mean, you mentioned there about alternative forms of, of information. well it's rubbish. and tiktok, whose are owned by the chinese state. it's a way for the chinese state to control the masses in the west. >> that's what they're doing. >> that's what they're doing. >> i don't disagree with you, sir, but if you look at things like bbc, for example, let's just say your bbc is your only way to get history right. they put out a video last year that said that that black people were romans, essentially. and like, that's very confusing. if you can't go into social media and 90, can't go into social media and go, is this real? is this not real? >> because there is an attempt to social media for that, but they just go and open an encyclopaedia. but we have to admit, we need to go back to traditional forms of learning. >> well , yes, traditional forms of learning. >> well, yes, but our own traditional forms of learning. >> well , yes, but our own state >> well, yes, but our own state has got its own propaganda out that it wants to force down our young people's throats. and i do like the idea that they can go and get alternatives. >> opinions. can i just chip in? sorry. please. so i, i hear what you're saying, but i also believe that there are far more

damaging things like that on social media. minute in, minute out. and i think it's the non—stop and it's the creation of the reels. >> they are so addictive. they are so addictive. >> for example, i will say this, they are very good at content moderation between themselves, young people as well. and i've got very young brothers and all in their teenage years. early 20s, and none of them were brainwashed by anything or have seen any conspiracies that they buy into. they, they, they actually moderate it amongst their friendship group. >> it's also the reasons behind it. again, now we've made some serious points there about national security and stuff like that. the reason here is, given this mental health epidemic among young people now, i'm deeply sympathetic towards that. okay. but if we are going to start banning things left, right and centre again , really to and centre again, really to continually try and take the pressure off our health service, then all of a sudden, what are we going to be left with? yeah, this is this is the thing i don't think we can keep saying we managed fine before social media was a bad thing. >> i just want to say i've worked in the tech industry for a very, very long time, and there are always ways around bans like, let's just be real, you're just going to create a

black market for it and young people consuming this content through vpns and other ways. >> there's no way to actually properly ban this. when young people will share the information they've found that around the world, actually, they've taken steps and there are ways around it, however, that it has had some impact. >> it has restricted use. we've got to do something. we really do. >> we really do. >> we really do. >> i think it's the tip of an iceberg. things are going to get a lot worse. they really are. we're only just starting to see now the extent of the damage as these teenagers come of age and going back to what i was saying about protecting girls, you know, it's the vulnerable that suffer from from this in society. and what sort of messages are young people learning ? and as i say, you learning? and as i say, you know, having more access to, you know, having more access to, you know, girls feeling pressure about the way that they look, comparing themselves to other people, the use of social filters and, you know, on their on their images, girls wanting to have plastic surgery so they look like that to heavily filtered by the media. >> yeah, we're doing that with the press. not that long ago we had page three that only ended a

few years ago. there's other forms of this this happening of a basket of things as well, though, isn't it? >> it's part of a basket of things that we're seeing. yes, but the media is regulated. >> the mainstream, the traditional media is regulated. >> but you've got, you know, banning smoking in pub gardens, the potential for takeaways that have been existing for the last 20 or 30 years, that now happens to be near a school to be shut down because that's going to, you know, harm, harm, children's health, all sorts of banning, banning, banning, banning. and this could be the latest one if i was the labour government, even if i thought this was a good idea, i would be quite concerned about how authoritarian i was may be coming across, or how easy it would for be people to suggest that they are authoritarian. but that they are authoritarian. but thatis that they are authoritarian. but that is certainly a lively one to kick us off with this particular tranche of newspapers. but someone's dash cam caught this shocking moment in south carolina when a train smashed into a trailer that was carrying a military vehicle. take a look at this . you. know.

take a look at this. you. know. yeah. unfortunately, volodymyr zelenskyy will not be getting that tank. but so far there have been no reports on whether anyone has been injured. so hopefully everybody is okay. now coming up, i will reveal to you what happens next . coming up, i will reveal to you what happens next. here. we did that. it should be another one. don't worry , i'll have all of don't worry, i'll have all of the rest of dave myers newspaper front pages. don't go anywhere. i'll see you in a

tick. all right, so welcome back to patrick christys. tonight it's time for the liveliest pay per view on telly. i've got two more for you, well, this is the mirror. and it's farewell to ex—england boss. a tear for sven. emotional david beckham mourns eriksen with family and friends at funeral. but let's go over to the daily express now.

prime minister, please keep promise to change cruel law. dame esther rantzen has urged sir keir starmer to make his promise. make his promise come true and hold a vote on legalising assisted dying. this is a campaign the daily express are doing alongside dame esther rantzen, who obviously would like the ability to engage more with assisted dying, and yeah, i mean, that's that's going to be a question that's going to come forward in the coming in the coming months, isn't it? and as evenl coming months, isn't it? and as ever, i am joined by my wonderful press pack. but i thought i'd bring this to your attention. if you've not seen it already. so the prime minister and our foreign secretary, david lammy, they jetted off across the pond yesterday for high level diplomatic talks with their american counterparts , joe their american counterparts, joe biden and anthony blinken in washington . well, so far so washington. well, so far so good. but on closer inspection, david lammy is footwear raised a few eyebrows. there we go. look at that. can you spot what's wrong with that? he rocked up sporting a pair of running

trainers. so is that really appropriate sartorial choice to greet the president of the united states? especially with everything that we've got going on at the moment. is this a little bit unserious? alex? no it's ridiculous, isn't it? >> well, they're actually quite expensive. >> checking out what you've got on. yeah, i've show up to work appropriately all right, that's it. >> never, never, never anything but smart , patrick. but, i mean, but smart, patrick. but, i mean, he's the foreign secretary. he's not just a bloke off the street. he's going to represent our country. and this buffoon keeps on doing silly things wherever he goes. i mean, i can't believe this man represents britain. i mean, they are expensive running shoes, to be fair, but i mean, goodness, i suppose rishi sunak had his adidas sambas when he met maloney. >> it all went downhill from there, didn't it? >> somebody said he was wearing trainers so he could run away from any difficult questions. i don't know how true that is. >> i don't think he's going to pose any to him. >> is he? he probably doesn't even know where he is or who david lammy is to be quite frank with also american men, let's face it, they can't dress for toffee. so i mean, that's, that's that's where this thing originated. it's like robert downey jr. he sort of dresses

like a zany dad with the trainers and the suits, and it's just terrible. it's all foreign secretary. >> that's the issue. that's the issue. but lammy doesn't really matter, does it. yeah, but but when you're the when you're the foreign secretary it really matters. it's a stupid thing to do. it's a stupid thing. >> it's terrible . i mean, if sir >> it's terrible. i mean, if sir paul mccartney can't pull it off, then david lammy certainly isn't going to be able to pull it off. and that tie, not terrible tie, not as well. >> the other aspect to it wasn't it. i'm checking mine now. there you go. i think that's all right. you're all right. but again, i'm not foreign as alex would say. i'm not foreign secretary yet. okay, so i think we've just about got time, haven't we, to reveal today's greatest britain and union jackass. okay, so we start with the greatest britain. and, sarah, i'll start with you. >> i'm going to nominate king charles. well, you know what an ardent royalist i am, patrick. obviously, from coming on the show, but for me, king charles. and it's because of that lovely hug, that lovely moment he exchanged with the new zealand female rugby team earlier this

week. >> i think we can we can have a little look at it. actually. >> a tear to my eye. yeah, we all wanted a hug, but only if it was like a hug. >> yeah. why not? i >> yeah. why not? i >> what you can't see is camilla's fuming in the background . yeah. it's good. oh, background. yeah. it's good. oh, it was nice. that was. i mean, that was about as human as you could possibly ever get. >> exactly. >> exactly. >> isn't it? exactly. and i just think it showed there's so much packed into that. i don't think we've ever seen such an array of emotion on the king's face before. you actually saw his real human side properly for the first time. and given what that man's gone through in the last couple of years, losing his mother, his father battling cancen mother, his father battling cancer, his son as well, harry going away to america, he actually needed that hug . he actually needed that hug. he really did. i think that's what really did. i think that's what really touched people. when they watched it. you saw how much he actually needed that hug and he

just let that he just let go just let that he just let go just for a split second there. and i just really felt it. and i just thought , you know what? just thought, you know what? >> it was really nice. >> it was really nice. >> lovely. yeah. >> lovely. yeah. >> great start. nice britain. >> great start. nice britain. >> so go on. »- >> so go on. >> alex, mine is a young man called charlie simpson. he is 13 years old, but at school he's openly supported reform. and he was called a nazi by some of the staff. i know gb news did a report on this yesterday. everyone should go check it out, but i think it's very brave of him to stand by his morals. it doesn't matter who you support in politics. at 13 years old, the young man has stood his ground and said, no, i'm not going to be bullied by teachers or adults. i support reform and for good him. >> another example of one of the reasons. sorry not to digress here, but why i'm a bit squiffy about this social media stuff, right? because if he maybe did not have ready access to certain things that you can see online and clips online, like say for example, you know what he decides that he backs about reform and you just know that you're going to get called a nazi by your teachers. yeah. if you say you might not have anything to reinforce your beliefs there, i don't know. that's one of the reasons why

i'm a bit squiffy about it. anyway, i think he's done very well and go on, who's your right? >> so gb news viewers on many of them are going to hate me for this, but i'm going to pick i'm going to pick robert jenrick. now, i'm not a massive fan, but our political system, in my opinion, is knackered. it's broken, genuinely broken. robert jenrick has promised to smash reform and i've got nothing against reform. but but but we've got a weak labour party in power with a big majority. we've got an exceptionally weak tory party. we've got reform over there. we need a stronger right right of centre to challenge and bnng right of centre to challenge and bring out the best in left of centre government. so i would say robert jenrick is the man to unite the centre right. well, there you go. bring out the best of the government and challenge them and possibly replace them. without this labour will be in power forever. i agree . power forever. i agree. >> well there you go. >> well there you go. >> okay, forever strong. >> okay, forever strong. >> today's greatest britain is charlie simpson , the 13 year old charlie simpson, the 13 year old lad who stuck to his guns at school. although i must say. well done, alex. it could have been any of us. right. okay, so we're gonna have to be quite

quick with this. now. we've got a couple of minutes. uni and jackass, please. >> okay. for me, it is australian supermodel elle macpherson for the absolutely stupid, stupid comments she made earlier this week, saying that she relied on, in a sense , an she relied on, in a sense, an holistic therapy with which to cure her cancer and not to have chemotherapy. what was it mentioned? is one of the people who she's been working with is the disgraced former doctor, andrew wakefield. he was obviously the man behind , the obviously the man behind, the mmr vaccines and all of that trouble . and i just think you've trouble. and i just think you've got sometimes gullible people who will see this and think, i'm not going to have chemotherapy because elle was supposedly cured . cured. >> yeah, mine's david lammy, i think just being david lammy, frankly. but no, no, the shoes. it's the shoes. come on man, you're foreign secretary. put on a pair of shoes. >> go on andy, very quickly it's donald trump. >> his cats and dogs statement was bizarre . he's already losing was bizarre. he's already losing it. he's already losing the election and he's just alienated. loads of undecided voters. he's a jackass. >> wow, is that bleach ?

>> wow, is that bleach? >> wow, is that bleach? >> well, there we go. today's winner of the union. >> jackass is. >> jackass is. >> it's david lammy. oh, no. >> it's david lammy. oh, no. >> double whammy. it is fixed. >> double whammy. it is fixed. >> all right, now. >> all right, now. >> thank you very much, everybody. thank you, thank you, thank you. wonderful panel. this evening. and thank you to everybody who's been at home watching, listening . if you're watching, listening. if you're out and about listening to your radio, headliners are up next. we're going to take a much more in—depth look at all of the newspaper front pages. i'll be back at 9 pm. on monday, and i've got something very special lined up for you, so tune in. >> ooh, exciting. >> ooh, exciting. >> a brighter outlook with boxt solar, sponsors of weather on . solar, sponsors of weather on. gb news. >> hi there, and welcome to the latest forecast from the met office for gb news. following a topsy turvy week of weather, it's been a reasonable end to the working week for many of us, and it stays clear over the next 24 hours in the south. a chilly start to the weekend there, but

further north there will be an increase in the cloud overnight as this weather system moves in. that's going to bring the thickest cloud and the more persistent and at times heavy outbreaks of rain to western scotland through the evening and northern ireland. however, the rain does turn lighter and more patchy through the night and by the end of the night, even in the end of the night, even in the north it will be mostly dry, albeit cloudier and milder compared with how we started things on friday. the clearest skies will be further south and again temperatures approaching zero, so a bit of a chill in the air for southern counties of england, parts of south wales into the midlands and east anglia. i think in main towns and cities. temperatures at 8 or 9 celsius in sheltered rural spots more like the low single figures. however, for northern ireland, northern england, parts of scotland. a very different story. first thing saturday. 10 to 13 celsius with an awful lot of cloud out there and some outbreaks of persistent rain and drizzle over the hills of

western scotland. otherwise actually eastern scotland seeing good shelter from that and some brightness coming through, and it's going to feel milder with the winds picking up from the southwest. meanwhile, for much of england and wales, a bright, albeit relatively cloudy afternoon to come, the best of the sunshine will be in the

gb news. >> good evening. the top stories from the gb newsroom. the us president, joe biden, has said he doesn't think much about the russian president as sir keir starmer joined joe russian president as sir keir starmerjoined joe biden russian president as sir keir starmer joined joe biden for talks about the conflict in ukraine. this after president zelenskyy expressed his frustration at the continued restrictions on the use of western weaponry against russian targets. sir keir starmer has said he believes the uk and us are strategically aligned as they began discussions in washington this evening. the russian president, vladimir putin, has warned against such a move, saying it would represent

represent