to address the united due to address the united nafions due to address the united nations this evening as he joins other world leaders in calling for an immediate ceasefire in the fighting between israel and in lebanon. sir keir speech comes on the day the israeli military targeted and killed another top hezbollah commander, mohammad sarur, a senior leader in the terror group's aerial command, was killed in an airstrike on a building in southern beirut. the us defence secretary, lloyd austin, has warned the situation is rapidly escalating and we now face the risk of an all out war, another full scale war would could be devastating for both israel and lebanon. >> so let me be clear. israel and lebanon can choose a different path . despite the different path. despite the sharp escalation in recent days, a diplomatic solution is still

viable . viable. >> scotland yard has issued a call for any potential victims of mohamed al—fayed to come forward . five women have claimed forward. five women have claimed they were raped by the former harrods owner, who died last year at the age of 94. a number of others say they were sexually assaulted by him. the current managing director of harrods, michael ward, has apologised and said the business failed . said the business failed. colleagues. the family of a teenager who was murdered in wolverhampton have told a court they are devastated. totally heartbroken and confused. 212 year old boys found guilty of murdering shawn seesahai in a random machete attack are being sentenced this week. the killers were convicted in june of murdering the 19 year old, who was stabbed in the heart and suffered a fractured skull in november last year. they are believed to be the youngest defendants convicted of murder

in britain since robert thompson and jon venables , both aged 11, and jon venables, both aged 11, were found guilty of killing two year old james bulger in 1993. the hollywood icon dame joan collins has taken a swipe at extreme political correctness . extreme political correctness. speaking to gb news presenter andrew pierce she said she was definitely no fan of woke culture. >> i consider myself to be feminine and a feminist and why should we be called female actors? i find it demeaning. i think it's gone out of control really . you can't say anything really. you can't say anything and people get offended . we've and people get offended. we've lost our british sense of humour. >> and finally, astronomers have unveiled the most detailed map ever seen of our galaxy. from the violent birth of newborn stars to the hidden mysteries of the galactic core. the new images show the milky way as

you've never seen. you've never seen. >> you've never seen. >> for the very latest gb news direct to your smartphone, sign up to news alerts by or go to gbnews.com/win . gbnews.com/win. >> thank you mark. now welcome to farage with me martin daubney standing in for the big man, nigel farage. now the uk is on the brink of a conflagration . we the brink of a conflagration. we have regional conflict in the middle east, a full blown war in eastern europe. and now the government is being warned that british civilians must be ready to fight , because we don't have to fight, because we don't have a big enough army. you couldn't make it up. a new committee reports from the house of lords, has said that the country must adopt the mindset of a nation and a genuine threat. lord kitchener is no longer saying your country needs you, but the country is ordering you to fight for king and country. well, join

me now to go through this is lieutenant colonel stuart crawford, defence analyst and former british army officer. always a pleasure to have you on the show . lieutenant crawford, the show. lieutenant crawford, let's face it, this idea is absolutely bonkers. the notion that lords average age of about 300 can be ordering young men and women to go and fight for their country is absolutely preposterous. i know we've got the smallest army since the napoleonic era, the smallest raf since its inception at the end of world war one. so few navy sailors that we are scrapping ships. but the notion that we can force british citizens to go to war is for the birds, isn't it ? it? >> good evening. martin. well, yes . that's what that's one way yes. that's what that's one way of looking at it. i would just say that from the outset, the people who send our young men and women to war are us, the electorate. and we do that through our elected representatives in parliament.

and the house of lords has a peripheral role in that. an important one. you might you might think, but but it's peripheral to that. it's down to the prime minister and the government and the parliament to do that. having said that, although i haven't read the house of lords report in any great detail, i have read a lot of the media coverage of it, and i think it's pretty accurate, to be honest, we are in a position where our armed forces have atrophied to such an extent that we probably can't do , or they we probably can't do, or they can't do what we would want them to do . and the reason for that to do. and the reason for that is decades of underfunding through successive governments of all political hues. and that's what sir keir starmer and john healey, his defence secretary, and his government have now got to tackle . have now got to tackle. >> but the fact of the matter is, if people aren't volunteering, if the conscription process is so woeful, which we know it is, and by the way, they should probably think about stop having a go at

white working class men who historically have been the most likely to take up arms and defend their country. look at rishi sunak's doomed national service scheme that has 65% approval rating against it from those aged 18 to 24. they're the ones that will be expected to go up the ladder first, not some dusty old fossils in the lords. >> well, that's what i think the populist or popular concept might be, but i am reminded that in the 1930s, the oxford union, the speaking union, passed a motion saying that this house would not fight for king and country. and a few years later they were either all dead or in prisoner of war camps. so i think that it's easy to say such things in the abstract. but when bombs are being dropped in london or liverpool or glasgow or wherever, or missiles are crossing the channel, or boats are being sunk in the north sea

and the north atlantic, i think people have a completely different perspective. i have no doubt that today's younger generation, if it came to it, if it came, if push came to shove, would would step up to the plate. and i'm confident that, those are the sort of people that we have to rely on in the future. >> do you think that's really the case? i mean, i just came into the studio now and outside there's a protest once again on there's a protest once again on the streets of london by pro—palestinian protesters. tens of thousands of them seem to turn up. i wonder if those people would take up arms against britain. do we really have enough people in the united kingdom who believe in patriotic values, who believe in king and country, who believe in protecting our sovereign borders? the data suggest that's not the case. they can't get people to even volunteer to sign up at the moment, recruitment is at a record all time low. >> well, that's a fair point . >> well, that's a fair point. and there are there are reasons

for that. and i think the primary reason is that the armed forces are not seen generally speaking, as being a sort of attractive career option at the moment . and the reasons for that moment. and the reasons for that are many. and manifest, but much of it has to do with, the negative pr, which which appears in the media, week in and week out. and much of it is actually deserved. the, defence estate , deserved. the, defence estate, properties for married quarters and soldiers quarters is poor and soldiers quarters is poor and it needs to be upgraded. the recruitment system , which in recruitment system, which in terms of the army has been recruited, has been outsourced, is appallingly poor and that needs to be sorted. and i'm heartened that john healey, our defence secretary, has said that he is going to impose immediate , he is going to impose immediate, action to try and sort that out. and as for the people on the

streets protesting about palestine, well, most of them actually don't know what they're protesting about. it's almost become fashionable to do that. there is a debate to be had. there's much to be said on both sides. and there are, you know , sides. and there are, you know, there's much to be conceded on both sides . but i think that, we both sides. but i think that, we should be reasonably optimistic that our youth in particular will rise to the top if needed. >> well, i admire your glass half full mentality, lieutenant colonel stuart crawford, it's always a pleasure to have you on the show. thank you very, very much for your time. now to continue this conversation, i'm joined in my studio by my superstar panel. and tonight is the conservative mp for romford, andrew rosindell and of course peter tatchell. the human rights campaigner and activist. gentlemen, welcome to the show. andrew, could i start with you? successive governments have grappled with the issue of how do we make young people sign up to take up arms or be prepared to take up arms or be prepared to defend the realm? hasn't been

achieved by successive governments. your mob didn't do a good job. i don't think the current lot will be much better. is it really the answer for the law to say, well , okay, you law to say, well, okay, you don't volunteer, we're going to force you to do it . force you to do it. >> so freedom isn't free. our liberties are not something we can just for take granted. there are times in our history when we do have to fight to defend the freedom that we cherish. and my father was in the royal air force in the second world war. both my grandfathers fought in the first world war, so they had to go and fight for king and country on both occasions. who knows, that might happen again in the future. i hope it doesn't. i don't believe it will. but you can never be certain. one thing i will say is that this country is a great nation, and we do rise to a challenge. if we are threatened, if our freedom and our way of life, our existence is under threat. the british people do rise to that. the big problem,

i'm afraid, is that as you've rightly said, martin, every government has failed to invest in our defences. i believe that we should at least be spending 3%, and i do hope the new government we have at the moment will match that , because if we will match that, because if we don't invest in our defences, we pay a don't invest in our defences, we pay a very high price down the road. >> i wonder, peter tatchell , >> i wonder, peter tatchell, back to my point about how many people actually believe enough now in great britain, the united kingdom, in the monarchy, the realm, everything that the country stands for seems to be almost taken apart from within, from within academia, from within. a lot of the mainstream media, from, i think a lot of them within the political circle. do we now find ourselves in a position where people, particularly people on the liberal left, people outside tonight? i wouldn't call them liberal, but they're protesting against britain on the streets of london. these people would neven of london. these people would never, in a million years take up arms to defend the uk, would they? >> well, the people protesting

for palestine outside tonight , for palestine outside tonight, they're not against britain. they're against britain providing arms for what is a quasi genocide in gaza and increasingly, increasingly in lebanon . so it's not about lebanon. so it's not about they're not patriotic, it's just they're not patriotic, it's just they don't agree with a particular policy. now, going back to your original question, the last time i spoke with senior officers at the camberley staff college, i asked them about this issue and they said, absolutely, they wanted a professional, highly trained army. they did not want conscription. they thought british excellence comes by having a professional army that's well paid . the job is that's well paid. the job is attractive and in particular the terrible accommodation issues that face lower ranks and married service people. that's a really major stumbling block to recruitment, and i think it's quite shocking that the officers in the british army have fantastic accommodation. the lower ranks do not. it wouldn't pass muster in civvy street to put people in an accommodation that some of our lower ranks have to live in, in military service, so we need to address

those changes. if we make it a more attractive option, then we'll get the recruits and then we'll get the recruits and then we'll have the highly excellent professional army that we need and deserve. >> it's an excellent point. and andrew, we've been covering today on gb news, the homes for heroes scheme put forward by sir keir starmer upon first of casual analysis . actually, it casual analysis. actually, it doesn't prioritise veterans . doesn't prioritise veterans. they will be behind the queue behind asylum seekers. even so, what does it say to people who might be thinking about joining the armed forces when they're when they finish their time? the governments, successive governments, successive governments again has to be said. they seem to care about them. they simply thrown out. you've served your time. thank you very much. often being crippled by by by homelessness, by addiction, by being tossed onto the scrap heap. so until we show that we care about our armed forces and our veterans, why should they care about us? you're completely right. >> we have failed our veterans. there's so much we should have been doing in recent years to not only look after those that

have served queen and country, but also to encourage more younger people to actually want to go into the armed forces . we to go into the armed forces. we should have invested a lot more in things like the air training corps and the army reserves. i think they should be supported at local level, particularly in schools and outside organisations. i think that we've done a lot to encourage young people to go to university, haven't we? a lot of that, but very little to encourage people to actually join the armed forces. and i think we need. peter's right. the conditions are a big factor. people decide to not go to the armed forces because the conditions are so bad. we need to change the mindset of this, but to do so, it means spending a lot more money. and i'm afraid the peace dividend that we thought we had in the 90s after the fall of the berlin wall, i'm afraid that was largely a mistake. we should have continued to invest in our armed forces, and we wouldn't be facing the problems we have today had we done so. i think framing the problem in terms of

defending king and country is the wrong approach, because that's a divisive issue. andrew's right. it needs to be about defending our democratic way of life and our freedoms . if way of life and our freedoms. if you sell the military on that basis, then i think more people will be inclined to join up. >> why do you think that divides? is it because the monarchy in itself is divisive? and why would i? why would i be prepared to die for the king? is that what you're saying? well among young people, nearly 40% want to abolish the monarchy and replace it by a democratically elected head of state. >> so if you say the military is all about defending king and country, the royal family, a lot of people are going to be turned off. you don't want to turn them off. you don't want to turn them off. you don't want to turn them off. you want to make it as open and inclusive as possible. and that's why freedom and democracy has to be the rallying call. i think that's a sign i think you're going a very wrong road there, peter. look, you have to swear an oath of allegiance to the king to serve in the armed forces. it's something that people should be proud to do. it's an honour to serve king and country as my father and my grandfathers did to suggest that it's because they don't want to

show loyalty to the king. i don't meet a single young person in my constituency that that thinks that's an issue for them. dufing thinks that's an issue for them. during the second world war, people didn't sign up and enlist in their millions to defend the king. they signed up to defend our democracy against nazi fascism. and that's a very, very different issue. and we want to make the military you're entitled to your opinion, but that isn't the issue over this. >> i think you've both got excellent points. i think you're right. and i think that's a sad thing. but i do think peter is right on the fact that a great many people now don't seem to be prepared to stand up for the monarchy. it's been taken apart by the establishment, by the media, by the bbc and by their own scandals . yeah, there is own scandals. yeah, there is that. but look, great show, gentlemen. thank you very much, andrew and peter. now stick with us because coming up, the governments could try to resolve the prisons crisis by introducing a points based system that could lead to early releases, thanks to good behaviour . releases, thanks to good behaviour. is that the answer? we'll discuss

next. welcome back to farage with me . welcome back to farage with me. martin daubney standing in for the big man himself, nigel farage. now labour is looking to set to introduce a points based system which will reward prisoners for their good behaviour. the justice secretary will look at a texas style point system which offers offenders courses on reoffending, drugs or alcohol to reduce their sentences. and the news comes after 37 domestic abusers were wrongly released from prison yesterday. and the labour's controversial prisoner release scheme, following its action plan to reduce prison capacity. well, i'm still joined in the studio here by my superstar panel studio here by my superstar panel. that's the conservative mp for romford, andrew rosindell and of course peter tatchell, the human rights campaigner and activist. gentlemen, thank you for your company as ever. peter, i'm going to start with you. it

may come as a surprise to you. i think this idea has merit. i spent a lot of time in prisons. i hastened to say, for the right reasons. i go into prisons and i talk to young men about what it means to in return, as doing

wealth, and in return, as doing that, they should also get remission in their sentences together with their good behaviour. i have been to hmp grendon, which is a model prison. it's the it's the gold standard for prisons in the uk. it is all about rehabilitation that prisoners actually run the prison. their own sections themselves. they have weekly counselling and psychological sessions. >> what kind of offenders? they're not like killers. >> yes, yes. murderers. child molesters. the worst of the worst. >> they're running the nics. >> they're running the nics. >> yeah, they're running their own little unit. yeah wow. but it's all about self—responsibility . teaching self—responsibility. teaching them to take charge of their own lives, their own future, and a positive outcome. now, the results are that hmp grendon, the reoffending rate is half the national average. it's a huge success story and it shows that rehabilitation works. and i just think that every prison in this country, of course people need to be punished. there needs to to me. however punishment has to be be are as well. , to me. however punishment has to be be punished... , to me. however punishment has to be be punished. there,,, to me. however punishment has to be be punished. there needs to

be deterrents, but we need to to be punished. there needs to be deterrents, but we need to give people the chance of give people the chance of rehabilitation and to acquire rehabilitation and to acquire the skills they need so that the skills they need so that when they're released, they can when they're released, they can getjobs when they're released, they can get jobs and be productive getjobs when they're released, they can get jobs and be productive members of society. members of society. >> andrew rosindell peter >> andrew rosindell peter tatchell is saying a lot of tatchell is saying a lot of things there, which no doubt things there, which no doubt would challenge your your notion would challenge your your notion of law and order as someone from of law and order as someone from the conservative right, being the conservative right, being compassionate towards, compassionate towards, compassionate towards, compassionate towards, compassionate towards, compassionate towards, compassionate towards killers compassionate towards killers might go against the instinct of might go against the instinct of a lot of our viewers, but is a lot of our viewers, but is punishment just about punishment just about retribution? is it about retribution? is it about punishment, or is there some punishment, or is there some merit in a bit of humanity , merit in a bit of humanity , merit in a bit of humanity, equipping them to be better merit in a bit of humanity, equipping them to be better citizens if they're ever citizens if they're ever released? >> look, no one can disagree released? >> look, no one can disagree with the importance of with the importance of rehabilitation and ensuring that rehabilitation and ensuring that when a prisoner goes into prison when a prisoner goes into prison that they leave prison, perhaps that they leave prison, perhaps as a better person, better as a better person, better equipped to go back into society equipped to go back into society and not to reoffend. so anything and not to reoffend. so anything that can can do what's happening that can can do what's happening at hmp grendon, as peter has at hmp grendon, as peter has outlined that sounds excellent outlined that sounds excellent to me. however punishment has to to me. however punishment has to

be there as well be there as well . you cannot be there as well. you cannot just turn prisons into centres that people can go in and be given lead a normal life in prison and then to go out because then you're not. you're not discouraging people from committing those crimes. there's no deterrent. and i think that when it comes to sentencing, i've always tended to feel that we should have honest sentencing rather than actually let people out early. we should say, well , out early. we should say, well, if you behave, if you actually behave properly in prison and don't do things that don't do bad things, then perhaps you'll go out when you're meant to leave rather than have it extended. but it's important. that's a better way of doing it. >> but isn't paul the problem, though, is that successive governments again, conservatives 14 years in power and the labour party before that haven't built enough nics. well, that's all true. so we're having to release people early because there's nowhere to store them. >> we're facing this problem now because governments haven't planned they haven't actually built enough prisons. the

government are releasing people early, which i have grave concerns over now. there are 37 people have been released that shouldn't have been released. >> isn't that because the tories didn't have enough capacity? sure it was. labour have inherited this mess. >> all governments have have allowed this to emerge as a serious problem, and we should have been building more prisons. if you don't build enough prisons , there can't be prisons, there can't be a deterrent because people are let out far too early. then their sentence was given in the first place. so that has to change. and the last government did make mistakes on this, but the idea that the solution is to just let loads of prisoners out early, as you could see the other week , you could see the other week, prisoners uncorking champagne and saying, well, they're always going to vote labour now because of it. this is not the way there has to be punishment. there has to be deterrence, peter, but there's got to be rehabilitation, because if they just go into prison and come out, the unreformed characters, they went in, society isn't the benefit we lose , we lose. benefit we lose, we lose. rehabilitation works well in a small minority of prisons, but it's a very tiny minority. i've

deau it's a very tiny minority. i've dealt with prisoners who have been desperate to learn skills, even to learn english language. if they're foreign nationals, so they can be productive members of society. >> and they cut it to off be deported back to their own country. >> they they couldn't get the classes that they wanted. and so , classes that they wanted. and so, you know, if someone wants to get training and skills and they are not able to get ,

in a cycle of prison release, prison release. and that's what they don't want to make it an attractive option for people to commit crime and go to prison. no, we're not people actually, to want to go there. you have to make it a punishment as well. yes, rehabilitate. but also make sure that people know that they're not going to enjoy the experience of going to prison. otherwise it it defeats the whole object. >> and it's worth pointing out that 20% of the cons that have been released recently by the labour party are already back behind bars . labour party are already back behind bars. maybe a lot of them want to be back there. maybe they get three meals a day. maybe they kept nice and warm. maybe they kept nice and warm. maybe they kept nice and warm. maybe they miss their mates and maybe that's a problem. we have institutional dependence. >> put them to work. you know, prisoners should help pay for the cost of their imprisonment. it shouldn't be the taxpayer. that's why i'm saying prisoners in prisons should do productive work that earns money for the exchequer. they get a small share of it. and if they're doing their job well, it also counts towards good behaviour for potential early release. >> peter. andrew, superb stuff. you're getting on far too well. let's have an argument after the break. next we're off to the

bastion of free speech and equality wales. it appears the government there have shelved shocking plans to force political parties to have 50% of candidates being women. it's all kicking off. they're not happy in the

welcome back to farage with me. martin daubney standing in for the big man, nigel farage. you're going to love this story because the welsh government has u—turned on its plans to introduce legislation that would force parties to ensure at least 50% of its candidates are women dunng 50% of its candidates are women during its elections. now, quite rightly, the proposals were challenged on its legal basis . challenged on its legal basis. but cabinet secretary for social justice, yes, they've got a cabinet for secretary social justice in wales, jane hutt, said that there was now an opportunity for parties to

cooperate on creating voluntary guidance to ensure a more representative senate in 2026. >> our people , our senate >> our people, our senate members who are interested in what this expanded senate looks like in 2026, do you want to come back to a senate full of white men? no so please take some time to look at what we can do . do. >> and in a longer clip of that, the white men in the background start going a little bit nuts because they're basically being told you're not wanted in the welsh parliament. it's absolutely bonkers. let's go through the legal framework of this now with the excellent barrister stephen barrett. great friend of the channel, stephen, always an absolute pleasure. so on the basis of it, this is utterly bonkers mandating that 50% of candidates must be women . 50% of candidates must be women. and let's even get into like, are you actually identifying as are you actually identifying as a woman? but, stephen, i love getting you on to talk me through the legal framework of

this. putting politics to one side, is this actually legal? >> so let's go on a little tour of history, because i think it will illustrate a point i like to make about the law, which is that ultimately the laws are what the people want them to be, and it is not for the laws to tell the people what they should and shouldn't be. >> it's for not lawyers to dictate to people how they want their country run in the old days, this was unlawful and the labour party got taken to court in about 1996 because they were proposing all female shortlists. and somebody quite rightly pointed out, well, that's discriminatory against men. it is martin, by the way. and in that clip, clearly discrimination against, against white men was, was, was raised. we must not lose the ability to see this. and the court said no, no, no, that that's very wrong. so along comes a new law that the people use parliament as they can, as they can to change they can, as they can to change the laws. and under the equality

act 2010, this is permissible. it's something called section 104. and you can have all female shortlists. i mean, as a bisexual, martin, i'm going to advocate strongly for all bisexual shortlists. i'm not sure. i'm not sure how many of us there are. so i think i'd just be a shoo in. but, this is this is discrimination. it's what we call lawful or positive, allegedly positive discrimination because that's to give it an endorsement . discrimination because that's to give it an endorsement. i wonder, martin, if you're if your listeners and viewers know about the lord of the rings , about the lord of the rings, because there's a quite a powerful message in that where if you try and use the weapon of your enemy, you will become your enemy , or you will be corrupted enemy, or you will be corrupted and you will be destroyed by your enemy. and all of this idea, it goes. so let's go back to 2010. it's now 2024. are we free of discrimination then? is everything great? is everything absolutely hunky dory and lovely? but we have used the weapon of our enemy and allegedly to do good things. so

no, i'm afraid i have to say that this is technically lawful. what they're proposing is far was far stronger. they're proposing that all was far stronger. they're proposinit that all was far stronger. they're proposinit thaand this happens brought it in. and this happens quite a lot with good intentions. they made a big song and dance about how this would be completely voluntary for political parties. political parties won't have to do this. nobody will make you do this. it's just the option of picking up the ring if you want to. and very, you know, over time we have slid down the inevitable slope. and i'm afraid, martin, this this is it would have been lawful whether to compel them or not is different, but it would have been lawful. >> so it's bad law, but it is the law, and that's the big question. stephen barrett, has anything good come out of the equality act? it seems it's just become this monstrous weapon to enforce discrimination against those who happen to be what white men, you know , white men, you know, heterosexual. it's actually been

weaponized in a way that goes against the majority. >> well, they're the other group currently the other group. so the group that has been othered, the group that has been othered, the group that has been othered, the group against which it is, it is apparently allegedly okay to discriminate , but that can to discriminate, but that can change very quickly. i mean, it was it was stalin's russia that used identity politics setting little groups against each other constantly as a means of control. that's what this is. it's a way of getting control. doesit it's a way of getting control. does it address the substantive problem? i don't believe it does. and i came across something more interesting. you'll forgive me if i just look it up in section 159. martin, this is the ability of employers to discriminate. in favour of people if they want to, if they think there's a problem. the wording. just because you know, i am a nerd for words. the wording really struck me. and it's persons who share a protected characteristic. so that's me being bisexual. i've got that suffer a disadvantaged connected to the characteristic , connected to the characteristic, what what on earth does that

mean? what do you mean, a disadvantage? you're inherently saying that there's something wrong about me, that i'm one of those. he. he's one of those people, you know. oh, we had to give him a leg up because he he just, you know, he he needs it. he couldn't possibly get there on merit. you know, it's just it's just rude. it's actually very offensive. it's derogatory. as i say, it's the weapon of the enemy. it's the language of a discriminator. and i hate, racism. i hate any identity politics, martin. because fundamentally, it's not just morally wrong. and evil. it's irrational. it is utterly irrational. it is utterly irrational to look at my skin tone and say that i'm clever or thick. it'sjust tone and say that i'm clever or thick. it's just irrational to take that position on any human being, to say everyone who wears blue shoes is a genius. everyone with blonde hair is evil. this is just nonsense. it's nonsense. on stilts. but we have written it into our law. that is your choice. you have irrational laws. you asked if anything good has come of the equality act.

lots of fighting, martin. and lots more fighting will come. come of this. >> but luckily lots of magnificent monologues from people like yourself. stephen barrett. marvellous thank you very, very much for setting that up and making it so entertaining and even getting a bit of j.r.r. tolkien in there to boot. now thank you, stephen, and join me back in the studio, of course, my superstar panel, conservative mp for romford, andrew rosindell and peter tatchell, the human rights campaigner and activist. now, andrew, i want to start with you. this time. so what do you make of the fact that we have legislation now, which basically makes it okay to discriminate against white men ? discriminate against white men? >> it's discrimination. it's wrong. this equalities act needs to go and i hope that will be dumped once we have a new government in a few years time, because it's done a huge amount of damage, terribly divisive. >> you could have dumped it when you were in power. >> look, the last government failed on a whole range of things. in future, we've got to get these things right. the equalities act is divisive. it

divides people up . we're all divides people up. we're all individuals. we're all different individuals. we're all different in lots of ways . there are no in lots of ways. there are no two people alike. and i like the fact that in this country , fact that in this country, traditionally, people get to where they are because they're on merit. we have margaret thatcher as prime minister. she was a woman, right? she got there not because she was a woman, because she was a strong leader with a clear purpose. and people voted her in. so i don't believe we should discriminate. i don't believe in identity politics. i don't believe in any of this. i think everybody should be able to get to where they want to be because they deserve it, because they've worked for it and they they're purely there on their merit. >> peter, is it fair to say that laws like this have made monsters of the so—called social justice warriors? they're the racists now. they're the sexists. they think they're the goodies. they're actually the baddies. >> that's a misinterpretation. the equality act is everyone's protection. it guarantees equal from straight white men. no, no, it guarantees equal treatment and protection against discrimination for everyone, for

elderly people, white people, people with whatever they are , people with whatever they are, minorities or majorities. under that law, we are all equal. before the law. >> white people have protected characteristics. that's what stephen barrett has pointed out. they've invented a hierarchy. >> yeah. no. the purpose of the equality law is to right historic injustices and wrongs. so, for example, for centuries women have been excluded. women have been underrepresented. this proposal by the welsh government, whether you agree with a particular plan, its purpose is to try and put that right to ensure that women have an equal place in the welsh parliament, and i think that's a good thing, because women are historically underrepresented in politics and they're half the population perfectly able to put themselves forward as candidate. >> no one's stopping them being a candidate. >> well, i'm afraid to say that the bias of our political system and of political parties has been to favour men. now, i don't i'm all in favour of men being in parliament. i stood myself to

be in parliament and i'm a man. but i think it's right that we try and give an uplift to women so that we have a representative parliament. parliament should reflect the society it represents and legislate to so—called minorities. you need to give an uplift to you're going to divide everybody up and in the end, good people that could be there on merit can't be there because their places being taken by someone else, because they tick a certain box. too many white guys. absolutely wrong. you should only be able to get there on merit just because you're of a certain race or sexuality or gender that should not give you a free pass. you have to get there on merit as well. but you can still overtake someone that could have been there because they don't tick the box that you've created. >> and let's face it, identity politics is an invented hierarchy. it's created this oppression olympics. it gives favour to those who somebody decided in in 2010 with the equality act is oppressed and it's given the oppressor rights. thank you very much to people like us white guys. i've never

oppressed anybody in my life . oppressed anybody in my life. why should i be prevented from standing for parliament? because i don't tick a box. well, you wouldn't be prevented if there if there were enough men on the list already. >> if this was the law according to the welsh system proposed, you know, 50% representation would be male. so when men would not be excluded. but you'd have your right. and the equality act does not privilege minorities. >> so what happens if, as is presumably why we've got this legislation, not enough women are coming forward when it's a voluntary choice, what do we do ? voluntary choice, what do we do? we march them at gunpoint to go and stand as candidates? >> of course not. of course not. but i think it's good to have, political parties required to ensure that there is greater balance between men and women. so you'd make it. you would enforce it. you would. you would force political parties to have a quota of women and other types of minorities and other types of people. where would this end? no, i'm not. i'm not saying that. would it end? i'm not saying. but i think in terms of gender balance, i mean, women are half of our society. but

would you have gender balance in all other walks of life as well, or is it only mps? well, ideally it'd be good to have more women ftse 100 ceos. that would be great. what about what about the massively underrepresented? >> what about the bad jobs? it's always the great jobs that we want more. what about bricklayers? well, they're all men sewage workers. >> if you look at, you know, cleaners and other domestic workers, they're overwhelmingly women , overwhelmingly low paid. women, overwhelmingly low paid. so i think they deserve a better deal >> okay, let's call time on this debate about equality. great stuff gentlemen. now, in a moment, we'll discuss something that the man who normally presents this show feels very , presents this show feels very, very strongly about. and that is mps are under increasing risk due to the east conflict could they be in peril? we'll discuss that next with

welcome back to farage with me . welcome back to farage with me. martin daubney standing in for the big man, nigel farage. now, a story which the man who

usually presents this show feels very, very strongly about. counter—terrorism experts have warned that the threat to mps on the basis of their views on the war in gaza is soaring, and police have said that the spreading conflict, which is intensifying, of course , in intensifying, of course, in lebanon, could become a motivating factor for terror attacks and plots. police pointed to the hartlepool terror attack last year, where jihadist ahmed alid murdered 70 year old grandfather terence carney and told police it was revenge for israel killing innocent people and children in airstrikes on gaza. now this following, of course, the attacks on mps sir david amess, in fact, he was murdered just two years before when he was stabbed to death by an isis supporter. now we've got some a quick clip here to show you because there is actually at present a protest going on right outside the studio here at whitehall around the lebanon protest. i think we've got some footage of that now. we can show the hostages. >> so this is as we speak now

outside. >> so there's a sizeable protest again. and i've got to say, i've walked through these things almost weekly. they've been going on now all the way through since october 7th. i've had stuff thrown at me . i've had stuff thrown at me. i've had eggs thrown at me. i tried to get the police. i begged the police to take down that projector putting. it's disgusting image onto the houses of parliament. they're onto big ben. but enough about me. joining me now is my panel as the conservative mp for romford, andrew rosindell and peter tatchell calls the human rights campaigner and activist back to the point in question. i'll start with you, andrew. the threat to mps is clearly growing. now we've seen david amess murdered mike freer, of course. finchley mp is arson attack on his office at the last general election, he stood down as a candidate. labour party mps have had it too. vicky foxcroft , have had it too. vicky foxcroft, lewisham north. sir keir starmer was harangued off a train in glasgow. rachel reeves on the general election campaign. apolitically. it seems to be a

growing phenomenon and the people perpetrating this seem to be the new intolerant , be the new intolerant, pro—palestine protesters. is this a growing threat? >> so it's three years since sir david was was murdered and we still live with the horror of that moment. >> all of us that get elected are always potentially under threat from someone. we all have people in our constituencies who blame us for everything and come to our surgeries or come to our offices and say and do things which are completely inappropriate and sometimes threatening. but what happened to david and jo cox before him was absolutely horrific. i fear, however, that not enough is done to protect parliamentarians, but also the anger in society, a lot of it misplaced. i have to say, seems to generate hatred towards elected politicians . there's no elected politicians. there's no easy answer to this , but i do

easy answer to this, but i do believe that the authorities in this country need to take it much more seriously. how elected politicians and public figures generally are not protected and are not safe from carrying out their elected duties. >> peter tatchell cannot be ignored that this menace, this growing menace has definitely increased since october. the seventh. there seems to be a huge intolerance among the pro—palestine protesters. it's a cause i know you sympathise with, and i'm hoping you're going to call out this mob now and say, just calm down, lads. >> well, first let me say, when i stood for parliament in bermondsey in 1983, in the run up to that election, i was violently assaulted. 151 times. and that's disgusting . and i had and that's disgusting. and i had two attempts to run me down in cars.i two attempts to run me down in cars. i had a bullet through the front door, arson attacks upon my flat as well. so i know firsthand the terror that many mps are feeling. i totally agree that people have a right to protest, but not to the point of

violence and threats and aggravated harassment. there has to be a legitimate challenge . to be a legitimate challenge. that's part of politics, but not the extreme kind of behaviour of a minority. and it is a very small minority. most of the people in the palestine protests and other protests are well behaved. they are respectful of their critics and their opponents , but they're making opponents, but they're making a point that's valid in democracy. >> okay, peter tatchell. excellent. i'd like to bring in at this point a fitting moment to bring in sirjacob rees—mogg course. state of the nation is next. i know this is something that's impacted you. i've seen you harangued through the streets. they, the mob, have visited your home and harassed your children. what's your take? do you think it's the growing menace? well i agree so much with peter that people have a right to protest. >> even outside my home. they have a right to protest. as long as it's peaceful. i don't want them to. it's not nice to have people outside your house shouting at you, but as long as they're peaceful, it is legal . they're peaceful, it is legal. and so it should be. and there have always been risks. i think, again, peter reminds us it

wasn't always safe in the 80s. think of ian gow, airey neave in the late 70s. there has been a long standing risk to public figures, and it's really, really important that we remain an open democratic society where our voters can come and talk to us. we mustn't all be hidden away here. >> so, sir jacob, here. >> so, sirjacob, your here. >> so, sir jacob, your show is next. what's on your menu, sir? >> well, i'm trying to say we're back to. don't gate because it's the gift that keeps on giving, at least. sir keir starmer, who gets more and more gifts than anybody. so we're now going to discuss lord alli himself. what is he trying to get out of this? because he's given to so many different people? we discover tonight wes streeting at a party in this flat that lord alli owns, but never seems to use because it's constantly hosting various labour party politicians. what's he trying to do? because, as i said last night, where there's a tip, there's a tap. >> and my favourite line today was the £80 million mansion has now been called ali's palace. ally pally. very good stuff , ally pally. very good stuff, peter. thank you very much to you as well. andrew rosindell,

thank you so much for your company. great show. i will be back tomorrow three till 6 pm. on my show. up next, of course, is jacob rees—mogg with state of the nation. thanks forjoining us. have a fantastic evening. now here's your weather with aidan mcgivern . aidan mcgivern. >> looks like things are heating up. boxt boilers sponsors of weather on gb news. >> hello again and welcome to the latest forecast from the met office for gb news very wet overnight for some places with the risk of further flooding. rain then clears to showers through friday. colder but brighter weather arrives from the north. we've already seen that for scotland through the day, but across northern england, northern ireland, wet weather has been persisting all day. that then moves south overnight, merging with some heavy downpours across central england and wales. and these are the areas that saw flooding earlier in the week. and so an amber warning in force because

of the risk of 60mm in just a few hours overnight, could be some transport disruption first thing because of the effects of that rainfall. but by the morning rush hour , the heaviest morning rush hour, the heaviest downpours will actually be occurring across the south coast, parts of hampshire into sussex and kent, clearing away gradually from the rest of the south. brighter skies across south. ten in the north. now saturd brighter skies across wales and northern england. by south. brighter skies across wales and northern england. by this stage. northern ireland, this stage. northern ireland, scotland seeing a mix of sunny scotland seeing a mix of sunny spells and showers, and it's a spells and showers, and it's a cold start to the day in these cold start to the day in these areas, with temperatures in some areas, with temperatures in some places down in the low single places down in the low single figures. the cold air, because figures. the cold air, because of northerly winds and those of northerly winds and those northerlies extend country wide northerlies extend country wide through the morning, helping to through the morning, helping to push away the last of the rain push away the last of the rain and bringing brighter skies for and bringing brighter skies for many and drier weather. finally many and drier weather. finally across much of the country. across much of the country. having said that, there will be having said that, there will be further showers, these not as further showers, these not as heavy or as prolonged as recent heavy or as prolonged as recent weather, but certainly a mixed weather, but certainly a mixed afternoon to come. sunny spells afternoon to come. sunny spells and showers and a cold wind with and showers and a cold wind with highs of just 15 celsius in the highs of just 15 celsius in the south. ten in the north. now south. ten in the north. now

saturday starts saturday starts off chilly. a touch of frost in places bright though , across the south and the though, across the south and the east, and we keep decent spells of sunshine into the afternoon. western and northern scotland. northern ireland, northwest england and wales will see further showers and by sunday after a dry start. unfortunately we've got more wet and windy weather arriving from the west and the southwest . and the southwest. >> a brighter outlook with boxt solar sponsors of weather on

gb news. >> hello. good evening, it's me, jacob rees—mogg on state of the nafion jacob rees—mogg on state of the nation tonight. it's the story that never ends . nation tonight. it's the story that never ends. dona nation tonight. it's the story that never ends . dona gate not that never ends. dona gate not only has more evidence of dodginess emerged, but it also turns out lord alli lent a labour mp £1.2 million for a house. tonight we'll be looking into the influence. the labour

peer seeks. >> six children are heading towards a future that is filled with life threatening extreme weather events, crop failures, famine , war, suffering. famine, war, suffering. >> you may remember this interview that i had with just stop oil protester phoebe plummer last year, but she is now facing jail time amid sentencing tomorrow. starmer needed a £20,000 loan of a penthouse for his son's gcses, but he's bashing private schools with 20% vat. eton is passing it all to on parents. other schools risk going out of business. i think he was fundamentally a racist, but his speech certainly gave succour to racists . part gave succour to racists. part two of the greatest politicians never to have become prime minister. i'll be discussing enoch powell on state of the nation's book club with vernon bogdanon nation's book club with vernon bogdanor. state of the nation starts now .

starts now. i'll also be joined by my panel. my i'll also be joined by my panel. my most intellectual panel. gb news senior political commentator,