t0 mauritius. when it comes to to mauritius. when it comes to sovereignty, i can tell you now sovereignty, i can tell you now so many people are up in arms. they say it risks the uk and much broader security. does it or not.7 also, the uk is now spending money to develop albanians prisons. so many people say we don't want foreign criminals in our prison system, but is that the answer then, that we have to develop the prison systems of other countries? your thoughts also, civil servants are threatening to go on strike if they have to return to work in the office. is

a hard life, isn't it? also? a row has broken out about university free speech. i've got to say, though, it's not just universities. if you ask me. conservative views these days seem to have been looked down on in very dim light, don't they ? in very dim light, don't they? all of that and more. but first, the 6:00 news. >> michelle, thank you very much. the top stories at least nine people have been killed in an israeli airstrike in central beirut, according to lebanese officials. the israeli military says it was a precision attack on the building, which they say housed a hezbollah affiliated health centre. now, this comes as israel has today warned more people to evacuate in southern lebanon . meanwhile, hezbollah lebanon. meanwhile, hezbollah says it's detonated a bomb against israeli forces infiltrating a southern lebanese village. israel is carrying out an offensive against the iranian

backed terror group hezbollah, which partly prompted iran to launch around 180 ballistic missiles at israel . meanwhile, missiles at israel. meanwhile, more than 150 british nationals have left lebanon on the first uk government chartered flights out of the country . yesterday, out of the country. yesterday, foreign secretary david lammy confirmed there will be additional chartered flights to help those who want to leave, as help those who want to leave, as he warned about the ongoing volatile situation . a man has volatile situation. a man has been charged has been arrested after a suspected acid attack which seriously injured a 14 year old girl outside of a school in west london. now this attack happened at around 4:40 pm. on monday at a school in alfred road, where a substance was allegedly thrown at two children and also a staff member. an investigation was launched and this morning a 35 year old man was arrested on suspicion of causing grievous bodily harm . in other news,

bodily harm. in other news, downing street says the prime minister has paid back more than £6,000 worth of gifts and hospitality received since becoming prime minister following a backlash over donations. it comes as the labour peer at the centre of a row over donations to sir keir starmer, has been placed under investigation by the house of lords standards watchdog. lord alli faces a probe over what is being called the alleged non—registration of interests. he's one of the party's biggest donors and the largest donor to the prime minister. and the uk has announced it's giving up sovereignty of the chagos islands after more than half a century. the deal, reached after years of negotiations, will see britain hand over the chagos islands to china ally mauritius. it includes the tropical atoll of diego garcia , which is home of diego garcia, which is home to a military base used by the uk and the us. under the agreement, the base will remain under uk and us jurisdiction for at least the next 99 years. but

conservative leadership candidates reacted angrily to this, with former foreign secretary james cleverly labelling the government as weak robert jenrick, saying there's been a surrender. and tom tugendhat, who says the move undermines the uk's security, does. >> is it means that although the air base, which is jointly uk us operated, is maintained for on a 99 year lease, the other outlying islands are going back to mauritian sovereignty. now there are many other countries which will be interested in a permanent base in the indian ocean, china being one of them. >> those are the latest gb news headunes >> those are the latest gb news headlines for now. 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 .

forward slash alerts. >> thank you very much for that. i am michelle dewberry and i'm keeping you company until 7:00 tonight alongside me. my panel, i've got matt goodwin, the pollster and academic, and shaun simon, the former labour minister. good evening to both of you. good evening. you're very welcome tonight , as are very welcome tonight, as are each and every single one of you at home as well. and you know the drill. you can get in touch with me all the usual ways. you can email me at gbviews@gbnews.com. you can tweet or text me, or you can go to the website gbnews.com slash yoursay. you can talk to me and to each other there. so wherever you are, as i said, you're very welcome tonight. and look, diego garcia, if i said those words to you, i don't know a few days ago would you have thought it was a footballer, a gangster? would you have known what on earth i was talking about? well, of course, i imagine that perhaps by the end of today, you certainly will. now know those words. before we get into this story, of course we're talking

about the sovereignty of the chagos islands. let me hand over to our political editor , to our political editor, christopher hope. christopher. oh, in fact, actually bear with me. he's just getting ready to come and sit down because i want to start this story with an explainer, because i think sometimes we in the news, we're a little bit guilty. something happens and within nanoseconds everyone becomes an expert and armchair experts on the subject. so let's start then, by rewinding christopher hope over to you. let's start, if you will, with an explainer . take us will, with an explainer. take us back, first of all, and then we can move on to what's happened today. >> hi, michel. yeah, welcome to westminster , to our studio. westminster, to our studio. that's right. with these chagos islands, there are thousands of miles from his country. but it's caused a right political battle. today you've got the labour, you've got the labour government. they have been. they have agreed to hand over sovereignty of these islands to mauritius, which has links to china . they have got a guarantee china. they have got a guarantee that on the diego garcia airbase, on the chagos islands,

which we can keep running with the us for another 100 years, that's what that's what they are looking, looking at. but there's big concerns about whether undermines us on the international stage, because the importance of the uk to america is because of our interests around the world as being as well as being close allies. so having that that interest in the indian ocean has been able to to, support us with dealing with the increase bellicose behaviour in the region from china and also there's a wider concern about about labour as a government here, led by leaders who take the knee on black lives matter. are they concerned or worried about elements or fragments of our imperial past and maybe even embarrassed about that, and want to try and give those areas up? so giving up land is a big deal for any government, and that's why it's so important. arguably one of the most important thing this government has done in the past three months, since it was formed. on the other side of it, the tories are tearing lumps out of each other because all these talks about the chagos islands were started by james cleverly,

the favourite now to be the next tory leader. when, when, when he was, when he was meant to be in, when he was a foreign secretary under liz truss. now he had started these plans talking then andifs started these plans talking then and it's come to pass that we are we are giving up these islands now. but he has said on twitter it's weak , weak, weak. twitter it's weak, weak, weak. but others like tom tugendhat, friends of his who wants to rival him to be the tory leader. he says in terms that this puts at risk the falkland islands and other uk territories. no others being gibraltar, which spain are coveting. the foreign office say that isn't the case, but it has caused a big row politically here in the here in the uk. >> chris barrett, thank you very much for that. matt goodwin, what do you think to this? >> well, it's the wrong decision. it shows the labour government doesn't really care about the territorial integrity of the united kingdom and our overseas territories. it's not a humanitarian issue. i think mauritius is using the humanitarian issues to try and turn it into that. actually,

looking at most of the expert legal opinions out there in the world today, including richard ehns world today, including richard ekins, who wrote probably the most comprehensive report on this issue for policy exchange. there is no legal precedent for what what is, what is. there's no sound legal basis for what is happening today. richard's argument, i think it's i'm convinced by it, is that there is no real reason to be enforcing this decision at this particular time. and even the people who years ago were displaced on these islands have already received compensation, have already received citizenship . and more citizenship. and more fundamentally, michel, i think this is a great day for china. it's a great day for china in terms of having a potentially a strategic position in the indian ocean. not a great day for the usa who will be very annoyed with us for doing this. they would like that military strategic base there and not great for our other overseas territories that are going to be looking at this and thinking, well, hang on a minute, what does this mean for us, including the falklands and other territories?

>> so it's a big no from you. i want to bring in some reaction because of course a lot of people, prominent people have responded to this. it's created quite a lot of fury. i can tell you now, sir nigel farage, for example, he's tweeted earlier on saying giving up the chagos islands is a strategic disaster. our american allies will be furious and beijing delighted labour are making the world a more dangerous place . sean simon more dangerous place. sean simon our labour making the world a more dangerous place . more dangerous place. >> no, not at all. what? what a lot of nonsense from all these people, honestly. i mean, not helped by the fact that we're right. slap bang in the eye of a tory leadership election. i mean, the truth is , as mean, the truth is, as christopher hope was bound to mention , this was a process mention, this was a process started two years ago by the by the then conservative government. and it's a process that's been conducted in partnership with the americans, who are perfectly happy about it. it's got it's got nothing to do with the american lease over diego garcia. the british

government has no control or say over what happens in diego garcia hasn't done for decades. and decades. the technical sovereignty of diego garcia is irrelevant. the americans have had their lease extended for another hundred years. they totally control that atoll and the strategic significance is completely unchanged. and all the rest of it is absolutely fabricated fluff and utter nonsense. >> mauritius is aligned with china , but mauritius is china, but mauritius is a houday china, but mauritius is a holiday resort like diego garcia is what matters . is what matters. >> it's by far the biggest atoll in the chagos islands. the american control, like diego garcia, is the most kind of secretive, ultra, ultra militarised strategic outpost pretty much in the world. but the americans don't go. they don't let anybody on it. like the idea, the idea that mauritius is going to start

causing the americans problems. i said, it's a preposterous, ridiculous idea. >> if you're let's say you're sitting in the falklands or another overseas territory, right now watching these developments, what do you think you're thinking? >> i'm thinking i mean, who knows what those people are are thinking, i you know, i could take a guess. >> i think they're probably thinking we no longer really care about preserving the territorial integrity of our overseas territories. >> no, they're not. because. because it's completely different. because the difference in the falklands and gibraltar for instance, and the chagos islands is that falklands and the gibraltar are full of people who have very clearly , people who have very clearly, repeatedly voted that they want to remain british and there is no chance that a labour government will mess with that at all. not the falklands, not gibraltar, not any, not anywhere like that. the chagos islands, which nobody in this country, as michel said at the beginning, had even heard of last week, are simply not simply not in that

category. are you saying that 90%, 97% of people in the chagos islands want to remain british? no, of course not. there's hardly any people there. >> what do you think? >> what do you think? >> the people who were there, we've already given them citizenship. >> exactly. >> exactly. >> so what's the problem for what it's worth, by the way, i think the way that the chagossians have been treated is absolutely appalling. they have not been consulted, by the way, in any of this stuff. but that's kind of almost a side issue. what do you think has driven labour to do this? >> i honestly think i think this has been well, i know we all know when we're actually looking at the facts, this is a long term administrative project of the british government over the past from the conservative to the labour party, which is based on geopolitical considerations to do with our relationships with african countries, our relationships with multilateral organisations like the un, the

need after brexit to have as many good relations with as many other countries in the rest of the world as we can. and for those reasons what the incoming labour government has done is simply tied the bow and signed off the process that the tories already started in order to get it done and dusted out the way and move on to the series. >> i don't actually think it is a it's a labour conservative issue.i a it's a labour conservative issue. i think it is just, you know, the idea that we should be ceding territory because after brexit we need to be getting on well with other countries is a bizarre notion to many brits. so we'll be looking at this and thinking, well, we've got a perfectly good strategic location in the indian ocean at a time when geopolitical tensions are rising , china is tensions are rising, china is getting more belligerent, more aggressive. it makes perfect sense for us to retain a strong link and base in that part of the world. we've already given people their compensation. we've already given people their citizenship . why on earth are we citizenship. why on earth are we doing this? it doesn't matter if james cleverly started it or if keir starmer started it. i just

think many brits will be scratching their head saying, what is the logic behind this? >> two separate points. they're taking your second point first. there is no strategic element to this. the chagos islands was previously the diego garcia atoll, which is the strategically relevant place, was previously totally controlled by the americans and will remain totally controlled by the americans. the british sovereignty of the chagos islands has no strategic relevance at all. as for what if, if it has? no. just let me just let me go back to your first point as well. and then you can come back on both. as for what most british people are thinking, i don't think that very many british people are this evening as they sit having their tea, saying to each other as they watch gb news oh, i do think it's terrible that they've given up the chagos islands. i think they're saying like, i've never heard of the chagos islands. i don't care about the chagos islands. it's really not important to me if this is what the if this is what the government thinks is the best

thing to do. this government and the previous government like, and the americans and the americans are happy. >> can i just ask a brief question, michel, before we move on, if this has no strategic significance whatsoever, which is your view, then why is it all afternoon? i've watched one former defence minister after another, one senior lawyer after another, one senior lawyer after another, one senior lawyer after another, one major think tank after another, come out and say, this is a strategic mistake on the part of the uk. what do you know that they don't seem to know? because whether i look at people like grant shapps policy exchange, richard ekins among others, among shapps is not an expert grant shapps as a tory trying to make a point. it's also former cabinet minister, but among others, i'm sorry. so that in itself is revealing. so it's simply because somebody in the conservative party, their view and opinion is not significant. >> no . simply because he's >> no. simply because he's a tory green party simply because he's a tory politician, even though he was part of the tory

government that started this process, he can't resist because he's an opportunistic tory bish basher of the most knee jerk kind. he can't resist slapping the labour government about it, even though it was his lot. >> there are major, you know, one of the one of you said, i've watched all these experts and they say, well, grant shapps know, i said, a long shapps is not an expert. a long list of people, including richard eakins, head of no. sorry. this is an important point. head of the judicial project at policy exchange, one of the most experienced legal minds in the country, has written a comprehensive report for policy exchange, has come out today. you can read it. it's on x on twitter. it's come out and said, not only is this the wrong decision, it's not. it has no sound legal basis and it's establishing a dangerous precedent for other parts of the world. now, who do i defer to you could you could choose to defer to lots of countervailing. >> david lammy, legal academic think tank . just exactly the think tank. just exactly the same, i know, but funnily enough , same, i know, but funnily enough, people with a different view on

the other side of the argument of which there are loads. >> but i mean it is basic common sense. so if you've got this very strategic and important navy base, military base and then all of a sudden you've now ceded sovereignty to mauritius, who were in in cahoots, if you like, with china, if china, then come along and say, for example, i don't know, we want the island next door , we want to build next door, we want to build capabilities there. we want to do this . and then you end up in do this. and then you end up in a situation where you've destabilised potentially. i don't want to say world peace, because then i sound like some whatever beauty pageant person. but there are huge ramifications potentially for this. and i think you're being very trusting when you just sit there and you go when you just sit there and you 9° ' when you just sit there and you go , mauritius is a holiday go, mauritius is a holiday island and china are not going to try and do anything. >> so let's look at it from the other perspective then what? why do you think that the british government has done this, and that the previous british government was also planning to do it as well? what do you think? do you think? i mean, do you

think they're do you think they're completely. and it's not just the politicians, it's the foreign office. it's the it's the british state has over a long period of time taking a considered view that it was in our interest to do this. why do you think it is? >> i don't think it's as quite as simple as that. by the way, for example, people like tom tugendhat, they would push back and say that actually, while they're critical today, they were critical of this a long time ago. david cameron, for example. i'm sure he halted negotiations on this situation as well. and one of the reasons, just to be clear, the statement the joint statement that keir starmer issued with the prime minister of mauritius, he says the treaty will the sovereignty treaty, obviously that they're going to be working on the treaty, will address the wrongs of the past and demonstrate commitments of both parties to support the welfare of chagossians? now, that's quite interesting to me that we're going to address the wrongs of the past. many people would call this kind of people desperate for britain to apologise for

their colonialism, if you like, of the past is that's what is that what's driving the decisions? the ideology, if you like. what do think to that? carry on the conversation into. but i

hi there. i'm michelle dewberry and i'm with you till 7:00. matt goodwin and shaun simon remain alongside me. well, look, we're talking about the chagos islands, and we're looking at why, for example, have the labour government done this? well, as i was just explaining the joint statement that was issued from keir starmer and the prime minister of mauritius says this treaty will address the wrongs of the past. now, i've got to say the chagos islands are often referred to as the last british colony in africa. and the way that we've behaved in the past does raise a lot of eyebrows among a lot of people. so is this whole kind of decision ideology over strategic thinking? >> well, i'm sure there are lots

of people in the labour movement who will see it that way. in the same way that they're now trying to impose political dogma into our schools through the teaching of things like white privilege, whiteness , decolonisation. i've whiteness, decolonisation. i've seen that in universities for example, where basically left leaning institutions are of this view that western nations are inherently imperialist and racist and oppressive. so there'll be many people today in there'll be many people today in the labour movement who will view this through the lens, through through that lens, the reality, of course, is actually it's not to do with that at all. the humanitarian issues have already been dealt with. we've given compensation to people affected in earlier years. we've given them citizenship. they haven't been consulted during these negotiations. mauritius is clearly using playing the humanitarian card to make this seem as though it's something it's not. and by the way , on the it's not. and by the way, on the humanitarian thing. yeah. great idea. so you're coming at this from the perspective of humanitarian issues while pushing these territories closer to china. yeah, that's a really

interesting strategic approach. i see what you're doing there, phoebe. >> one of my viewers says, michelle, i was in tears when the government handed hong kong over to the chinese. it was clear the population there didn't want it, but they did it. since she says, shame on our government for letting us down again. military experts are all saying it's a strategic location for us. she says she feels that this country is on a rapid decline. sammy says michelle, the chinese must literally be doing cartwheels tonight, ali says.i doing cartwheels tonight, ali says. i just can't understand why we have done this. why, why, why? i think that is the million dollar question. and julia says it's not just about the sovereignty. it's also millions of pounds as well. you're quite right in the point that you pick up there, because we are going to be giving money to support this endeavour as well. sean, where are you on this? this whole kind of concept of trying to right the wrongs of the past? >> well, you yourself earlier on, michelle, you said you were

like, really had always been really shocked and upset by the way that the chagossians i never sure to how pronounce that they were they were forced out. >> there was depending on which statistics you read, there was between 1 and 2000 people that were essentially displaced from those islands, many of them against their will, but then given compensation and citizenship. >> but that doesn't necessarily wholly right the wrongs of the past. >> so we just keep whipping ourselves and feeling shame and guilt forevermore. >> i don't feel any shame and guilt, and i also i also like, notwithstanding that you keep talking about this one guy who works for a think tank who's apparently produced devastating. >> what's the most comprehensive report on this issue? >> a devastating people can download a devastating legal opinion that can't be challenged, but actually, like the british government and state is full of like eminent international lawyers of every

level who've reached strong conclusions for a long time that actually international law, which is what also most of the multinational international institutions say, international law says that we should give these islands back. and when you mentioned hong kong, michelle, that's what it made me think. it was a conservative government that gave hong kong back. and the reason they did it was just that we got to the end of a lease and we were honouring an international treaty. >> hang on, hang on. >> hang on, hang on. >> international law, which international law? because this is the crux of the pushback that many people are experiencing today. so when you say it's international law that all of this should be, it is who it isn't international law. >> it was advisory. >> it was advisory. >> it was trying to ascertain what is it you're referring to? are you are you referring to the icj? their their conclusion ? icj? their their conclusion? >> you said earlier that you you think i'm being very trusting. yeah. and basically i am being very trusting. and i asked the question i'm trusting that the british government under this, this leadership and the previous

leadership don't have an obvious, really bad motive for doing this. and you say you're trying to say that it's all kind of woke lefty anti—colonialism, making the labour government doing it . making the labour government doing it. surely making the labour government doing it . surely that's not why doing it. surely that's not why the conservative government started the whole process under the prime ministership of liz truss. >> just because you're a conservative doesn't necessarily mean you believe in this nation. that's one of the things we've seen over the last 14 years. and if you're asking me to believe that the people in the fco, in the foreign and commonwealth office and other parts of the civil service believe in in our national community, why is it that, as they went on record afterwards, they consistently tried to do whatever they could to dilute and soften brexit? they never believed in our territorial integrity. they never believed in our national sovereignty. they didn't. they didn't believe that we can be a self—governing, independent nation. much of the state doesn't believe that . now there doesn't believe that. now there are people in this country. there are people in politics, a

few people who do believe we can be a self—governing, independent nafion be a self—governing, independent nation like ordinary people in this country. they're sick of looking at the british state and saying, you simply do not believe in our potential. what is it? what has this got to do with liz truss? >> because she was the prime minister who started this process. process. >> process. >> this is for me. this isn't about conservative and labour. this is about do you believe that we can be a self—governing, independent nation that can defend our territorial integrity for you , politics in this for you, politics in this country and government in this country and government in this country is about conservative and labour. >> but i do need to also be clear, because, yes, liz truss started this process and james cleverly and all the rest of it, but it was never concluded. an outcome was never reached. then what happened was jonathan powell, for example, he got appointed to oversee some of these negotiations about a month ago. it was very , very ago. it was very, very prominent. if you like, in keir starmer's thinking he wanted to create a deal before the elections in mauritius. it was all ramped up and it was all speeded up. so it all happened

very quickly and he wanted to just get it done. >> it had been dragging on for years and they just wanted to get it done and move on. >> i know, but when a negotiation is dragging on for years, it's obviously because the two parties can't agree. you don't solve a negotiation by just wandering in, opening the doom just wandering in, opening the door, bending over and giving the other side whatever it is that they want. that would be what i would push back on that look, there's lots that i want to talk about to you after the break. i want to talk to you about should we be investing in prisons in albania in order to deport foreign criminals there? i want to talk to you about civil servants now looking to strike, because they have to go back to office, potentially. all of that and lots more. see you in two.

hello there. michelle dewberry with you till 7:00 tonight. mike goodwin and sean simon remain alongside me now from one foreign country to another, because albania is a country we talk about often here, don't we?

it's all about prisons. this time the uk is spending millions of pounds, apparently to try and bolster, if you would like the albanian prison system. this is all about trying to apparently get the most dangerous albanian prisons from the uk into the albanian system. matt goodwin yes, i don't actually call it a broken britain anymore. >> i'm now calling it bonkers britain because this is absolutely bonkers. we have nearly 1300 hardened, dangerous albanian criminals in our prisons. in fact, we've got nearly 11,000 foreign nationals in our prisons who we could deport and make room for, for criminals and keep them in rather than release them early. but that's another story. anyway, we've got nearly 1300 albanians in our prisons costing us a fortune. everybody said, by the way, when the albanians were going to come in, that this was going to come in, that this was going to come in, that this was going to be bad news in terms of organised criminality, drug dealing, prostitution , etc. dealing, prostitution, etc. a couple of years ago, edi rama, the albanian pm, comes over and he says, how dare you suggest

that albanians are disproportionately associated with criminality ? well, now we with criminality? well, now we know that the single largest nationality group in our uk prisons and now we're paying £4 million to improve and refurbish prisons in albania. right. look at our prisons. forget about those. we're going to spend £4 million doing up prisons in albania. so we can send 200 of the most dangerous albanians out of the uk, who shouldn't even be in the uk to begin with. it's absolutely bonkers. britain, a great example of bonkers britain. we should be removing all foreign national criminals from the country. all 11,000 of them, which, by the way, costs them, which, by the way, costs the british taxpayer £550 million a year. how many winter fuel payments for pensioners would that pay for? >> there you go. you can calculate that at home. tell me the answer, sean. simon, what do you make to it? >> it's a it's a classic example of how this goes, which is you you take a nuanced answer to a

complex problem and you say , complex problem and you say, bonkers, bonkers. this is bonkers. britain. the bottom line is the bottom line is this government took over three months ago whenever it was, and found itself in an extraordinary situation, that the prisons are full, completely full. you can't have a country where the prisons are full. they've had to do several things that you wouldn't want to do if you didn't have prisons, if you hadn't inherited prisons, if you hadn't inherited prisons that are completely full. one of the things that right wingers always say , and i right wingers always say, and i know that you don't like the term far right, but surely we can use the term right wingers like we do have left and right, surely. >> and i don't think, how is this a right wing issue? it's about keeping the british people safe. it it's a right. >> it's a right wing issue. when you say bonkers britain, albanians are devils. >> i don't think i ever said albanians are devils. i said they're disproportionately more likely to commit crime. >> like like devils . what? what >> like like devils. what? what are devils? not disproportionately more likely to commit a crime.

>> i don't i don't mean to be rude, but i think you're being a bit daft now. i think this has been a bit silly. >> well, i think i think it was a silly. i think it was a silly start. bonkers britain. bonkers britain. it's not bonkers. it is bonkers. it's a way of getting like we're constantly told, and i've heard you say and you've just said it now again, like, why have we got all these foreign criminals in our jails? foreign criminals in ourjails? fair enough. so here's a way that you actually can. and yes, i'm going to give you some money in it. no no, no, no way that you actually can get dangerous foreign criminals out of our prisons. send them back where they came from and free up some rules. do you want to do you want to know? >> do you want to know how we can get how we can get nearly 11,000 foreign national criminals out of our prisons and save the taxpayer £500 million a year? we can leave the echr for a start. we can start putting the safety and security of the british people ahead of international and european courts. and we can start saying that if we don't have enough space in our prisons, we're not going to spend £4 million of taxpayers money doing up prisons

in albania. we're actually going to deport the 11,000 foreign national criminals in uk prisons and create space for criminals here in the uk and keep them in prison. >> but you can't you can't just deport people just because they are originally albanian. as you say, because of international law, because of british law . and law, because of british law. and you say we could leave the echr, but we haven't left it, whereas this thing is going to happen straight away. >> we're doing this. it's a symptom of how our legal infrastructure, our legal system, is not set up to put the british people ahead of international courts and conventions. now, the conservative leadership campaign, which is underway at the moment, i'm not saying i support any of the candidates. right. but as an example, one of the lines in that campaign is about should we or should we not leave the echr the deeper issue underneath this question about are we? why are we giving £4 million to albania is why can't we deport foreign national criminals who pose a serious danger to british people? why can't we simply remove them from

the country, send them back to a safe country like albania without going through this torturous process of having to spend £4 million doing up prisons in albania, the answer is we need to exit the echr. we need to reform the human rights act, which tony blair brought in so we can fully control our own national community. this isn't rocket science. i don't think the conservatives will fix it. by the conservatives will fix it. by the way. i don't think the labour party will fix it. i do think there is a party that is advocating withdrawal from the echr. that's the reform party. we know that that is one route into which we can get out of bonkers britain, and i call it bonkers britain, and i call it bonkers britain, and i call it bonkers britain , because it is bonkers britain, because it is bonkers to most taxpayers that we are paying this amount of money to get criminals out of our country. >> so the bit that's missing is the notion there's nothing missing. well, i'm about to tell you what's missing. the bit that's missing is the notion that's missing is the notion that britain gets anything from being a part of a whole global

legal community. you have to have law between nations. >> nobody is saying we don't have laws . no, no, we can just have laws. no, no, we can just have laws. no, no, we can just have a british bill of rights, or we can have an alternate legal regime which keeps the british people safe. why are the small boats still coming? >> you didn't. you either didn't hear or didn't listen to what i said, i am listening. >> you have to have the same old argument. >> you have to have law between nations. you have to have international law. >> so why so okay, so why is australia, new zealand, canada? why aren't they adhering to the echr . echr. >> they, they crickets. >> they, they crickets. >> that's what's happening . >> that's what's happening. crickets. the way through this to stop us in this, to be in this absurd situation is to put the safety and security of the british people ahead of international conventions and courts. they're sick of it. £550 million a year, £4 billion on the small boats crisis. it's outrageous . we need to put

outrageous. we need to put british pensioners before international courts and conventions that are stopping us from controlling our own country. it's pretty simple. it's just do you want to go there as a political party, labour don't want to go there. conservatives don't want to go there. >> what? so i know why you think labour doesn't want to go there? why do you think the conservatives don't go there? >> why do you think ? because >> why do you think? because they're no longer a proper conservative party. >> well, why do you think even in the midst of a conservative leadership contest, when they are desperately trying to outdo each other every day to be as right wing as they can, why do you think even conservative leadership candidates are saying? even people like kemi badenoch, who's on the right of the conservative party running for leadership, saying things like , i'm not going to give you like, i'm not going to give you silly easy answers like, let's just leave the echr and pretend that'll solve the problems, because i know that it won't. why do you think that is? >> because there are tories. >> because there are tories. >> there you go. >> there you go. >> is that as simple as that? is this an oversimplified simplification of a very complex

issue? you will have very strong opinions on this at home. i'll bnng opinions on this at home. i'll bring you into the conversation after the break. i also want to talk to you. what goes on in institutions, universities, schools, whatever. when it comes to conservative values, are they welcomed or see you

hello, i'm michelle dewberry and i'm with you till 7:00 tonight. matt goodwin, the pollster and academic and sean simon, the former labour minister, is alongside. speaking of being a labour minister, i want to talk about free speech in a minute, everyone. don't worry, this six grand. i wasn't going to talk about it tonight. actually, because i spoke about it last night, keir starmer. but i can't resist. what do you make of him repaying £6,000 worth of his freebies? >> i like i don't think it was a very clever move, to be honest. >> what the repaying. >> what the repaying. >> i just feel like i don't really understand what he's. what he's trying to prove.

>> i think it's very strange. >> i think it's very strange. >> the whole thing is bonkers. britain, i've got to say. absolutely. you're not allowed to say that. >> he'll. >> he'll. >> he'll. >> he'll tell you off. but you see, the thing is, even though when starmer says, i'm playing within the rules, do you know what he's not playing within the british sense of fair play. they look at this and they think this is insane. and also, he knew he was going to be pm. like you knew in the polls. you knew you were going to be prime minister. you knew everybody was going to be watching you, and you still decided to take 40 grand's worth of clothing. it's insane. >> it'sjust of clothing. it's insane. >> it's just it is literally insane. and i don't think anyone, quite frankly, understands what on earth is going through his head when it comes to this stuff. and if you do, please enlighten me. look , do, please enlighten me. look, let's bannau well, i've got to say, i was going to say brian, but there's a lot of you actually in support of leaving the echr. i've got to ask you, though, if you do get in touch with me saying leave the echr. what do you think, if any unintended consequences might be as a result of that decision? that's a test for you. look , that's a test for you. look, universities, now we talk about free speech often don't we. but

now durham university actually a row was erupted there. its oldest student society has been excluded from taking part in a freshers fair this year. this follows a string of allegations, racism allegations and so on and so forth. i've got to say that a free speech union, just one example, they're saying that this is wrong. this is all about censorship. trying to exclude this group is censorship. of course it is. this is just a small example of a bigger problem. >> matt goodwin yeah, so i've actually spoken at the durham union. the kids there, the students, the organisers, they're really great people. they're really, really welcoming . they're really, really welcoming. i'm also closely aligned with the free speech union, one of the free speech union, one of the most important organisations in this country that protects people's free speech and their right to free expression. what we're seeing in the universities, what we're seeing on campus. i've been in universities for 20 years, right. i helped bring forward the higher education free speech act, which labour is now doing everything it can to bin. what we have is a free speech crisis on campus. the evidence is overwhelming. it's not just the cases of kathleen stock getting

chased out of sussex university by pro—trans activists. it's not just nigel biggar , the just nigel biggar, the philosopher and historian that got almost cancelled because he held different views on britain's empire. it's not just noah carl at cambridge who got chased out of the university for, you know, researching unfashionable areas. what we have is a systemic crisis in the universities where if you are conservative or you are gender critical or you say , actually, critical or you say, actually, on balance, i think britain's history is not just full of slavery and imperialism. we did some good things . basically, some good things. basically, what happens is you're intimidated, you're bullied, you're harassed, you're sacked, you're harassed, you're sacked, you're thrown out of these institutions . we need the free institutions. we need the free speech act. i'm going to say to you, i really want your views on this. we need the free speech act that passed parliament and got royal assent. and now bridget phillipson, the labour education secretary, is saying she's going to basically not not see it through and she's going to turn it, turn it around or try and repeal it. labour doesn't believe in free speech. that's the message that bridget

phillipson is sending. it's the same message, by the way, keir starmer sent after the protests in the summer. he's more interested in cracking down on free speech, cracking down on free speech, cracking down on free expression than allowing people to express their views. >> i was almost i was almost with you till then on quite a lot of what you said. but that's just that's just silly. >> i don't think little old ladies should be sent to prison for what they write on facebook. >> people setting fire to asylum. >> that's a separate issue. that's a separate issue. >> no, that's not that's what that's what happened in the summer. and that's what he was just about just about the universities we'll come back to. >> what about the universities? >> what about the universities? >> so i'm very conscious that like you have spent like decades in universities, which i certainly haven't. and you know, i've hardly i've you know, i've beenin i've hardly i've you know, i've been in and out of universities a bit, but i've never worked in a bit, but i've never worked in a university. you know, i went to university and i've done bits and bobs over the years, but so i definitely i don't have your experience of it. and , and i do experience of it. and, and i do recognise that there, you know, just from reading in the news, there has been what has seemed

from the outside like quite a growing culture of intolerance in universities and speaking for myself , i, in universities and speaking for myself, i, you in universities and speaking for myself , i, you know, in universities and speaking for myself, i, you know, like i'm not intolerant , you know, like not intolerant, you know, like i'm, i'm a, i'm a labour guy and i'm, i'm a, i'm a labour guy and i'm on the left, but i'm here on gb news regularly. we don't share views, but i want to hear what you think and i want to i want to debate it. and that's clearly what university should should be about. i don't want to see intolerance in universities. i my the two bits that i'm not sure about are for one, like i don't know if nevertheless there like there must come a point where you have to draw a line like i'm not sure that everybody should be allowed to say anything, whatever they, whatever they like, like there should be limits. and the other thing that i'm not sure about, given that we do have, like there is legislation to protect free speech and there is legislation against kind of hate

speech, like do we need separate legislation for universities? well , if i legislation for universities? well, if i just just on that point, because i, we do have legislation that in theory protects free speech. >> the problem is for about 20 years, it clearly wasn't sufficient because what was happening? i've just finished finishing a book on this actually at the moment what's happened basically, is the universities have moved sharply to the left over the last 50 years. so in the 1960s, for every one conservative academic like me in the 1960s there were three left wing academics. today, for every one of me, there are ten left wing academics. so the universities overall have moved left. the administration has become much bigger and we've seen things like diversity, equity, inclusion come in. so the bureaucracy is now incentivised to push what i would argue is a more political agenda that can stifle free speech. and as you go through all of that, we've then seen these high profile

sackings, cancellations, mobbings , academics acting like mobbings, academics acting like children, trying to throw each other off campus because they don't like their views or they don't like their views or they don't like their views or they don't like brexit, or they don't like, you know, gender critical opinions or whatever. and so what a group of academics, including myself, what we did underground basically is we designed and delivered the free speech. the higher education free speech act, which said to universities where you're not performing yourselves. so what we're going to do is we're going to have this law on top of that existing legislation. if you sack matt goodwin because he happens to hold conservative views or he's pro—brexit or whatever . matt goodwin can go to whatever. matt goodwin can go to an independent organisation, can go to an independent regulator and can fine that university for violating his free speech and free expression. now, the idea is that hopefully nobody actually gets fined. the idea is simply by having that you bring about this cultural change. i mean, durham university, great university, oldest university for free speech, one of the oldest apart from oxford. and you know, here are here are students trying to organise

these debates . i've taken part these debates. i've taken part in those debates. i've gone up to durham and now they're being censored and attempted to be shut down because of some views that someone's considered unacceptable. i think it's outrageous. >> but the thing , the thing that >> but the thing, the thing that bridget phillipson said when she said that they weren't going to immediately implement what i now learn is your law was passed as law, by the way, went through parliament. >> yeah, yeah, but no. but received royal assent . yeah, but received royal assent. yeah, but bridget phillipson clearly doesn't care about that but. >> well you know that's that's fine. but it hadn't come into force and it's perfectly within the purview of the new government to decide when to bnng government to decide when to bring it into force. she's a secretary of state like she's perfectly entitled to do that. but she didn't say, like, you know, this is definitely going to stop. stop this. i don't agree don't agree with it at all, she said. i'm going to stop it and think about it, because obviously they had concerns. but one of the concerns that she raised that i can that i can see, i could see what she meant is that the system that you

described sounds like a recipe for just a whole load of the same kind of thing you're trying to solve a whole load of chaos, constant, you know, complaints counter complaints, lawsuits, fines . fines. >> well, i don't know. the proof will be in the pudding, won't it? and i would argue as well that some of this stuff isn't just happening at universities. by just happening at universities. by the way, i've been busy myself looking for primary schools recently for my little one. i can't believe some of the stuff that goes on in primary schools . everybody. it's been schools. everybody. it's been eye opening and concerning to me. but look, that is a conversation for another day. matt . sean, conversation for another day. matt. sean, thank you very much for your company. thank you to each and every one of you at home as well. you're very much appreciated. do not go anywhere. i will be back tomorrow, but for now it's nana nigel farage up next. >> we'll see a cold snap which will quickly develop into a warm front. boxt boiler repairs sponsors of weather on gb news.

>> hello. good afternoon and welcome to your gb news weather update brought to you by the met office. well, to end the week we can expect a chilly start with some fog in places, but there will still be plenty of fine and dry weather away from the north—west to end today , though, north—west to end today, though, we still have high pressure dominating the weather across the country, bringing plenty of fine and settled to weather end the day today. a bit of a change from the north—west though, as we start to see this frontal system just clip parts of the north—west. so turning cloudier here into the evening with some outbreaks of rain by the time we reach the morning. elsewhere though, plenty of clear skies, so it is going to be feeling cold. colder than last night, in fact, and we can expect to see some mist and fog by the time we reach the morning too. and this might just be a little bit stubborn to clear, particularly across parts of yorkshire. by the time we reach tomorrow morning. so , as i say, western morning. so, as i say, western parts of scotland, plenty of cloud here and quite a damp start to end the working week with some outbreaks of rain just pushing into the west and a few dnps pushing into the west and a few drips and drabs of rain in the

north too. similar across northern ireland. a fairly cloudy start with some drips and drabs of rain just moving into the west, but elsewhere it should be fairly bright with those pockets of mist and fog. but that generally clearing through the morning and we still do have high pressure, generally dominating the weather across a lot of the country. so still plenty of dry weather, plenty of sunny spells too. but that cloud will continue to spill into the northwest. still, with those outbreaks of rain and turning quite blustery under those cloudier skies too . elsewhere, cloudier skies too. elsewhere, though, we do have lighter winds, and where you do catch the sunshine, it will generally be feeling rather pleasant . be feeling rather pleasant. highs of 1617 across the south and southeast into the rest of the evening. then that cloud will continue to move into the northwest, those outbreaks of rain continuing and still rather blustery. but elsewhere, we'll see another night of those clear skies. so potentially further frost and some fog patches in places could be turning a little bit more unsettled by the weekend, so stay tuned for all the details. bye for now .

the details. bye for now. >> a nice bright morning will generate a lovely warm day right through to the evening. solar sponsors of weather on

gb news. >> a very, very good evening to you. it's thursday the 3rd of october. i'm martin daubney covering for nigel farage, the big man on tonight's farage. well, the prime minister has clearly tried to draw attention away from the labour donations row by handing over the sovereignty of the chagos islands over to mauritius. have labourjust islands over to mauritius. have labour just opened the door to the chinese dragon? and next up, gb news. can exclusively reveal that a video previously posted by dawn butler to mark black history month contained pictures of convicted black terrorists. a cop killer and even a rapist. charlie peters will be with us soon to give us the scoop of the

day and a