middlehurst. >> jacob, thank you and good evening to you, will. the top story from the newsroom tonight. we've heard, in in the we've heard, in fact, in the last that nicola sturgeon's last hour that nicola sturgeon's husband, peter murrell, been husband, peter murrell, has been charged in connection with embezzlement of funds from the scottish national party following an investigation into the party's finances. the former snp chief executive was rearrested at about 9:00 this morning, with police scotland saying he was taken into custody. we now understand he's been released from police custody after being questioned by detectives. he'd previously been arrested and released without charge last april. in other news, today the uk and the united states have announced new sets of sanctions on a number of iranian individuals in response to the country's drone and missile attack on israel . at the missile attack on israel. at the weekend. lord cameron meeting with g7 leaders in italy today and saying the action demonstrates the uk's unequivocal condemnation of

iran's attack on a sovereign state. he said not only was iran's reckless attack a total failure, but they revealed to the world their true nature as a malign influence in the region. britain is also freezing the assets of some iranian organisations, including the country's navy and chief of the army. it adds to the more than 400 sanctions already in place . 400 sanctions already in place. >> iran's behaviour is unacceptable and it's right that countries come together here at the g7 and make those points, not just because of what iran has been doing, but also as a message to israel that we want to play our part in having a coordinated strategy that deals with iran's aggression that we saw so clearly against israel over the weekend . over the weekend. >> foreign secretary lord cameron there. now, labour is calling for police to investigate allegations that a conservative mp misused thousands of pounds of tory party campaign funds. the times

reports that mark menzies used political donations to cover medical expenses and pay off what he called bad people , who what he called bad people, who he said locked him in a flat and demanded thousands of pounds for his release. he denies any wrongdoing, but has agreed to give up the conservative whip for now , he'll sit as an for now, he'll sit as an independent mp while the allegations are investigated. >> i'll be honest, there's a degree of frustration as well. we're two weeks away from really important local and mayoral elections when , you know, elections when, you know, there's a lot of positive arguments that we want to make about the change we can bring about the change we can bring aboutin about the change we can bring about in these elections. and yet again, we're talking about misbehaviour by tory mps. and if ever you needed evidence of why we need to turn the page on this shower and, and have a fresh start with labour, i think it's in these allegations coming out today. >> sir keir starmer commenting there on mark menzies losing the whip . now just lastly, the

whip. now just lastly, the prince of wales has returned to pubuc prince of wales has returned to public duties today for the first time since his wife's announcement that she's been treated for cancer. william's been meeting volunteers at a food distribution charity in surrey as well as lending a hand in the kitchen. he was also presented with get well soon cards for his wife, the prince's last official engagement was a month ago . that's the news. for month ago. that's the news. for the latest stories, sign up to gb news alerts. scan that qr code on your screen right now or go to gb news .com/ alerts . go to gb news .com/ alerts. >> the international monetary fund has estimated that russia will outgrow all advanced economies in 2024. this is in spite of all the sanctions the west has imposed on russia. in spite of its removal of the swift banking system, in spite of the fact that germany has almost entirely weaned itself off russian gas, and in spite of the 50,000 soldiers who have

died endless resources it died in the endless resources it has poured into ukraine war. so what are we missing here? why is russia going to grow more than the rest of us? well, about a month ago, when discussing the proposed grid decarbonisation , i proposed grid decarbonisation, i went through the following energy costs kilowatt hour energy costs per kilowatt hour by country in the united kingdom $0.44. the united states $0.17 china and india $0.08 per kilowatt hour each. but i didn't mention russia, russia's cost of energy per kilowatt hour is even lower than india and china at just $0.06. and why is this? well, it's simple russia is willing to make use of its own energy resources to provide abundant supply to its citizens, increased supply means lower prices, and cheap energy is inextricably linked to economic growth. take the comparison of gdp per capita growth between the uk and the us. gdp per capita growth between the uk and the us . both are the uk and the us. both are mature economies with high standards of living. but since 2008, the united states has grown at twice the rate of the united kingdom. the big difference is that america has

much lower energy prices, while the uk insists on masochistic green policies . the uk insists on masochistic green policies. but it's no surprise that the green fanatics in the scottish government, where they know how to be fanatics, have had to backtrack on their flagship greenhouse gas reduction target. the snp has committed to reducing scotland's c02 committed to reducing scotland's co2 emissions by 75% by 2030. yet scotland has missed eight of its past 12 carbon emission targets. now, the climate change committee has reviewed its policy and advised that the absurd reduction target is out of reach. so this afternoon, the snp's energy secretary announced the scottish government would scrap its annual and interim targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions in this challenging context of cuts uk backtracking, we accept the ccs recent re—articulation that this parliament's interim 2030 target is out of reach. >> we must now act to chart a course to 2045 at a pace and a

scale that is feasible , fair and just. >> however, instead of taking this dire assessment from the climate change committee as grounds for reassessing its costly and hasty plans, they've doubled with more doubled down with more commitments, such as a route map to a 20% reduction, but also to a 20% car reduction, but also blamed on his blamed their shortcomings on his majesty's government. it is time to recognise the truth that net zero by 2050 is unrealistic and unaffordable. it's time we rid ourselves of this foolish and costly idea that will simply make people cold and poor. we need to prioritise cheap energy for britain's consumers and for companies, for industry. enabung companies, for industry. enabling economic growth that will benefit us all. as ever. let me know your thoughts mailmogg@gbnews.com. but i'm now joined by seppo golzari munro, energy expert and former director of the energy and climate intelligence unit. well, thank you very much for joining me this evening. this is very embarrassing for the scottish government, isn't it, where the snp are propped up by the greens

? >> 7- >> yes. i 7_ >> yes. i mean, ?_ >> yes. i mean, i ? >> yes. i mean, i think it's very disappointing all round. and i think it's really important to mention that the targets that the scottish government set was way beyond what the committee on climate change, who are the independent advisers to both the uk government and all the devolved administrations and had thought was, both ambitious but also realistic and achievable , and so realistic and achievable, and so i think that's really important to bear in mind, is that they've gone beyond what the independent experts and analysts who look at this kind of thing, very often , this kind of thing, very often, day in and day out, had recommended . so i think that's recommended. so i think that's the key point initially. but then to go on from there to have set the target, they didn't necessarily actually work towards making the detailed plans that would, you know, implement that target . so implement that target. so i think i'm glad you say that.

there because that seems to me to be the key there. >> it's very easy for governments devolved or whichever, to set targets , but whichever, to set targets, but as soon as they have to make difficult choices that affect voters pocketbooks, they run away from them. so, the central government decided not to have a boiler tax and to delay the increased charge on gas boilers to get more heat pumps, put in, car transfer has been pushed back as soon as there's likely to be a cost. governments look to be a cost. governments look to their electors and don't want to their electors and don't want to do it. and i wonder whether this is a reality that needs to be taken more seriously. and therefore 2050 becomes too ambitious . ambitious. >> well, i think actually, if you look at the all of the expert advice that's been given to governments since 2008 from the independent committee on climate change , they've set a climate change, they've set a very, realistic pathway and the least cost pathway to reach the target and the reason targets

are important is because they do give that long term signal to businesses about where we're going. and i think it's important to mention at this point that, you know, the uk government met the last government has met the last three, legally binding targets, the carbon budget , and three, legally binding targets, the carbon budget, and has in fact exceeded those. so they actually do work very well. but i've been saying setting a target alone, it's like signing up for a marathon , running a5k up for a marathon, running a5k and saying, well, that's job done. and saying, well, that's job done . you know, setting a target done. you know, setting a target is necessary, but it's just not sufficient on its own. and it needs a lot of detailed plans and policies. otherwise it becomes a self—fulfilling prophecy, really, that you can set a target. but if you're not going to act well, of course you're going to. you're going to miss it. but we've met our targets essentially by sleight of haven't of hand, haven't we? >> saying that emissions in >> by saying that emissions in other goods that >> by saying that emissions in 0th buy, goods that >> by saying that emissions in 0th buy, that goods that >> by saying that emissions in 0th buy, that are goods that >> by saying that emissions in 0th buy, that are imported hat >> by saying that emissions in 0th buy, that are imported don't we buy, that are imported don't count as emissions, and that's helped us to bring emissions helped us to bring our emissions down but ruined industry .

down by 43, but ruined industry. it's not actually that clever to meet targets by sleight of hand, i think. >> i don't know where you get the point around ruining industry, because really a lot of changes that were made to of the changes that were made to british industry were were done many for the many years before for the climate change act was even passed in 2008. >> i suggest you go to scunthorpe or to port talbot, where the steel industry is being destroyed by these crazy green policies. >> well , i green policies. >> well, i think this is what's so interesting, jacob, is that if you look, if we were in a, you know, hermetically sealed environment in the uk, just doing our own thing , some of doing our own thing, some of these arguments might wash, but these arguments might wash, but the reality is, is that the global economy really is changing very fast . and, you changing very fast. and, you know, we we're finding it, you know, we we're finding it, you know, we we're finding it, you know, we can't just do one thing and say one thing and be left behind, you know, 40. i think, you know, it's important to remember that you know, global global investment in clean energy rose by 40, last year

alone. so this is where it's going. the us has set its inflation reduction act. they're they've building up their supply chains. they're manufacturing the jobs i think it really is. we can't pretend that we're where we are. >> and the economists that aren't doing any of this are growing much faster. but thank you very much, thank you you very much, sir. thank you for with me now is forjoining me. with me now is donna a great friend donna mccarthy, a great friend of and director of the program and director of the coalition, the climate media coalition, the uk's total climate emissions make no difference to the world. scotland's make no difference to anything. so does this matter at all, britain is 1% of the world's emissions. >> we're at 0.8% of the world's population. so proportionately we have to act. however if i said to you before, britain is the centre of the world's second largest centre of climate , largest centre of climate, fossil fuel finance, and we're the major centre of the fossil fuel insurance industry. so britain has a responsibility way beyond earthsight. we're talking about something like 15 to 20% of the global fossil fuel economy through the city of

economy goes through the city of london. we have responsibility. >> if look russia , >> but if you look at russia, which is a country we want to see badly, it's managed to see doing badly, it's managed to get its economy to recover because it's got incredibly cheap energy prices, partly because nobody else will buy their energy at the moment. but that helps consumers and it helps industry. and helps russian industry. and regrettably, aid to russian regrettably, that aid to russian industry used to make industry is being used to make munitions to fight against the ukrainians. >> i find your use of russia rather extraordinary to two out of the last four years they were in recession, two of the last four years they were in session. >> currently, their interest rates their inflation rates are 16, their inflation rates are 16, their inflation rates 8, and their average income is £7,000 a year. comparing our economy, which is a lord which has lowered our carbon emissions over since 1990 by 50% with 60 to 70% growth, but much slower growth than the us, which is lower, which, if you don't like the comparison with russia and compared to the us since 2008, the uk economy

has grown at half the rate of the us economy. >> that's really serious. and it's actually it's true across the continent of europe, european economies used to be about the same size as the us. now the us has steamed ahead and the us, currently their growth rate is very similar to russia's. >> not much difference between the two, but it's cheap energy. >> cheap energy is the key. >> cheap energy is the key. >> not much, not much too much. they have decided to invest massive amounts over the last three four years in the transition to a low carbon economy. and i think what we have to remember, i the difference between two is, difference between the two is, is i think you are, you support vulture capitalism. you, in my view, support taking the assets. now i'm i'm actually a free i'm a market capitalist, i believe, looking after the assets. so though i don't destroy the assets for future economy and by use by by destroying the planet now through excessive use of fossil fuels. >> you see, i don't think we're

destroying the planet. i think our doesn't make any our 1% doesn't make any difference. that you're difference. and that you're putting the cart before the horse, that are horse, that there are investments that may be extremely successful, that jcb , extremely successful, that jcb, for example, is making a hydrogen engine and if you can make the hydrogen engine economic, make the production of hydrogen economic, then the green agenda works on its own terms and is cheaper potentially than fossil fuels. but i think that should only happen if that is a genuine market solution. i don't think it should be forced to make this country worse off than other competitor nations. >> well, the difference between us, i believe that actually having an that respects having an economy that respects the the climate the asset, i.e. the climate without a climate you have no economy and actually has a growth rate of 70. so this is 1990. this is i think that's a deal that's worth doing. you don't and i don't understand . don't and i don't understand. >> but this is why i think it's important that should quibble >> but this is why i think it's impoyou, that should quibble >> but this is why i think it's impoyou, because tould quibble >> but this is why i think it's impoyou, because you'rejuibble >> but this is why i think it's impoyou, because you're usually with you, because you're usually quite . but you get quite measured. but you get tempted by this language of

destroy the climate . things will destroy the climate. things will change, and there may be ameliorations that we will need to make. there may be things that we need to do that help third world countries that may need dykes bill to help them flood against flooding . there flood against flooding. there may be things that we need to do, but climate alarm ism seems to me to be making us make non—economic decisions that are making us poor. >> well, the real problem with that is, is having a scientific background. i look at what the consequences of our of changing what you call a small change in temperature, the difference between ice and water is one degree. and what we're talking about doing to the planet is four degrees. that's where we're heading at the moment. and i think impacts of that on think the impacts of that on climate and on agriculture, it's agriculture a real worry for agriculture is a real worry for me because i look at those farmers in the south of farmers in in the south of england, i've had 200% rainfall farmers in in the south of eng|they i've had 200% rainfall farmers in in the south of eng|they have1ad 200% rainfall farmers in in the south of eng|they have had200% rainfall farmers in in the south of eng|they have had fields'ainfall farmers in in the south of eng|they have had fields under and they have had fields under water for six months. and that is terrifying. >> of heavy rain that >> but years of heavy rain that have wiped out crops have

have wiped out the crops have happened throughout our history. this not novel. this this is not novel. this will happen and things like happen again. and things like forest fires are at a lower level than before. there are level than before. so there are various indicators about where things are going. there's not just this uniform picture and that you may get less good crop growing conditions in one country, you'll get better ones in another. >> but if when you break the climate and you break the stability of the climate . stability of the climate. >> but this is this is where it becomes climate alarmism. when you about breaking , it you talk about breaking, it always you talk about breaking, it alw it s you talk about breaking, it alw it evolves. let fine tune >> it evolves. let me fine tune it . it. >> what do you say about the medieval period mini ice medieval warm period mini ice age , all these things? medieval warm period mini ice age let ll these things? medieval warm period mini ice age let me1ese things? medieval warm period mini ice age let me fine things? medieval warm period mini ice age let me fine tune s? when you >> let me fine tune it. when you break the ability of the climate thatis break the ability of the climate that is alarmism, stable . that is not alarmism, stable. that's what we're doing. we're actually bringing the stability our our agriculture has been based stable historically based on a stable historically it hasn't been that stable. >> the mini ice age, which we survived in terms of the medieval warm period . medieval warm period. >> you know, those are those are minor issues from a scientific point of view of a stable

climate from 2 or 3000 years that our agriculture has flourished. if you break that stability , we're in trouble. stability, we're in trouble. >> this occasion, i'm >> on this occasion, i'm allowing last word, allowing you the last word, because time i took allowing you the last word, bec last time i took allowing you the last word, bec last word time i took allowing you the last word, bec last word for time i took allowing you the last word, bec last word for myself.�* i took allowing you the last word, bec last word for myself. so ook the last word for myself. so thank coming up, the last word for myself. so than polling coming up, the last word for myself. so than polling has coming up, the last word for myself. so than polling has showniing up, the last word for myself. so than polling has shown the up, the last word for myself. so than polling has shown the tories new polling has shown the tories are labour every are trailing labour on every issue, issues labour issue, even issues labour doesn't have policies for. so will this will the tories climb this electoral mountain

? well, we were discussing 7 well, we were discussing green targets and gdp growth . and your targets and gdp growth. and your mail mobs have been steaming in. but a wonderful one from ian who says. happy alphege says. happy saint alphege day tomorrow , the 19th of april. tomorrow, the 19th of april. alphege a great saint attacks martyr. he refused to pay the danegeld in what was it? 1014 and he had ox bones thrown at him as a punishment. he was the archbishop of canterbury, but the 21st is the feast of saint anselm, another archbishop of canterbury . and of course, the

canterbury. and of course, the 23rd is saint george. so it's a great week for patriotic english saints. see emails in to say this government focuses on getting involved in other countries wars, thus bankrupting our country and neglecting the uk. and graham, the very notion that a trace gas responsible for all plant life is somehow deadly poison will go down as the greatest mass delusion in human history. a new poll from lord ashcroft has apparently revealed that labour is now trusted more than the tories on every major issue, including defence and national security. however, the poll also said that 45% of voters do not want a starmer government . so is the government. so is the conservative and unionist party my party, a lost cause or is there still hope? well, considering labour is polling higher for issues they've not yet announced policies on, perhaps there is something else at play with me to discuss. this is my most intellectual panel. gb news senior political commentator nelson , and commentator nigel nelson, and the journalist and conservative peer goodman . nigel, this peer paul goodman. nigel, this fascinating poll because the

straight polls have labour storming to victory. yes. and now 45% of people say they don't actually want a labour government, and 37% say they don't like the tories, but they'd much rather have a tory government. >> yeah, well, they'd prefer a tory government. i don't think they're saying they're much rather the way the rather one, that's the way the daily mail writes it up, i daily mail writes it up, if i was right in this poll up, i'd point out that 56% would prefer a labour government a tory a labour government to a tory one, so what you've got is the remainder , your 37% who don't remainder, your 37% who don't like you, but will vote for you anyway, and only 8% who actually say that to 45, but 45% is a majority. >> obviously 56 would be a bigger majority, but a bigger majority. if labour could get could get to that. but what about the issues? is that a consequence of the support for laboun consequence of the support for labour, or does it tell you something about individual policies, people? i mean, it was fascinating. the times did a poll where a fictional cabinet minister was net distrusted. and is that just because he had a

tory badge and it had to be. he just had a tory badge and therefore wasn't liked? is that what's happening with defence policy? brexit policy where labour theoretically, policy? brexit policy where laqur theoretically, policy? brexit policy where labi find theoretically, policy? brexit policy where labi find itieoretically, policy? brexit policy where labi find it bizarreally, policy? brexit policy where labi find it bizarre that anyone >> i find it bizarre that anyone could think that labour is more brexity than the tories. so yes, i mean, i think, i think what's happenedis i mean, i think, i think what's happened is we're in a time for change thing here, regardless of anything else that was going change thing here, regardless of anyears| else that was going change thing here, regardless of anyears of.se that was going change thing here, regardless of anyears of margaret as going change thing here, regardless of anyears of margaret thatcher, 13 years of margaret thatcher, 13 years of margaret thatcher, 13 years of new labour, after 14 years of this government, time for a change and also the kind of way that politic has been destabilised by things like brexit. brexit costs two tory prime ministers. we've got two who, in my view, weren't really suitable for the job. and then we were hit with covid, then we were hit with ukraine. so the whole thing is thing has been totally destabilise rising and the voters are fed up with the current lot. you can't get them out of the mess that we're in. >> paul, is it as simple as that? does it also that? but does it also raise questions? labour win questions? should labour win that they won't have much of a honeymoon the basis this

honeymoon on the basis of this type polling? honeymoon on the basis of this type p i.ling? honeymoon on the basis of this type p i don't honeymoon on the basis of this type pi don't think lord >> well, i don't think lord ashcroft's done headline ashcroft's done any headline polling 2015, i'm not polling since 2015, i'm not quite sure why, but he does do this kind of polling , and i this kind of polling, and i think it's quite instructive. and i think what it does show pretty clearly , as nigel said, pretty clearly, as nigel said, is that when you become unpopular as the conservatives vote, that covers everything. it doesn't matter what the subject is. does it matter whether it's brexit, defence, nhs, it will cover everything. i think the finding that labour nonetheless have quite a lot of resistance to them does seem to fit in with the polls. i think if you look at politico's poll of polls , you at politico's poll of polls, you see the tory line going down. interestingly you also see the labour line coming down slightly. the two big parties are actually despite labour's lead, not overall structurally in a great place. >> and this is a problem, isn't it? if there's a general malaise about politics and neither leader being enormously popular,

but people recognising in a two party system they have to vote for one another? >> well, i like saying nice things about party and things about my own party and nasty but nasty things about labour, but i have to confess, look at have to confess, if you look at the objectively , the situation objectively, really the two main parties are they like to guess going home at they like to guess going home at the end of the rather alcohol friendly evening, who are propping each other up, and that's what first past the post does. it props up the big parties . i does. it props up the big parties. i think historically that's been a good thing. it saved us from some of the extremism you see on the continent, but i've got to be level headed and level eyed and say, that's what it looks like . say, that's what it looks like. >> it has to be said that the two leaders are two of most two leaders are two of the most sober sided you could sober sided people you could imagine. of them imagine. so the idea of them being staggering in this way is very unlikely. but nigel labour must be pretty disappointed by this. must feel they this. they must feel that they can't get the zeitgeist of the nation. must look tony nation. they must look at tony blair and how he blair and think, how did he manage his finger on the manage to put his finger on the pulse of britain in a way that we can't? now we just can't? now >> well, i think that that, keir

starmer is not tony blair, and although he's taken an awful lot from the new labour playbook, we're in a different, different time. i mean, the thing about tony blair, i think, was that a the economy was much better. so there was there was more he could do, he had some fairly solid foundations, a sort of political behind political philosophy behind everything he did, which was the third way, nicking policies from left and right. but he third way, nicking policies from left and right . but he actually left and right. but he actually had something that people, people could, could admire. >> but starmer, who i don't think is a bad man at all, is really, really dull. i mean, he was terrible at prime minister's questions yesterday. leaden, unfunny and rishi sunak wiped the floor with him. >> well, i don't think pmqs yesterday was actually a great one. anyway i mean, rishi sunak wanted to have a go at angela rayner that then provoked that first answer, brought the house down and made starmer look hopeless. >> well, poor old angela was sitting next to him, going as red as red could be, but starmer could turn around and

could actually turn around and say, it's throwing stones say, well, it's throwing stones in glass houses on the basis that she did. >> he he did he he made a point about he made a point about the non—dom status of the sunak family. >> but isn't that the point that starmer just can't get a >> but isn't that the point that starmerjust can't get a grip of starmer just can't get a grip of it to communicate to voters because he's too dull? >> it's not necessarily a bad thing to be a dull prime minister, and we've had dull prime ministers in the past who've been reasonably effective, or at least were seen as being so at the time, like stanley baldwin, was stanley baldwin, who was a dominant, dominant, dominant figure in the 30s, dominant but hopeless, dominant. but in charge of a party with a very, very large majority. and when you're in the house, i remember you're in the house, i remember you used to defend some the you used to defend some of the things that happened under stanley baldwin's government, like how the economic things that probably better not go that we probably better not go down this historical analogy. what worries me more about starmer isn't the dullness. it's whether or not if he becomes prime minister as he looks likely to be, whether we're

going to see the keir starmer, who's presently putting union flags on every labour leaflet or whether we're going to see the old lefty lawyer from from north london that we saw before he became labour leader. >> very interesting . and you've >> very interesting. and you've given me the topic for the christmas discussion, which is half dull. prime minister's been effective. with effective. we'll start with walpole, definitely wasn't walpole, who definitely wasn't dull. thank you to my panel coming the labour coming up. could the labour party be in breach of its own equality after equality act after a tax advisers comments

? well, 7 well, we've been ? well, we've been talking about the government and the polls and all of that. and we've got some splendid messages coming in. john says don't let the tories destroy themselves . and, steve, destroy themselves. and, steve, very nice message from steve. thank i love the way you thank you. i love the way you invite people disagree with invite people you disagree with on them speak. on the show and let them speak. good debate net zero, steve. good debate on net zero, steve.

you're right. think good debate on net zero, steve. you much right. think good debate on net zero, steve. you much more right. think good debate on net zero, steve. you much more interestinghink good debate on net zero, steve. you much more interesting to k it's much more interesting to view program where there's view a program where there's a proper rather than proper discussion rather than just me banging on for all 50 minutes, and stewart says, time to all green commitments. to drop all green commitments. we should be fracking here, here, oil fields here, getting more oil fields and stop all these stupid taxes and stop all these stupid taxes and telling people to buy electric heat pumps, etc. electric cars, heat pumps, etc. stuart, an excellent stuart, that's an excellent message. with it. now, message. i agree with it. now, could it be that a labour party adviser has breached the party's equality act for ageism? well rachel reeves tax adviser, sir edward troup, has faced censure for referring to pensioners as codgers who have it , quote, codgers who have it, quote, ridiculously good, before asserting that they should pay their bbc television taxes. but putting conservative ageism to one side, sir edward has in the past spoken in favour of increases in income tax, national insurance contributions, vat and corporation tax. so are these the policies we could the sorts of policies we could expect from a labour government? i'm joined now my panel gb i'm joined now by my panel gb news senior political commentator nigel and commentator nigel nelson, and the and conservative the journalist and conservative peer paul goodman. paul, can we now an absolutely classic

now start an absolutely classic tory campaign about the tax double whammy that's going to box our ears if rachel reeves becomes chancellor? well, i think rather like talking of labour people. >> tony benn, who you remember always used to say we should concentrate on the issues some of your viewers will remember tony benn saying that actually the issues here are pretty substantial. mean, we have substantial. i mean, we have 2.5% of the population currently over 85, 20 years. that's 4.3, a quarter of public spending goes on pensions and health care. now, whatever the tactlessness of sir edward troup , this of sir edward troup, this situation is unsustainable and it is going to mean either tax rises or spending cuts if growth doesn't come to rescue us. >> okay, so nigel, edward is saying something that's perfectly sensible and we should be lucky that he's advising rachel reeves, who can come in and make us all wear a hair shirt. >> i'd be interesting to see what he says. now, bear in mind

these back 2019. these comments go back to 2019. so about the bbc so when he talks about the bbc licence the bbc now pays licence fee, the bbc now pays that rather than the rather than the government. >> don't for >> and they don't pay it for everybody anyway. >> over 75 on >> only people. yeah. over 75 on pension . yeah but they're pension credit. yeah but they're the ones so. so you can park that one. anyway it comes that one. anyway when it comes down pensioners paying tax down to pensioners paying tax it's 2 in 3 do now. and that's because of the freezing of threshold fiscal drag , and isn't threshold fiscal drag, and isn't there also going to be an issue with increased longevity of life. meaning we've got to raise the pension age that that process has happened a bit, but it needs to go further and politicians need to continue to push that as life expectancy is way ahead of pension age. >> yeah, i mean, i think that the that, we're in dire need of pension reform, politicians shy away from it because older people tend to be voters or vote more often than younger than younger people. so yes. but i mean, i think that you need to look at the triple lock. you need to decide whether the winter should

need to decide whether the wtaxable should need to decide whether the wtaxable benefit should need to decide whether the wtaxable benefit ratherlould need to decide whether the wtaxable benefit rather than a taxable benefit rather than a tax free one. i know a pensioner who uses what he calls his claret fund to restock his wine cellar. that shouldn't happen, and on pensions, the real difficulty is the unfairness of the public sector against the private sector. >> so not just the state pension . it's i think teachers now get a 28% contribution on top of their salaries paid into the pension for them , by the state. pension for them, by the state. that's enormous and becomes unsustainable . well, it's also unsustainable. well, it's also bad value for them because if they put it in a defined contribution pension, they'd have better funds at the end of it all these issues are bound up together. >> and the point you're making about between about the difference between pubuc about the difference between public and public sector pensions and private sort of private ones make some sort of sense . i mean, on the retirement sense. i mean, on the retirement age of the state pension actually at the cost of taking a complacent view of things, we've managed this fairly well so far. you raising the state you try raising the state pension age in france and people are out on the streets , whereas are out on the streets, whereas successive governments have wounded without there being

wounded up without there being a revolution. and that actually is a good sign . a good sign. >> i agree with that. but we've paused, haven't we, that we needed to keep on going. and as we the waspi women, if we see with the waspi women, if you give people plenty of you don't give people plenty of nofice you don't give people plenty of notice know notice and let them know properly, have a great deal properly, you have a great deal of complaining coming through later. . later. we do. >> and there's a limit to the degree to which we can deal with the demographic problem just by raising retirement age in raising the retirement age in just the same way as there's a limit to how we can deal with it by immigration, as we're by mass immigration, as we're finding finding finding out, as we're finding out, need to change out, you need to change employment out, you need to change employmen that the raising, the >> i mean, that the raising, the pension age, pension age is fine. but what you have to do is stop companies laying people off when they get older because they're a bit more expensive. they people in. so they want younger people in. so that to be dealt with. that needs to be dealt with. >> right. well, the north >> all right. well, the north korean state has made the decision use primary school decision to use primary school children as lgbt champions. the telegraph has seen documents showing schools are setting up lgbt clubs , as well as gender lgbt clubs, as well as gender and sexual orientation alliance groups on the matter. kim jong

un said we are committed to doing everything we can to make scotland the best place to grow up lgbt betke plus young up for lgbt betke plus young people. sorry did i say north korea and kim jong un? what a silly, freudian slip. i meant to say scotland and a scottish government spokesman. yes, these are new plans being drawn up in scotland as part of a scheme run by a charity called lgbt youth scotland, which has received nearly £1 million of your money. so the question is when did the scottish government start getting its propaganda from nonh getting its propaganda from north korea , nigel, what do they north korea, nigel, what do they think they're doing ? think they're doing? >> well, i think that i find that the, the principle of this quite reasonable. it's a question of how the, the practice works, but these are five year olds. >> they're a primary school, everything's to be age everything's got to be age appropriate. whateverthis appropriate. so whatever this initiative is, it's age appropriate . i mean, the daily appropriate. i mean, the daily telegraph reported today that four year olds will be asked if they're gay or straight or trans. i can't believe it's as simple as that, because you would, first of all, have to

teach a four year old about sex before they could understand the next stage. >> but isn't what this is what the propagandist they want the propagandist want? they want four year olds to say that they don't what they are, don't know what gender they are, andifs don't know what gender they are, and it's quite sinister. and it's all quite sinister. >> it shouldn't be >> well, it shouldn't be sinister. i mean, if they are encouraging something like, like, trans or, encourage them into a certain sexuality, that would be wrong if there was any indoctrination going on that would be wrong. but no harm in normalising sexuality at a young age. there will be there will be kids there who will now have parents who are two moms or two dads. and so it normalises in school as it is at home, taking away the innocence of children , away the innocence of children, that they'll find out all about this in due course. >> they don't to be told it >> they don't need to be told it by state, the state in by the state, and the state in scotland increasingly take scotland seeks increasingly take the position the family which the position of the family which it supersede . it wishes to supersede. >> look, either you're teaching four about sex or four year olds about sex or you're not. i think you shouldn't be if you're not teaching four year olds about sex. i don't see how you can

reasonably be introducing them to ideas about sexuality at four ehhen to ideas about sexuality at four either. yeah, no. >> and therefore you're making them learn about something that is not age appropriate by definition. so nigel says it will be age appropriate, but it just can't be. >> well, nigel, just agree with what i said. so you know, we're all we're all agreeing and but doesit all we're all agreeing and but does it tell you something about the snp? >> i mean, they're are pushing these very hard line policies that have done a lot of damage actually to scottish education. but they want it seemed to want to continue with them. they had the gender recognition bill that got alister jack got squashed by alister jack earlier . they seem earlier in the year. they seem to bought into this to have bought into this ideology strongly. well ideology pretty strongly. well the question is what is actually happening schools? happening in the schools? >> think that i've been >> and i think that i've been trying of this trying to get hold of this charity ask charity today to actually ask them this actually them how this this actually works. and i can't get hold of them. apparently they don't come back back for a week or something actually talk to something to actually talk to you, not very helpful, you, which is not very helpful, but but, are simply

but the but, if you are simply normalising sexuality in an age appropriate way, that's fine. indoctrination not fine, encouraging, not fine. >> but this seems to me you should be leaving it till secondary school anyway. at that point it's age appropriate and it matter family and it a matter for the family and for contemporaries much as it for contemporaries as much as it is school. is for the school. >> what >> i mean, that's what i said a few ago. can say the few moments ago. i can say the same if you like. same thing again, if you like. >> well, well, i will i will confess viewers and confess to my viewers and listeners that when i go through the children, the catechism with my children, we go through the commandments and to the sixth and we get to the sixth commandment, you commandment, which, as you all know, shalt not commit know, is thou shalt not commit adultery. talking adultery. and when i'm talking to old, i over to a six year old, i rush over it quickly and move to a six year old, i rush over it to quickly and move to a six year old, i rush over it to the quickly and move to a six year old, i rush over it to the seventh ly and move to a six year old, i rush over it to the seventh commandment, on to the seventh commandment, which talk which is an easier one to talk about now. the website about now. the news website unherd has released a sensational report that it states shows how british government sponsored agency is censoring journalism . my panel censoring journalism. my panel and i will be examining this extraordinary revelation

while the male mogs have been coming in after we were discussing labour, ageism and lgbt child champions, brian says the living wage is £20,820.80 per annum. that's how much is needed to live on. please explain how pensioners are meant to survive on £11,492 per annum. and rod makes a point that i thought that my most intellectual panel might make, that the details people that the details of people living has been out of living longer has been out of date for around three years. life expectancy the uk and life expectancy of the uk and the eu, by the way, is actually falling. rod, you're falling. and rod, you're absolutely . but our absolutely right. but our pension rise hadn't pension rise age rise hadn't gone up enough to compensate for the level that we'd already got to. so although what you're saying is absolutely true, we've still behind on raising still lagged behind on raising the unherd is a news and the age. unherd is a news and current affairs website that specialises in slower, longer form journalism and commentary. it was set up by tim

montgomerie, formerly of the times and edited by sally chatterton, formerly of the telegraph and the evening standard . all very centrist and standard. all very centrist and mainstream and yet unheard , only mainstream and yet unheard, only receives 2 to 6% of the advertising revenue normally expected for a publication of its size . why? well, freddie its size. why? well, freddie sayers unherd editor in chief and chief executive officer, has revealed in a report that a global network of censorship is in operation , which is in operation, which is reportedly funded by the likes of the george soros open society foundation and, worryingly, his majesty's government. the global disinformation index , mr sayers disinformation index, mr sayers states, was set up in 2018 with the aim of disrupting the business models of organisations that it deems spread disinformation and disinformation and disinformation to the gdi does not mean lies as it may to you or to me. i quote gdi founder clair—mel offered. something can be factually accurate, but still extremely harmful. gdi leads you to a more useful definition of disinformation. i'm joined now

by my panel gb news senior political commentator nigel nelson , and the journalist and nelson, and the journalist and conservative peer paul goodman. paul when i read that out, it's pretty sinister, isn't it , that pretty sinister, isn't it, that there is a group funded by a state that lobbies against a news organisation receiving advertising revenue for not having politically correct views, and you had to take your time over it because it's quite a detailed story to understand. >> but the principles of it seem to me to be pretty simple and to raise a really big question, which is on the one hand you'd say, well, in the world of the free market, advertisers should be free to advertise with whoever they like and consult whoever they like and consult whoever they like and consult whoever they like. and if it's bad for people on the right of politics, too bad the other view would be that these bodies have tremendous political power, and we don't simply allow tremendous political power to run riot. i mean, you know, we don't allow the advertising of nazi memorabilia or child porn and that government has to step in.

well, whatever you think of that debate, one thing that i thought was very clear, which that our government should not be funding these if they are these agencies if they are effectively acting in a openly biased way. >> well, that seems to me to be the fundamental point that george soros can fund whoever he likes. if wants unheard, likes. and if he wants unheard, not receive adverts, and he wants to his money to stop wants to spend his money to stop them , that doesn't seem me to them, that doesn't seem to me to be once you get be outrageous. but once you get a state, the government funding organisations that discourages advertising from unherd , which advertising from unherd, which may sometimes be critical of the government that is something the government that is something the government has no business doing. >> yes, i mean, the media has been been trying to ward off statutory regulation for quite some time. and so what this is, is another form of doing it, nothing wrong with fact checking . i disagree with the definition of disinformation. there that if the facts are wrong, that's fine . but not to actually argue that an opinion is wrong. an opinion

is a matter of free speech and that shouldn't be interfered with. and then to try and blacklist effectively news, news organisations rations by starving them with the advertising to put them out of business. >> and, this is what happened in the 1970s when the trade unions were very strong in the newspaper industry. sometimes they wouldn't print opinions that didn't like . that they didn't like. >> yes. that's right. yes. i mean, i lived through that period. so yes, i know what was going on. and the and, the union, some of the unions, the print were really print unions were really difficult during that period. they any longer. difficult during that period. theindeed. any longer. difficult during that period. theindeed. and any longer. difficult during that period. theindeed. and freedom jer. difficult during that period. theindeed. and freedom of speech >> indeed. and freedom of speech was enhanced when that when that ended. was enhanced when that when that ended . and this comes back to ended. and this comes back to the advertising point. if tesco's want to tesco's doesn't want to advertise with unherd, that is a matter tesco's . but should matter for tesco's. but should there be somebody telling them not to, or should they be stronger and say we're not going to be told who we are going to advertise with? we'll just advertise with? we'll just advertise with? we'll just advertise with who we advertise with people who we think products. think will buy our products. >> key quote in >> i thought the key quote in the that you read was the

the story that you read was the woman involved in the woman deeply involved in the project who said, no, no, we're not simply dealing with stuff here that's wrong with disinformation, we disapprove in effect of opinions that are harmful. are now where where does that begin and end? and i think, like me, you won't be a fan of these ideas of, actions that are legal but harmful because harmful is a pandora's box, harmful is a sliding slope. where do you begin an end? you begin an end very quickly with censorship. yeah, absolutely . censorship. yeah, absolutely. >> and this is what these bodies do. but should you stop the bodies themselves or just the government funding? well you should certainly stop the government funding them. >> i would start there and then wrestle afterwards with these quite issues of quite difficult issues of principle that you're raising. certainly the foreign office or whoever shouldn't be funding them. >> and you would say that the advertising standards agency is entitled to say bad adverts, wrong adverts shouldn't be placed. that's fair.

>> yes, i think that would be correct. >> ones that are saying things that factually untrue. so recently nationwide on closing bank , they turned out a bank branches, they turned out a lot of the complaints came from another which is quite another bank, which is quite funny, to add. funny, you have to add. >> mean , we've had a >> i mean, we've had a conservative led government for 14 years. i mean, you have to ask, why on earth are we funding this stuff? >> well, it's a very good question. mean , how government question. i mean, how government funding charities that funding goes to charities that are deliberately opposed to what is ostensibly the government's policy. yeah, that's taxpayers cash. >> and i agree with both of you that that should not happen. the government shouldn't be getting involved in something like this. i how actually i don't know how you actually close organisations. close down the organisations. i think be tricky . think that would be be tricky. >> is that going too far in the other direction of censorship of their view? they're entitled indeed. >> that's the problem. i >> i mean, that's the problem. i mean, the advertising standards agency is there to actually make sure, but fundamentally it should be business to stop being so wet. >> and it's the wokeness of big business. don't have to

business. they don't have to listen this listen to this poncy organisation. get organisation. they can just get on adverts with unherd on and pace adverts with unherd and say a finger of fudge is just enough via unherd or whatever and do it well. whatever it is, and do it well. >> say something about >> it does say something about the mood of the times that people on the centre like people on the centre right like you and i, no longer point you and i, can no longer point to private sector as the to the private sector as the exemplar of everything that's normal and well balanced, i'm afraid. >> well, we're going to have to have another discussion on erg and damage that does and the damage that does to investing disaster investing and the disaster that it but that have be it is, but that will have to be on week. thank you on another week. so thank you very my panel. and now very much to my panel. and now for grand finale. the for the week's grand finale. the most important story of all. and it's about duke ball or it's not about the duke ball or the kookaburra, which you probably thought it might be. it concerns god's own county of somerset. would somerset. and i would like you to back to my early to think back to my early childhood, little over 200 childhood, a little over 200 million years ago, whilst the cheddar was just as cheddar gorge was just as gorgeous and the cider was just as scrumptious, palaeontologists have revealed that a mysterious creature length of creature twice the length of a combine harvester, that is to say, about 80ft. once traversed the coast surrounding our great

county, archaeologists have been busy piecing together giant jawbones over the last few years, and have recently concluded it belonged to a previously undescribed species of ichthyosaur . or think of it of ichthyosaur. or think of it as a large prehistoric dolphin. this adds to the long list of things that make somerset great. and if i remember rightly, i think i used to have one as a pet, a most charming and delightful companion. it didn't dnnk delightful companion. it didn't drink that's all drink cider anyway, that's all from me. up next is ben leo standing in for patrick christys . ben, what's on your bill of fare this evening? and as patrick really gone on holiday, this unprecedented. this is unprecedented. >> he's sunning >> i think he's. he's sunning himself somewhere in the canaries. well—deserved break, canaries. a well—deserved break, jacob. cracking show makes me want to go to somerset tonight on show . mark menzies on the show. mark menzies william has william wragg. peter bowen has parliament got a sleaze problem, particularly your party? jacob? don't that elsewhere. don't answer that elsewhere. humza yousaf. been a net humza yousaf. he's been a net zero hypocrite. and angela rayner's £23,000 kitchen. have you seen the pictures of that all to come in just a few

minutes. >> these labour people have a great thing for kitchens, don't they? didn't ed miliband have a vast kitchens in his vast number of kitchens in his house? seem to remember so house? i seem to remember so well. your programme, as always, sounds absolutely fascinating. a worthy stand in for patrick. that'll all be coming up after the weather. i'll be back on monday at 8:00. i'm jacob rees—mogg. this has been state of the nation and the weather in somerset with or without an ichthyosaurus, is going to be absolutely beautiful . absolutely beautiful. >> a brighter outlook with boxt solar sponsors of weather on . gb news. >> evening. welcome to your latest weather update from the met office here on gb news tomorrow we'll see again plenty of april showers, some sunny spells and a chilly wind in the east. high pressure is slowly edging towards us and it will bnng edging towards us and it will bring many of us a fine day on saturday. but for the time being, we've still got low pressure and weather fronts in control. they've been bringing rain through control. they've been bringing

rainday through control. they've been bringing rainday and through control. they've been bringing rain day and that through control. they've been bringing rainday and that rainthrough control. they've been bringing rainday and that rainthrnow the day and that rain is now trickling southwards. damp, trickling southwards. so damp, drizzly , east drizzly for the midlands, east anglia and southeast anglia and the southeast overnight. south—west overnight. the south—west generally staying dry with more cloud and more breeze. it is going to be a much, much milder night than last night. we started today with a frost in many areas. we'll start tomorrow at 8 degrees, a little at 7 or 8 degrees, a little colder northern scotland, colder in northern scotland, where there will be a really chilly blowing. that will where there will be a really chi a( blowing. that will where there will be a really chi a featureylowing. that will where there will be a really chia feature ofning. that will where there will be a really chi a feature of the . that will where there will be a really chi a feature of the weather ll be a feature of the weather right eastern areas right across these eastern areas tomorrow. elsewhere . tomorrow. cold wind elsewhere. we'll start with lot of we'll start with a lot of clouds, bit of rain, clouds, a little bit of rain, but should brighten up but it should brighten up through certainly through the day. certainly a much for northern much brighter day for northern ireland western ireland and especially western scotland compared to today. still, few showers dotted still, a few showers dotted around through the afternoon and again it is going to feel chilly, particularly in the east with that wind. or celsius with that wind. 9 or 10 celsius 14 south, 14 or 15. further south, temperatures will drop sharply on friday evening. some pockets of frost to start the weekend, but for many it is going be but for many it is going to be a fine day on saturday. decent amount of sunshine a bit fine day on saturday. decent amoucloud;unshine a bit fine day on saturday. decent amoucloud and1ine a bit fine day on saturday. decent amoucloud and some a bit fine day on saturday. decent amoucloud and some patchya bit fine day on saturday. decent amoucloud and some patchy rain more cloud and some patchy rain across northern scotland. still across northern scotland. still a the east a bit breezy across the east anglia in particular, but for many, as i said, a fine day on

saturday. not spectacularly warm. highs of 10 to 14 degrees. >> looks like things are heating up. boxt boilers sponsors of weather on

gb news. >> good evening. it's 11:00. gb news. >> good evening. it's11:00. in a moment. headliners. but first, let's bring you right up to date

with the latest news headlines. nicola sturgeon's husband, peter murrell, has been charged in connection with embezzlement of funds from the scottish national party following an investigation into the party's finances. the former snp chief executive was re—arrested at around 9:00 this morning, with police scotland detectives interviewing him all day. they're now saying in a statement released this evening that he's no longer in police custody . he was previously custody. he was previously arrested and released without charge last april. it's understood as well. tonight he's resigned from his snp membership, a spokesperson for the party saying it was a shock but couldn't comment further . the party saying it was a shock but couldn't comment further. in other news today, andrew malkinson, who 20 years ago was wrongly jailed for rape, has rejected a criminal review board's unreserved apology , board's unreserved apology, saying it's too little, too late. 57 year old andrew malkinson was found guilty of raping a woman in manchester in 2003, and a year later he was

jailed for life. he could have been released after six years if he'd agreed to give a false confession, but it was something he was never prepared to do , he was never prepared to do, instead always insisting that he was well his was innocent. well his conviction was overturned after fresh dna linked the crime to another man. mr malkinson appealed for his case to be referred to the court of appeal, but was rejected twice by the criminal review board. the lord chancellor has said today that his case has been an atrocious miscarriage of justice, the prescription of puberty blockers and hormones for children in scotland has been put on pause . scotland has been put on pause. it follows the landmark cass review of gender services for under 18 seconds, which revealed that children had been let down by a lack of proper research and weak medical evidence . ministers weak medical evidence. ministers in scotland have welcomed the move. trans campaigners have argued the decision is wrong. like other parts of the uk, scotland has seen a rapid rise in the number of young people questioning their sexual

identity in