Saying only that its his working assumption. It will take place in the second half of the year. Michael place in the second half of the year. Michael gove place in the second half of the year. Michael gove has named some of the groups to be investigated under a new definition of extremism, which he says will mean the government can express more clearly than ever who poses a risk to britain. Some of the groups included are alleged to have islamist views, with others described as neo nazi. See described as neo nazi. See todays new extremism definition will be used to assess whether some groups should be marginalised or blocked from pubuc marginalised or blocked from public funding. But michael gove insists its not about silencing those with private and peaceful beliefs. Beliefs. We have to be clear eyed about the threat we face, precise about where that threat comes from and rigorous in defending our democracy. That means upholding freedom of expression, religion and belief when they are threatened, facing down harassment and hate, supporting the communities facing the greatest challenge from extremist activity, and ensuring this house and this country are safe, and country are safe, free and unhed country are safe, free and united now. Great yarmouth mp Brandon Lewis has announced he is standing down as a candidate at the next general election. In the next general election. In a statement posted on x, formerly twitter, the former Northern Ireland secretary said it has been the greatest honour of my life to represent the people of Great Yarmouth in parliament. In other news, russia has been accused of disrupting the gps signal on the defence secretarys plane en route to poland. The incident occurred as the raf jet flew close to the edge of kaliningrad. Gps navigation and Internet Access was lost for around 30 minutes dunng was lost for around 30 minutes during the flight, but the pilots have confirmed the aircraft was never at risk , and aircraft was never at risk, and the prince of wales has expressed concerns about the amount of time children spend on phones as hes visited a youth club today. The prince asked some of the children how long they spend on their phones, with one girl saying she spends up to 15 hours a day. The future king said grown ups were also guilty of excessive screen time and said weve all got to get better at managing it. He also poked fun at his apparent lack of artistic skill as he took part in some biscuit decorating, saying is the arty saying that his wife is the arty one. And for the latest story, sign up to gb news alerts by scanning the qr code on your screen or go to gb news. Com slash alerts. Now its back to. Jacob. Michael gove today unveiled the governments new official definition of non violent extremism. It states extremism is the promotion or advancement of an ideology based on violence, hatred or intolerance that aims to negate or destroy the fundamental rights and freedoms of others, undermine, overturn or replace the uks system of liberal parliamentary democracy and democratic rights, or create a or intentionally create a permissive environment for others achieve the results. Others to achieve the results. In 1 2 groups that meet this in 1 or 2 groups that meet this definition will be blocked from receiving government funding and meeting officials. Extremism meeting officials. Extremism used to be understood to mean violence. Advance violence. To advance your political cause through violence and not through debate. Non violent extremism , however, non violent extremism, however, is nebulous rhetorical is a nebulous rhetorical flourish. Hazy , indistinct, flourish. Its hazy, indistinct, open to widely different interpretations and is dangerous as the basis of legislation, freedom, rights and responsibilities are not absolutes. Containing freedom in one area enables it in another and vice versa. Freedom for the wolves means death for the lambs. As Isaiah Berlin put it. A 2016 channel 4 news poll found that half of british muslims think homosexuality should be illegal. This would appear to meet the criteria as defined by the government of non violent extremism. As such, a view negates the freedoms of others or creates a permissive environment for others to do so. Now making homosexuality illegal is a view i disagree with, but it would not be desirable or workable to ban half of british muslims from interaction with the government. We could no longer britain a democracy longer call britain a democracy if did so. And a democracy. If we did so. And a democracy. How we relate to each other has to be put through at times difficult process of deliberation and debate. Unfortunately its not how many of those on the left see things today. An influential Advocacy Group called hope not hate issued a release called state of hate 2020 for front and centre of the report. However, not fascists who are pushed right to the back but elected members of parliament. Im in there as my fellow mps miriam cates danny kruger, marco longhi and others. The conservative media comes under attack. The very mild mannered spectator, as well as the daily telegraph. There as well as gb news, which is mentioned over 60 times. Even the Prime Minister questioning labour policy is suggested to be evidence of a radical right drift, which is perhaps not surprising given one of their directors is a labour peer. Hope not hate says that it is non partisan. That is anti fascist, and that they defend, champion and promote democracy in the rule of law. Speaking against anti democratic and authoritarian forces and policies. Under this fake policies. Under this fake posturing, it receives government funding. The home government funding. The home offices counter extremism unit, in fact, has given them over £100,000 over the last few years. Not only that, but theyve received a similar sum from trust for london, trust for london manages church of england trusts, ostensibly for the maintenance of church buildings, but also administers a trust set up for poverty relief with a 10 million grant from the government. After the abolition of the Greater London council. As you see, institutional capture is unfortunately how too much of the left operates. They much of the left operates. They will take advantage of the good faith of their opponents to smear and silence those with whom they do not agree. It has happened with hope, not hate and the rest of the quangocracy with sir intends sir keir starmer intends to expand. Happened the expand. It has happened with the Civil Service. Has happened Civil Service. It has happened with church of england. With the church of england. Its even some degree even happened to some degree with forces and with the armed forces and unfortunately its at risk of happening again with standards of this kind that have been announced today, despite the good intentions that may be behind it. As ever. Let me know your thoughts. Mail margaret gb news. Com and im joined now by sean irish spokesman Just Stop Oil, my panel of former conservative mp and commentator paul goodman and gb news senior political commentator nigel lawson. Now, sean, were both a bit worried that we may agree on this definition of extremism. Stopping your Group Just Stop Oil doing things that are legitimate protest. Sadly. Well, its not surprising that the government have taken this stance. I mean, tory policy has been written by the daily mail and gb news, and now its come back to bite us. You know, its quite clear what gb news and the daily mail have been months and been saying for months and not years, that protest needs to be squashed, democratic, you squashed, that democratic, you know, express squashed, that democratic, you know, in express squashed, that democratic, you know, in a express squashed, that democratic, you know, in a democratics squashed, that democratic, you know, in a democratic manner yourself in a democratic manner if not the way gb news if its not the way gb news likes to do it. So this you know, its not surprising. Its just these are upset now that its come back get used and its come back to get used and we will defend you on this. It is not it should not is not right. It should not happen. But also youve laid you made bed. Youre to made your bed. Youre going to have in, think, at this have to lay in, i think, at this stage, hopefully we will stage, but hopefully we will see, you know, next election will change. Will bring change. Not against your but im not against your right protest. Indeed, ive right to protest. Indeed, ive defended i against you defended it. I am against you gluing road gluing yourself to the road because criminal because thats called criminal damage. Always damage. So there is always a balance within the law. What is legitimate protest and what is illegitimate . Question illegitimate . Its a question of where line. Surely, certainly. And we are going to hold. We were we hold ourselves accountable action accountable for every action that ive that we take. You know, ive been court many times. My been into court many times. My partner just sent prison partner was just sent to prison today, without trial, today, again without trial, which quite which is happening quite frequently in the uk. Groups like Just Stop Oil and these like Just Stop Oil and all these other going to other groups are not going to stop were matter stop what were doing. No matter what government says to us, what the government says to us, they to come to the they need to come to the negotiation table. They need to recognise people of recognise that the people of britain change, saying britain want change, and saying that extremist ask for that its extremist to ask for that its extremist to ask for that will not stop people that change will not stop people from asking for it. Be entitled to and you must be entitled to argue for your cause, even if other people disagree with it. And mean, ive often said and i mean, ive often said to you, stand for you, you should stand for election it to to election and put it to voters to see if want your policies, see if they want your policies, which i think are extreme but not you follow me not extremist. If you follow me in of difference , i in terms of the difference, i understand what you mean. Yeah. Well, i would say, you know, again, politicians are seeing is coming. Seeing this change is coming. You we having more and you know, we are having more and more mps that are saying they agree with our demands of ending new gas. Although labour new oil and gas. Although labour have some of their have reneged on some of their demands, saying demands, they are still saying that not be that new licences will not be part their policies part of their policies going forward. We are seeing that the tories going to thrown tories are going to be thrown out in next general out in the next general election. Whenever decides election. Whenever rishi decides to well see about that. Time. Will tell, nigel, i hope not. Hate coming out and saying that a whole slew of conservative are being conservative mps are being exploited essentially as fascists. Underpins fascists. Thats what underpins them. He said. Them. Thats not what he said. Well, them in their well, it lists them in their whole that theyre whole cause, is that theyre there to fascists. There to expose fascists. Well, what it describes. Well, what what it describes. You are it describes you as is radical, right . I dont know if you would actually along with you would actually go along with it that description. It with that description. Part of the mainstream it with that description. Conservative re mainstream it with that description. Conservative party. Nstream it with that description. Conservative party. Nstrtanr the conservative party. Im an elected of parliament elected member of parliament because their campaign is because their whole campaign is implying people on the implying that people on the right are involved in hate. There is no evidence that members of the tory party in parliament are involved with hate. Its a very extreme view. Hate. Its a very extreme view. I mean, what hope not hate . I dont dont agree with with, a lot of they say. I dont lot of what they say. I dont agree with a lot their agree with a lot of their conspiracy theories, they have done some good work. Done some really good work. I mean, that their main is mean, that their main focus is to, expose the far left, far left extremists , and thats left extremists, and thats their basic target. What they were arguing was that people like you are taking the mainstream towards the right. Now. I, as i say, i dont back that particular argument. But when youve got an organisation that prevented an mp, rosie coopen that prevented an mp, rosie cooper, from being murdered by neo nazis, that shows the kind of good work that they have been doing and that went to court and the Security Services protected raise cooper from that. But its mentioning people like me in the same list as, people who are neo nazis. I mean, thats pretty ridiculous. Seems to me youre mentioning the same document. I dont think that they call the neo nazis, that the fascist fringe. So they do distinguish between the radical right, which they you as, and the they label you as, and the fascist , which are the fascist fringe, which are the neo nazis. Its very dodgy that a group like gets government funding. Paul, look, its a perfectly sensible thing to have organisations that are monitoring far right activity, far left activity , islamist activity. Thats all absolutely fine. But i think hope not hate are just not doing themselves any favours or doing what theyre meant to do. Any favours. If they start dragging in and seeking to deal, legitimise views that are within the democratic mainstream , even if democratic mainstream, even if you disagree with them like you, or even, say, nigel farage, and putting them in the same bracket as neo nazis, it doesnt do the debate any good, and its actually devaluing the contribution they themselves can make. And saying that were blurring the lines between the radical right and fascist, which from an extraordinary view, they are lines between are blurring the lines between what legitimate criticise what is legitimate to criticise in my view, and whats part of the mainstream. Even if you dont like it. Even if you dont like it. Back to michael and come back to Michael Goves this goves definition of this morning , does that stop the morning, does that stop the government interacting with people who have legitimate views . That is to say, would it be legitimate to want the caliphate to take place in the uk . If you could persuade uk . If you could persuade british people to vote for it . Its very important to go back to the origins of all this. I mean, this debate about extremism isnt you. And the government years has had government for years has had this debate over another group that wasnt today, the that wasnt named today, the Muslim Council of britain. You know, do you give it a platform . Know, do you give it a platform . Do you provide it with government patronage . Do you do you fund it . Theyve been having that debate. This just doesnt apply to Just Stop Oil at all because the governments never patronised the governments patronised it. The governments never it money the never given it money and the governments a governments never given it a platform. So feel myself that platform. So i feel myself that the got a of the governments got a bit of explaining to do. Know, i explaining to do. You know, i understand engage understand not wanting to engage orfund understand not wanting to engage or fund groups that seek to overthrow parliamentary democracy. To on democracy. When you get to on part one of the definition, which is all about ideas and values , that me values, that seems to me a muddle. And im not quite clear what the governments thinking of here, because, nigel, were not all obliged have same not all obliged to have the same values, we . Values, are we . No, the point. And im no, thats the point. And im quite pleased to see the quite pleased to see from the old prevent definition , the idea old prevent definition, the idea about undermining british values, disappearing simply because its so vague. Im in favour of british values. But if they mean Different Things to different this is different people, this is certainly more specific. But i think pauls right. It rather depends how its actually exercised, because its going to be a subjective judgement on groups, not an objective one, and the michael gove oddly mentioned things like patriotic alternative , a Neo Nazi Group alternative, a Neo Nazi Group which obviously doesnt get government funding. What worries me is that when i was in the cabinet office, we heard that a sort of semi terrorist supporting group had gone into home office. So we drew up regulations to try stop groups like that try and stop groups like that going the government. Then going into the government. Then we a civil we discovered that a Civil Service interpreted this to service had interpreted this to stop expert on whatever field stop an expert on whatever field he who didnt like brexit he was in who didnt like brexit going and this the going in. And this is the problem. Rules from problem. The rules go from something perfectly sensible. And is, think, where and this is, i think, where youre concerned to stopping people having legitimate cause. I think is very much the i think this is very much the point. And this why i would point. And this is why i would say you, jacob, like, if this say to you, jacob, like, if this is concern, you have, oddly is a concern, you have, oddly enough, share it, but will enough, we do share it, but will you support a call for Citizens Assembly . Things like this assembly . So things like this cannot mps cannot go way cannot happen. Mps cannot go way past the mark and do ridiculous things like this without ratification by the people. Ratification by the people. They that through they do that through parliament the Great Parliament because the great citizens the house Citizens Assembly is the house of today we hope of commons. Today we asked hope not appear tonight, but not hate to appear tonight, but they and have not given they refused and have not given a statement either. Also a statement either. We also asked truss for london for clarification on its funding of hope, did not hope, not hate, but did not receive later. Ill receive a response later. Ill be to the bottom of be getting to the bottom of whether it was right for the speaker to choose diane speaker not to choose diane abbott yesterday abbott to speak yesterday at Prime Ministers questions, and ill my next ill be assessing what my next guest called the implosion guest has called the implosion of in state the of tories in state of the nafions of tories in state of the nations book club well. Welcome back. Weve been talking about extremism and john makes the very good point. As far as im concerned, this organisation should be called hate, not hope. Graham. Those considered far right are simply normal people who can think critically that the floor has moved beneath their feet does not them right not make them extreme right wingers mc. The government wingers and mc. The government is down a blind in is racing down a blind alley in trying to extremism. The trying to define extremism. The police need to enforce police simply need to enforce the. As it stands, they are the law. As it stands, they are failing do so and the failing to do so and the government is tripping over itself be itself when it should be demanding that the police does its job properly. Speculation has been rife recently that an election could be called on the 2nd of may, the day of the local elections in the last few hours, however, the Prime Minister has ruled out an election on that date, which has been taken as a strong indication that it will not now an early election. Not now be an early election. Well, panel is still with me, well, my panel is still with me, paul goodman and nigel nelson, paul goodman and nigel nelson, paul, paul goodman and nigel nelson, paul , this has been a completely paul, this has been a completely unnecessary distraction, hasnt it . Well, there are two great games that political journalists play. Game number one is when will the tory leadership challenge be . And game number two is when will the general election be . And the truth is, both of these could have been shut down if the 1922 committee had rational rules about had more rational rules about leadership challenge, and if the prime only seen Prime Minister had only seen through what he started to do in january and rule out a may election, none of this need have happened. Does ruling out the may election make the other favourite conversation on tory leadership more topical . Well, that conversation is rather like rain falling in the british spring. It will go on regardless of when the general election is called or what the particular circumstances of the time are. I mean, my judgement is it makes it marginally less likely. But hey, the media wants to talk about a tory leadership challenge. So do lots of conservative mps. So do some conservative mps. So do some conservative commentators. So we doubtless will. We doubtless will, nigel, you must be watching this with a sort of degree of amusement as the tory party gets itself into a bit of muddle over dates and so on, apart from the damage its doing to the country. Apart from the damage its doing to tbutzountry. Apart from the damage its doing to tbut yes, ry. Apart from the damage its doing to tbut yes, i. Apart from the damage its doing to tbut yes, i mean, to an but yes, i mean, to an extent, though i would add one to the journalists list that paul mentioned when got to the journalists list that pa|nothing oned when got to the journalists list that pa|nothing else when got to the journalists list that pa|nothing else to when got to the journalists list that pa|nothing else to writezn got to the journalists list that pa|nothing else to write about,|ot no nothing else to write about, we reshuffled the cabinet, thats third one. Thats the third one. Absolutely, on the may absolutely, but on the may election. On the may election, election. On the may election, i think that he had it planned. I think that he had it planned. I think he had it planned towards the end of last year. That was the end of last year. That was the but certain things had the idea, but certain things had to fall into place. One is that the National Insurance cut worked, budget worked, that the recent budget had to change polls around, had to change the polls around, and had a plane off to and we had a plane off to uganda, off to rwanda, none of those things have happened. So i think that the polls havent changed at all. They theyre just getting worse. And hes now in the stage of lets just hope something turns up and we get away with that. But this is very much the labour partys narrative, isnt it . The labour party wants to imply been doing a lot imply and has been doing a lot of saying that they of briefing, saying that they think to be may and think its going to be may and telling candidates that telling labour candidates that theyve have their theyve got to have their election addresses in by midnight on whatever it is. Midnight on whatever day it is. But pretty soon to try and beef up the heat around the 2nd of may to then say youre for it. Thats right. I mean, labour have certainly been pumping this up the month and up for the last month and ironically, at point when it ironically, at the point when it seemed likely it was not seemed less likely it was not going to the budget, i think was the final nail in the coffin. It hasnt the dial and so hasnt moved the dial and so because of that, it just became so much less likely that he could go on may the 2nd. The question really is when does he go . I mean, will things get better for him, all he can pray is that hes done enough to get rid of labours economic policy. We may end up in a situation is. Well, which one . Which one is better than the other . And as simple as that. And theres a golden rule of british politics, isnt there . That has certainly held true since 1979 that governments go after four years. If everything is going well and theyre comfortably ahead in the polls, thats the time to do it. Yes, but it often doesnt happen. And this is a case now ive never thought it would be. May just because ive never thought it would be. Mayconservatives just because ive never thought it would be. Mayconservatives are st because ive never thought it would be. Mayconservatives are aboutiuse ive never thought it would be. Mayconservatives are about 205 the conservatives are about 20 points behind. And hey, Prime Ministers dont to the polls ministers dont go to the polls when theyre 20 points behind. I mean, suppose really what will mean, i suppose really what will happen, suppose, is broadly happen, i suppose, is broadly one things. The first one of two things. The first thing is, to be frank, people have looked at the conservative moves, seen have moves, theyve seen them have four and just four terms and theyve just given up. Want change. Given up. They want change. Thats possibility one. Thats possibility number one. Probably the most likely the other, which i suppose is rishi sunaks hope, is that when the campaign actually starts, people will become more politically engaged than they are now. But engaged than they are now. But clearly theres no great affection for keir starmer. It doesnt really look as though labours got much room for manoeuvre and people will have second thoughts. And thats the nature of the choice. This put pressure on and does this put pressure on for the 3rd of may, when the Election Results have come in on the leadership question, or do you share my view that another change in leadership would be absolute madness . Well the two points youve made are not contradictory. Yes, of course there will be immense turmoil after the local elections in may, but you really have to ask what another change of conservative leader is actually going to do . Who is this magical person whos going to unite the conservative party . Well, penny morden seems to be putting herself forward as far as the newspapers are concerned with. With all due respect to Penny Mordaunt badenoch or any with all due respect to penny m theset badenoch or any with all due respect to penny m these potential badenoch or any with all due respect to penny m these potential contenders r any with all due respect to penny m these potential contenders , any with all due respect to penny m these potential contenders , i ny of these potential contenders, i mean, why on earth should, the voters accept now a third conservative leader who has had no endorsement for the voters once, maybe fine, twice , once, maybe fine, twice, possibly third time . No. So theres a final point. If we had another leader, wed have to go straight to an election. Couldnt then. Hold on. Theres no question about it. Wed have to be a general election. Yeah. Something of has so something of a stir has ansen so something of a stir has arisen after Prime Ministers questions yesterday when, in arisen after Prime Ministers questofrs yesterday when, in arisen after Prime Ministers questof diane erday when, in arisen after Prime Ministers questof diane erday wh reported spite of Diane Abbotts reported 46 chamber, way of 46 bobs in the chamber, a way of signalling intent to ask a signalling ones intent to ask a question, the didnt question, the speaker didnt select its widely select her. Its been widely suggested that this was a disappointing from mr disappointing decision from mr speaken speaker, considering the unpleasant about speaker, considering the unpby sant about speaker, considering the unpby the about speaker, considering the unpby the tory about speaker, considering the unpby the tory donor, about speaker, considering the unpby the tory donor, frank out her by the tory donor, frank hester. However, context is missing from this. Prime ministers question is half an hour, ministers question is half an hour , and the speaker has to get hour, and the speaker has to get through the entire order paper , through the entire order paper, including six questions from the leader of the opposition and two for the snp commons leader. If people have a problem with the way things are embodied yesterday, its a procedural matter rather than the speaker doing wrong. My doing anything wrong. Well, my commentators are still with me, paul commentators are still with me, paul, you procedure in the paul, you know, procedure in the house of commons, the draw is done every week, and yesterdays draw had almost overwhelmingly opposition. I think it opposition people. I think it was 11 opposition, four conservative. The speaker didnt get through all the people on the paper by half past, let alone getting on to opposition people who werent on the list. I suppose just to put the other point of view for a moment, i think some of your viewers will think, well, hey, you know, Diane Abbotts been named shouldnt named this week. Why shouldnt she up . And lets sweep she get up . And lets sweep aside these anachronistic aside all these anachronistic rules regulations rules and regulations that prevent being called. And prevent her being called. And i suppose the answer to that is, you know, rather as youve got to have rules in a school to keep order, youve got to have rules in the house of commons, if a labour mp is down on the order paper be called, you order paper to be called, you cant push that person cant just push that person aside to put someone else. Some people only expect to get twice so being get in twice a year. So being called Prime Ministers called at Prime Ministers questions a big thing. If questions is a big thing. If youre on the order paper, you dont to lose your spot in dont want to lose your spot in the sun. I understand that no, i understand that totally. After the totally. And if after the shuffle, guys call it, shuffle, as you guys call it, took and had a full took place and you had a full list, it was going to be very difficult for the speaker to do anything it. I just think anything about it. I just think in case like this where almost anything about it. I just think in entire like this where almost anything about it. I just think in entirelikeprimervhere almost anything about it. I just think in entirelikePrime Ministers st the entire of Prime Ministers questions about diane abbott questions was about diane abbott , it seems particularly sad that diane abbott didnt have a chance to question the Prime Minister when the whole debate was about her. But there is one thing that you can do as backbench mp, you can do as a backbench mp, and that is raise a point of order, which the speaker would unquestionably taken at unquestionably have taken at the end pmqs when prime end of pmqs when the Prime Minister there. End of pmqs when the prime mirifter there. End of pmqs when the prime mirif the there. End of pmqs when the prime mirif the prime there. End of pmqs when the prime mirif the Prime Minister is if the Prime Minister is still there. But if youre fleet of foot, the Prime Minister is still there, and the speaker would have been perfectly to have been perfectly happy to take a of order. Thats take a point of order. Thats the thing with house commons the thing with house of commons procedures , theres procedures, theres always a way. But the backbencher has to be to use the way to get be willing to use the way to get his or her point across. Think the Prime Minister i think the Prime Minister might done runner before might have done a runner before that. Got to her but that. She got to her feet, but the speaker was criticised a fortnight for changing fortnight ago for changing commons procedures, which is why i why he couldnt do i understand why he couldnt do it this round. And everyone it this time round. And everyone said you shouldnt do that. Said why you shouldnt do that. Therefore has to stick to therefore he has to stick to procedures. People dont like procedures. If people dont like it, committee can it, the Procedure Committee can make alternative suggestions. Imagining a in im just imagining a world in which abbott would have which diane abbott would have got feet and said, point got to her feet and said, point of order, speaker. Just of order, mr speaker. Just before Prime Minister before the Prime Minister scurries of the chamber, before the Prime Minister scurrieis of the chamber, before the Prime Minister scurrieis fact,� |e chamber, before the Prime Minister scurrieis fact,1esuspectar, before the Prime Minister scurrieis fact,1esuspect what which is in fact, i suspect what would been happening. I would have been happening. May i make prime make the point that Prime Ministers look very weak if they scurry out, when know scurry out, when they know theres point to be made theres a point about to be made about and they carefully about them, and they carefully orchestrate stop orchestrate things to stop looking though looking weak, though in a situation like that, the last thing is be thing he wants to do is be questioned diane abbott, so questioned by diane abbott, so you can can understand that. You can one can understand that. He wouldnt have to well, he wouldnt have had to respond, would have been respond, but he would have been there. Id been very surprised if out because if hed scurried out because i dont think hes a cowardly man. Okay, well, i mean, ive seen parameter pretty parameter scurry out at a pretty rapid rate. When there are rapid rate. When there are things coming up, well never know. Well never know. Well never know. But think the speaker know. But i think the speaker did right thing and stuck to did the right thing and stuck to the you to my the rules. Thank you to my panel the rules. Thank you to my panel. Be explaining panel. Ill be explaining shortly returning shortly why returning wolves to the wild in britain could be one of most gloriously of the most gloriously potty ideas heard in a long time. Ideas ive heard in a long time. Plus, britains foremost plus, one of britains foremost political joins political journalists joins for state nations book club. Welcome back. Well be talking about mr speaker and diane abbott. And youve been sending in your mail. Moggs martin says. Is it any wonder the polls have not improved after the useless budget . 2 of ni telling the pubuc budget . 2 of ni telling the public there are £900 a year better off. Most people wont be £900 better off as they state the average wage rather than the lower wage. Ann says lower median wage. And ann says jacob, what do you think about Angela Rayner suggesting diane abbott should be allowed in abbott should be allowed back in to well, they might to the party . Well, they might want to. After all thats gone on week. She is, of course, on this week. She is, of course, an independent at the moment, not member of for not a labour member of for parliament some time now there has a movement in britain has been a movement in britain to wolves to the wild in to return wolves to the wild in the uk, and footage emerging from deer from lincolnshire of deer holding once holding up traffic has once again reignited the wolf lobby. Indeed, you could say theyre howling. Wolves once part howling. Wolves were once part of british ecosystem until of the british ecosystem until they to extinction. They were hunted to extinction. Really time of the reign really by the time of the reign of henry the seventh in 1485, a few continued into the 18th century, a Great Century of which im sometimes said to be the member for. But i cant think of a more splendidly eccentric idea than returning wolves to the wild, not least because it pays a nightmare for farmers. And, of course, the three little pigs with the aid of the big bad wolf, big bad wolf, big bad wolf, whos afraid of the big bad wolf . Is that really what we want in rural somerset, where we both actually live . Actually live . I mean, its funny that you should show three little pigs because its pig farmers on the continent that are most happy about return wolves. About the return of wolves. Because of african swine because of course, african swine fever a real threat pig fever is a real threat for pig farming. And its only in those places where wolves present places where wolves are present that the that wild boar which carry the disease control. Disease are under control. Kills the boars, it so it kills the boars, it kills the weaker boars, kills the sick ones. But then it the sick ones. But then it doesnt get the three little pigs. They jump over into pigs. They dont jump over into the and gobble up all of the sties and gobble up all of the sties and gobble up all of the pigs at once. I mean, look, the idea of having wolves back in britain is considered think considered mad. I dont think its quite mad as people will its quite as mad as people will have believe. Mean, anyone have us believe. I mean, anyone whos been on holiday in the continent year or continent in the last year or two lets say, or two in france, lets say, or belgium italy spain , has belgium or italy or spain, has beenin belgium or italy or spain, has been in a landscape populated by wolves and lots of i mean been in a landscape populated by wol4s and lots of i mean been in a landscape populated by wol4 or nd lots of i mean been in a landscape populated by wol4 or 5000 s of i mean been in a landscape populated by wol4 or 5000 wolves i mean been in a landscape populated by wol4 or 5000 wolves in i mean been in a landscape populated by wol4 or 5000 wolves in italy. An the 4 or 5000 wolves in italy. Arent they generally but arent they generally less populated less densely populated countries . The is countries . And that the uk is pretty densely populated and youve seen lots of foxes coming into london . Do they then come into london . Do they then come into london . Do they then come into london once theyve exhausted the food supply in the countryside . Well, of course, the netherlands is as densely populated or more than we are, i think. And certainly one of the most intensively managed landscapes europe. I think landscapes in europe. I think the netherlands is 2 or 3 in the League Tables in terms of food exporting there are exporting nations, and there are more the netherlands, more wolves in the netherlands, and norway. So and youll find in norway. So there are wolves in luxembourg, in and in cities rome, in belgium and in cities rome, amsterdam, in belgium and in cities rome, amsterdall, wolves. But theyve all got wolves. But i dont think we should play down the difficulties of living alongside charismatic wildlife like wolves. It is a difficult thing. Dont pose a threat thing. They dont pose a threat to humans, but they do pose a threat to some livestock, especially sheep, especially sheep. And i mean, in rural somerset, you have lots of sheep that arent particularly protected. Theyre protected by protected. Theyre protected by drystone hedges. And drystone walls or hedges. And the wolves could easily get over that. Are wolves like foxes in that. Are wolves like foxes in that they wont just kill one, theyll kill as many as they can, so theyll kill livestock and theyll kill them in numbers i so they do that in the same way that foxes will go into a chicken shed and kill more than they need. No one quite understands why they do that, but but co existence is possible. I mean, belgium, for example, has invested heavily in co existence and in the co existence measures and in the last while numbers last year, while wolf numbers have theyve halved the have gone up, theyve halved the numbers livestock killed by numbers of livestock killed by wolves. Have they done that . How have they done that . How have they done that . The whole range of so the whole range of different techniques, special sounds and experimenting with pheromones, drive pheromones, smells that drive wolves flapping wolves away, little flapping bits plastic, plastic around wolves away, little flapping bitsfencing,ic, plastic around wolves away, little flapping bitsfencing, dogs, stic around wolves away, little flapping bitsfencing, dogs, alpacas|nd wolves away, little flapping bitsfencing, dogs, alpacas , d the fencing, dogs, alpacas, donkeys theyre trying everything. And the eu to give it credit is really investing in that coexistence. But but the numbers of livestock killed are not as big as people would have you believe. So in france, for example, where there are many sheep, millions, and where there are many wolves, the number of sheep about sheep killed amount to about nought all nought point nought 2 of all the in each year. The sheep in france each year. And terms of the wolves and in terms of the wolves breeding, how many would you expect to get if they were left free . And would you get in the position where you might have to cull if the cull wolves if the reintroduction were successful . Cull wolves if the reirso duction were successful . Cull wolves if the reirso im ion were successful . Cull wolves if the reirso im no were successful . Cull wolves if the reirso im no scientist, essful . Cull wolves if the reirso im no scientist, butful . So im no scientist, but carnivore that carnivore Scientists Say that humans to manage the humans do not need to manage the numbers of apex predators. They are so american are self regulating, so american scientists will say that you dont to harvest manage dont need to harvest or manage wolves cougars. They are wolves or cougars. They are self regulating. I think theres a sort of birthrate thing here. Aside from the practicalities of bringing of managing explosive numbers of deer , especially in numbers of deer, especially in our croplands, you know, 85 of the food that we produce in this country comes from lincolnshire, cambridgeshire, the east. Places that are overrun with deer and hunters are on of it and hunters are not on top of it and wont get on top of it. So aside from the practicalities, i think that moral or that theres a moral or a birthright argument for putting back these missing species. Look how people that how delighted people are that white are back in sussex, white storks are back in sussex, or the or beavers are back in the rivers the country. Rivers of the west country. Yes, absolutely. But theyre theyre and perhaps you theyre harmless and perhaps you can tell that ive got lots of little children. Why, i know the can tell that ive got lots of littlbadildren. Why, i know the can tell that ive got lots of littlbad wolf|. Why, i know the can tell that ive got lots of littlbad wolf cartoonsknow the can tell that ive got lots of littlbad wolf cartoons so w the can tell that ive got lots of littlbad wolf cartoons so well, big bad wolf cartoons so well, but perhaps theyre less frightening wolves. But frightening than wolves. But theres story to talk theres another story to talk about whilst youre here, ben. And thats the fact the eu has seemingly come its senses at seemingly come to its senses at last the on the question of last for the on the question of green farming rules, the unelected, unaccountable European Commission seems to have listened to voters and is set take the decision to set to take the decision to slash environmental requirements for amidst months of for its farmers amidst months of backlash from farmers across the country. So its rare that i praise the european union, but surely making easier and surely making it easier and cheaper for own farmers to cheaper for our own farmers to produce is a sensible way produce food is a sensible way to competitiveness. That to enable competitiveness. That this important this is a really important decision isnt it . Because european farming was becoming less less competitive and less and less competitive and the eu has now, i think, basically said it will lift almost all regulations on farmers of under 25 acres, which is the majority of farmers in recipient in receipt of subsidies in europe. So whats in the sights of the European Commission are not so much the regulations governing farming as the green conditions attached to the subsidies which are provided to farming, and i dont believe in subsidies. Long term for any industry. The eu gives out 55 to ,60 billion a year to farming. And are some and then there are some conditions attached conditions historically attached to around to that cross compliance around environmental stewardship. I think public money be think public money should be used deliver public goods, used to deliver public goods, and i would be in favour of removing subsidies. Really and replacing with payments for replacing them with payments for things need. For things that we need. So for example, if a cluster of farmers is shown to be helping to reduce flooding thereby protecting flooding and thereby protecting communities water, communities from flood water, they should be rewarded by the state for doing that. But just dishing out cash according to how youre farming is how much land youre farming is a in my mind, and one of a madness in my mind, and one of the best brexit dividends that we could have possibly conceived the best brexit dividends that weas uld have possibly conceived the best brexit dividends that we as environmentalists conceived the best brexit dividends that we as environmentalists co an ived of as environmentalists is an end mad subsidies. End to those mad subsidies. I completely agree with well, i completely agree with you and fact that there are you and the fact that there are so 25 acre farms subsidised so many 25 acre farms subsidised in continent why in the continent shows why eu farming inefficient, farming is so inefficient, because they have propped up farms that ought to have consolidated, as has mainly happened the uk, and farming happened in the uk, and farming can be, as the dutch show, can be globally competitive. If you are concentrated and you adopt to a commercial activities. Yes, but the European Unions farm subsidies, about 50 of them are given out to the 10 richest farmers. So actually its overwhelmingly the largest. And i think what happens when you subsidise an industry with for 40 years, with billions and billions of euros, is you kill any desire for innovation, any willingness to innovate. So i think european and british farming and farming has become stagnant and change was always a constant in the british landscape. If youve taken the train kent in taken the train across kent in the youd have the pre war years, youd have found hops. We went found lots of hops. Then we went to apples. Now were going to white wine. Innovation has always something thats always been something thats present the british present in the british landscape, subsidies landscape, and subsidies have killed that off. Amazing and its absolutely amazing in see farmers in somerset how you see farmers who doing incredibly well who are doing incredibly well because innovating and because theyre innovating and theyre added theyre doing value added things. And theres a farmer very near me who has his own dairy. He sells the milk locally. It sells at a premium price. Hes got on the site, price. Hes got on the site, somebody making mozzarella of all be made in all things to be made in somerset. And that innovation is really what makes us competitive, subsidies. Competitive, not subsidies. So. So issue of cutting so on the issue of cutting subsidies, im sure youre right. Yeah. But and i think michael gove was so brilliant when he was in defra because he replaced subsidies with a system known as pubuc subsidies with a system known as public for public good or public money for public good or environmental management. Environmental land management. And is and its each payment is directly the public directly linked to the public goods delivered. And goods that are delivered. And i think where those public think that where those public goods are quantifiable in their benefit society , i think benefit for society, i think its quite right that the state should pay for them. There some difficulties there are some difficulties with i agree with your with that. I agree with your point its been point on flooding. Its been more some of the more difficult with some of the process land out of process of taking land out of agriculture, because thats damaged farmer who damaged the tenant farmer who hasnt been able to innovate agriculturally and has been a great boon for the landowner who probably doesnt it. Probably doesnt need it. Yeah , i think the most yeah, i think the most effective Landscape Recovery programs , which are which are programs, which are which are typically geared towards much less productive landscapes , less productive landscapes, typically in our national parks, are ones that have been are the ones that have been designed conjunction with designed in conjunction with tenants. Some tenants. And there are some brilliant there and brilliant ones out there and i think some of these tests and trials that have taken place have shown that, that is have shown that, that that is possible. Dont possible. You know, i dont think Landscape Recovery needs to with the rights of to be at odds with the rights of tenants. And i havent seen anyone suggest that we should be taking productive land out taking good, productive land out of wants to of production. No one wants to rewild for rewild cambridgeshire, for example. Places , example. Now, in those places, the challenge as far as Food Security is getting the security goes is getting the land under production food land under production for food for than for for people rather than for machines. Mean , bioenergy, for machines. I mean, bioenergy, for example, up 300,000 acres example, uses up 300,000 acres of our best boundaries. Yes, its a terrible idea. Yes, its a terrible idea. Well, im sure i want wolves well, im not sure i want wolves in West Harptree , but actually in West Harptree, but actually theres a lot of agreement between you, ben, very between us. Thank you, ben, very much coming state of much indeed. Coming up, state of the book club returns the nation book club returns with the telegraphs political edhon editor, ben riley smith, to discuss the right to rule 13 years, five Prime Ministers and the implosion of the tories. On Patrick Christys tonight, 9 to 11 pm. Michael goves new definition of extremism is out. But who slipped through the net . Ill face off against a line up of these potential new extremists. The home office have accepted a migrant argument that israel is an apartheid state. Have we just opened the door for nearly 2 million palestinians to come to britain . Plus nigel farage tells me, if the Boris Johnson bubble has burst and huge divisions in the labour party. Angela rayner wants diane abbott back in its Patrick Christys tonight. 9 to 11 pm. Be i well. Welcome back. Weve been discussing wolves and eu agricultural policy. And youve been sending in your mail. Moggs elizabeth says they want to bnng elizabeth says they want to bring back wolves to stop us eating lamb walks. Theyll all be eaten by the wolves. And jeff. Jacob, weve had mass migration for two decades. Multiculturalism has failed and the red squirrel is gone. Britain is full. We have no room for wolves. Well, i didnt think the wolves were coming over on the wolves were coming over on the boats, but perhaps the small boats, but perhaps they and as a wolves they are. And alex, as a wolves fan, and i think thats an Association Football team. I Association Football team. I think return of best think the return of the best football in midlands Football Team in the midlands would thing. Would be a wonderful thing. Excellent. Hear excellent. Im delighted to hear it. The new book, the right to it. The new book, the right to rule 13 years, five Prime Ministers and the implosion of the tories , is an explosive but the tories, is an explosive but erudite account of westminsters intrigue over the last decade, and a bit from the ashes of the financial crisis to brexit and the global pandemic. Ben had a front row seat. State of the nafion front row seat. State of the nation club starts now. Nation book club starts now. Well, im joined now by ben riley smith. The Political Editor of the daily telegraph. Ben, thank you very much for coming in. Thanks for having me. A much enjoyed reading your book. Brilliant. Some which i was around for. And one of the great unknowns is the 2017 election, which theresa may calls the famous walk in the hills that she did and came back and called an election. Having said she wouldnt. Yeah. And said she wouldnt. Yeah. And then she didnt win it. What effect do you think that had . Effect do you think that had . Oh, a huge effect. I think its so easy when we consider theresa mays legacy. Now we remember that brexit crunch in parliament, the inability to get anything house of anything through the house of commons and how that commons and how much that ultimately undercut her premiership led to her being premiership and led to her being forced out. What we dont remember is that first year when she was miles ahead in the polls, she was seen as kind of cleaning up the mess of the posh boys, sensible, sincere, boys, the sensible, sincere, hardworking boys, the sensible, sincere, hardw she ng boys, the sensible, sincere, hardw she called that snap when she called that snap election, she was roughly as far ahead of labour. The tories were far ahead of labour as labour are now kind of 20 points. So it was there to win a bigger majority, and that would have given her the space in the commons to get through her version of brexit. And what would her version have think . Have been . Do you think . Thats a fascinating well, thats a fascinating question. Chapters question. In one of the chapters we explore those early months and just how and plot out just how influential nick timothy is now running of your running to be. One of your colleagues on the tory benches, was her camp, remember . Was in her camp, remember . Theresa may was a remainer. Nick timothy was a brexiteer. There timothy was a brexiteer. There was that big speech in the conference of 2016 where theresa may had to project to brexiteers like that could be like yourself that she could be trusted brexit. And nick trusted with brexit. And nick timothy a huge part in timothy played a huge part in shaping that narrative and ultimately quite a hard ultimately it was quite a hard version brexit that version of brexit that she espoused in that speech, saying, no, were not going to be in the Single Market or the customs union. No, eu judges arent going to be involved. The going to be involved. So the question whether if she had question is whether if she had one space, she have one extra space, she would have continued with hard brexit continued with that hard brexit or she would have or whether she would have actually to softer one actually pivoted to a softer one because the prominence of the erg and of the one nation group really comes about because shes got majority. Got no majority. We would have been yeah, we would have been marginal shed had marginal figures if shed had a majority of 100, that it looked as if was going to get when as if she was going to get when she called the election. Politics a numbers game, politics is a numbers game, and who holds the balance and he who holds the balance holds power. And why the erg holds the power. And why the erg was so powerful that period. Was so powerful in that period. After election, when after the 2017 election, when theresa lost her Commons Theresa may lost her commons majority and had to do a deal with the dup, was they had the numbers ultimately the numbers and ultimately the spartans steadfast spartans wanted held steadfast and didnt want to back her deal and didnt want to back her deal. But youre right. If she had had 50, 60, 70, 80 mp majority then she would have been fine. And one of the things that runs through the book is this 15. You say that David Cameron thought every day. He thought about 15 every day. He was the party and its was leader of the party and its led to there being five Prime Ministers whilst labour couldnt get rid of, jeremy corbyn, even when, yeah, a huge percentage of his party, over 60 voted against him. How destabilising do you think the 15 is . And do you think David Cameron would have been removed had he not gone after losing the referendum . Well, in this book that covers this period of 13 years plus, i think you can see politically the strengths and the weaknesses of that 15. You know , Boris Johnson, theresa may know, Boris Johnson, theresa may was ultimately toppled because tory mps didnt want her. They triggered that 15 threshold. Youre quite generous in passing about our efforts to get the letters in, which seemed much embarrassing, much more embarrassing, a failure at time than you failure at the time than you made sound and you made the referendum. The reference to dads army. I think you and others went pubuc i think you and others went public said, we want these public and said, we want these no confidence in, and no confidence letters in, and for nothing for a week or so nothing happened. Happened. Happened. Nothing happened. Yeah. So arguably politically that got rid of that worked. It got rid of theresa may, Boris Johnson theresa may, got Boris Johnson secured majority drove secured this big majority drove through the policy of brexit. But arguably what happened, but then arguably what happened, two years ago when that happened with boris. And then it happened so quickly with liz again showed that almost kind of itchy trigger finger. It was so easy to get rid of leaders. That became a habit. And the public clearly, became disillusioned with that. And the tories are still to recover and still trying to recover and indeed, and they got fed up with it at the point at which boris went and the polls have never recovered then. Recovered from then. Very interesting its a very interesting comment have from kwasi comment you have from Kwasi Kwarteng truss kwarteng on the liz truss experience. Hadnt experience. Yes. If it hadnt been mini budget, it would been the mini budget, it would have been Something Else. Is that view you came to when that the view you came to when you were it . Because you were writing it . Because until minister, until she became Prime Minister, shed very good tactical shed been a very good tactical politician and had managed to survive all sorts of shape shifting within the tory party. I think the truth about her often you hear in politics, people saying, why arent politicians conviction politicians . Actually, liz truss was probably more of a conviction politician that the common common assessment puts it. But there was this it. But yeah, there was this problem. One of her former problem. One of her former speechwriters called it the spinal tap problem. She had always up 11. Always turn everything up to 11. When youre cabinet minister when youre a cabinet minister that works well in that works quite well in negotiations you negotiations because you ultimately bartered down by ultimately get bartered down by the service other the Civil Service or by other cabinet ministers. Your cabinet ministers. When your Prime Minister, there is no one there you no, it there telling you no, turn it back down. So if you have this instinct going and you instinct for going big and you dont the checks and dont have the checks and balances on your power, as balances on your power, then as Kwasi Kwarteng and a Kwasi Kwarteng said, and quite a few other in that few of, other people in that inner said it was going inner circle said it was going to be Something Else that she would gone to big on. Would have gone to big on. Yes, actually the yes, though actually the civil deserves some Civil Service deserves some credit a bit because you discuss the of the gas price for the setting of the gas price for a long period. The Civil Service negotiator, who i very negotiator, who i work very closely with, was absolutely brilliant and quite brilliant and was quite determined. Were not going to determined. We were not going to settle at a lunatic price costing billions of pounds , and costing billions of pounds, and there an element there was certainly an element of sure that things of making sure that things didnt happen too quickly and we didnt happen too quickly and we didnt get a ridiculous price. Yes, but in that, did you feel that liz truss was pushing for a big deal . Because, you know, as we describe in the book from you know, they from others, you know, they wanted a big two decades deal that of that was going to be tens of billions pounds. Could billions of pounds. That could be admirable drive. Be an admirable drive. Certainly some talk there was certainly some talk around that. That is that is certainly, certainly true. And now got rishi sunak, yes, now weve got rishi sunak, yes, of hes still in place. Of course hes still in place. As your book ends, where do you think it goes next . Well, ultimately the well, ultimately to the election. And can there be election. And can there be a miracle turnaround . I mean, what is true certainly looking back from where we are is there have been so many points as journalists when we look forward and say, well, maybe that is the point when things to turn point when things begin to turn the statement this net the autumn statement this net zero last autumns zero reset last autumns conference , this months conference speech, this months budget. And yet the polls have remained doggedly at about 20 points with labour ahead. So you do begin to wonder what if it hasnt happened yet, will trigger that turnaround . Yes. Theresa may once yes. As theresa may once famously nothing has famously said, nothing has changed. Thank you very much changed. Ben thank you very much indeed. Thats all from me. Up next, its Patrick Christys. Patrick, what is on your bill of fare this evening . Absolutely massive yeah, absolutely massive show. It appears the home show. It appears that the home office to let office seems willing to let around million palestinians around 2 million palestinians come asylum the uk, come and claim asylum in the uk, which think is rather which i think is rather frightening. News. Angela rayner blows the labour party apart. Diane thinks a diane abbott thinks everyones a racist farage is racist and nigel farage is teeing off on Boris Johnson. 9 to 11 pm. Ill have all of tomorrows newspaper front pages for as well. And ive for you today as well. And ive got a rock star panel this evening. Allison pearson, shaun got a rock star panel this evenin and lison pearson, shaun got a rock star panel this evenin and matthew rson, shaun got a rock star panel this evenin and matthew laza. Shaun bailey and matthew laza. Always, sounds well, as always, sounds absolutely excellent, and i wonder whether home office wonder whether the home office will them all £3,000 will give them all £3,000 when theyve illegally to theyve come here illegally to go rwanda. Thats coming up go to rwanda. Thats coming up after weather. Ill be back after the weather. Ill be back on monday at 8 00. Im jason jacob rees mogg. Has been jacob rees mogg. This has been state the nation and i shall state of the nation and i shall shortly be motoring down to somerset , im shortly be motoring down to somerset, im looking somerset, and im looking forward there as the forward to heading there as the weather improves incrementally mile by mile. Furlong by furlong until finally i reach those broad, sunlit uplands that are known as gods own county of somerset , where known as gods own county of somerset, where king known as gods own county of somerset , where king alfred, of somerset, where king alfred, of course, worked out how to defeat the danes. A brighter outlook with boxt solar, sponsors of weather on. Solar, sponsors of weather on. Gb news. Good evening. Welcome to your latest weather update from the met office for gb news. Tomorrow will be a case of dodging the downpours. Some pretty heavy ones around, also some ones around, but also some bright spells when low pressure is dominating. Sitting right over the uk, youre never going to have dry weather for long, but this low has been providing some very soggy conditions through central and southern scotland day. It scotland through the day. And it stays overnight here, stays wet overnight here, showers elsewhere becoming bit stays wet overnight here, showfor elsewhere becoming bit stays wet overnight here, showfor englande becoming bit stays wet overnight here, showfor england and coming bit stays wet overnight here, showfor england and wales] bit drier for england and wales through the night, then more through the night, but then more heavy downpours coming the heavy downpours coming from the southwest through the early hours. Winds that as hours. Gusty winds with that as well, the odd rumble well, maybe even the odd rumble of thunder that might wake you up. Very mild night for most, up. A very mild night for most, but enough touch but just low enough for a touch of frost northern scotland in of frost in northern scotland in the countryside. So a and the countryside. So a damp and chilly start for most of scotland. Further heavy showers further south. A lot of spray and surface water on the roads for the morning commute, but those downpours should ease through the day. But it stays dull and for southeast dull and damp for southeast scotland. England scotland. Northeast england elsewhere, a mixture bright elsewhere, a mixture of bright spells some further spells but also some further showers. Again pretty mild for england and wales. 1516 where we see sunshine but a cold see some sunshine but a cold feeling day, particularly that persistent scotland persistent rain over scotland gets pretty cold on friday night. Of us will start the night. Many of us will start the weekend a touch of frost, weekend with a touch of frost, but many of us will start but also many of us will start with some sunshine. Stays fine for of eastern england, for much of eastern england, Northern England and scotland. Further west, will be further west, cloud will be edging with some patchy rain. Edging in with some patchy rain. Temperatures teens in the temperatures in the teens in the south single figures once more further north. Despite some decent spells of sunshine, goodbye looks like things are heating up. Boxt boilers sponsors of weather on gb news. Good evening. From the gb newsroom at 11 00. Im sophia wenzler your top story this houn wenzler your top story this hour. The Prime Minister has ruled out holding a general election on the 2nd of may. Amid speculation he could choose to go to the polls. Earlier, in an interview with itv, rishi sunak was asked if there would be an election on the same day as the local elections, which takes place on the 2nd of may. He replied there wont be a general election on that day. Michael election on that day. Michael gove has named some of the groups to be investigated under a new definition of extremism, which she says will mean the government can express more clearly than ever who poses a risk to britain. Some of the groups included are alleged to have islamist views, with others described as neo nazi. Todays new extremism definition will be used to assess whether some groups should be marginalised or blocked from public funding. But michael gove insists its not about silencing those with private and peaceful beliefs. Private and peaceful beliefs. We have to be clear eyed about the threat we face, precise about where that threat comes from and rigorous in defending our democracy. That means upholding freedom of expression, religion and belief when they are threatened, facing down harassment and hate, supporting the communities facing the greatest challenge from extremist activity and ensuring this house and this country are safe, free and united. Meanwhile, Angela Rayner says she would like to see diane abbott brought back as a labour mp. Former shadow home secretary mr abbott is currently an independent mp after she had the whip withdrawn following remarks she made in the observer last year over racism. There have been calls for to her have the whip restored since the race row erupted this week. Mps are erupted this week. Mps are getting a pay rise with an inflation busting 5. 5 boost, pushing salaries to around £91,000. It means pay will increase by more than £4,700 next year, or almost £400 extra each month. The westminster watchdog says its in line with an award for senior Civil Servants , but its above servants, but its above inflation, which is just 4, and the prince of wales has praised his mother dianas legacy at a ceremony marking a charitys 25th anniversary. The prince said his mother taught him that everyone has the potential to give something back, as he paid tribute to her at the diana legacy award. He told the legacy award. He told the audience that he and his wife, the