gb news. >> hello. good evening. it's me, jacob rees—mogg, on state of the nafion jacob rees—mogg, on state of the nation tonight. johnny mercer has said he would sooner go to prison than give up the names of the sas whistleblowers to the afghan inquiry. but surely people should be able to speak to mps confidentially as they to can a lawyer or a journalist. the oecd has made a gloomy forecast of britain's economic future. and no, it's not because of brexit. it's because of the bank of england's insistence on high interest rates and the overtaxing of british people. as the college campus anti—israel protests reached fever pitch, the cacophony has spilled over into the uk, with protest camps being set up across britain in universities. but will we see the same degree of disorder? plus a teacher who has been

banned from his profession after misgendering a student, has taken his case to the high court? i'll be speaking to the man himself tonight. state of the nation starts now. i'll also be joined by my most intellectual panel this evening. gb news is senior political commentator nigel nelson and the journalist and conservative peer paul goodman. as always, as you know, i want to hear from you. it's a crucial part of the programme. email me mailmogg@gbnews.com. but now it's what you've all been waiting for. the news bulletin with sam francis . with sam francis. >> jacob thank you and good evening to you. it's 8:00 and the top story from the newsroom tonight is that more than 700 migrants arrived in the uk today after crossing the channel in a single day, a new record for the yeah single day, a new record for the year. so far. home office

figures show 711 people made the journey in 14 boats on wednesday, suggesting an average of 51 people per boat. it brings the total number who've made the crossing since january to nearly now 8300. that's up 34% compared to the same time last year. we've heard tonight that a third man has been charged with assisting illegal immigration after five migrants, including a seven year old girl, died trying to cross the channel last week. the defendant, from sudan, was reported to be 23 years old. but dunng reported to be 23 years old. but during his court appearance today, he claimed to be a minor. it comes after two other men were also charged over that incident and they too claimed they were 15 and 16 years old. but initial assessments by immigration officers placed them in their 20s. meanwhile, police have arrested 45 people after a large group of protesters blocked a coach to stop it from leaving. with migrants on board. footage showed officers surrounding the bus and removing

several protesters , while others several protesters, while others joined the demonstrations. sitting in the road . the bus was sitting in the road. the bus was supposed to take seven migrants, we understand, to the bibby stockholm barge in dorset, but eventually left without them on board. downing streets called the protests as unacceptable . a the protests as unacceptable. a samurai sword attacker has appeared in court today charged with the murder of a 14 year old schoolboy in north—east london. daniel anjorin was fatally stabbed on tuesday morning as he made his way to school. marcus monzo, a spanish brazilian dual national, is also charged with two counts of attempted murder and injuring four other people when he broke into a house where a family was sleeping. the 36 year old has been remanded in custody and is next due to appear at the old bailey. custody and is next due to appear at the old bailey . well appear at the old bailey. well voters are continuing to head to the polls tonight in a series of local elections in many parts of england and wales , seats are up england and wales, seats are up for grabs on 107 local authorities , while there are authorities, while there are also votes for mayors. some police commissioners . and

police commissioners. and there's a by—election in blackpool south voting is due to end at 10:00 tonight and there will, of course, be full coverage and analysis right through the night here on gb news. the government, meanwhile , news. the government, meanwhile, has apologised to veterans today after some were turned away from polling stations because their veteran card wasn't on the official list of acceptable ids. veterans minister johnny mercer has vowed to do all he can to make sure veteran id cards are added to the list of valid identification varne. however, labour says the government's had years to make sure the cards were included. today's elections are the first time that many voters in england and wales have had to present id to vote. and finally, before we hand back to jacob in westminster to the us, where president joe biden has called for order on college campuses after violent clashes between police and protesters in california, hundreds of riot police moved in on pro—palestine protesters at ucla campus in los

angeles. police there say they've made hundreds of arrests dunng they've made hundreds of arrests during their crackdowns, and meanwhile in the uk, students have also set up sit in camps in protest against israel's war with hamas students in sheffield, in leeds, newcastle and in bristol set up tents outside campus buildings. organisers now suggest those demonstrations could spread across the rest of the uk . across the rest of the uk. that's the latest from the newsroom. more at 9:00. until then , you can sign up to gb news then, you can sign up to gb news alerts. just scan the code there on your screen or go to gb news. common alerts . common alerts. >> welcome back to state of the nation. the afghan inquiry has set a deadline of next week by when the veterans minister, johnny mercer, must reveal the names of the sas whistleblowers who gave him sensitive information in confidence about the alleged murders of innocent people in afghanistan . but people in afghanistan. but today, the times reported that sources close to mercer have said he would be willing to go

to prison before disclosing the names of the whistleblowers. in february, mr mercer, a former officer, told the inquiry that special forces soldiers had raised concerns with him about alleged executions of innocent civilians in afghanistan, as well as other concerning information regarding the mistreatment of afghans. the inquiry chairman, the very distinguished lord justice haddon—cave, ordered mercer to reveal their names, promising to protect their anonymity. but mercer refused. mercer was then told he had a deadline of the 5th of april or face a prison sentence. but the deadline has now been extended until next week. but this is a troubling case about the balance between the judiciary and parliament. are constitution works on a balance between the two, as a rule, mps are answerable in civil matters to their constituents, not to the courts and historically are exempt from civil but not criminal arrest. and much in the same way that when a defendant confides in his lawyer, or when a source confides in a journalist , a

confides in a journalist, a whistleblower has the reasonable expectation of anonymity . when expectation of anonymity. when giving sensitive information to a member of parliament. it is extremely rare that a journalist or a lawyer would have to hand over the names of sources of sensitive information , and i sensitive information, and i think the same should apply here. if these names were to be given to the inquiry, it would discourage other whistleblowers from coming forward. but on a more fundamental level, parliament is the highest authority in the land, higher than the courts because it's representative of the people. move like this would discourage anyone from giving sensitive but possibly vital information to a member of parliament who may be able to do his job better with such knowledge as ever . let me such knowledge as ever. let me know your thoughts mailmogg@gbnews.com. and i'm joined now by a friend of the program, legal consultant in human rights, fadi farhat. fadi, thank you very much for coming in. this is a very interesting issue because the allegations are tremendously serious and it is important that we find out if people were murdered by british

armed forces, and that's what the inquiry is doing, but is it right that the judge should then appear to have this power to extract information from someone? >> well, when this matter first broke out, jacob, back in march , broke out, jacob, back in march, and, i remember referring to the inquiries act 2005, and i had a look at section 21, which provides the, chairman powers to make a notice under that section. and broadly, there are three broad provisions. one is to give evidence , the power to to give evidence, the power to compel, to give evidence or to provide evidence in written form. and two is to provide any documents in one's custody , or documents in one's custody, or three to provide or produce any thing in one's custody. this isn't a document. the names of the sas officers are information, so it's not a document or a thing in one's custody . and so it can only be custody. and so it can only be the power, can only apply to the power to give evidence or to

produce evidence . and in my produce evidence. and in my view, that might that may not arguably may not extend to compel to give evidence and dictate the content of that evidence . john mercer has evidence. john mercer has already given his evidence as to what was said to him, and it's questionable whether the power then extends to compel him to , then extends to compel him to, produce evidence and dictate the content of that evidence , which content of that evidence, which is what he's being told to do by by producing the names i see. >> so there's at least an argument that there you can compel somebody to give evidence. you can't compel the extent of that evidence, as long as what they say is true in the evidence that they give. >> that's that that seems to be a plausible interpretation on on the wording of section 21 and parliament may have intended that to not to at least provide evidence , but not to dictate or evidence, but not to dictate or the extent of that evidence. and in what i hope is the unlikely eventuality that johnny mercer would be sent to prison, how would be sent to prison, how would that function? >> would he go for trial before jury, >> would he go for trial before jury, or would it be unilateral

action of a judge, the act, says , says that under section 35 that the chairman could institute proceedings or start proceedings, and it's, and one's liable for summary conviction up to 51 weeks imprisonment , so to 51 weeks imprisonment, so that's that . but in built in that's that. but in built in section 35 is whether you have a reasonable excuse defence. yes. so even in the event of a breach, one could still present the reasonable excuse defence. and john mercer has already pointed to the fact that his reasonable excuse is that there are public interest considerations in not divulging the names, as well as the officers being vulnerable or the officers being vulnerable or the officers being vulnerable or the officers being susceptible to reprisals or their family members . so there are reprisals or their family members. so there are wider issues that he could point to in providing that reasonable excuse defence. >> and there are other people who have an interest in this, aren't there? i mentioned journalists and lawyers because as a general but not absolute

principle, journalists can protect their sources and lawyers do not have to sneak on their clients. yes. and this is fundamental rental to a democratic society with free speech and the rule of law. >> indeed, indeed, and to public inquiries which is what this is, because john mercer has provided his evidence and we've, obtained valuable information from that . valuable information from that. if officers were to if the impression , if the president impression, if the president were to be set, that you're going, you're going to be named or there's a risk of that in future officers may not come forward. and the evidence that john mercer has provided to the inquiry would not be given in future. >> and it changes because you wouldn't have the information, you wouldn't have the information, you wouldn't say that you'd got the information and you wouldn't get it because people wouldn't come to you. indeed. and this firm, members of parliament is a, i think, a real problem to how our constitution works because people come to their mp week in, week out with an expectation that their conversation will be confidential and that it won't

be passed on, and that it informs the member of parliament. and they may then want the mp to do something, but that it won't be revealed to somebody else . yes, exactly. somebody else. yes, exactly. >> but ultimately, the answer or solution to this problem will be from parliament, because parliament can clarify the powers under section 21, because that's the these powers are not inherent. they stem from the inquiries act 2005, and it's open to to parliament amend that and clarify the provisions. >> and that would be better than getting into the very complex constitution grounds of whether you can imprison a member of parliament, in these circumstances, because , it's circumstances, because, it's always very straightforward that if a member of parliament breaks the criminal law, they murdered somebody or any of that sort of thing , there is no exemption for thing, there is no exemption for mps. and there almost never has beenin mps. and there almost never has been in our history. but mps have always been protected against civil actions to stop them being arrested in civil

cases. and this is in something of a grey area, isn't it? >> between the two, we are entering this dark , labyrinthine entering this dark, labyrinthine corner of our constitution. and i think the proposal and i think the solution would be for parliament to clarify the inquiries act rather than necessarily enter into that, into that area. it's a very interesting area as it is. yes. well, yes. ultimately we'll need to be resolved one way or another. >> i find these corners of the constitution absolutely fascinating, but i may be in a minority in that, how much discretion does the judge have in terms of the inquiry? could he simply decide that it is not in the public interest to proceed? and drop the request for evidence, or having gone this far? is he in some sense obuged this far? is he in some sense obliged to carry on? >> no. so section 35 appears to provide that discretion . so even provide that discretion. so even in the event of a breach, the discretion is that the chairman has a broad discretion whether to institute proceedings for what is quasi contempt almost. >> and i suppose the case for where he's gone so far is that

actually finding out if things went wrong in afghanistan , in went wrong in afghanistan, in the way that's been suggested is really very important because as a nation, we've always prided ourselves, prided ourselves for generations , runs on proper generations, runs on proper behaviour in war. that's not to say that war isn't horrible and cruel and doesn't kill people, but that we have abided by the rules of war, and that in trying to find out that that or allegations that hasn't happened, that is a serious matter that needs a proper investigation. indeed. >> yes, that is a serious matter that needs investigation. on the other hand, perhaps, revealing the names would then enable the, the names would then enable the, the inquiry, the public inquiry to call the officers with safeguards and therefore use that as a platform to extract more information from which we can draw lessons. but the other side of the argument is that john mercer's probably provided that already , having as a third that already, having as a third party. yes. and all you're going to have is then duplication, which is unnecessary. >> polly. thank you very much

for coming in. i'm particularly grateful because initially we told you we were going to talk about a completely different subject, and he's shown his legal flexibility. vie coming up, the oecd has forecast slovenly growth , with the uk slovenly growth, with the uk being the worst performer of the g7 next year . being the worst performer of the g7 next year. but will being the worst performer of the g7 next year . but will the being the worst performer of the g7 next year. but will the bank of england do the right thing next week and cut interest rates? and will the high court side with the teacher who refused to use preferred gender pronouns? i'll be speaking to the man himself

welcome back. the organisation for economic co—operation and development, oecd has revised its forecasts for g7 economies, and it is painted a gloomy picture for the united kingdom. the uk is now projected to be the second slowest growing economy in the g7 for 2024, ahead of germany and the slowest of the entire g7 in 2025. but while many of these international institutions are known to be brexit bashing, britain hating and dominated by

bureaucratic liberal groupthink, the oecd has cited fiscal and monetary policies for its revisions. the new report said. high personal income taxes and high interest rates are having a seriously negative effect on economic growth, but also, crucially, that mass migration has masked our entrenched economic problems. well, i'm joined now by my panel, gb news senior political commentator nigel nelson, and the journalist and conservative peer paul goodman, nigel. well, the oecd has basically said we should cut taxes and have low interest rates. is that a good idea? >> the oecd cd is also said we won't hit the 2% inflation target until 2026. >> that's very unlikely to be true . true. >> well, i mean that's what they're saying. yeah, it's in they're saying. yeah, it's in the report. so yes, on the basis of that, that means interest rates can't come down to the level that we want them to. they'll probably drop, but they still can't come down to a lower level until we get to get to that stage. and so when it comes to cutting taxes , we're back to to cutting taxes, we're back to the problem here, which is

priorities , is do we have decent priorities, is do we have decent pubuc priorities, is do we have decent public services? do we pay for the mistakes we've made? the infected blood scandal, the mistakes we've made? the infected blood scandal , the infected blood scandal, the waspi women, which everyone has got remarkably quiet about. i've noficed got remarkably quiet about. i've noticed since the. >> yes, well, the labour party has gone very quiet on having been very keen to pay for it. >> i mean, no one's, no one's keen to pay for it, but it's still out there. and if you're considering tax cuts and things like that, i'd rather see, as do something about public services. more on the nhs and to correct those mistakes. >> and paul, it seems to me just on the point of 2% inflation, not until 2026. that's just fundamentally unlikely. >> i mean, first of all, the oecd, it's rather more gloomy than some of the other institutions , and some people institutions, and some people predict better and some people predict better and some people predict worse . actually, our predict worse. actually, our growth compared to some other countries over quite a long penod countries over quite a long period of time hasn't been too bad. but i think for your viewers watching this who've had a very hard time in recent years, the situation is pretty bleak and i don't think it can

be corrected . as we found out, be corrected. as we found out, i'm afraid under the truss experiment, simply by cutting taxes and letting everything else go. the fact is, we need a sustained, serious, long term plan to reconstruct the economy. and that doesn't just mean cutting taxes. it means getting some grip on our spending on our colossal debt. >> well, i agree with that. i think that we need to get control of expenditure. we need to move away from this idea, which you were sort of hinting at that public spending is in itself a good thing. it's only goodif itself a good thing. it's only good if the money is spent well. >> well, tax cuts are a good thing. tax cuts are always a good thing. no, tax cuts are a good thing. no, tax cuts are a good thing. no, tax cuts are a good thing. yes, sometimes. but what i was talking about was where your priorities lie when you've got a finite amount of money. we want to spend 2.5% on defence. we've got to find 75 billion for that. it's the and ultimately this is where liz truss was, right. >> it's about growing the economy. the only way that. yeah. and how do you get there. right. and that seems to me as paul was indicating a number of

other steps, you can't just leave everything as is and cut taxes. otherwise your deficit balloons and the debt gets out of control. you need to look at restructuring the economy . and restructuring the economy. and what's interesting about these oecd figures is that it's consistently the us and canada that are doing reasonably well, and european nations are doing badly. they seem to have locked themselves in to being low growth economies. >> we all agree that economic growth is a good thing. and that is the way to get to get britain out of the doldrums . i would say out of the doldrums. i would say it would be something like, i regret that, that labour won't, won't spend the 28 billion they promised to on their green projects. that has the potential to give us £1 trillion worth of extra business for britain by 2030. and you're looking, i believe, that for a moment. would you not believe it? but it's what jeremy hunt said. and grant shapps said in that in the green fiscal strategy last year . green fiscal strategy last year. >> but the green fiscal strategy is nonsense, that actually what

is nonsense, that actually what is it that the european states have had that the us hasn't is very high energy costs. and so we're, what, $0.44 per kilowatt hour of electricity against $0.17 in the us. and hour of electricity against $0.17 in the us. and that's been one of the biggest things holding back. i'm very doubtful about the prospect. >> you can simply spend your way to success. and we have to think about not just how we're going to fund the nhs tomorrow, but how we're going to fund it the day after tomorrow. and the day after that. and that means having your tax policy in line with your spending policy, which means, i'm afraid. yet more painful choices coming down the line for all european countries. you are quite right about that, about the problems europe faces compared to america. >> so what sort of choices are you talking about? >> well, in america they've got a reasonably buoyant population . a reasonably buoyant population. here we've got a demographic problem. we either have to import our labour or cut our spending , or simply work longer, spending, or simply work longer, and there's a point at which we won't be willing to work longer.

and where there's resistance to immigration, at that point, you have to start looking at the third of your public spending that goes on health and pensions i >> -- >> and the oecd is saying that our growth, such as we've had is from very high levels of migration, which everybody is now committed to cutting . now, now committed to cutting. now, i think, again, that's not a very good analysis, because that has led to gdp per capita falling, which is what people are more concerned about, because that's what you've got. >> it's what you've got. yes and i'm not sure. again, i mean, legal immigration should work on the basis of the economic need of the country. i don't mind cutting it to tens of thousands, if that's what britain needs. but if not, don't put it put a figure on it and all we're doing at the moment is reversing tory policies such as we're encouraging students into this country. we wanted 600,000 students by 2030, to pay for the universities. now we want to discourage them. what's going to happenis discourage them. what's going to happen is tuition fees will go up. >> and that's one of the difficult choices that paul was alluding to, that you can either have your universities

subsidised by foreign students who pay very high rates, or you can get domestic students to pay more. >> sooner or later, the main parties are going to have to grapple with that because yes, you either do that or you end up, i'm afraid, closing universities and closing places. >> so it may be that the 50% target isn't realistic. >> it may be so, it may be so. >> well, thank you very much to my panel coming up, the pro—palestine cacophony from us college campuses has spilled over into the uk. but will the police deal with those breaking the law as they should? and should teachers have the right to resist the tyranny of gender ideology? i'll be speaking to a man on the front line of this battle

well, we've been talking about nostradamus. well, we've been talking about nostradamus . really? and oecd nostradamus. really? and oecd forecasts. nostradamus was much better at it. alexander says, jacob, in light of the new brexit checks implemented, it's no surprise that the oecd has

made such a gloomy forecast . made such a gloomy forecast. surely brexit plays some role here. no, they are not brexit checks. these are an act of self—harm. the government has voluntarily imposed on the border. it is not a consequence of brexit, it is a choice and in my view, a moronic one, in case ihadnt my view, a moronic one, in case i hadn't been clear yesterday , i hadn't been clear yesterday, philip, please explain why cutting spending would help britain's economy . our public britain's economy. our public services are barely running, mainly because the tories won't fund them properly . if we want fund them properly. if we want a healthy economy, surely we need pubuc healthy economy, surely we need public services running well. productivity in public services is no higher than it was in 1997. that's the problem with pubuc 1997. that's the problem with public services. it's not money, it's productivity. jeff jacob, surely it's time to end the independence of the bank of england. the ostriches have had their time and have failed miserably . jeff, i think you are miserably. jeff, i think you are absolutely right. bank of england independence has not worked and is costing us a lot. the united states, the united states of america has seen a nationwide phenomenon of pro—palestine riots erupting across about 30 university campuses, with the police having

to step in and making as many as 3300 arrests. students have been staging sit ins with repeated acts of vandalism and disorder. the activists have said they are protesting against their institutions doing business with israel, or companies linked to its military. but some of the protesters have seemingly become so consumed by the cause that they themselves believe their actually in gaza. as one of them said to reporters, do you want students to die of dehydration and starvation or get severely ill even if they disagree with you? if the answer is no, then you? if the answer is no, then you should allow basic. i mean, it's crazy to say because we're on an ivy league campus, but this is like basic humanitarian aid. we're asking for. it's absolutely bonkers. never mind. but it's spilling over into the uk with campus sit ins occurring across british universities, including at manchester, leeds, bristol and sheffield. the question is, will we see the same degree of disorder? well, with me now is my panel gb news senior political commentator nigel nelson and the conservative peer paul goodman. paul conservative peer paul goodman. paul, why can't we think up our

own protest with black lives matters? and with this, we've just got a copy of the us because it's a psychic epidemic as a psychologist, as a psychologist might put it, it is literally a kind of case of mass hysteria , and i say that without hysteria, and i say that without in any way , taking everything in any way, taking everything that the israelis are doing in gaza. but why is it when we had, i think up to 300,000 people died in the syrian civil war, 15,000 dead now in the sudan, where are the protests ? there where are the protests? there aren't any. i think the reason for this is it's fundamental , for this is it's fundamental, ali, a kind of adolescent protest against authority and western liberal democracy as represented by israel in the imagination of these people . imagination of these people. >> okay. and therefore they have been infected by it. and that's why they talk nonsense about saying that there they are in their rich , wealthy campuses their rich, wealthy campuses being dehydrated when there's a cafeteria open 20 yards away. >> i just keep coming back to

the absence of protest about anything else , about all the anything else, about all the other evils in the world. sudan at the moment where there are terrible massacres going on, all the horrors that happened in the syrian civil war, nothing like this, nothing like that. >> that's such a good point. it is a good point. no one's complaining about the uighurs in china. >> no. absolutely. and i think that, i mean, i, i grew up at a time when student protest changed things or at the very least influenced change. so 4 million students going on strike in the us against vietnam, half a million marching on washington. it helped to end the vietnam war in france. students, student protest in paris managed to get rid of charles de gaulle. he fled the country, resigned the following year. so in a sense, i'm quite pleased to see protests coming back again . it protests coming back again. it can actually achieve something. this one has become such a polarising issue . but if polarising issue. but if students want to protest. you were very generous to about the

students who harassed you last week . if students want to week. if students want to protest, that's fine as long as they continue with their studies and they do it peacefully. >> well , i and they do it peacefully. >> well, i think that's absolutely right. and it's what i said in my own case that nobody was breaking the law. they were just making a they were harassing you. >> there was no question you were being intimidated and harassed, being intimidated by a few people shouting at me, i'm not that wet. well, you had six security guards around you. >> the security was, was very professional, and they want to make sure nothing went wrong. but no, the right of protest means that people can be protested against. and politicians who express their views every night or gb news. >> that's really generous. >> that's really generous. >> must be we were all defending you on gb news. don't you agree that? but the police will find getting this balance right difficult as they have in the us where they've waded in quite strongly because some of the things in the us have definitely gone over into anti—semitism. some jewish people have been injured. and so there is a point at which peaceful protest becomes unpeaceful and illegal.

>> the students have got every right to protest, just as we've got every right to protest about them protesting. it's when it spills over into violence , this spills over into violence, this or that thing that's on the edge of violence, intimidation , then of violence, intimidation, then that's a point at which it becomes a matter for the authorities . authorities. >> right now, they're showing pictures of me being harassed on the screen or harassed even on my point on the screen. now, you see, they're just, well, i don't have eyes in the back of my head. so i couldn't see all of this when i was getting into the car, but it all just seemed a bit noisy to me, rather than particularly intimidating. and protesting is a fundamental right in a democracy . right in a democracy. >> it is. i'm just looking at those tv pictures again . it is those tv pictures again. it is seems to me to be pretty much on the cusp, and we'd be asking, were you on the verge of being hit? were you on the verge of being assaulted? and the answer to that is, we don't know. >> we don't know. and i didn't feel that i was likely to be right, but what's going on in the us? what point do you say you have to move away camps and

things like that? is that part of legitimate protest, or is that such an inconvenience to other people that you are entitled to move them away? >> i don't think inconvenience is a reason for moving people. i think that what has happened in america is we've ended up with some violence, especially over in california , for instance. in california, for instance. that's when the police actually have to intervene. i mean, from a political point of view, this is election year there, biden relies on the youth vote. it's what they're doing is maybe symbolic , but it's quite symbolic, but it's quite important. >> and it's very interesting because , biden has come out and because, biden has come out and said, this is hate speech. and that everyone needs to calm down. trump's been obviously trump like and said that they're infiltrated by paid agitators and so on. but biden is potentially disassociating himself from a big chunk of his voters. >> yes, that's right . and that's >> yes, that's right. and that's what i mean about, why it's important that this could actually change things, because he's got to look for the youth vote. i mean, these are people who are not going to vote for

trump. the democrats would remember there were waves of student protests in 1968. >> who won the american presidential election in 1968, richard nixon, richard nixon's indeed. >> well, it's hard to keep up with donald trump's legal affairs these days . but on affairs these days. but on tuesday, it emerged he's been ordered to pay a fine of £7,200 for repeatedly breaching a gag order in his so—called hush money trial. the former president had criticised expected trial witnesses nine times on social media, despite the gagging order, prompting the judge to threaten incarceration if it were breached again. and while £7,200 is a drop in the ocean compared to trump's vast wealth , surely the principle of wealth, surely the principle of free speech applies and he should be free to criticise whomsoever he pleases. well, the president continues in court today and with me to discuss this is the legal analyst and author ronald chapman, ronald, thank you very much for joining me. the first amendment in america is very powerful, isn't it? unlike in this country where you can't discuss a court case in the us, people have much

greater liberty to discuss court cases. cgses. >> cases. >> yes, absolutely. and that's the exact right that is pitted against the judge in this case who has to decide whether or not, gagging donald trump would be an infringement of his first amendment right. and that's why you see that the ultimate gag order that was administered by the judge was limited to those things that would have an impact on the outcome of the trial, statements and threats related to witnesses, things that would prevent them from taking the witness stand would often be gagged , as opposed to comments gagged, as opposed to comments about the judge, or other members of the prosecution team. the judge carved out, donald trump's ability to speak about even alvin bragg on the campaign trail. and so with this narrow 939 trail. and so with this narrow gag order, the judge does have some authority, even with the first amendment to issue these fines. we've seen a relatively measured approach. so far with lower fines, but they could increase .

increase. >> and how much is it entirely in the judge's discretion ? in the judge's discretion? discretion? or can this be appealed to senior courts because trump already has, in front of the supreme court , the front of the supreme court, the question about his immunity from when he was president could these fines end up in another, endless legal process? >> yes , absolutely. they could, >> yes, absolutely. they could, donald trump has filed a number of appeals to the new york court of appeals to the new york court of appeals related to several cases in new york, but the court continues to deny appeals , even continues to deny appeals, even from this trial, regarding whether the judges bias and should recuse himself regarding the gag order and first amendment protections. trial courts in the united states get significant leeway to make decisions like this and prevent certain conduct. it's possible that they could be appealed and overturned, but it's unlikely that that would result in a changed outcome for donald trump or stop the trial. so yes, he can appeal, but it's unlikely to be successful. >> and what is the timeline of the trial? how much longer is it

expected to take? >> well, i believe the judge asked the jury what their availability was going to be over the memorial day weekend , over the memorial day weekend, which usually happens in late may in the united states , that may in the united states, that suggests to us that the trial is going to go for several more weeks with testimony and deliberation and some people may be aware the prosecution gets to go first, and then the defence has the opportunity to call witnesses . but the defence does witnesses. but the defence does not need to disclose specifically who they will call in many cases. so depending on the number of witnesses donald trump wants to call, this case could go on another 4 or 5 weeks before its conclusion and before the jury begins their decision making process. >> and this makes all the issues around first amendment rights. so much more sensitive, because it's 4 or 5 weeks where donald trump, former president trump, is in court. he can't campaign. he's running for the presidency of the united states . and of the united states. and anything that restricts a candidate for the presidency . candidate for the presidency. vie is an even bigger restraint

on freedom of speech than if he were a another defendant . were a another defendant. >> absolutely. this is the most concerning aspect of the trial . concerning aspect of the trial. a lot of us are asking the question, why did this have to happen? now we have a relatively minor offence, 34 felony counts, but really the punishment is probation to four years in confinement. that is a minor offence in the united states. and we have that blocking up a very important new york court that has to deal with murders and robberies and other cases. we see that this has a tremendous impact on donald trump's ability to campaign, and it will surely lead to an argument by him and his constituents should he lose , constituents should he lose, that the election was rigged because he was prevented from being on the campaign trail as a result of this judge's requirement, it would have made much more sense to wait for the outcome and then have the trial. >> and there are political elements to it, aren't there, that the prosecution comes out of democrat politics. and i believe the judge made a

donation to the democrat party or a democrat candidate, albeit a modest one, at some point in his career . his career. >> i believe so, and i believe his his daughter worked for the campaign of a democrat as well, something that donald trump, i believe highlighted significantly. we do know that there is a federal connection to there is a federal connection to the prosecutors in this case, several of them worked for the department of justice, the same entity controlled by joseph biden and currently prosecuting donald trump, there's smoke and a bit of, a bit of an odour here on this case. and the way that it was, started i think the real question will be what does the jury question will be what does the jury do if there's an acquittal for donald trump? i think that that will have go great lengths in terms of donald trump arguing that this was an attempt to sway the election, and isn't it seems from an english point of view , from an english point of view, extraordinary that a judge who's donated to a political party thatis donated to a political party that is opposed to the defendant hasn't recused himself . is it hasn't recused himself. is it normal in the us for somebody

with a known political bias to remain trying a case of a political opponent , typically political opponent, typically not normal? >> of course, we don't have too many cases with political opponents. i would say in the united states we really only have two parties. a judge that, is elected is likely going to hold a relatively political position and would make campaign donations. i think it would be difficult to find a judge that did not donate to one campaign or the other. and of course, if they donated to a republican campaign, they'd be biased if they donated to a democrats campaign, they'd be biased. i think this is one of the things that we just have to deal with when we're dealing with the prosecution of a former president of the united states . president of the united states. >> well, brilliant. thank you, ronald, for that very clear explanation , coming up next, explanation, coming up next, i'll be speaking to the teacher who has been busy taking his gender pronoun case to the high court. will the high court rule in favour of free speech and common sense?

well, we were talking about palestine protests in universities and trump. and you've been firing in your mail. morgues elizabeth said in a world in which thousands die in sudan , yemen, ethiopia, syria, sudan, yemen, ethiopia, syria, china, etc, only when israel defends itself, the leftist students seemingly lose their minds . why? the double standard minds. why? the double standard was a very good question. elizabeth and frankie asks me, jacob, how do you see the israel—palestine conflict coming to an end? that's such a difficult question . i think difficult question. i think these things just take a very, very long time. and al, the more donald trump is punished by the judicial system, the more it empowers his base. the answer must lie with the people in an election. we've seen some states try and remove his name from ballots, but this would be a disaster and would in itself pave the way for a repeat of the 6th of january. i agree with that. i mean, i think the more they use legal fair against him,

they use legal fair against him, the stronger he becomes. in may last year, the professional conduct panel teaching regulation authority recommended that education secretary that a maths teacher should be banned from teaching after being found guilty of unacceptable professional conduct . a panel professional conduct. a panel from the teaching regulation agency found. mr sutcliffe had not treated his transgender student with dignity or respect after refusing to use his or her pronouns , as well as finding pronouns, as well as finding that he inappropriately shared his christian beliefs with pupils. but mr sutcliffe has taken this decision to ban him from teaching to the high court, which heard yesterday from his lawyers that this decision was an unjustified interference in his right to free speech and freedom of religion. so what will the high court make of it? well, i'm joined now by the man himself, joshua sutcliffe. joshua, first of all, thank you so much for coming in. it's a pleasure. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> this can't be much fun for you that you know, you're a maths teacher. you want to be teaching maths, not working your way through the law courts. >> oh, i agree with you. i mean, a few times yesterday i was

brought to tears. i'm just listening to all the arguments again and, you know, losing the profession that i love, but i'm very happy that in the uk we're able to take our to case the judiciary and hoping for, an excellent outcome in the next few weeks or months. >> and what led to all this ? how >> and what led to all this? how did it come about that the teachers regulatory authority decided to take away your right to teach , well, again, it was to teach, well, again, it was argued yesterday that, the fundamental reason was that i didn't want to use the pronouns of a student in my class , and of a student in my class, and then that has been taken on by then that has been taken on by the tra, as you mentioned, as the tra, as you mentioned, as the dogma that must be submitted to, but we're hoping that the judiciary recognises that there are alternative opinions. and of course, we've seen recently in the press, the cass review come out, and it really sort of backs , you know, the an alternative

perspective , if one was tra perspective, if one was tra basically deciding that the law was that gender self—identification was to be followed by teachers, i would say. so, yes . and i think that's say. so, yes. and i think that's why we need to see this case, overturned, because it isn't the tra's decision to assert it. these sorts of contentious issues into our society. and the school asserted that on me and then the tra have asserted it, but hopefully the judiciary recognised that, it doesn't need to be that way in our country. >> and the cass review has been very important because a very detailed study has shown the dangers of allowing children to think that they have a different sex or gender. >> well, this was my reservation from the outset. is that , it from the outset. is that, it leads children down a very dangerous path. i would suggest, because, you know, you go on to take hormones and a range of

other things can be, you know, implemented . and that was my implemented. and that was my reservation. but i did always try and consider the student and, treat them with dignity and respect. actually, the finding was that because i didn't use the pronouns that, i didn't treat them with dignity and respect. and that's really where the argument, you know, centres and as we heard yesterday, but we now really know from the cass review that it may in fact be better not to use somebody's pronouns because you may be encouraged ing an entirely different problem . yeah. and i'm different problem. yeah. and i'm really pleased that the medical professionals have backed up that position because, you know, it's the wellbeing of the young people that's paramount, and it's why i went into teaching is to help the young people and, you know, and to try and better them their lives. you know, just to help them and to help them improve with their education. and so on. so, no, i'm really pleased that the medical experts have come to that conclusion. >> how strong an influence, in

the findings against you, was your christian faith , i do think your christian faith, i do think that, the student and other, people may have taken that into stronger consideration than was necessary . i was, i was and necessary. i was, i was and still am very good at, separating my, my sort of views from my professional conduct. and i do think that because people have seen me in places like this, that with you, jacob, that they think that i, you know, they've kind of made a view about me without actually taking into consideration the facts of the case. >> where are you going into class and saying, repent and believe the gospel? >> no, of course not. my classes are actually very high performing and i took great pride in that. and, you know, still to this day, if i were to help anyone, i would be confident that the same outcome would be, you know, it seems quite hard to get religion into a maths lesson. well, it's difficult, of course . difficult, of course. >> was a religious figure of

some kind, had very strange religious beliefs . religious beliefs. >> but yes, he did. >> but yes, he did. >> but yes, he did. >> but other than that, it's not a particularly proselytising environment. >> well, exactly. no no, no. your guess is as good as mine. jacob but, you know, i do know my differentiation and my from my differentiation and my from my geometry and, you know, it's , my geometry and, you know, it's, i'm good at those things, but, you know, aside from that, obviously i do have, a strong christian conviction, and but this was part of the reason you were banned for teaching from life was that you, promoted your christian faith in a school, that it was, part of the case was since you've asked that i had a conversation with the student who made the allegations against me, and that conversation was something that came to light my views on marriage that, you know, my traditional views of marriage between a man and a woman , but between a man and a woman, but it wasn't really the epicentre of the debate yesterday. it was

really around, the gender, the pronouns and those sorts of things. so, i would have thought that there was other things would have been dismissed by now because it has been the focus, throughout, you know, and that is the issue of misgendering, which very helpfully from the cast report has now been dismissed essentially as a thing that , people have the dismissed essentially as a thing that, people have the gender that, people have the gender that they're born with. >> they don't have a gender that they think that they've got because they've decided to change it. >> yes, that's the truth. >> yes, that's the truth. >> that's the truth. and now people are able to say it again without creating a great scandal . but you were very unfortunate to be caught up in the, hysteria that there was around allowing self—identification. >> i agree with you, jake . >> i agree with you, jake. jacob. and i'm really hoping that, because of, what's come to light in recent months and years that it's quickly overturned. and, i can be to free do what i love if i so choose. >> and when do you expect the judgement, it should be a few

months, i'm told. but, you know, it's difficult to tell. >> okay, well, i wish you every success and good luck in that. and thank you for coming in, joshua. that's all from me. up next. it's not quite all for me because i'm going to be back at 1:00 in the morning for the night owls talking about the election, but before that, it's patrick christys. patrick, what have you got on your bill of fare this evening? >> well, it's very much a show of two halves, jacob, because i'm starting with the protests outside of margaret hotel today. they blockaded the bus that was supposed to be taking asylum seekers from there to the bibby stockholm. so lots of strong stuff from there. and then obviously at 10 pm, the polls do close. so it's local elections. it's by elections, it's mayoral elections, and we are doing the absolute lot of it. so it's action packed. blink and you'll miss stuff all the way from 9 to 11 pm. tonight. jacob >> oh that's all very exciting. and the election results are going on forever, aren't they? some of them we won't get until saturday. i don't think . saturday. i don't think. >> absolutely. so it's a long night for you, jacob. possibly a long few days, actually. >> well, possibly. but, patrick, you're always broadcasting, so if it's long for me, it'll be

even longer for you. i'll be back tonight, as i said, at 1:00 for gb news election coverage . for gb news election coverage. in case you've forgotten, i'm jacob rees—mogg. this has been state of the nation. and you're waiting for my thoughts on the weather in somerset for the weekend . i think it's going to weekend. i think it's going to be a beautiful bank holiday weekend. every possible sunbeam will be flooding down on god's own county so that we enjoy the may day celebrations . may day celebrations. >> a brighter outlook with boxt solar sponsors of weather on . gb news. >> good evening. it's time for your latest gb news weather update brought to you by the met office . there's going to be office. there's going to be quite a bit of rain around tomorrow, but before then, the risk of some heavy thundery downpours overnight in association with a front that's still lingering across central parts at the moment. still lingering across central parts at the moment . and we do parts at the moment. and we do still have some blustery conditions because of an area of low pressure over the near continent. but i think it's the thundery downpours across central parts of england into wales, where we're most likely to see any issues. there's some of the showery rain will

continue as we go overnight, and we'll likely see a few bursts pushing in from the north sea further north as well. but many areas towards the north—west of the uk staying dry. some clear skies, but for most a relatively mild start to the day tomorrow as we go through tomorrow itself, then more rain to come across central parts of england, wales and some showers across northern england and into southern scotland to some of these could be heavy and thundery, lots of cloud and showery rain continuing across many areas but towards the far north and the far south of the uk, we should have some decent dry and sunny weather in the sunshine. it will feel quite warm, albeit temperatures not quite as high as they were today. as we look towards the weekend. and while it is looking pretty messy on saturday, there's going to be quite a bit of cloud and outbreaks of showery rain across the northern half of the uk before some showery stuff is likely to push its way up from the south as we go through the day. and that could be heavy , possibly even could be heavy, possibly even thundery. more mixed weather to come as we go through sunday into monday there will be some dnen into monday there will be some drier, brighter weather at

times, but also plenty of showers as well. i'll see you again soon. >> looks like things are heating up boxt boiler dollars. sponsors of weather on

gb news. >> it's 9 pm. i'm patrick christys tonight. now this individual. this individual is just assaulted. a gb news cameraman. and it's going to be arrested by police as he , a arrested by police as he, a masked thug, attacked the gb news cameraman . someone over news cameraman. someone over here now who looks as though they're currently being arrested . get back! please massive tension as protesters block a migrant bus bound for the bibby stockholm news. >> oh ! gb news off. gb news off. >> oh! gb news off. gb news off. gb news off gb news. >> and the polls slam shot at 10 pm. tonight. we've got you p.m. tonight. we've got you covered as britain decides also