[0:00]Tonight, number 10 calls for Lord Mandlesson to lose his parage [music] and testify in the US as new details emerge of his dealings with pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Amongst the documents
[0:10]in the [music] latest Epstein files release highly personal emails between the two and apparent leaks of sensitive government [music] information. The [snorts] former Prime Minister Gordon Brown demands an investigation and
[0:22][music] the SNP report Mandlesson to the police as the fallout from the revelations threatens [music] to inflict more political damage on Kier Star. Also tonight, more pressure on the NHS in
[0:33]England as resident doctors vote to extend their strike mandate by another 6 months. The prime minister defends his trip to China, but the opposition accused him of a supine [music] and
[0:44]short-termist approach. And we'll discuss an unlikely shared trait of Zack Palansky [music] and Donald Trump. They are both ttotal. Just how common is it in the political [music] domain and does it really mean
[0:56]anything these days? All that and more sober analysis with Tom Pers glove and Liz Savl Roberts [music] will be here in the studio for the next hour. It is Monday. I'm Matt Barbett live from
[1:06]Westminster. This is the politics hub. Good evening. Today is Groundhog Day, so
[1:20]forgive me if you think you've heard this before. We've had revelations about Lord Mandelson's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. We've had the prime minister frantically trying to distance himself from the man he made US
[1:30]ambassador. And we've had calls from political opponents for action. But tonight is different because the latest revelations from the huge cache of documents that were released late on
[1:40]Friday night are continuing to throw up new information not just about the intimate closeness of Mandlesson to Epstein personally, but also about what he was telling him. Some of the emails suggest that this might include
[1:52]sensitive political and market intelligence that he was privy to as the business secretary under Prime Minister Gordon Brown. This evening, Gordon Brown asked the cabinet secretary to investigate. We haven't heard from Lord
[2:04]Mandlesson today, but over the weekend he said he'd been wrong to believe Epstein following his conviction and to continue his association with him afterwards. And he apologized
[2:14]unequivocally for doing so to the women and girls who suffered. Our chief political correspondent John Craig has more. >> Mr. President, thank you very much
[2:24]indeed in um hosting us this morning. Peter Mandelson flattering President Trump in the Oval Office last year when he was the UK's Washington ambassador.
[2:36]Only months later, he was sacked over his links with pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. And after the release of documents, including an unflattering photo of him in his underwear in Jeffrey
[2:47]Epstein's Paris flat, he's now resigned from the Labour Party, saying he didn't want to cause the party further embarrassment. But there are also several photos of Mandlesson and Epstein
[2:59]together on a luxury yacht. It's documents in the Epstein files, however, that are potentially more damaging, including an accusation that Epstein
[3:09]sent him $75,000 and claims he lobbed a Labour chancellor on taxing bankers bonuses. >> Are you embarrassed to put your trust in Peter Mendlesson, Prime Minister? For
[3:21]the prime minister and the government, there's no hiding the embarrassment. >> Contained within the release by the US Department of Justice were documents which highlighted the close nature of
[3:31]the relationship between Jeffrey Epstein and Peter Mandlesson. For the avoidance of doubt, this information was not known by the government until the release of documents by the Department of Justice
[3:42]on Friday. The nature of the documents also raised serious concerns about Peter Manderson's behavior. The prime minister has today asked the cabinet secretary to review
[3:53]all available information regarding Peter Mandlesson's contact with Jeffrey Epstein during his period as a government minister and to report back to him as a matter of urgency. The
[4:03]latest disclosures include confidential government emails passed to Epstein and have prompted demands for a police investigation. One is a Dear Gordon private email from
[4:15]a number 10 official to Gordon Brown containing highly sensitive market information on secret plans to sell off government assets.
[4:25]Another reveals an exchange of emails which appears to suggest Mandlesson tipped off Epstein about a government bailout to stop some EU countries going
[4:35]bust. In another email the day before Mr. Brown resigned as prime minister in 2010. Mandlesson told Epstein, "Finally got him to go today."
[4:46][cheering and applause] More than a decade later, Mr. Brown's allies have accused Mandlesson of a betrayal of trust and the former PM has demanded a Whiteall inquiry. And in
[4:58]parliament, opposition parties turned up the heat. someone who was sitting around the cabinet table alongside a a UK Labor prime minister was sharing market
[5:08]sensitive information with a Wall Street trader, a person who of course is a notorious convicted pedophile. That's that's beyond that's beyond any sort of normal realms of discussion in UK
[5:20]politics and it goes right to the heart of the judgment the prime minister showed by appointing this man. Sky News has approached Lord Mandlesson for a response to these claims. In
[5:30]response to previous allegations, he said he was wrong to believe Epstein following his conviction and apologize for continuing his association with him. MPs have been told that the prime
[5:41]minister believes Peter Mandelson should not remain in the House of Lords or keep his title. However, he does not have the power to remove him. So the government
[5:52]is calling on all political parties, including the Conservatives, who are the biggest party in the House of Lords, to work with the government to modernize disciplinary procedures, but the
[6:03]government has not ruled out legislating to remove Mandolen from the Lords. John Craig, Sky News. >> Our deputy political editor Sam Coats is
[6:14]here with me now. This one is just not going away, is it Sam? So what are the likely ramifications for Peter Mandelson himself and for Kier Starmer and his team? >> I think for Lord Manderson, Peter
[6:26]Mandlesson the net is closing quite frankly. What was new today was that we saw not only information about alleged payments. He disputes uh that but to the
[6:37]tune of many tens of thousands of pounds potentially. but also Peter Mandelson apparently leaking confidential market sensitive data. In in one instance there
[6:48]is an email sent to the prime minister which is forwarded it appears by Peter Mandlesson 4 seconds later to Jeffrey
[6:57]Epstein. Now there is a potential crime of misconduct in public office. Peter Mandlesson would deny all charges but there are others who would say he should
[7:08]be investigated under that. Darren Jones uh the chief secretary to the prime minister saying in the Commons today quite notably that the government would assist anybody seeking uh to do an
[7:19]inquiry. I think that Peter Mandlesson is unlikely to emerge in public life or even as a figure in the public realm on telly uh after what we've seen today.
[7:29]But in a sense Peter Mandlesson is a figure of the past. we'd have to deal much more urgently and uh with a um uh with the prime minister and what the fallout is for him. I think this is a
[7:40]sort of seven out of 10 crisis for Kier Starma. I don't put it higher than that because so many different people have as it were dipped their hands in the judgment of Peter Mandlesson and this
[7:52]scandal goes back 20 years. But in the end, Karma's chief of staff Morgan Mweeny pushed through this appointment against objections even from the foreign
[8:03]secretary David Lammy. I understand it. >> That's his ambassador to Washington. >> Uh when it was Yes. when he was appointed just over a year ago to be our person in Washington. There were red flags from the security services, I
[8:15]understand, about uh his financial connections. Uh there were clear issues raised in the public domain about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein and it
[8:25]was known in the public uh domain because the Financial Times had reported it that Peter Mandlesson had stayed in Jeffrey Epstein's flat in New York while
[8:35]Jeffrey Epstein was in jail for soliciting sex with um a minor. Now that is the backdrop against which that appointment took place. That is the backdrop against these questions will be
[8:47]asked. I wonder whether for now the heat sink is Morgan Mc Sweeney the chief of staff but it's a really difficult few days for the government. >> Sam, thank you very much indeed. A
[8:57]little bit earlier I spoke to Labour MP Rachel Mascll who's put forward a removal of titles bill. Here's what she said. So here we are. Thoughts on Peter
[9:08]Mandlesson now? what's happened to him and perhaps what you think should happen. >> Well, obviously there are so many questions in the air at the moment because first of all there was the denial. Then there was the not
[9:20]remembering and then obviously then the evidence came forward, the photograph and and clearly other pieces of documentation. Of course that exposing perhaps a breach of the ministerial code
[9:32]and that clearly is going to be investigated. But what else does Peter Mandlesson know? Where else has his tentacles of power run into? And I think they're the kind of questions which are being asked across the parliamentary
[9:43]Labor Party. He may not hold office. He may not hold a membership of the Labor Party, but clearly his phone book will be full of numbers. And will he control
[9:54]from his own now very much lower position or what will happen next? I think we need an independent investigation onto this. With regards to his periage, I put forward legislation,
[10:05]the removal of titles bill to enable the parliament to either remove the title, someone to relinquish it or indeed the king to take a title. I think that
[10:14]legislation is timely. Um it's um waiting for its second reading and parliament could rush that through and address the issue of the periage and of course we'll wait to see what the cabinet office come forward with with
[10:26]regards to the terms of reference of their investigation. And here you think he's got a question to answer about things that were raised in the Lord's only a year after he received his life periage.
[10:37]>> Well, that's right. I mean, the associations are very clear now and I think we need to know who knew what when. Um, including right through to his appointment as the ambassador to the
[10:48]United States. How did that decision get made and who were behind the lobbying for that that role? I just think there's questions, questions, questions, and we need answers.
[11:00]>> Yes, Peter Mandlesson is not a stranger to scandal. Loansome Jeffrey Robinson back in the day, passports, stepping down as UK ambassador to the US
[11:12]and now this with his kind of history, his kind of hinterland, why do you think he has bounced back so regularly, especially when it comes to serving the Labour Party? Well, it's a very good
[11:23]question why so many people have depended on Peter Mandlesson over the years because clearly he has fallen so many times and yet seems to then be
[11:32]elevated to higher positions. So I think there are serious questions that have got to be asked about judgment. This is about judgment of character but also
[11:42]it's about ensuring justice to those people who have fallen under him. >> We don't know who they are. It could be innocent. You're right. Only a handful of people can shed some light on that,
[11:54]but so far he denies wrongdoing in relation to what we know of Jeffrey Epstein's uh activities. When it comes to people's judgment, are you talking about the prime minister's
[12:05]judgment? Are you talking about his chief of staff, Morgan Mcweeny? Whose judgment are you talking about? Well, none of us know exactly what those conversations are at the heart of government, but apparently there is
[12:17]close relationship between Peter Mandlesson and several people whether in the cabinet, the prime minister himself, and of course his chief of staff, Morgan Mweeny. We don't know what those
[12:26]conversations are, but we want to know. >> We know there's been a bit of unrest on the Labour backbenches in recent weeks and months for for lots of reasons. How
[12:36]does this contribute to that? Well, I think it really does play into many of our concerns that there are a few people controlling our party when we believe it
[12:47]should belong back to the members, back to the public and should be focusing there. We have got a very much transactional um center of power as opposed to that
[12:56]dispersal and those roots coming forward and that real dynamic voice of working people at the house of our party. >> But let me just press you on that a little bit. The people who are in government are the ones who won the
[13:07]election. It was their manifesto. It was their approach that ultimately put Labor in the majority. So you have to there has to be more compromise there, doesn't
[13:18]it? From the part of the backbenches to understanding it was this bunch who got us in power in the first place. >> Well, I would say it was the Labour party. It was the activists, the members, the people on the ground who were having those conversations of
[13:27]people in our communities that won the election. We're not dependent on one or two people. And I think this is the problem with politics today. It's become incredibly presidentially focused as
[13:38]opposed to really recognizing the breadth of the dynamism behind the Labor Party, the trade unions and of course the backbenches, the counselors and people that work every day on the ground as volunteers.
[13:49]>> Let's just finish off Rachel by talking about system change then because you talked about your bill and Pierce having their titles taken off them. There had been within the Labour party, certainly
[13:59]within Labor in opposition, discussion around Lord's reform. What's happened to that? And could this prompt more discussion around Lords reform as well? Well, I think it should because there
[14:10]needs to be accountability within the system. Now, one thing I've said immediately, Peter Mandlesson should refer himself to the Lord's Commissioner for Standards. I think that would be an appropriate step, but beyond that, we do
[14:21]need to see significant reform of the House of Lords. It's not right that somebody could be given a periage, no matter what they do, hold on to that position of power, be able to draw public funds. So, an elected second
[14:33]chamber, smaller chamber, fewer people, that kind of thing. >> All of the above, I would say. And ensuring that there is that democratic accountability in the second chamber, the chamber which is involved in
[14:43]scrutiny of legislation, that's its function, not to spin off into its other wider activities. >> Thank you very much indeed. >> Thank you.
[14:54]Well, if you didn't realize before, you surely have now that this throws up all sorts of ramifications for many people and things as well. Let's bring in our duo for this evening, former Conservative Minister Tom Perslov and
[15:04]Ply Cumry's Westminster leader Liz Savile Roberts. It's good to see you both. Um Liz, you were in the chamber today when the prime minister was talking about his trip to China and he left and he left Darren Jones to then
[15:16]talk about the ramifications uh of this. Um what do you think? Well, in the first instance, I think it was choreographed in the sense that the prime minister could just deflect any questions about
[15:27]Peter Mandlesson knowing that Darren Jones was coming after and then Darren Jones had to carry the can for it. Some really interesting conversations now. I mean, I don't think there'll be anybody in the chamber who in any shape or form
[15:38]thinks that Peter Mandles should remain as Lord Mandlesson. He was of course a Labour appointed peer. The government can appoint people to the House of Lords, but they can't disappoint them. They can't get rid of them afterwards.
[15:50]However, that would disappoint them. >> True of all parties, though, isn't it? >> It is true of all parties, but this is it's it's it seems to be a deep irony of our democratic system that governments can stuff the place with people they like while they like them, but everything goes wrong, they can't really
[16:01]do anything about that. And I would you forgive me, this is true of the the conservatives of Michelle Moan as it is with Peter Manderson and the here and now. But of course, this has been a very
[16:10]um moving story, developing story. >> We have heard more and more of what's coming out from the Epstein files. It's really interesting that this information has come out of the Epstein files and it
[16:22]looks to be the case that the archives here no longer have records in the United Kingdom of what is coming out from the United States. That's an interesting question in itself. I think this opens up so many questions about
[16:33]who knew what in number 10. And it in the end I think where we're moving towards now is a serious question in terms of the money, in terms of possible influence and bribery possibly. There
[16:44]needs to be an investigation of misconduct in in public office. This goes beyond just taking away the honorary role of being in the Lords. This is something that we need to have confidence in our democratic institutions.
[16:55]>> We'll return to that. Tom, I think Liz is talking about who knew he was in number 10 in recent times. Certainly hearing from Gordon Brown today. Who knew he was in number 10 at the end of the 2000s
[17:06]that has lifted this to a different level really, hasn't it, for our political system. >> Oh, completely. And look, if you take this back to its most fundamental, Lord Mandlesson should never have been
[17:17]appointed as the ambassador because the Epstein story was growing in prominence. The dark clouds were gathering. The story was beginning to emerge. And someone who'd had that association after
[17:29]they'd been convicted of child sex offenses was never appropriate to be appointed. And I think it begs really difficult questions for the prime minister about the decision that he took, whether security advice was
[17:39]ignored as part of that. And actually what we now need is transparency around the whole affair right the way back from when Gordon Brown was prime minister. The fact that market sensitive
[17:51]information this is basics of ministerial office that that information is simply not to be shared. We've seen in the files today copies of what looks like internal documents being sent
[18:02]across to Jeffrey Epstein presumably with attachments that contain advice for ministers and and the sort of advice that you would consider around decision-m that is just completely wrong and I think as Liz says it begs serious
[18:13]questions about a misconduct in public office investigation and the requirement for that to happen but as a minimum the ministerial code has been breached here and there's various other sort of
[18:24]ethical questions that this brings brings into very sharp view. >> As we've been talking, the Metropolitan Police have put out a statement. So, some breaking news to bring you on this. Now, Ella Marriott, who's the commander of the Met says, "We are aware of the
[18:36]further release of millions of court documents in relation to Jeffrey Epstein by the United States Department of Justice." Following this release and subsequent media reporting, the Met has received a number of reports relating to
[18:47]alleged misconduct in a public office. The reports will all be reviewed to determine if they meet the criminal threshold for investigation. As with any matter that the uh officer finishes, if
[18:58]new and relevant information is brought to our attention, we will assess it and investigate as appropriate. Um, back to you, Liz. Let's talk about those wider
[19:09]questions around the system. You talked about appointments to the Lords, but also the Lords itself. I mean, it cropped up in that conversation had with Rachel Mascal about the idea of Lord's reform seems to have fallen by the
[19:21]wayside with this government even though they talked a lot about it previously. Could this fire things up again? >> I think it will have to because of course Kristama came into government in
[19:31]2024 saying that he would behave in a different way to what we had under the previous government and what he would describe as the chaos under the previous government. If the lords now seems to be
[19:42]an area as it does where the government really can't influence what is happening there you there's a lord's commissioner for standards but what will they actually be able to do and if the prime
[19:52]minister himself who is put in this invidious situation cannot deal with a member of what was his own party certainly somebody who was appointed there as a member of his own party if he can't deal with that that really does
[20:04]beg the question but I think there's one other thing I would like just to touch upon we're talking about Morgan Mcweeni and I Again, we owe it to our democracy to look at where these various trend tendrils
[20:15]leaders, but I would also be very much concerned if number 10 thought that they could just use the short-term news cycle and perhaps throw something somebody to the wolves and then move ahead. It's got
[20:27]to be way more than that. There are questions about Morgan Mcweeny, but it can't just end there. >> Well, people working the short-term news cycle have quite long memories as it happens, Liz. So you know these things do have a tendency as we've seen with
[20:39]Peter Mson to come back and come back again. And that's the that's the final question on this. It's not as if he hasn't had previous in terms of scandal.
[20:47]No judgment is not good. Successive incidents with Peter Mandlesson's judgment being brought into question. Resignations from government. The prime minister knew all of this when he made
[20:57]this appointment and it just beggars belief that he took that decision. This is entirely predictable as a situation and I do think that this will begin to have ramifications within the Labour
[21:08]party within the government because you know I've been in parliament I've been in government and when ministers stop trusting the line that they're given from number 10 to go out onto broadcast rounds you end up in an awful lot of bother because that's when the whole
[21:19]thing starts to break down. That is why actually the prime minister should live up to what he's demanding of others. Publish the information, all of the advice that he received, the communications and everything so that
[21:31]actually there's proper transparency around this so that people can have confidence in him and his administration and the decisions that they took. I don't think they can keep running away from that scrutiny and actually it's
[21:42]important for the victims that there is that transparency. This is a horrendous situation, totally unacceptable on every level, and I think it really damages our democracy. >> It's an important point to return to
[21:53]thinking about the victims. Absolutely. We will return to the discussion in a moment because Peter Mandlesson has always had a complicated relationship with his own party. Listen to this exchange from 2005 between the then
[22:04]prime minister Tony Blair and the leader of the opposition at the time, Michael Howard. The prime minister once said, "My project will be complete when the Labour
[22:15]Party learns to love Peter Manderson." [laughter] >> Can he give us a progress report on that? [cheering] >> Well, I I think I may have to say on
[22:30]that one, a lot done, a lot left to do. 21 years ago that was. Well, I've been speaking to the political historian and biographer of Tony Blair, Sir Anthony
[22:40]Seldon. Just how influential has Peter Mandlesson been in the modern-day Labor Party?
[22:52]>> Massive. You can't think of any more influential figure apart from the the prime ministers of uh Tony Blair, Gordon
[23:01]Brown and Karma. And he was simply the creator of Labour's most successful period uh
[23:11]electorally in its entire history. >> He's had more comebacks than Elvis and some of those have been down to his own, you know, misdoings. Um but some of them
[23:22]as you spelled out there is because the party and whoever's been leading it have needed him. We saw that with his being appointed UK ambassador to Washington
[23:31]DC. Um how do you explain his sticking power, his mercurial uh approach that may have now come finally to an end?
[23:42]>> Well, it is a kind of genius, isn't it? I mean, uh, look, most geniuses have, uh, h have have their dark sides and,
[23:52]uh, uh, he does, um, and significant, um, inability to, to to make wise
[24:00]judgments about, uh, people, um, who, uh, he could and should have known better um, about associating with. And
[24:11]uh so he I think that none of the three leaders uh were under any illusions that he was you know Peter being Peter uh
[24:22]that he came with baggage uh that there was a downside to him that he had his profound flaws uh but his ability to uh
[24:34]see into the future to see what would be needed and to recognize I mean it's essentially a call or insight that Labor is not going to win from the left. I
[24:44]mean, and a lot of people on the left think that that's where you win from, but it's delusional um any more than the Conservatives can win from the right.
[24:53]You win in in British politics, like in any political system, by appealing to the center ground. That's where the most voters are. That's where you peel away
[25:03]the voters from the other side. And he knew and understood that deeply. And at a time that so many people around him were tribal and saying we're failing
[25:14]because we're not labor enough or we're not left-wing enough or we're not ideological enough. Uh he said no. And he also had a was one of the first
[25:25]people in British politics to deeply understand the importance of focus groups and polling and the science of of electoral politics
[25:36]>> and uh and he used that to very good effect uh underpinning his arguments about where Labor should be. You you said a lot of this his behavior
[25:47]and his decision-m was down to Peter just being Peter, which when you hear of him mistaking mushy peas for guacamole, you can sort of understand. And that's
[25:58]the that's how the story goes when he visited a >> a chip shop up north when it's him making terrible decisions in terms of his relationships with people like
[26:08]Jeffrey Epstein. How was that sort of explained away or or is has that just run out now, do you think? >> Well, I don't know how much of it was
[26:18]known and there are reports uh I don't know how far they've been validated of
[26:25]him uh giving or offering Epstein access to cabinet papers. And I mean you know that is such a
[26:35]complete no no whoever they are and let alone somebody like him. So uh I mean clearly
[26:44]um the associating himself with such a person such a such a a toxic and such a
[26:51]deeply evil person uh was you know the error of judgment that that nobody in that position should make. So, uh he
[27:02]made those mistakes and um uh he he has made mistakes all his uh all the way through his political career. It's
[27:12]almost the flip side of who he is. >> Let me just finish off by asking a little bit more about that because you described his politics. He's not an out and-out socialist. Certainly had labor in his blood, but his personal politics
[27:23]certainly seems to be more new labor center left. Nevertheless, he's been called a champagne socialist because he certainly was attracted to people with
[27:34]power and wealth. >> Yeah, definitely. I mean, that was a fatal attraction and it goes all the way back to uh uh the beginning of Labor
[27:45]history. And the first Labor Prime Minister, Ramsey Macdonald, uh appalled and revolted his uh uh left and and center uh Labor colleagues by
[27:57]becoming very obsessed and and in awe of wealth and industrialists and and the aristocracy. So I mean it's a temptation that all
[28:09]politicians and and it constantly drags them down. I mean what drags down politicians
[28:15]uh power um money and sex and um and that corrods their their judgment. And in the world in the world circles in
[28:27]which they operate they uh come across them and people uh who want access uh a light on vulnerable people and uh the
[28:37]story will go on and on. He won't be the last politician who who gets dragged into that uh uh spider's web. >> That was Anthony Selen speak Seldon I
[28:51]should say speaking to me a bit earlier on. You're watching the politics hub. Coming up, resident doctors vote to extend industrial action by another [music] 6 months in their ongoing dispute over paying jobs in England. We
[29:02]will have the latest. Heat. Heat.
[29:43]Heat. Heat. Are you
[31:10]The best thing about being a Sky News journalist. They call him the king of the jungle. >> Being a Sky News journalist.
[31:23]Ustra Albaga [music] has this report and this is what's left of it. As a woman of color, how did the Harris campaign speak to you? >> People risk their lives to speak to us for this report. >> Mr. Zuma, Sky News,
[31:35]>> we're trying to see as much as we can. >> Now, there could be further NHS strikes on the horizon after resident doctors in
[31:45]England voted to continue industrial action for another six months. As part of their ongoing row over pay and jobs, the British Medical Association announced that 93.4% 4% of those who
[31:56]voted supported further action. Turnout was actually around 53%. Dr. Jack Fletcher, who chairs the BMA's resident doctor's committee, said they are willing to negotiate.
[32:08]No industrial action is planned. No data in the diary. What we need is we need Wes Streeting and his team to continue talking constructively at the table to fix this ridiculous jobs crisis that
[32:19]we've got for resident doctors in this country where we are about to turn potentially 30,000 applicants away from jobs in this country. Yet we are seeing
[32:29]corridor care endemic in our NHS at the moment. Um, and on top of that, we have a health secretary who is pushing real terms pay cuts onto resident doctors in
[32:39]the next few months. And obviously that is not acceptable. We're willing to negotiate. We're willing to be constructive and creative. But we do need to see that lost value over over a
[32:49]number of years restored to prevent the hemorrhage of doctors out of this country to other countries. A Department for Health and Social Care spokesperson said the government has
[33:01]been in intensive and constructive discussions with the BMA resident doctor's committee since the start of the new year to try and bring an end to the damaging cycle of strikes and avoid further unnecessary disruption for
[33:12]patients and NHS staff. We hope that these talks result in an agreement that works for everyone, they say, so that there is not any more strike action by resident doctors in 2026.
[33:24]Let's bring our duo back in for this evening. Tom Persclub and Liz Savile Roberts settled in Wales, settled in Scotland. Tom, what do you think uh the government can do about this? Because
[33:36]they have given so far resident doctors in England quite a hefty payriseise over the past few years, something like 30%. But they still don't think it matches the levels last seen at the end of the 2000s, which is what they want to
[33:48]restore. >> I think you always have to look at these things in context. And actually these are challenging fiscal times. There's a fairness question that always comes into this in terms of the affordability of
[33:59]pay rises, higher taxes for other people in order to pay for them. And actually, for example, what pay rises are we seeing in private businesses? What are we seeing in other public services? But the government did rather set themselves
[34:10]up for this because they plundered into government and went and gave that huge bumper pay rise all in one go. And I think that that's probably led the BMA to believe that they can consistently
[34:21]have government over a barrel when it comes to these negotiations. Now, I would absolutely implore everybody in government and in the BMA to get around the table and to try and resolve this,
[34:32]but it seems a real struggle to me to think that the sorts of pay rises that we saw in that previous round can be given again. That just isn't affordable. And as I say, there is that element of fairness and you do have to take proper
[34:44]account the fiscal conditions. I think the government was offering 2 and a half% next time round which isn't satisfying the resident doctors. The other issue with this Liz is they want jobs to go to when they have finished
[34:56]their training. It was something like 30,000 doctors trained doctors and only 10,000 jobs going around which makes you wonder if they expect the government to pay them more. How are the government going to use money to create more jobs?
[35:08]>> I I'll be the first to say I am concerned that there will be strikes in England. I note that this issue has been resolved in Wales. Nonetheless, we do need to have training posts for doctors.
[35:19]We do need to have more doctors in the system. It's not just a matter of being a battle between the BMA and resident doctors and the government.
[35:28]>> Looking ahead, you see, you know, are we ensuring that we've got the skills that we need for the future? And that may need to cost to the government even in the number of jobs. But if we don't do
[35:39]that, then we're not fulfilling what the NHS is supposed to do to put it quite quite simply. >> You broaden the the situation out from that though then. And you just realized,
[35:49]Tom, the NHS is incredibly costly. We're just talking about it from the point of view of doctors, but just in general now again, is this going to prompt questions about overhauling it in some way? West
[36:00]Streeting has talked about that to a degree but without an awful lot of detail of as to how >> and that's where actually there's quite a lot of common ground in terms of trying to really drive technological
[36:10]advance being innovative when it comes to new drugs and to try and get those new treatments available. I think things like GLP1s and some of the pressures that that can help to relieve in in
[36:20]terms of obesity um are really important but we've got to be much more strategic when it comes to health. I don't think we do by anywhere near enough when it comes to prevention, healthier eating,
[36:30]more physical activity, trying to work more with younger people to instill those values in the very early years of life to try and set people up onto more sustainable pathways. But it but it is a real challenge and I think we do need to
[36:42]look at health and those decisions and what that means and try and support the right things that then help to relieve some of those downstream pressures that in the NHS because the bill continues to
[36:53]go up and up and up and that also has an effect not just in terms of health spending but also when you look at things like health and disability benefits that the department for work and pensions is responsible for. >> I mean let us remember and this actually
[37:04]is a success story. People present the fact that we are an aging demographic, an aging society as a bad thing. The fact that people are dying later is probably a really good thing.
[37:15]>> Well, we'd all like to live longer. >> We all like to we all like to live longer. We want we want to live life as healthy for as long as possible. >> But with that, there will inevitably be health complications and we have to plan
[37:26]for that. If we don't plan for that, we're going to see extra costs coming down the road in ways we can't cope with them. >> It just so happens we'll be talking about politicians being tetotal a bit later on. So, so hold that thought when it comes to prevention rather than cure.
[37:38]A reminder to catch our new late night program as well, the rap tonight from 10. Here to discuss all of today's big stories and the best of tomorrow's papers, the chief political correspondent at the times, Aubry
[37:48]Aligreti, and the former first minister of Northern Ireland, Baroness Foster. Right now, you're watching the Politics Hub. Coming up in a moment, the PM says not engaging with China would be a
[37:59]dereliction of duty [music] as he returns from a trip to the nation. But Kenny Vadno accuses him of taking what she called [music] a supine approach. Heat. Heat.
[38:31][music] Heat. Heat.
[39:34]Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.
[40:17]Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.
[40:56][music] The prime minister said today that
[41:16]refusing to engage with China would be a dereliction of duty. Updating MPs on his trip to the nation and to Japan afterwards. Saki Starama said ignoring Beijing had achieved nothing. He
[41:28]outlined that he had raised the case of Jimmy Lie and said he called on China to end economic support for Russia's war effort. But Kim Adnock hit out at the PM's visit, accusing him of taking a
[41:38]supine and short-termist approach. >> Mr. Speaker, China is the second biggest economy in the world, including Hong Kong. It's our third biggest trading
[41:50]partner, supporting 370,000 British jobs, and it is an undeniable presence in global affairs. It would be impossible to safeguard our
[42:02]national interests without engaging with this geopolitical reality. Of course, Britain should engage with China. >> Even though the chancellor wasn't
[42:12]allowed to go, even though they are an authoritarian state who seek to undermine our interests, even though they spy on us, sometimes within the walls of this building,
[42:23]>> even though they fund regimes around the world hostile to our country, they are a fact of life, a global power, and an economic reality. So, let me be clear.
[42:34]It is not the prime minister engaging with China that we take issue with. What we are criticizing is his supine and short-termist approach. >> Following the trip, China lifted
[42:46]sanctions on six parliamentarians who've been banned from visiting China. The former security minister Tom Tugenheart, who was one of those sanctioned MPs, criticized the extent to which sanctions
[42:56]have been lifted. Do you not find it as surprising as I do that the prime minister has come back with a deal that lifts the sanctions on
[43:06]those six of us who are still in this house but not the one who isn't nor the lawyers advisers and academics who support the work of this house? Is this not a direct affront to the democracy of
[43:18]this place? An attempt to divide and conquer that we've seen China play against the European Parliament and sadly has tricked our government too. >> Yeah.
[43:28]Let's bring in our duo for this evening, Tom Persclo and Liz Sal Roberts. Tom, does the other Tom Tugenhard have a point there? Or are the conservatives expecting Karma to go there and land
[43:39]instantly a slam dunk without sort of doing the hard graft of building some sort of a relationship with President Xi. >> I thought the prime minister looked like a very diminished figure on the world
[43:49]stage and the relationship was rather akin to a supplicant. And when you look at >> maybe the UK is just a diminished place compared to China. these days. >> I mean, I just don't accept that. What we managed to do in this was upset our
[44:01]closest ally, namely the United States. And what did we get? We got a promise to do a little bit around engines for small boats. Well, you know, I've got a bit of knowledge around that and I suspect it will make no difference whatsoever. 30
[44:13]days visa-free travel and a breakthrough on Scotch whiskey, which is great. But when you look at the fact that we were seeing billions of pounds of investment going into China, all of this was tilted
[44:24]in their direction and not in ours. The fact the prime minister was shown around by a tour guide, not by somebody senior from government. The fact he was buffeted around on the red carpet, I thought the optics of it were terrible.
[44:35]So, of course, we should engage, but that did not look like a partnership where we were on a level playing field. And the prime minister allowed that to be the case. >> Well, Tom talks about the US. We're probably not on a level playing field
[44:47]with them either. So, you know, and he's been accused of being super into Donald Trump. He's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't, isn't he? the world although is shifting whether the UK
[44:57]likes it or not. I think he is walking a fine line. I'm not going to be speaking in favor of the prime minister here. But just from outside looking of course
[45:07]>> he should be making he should be developing relationships with President Xi with China. It is I think the fourth m the fourth biggest import partner of the United Kingdom. It's the second for
[45:18]for Wales. They are a very very significant power. We see the president of the United States behaving more and more erratically and we need friends I
[45:29]think wherever we can find them. At the same time of course of course at the same time of course we're calling out the human rights abuses and I would question how much effect we've had with that and at the same time of course we
[45:40]have to make sure that our internal home security is made sure but that could apply to other nations as well. Of course, the big question here is that our our nearest neighbors, the EU,
[45:50]there's supposed to be an EU UK reset later this spring. Yeah, >> that is the one that I really hope we see some more than nice but not very significant development. >> Tom, it's interesting from the point of
[46:02]view of the Tories. It it was David Cameron, a conservative prime minister, talked about a golden age in the relationship between the UK and China. Okay, granted, it's over 10 years ago
[46:12]now, but it's been quite a shift in the meantime. Certainly if what you hear Kevin Bnock say is to be believed. >> I think the whole world has moved on enormously since then and what we are seeing is an upping of the ante when it
[46:24]comes to spying on us including in parliament which I find utterly extraordinary. We've seen the government roll over on the super embassy which feels like a sort of transactional back and forth that unlocked this trip. Yeah.
[46:36]and also things like chaos which again all of our national interest would would dictate that the common sense thing to do is for us to retain that there's no
[46:46]grounds no reasonable basis upon which we should be parting with the Chaos Islands. It damages our standing internationally and damages our strategic position. You know in the end
[46:56]China are um strategic adversaries and we need to see the relationship through that lens. Of course, there should be engagement. That is right and proper. But we should also be, you know,
[47:07]open-minded and realistic about the challenges to that relationship, and I don't think it took proper account of that. >> Let's leave China there for the time being because the president of FIFA has defended awarding Donald Trump the
[47:18]controversial FIFA Peace Prize. The International Governing Body for Football has faced criticism over the award, which was the first of its kind, and was presented to the US president at the uh World Cup draw in Washington DC
[47:30]back in December. Johnny Infantino was speaking to our lead world news presenter Yalda Hakeim. >> For some time we were thinking about, you know, we should we should do
[47:39]something to to reward people who who who do something. And when this whole situation recently also with with Gaza
[47:49]last year happened, I mean, how many 60,000 people
[47:57]were killed, died in in in Gaza and then it stopped. It did stop.
[48:08]Well, you have to we have to stand for peace. We have to support everyone who does something um for peace.
[48:20]>> So there is no doubt that he played an instrumental role when it came to Gaza and the ceasefire there. >> But of course the criticism is around Venezuela for example, you know,
[48:30]plucking Maduro from uh the capital, taking him to New York, the threats against Greenland. There are accusations that President Trump has also been a
[48:40]destabilizing force. >> If you can save one life, it's worse. Then you can you can you can discuss about criticize about what words
[48:52]you use about threats about uh uh you know uh politics.
[49:00]But if you manage to save lives to protect your people and other people around the world, well, you deserve
[49:10]respect. That's a little flavor of the FIFA boss's chat with Yaldo. You can watch the full interview with Johnny. It's on the world coming next after the politics
[49:21]tell a light. It's coming at 9:00 UK tonight is next. But that's where you can watch Yalda and her interview with Johnny and Bentino. Still to come right now, as Green Party leader Zack Palansky shares that he's never taken [music]
[49:33]drugs or drunk alcohol, we'll be talking tetotal politicians. Coming up [music] on the UK Tonight from 8, an answer finally to who killed
[49:44]Victoria Hall in 1999 as the serial killer Steve Wright admits to murdering the teenager. Also tonight, the [music] heartbreaking story of a young woman who died of a blood clot linked to a birth
[49:55]control pill. Plus, the snooker [music] playing toddler who broke two Guinness World Records for his trick shots. All that and much more on the UK [music] tonight from 8. >> This is how you travel when the mafia
[50:12]wants to kill you. >> He's almost given [music] up his own freedom, but that's the price he's willing to pay. >> Here, they don't just arrest Andrangetta
[50:22]mafia members, [music] they also live among them. Time after time, I've seen the devastating impact of extreme weather and climate change. >> We don't have much snow at the moment.
[50:34]>> They've had a warm spring, an exceptionally hot summer, and that means they're expecting to lose more than three times the amount of ice than they usually do.
[50:44]>> Flames are still forcing people from their homes and leaving many questioning their futures. >> Here was my life. We have nothing. I can't say anything. [music] It's so sad.
[50:54]This disaster is testing the resolve of everyone on this island. >> The only way out now is by boat. Everything you see is devastated and the
[51:06]misery being felt by people living here is repeated in towns and villages across central Europe. Sky News. Get the full story first.
[51:17]>> Turkey is burying its dead. >> The loss is profound. Whole families died in this collapse. Generations wiped
[51:28]out. The violence has penetrated the heart of the city rather than being contained [music] to the estates around the edge. And that speaks to the level
[51:38]of anger being felt here. In Sweden, police have seized a lethal stash. This is just a small sample of the deadly arsenal taken off the streets. This is
[51:49]an example of an advert. Really anyone of any age could say I'll do that for a million crown and then have [music] to go and shoot someone. >> Yes. >> I'm Siobhan Robbins, Sky Europe
[51:59]correspondent based here in Berlin. >> There's always more to the news than a
[52:08]headline. We want to discover to delve a little deeper to find out what's really going on. Explanation, analysis, the
[52:17]people at the heart of every story. I'm Neil Patterson [music] and this is the Sky News Daily podcast. So by the end we'll hopefully all understand what's
[52:28]going on in the world just that little better. Available wherever you get your podcasts. The Green Party leader Zack Palansky has
[52:39]shared that he has never taken drugs or drunk alcohol. The T-total admission came as the leader reiterated his backing for the legalization and regulation of drugs and after a jive
[52:50]from the PM about the Green Party's drugs policy at PMQ's last week. He told the BBC Sunday with Laura Coonsburg program, "I've never actually taken a drug in my life or even drunk alcohol,
[53:01]but I still don't sit here as the fun police. I very clearly believe people should be able to do what they want to do. It just wasn't for me." Well, Zach
[53:11]Palansky isn't the only tea totler in politics. Donald Trump famously does not drink alcohol either. I had a brother, Fred, great guy,
[53:23]bestlooking guy, best personality, much better than mine, but he had a problem. He had a problem with alcohol. And he would tell me,
[53:34]"Don't drink." And to this day, I've never had a drink. And I have no longing for it. I have no interest in it. To this day, I've never had a cigarette.
[53:45]Don't worry, those are only two of my good things. I don't want to tell you about the bad things. >> Uh let's bring in our duo for this evening, Tom and Liz. Uh are you tea
[53:57]totalist, Liz? I think if I said that I was [laughter] it would so obviously and be swiftly be blown out of the water is a lie that [laughter]
[54:07]No, I mean and I'm just thinking we've got the England and Wales Six Nations rugby game on Saturday. >> Yeah, >> if you didn't have a drink with that, I don't know how really you'd get through it.
[54:17]>> I forgot how quickly the Six Nations is coming around. Tom, how about you? >> No, I think everything in moderation in life, but I'm a I'm a keen sportsman. I enjoy um a beer watching the sport and
[54:28]actually political life is very social in the sense of you know you need to get to know colleagues and it does play a part in you know some of that getting to know people and so in moderation there's a place for that >> when you're in the palace of Westminster
[54:39]you got subsidized booze come left right and center haven't you I mean it's it's you know you looked after if you want a drink of course obviously people like Zack Palansky although I know he's not in parliament but they wouldn't want that but you know if you want it it's
[54:51]it's cheaper I'm rather out of date on all of that because I've I've been there for 18 months, but what's the law of the land at the minute, Liz, on that front? >> There there are bars there to cut us some slack. Of course, when
[55:02]you get into Westminster, when you're there and you're waiting for votes to happen, now you should not drink before you are having a vote. Let's put that on the line now, which used to happen, didn't >> nonetheless, people are stuck there all
[55:13]day. You have to have food there. You have to have provisions there. And it's just the way that the place operates. And of course the social side does matter actually because you know we do the synchronized nastiness at PMQs and
[55:24]we we we go on out be unpopular to people but at the same time actually >> I mean in real life you have to be able to get on with people and people from across parties and it's this talking
[55:34]actually you will on occasion achieve really good common interest things. >> Well you open up if you had a few drinks don't you? >> And sometimes you get to know >> start saying what you think. Well, well, it's fair to say that actually you often
[55:45]get to know colleagues from other parties better in in that environment, rather like in communities across the country. People go to their local pub >> and they meet other people in the community, important social hubs.
[55:56]Actually, often alcohol in that political environment in a responsible context helps to do that in that sort of Westminster setting. >> But there'll be plenty of tea toters watching saying you don't need it as a
[56:08]social lubricant. And look, clearly times have changed. familyfriendly hours these days in parliament for example when it didn't used to be the case and >> you know some of the parliamentaries there be boozing all day and all night.
[56:19]>> Yeah. And the latest I've been in the House of Commons was to about half past 2 in the morning. So we do have familyfriendly hours but normally if there was a vote on a Monday we will be there till 10:00 at night. >> Yes.
[56:30]>> So no we still have very long hours there. And I think the the means for us it is important for us to be talking to each other. This is one of the reasons why we still have the voting going through the lobbies where basically all you what you need to know now is to
[56:42]carry your your your pass with you. You don't even need to remember your name. [laughter] >> Remember get hold of ministers and get things done for your >> constituent. So you see people face to face and that that you do get things
[56:54]done in a different way. >> Yeah. So you don't need to have a drink with them. It does you don't need to know if they're tea total or not. Frankly, >> no. But actually I'm rather taken with these non-alcoholic beers which I think are fantastic. So there are good
[57:04]alternatives out there for people who don't have a drink. Tom, they helped me get through dry January without touching all and I'll go have you really. >> It was It was difficult. It was difficult, but I admire those who don't
[57:15]touch a drop. Uh Tom, Liz, good to see you both. Thank you very much indeed. That's it from us tonight. I'll see you tomorrow at 7:00. Up next, it is the UK tonight with Sarah Jane me.