Sir arthur rees mogg , and the sir arthur rees mogg, and the author and broadcaster eamonn eckleton. As you know, as always, i want to hear from you. Its a crucial part of the programme. Email me mailmogg gbnews. Com. Now its time for the news bulletin with aaron armstrong. Aaron armstrong. Very good evening to you. Im aaron armstrong. The prime aaron armstrong. The Prime Minister has offered an unequivocal apology to victims of the infected blood scandal, describing it as a day of shame for the british state. The inquiry found a subtle, pervasive and chilling cover up from those in positions of trust and power, including the deliberate destruction of documents by government officials. The final report concluded patients were knowingly exposed to unacceptable risks, and the scandal could have largely been avoided. More than 30,000 people were infected with hiv and hepatitis c over more than 20 years because of contaminated blood products and transfusions. This is a day of shame for the british state. Todays report shows a decades long moral failure at the heart of our National Life , from the our National Life, from the National Health service to the Civil Service to ministers in successive governments, at every level, the people and institutions in which we place our trust failed in the most harrowing and devastating way. Harrowing and devastating way. They failed the victims and their families and they failed this country. The inquiry chair , sir brian the inquiry chair, sir Brian Langstaff, found victims suffering had been compounded by the slow pace of government compensation and in waiting for the conclusion of the report, rishi sunak had perpetuated the injustice. Labour leader sir keir starmer also apologised , keir starmer also apologised, saying victims had been failed by all parties, including his. By all parties, including his. I acknowledge that this suffering was caused by wrongdoing , delay suffering was caused by wrongdoing, delay and suffering was caused by wrongdoing , delay and systemic wrongdoing, delay and systemic failure across the board, compounded by institute defensiveness. And as sir brian defensiveness. And as sir Brian Langstaff makes clear in his report , any apology today must report, any apology today must be accompanied by action. Details of the governments compensation package will be outlined tomorrow. In a statement in the commons. Victims say todays events are vindication of their suffering over decades. Sometimes we felt like we were shouting into the wind dunng were shouting into the wind during these 40 years when we told people they didnt believe us, they said this wouldnt happenin us, they said this wouldnt happen in the uk, but today proves that it can happen in the uk, and it did happen in the uk and i just feel validated and vindicated. I think everybody today has read of the disasters that unfolded , and sir brian has been unfolded, and sir brian has been very thorough and has not minced his words. This was a systemic this was by government, by Civil Servants and by health care professionals. I think that really rocks what we think of as society and really challenges the fact, the trust that we put in people to look after us, to do their best and protect us, none of that can we take for granted anymore. The parents of a baby girl say theyll never forgive the callousness of a nursery worker whos been convicted of manslaughter. 37 year old kate rowley placed nine month old Genevieve Meehan face down on a beanbag for an hour and a half while working a tiny toes nursery in Cheadle Hulme in may 2022. Colleagues and paramedics tried to revive the baby, but she was declared dead later that day. Roughley has been remanded in custody and is due to be sentenced later this week. You sentenced later this week. You can get more on all of our stories in our later bulletins or theres more right now on our gb news alerts. Scan the qr code on your screen or go to the website. Now its back to. Jacob. Welcome back to state of the nafion welcome back to state of the nation on the 12th of february of this year, at exactly this time, gb news hosted an episode of the Peoples Forum with the Prime Minister and first lord of the treasury, rishi sunak , the treasury, rishi sunak, presented by our own Stephen Dixon. Because gb news is the peoples channel, gb news created a new broadcasting format that put the people at the centre of the programme, with questions coming from members of the public and not from journalists. Gb news hired from journalists. Gb news hired an external and independent organisation to select the audience, which consisted of roughly 100 undecided voters. Neither gb news nor the Prime Minister knew what the questions were in advance. Programs format gave complete freedom to the people to ask their questions , but apparently the questions, but apparently the broadcast regulator, ofcom, doesnt believe in putting voters at the heart of government scrutiny. Today, ofcom released its decision that found gb news to be in breach of the broadcasting code and is now considering sanctioning gb news. Ofcom has made three basic claims for its decisions that a wide range of views were not presented, that due impartiality was not preserved, and that there was a problem with the Prime Minister promoting policies. In a period preceding a uk general election , the first a uk general election, the first two points of a wide range of views not being heard and a lack of due impartiality. I can give you evidence here and now to debunk these points. Heres an example. Robin white im a barrister from somerset. Why should lgbt people vote conservative . Weve made changes in the nhs for provision of Health Care Services for same sex couples, and that gives hopefully you and everyone else a sense that this is a country whose values are reflected in our party and in government, and that is that its a compassionate, tolerant place. Forgive me slightly, but i think some of the issue may be less about the lgbt and more about the t. Prime minister more about the t. Prime minister more about the t. Prime minister more about the trans issue. About the trans issue. Quite clearly, this was a left wing criticism of governments stance on lgbt matters, and the presenter, Stephen Dixon , pushed it on the Stephen Dixon, pushed it on the Prime Minister further. It was a clear occasion of a question being asked and answer being given, and then pushed back onto the Prime Minister. He was also held to account on a range of other policies. Listen to this on rwanda. Why are you so adamant about rwanda when public documentation shows it isnt working and that its not going to work . So can you be open and honest with everybody today and tell us what the next steps are . For the First Time Since the small boats thing became a phenomenon, the numbers were down. They werent down by little. They were down by over a third. That if you come to our country illegally, you wont get to stay. We want to be able to to stay. We want to be able to remove you either to your home country, if its safe, like weve done with albania, and for everyone else, we need an alternative. And thats what rwanda is about. Prime minister, im not meant to really interject with any questions, but ive got to say, a lot of people will be wondering how do you get this through parliament . This is a big problem. Big problem. And here we had a questioner saying to the Prime Minister he wasnt being open and honest. If thats not challenge , i dont thats not challenge, i dont know what is. And heres another example on the question of social care. Social care is chronically underfunded , and government has underfunded, and government has abdicated responsibility to local government , effectively local government, effectively making it a Postcode Lottery for many. Do you agree that it needs radical reform, and if so , what . Radical reform, and if so, what . We announced an extra £600 million for local government across the country and of that extra money that weve put in, the bulk of it is ringfenced specifically for social care. Its such a difficult issue which has faced so many governments, but do we ever seem to get an answer where we can really see any significant difference within a short timescale, at least in each of these three instances, the questions challenge the Prime Minister and Stephen Dixon interjected to further the challenge. And you must think ofcom is like the deaf adder that charmed gb news ever so nicely. Its stuffed up its ears, which address the bizarre claim about the Prime Minister promoting policies in a period preceding a uk general election. Every point in english and then british history since the middle of the 13th century. Pre seeds a uk general election and since the fixed term parliaments act was abolished, inevitably or always in a pre election period. And thats been our normal state of affairs for hundreds of years. If the programme had been hosted two years ago or three years ago, it would still have been proceeding a uk general election. And theres nothing in the broadcast code that says anything about preceding a uk general election, other than when parliaments been dissolved, and we are an official election period , which official election period, which we were not during the programme and still are not now. Were not evenin and still are not now. Were not even in the electoral commissions pre general election early spending period, which starts in july. So this decision is quite sinister. Gb news was and has continued to be completely transparent about this broadcast structure that stays true to its values , but stays true to its values, but ofcom seemingly only wants apparatchiks to ask the questions. This chilling decision gets the heart what the media ought to be. For decades, journalists seem to be on the side of the elite against the people that they know what is best. But gbnews, we believe the people know what is best. Ofcom begs to differ. So gb news is the newest addition to the broadcast ecosystem , and its broadcast ecosystem, and its doing quite well. This programme has reasonable figures and most days were a bit ahead of sky and sometimes ahead of the bbc two. The establishment doesnt like this. Who could forget the time . Not too long ago when a journalist called for gb news to be taken off air on bbc newsnight and went entirely unchallenged, there were ofcom complaints about this, but we didnt hear anything about threats or sanctions. You know, i have to say, i think the complaints have piled up against gb news. I think there is a delicate and important broadcast ecology in this country. Important broadcast ecology in this country. I think, you important broadcast ecology in this country. I think, you know, this country. I think, you know, gb news is trying to bust that ecology. And frankly, what ofcom should do is shut it down like it shut down. Rt speaking of the so called delicate broadcast ecology that ought not to be disrupted. Its about time said that you, the public, own a broadcaster that poses as impartial news, but in reality he pumps out left wing propaganda. And for once, im not talking about auntie. The bbc, which has its own problems. Im referring to channel 4 news. Hardly surprised that people like adam boulton, who, it must be said, has some degree of interest to declare along with other establishment journalists, they would like us shut down. But for ofcom to behave like this represents a threat to freedom of speech. Its about freedom of speech. Its about time. Its antiquated, nonsensical regulations were removed for privately funded broadcasters , not least because broadcasters, not least because it cant seem to apply them fairly. It is it cant seem to apply them fairly. It is a dark day for freedom of expression. Its time we had an equivalent of the United StatesFirst Amendment that protects freedom of speech from left wing bureaucrats. Id like to make it clear that both gb news and i wholeheartedly reject this ruling , and will not reject this ruling, and will not back down on our foundational principle whether ofcom likes it or not, we are here to represent you. The or not, we are here to represent you. The british people. Gb news is, in a way, an easy target for the left , but were not going the left, but were not going anywhere as ever. Let me know your thoughts. Mel mogg at gb news. Com im joined now by an old friend of the program, journalist and author michael crick, and the director of the Free Speech Union and associate editor of the spectator, toby young. Michael, youre not a fan of gb news, are you . Im not a fan of gb news in the sense that i think it is a right wing propaganda channel. I think its absurd that youre allowed to get away with ridiculous scenarios where you interview nigel farage, one senior right wing politician interviewing another , or richard tice or john another, or richard tice or john redwood, or farage interviews tice or farages former press officer, another presenter Patrick Christys interviews farage or farage his wife. But youll never get away with that on any other channel. Nigel farage is critique of the conservative party. When i interviewed him last week, was brutal, yes, but how often do you get a true left wingers interviewing each other on gb news . Once a year. You have that on channel 4 most nights of the week. Well, you used to be on channel, you know, my criticisms of channel 4 news and i made them for a long time. And, and i did ive given a lecture about all of this. So its no secret that i felt that in the, in the, in the, in the teens channel 4 news was biased to the left. Now you know. So ive got to be consistent here. Yeah. And i think that is its as i think basically gb news is taking the mickey out of ofcom. Ofcom have become so weak they feel under i dont know whats going on at ofcom. Frankly the people running it are just not up to it and they but on this ruling actually, this ruling , i ruling actually, this ruling, i think that its a bit like al capone being prosecuted for tax evasion. I mean, that program, it wasnt revolutionary. Granada it wasnt revolutionary. Granada did the granada 500 program, i think, in 1964, similar format, 500 voters interviewing a politician. Now, it was a dull program, actually. Ofcoms right when they say that the program should have allowed the members of the audience to follow up their questions in response to their questions in response to the Prime Ministers answer , the Prime Ministers answer, they let sunak rambled on for far too long, but, but and okay. Offences were committed. But theyre minor compared with what ive described. The way in which you allow politicians to introduce the same party and theyre all right wing politicians. Thats surely a matter of editorial judgement as to how long you allow a Prime Minister to respond, that you are asked pretty tough questions. They were tough. They were pretty. If i were sunak, i would have been delighted with that. Now, of course, what where it went wrong is that gb news thought that they might get a programme with keir starmer as well. And according to gb News Executives to talking ofcom, starmers people are given the indication that they would cooperate. But they hadnt actually said definitely they would do it now. If starmer had then been subject to such a programme, there. I really dont think that, but but in the end, labour basically have copped out. Okay, but you cant be held for that because Boris Johnson wasnt interviewed by andrew neil. It didnt mean that andrew neil. It didnt mean that andrew neil couldnt. But i think the people knew in the 19 in the 2019 election, how an what an unprincipled character a johnson was and how he couldnt be trusted. And therefore they prepared for that eventuality. You mustnt allow tv channels to be held to ransom by one person refusing to appear. I agree, i agree, but i mean, they could have changed the nature of the programme. So there was more criticism of sunak than than than youve just portrayed. This seems to me pretty fundamentally about freedom of speech that you must be able to have a programme that questions the Prime Minister and decide what is suitable, and that ofcom is applying its rules erratically, unfairly. And erratically, unfairly. And actually it just wanted a more left wing programme. Left wing programme. Like most, attacks on free speech, it underestimates the intelligence of the general public. Intelligence of the general pubuc. The intelligence of the general public. The general viewing audience, you know, michael accuses gb news of being a right wing propaganda channel, actually , early polling actually, early polling indicates that a majority of gb news viewers are going to vote labour rather than for any other party. More viewers are going to vote labour than for any other party. So it is a right wing propaganda channel. Its not doing a great job. Or maybe members of the audience are intelligent and can make up their own minds, michaels right that this format isnt entirely revolutionary. In 2005, the bbc, put blair in front of a studio audience that grilled him. No other senior politicians on that programme to talk about the iraq war in 2016. Michael gove, when he famously said he thinks weve had enough of experts. He said that in a programme on sky news in which it was just him being scrutinised by an audience, so we have called keir on lbc. Where are the ofcom complaints about those programmes . This feels like two tier regulation, ofcoms equivalent of two tier policing. Yes. I used to do a call rees mogg programme with nick ferrari and thats absolutely right. It was only me and intermediated by nick. One of the complaints that ofcom has upheld and the rationale its given for upholding the complaints is, as youve discussed, that there wasnt enough scrutiny of sunaks answers that the presenter sh