 We are now on day eight of the scandal into Tory corruption and sleaze and the revelations just get worse and worse. Today, we're taking you through all the shocking details of Geoffrey Cox's side jobs in the British Virgin Islands. Yes, that's a tax haven. He was there during the coronavirus lockdown. To discuss that story and more, I'm joined by Aaron Bostani from Glasgow. How are you doing, Aaron? Michael Walker, it's so good to see you. Do make sure you subscribe and if you have any comments, any questions, tweet them on the hashtag TiskeySour or put them in the comments box. Sir Geoffrey Cox is a big deal in the Conservative Party. He was Attorney-General under Theresa May and Boris Johnson over the final two years of the Brexit process and became famous for booming interventions like this. This Parliament is a disgrace given the opportunity. Given since I am asked, let me tell them the truth. They could vote no confidence at any time, but they're too cowardly. They could agree to a motion to allow this House to dissolve, but they're too cowardly. Pantamime-like performances of that kind made Cox popular within the Tory Party, so much so that Boris Johnson chose him to launch his leadership campaign. I am pleased today. I am proud today to introduce the candidate whom I shall support to lead the Conservative Party and our nation, a man who has already shown that he can lead this great global city through two successful terms. Ladies and gentlemen, Boris Johnson. Thank you very much. Good morning everybody. Thank you. But Boris Johnson, who once celebrated his relationship with Cox, no longer wants to hold him so close. That's because we've learnt that while Cox has gone silent in the Commons, only speaking once in the past 18 months, he's been very busy elsewhere. Specifically, Cox has been representing the Government of the British Virgin Islands in an inquiry into institutional corruption. That inquiry was launched by the British Government. Over the past six months, Geoffrey Cox has spent 680 hours working for the law firm that represents the Government of the island. In the process, he's pocketed £637,000. Those hours included 10 days appearing in a Caribbean court when the UK Parliament had been sitting. One of those was this June when Cox opined about just how seriously the Virgin Islands, which is a tax haven, takes the issue of transparency and corruption. Those I represent, I think, accept entirely that it is central to the democratic idea that the purpose of elected office is to serve the public. It is not to enrich the office holder, and it is not to enrich the office holder's personal connections. Members should not use their position plainly to influence the legislative process for their own advantage or for someone to whom they are connected. For this purpose, as you know, many parliaments, most frankly in democratic countries, have now provided for members to make periodic returns of pecuniary interests to be recorded in a register. And the purpose of that register is to strengthen public trust and confidence in parliamentary processes, and those I represent fully accept that principle. There are a couple of things that jump out about that clip. First, Cox is himself now the best argument as to why a register of interest, what he was arguing for there, is not enough to maintain confidence in a parliament. That would also require MPs to not take the piss. Second, if you thought Cox sounded rather defensive of the government he was representing, he's essentially saying, trust me, they do think corruption is a problem. He has reason to be. According to the mail, members of the British version island government are among other things accused of giving 29 million pounds of COVID relief funds in cash handouts to political allies, misusing 70 million of tax payers' money that were supposed to be spent on infrastructure projects and wasting 23 million pound building a pier after awarding construction contracts to cronies. These are of course the allegations which led the UK Foreign Office to launch a judicial inquiry into institutional corruption on the island. When it comes to Cox's lucrative role working for the Virgin Island government, what adds insult to injury is the timings of his trip to the Caribbean. Cox flew to the Virgin Island on April 26 when holidays for ordinary Brits were still banned. What's more is in the month he was there he voted in the UK parliament 12 times, something only possible because proxy votes had been temporarily introduced during COVID. It goes about saying proxy votes were meant to enable working from home during the pandemic to stop social interaction and travelling. They weren't meant so that people could vote from the Caribbean. It's of course worth noting none of the events I have described so far while outrageous reach parliamentary roles. They're all above board. However, Cox, who considering the fees he charges for his legal services should have a keen eye for the law, does seem to have slipped up on Tuesday night, 24 hours into the controversy, a video emerged of Cox representing the Virgin Islands government in what appears to be his own parliamentary office in Westminster. What you say is that you may want submissions to put the premier's evidence into context and you may write it. Let me give that some thought. Would you forgive me for not being present this afternoon? I'm afraid I have compelling other commitments, but Miss Petey will be here. I know. And that was explained this morning. I'm very grateful. Forgive my absence during some of the morning, I'm afraid. Thank you very much. That clip was from a hearing on the 14th of September. At the end, you heard Cox say the bell went off. That's thought to be a reference to the division bell, which rings when MPs can go into the lobby to vote. This is all a problem for Cox as while holding lucrative second jobs is not against any rules operating those jobs out of parliamentary offices very much is. This is something the Health Secretary, Sadid Javed, accepted earlier today. Whether it's your parliamentary office or any other parliamentary stationery or anything that's funded or supported by the taxpayer, of course that should not be used. And again, I can't talk about any individual case. I think the rules on the use of whether it's parliamentary property or your letters or letterheads or stamps or anything like that. I think the rules are clear. And of course, all MPs would be expected to observe that at all times. Sadid Javed is saying that MPs are expected to follow the rules, although if they're friends of the prime minister, he might try and let them off. Cox has released a statement defending his role. So in it, he says the following or his representatives say the following in the third person. So Geoffrey Cox is a leading barrister in England and makes no secret of his professional activities. He was asked to advise the Attorney General and the elected government of the British Virgin Islands, a British overseas territory, in a public inquiry into whether corruption, abuse of office or other serious dishonesty may have taken place in recent years in the Virgin Islands and to carry out a review of its systems of government in preparation for that inquiry. This is not to defend a tax haven or as has been inaccurately reported to defend any wrongdoing, but to assist the public inquiry in getting to the truth. No evidence of tax evasion or personal corruption has been adduced before the inquiry and if it had been, that person would have been required to seek their own representation. Later in the statement, he goes on to say, So Geoffrey regularly works 70-hour weeks and always ensures that his casework on behalf of his constituents is given primary importance and fully carried out. Throughout this period, he continued to have online meetings with organisations, businesses and individuals within the constituency and it made no difference where he was for that purpose since it was not practicable or desirable at that time to meet face to face. As to the use of the proxy, prior to his visit to the BVI, he consulted the Chief Whip specifically on this issue and was advised that it was appropriate. So potentially some problems for the Chief Whip there who we know takes orders from Boris Johnson. And next, so Geoffrey's view is that it is up to the electors of Torridge and West Devon whether or not they vote for someone who is a senior and distinguished professional in his field and who still practises that profession. That has been the consistent view of the local Conservative Association and although at every election his political opponents have sought to make a prominent issue of his professional practice, it has so far been the consistent view of the voters of Torridge and West Devon. It is very content to abide by their decision. Elsewhere in the statement, Cox does not deny working from his parliamentary office when doing private business, but nonetheless suggests he doesn't believe he broke any rules. I'm still waiting to see how he squares that circle. From those parts we showed you there are a couple of points I think it's important to make first. It's obvious why Cox appears happy to let constituents decide his future. He represents one of the safest Tory seats in the country. Second, his justification of his activities in the Virgin Island is to say he wasn't defending corrupt practices but was assisting the public inquiry in getting to the truth. But that brushes over the fact that in that inquiry he is representing one side, the government. He is not, for example, assisting the judge. That would be a neutral role. The role he has taken is not that. It also seems unlikely that his role on the Virgin Islands is to promote maximum transparency. These comments on the drawbacks of an open register of interest suggest he could be helping the government to justify only the bare minimum of reform. Accepted the principle of having an open register. There are real drawbacks to open registers. It becomes a political tool for every many, many frivolous complaints. It is a profound invasion into a legislator's private life because what happens is, as you can imagine, stories get written, minor infractions are written up to be morally shameful or even in pure dishonesty. I accept the need for a register. Of course I do. Every legislator must. But there are perfectly understandable reticence to invite that kind of onslaught that it can sometimes mean. I understand that. That was Geoffrey Cox suggesting we should be a bit transparent, but not necessarily that transparent. The electorate might get ideas. I assume that his view of open registers will have only got worse over the last couple of days. My favourite part of this story I haven't told you yet, which is, while Cox earned a total of £1 million last year, so that was the full tally of his jobs outside of his £82,000 job that he gets in Parliament, the taxpayer part of his salary, he felt the need to build taxpayers £629 for an iPad to enable effective working while travelling and another £419.95 for tablet accessories to help with remote working. As is so often the case, being filthy rich does not mean Cox is not a penny pincher, so he's earning £82,000 from the taxpayer, £1 million from various clients, including Tax Haven Islands, and then still charging the state £600 for iPads. I mean, it's pretty outrageous. Before we move on, I want to address one particular argument that's made in favour of MPs having second jobs and, in particular, Cox having a second job. This was Dominic Raab speaking to Times Radio. Do you think you can do your job properly as a constituency MP from the British Virgin Islands during a pandemic? Well, look, I think it's first of all important to say that all of any outside interests have to be properly declared. In relation to the British Virgin Islands, there's a foreign secretary that commissioned a commission of inquiry given the allegations of misgovernance and very serious ones, including criminal wrongdoing. Now, I'm not going to get dragged into what individual MPs do, but actually having the former Attorney General, and it wasn't my decision, it was hired by the government of the BVI to advise them on how to correct and deal and address those allegations, which actually is a legitimate thing to do as long as it's properly declared. And, of course, it's quite important in the Parliament, which is responsible, residualy, for some areas of our relationship with the overseas territories. It's got some knowledge of what's going on in those territories. So I'm not getting dragged into individual cases, but actually being in touch and working with our overseas territories is quite an important piece of the responsibilities of the UK and indeed our Parliament. There might be, at a stretch, some arguments as to why second jobs could be a good idea for MPs. If you're a doctor, it's a no-brainer. If you're a nurse doing a few hours on the side to maintain your professional qualification, that's a good idea. It's also obvious that it doesn't really create any conflicts of interest. But working for a government in a tax haven, I don't think that really makes the grade. And in any case, if what we're interested in is getting experience, getting experience and knowledge that can input into the legislative process, Cox didn't need any extra practice because he already has enough experience working for these guys. The Mail report that in 2014, taxpayers were forced to stump up 1,800 pounds to fly Cox home from the Cayman Islands when Parliament was unexpectedly recalled during a recess to discuss an emergency in Iraq. And in 2018, Cox provided support to the governments of both the British Virgin Islands and the Caymans in Parliament in 2018 when he spoke repeatedly against a proposal to increase transparency in tax havens. So this is a guy who is no stranger to these overseas territories. Aaron, I think we can hear you okay now. I'm going to ask you the same question I sort of begun with, which is, I suppose, super basic. How significant do you think this Jeffrey Cox scandal is? It's a perennial of British politics and politics in any democracy to talk about corruption and scandal and sleaze. That's normal in democratic societies. There are people who are shown to be hypocrites. That happens a lot. It'll happen in the future. Tory, Labour, whatever. But I think we're in a new moment politically, Michael, where you can have an elected legislator lobbying for a Crown territory or a different sovereign entity, but it's a political entity that separates the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, which has directly competing interests against the country within which they're a legislator. And I don't use this word frivolously. I think you would probably define that as treachery in centuries past in terms of the public interest of this country, which of course, as a legislator, as he notes in a conversation which you just appealed to a few minutes ago, he is duty-bound to defend the public interest of the people of this country, and yet he's representing interests who have interests of their own directly odds with ours here. And it's important to say as well, Michael, this is not all one-off. Jeffrey Cox is a lawyer and he has a specialisation in issues of tax and minimising the levels of tax that people and organisations, in the case of the BBI, a Crown territory, I think that's what it's called, would like to pay. And this is new. And I don't know if you call that corruption. He's lobbying for an entity with directly conflicting interests with those of citizens here in the UK. And I think that's something really remarkable. And I hope it's explained with the utmost clarity to the British public at large in the coming days, weeks and months. And I'm worried, Michael, with the whole Tory corruption sleaze scandal that there's this kind of universal equivalence and that actually people don't get into the specifics of what's going on with Jeffrey Cox and how remarkable this is and how it shouldn't be permissible in a liberal democracy. The man should be run out of town as far as I'm concerned politically. If I was Boris Johnson, if I was the chief whip or if I was a chair of a Conservative Association out there in the Shires, I would be terrified of what this man means to my political brand. Now, look, in the short term, they don't need to worry. They've got the male. They've got the son. They've got the express. They've got the telegraph. But this will have consequence in terms of corroding the core sort of political message which they have, which is we represent the people of this country better than anyone else. No, the man was being paid very lucratively to do the precise opposite of that, opposite of that in my opinion. I suppose it's probably worth saying that he wasn't necessarily lobbying because his job was to give advice to the government of the Virgin Islands in a public inquiry, a judge-led public inquiry or judicial inquiry or whatever, in the British Virgin Islands which had been set up by the British government. So he'd also say, you know, it's not where there are, it's not that there is a claimant and a defender and one of them is the British government and one of them is the British Virgin Islands. It's that there was the British government who advised that there was institutional corruption in that territory. They set up this judicial inquiry and then Geoffrey Cox goes to defend the government of the British Virgin Islands. Now, he's trying to say, that just means I'm there to try and find out the truth and try to get to the bottom of this. As I say, I don't think that stands up because he's there to advise the government and even if they aren't formally, you know, a defendant in that inquiry, practically they are. If he's looking into institutional corruption on the island from the government then that is kind of the role, it's not formally, they're not formally the defendant. That is kind of what's going on. He could also have lobbied. I mean, it's clearly you've got a lot of possibility for him to lobby, given that he's being paid handsomely by the British Virgin Islands and the UK government has a lot of sway over what happens. We don't have evidence of it yet. What we do know at this point in time is that he got paid a million pounds last year, spent a lot of it in the Caribbean while we were all under lockdown and yeah, he was defending a system which seems very unsavory in many ways. Moving beyond Cox, we have a couple more updates on this general story. First, MPs are still moaning about their 82,000 pound salaries. The Financial Times quotes an MP as saying the following, there's no way I could be an MP without my outside interests. My wife works full-time. I've got kids and need the money for childcare. It's of course worth remembering that MPs are among Britain's top 5% of earners. They also get expenses on top of that. The idea that on that income in the top 5% of the population you can't afford childcare, it would suggest something. Why have these Tory MPs not yet passed universal childcare for people? Surely they realise that it's a problem if you're in the top 5% of earners and you need a second job before you can pay for childcare. On Twitter, whether childcare was sort of a euphemism for private school. But because it's an anonymous MP we might never find out. Second, we have some more detail on the original Owen Patterson scandal and Boris Johnson's relation to it. Tom Newton, Donov Times Radio tweeted, this is quite something. Two different backbench Tory MPs tell me they have been approached by whips in the last 24 hours to tell them the chief Mark Spencer was not the instigator of last week's disastrous motion but he was following direct orders from the PM. It means government whips have officially or not begun actively briefing against number 10. Sources close to Spencer emphatically deny he sanctioned this. Government source it was a government decision, it's a team game we stand or fall together. I mean we saw from the Labour Party over the past 5 years if you've got a lot of backbenchers who decide that they've fallen out with the leader it really does make a story just run and run and run. So potentially if Boris Johnson is trying to throw people under the bus and they're now sort of resisting being thrown under the bus, we could see a bit of a circular firing squad within the Conservative Party and that could be politically consequential at least. I don't know Michael, look I'm in Glasgow, I don't know about the political implications of it but how it seems to me is that the big work of Labour has to be the specifics of what's going on with Cox which I do think is unprecedented moral nadif politicians in this country I sincerely believe that my worry is that it just becomes corruption and sleeves and oh it's all the same, no this is really qualitatively quite bad I think unprecedented and it has to be addressed now so like I say the big work for Labour or the left or for me and you here on the foreign media is that this is just another sleaze, corruption scandal because this is not somebody you know sleeping with somebody that they shouldn't be this is a politician I think using public resources in a certain way which is really unbecoming of somebody in the elected office and they shouldn't frankly be an MP anymore. I mean what normally comes out of these scandals is you know some new rules that for a while stopped that particular infraction happening and then you all work out that another infraction was going on at the same time so the expenses one you know that was a route but it did change the rules as did the cash for questions one I mean obviously it doesn't get to the bottom of the rot in British politics and society but I don't know what would be your sort of desired implication of the Cox affair where could this lead because I mean it doesn't seem like he's going to prison for example No. No I think it feeds fundamentally into a culture thing Michael and both parties don't want principled independently minded people representing constituencies as MPs because that's the personality type they don't want in politics and that might sound sort of conspiratorial but you see the exact same thing in the Labour Party Michael the idea of somebody who's independently minded and principled and ethically driven and who doesn't just basically you know count out the status quo that kind of person really isn't welcome in elite politics in this country Michael really really is not welcome and like I said it's a cultural thing you're seeing a little bit of a break with that in the Tories and the kind of blue walk the form of red walk constituencies and I think if this kind of behavior probably concerns them the most because their electoral base formerly Labour voters now voting Tories are probably more sensitive to the idea of conservative corruption than anyone else but generally speaking people like Jeffrey Cox are the kind of people elevated to public life in this country have been for hundreds of years I think it boils down to a cultural thing and I think that's why I'd like to see in both major parties open primaries and a culture of mass public participation accountability, scrutiny the media, the Tories and the Labour Party all have a vested interest in not doing that so it's going to have to change from the outside people have tried to do that with the Labour Party look what happened 500,000 people labeled Holocaust denies and racists and anti-Semites and misogynists and bullies the collective might to the British establishment thrown at them so it's going to be very tough but like I say for me the solution is culture and very different kinds of people being involved in politics there is an institutional fix for that like I say it's more democracy open primaries but Michael these people will fight like their lives depend on it so that doesn't happen I think that's a really good point I wanted to get down to what you wanted to be the consequence of this and I very much agree with that point I think if an argument for democratic renewal would be a good outcome from this as opposed to just some tighter rules for the more obscene things that MPs do on the side we have almost 2000 people watching almost 400 likes who hit that like button it helps us on the algorithm and we're staying on a similar story going to the Labour Party the side job scandal embroiling the Tories should give Labour an opening to steal their voters however as we've discussed on previous shows Labour seem unwilling to come out with a strong opposition to MPs making money on the side we now have a possible explanation it's that Keir Starmer has been known to dabble inside jobs himself this is a 2017 article from Labour List at the time that article was written Starmer was Brexit Secretary and Corbyn was due to rule on whether he would be allowed to take the job it was controversial because Sir Keir should have been busy enough in his Shadow Cabinet job but also because Michelin de Rayer that's the company he was going to be working for had just represented Dina Miller in her bid to block the Brexit process it would not have been a good look for Labour in 2017 remember they were still backing Brexit the correct position ultimately the move was blocked but the fact Starmer was considering it was brought up in an excruciating interview this week with Sky in 2017 you were in talks to take a consultancy job yourself with Mishkan de Rayer was the decision was that decision wrong do you regret that now I have in fact given up my practicing the point at which you said it was wrong you were in talks to take a job yourself no I wasn't and I was in discussion nothing happened you were in talks to take a job yourself no I wasn't I was in discussion Aaron this is one of my favourite Keir Starmer clips so far I wasn't in talks I was in discussions incredibly different forensic what did you make of that answer in terms of the zeitgeist Michael Keir Starmer is the worst possible politician to lead the Labour Party right now in terms of his style of politics in terms of how he relates to people in terms of his personality he needs to win back loads of the North with a strong working class message of national renewal and yet this is a guy who's a London lawyer who's led to politics with terrible political instincts and I think people really underestimate Michael with somebody like Jeremy Corbyn the sort of slick PR stuff often didn't work but what did work was he knew who he was he had a set of core values and he always stuck to them so he'd be confronted with the problem and he said Jeremy Corbyn responds to this and actually on many things that was popular so I'm not allowing Keir Starmer to have a sideline working for a massive law company when he should be an effective shadow secretary of state for Brexit a pretty good political response and he was very coherent probably for Starmer is he's not coherent because he doesn't have any backbone or principles or sort of guiding moral compass and so he's a bit like Boris Johnson the trolley as he's defined by Dominic Cummings or varying from thing to thing Keir Starmer is an establishment politician in 2017, 2018 it would have seemed perfectly fine to him to have a sideline working for Mishkon Rea because he didn't have that moral compass that Jeremy Corbyn did and does now of course it's politically inexpedient for him to say that so he looks ridiculous, he looks hypocritical which is the exact reason why Jeremy Corbyn became the Labour Party leader in 2015 did so impressively in 2017 is because he said look I'm not a politician like all the rest of them, I'm not business usual Starmer if he wants to win a majority going against Tory sleaze we'll have to do something similar okay far more palatable, far more with far greater media refinement but this really illustrates that he can't and you know it's going to be a very tough sell let's see, but I thought it was deeply embarrassing and look, fundamentally the guy's meant to be a lawyer a retritition and yet he contradicts himself again in the space of 10 seconds we have some comments Robert with a 5, corruption is a feature not a bug like being part of a mafia or a gang everyone must be guilty of something and so depend on the gang for protection I like those theories of elite power you all have to have something on each other to trust each other Rosa Gilbert tweets on the hashtag Aron has excellent taste in whiskey Balvin E. Doublewood 12 year and Lagavulin if I'm not mistaken I'm wondering Aron if they are your whiskies because I imagine you're in an Airbnb no they are our host whiskies and Rosa should know that I prefer Irish whiskey red breast is my favourite sorry it's Scotland this is all going completely above my head let's go straight on to our next story this year alone Israeli police have stormed the holiest site in Palestine Israeli courts have expelled Palestinians from their homes and the Israeli army have killed 260 Palestinians including 60 children in airstrikes it should then be no surprise that when the country's ambassador speaks in public protests take place this is what happened on Tuesday night when Zippy Hotovelli spoke to students at the London School of Economics that to me looked like a pretty standard protest I spoke to a bunch of people who were on it and by all accounts it was but that's not how the media reported it the Jewish Chronicle quickly published a leader titled on the anniversary of Kristallnacht a Jew hunting mob on the streets of London the night of broken glass was a pogrom against Jews carried out by Nazi paramilitaries it happened over two nights in 1938 267 synagogues were destroyed over 7000 Jewish businesses were damaged and 30,000 Jewish men were arrested and incarcerated in concentration camps it was one of the most despicable events of the 21st century and it has absolutely nothing to do with some LSE students protesting apartheid other journalists got in on the act though Theo Usherwood from LBC tweeted the following not quite sure what is more worrying the fact that this happened at a London University or the fact that 11 hours on that same university the LSE still has nothing to say about it LSE did go on to make a statement it condemned any threats made to the Israeli ambassador on social media but it didn't condemn the protests themselves Labour politicians had less of a spine Shadow Foreign Secretary Lisa Nandi tweeted the following the appalling treatment of Israeli ambassador Sipi Hotovelli is completely unacceptable there is no excuse for this kind of behaviour freedom of speech is a fundamental right and any attempt to silence or intimidate those we disagree with should never be tolerated now Hotovelli took part in a 90 minute debate at LSE it was uninterrupted when she left the building she had to witness a protest against the crimes committed by the state she represents the only threat to free speech here is the demonisation of peaceful protestors she took part in a 90 minute debate Shadow Home Secretary Nick Thomas Simons had an even worse statement so he tweeted the following shocking scenes last night involving Israel's ambassador anti-Semitism has no place in our society I wish Zipi Hotovelli well and support the police in any investigation now why do I say this tweet is worse because without any evidence it explicitly accuses the protesters of anti-Semitism secondly it explicitly wishes Zipi Hotovelli well now let's look in more detail at who this person is who the Israeli ambassador is to see why both parts of that tweet are ridiculous so before taking her job as Israeli ambassador to Britain Zipi Hotovelli served as Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs and then Minister for Settlements Minister for Settlements just keep that in mind both were in governments of Benjamin Netanyahu that means Hotovelli is on the right even in Israel which might be why Netanyahu was confident putting her forward to defend Israel's bombing campaign this May this is Hotovelli speaking to Sky on day 10 of Israel's bombing campaign by this point Israeli forces had killed 260 Palestinians including 66 children who wanted this conflict to begin with it was a pure provocation of a radical jihadi terror organization Hamas that wanted to shoot our kids our women our men millions of Israelis spend the last 10 days in bomb shelters because the whole country was under attack of over 3,000 rockets the reason Israel wants to make sure that those kind of attacks won't be coming back again and again so we want to restore quiet we don't want to be in a war but we would like not to have a quick fix we would like to have something that is sustainable so our people can get back to normal life first of all the idea Israel didn't want this conflict or that its leaders deserve sympathy is ridiculous 260 Palestinians were killed as more than 20 times the number of Israelis who were killed in that period just as importantly the conflict started because of Israel's unprovoked actions storming holy sites and Palestinians from their homes in that clip Hotter Valley also spoke of bringing quiet to Israel and the sustainable solution to the conflict these might sound like reasonable statements to the uninitiated so its important to know some background to get what she means he here is that Hotter Valley is a supporter of a greater Israel that means all of the Palestinian territories should be a next no Palestine she said this land is ours all of it is ours she justifies annexation by another extreme claim that Palestine and thus the Israeli occupation have never existed in 2019 Hotter Valley told a US audience using the term annex is not true you annex something that is not yours this is not a story of annexation this is a story of realisation what's next what's going to happen what's going to change after the annexation of area C for 52 years we were feeding this myth of occupation it's a myth it's not true so the occupation which has been recognised by the UN for 52 years Palestinians recognise it as going on from 1948 she says it's never existed because the Palestinian people have never existed Palestine doesn't exist in this extreme related to the belief that there has never been an occupation is Hotter Valley's belief that the Nakba is an Arab lie that's what she told the British Board of Deputies about the expulsion of 700,000 Palestinians by Israeli forces in 1947 and 1948 if this was about any other conflict the Labour right would be calling her a genocide denier and they would be backing the protests outside the debate not in this situation it's also worth noting given the condemnations of the LSE protests that Hotter Valley is by no means herself an advocate of a vibrant public sphere in 2017 Netanyahu cancelled a meeting with the German Foreign Minister because he had previously met two Israeli human rights organisations defending that decision Hotter Valley described one of those groups they're called Breaking the Silence it's ex-IDF veterans as an enemy of Israel called them an enemy of Israel and even implied they were war criminals if you are still not convinced that Hotter Valley is worth protesting I have one more bit of information about her politics this one is really shocking it's from an article written by the journalist Jenny Fraser in Jewish news it was it came out just before Hotter Valley had become ambassador and it argues that she is too extreme to take on that role her examples of her extremism include the following what are we to make of her 2011 invitation to the Lahava organisation to speak to the Knessitz committee on the state of women and gender equality of which she was a member Lahava's mission is prevention of assimilation in the Holy Land and it's bigoted members, yes bigoted have frequently demonstrated against personal or business relationships between Jews and Arabs Hotter Valley's reasoning was that it was important to check systems to prevent mixed marriages Fraser writes it should scarcely be necessary to point out that even the most traditionally observant of politicians has no role in preventing mixed marriages would anyone have as casually invited members of the Ku Klux Klan to address a Knessitz committee so you can see this person's politics this person's politics is they don't want marriages between people of different ethnicities this is like 1960's Ku Klux Klan stuff she doesn't think Palestine has ever existed she wants Israel to occupy the whole of the lands of Israel and Palestine incredibly extreme and yet when there is a peaceful protest against her speaking at a university this is very ordinary this is not exceptional it's a protest about someone speaking who they disagree with and for good reason you have the shadow home secretary of the Labour Party tweeting about any evidence whatsoever that the protesters who by all accounts oppose apartheid by all accounts oppose bombing campaigns on one of the most densely populated areas in the world which killed 60 children very reasonable reasons to protest I'd say good reasons to protest he's called them all anti-Semitic and then he said solidarity to the person who doesn't want people of different ethnicities to get married he wishes her well he wishes her well this is the person who in May this year was going out on television saying oh no it's absolutely fine that Israel is continuing to bomb as I say the most densely part one of the most densely populated parts of the world it's completely fine because I think she said in that clip you know my grandma had to go into a bomb shelter well let's have some perspective as I said before in Israel there were 12 people killed over that 10 days in Palestine there were 260 including as I've said 60 children this is not someone who anyone anywhere near the Labour Party should be expressing their solidarity in a tweet with and especially not because they've experienced a protest this is you know you can imagine if there was some sort of terrorist activity you can imagine wishing well to someone who you vigorously disagree with you know I might disagree with what you stand for but this was obviously a tragic action if something really appalling has happened but this was a protest this was people holding up signs and saying you're not welcome at LSE because you are part of the government of an apartheid regime that's not my words that's the words of the Human Rights Organization or sorry Human Rights Watch and Betsalem which is Israel's most prestigious human rights organization and yet and yet we have Lisa Nandi saying this is terrible what has happened this peaceful protest this is terrible what has happened I find the whole thing cowardly I find it despicable and it frankly means no one should have any trust whatsoever in the people at the top of the Labour Party that they will do anything to the left of Tony Blair you know these are people who are coming out with actively imperialist statements backing people who are against marriages it's unbelievable I'm even saying it she's someone who opposes marriages of Jews and Palestinians Israelis and Palestinians Jews and Arabs Jews and Muslims this is not the kind of person who the Labour leadership should be standing up for and just piling in there and smearing these protesters as anti-Semites is despicable Boris Johnson is a self-absorbed egotist who cares for nothing but himself his prime ministership has been a disaster and it's cost tens of thousands of lives there is however just the tiniest silver lining to his inept role it's that his shameless incompetence means that over and over again on morning TV we get to see other self-absorbed egotists making fools of themselves defending his ridiculous actions this is Dominic Raab looking like an idiot after Boris Johnson refused to wear a mask on a recent hospital visit we've talked a fair bit haven't we about Boris Johnson and that hospital visit yesterday I'm just going to share some images now from the hospital yesterday he was at Hexham General Hospital not wearing a mask everybody else in the image that we can see at the moment is wearing a mask what type of message do you think that sends out well I know the prime minister took the advice on the clinical setting that he was in and followed all the protocols and procedures that were applied there and that's what everyone should do do you think though that maybe you're not the best look for a prime minister going into a hospital and you know I know you're saying that in clinical settings he wore a mask I was working in a hospital last week I was filming we put masks on from the moment we stepped through the door I think the right thing to do in all those settings is to take the advice that you've got follow the guidance very carefully and I know that's what the PM did I'm just going to read you the quote actually from the hospital itself they say anyone attending our hospitals and community settings must continue to protect patients, visitors and staff your reaction to that well my understanding is that the Prime Minister was given followed all the guidance that was given to him from the moment he was at the hospital and obviously in the different settings that he visited and that's right my understanding is that the Prime Minister followed all the protocols and all the advice for the setting he was in the host reads him the protocols and the advice for the setting that that was in surprisingly on the hospital's website it tells you that when you enter any part of the hospital you should wear a face mask and then Dominic Rogers repeats it I understand that that was the advice he was given was there bespoke advice written for the Prime Minister because that wouldn't be particularly good health policy that we should make complaints to the hospital if that were the case but I think more likely here is that Boris Johnson just thought why do the rules apply to me why should I wear a face mask now and I've said this before I'm not that militant about face masks it's very polite to wear them in supermarkets where there might be vulnerable people in there who really feel uncomfortable because people are breathing in and out I think it does make that setting safer I've spoken to epidemiologists who don't necessarily think that if we all wore face masks that would dramatically reduce transmission in Britain overall but in particular places absolutely it does on trains absolutely it does in supermarkets absolutely it does I'm going down the numbers because transmission mainly happens in schools and in social events where masks are well some would argue impractical some would argue wouldn't but in any case I'm not here to judge people who aren't wearing one I go out to bars and I'm not wearing a mask but where I do wear a mask is where I've been asked to wear one and where I do wear a mask is where other people are wearing one and where I do wear one is if I think that people around me might be vulnerable might be people who are particularly you know for a good reason really really don't want to risk catching Covid I should say I do lateral flow tests regularly as well but Boris Johnson is in a place where anyone you probably learn about age 4 that hospitals are full of vulnerable people I don't think it doesn't take that long to work that out Boris Johnson has gone there speaking to all these healthcare workers who are all wearing masks who speaks to a bunch of people in masks and doesn't think that maybe I should wear one but how in your own world where the only thing you are thinking about is yourself and what joke you're going to make next do you have to be to do that it's unbelievable and I do struggle to work out what he's trying to do like I saw some people on Twitter say maybe this is a dead cat maybe he didn't wear a mask because he wants us to be talking about masks instead of all the scandals about MPs second jobs now I don't normally find that kind of thing particularly convincing I think that's often over thinking it at the same time what's the other explanation it has to be a proactive decision because I just feel like anyone who's not a sociopath would feel somewhat uncomfortable walking around a hospital speaking to healthcare workers who are all wearing masks and not wearing a mask it's phenomenal but in any case at least we get to watch Dominic Raab making a fool of himself on national television because that guy did not look good I hope when this government collapses all of them you know condemned to the dustbin of history what have they contributed to society they've defended an idiot whose government has killed a bunch of people it is not really something that you want the history books to remember you for let's go to a comment we're finishing exactly on time Saul with a fibre those protesting against a far-right politician who is the diplomatic representative and apartheid regime should be applauded not condemned absolutely I think it's you know when I saw that video loads of people were sharing how outrageous is this this is you know I think if you've got an apartheid regime as I say human rights watch both said it's apartheid then I'd be worried if people weren't protesting the chief diplomat of that place so I mean we live in a really really topsy-turvy world that's it for tonight for your comments if you are already a Navarro media supporter thank you so much you make all of this possible we'll be back on Friday I'll be getting a proper full update from Aaron Bostani about what's been going on at COP26 I'm sure he'll sound and look amazing so see you then you've been watching Tiskey Sauer on Navarro media good night