Welcome to Sunday morning with Trevor Phillips. 3,000 years ago, Solomon, the ruler of ancient Israel, wrote that, Faithful are the wounds of a friend. He meant that true friends tell us stuff that hurts our feelings, but that we need to hear. This weekend, modern Israel's allies, amongst them the United Kingdom, are doing some stinging truth-telling. Six months ago, most of the world stood shoulder to shoulder with the Jewish state, mourning murder, rape, and abduction of hundreds of its people by Hamas. But after the killing of aid workers, the shooting of hostages by Israeli forces, and the deaths of thousands of Garzans, the majority of them, women and children, global sympathy is daily draining away. Many Israelis say that it was always thus for Jews, that this is exactly the betrayal they expected, and they faced isolation before and survived. Many of their friends, and indeed, some Israelis, retort that Israel's own actions make it impossible to remain uncritical. While true friendships do survive, we'll try to work out this morning whether this one can weather the storm. Let's start this morning with the government. A little earlier, I spoke to the Deputy Prime Minister, Oliver Doudon.

Deputy Prime Minister, six months ago, did you imagine that the October the seventh atrocities would still cast the shadow they are this morning?

Yes, I did. I think it's really important that we remember six months on, quite the horror that was inflicted on the people of Israel. Their borders were breached. 1,400 innocent men, women, and children were murdered. Israel remains right now a nation in a state of existential threat, in a state of trauma, and indeed, the Jewish community in this country feels that trauma, as indeed I do, and most decent people around the world feel the sense of the horror of that attack.

However, there has been a change of tone towards Israel. Last October, when I talked to your colleague, James Cleverly, he said our backing for Israel was unqualified. He did call for restraint and discipline, saying, These are the hallmarks of the Israeli defense force I want to see. This morning, the foreign secretary is saying that our backing for Israel is not unconditional. After shooting of hostages and killing of aid workers and so on, can you honestly say that Israel has repaid your loyalty?

Well, Israel is facing a very difficult enemy in the form of a terrorist organization, Hamas, that embeds itself amongst the civilian population, hides itself under hospitals and elsewhere. It's a difficult conflict for the Israeli defense force to prosecute. Now, nonetheless, against that backdrop, we continue to urge Israel to improve the way it's conducting that operation, whether it's in relation to deconflicting targets, as we saw with the terrible death of those aid workers, or indeed getting aid in to help the suffering people of Gaza who've suffered under Hamas and are now suffering in this war. Now, I think that's the conversation that we have with a country like Israel, which is a democratic country country which has robust institutions. It's appropriate for us to have that conversation, but in the context of recognizing that Israel has a legitimate cause, the prosecution of self-defense to prevent Hamas terrorizing its people again, which is interesting to note they have said they would do all over again.

This might be right in principle, but the fact on the ground are these. A death toll, according to Hamas, and most people think it's something like this, is north of 30,000 since October the seventh in Gaza. More importantly, in a sense, their deaths in Gaza before October seventh, strikingly, only one in seven of those killed in the conflict were women and children. Since October seventh, that figure is seven Five in seven. Five in seven of those who have died are women and children. You can see how people might say, Okay, let's be loyal, but are you still giving carte blanche to the IDF to behave in a way that is careless, cavalier, and results in this scale of death?

No, we're not giving carte blanche, and we have robust conversations with Israel. Indeed, both our Prime Minister had conversations with Prime Minister Netanyahu, and the Foreign Secretary had conversations with his opposite number. I would say that some of those numbers I would take with a slight pincher, so I believe some of them come from Hamas, but nonetheless-I have said that. But at the same point, Trevor, I'm not- Even if they're half that number. I'm not disputing the fact that there is terrible suffering going on. There's terrible suffering that the Israeli people are suffering from as a result of this trauma. There's terrible suffering going on in Gaza. Now, that is why the position of the UK government is we want to get those hostages out. We want to get more aid in. The best way to achieve that is to have a temporary pause to allow that to happen. That That is the way that we stop the suffering. Indeed, Hamas has it in its hands to stop this suffering, to agree to that deal, to get the hostages out. Then, secondly, we need to get that security of Israel, and then we can start down the road to the peace which all of us are praying for.

Let's just stick for a moment with James Cleverly's desire for restraint and discipline. How can you make that happen? Well, one way some people think you can make it happen is through our arm sales. Now, we're not a major supplier to Israel, but we do spend them in one way or another, several hundred million dollars worth of weaponry. Can I just ask you, just a matter of fact, what legal advice have you had about whether we should have suspended such sales or exports, I should say, precisely?

Well, the way that this process works, by the way, we have one of the toughest systems of arms export controls in the world. It's well respected around the world. The decision in relation to arms exports is one for the business secretary. The business secretary, in turn, takes advice from the foreign secretary, who receives advice across a range of different issues. Now, the foreign secretary has not changed his advice to the business secretary. Of course, it's the case that we continue to engage with Israel across a range of issues such as deconflicting and aid. I would note, though, that we are holding Israel to standards that we wouldn't remotely expect of the terrorists that they are facing.

Can I just stick with the factual question I asked? Do you know when the foreign secretary last took any legal advice on this matter?

Well, the process is an ongoing one because this is an ongoing conflict. And by the way, it's also the case that's not just unique to Israel. That is the case with all our arms exports around the world.

But the thing is, we know that the foreign secretary did have some legal advice, I think in December. Has that legal advice been updated? Is it being renewed? Has he asked for consideration of events since December?

Well, Trevor, I think you're tempting me down a line, and you know what I'm going to say on this, which is that in relation to specific legal advice, that is something that the government has kept confidential in line with the conduct of previous governments. But based on legal advice that the foreign secretary receives, the foreign secretary receives periodic legal advice. I can assure you, as a minister, I'm constantly receiving legal advice across a range of issues. But what has not changed is the fact that he has not changed his advice to the business secretary in respect of arms exports.

It's up to date. In a sense, you agree with Boris Johnson that any suspension of arms sales would mean that we are, I'm quoting here, willing the military defeat of Israel and victory of Hamas.

Well, we have a process to go through in respect of arms exports. I'm not going to start trying to pre-empt the outcome. What I would say is it does worry me. I want to use my words carefully, but the manner in which some people are seizing on this issue and trying to hold Israel to incredibly high standards. Of course, it's right that we hold Israel to high standards, but I just think there's a bit of relish from some people about the way in which they are pushing this case against Israel.

Are you saying that there's some coded anti-Semitism going on here?

No, I wouldn't go so far as that, but I think it goes right back to the beginning point, which I think there's many people in the Jewish community in Israel who have just been expecting this shift in approach to Israel. We should think back to how Israel was on the day of that attack, the trauma it's still suffering. Of course, Israel has made mistakes and made big mistakes, and we should hold them to account account for that, but we are holding them to a very high standard.

Westminster this week has been preoccupied by the revelation that explicit photographs and so-called spear phishing messages have been sent to parliamentarians. First, can I ask you, have you ever received anything like that?

No, I haven't. No.

Okay. Well, we now know that there are several police forces investigating, and it's obvious that there are several politicians and also journalists involved. Is the cabinet office investigating this? If so, do you have any ideas of the scale of this?

Well, I think the appropriate way first is for the police to investigate this. Of course, we have responsibility in the cabinet office through the National Security Secretariat to develop our understanding of threats, particularly from hostile states. Now, it's a long-standing convention that ministers don't comment on intelligence. But I think what I would say is that this is just another example. There's been a lot of talk recently about the state that the world is in and the the rising risk of conflict. Cyber is a front in that, and it's important that we're on our guard across all issues, including cyber. Indeed.

Some of that talk has come from you. You made a speech a couple of weeks ago when you said that, or you told this comment, in fact, that the China-affiliated actors pose a real and serious cyber threat to the United Kingdom. Are you sure that this series of incidents aren't the work of foreign actors with malign intent?

Well, first of all, I can't comment on intelligence issues, and it'd be very premature to jump to those judgments. But it is the case that over the course of the past few years, we have seen rising intent and rising capability in respect of cyber threats, not just from China, but from Russia, from North Korea, and from Iran. Now, we are raising our game against that, not least with the National Cyber Security Center, but this is a real and increasing risk.

It would be a bit odd if you didn't at least look at this set of incidents as connected to that threat.

Well, of course, we look at all cyber incidents, but this isn't one of those things where one can make snap judgments.

Okay. Just As a fellow parliamentarian on Mr. Rags himself, colleagues have been publicly sympathetic, but whatever his personal circumstance is, wasn't this behavior at the very least, irresponseable responsible. At some level, he gave his colleagues phone numbers out rather cowardly.

Well, Will Rags behaved in a foolish way, and by his own admission, he did so and has apologized for it. I think he deserves some credit for being open and transparent about it. I think it's right we should be open and transparent about the range of the cyber threats that everyone faces, in particular, elected politicians.

All right, let's get back to raw, vulgar politics. The Prime Minister hinted this week that the government is prepared to withdraw the United Kingdom from the European Convention on Human Rights if it prevents flights taking off to Rwanda. Is that on the table?

Well, the Prime Minister is absolutely determined to make sure that we deliver on that commitment to stop the boats. The Rwanda policy is an important element of the deterrent, and we won't allow the European Court of Human Rights to stand in our way of doing that. That is an indication of the strength of the Prime Minister's feeling on this.

If there's a legal ruling that says you can't do it, you'll ignore it or you'll legislate to get around it?

Well, I think you're getting into the range of hypotheticals. The Prime Minister said out-No, it's- Look, Trevor, he said out a position. We've got to. He He set out a position that he's not going to let the European Court stand in his way. I think that that speaks for itself.

It is open. It is possible that we could come out of the European Convention on Human Rights sometime before the next election if it looks like it will thwart your flagship policy of sending flight to Rwanda with asylum seekers on it.

I think we're getting into the realms of speculation. I'm only trying to understand what the Prime Minister said. The fundamental principle that the Prime Minister has set out is he wants to get those flights off and he's not going to allow the European courts to stand its way. By the way, we have bent over backwards to make sure we comply. We've passed legislation through Parliament. We've been absolutely clear. I've It's always been of the view that our Parliament is sovereign and that extends to any international institutions.

All right, well, some of this is actually about winning elections. It's local elections in less than a month. Last time round, the Party Chairman Greg Hans told my colleague Sophie Ridge that you might lose a thousand councilors, and though that's bad, it's not disastrous. What's your expectation this time? What would not be disastrous? Losing a thousand? Losing 2,000?

Well, I'm not a party chairman, and I'm not a commentator. Well, you have been. I'm not in the business of putting numbers out there. You're an experienced science. Of course, this is a challenging backdrop for those elections, but these are really important elections. If you think to the elections that are happening in London, I would say to your views, if you're fed up with a war on the motorist, you're fed up with Ulez, you're fed up with driving at 20 miles an hour down Park Lane when it used to be 40 miles an hour with three lanes now down to one, thanks to Sadek Khan. You know what you need to You need to vote for our excellent conservative candidate. If you're fed up with Birmingham City Council that's going bankrupt and spending £1.8 million on Trade Union facilitation, you should vote for our excellent candidate, Andy Street.

You have the party political broadcasts available to you, so that's enough of that. But in return then, let's deal with this issue. We like facts on this program, and the overwhelming fact, electoral fact for you, is that the polls aren't Here's something. You made two big tax cuts, one in the autumn and one recently. Though overall taxes are going up. But basically, your marquee promise, two Two P in the autumn, Two P recently. Have a look at the electoral impact, Zilch. Electrally, it is actually all over for you guys, isn't it? The country stopped listening to the Conservatives.

Well, first of all, we're doing this because it's the right thing. Thank you for highlighting this policy. Actually, today, we're seeing that second cut in coming to force. You know how generous I am? Which means that an average person is seeing their tax cut by £900. That is the biggest tax cuts for a generation. When it comes to your point about the polls, and this is what happens in election years, these polls still, to a certain extent, are indications of people's Part of your frustration, particularly after being in power for 40 years. No, no, no. Trevor, you asked me this question. You asked me this question. You need to allow me to finish the point. As we get into an actual election campaign, and this almost certainly is an election year, we move from a referendum on the government to a choice. I'm confident as people face that choice and they look at the threat of labor, whether it's building over the Green Belt in my constituency, carte blanche to do that, Whether it's in relation to their employment laws, which are going to destroy the jobs market, or it's in relation to their sons that don't add up, versus our plan, you will see those numbers narrowing.

I'm totally confident of that.

A few days ago, you put out a poster online saying that Britain was the second most powerful nation in the world. Here it is, in case you didn't see it yourself. It's been deleted. It's mysteriously he disappeared. Why was it pulled? Is it because somebody told CCHQ that being second best wasn't a brilliant message in election year, or did you accept the king? Why did that get pulled?

I have absolutely No idea why that happened, Joe, but I would commend the sentiment there, which is the strength that the UK has.

It's great to be second.

Well, when you're up against the United States of America in terms of its global power, but actually, if you look at our armed forces, the soft power of whether it's the Premier League, which I think is being demonstrated there, whether we look at artificial intelligence, where we are a genuine world leader. Across all these areas, we have so much to be proud of in this country, and I think that's what that poster was seeking to do.

Oliver Doudon, thank you very much for your time this morning. Thanks, Trevor.