Loose Women's Charlene White interrupts Kelly Brook as TV debate gets awkward
Charlene White was seen interrupting Kelly Brook during a fiery political debate on today's episode of ITV's Loose Women.
The newsreader was in her usual slot as the programme's anchor on Thursday's edition of the ITV lunchtime chat show when she and her co-stars discussed the news that 16 and 17-year-olds will now be able to vote. When Kelly's turn came to speak, she tried to argue that there is "more information" now than the days when perhaps children would have simply copied their parents, even though there is "a lot of misinformation" around as well. The model tried to argue that a person's voting stance can change throughout their life, depending upon their own experiences.
She suggested that some people may be more affected by the care system, for example, or may be running a business when they reach adulthood, so the way they vote could be different to how they would have done as a teenager. Charlene continually shouted "Kel, Kel, Kel, so what I'm saying is," over the top of her. Ultimately Charlene also argued that voting needs may change as one gets older, and Kelly concurred, but then quickly added: "So that's why 18-year-olds shouldn't be voting."
Kelly then tried to ask if the move was "so important" why it hasn't come about before, but again, Charlene interrupted her again to bring fellow panellist Linda Robson into the conversation. The Birds of a Feather actress simply noted that she had "never been interested" in politics but would encourage her grandchildren to think differently, whilst Nadia Sawalha claimed that the move may help the country "inch towards a democracy" as time goes on.
But Charlene's interruption of Kelly did not go unnoticed, and viewers took to social media to vent their frustration. One wrote: "its all kicking off on #loosewomen i'm sure all its 5 viewers are enjoying kelly brook's rant", and another championed Kelly as they wrote: "Go on kelly brook let her finish Charlene".
Another viewer complained that Charlene had been "too loud" in the moment and ordered her to "shut up", but another claimed that Kelly had been "way out of her depth" with the comments.
Under existing rules 16 and 17-year-olds are already able to cast a ballot in both local and devolved and local elections in Scotland and Wales - but not in England and Northern Ireland. The age of voting at a general election currently stands at 18 for all four corners of the UK.
It is among a string of changes that also includes closing loopholes on foreign donations to political parties through shell companies. There will be more severe fines of up to £500,000 for those who breach the rules. UK-issued bank cards will also become an acceptable form of ID at polling stations.
The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government also said "far too many people are being deterred from voting" due to controversial Voter ID rules. Deputy Prime Minister, Angela Rayner said: "For too long public trust in our democracy has been damaged and faith in our institutions has been allowed to decline."
She said ministers are "taking action to break down barriers to participation". Minister for Democracy Rushanara Ali described it as a "generational step forward".
It is the first time the voting ages since the 1960s. Harry Quilter-Pinner, director of think-tank the IPPR, said: "Our democracy is in crisis, and we risk reaching a tipping point where politics loses its legitimacy. The government has clearly heard these alarm bells. The policies announced today represent the biggest reform to our electoral system since 1969, more than 50 years. "
And he continued: "At a time when public trust in politics is at a low ebb, this expansion of our democracy is a vital step toward rebuilding confidence, modernising our institutions, and pushing back against the rise of populism."
Green Party MP, Ellie Chowns said: 'On this one, Labour have got it right. Giving 16- and 17-year-olds the vote is a long-overdue step towards a stronger, more inclusive democracy. Young people have powerful voices and a vital stake in decisions about their future — it's only right that they have a say at the ballot box."
But she called on the Government to go further by scrapping the House of Lords and bringing in proportional voting - a system that would benefit smaller parties.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
26 minutes ago
- Reuters
Trump says US is close to reaching a trade deal with China
TURNBERRY, Scotland, July 27 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump said on Sunday his administration was close to reaching a trade deal with China, but gave no other details. "We're very close to a deal with China. We really sort of made a deal with China, but we'll see how that goes," Trump told reporters at the start of a meeting with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in Scotland.
The Guardian
26 minutes ago
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on talking in class: the writers speaking up for oracy education are right
Two years ago, Sir Keir Starmer enthused about teaching speaking skills. So schools campaigners were understandably dismayed when oracy – otherwise known as speaking and listening – did not appear in the interim report of the curriculum review for England headed by Prof Becky Francis. Peter Hyman, the former New Labour adviser who became a headteacher, has been a key figure behind the revival, over the past decade, of an idea developed in the 1960s. Steps to embed the importance of verbal communication in education have already been taken, with more than 1,000 schools working with the charity Voice 21, and a parallel project in Scotland. The hope expressed by children's authors and others last week is that its absence from the draft report was an oversight which will soon be rectified. The task before Prof Francis's commission is a daunting one, with reformers of all kinds looking to it for solutions. An evidence call attracted 7,000 responses, with the future of special educational needs provision, and a wish to reduce exams, among key issues raised. But it should be clear to the panel, and to ministers, that oral learning also matters. One reason is the rising number of children arriving in primary school with speech and language skills below the expected level. While some pupils catch up later, others need specialist help. Communication difficulties are one reason for the increase in the number of education, health and care plans (EHCPs), which set out what such support entails. The reasons for such complex changes are not yet fully understood, although the pandemic has had an impact. The challenge of artificial intelligence, in relation to university studies as well as schools, is another factor behind a renewed emphasis on talking. Given the easy availability of technological tools to aid writing, it is arguably more important than ever that people are equipped to share ideas and knowledge through speech as well. In many European countries oral examinations are far more common, in schools as well as universities, whereas in the UK 'vivas' are mostly reserved for postgraduate studies. In foreign language learning, the importance of speaking is taken for granted. But while oracy already features in the maths and science curriculum, as well as in English, it is often marginalised. The tricky task of reformers is to alter teaching practice so that more weight is placed on verbal communication, without making this yet another assessment hurdle to be cleared. For its champions, the core of oracy education is the ability to make connections. They want young people to be able to express themselves, and point out that this is a vital life skill – for example, in job interviews and the kinds of public‑facing work that seem least likely to be taken over by machines – for which school should prepare them. Big gaps in confidence about public speaking have long been recognised among the most glaring social inequalities. This doesn't mean that everyone should aspire to be a debating champion. Different accents, personalities and ways of relating should be valued, not ironed out. But if our schools are to keep pace with our frenetically changing world, it is surely right that they should maximise the facility for language, which is part of what makes us human.
The Guardian
26 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Remembering victims of historical injustice
Campaigners are right to say that the miners' strike, which saw the violent repression of strikers at Orgreave in 1984, remains an enduring source of injustice (Government launches Orgreave inquiry, 40 years after clashes at miners' strike, 20 July). And Pete Wilcox, the bishop of Sheffield, who is to chair the Orgreave inquiry, is right to recognise that the acknowledgment of truth is essential for long-term community healing. Sadly, Orgreave is not the only example of where truth and justice have been forsaken when excessive violence has been used against people on strike. Two hundred years ago, on 3 August 1825, six people were seriously wounded and seven killed by soldiers at North Sands, Sunderland, during the 1825 seamen's strike. The killings were met with anger and outrage, with many local people believing that those who died had been wilfully murdered. Soldiers had fired like target practice into a crowd of 100 from a boat on the River Wear. The threat posed by the crowd, made up of a combination of women, children, strikers, workers and bystanders, was greatly exaggerated. The only inquiries were two short inquests into just two of the seven deaths. At the time, the killings were reported in national newspapers and were undoubtedly one of the most significant events of 1825. What happened at Sunderland is not so different from that six years earlier at Peterloo, on 16 August 1819, yet knowledge and awareness of these two massacres are vastly different. The Sunderland seafarers' union, the Seamen's Loyal Standard Association, stated that 3 August 1825 should 'ever be remembered', but over time, the North Sands Massacre has been virtually forgotten. The denial of truth and justice at Orgreave is unfortunately just one of several incidents where those policing industrial action have used unnecessary violence and then placed the blame on their victims. All victims of historical injustice should be remembered and their communities allowed to David Gordon ScottThe Open University Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
