Tonight

Current affairs news stories presented through interviews and discussions. Focuses on major developments.

When is Tonight next on TV?

In the UK... it's next showing on ITV1 London Tonight, 8:00pm and on ITV1 London December 5th, 8:00pm. See more...

Still looking for more?

 Click here to search the web for Tonight

Comments

  • Use www.gravatar.com to create an Avatar for your e-mail address and use it on many supported sites November 22nd - 7:49pmcarmen said...

    I have a fear/phobia and would love to get in touch with the therapist shown on your programme on London Tonight which helped people with different fears.Thanks.

  • Use www.gravatar.com to create an Avatar for your e-mail address and use it on many supported sites June 3rd - 9:43amJill Rowett said...

    I wanted to watch the Tonight interview with Russell Watson and it is not available on the Catchup site on ITV.com. Please let me know hen it will be available. Thanks

  • Use www.gravatar.com to create an Avatar for your e-mail address and use it on many supported sites March 10th - 10:40pmRob Slack said...

    Do comments form a debate (if so where can I find them please?) or just submissions to you for some other purpose? (If so, what please?)

    Regards

    Rob Slack

  • Use www.gravatar.com to create an Avatar for your e-mail address and use it on many supported sites March 10th - 8:34pmRob Slack said...

    Why do you (and LibDems) claim that High Earners pay more tax than their cleaners and then quietly qualify it by paying "in %age terms". High earners pay MORE £tax (unless they avoid or evade; different issue). Therefore their cleaners pay less £tax. Why is the %age view significant? Why not the reciprocal of the £amount? I assume the %age view allows for a "good" story. It is also a misleading, if not dishonest, story. Why should high earners pay more in taxes? What do they get for their money*? What would happen if high earners paid more tax and others less? Probably less investment and more waste on nail bars, football kits and silly "trainers".If taxes to pay for services are based on earnings, why not the price of a bag of fish and chips?

    * probably they value public services more highly; they have more to protect and lose if the services fail.

    Rob Slack (semi-retired, not high earner, just honest and sick of spin).

Add a comment

(required)
(required but not displayed)
Your e-mail is also used for adding an Avatar image to your comment using the free and very cool Gravatar.com
 
(your personal web site)