Full Comment - August 03, 2026


Why U.K. conservatives need to imitate Canada


Episode Stats


Length

50 minutes

Words per minute

171.91

Word count

8,644

Sentence count

367

Harmful content

Misogyny

2

sentences flagged

Toxicity

7

sentences flagged

Hate speech

11

sentences flagged


Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Toxicity classifications generated with s-nlp/roberta_toxicity_classifier .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:00:00.480 Recently, our company's softball team lost the big game by one run.
00:00:04.800 Then Dale tried to console us with the quote,
00:00:07.200 winning isn't everything.
00:00:09.060 Well, Dale and I are very different.
00:00:12.740 I get early payout from Bet365.
00:00:14.680 If my team goes up big, I get paid out instantly,
00:00:17.480 even if they blow the lead later.
00:00:19.540 Sound familiar, Dale?
00:00:21.280 Thanks, Bet365.
00:00:22.920 Must be 19 or older, Ontario only.
00:00:24.420 Please play responsibly.
00:00:25.240 If you have questions or concerns about your gambling
00:00:26.660 or the gambling of someone close to you,
00:00:27.700 please go to connexontario.ca and see supply.
00:00:30.000 Hungry now, now, what about now?
00:00:39.000 Whenever it hits you, wherever you are,
00:00:42.000 grab an O'Henry bar to satisfy your hunger.
00:00:45.000 With its delicious combination of big, crunchy, salty peanuts
00:00:49.000 covered in creamy caramel and chewy fudge with a chocolaty coating.
00:00:54.000 Swing by a gas station and get an O'Henry today.
00:00:57.000 O'Hungry O'Henry.
00:01:00.000 Have you noticed that Britain suddenly resembles Italy?
00:01:05.160 No, they don't suddenly have great food,
00:01:07.040 they're not serving wonderful coffee in their cafes,
00:01:09.300 but when it comes to politics,
00:01:11.640 Britain is looking more and more like Italy.
00:01:13.580 Seven prime ministers in 10 years,
00:01:15.400 while Italy, who we used to make fun of
00:01:17.100 for changing governments all the time,
00:01:18.660 is looking, well, practically stable.
00:01:21.400 So what's happening in Britain?
00:01:23.160 Hello, and welcome to the Full Comment Podcast.
00:01:25.300 My name's Brian Lilly, your host,
00:01:26.960 and to help us understand what is happening
00:01:29.080 and British politics, why all the changes, and whether Andy Berman, the seventh prime minister
00:01:33.560 in 10 years, is the answer, or whether we'll see more churn. We turn to a man who understands both
00:01:40.320 Canadian and British politics incredibly well. He's a former member of the European Parliament
00:01:45.140 and a student of politics, and he currently sits in the House of Lords, Daniel Hannon,
00:01:50.260 otherwise known as Lord Hannon of Kingsclare. Daniel, explain to me how did Britain become
00:01:55.680 the new italy with a new prime minister yet again this is causing great amusement in italy there was
00:02:02.560 a headline the other day l'italianizzazione del regno unito i don't really speak italian but even
00:02:08.480 i could understand that um honestly the the basic problem brian is that we've been spending more
00:02:16.540 money than we have we've been doing it for years uh the state has gone from spending about a third
00:02:22.400 of our economy, one pound in three in the Blair years to closer to one in two now, and no one
00:02:28.220 wants to admit it, and no one wants to take the tough short-term decisions that will put us back
00:02:35.480 on a path to long-term prosperity. And so a frustrated electorate keeps running through one
00:02:42.360 after another prime minister until eventually they will either run out of money and we will collapse
00:02:47.780 you know, in the manner of Greece or Ireland in the Euro crisis, or we finally have somebody who
00:02:55.000 is prepared to tell us what we don't want to hear, which is that we can't carry on living beyond our
00:02:58.800 means. I don't think that Andy Burnham is the man to do that. He seems more committed to socialism
00:03:05.060 than Keir Starmer from my perspective, but maybe I've got a wrong read on him. Nobody knows. I mean,
00:03:11.780 honestly nobody knows uh it's amazing how far you can go in politics just by not saying anything
00:03:18.540 you know smiling you think of the late queen mother right everyone loved her what was her
00:03:22.300 secret she never gave interviews right and it allows you to to project it allows people to
00:03:27.280 project what they want onto you and annie burnham has been doing that but of course to governors to 1.00
00:03:31.900 choose and eventually we're going to see is it going to be more rearranging of deck chairs is
00:03:35.980 it going to be which is what we've had so far you know a cap on bus fares and a slight tweak on the
00:03:41.320 VAT on electricity and so on, very, very small stuff that is mildly expensive, but doesn't
00:03:50.120 particularly accelerate our decline? Or is it going to be really radical socialism? He talks
00:03:56.400 about reversing 40 years, i.e. pre-Thatcher. Or is it actually that he may see what needs to be
00:04:03.620 done? And under all this rhetoric, he'll take rather than talking about tough decisions.
00:04:08.780 Nobody really knows.
00:04:10.160 I wonder if even he really knows,
00:04:11.360 sort of shredding his burn him.
00:04:12.620 You know, it could go in any direction.
00:04:15.340 Well, if things are, as you say, that bad,
00:04:17.740 then maybe he gets in, looks at the books and says,
00:04:20.760 oh, okay, we need to go back to Blairite
00:04:25.100 labor-style politics
00:04:27.240 as opposed to continuously expanding everything.
00:04:30.260 Right, which is how he started, right?
00:04:31.620 He was a minister under Tony Blair.
00:04:34.440 When he was elected in 2001,
00:04:37.120 before he went off to Manchester to be mayor, when he was first an MP, the state was spending
00:04:42.660 about 34% of GDP. And now that figure is like 45%. And that is the root cause of all our
00:04:51.580 problems. One of the lines I picked up from Pierre Polyèvre, actually, he likes to say
00:04:55.660 the high house prices, the inflation, the debt, the unemployment, the regulations,
00:05:04.000 These are all the symptoms. The cause is big government. The disease is big government. And it's exactly the same here. The disease, I'm afraid, is at a much more advanced state and the patient is much more in danger.
00:05:16.860 So, I'm now unattached politically. I'm running our oldest think tank on the right, the Institute of Economic Affairs. That means I'm outside party and my party political glands have been cauterized in a painful operation.
00:05:36.520 So I have to, you know, being neutral, I have to say I really hope that Burnham gets it.
00:05:40.820 I want Britain to succeed.
00:05:41.940 And that means I want Burnham to succeed.
00:05:44.680 And success means being prepared to take some of the tough decisions that until now have
00:05:50.960 gone unacknowledged.
00:05:52.400 And there are things you can do if you are a left-wing leader.
00:05:55.540 Actually, I think Canada was an example of how the fiscal turnaround can begin with a
00:06:00.260 left-of-centre government.
00:06:01.240 Or Australia and New Zealand were other examples.
00:06:03.760 Even Clinton, maybe, in the US.
00:06:05.720 You can, as a Labour leader, much more easily than as a Conservative leader, reform welfare without being accused of murdering the poor. 0.59
00:06:14.540 You can introduce market mechanisms into the NHS without being accused of wanting to sell it all off to American corporations or whatever the current QAnon-level conspiracy theory is.
00:06:24.480 You can build more houses on Greenbelt land because it isn't represented by Labour MPs, by and large. 0.79
00:06:30.360 You can even raise the state pension age
00:06:33.300 because how many votes are you going to lose?
00:06:36.060 The Tory vote is the last redoubt it has 0.93
00:06:38.720 is the pensioners, right? 1.00
00:06:39.840 So there are things he could do. 0.64
00:06:43.400 And the doors of the Institute of Economic Affairs
00:06:46.340 are always open to him
00:06:47.260 if he wants to find out how to do them
00:06:49.460 in the most effective way.
00:06:51.120 But what you're describing,
00:06:52.200 going in and really changing things,
00:06:55.080 isn't that what Keir Starmer was supposed to do?
00:06:57.620 After how many years of conservative rule was it, 15?
00:07:02.040 Wasn't it supposed to be Keir Starmer that would go in and be the agent of change?
00:07:06.300 What happened to him?
00:07:09.100 Well, he really did not have any plan at all.
00:07:12.640 He got in and immediately set up 28, I think, commissions to tell him what to do.
00:07:20.120 He really was what he looked like, a slightly pudgy man who, in late middle age,
00:07:24.740 wildly fancied becoming prime minister as a bit of a career change turned up in number 10 expecting
00:07:31.260 to find someone there to tell him what to do found that there was no such person and hence that sort
00:07:35.820 of fish on the slab expression he's had ever since and now andy burnham has just watched that happen
00:07:40.680 to somebody else so is is he going to be in that category or is he going to have a a plan now it is
00:07:48.080 possible, but he has a plan and he doesn't want to scupper the chances of getting a five-year
00:07:56.340 mandate. He may well be preparing for an earlier election and then we'll see what he's thinking.
00:08:01.760 That is a possibility. Another possibility is that actually we're just going to have more of
00:08:06.520 the same, that he will fiddle around tweaking here and there while the economy continues to
00:08:12.000 be pressed under the weight of big government. A big part of recovering as a country is
00:08:18.780 like with anything, right? You have to acknowledge the disease, you have to get the diagnosis right,
00:08:24.100 and then you move on to the prescription. People are quite shocked in this country when they
00:08:29.280 realize how badly we fare internationally. We at the IEA did a survey quite recently where we said,
00:08:35.780 compared to other countries, how rich do you think we are? Here are the rest of the world
00:08:40.440 ranked by GDP per head. Most people thought we were about on a par with Switzerland or Singapore.
00:08:46.720 The reality is that those countries have twice our GDP per head. We are actually about to be
00:08:50.620 overtaken by Slovenia and Poland, right? So acknowledging that is the first step to recovery. 1.00
00:08:56.620 And I guess we'll find out whether Burnham is in that camp. One thing that Burnham has in
00:09:04.460 common with Mark Carney is that they both became prime ministers, not through a democratic process
00:09:10.920 of the general population, but through a process within their own political party. Carney
00:09:16.720 subsequently went on to win an election. Are there any other similarities in terms of coming in? I
00:09:25.180 mean, Carney was able to become incredibly popular because he said he would stand up to
00:09:30.460 Donald Trump went to the electorate. They said, yes, you're the man for that. And they didn't
00:09:36.180 quite give him a majority, but he was able to manufacture one. What about Burnham? Does he
00:09:41.660 enjoy popularity or people just don't know him yet? And you mentioned an early election.
00:09:47.140 It's a good question. So people, people are, he starts, he kind of looks the part a little bit
00:09:54.840 like Carney, right? And he has an everyman quality. He's relatable, as they say. And that
00:10:01.640 helps him. Also, and here I think the parallel is very strong, he can, like Carney, become quite
00:10:09.980 popular simply by dropping the worst of his predecessor's policies, right? Not by doing
00:10:14.440 anything positive, but just by not doing some deeply unpopular things that the previous guy
00:10:19.880 was doing. So in our context, this would be things like the digital ID card scheme, the early
00:10:25.700 prisoner release scheme, handing over the Chagos Islands to Mauritius and paying for the privilege.
00:10:33.540 There's a bunch of very easy wins, reduction of jury trials, et cetera, where a bit like with
00:10:42.240 the carbon taxes, he becomes popular by not being the previous guy. I would also make the parallel
00:10:49.420 in this way. I think Mark Carney obviously was vindicated in his decision to call an election.
00:10:54.800 That turned out to be spectacularly the right thing for him to have done in a political sense.
00:11:01.620 But I think he was also right constitutionally to do that. He hadn't been an MP. He didn't have
00:11:06.720 any direct mandate. And I think it was the right thing to do. I think both of those things apply
00:11:13.580 in this situation to Burnham. So yes, constitutionally, he should do it. He'll
00:11:18.040 want to do things differently. He won't want to be bound by Keir Starmer's manifesto.
00:11:23.980 He needs permission. But also, I think he's only going to get less popular because he'll have been
00:11:30.820 told how bad our fiscal situation is. A Labour government that can't hand goodies out, that
00:11:36.980 on the contrary has to cut things, is never popular. So his best bet, I think, tactically,
00:11:43.460 is also an early election. Now, I should stress, Brian, that I'm very much in the minority.
00:11:48.040 in predicting this. The consensus in Brisson is that he's too far behind in the polls. There's
00:11:53.920 no chance of an earlier election. Maybe. I mean, I'm not the guy to ask about internal labor
00:12:00.280 dynamics. All I can say is if it was me, I would hold an early election. And even if that means
00:12:05.920 sacrificing a couple of hundred labor MPs or a hundred in order to carry on as prime minister
00:12:11.420 of some kind of coalition government, I think he'd still be right to do it.
00:12:14.400 Well, one of my favorite sayings about politics is that voters are fickle, polls can change, and campaigns matter. But you're right. At this moment, it's a bit of a dog's breakfast for political parties and British public opinion polling.
00:12:29.040 The latest one I'm looking at right now, it's Find Out Now.
00:12:32.920 I don't know if they're a good polling firm or not.
00:12:36.160 They've got Reform at 24, Labour at 22, Conservatives at 19, Lib Dems at 10, Greens at 14.
00:12:43.820 Not dissimilar from other polls, though, from YouGov and the others.
00:12:50.440 What has happened that Reform is outpacing the Conservatives now, your former party?
00:12:57.240 Well, I mean, that's easily enough explained. The Conservatives were incredibly unpopular at the end of 14 years, partly because of a series of errors that they made, unforced errors, particularly on immigration policy, but also on tax policy, on net zero.
00:13:12.500 Partly in their partial defence, I don't want to overdo this, but they carried the can for the
00:13:18.900 costs of the lockdown, despite the fact that all the other parties had also been demanding the
00:13:23.060 lockdown, as had the electorate at large. 93% of people wanted severer and longer restrictions,
00:13:29.980 and yet they are now complaining about the impact of those restrictions in terms of higher taxes,
00:13:35.140 higher debt, higher inflation, lower productivity, truancy, etc., etc. So to some extent,
00:13:41.260 I'd give them a pass on that.
00:13:43.900 But they also made a bunch of mistakes on their own.
00:13:46.000 People are very resentful.
00:13:48.620 But you see, the way you just read those figures, in a way, Brian, is very, very telling, right?
00:13:55.640 We have the same electoral system as you.
00:13:58.360 And it is designed for basically a two-party system with a few extras, right?
00:14:03.000 So we, like you, had basically a two-party system with a couple of smaller parties and then one sort of separatist party in one part of the country.
00:14:11.260 And a first-past-the-post system works pretty well for that.
00:14:16.480 When, as we've just heard from the figures you read, when we have effectively a five-party system, then you start getting freak results.
00:14:25.880 And a tiny shift of 2% from one of those parties to another one can completely alter the complexion of a parliament.
00:14:32.160 And so you were very right to say that voters are fickle in elections or uncertain, right?
00:14:37.400 I mean, almost any outcome is possible.
00:14:41.960 But with all of that, things are not going to get any better for Labour, right?
00:14:46.560 Go now in your honeymoon before when people are still projecting their wishes onto you,
00:14:50.740 when everyone still wants to imagine that you're on their side, before you've had to
00:14:54.380 start choosing and making tough decisions.
00:14:57.320 Now, now would be the time to do it.
00:14:59.820 Burnham could become the Barack Obama of British politics.
00:15:02.840 I mean, it's a big reason that Obama was elected when he was.
00:15:05.740 people didn't know much about him they just knew they wanted change and they could say this guy
00:15:12.120 embodies what i believe and he believes in hope and change and so do i and on we go nobody defined
00:15:18.960 what that was he could be and uh you know like i say he was i mean he's been on quite a journey
00:15:28.560 he was a blairite when he started and then he uh you know then he moved very much to the left in
00:15:34.660 order to contest the Labour leadership. I mean, who knows, right? It is possible. But let me just
00:15:42.660 make this point that Milton Friedman, who was one of our gurus here at the IEA,
00:15:47.960 spoke here regularly, wrote often for us. He used to say,
00:15:51.940 the challenge is not to get the right people in. It is to set the incentives in such a way
00:15:59.200 that even the wrong people will do the right thing.
00:16:02.980 Now, we have failed to do that in the UK.
00:16:05.240 We have set the incentives in such a way that even the wrong people,
00:16:08.020 even the right people are doing the wrong thing now, i.e. spending too much money.
00:16:12.680 The lockdown and the furlough scheme and the grants and so on
00:16:16.860 served to convince a chunk of the electorate that there really was a magic money tree.
00:16:21.740 And no politician has been brave enough to disobligge them of that fact.
00:16:25.600 So we've gone from spending, as I say, a third of the economy was state-controlled when Burnham was first elected as an MP in 2001 under Tony Blair. It's now closer to a half. And that is what needs to change.
00:16:39.440 Now, I've sketched out some of the ways in which a Labour government can do that more easily than a right-wing government could, as happened with Paul Chrétien. It began in Canada under the left. Stephen Harper came in and built on success, right?
00:16:52.660 the same with with roger douglas in in new zealand arguably uh the same with bill clinton in the u.s
00:16:59.240 so that is a possibility and it's one that i'm hoping for uh i have to say you know this is just
00:17:06.700 me projecting doing whatever else is doing and projecting my optimistic scenario onto the guy
00:17:11.880 there are people on the far left doing exactly the same thing saying he's going to reverse the
00:17:15.340 whole bunch of things they want him to go full socialist they do and do you know it's an odd
00:17:20.620 thing, because the one slightly absurd thing about his rhetoric is he keeps talking about
00:17:25.480 40 years of neoliberalism. Like, we made this terrible mistake under Margaret Thatcher,
00:17:31.220 and all the subsequent governments have kind of followed it. I mean, we've never had more
00:17:38.560 regulation in the last 50 years than now. We've never had higher taxes or higher spending.
00:17:44.540 we are giving more in benefits to working age adults than we are taking in income tax from
00:17:52.700 working age adults who are working we are spending more on debt interest repayments than we are on
00:17:59.540 our defense budget if this is a neo-liberal state then what does a social democratic state look
00:18:06.720 look like right i mean the idea that anyone could seriously look at deregist over-regulated
00:18:13.220 massively overtaxed contemporary Britain and say, oh, this is some kind of Hayekian or Dickensian
00:18:19.000 skeletal state is just for the birds, right? I mean, and now, is he saying that to please his
00:18:25.740 base? Because there are a bunch of stupid voters out there who think that? Or does he actually 1.00
00:18:30.340 believe it himself? I guess we're going to find out. But all I would say to all of the people on
00:18:35.300 the left, any Brits who happen to be watching this, who are still in that, you know, evil
00:18:40.260 Margaret Thatcher destroyed the working classes. If you're really against that, you really want
00:18:44.740 to reverse that, then you've got to answer the question, what would you reverse? Would you
00:18:50.420 re-nationalize British Airways? Would you re-nationalize the telephones so that we go
00:18:57.520 back to having a month waiting before somebody installed a line for you? Would you hand the
00:19:02.460 Falkland Islands over to Argentina again? Would you bring back exchange controls? Would you send
00:19:07.960 a big chunk of our male population back underground to breathe in coal dust so that we can run 1.00
00:19:12.240 a coal-fired economy. If you wouldn't do those things, then you don't really want to
00:19:18.180 reverse it. So stop pretending and stop cosplaying.
00:19:23.360 Thatcherism still holds some sway within the Conservative Party, but the Conservative Party
00:19:28.140 doesn't seem to hold much sway with the British voters. You mentioned earlier, a lot of that is
00:19:33.680 due to, you know, mistakes that they made
00:19:38.000 and a long period of time in government.
00:19:40.320 But, you know, from my perspective,
00:19:43.360 looking across the ocean,
00:19:45.240 the new leader, Kemi Badnock,
00:19:46.980 seems to be saying the right things.
00:19:49.400 Why is she not gaining any traction?
00:19:53.040 Yeah, it's...
00:19:54.680 One of the paradoxes of the two right-of-center parties
00:19:58.240 is that neither will admit
00:20:00.340 how close it is in policy to the other.
00:20:03.680 If by the next election, I were to come back on your show and read you the two manifestos and try and get you to guess which one was which, you would struggle as anyone.
00:20:14.200 So the difference between them is much more kind of tonal, right?
00:20:18.140 It's much more gestalt if you want to be pretentious about it.
00:20:20.880 It's not really, you know, they agree on backing off net zero.
00:20:23.960 They agree on border control.
00:20:25.180 They agree on tax cuts.
00:20:26.220 They agree on beefing up our defense, right?
00:20:28.080 But there's a difference in style.
00:20:31.040 Reform is, it's kind of in the names, right?
00:20:33.600 Reform is for tearing stuff down and saying the whole system has failed, the politicians are useless, the state has failed, we need a completely different approach.
00:20:40.660 The conservatives are still small-c conservative in the sense of saying we want to preserve our country, our institutions, and the things we love.
00:20:48.380 Although they might end up in a similar place, they are starting from different places philosophically.
00:20:56.900 And then there's just the simple fact that one was in office and the other wasn't.
00:20:59.820 so a a reform voter looking at the conservative manifesto will say well that's great but why
00:21:06.040 didn't you do any of it you had 14 years and a conservative looking at the reform manifesto
00:21:11.400 will say well that's great but this is completely unrealistic you might as well promise good weather
00:21:15.680 every day you know how are you actually going to deliver that and and they've both kind of got a
00:21:19.680 point right i mean i if it were up to me and like i say i'm not in in party politics anymore but
00:21:25.140 If it were up to me, I would try, if I were in either of those parties, to have a grown-up, sensible agreement with the other, that each party should focus on the constituencies, on our ridings, where you are likeliest to do well.
00:21:43.160 And actually, the geography of the two parties is very complementary, with a very small number of exceptions. The Conservatives are strong in southern, rural and suburban England. Reform is strong in northern England and Midlands England. Even in your ancestral Scotland and my ancestral Scotland, it's kind of fairly obvious, right? The Tories are strong in the borders and in Aberdeenshire and the northeast. Reform would be everywhere else.
00:22:08.780 in wales i think it would be entirely reformed yeah i mean the geography is like really it's
00:22:14.220 really obvious what you would do if they did that i think they would almost certainly form a majority
00:22:20.420 but it's interesting that you said the difference is tone and of course stephen harper was able to
00:22:27.640 work with peter mckay to bridge the canadian alliance and the progressive conservative party
00:22:33.620 to form one unified modern conservative party.
00:22:37.440 But right now, Pierre Polyev is in the wake of losing the last election just over a year
00:22:43.580 ago, dealing with a lot of infighting among conservatives.
00:22:47.400 And there are some that want to apply a purity test.
00:22:50.920 And when you look at what they're actually saying the purity is, it's more about tone.
00:22:55.440 Are you harsh enough in your criticism of the current government?
00:22:58.800 um do you take the right stance in in terms of how you present as opposed to what you're actually
00:23:05.680 putting forward and there's a real potential for polyev who i i know you know and like um
00:23:11.180 that there could be a schism in the party again which leads to situations like you have in britain
00:23:17.920 where you you know the the people proposing very similar things are quite popular but in different
00:23:23.320 areas and wouldn't that would make it much more difficult for them to form government
00:23:28.140 Well, it's interesting. I was talking to Pierre's predecessor, but one, Andrew Scheer. I was talking to him about the experience of the split and then the reunification of the Canadian right. He told me something quite interesting.
00:23:44.500 He said when he was working, I think he was a researcher for Stockwell Day, or he had some position as a young man in politics.
00:23:53.300 And he said one of his jobs was to go through the Progressive Conservative Manifesto and find things to attack as a reformer.
00:24:05.200 And he said, with every page, I found that, yes, I could do that.
00:24:08.360 But actually, I basically agreed with it.
00:24:09.780 I could see where they were coming from.
00:24:10.960 And he said, by the time I got to the end, I realized that it was inexcusable to keep splitting the vote, that our differences were so small that it was just not – we did not have the right to inflict a left-wing government on Canada because of these sort of vanity issues.
00:24:30.060 And I think that was – I'm sure he was right about that.
00:24:32.180 I'm not a Canadian, but that must have made sense.
00:24:35.880 And in fact, when I asked Pierre, Pierre was in London, had a very successful visit in March. Everyone loved him, wowed the whole city. But I asked him the same question, you know, what would you, what do you most regret about that period of the two coming together, you coming from the reformed tradition?
00:24:53.880 And he said, well, we should have done it five years earlier. You know, we were self-indulgent in both parties in not getting it. Now, whether that could have happened is a whole different question. But the logic definitely applies to Britain, right?
00:25:11.000 If people are entirely driven by logic and reason, they will come to some agreement.
00:25:19.160 If they're driven by ego and vanity and what you describe in Canada, the purity spirals, then they won't.
00:25:26.420 And it's not for me to give advice to Canadian Tories.
00:25:30.680 I love the party.
00:25:31.620 I actually felt much closer to it politically at the time than I did to my own party when I was a British Tory.
00:25:38.400 I think it has a genuine radicalism and energy that the British Tories, being a little bit more kind of hierarchical and backward-looking, don't have.
00:25:54.240 but i i would just caution everyone not to put ego or purity tests above you know not just their
00:26:05.160 party interest but their national interest if they think that they're offering a better
00:26:08.360 solution than the other side right um i think the canadian tory party is led by one of the
00:26:14.640 outstanding politicians of his generation he may not poll as uh you know he can be he can be tough
00:26:22.560 in what he says and that's reflected in the polls, but I don't know a better political strategist
00:26:27.280 and I don't know a better economic brain. He is one of the great figures in the world on the
00:26:33.780 right of center at the moment. And I just think it's crazy not to go with what you've got when
00:26:37.620 you've got an asset of that kind, a campaigner of that kind. Take away that bizarre and unpredictable
00:26:43.960 black swan event of the Trump annexation threats and he would now be a hugely successful prime
00:26:49.320 minister. I would agree. But you're starting to sound like you like Pierre even more than Stephen
00:26:53.940 Harper, who you've long admired. Well, I remember Stephen once told me that the one rule in politics
00:27:01.800 is that every leader disapproves of his immediate successor. I can think of a lot of countries where
00:27:07.940 that is true. I therefore have the unusual, possibly even unique distinction of counting
00:27:14.600 as a friend every one of the four most recent Canadian Tory leaders, Stephen Harper and Andrew
00:27:21.580 Scheer and Erin O'Toole and Pierre. But Pierre is the one who's going to turn things around. He's
00:27:28.620 going to be a great prime minister. All right. We'll talk more about British politics, including
00:27:32.840 reform and where they go from here when we come back. Quick break. But first, Daniel, I'm going
00:27:38.940 to try and tempt you to buy some of our National Post Toronto Sun merchandise. Yes, we've launched
00:27:44.500 merch store we've got hoodies hats tote bags mugs more shop the official post media store you can
00:27:50.280 get your local newspaper uh swag as well show your support for journalism and you get to look good
00:27:56.720 too visit postmedia.store to shop the collection today that's postmedia.store recently our company
00:28:05.260 softball team lost the big game by one run then dale tried to console us with the quote
00:28:10.780 Winning isn't everything.
00:28:12.640 Well, Dale and I are very different.
00:28:16.300 I get early payout from Bet365.
00:28:18.220 If my team goes up big, I get paid out instantly,
00:28:21.040 even if they blow the lead later.
00:28:23.040 Sound familiar, Dale?
00:28:24.840 Thanks, Bet365.
00:28:26.480 Must be 19 or older, Ontario only.
00:28:27.980 Please play responsibly.
00:28:28.800 If you have questions or concerns about your gambling
00:28:30.240 or the gambling of someone close to you,
00:28:31.320 please go to connexontario.ca TNC Supply.
00:28:33.740 You're a political junkie, right?
00:28:35.160 I mean, that's why you're listening to this podcast.
00:28:37.600 But if you're not in the loop with PostMedia's VIP political hack,
00:28:43.260 then you're not getting even close to the whole politics story.
00:28:47.460 I'm Stuart Thompson, Parliamentary Bureau Chief.
00:28:50.060 And I'm political analyst Tasha Carradine.
00:28:52.880 We head up the team that brings political hack members the exclusive political intel
00:28:56.700 that goes so much deeper than the news.
00:28:59.220 With inside stories, sharp analysis, and behind-the-scenes scoops from Parliament Hill and beyond.
00:29:04.840 With our twice-weekly newsletters, exclusive reports from Washington, D.C., early access to John Iveson columns, and subscriber-only videos and events,
00:29:16.200 PAC members get insider insight into the minds of the strategists, policy gurus, and power brokers shaping Canada's political future.
00:29:24.940 You don't want to miss all that, do you?
00:29:26.340 I sure don't.
00:29:27.720 And you can get all now for less than a dollar a week.
00:29:32.180 Just go to nationalpost.com slash newsletters to sign up.
00:29:38.260 That's nationalpost.com slash newsletters.
00:29:41.840 So much is happening in politics right now.
00:29:44.760 Rising tensions with the U.S. on trade and defense.
00:29:48.080 Not one, but two provincial separatist movements gaining real ground.
00:29:52.140 The liberals trying to hang on to a razor-thin majority
00:29:55.660 as the economy stumbles and with the cost of living still rising.
00:29:59.880 It's exciting.
00:30:00.760 Extremely exciting.
00:30:02.180 But the only way to get behind the scenes and right into the source code of what politicians and the people around them are really thinking is to get political hack.
00:30:10.100 Go to nationalpost.com slash newsletters.
00:30:13.680 And join us.
00:30:15.040 This is Tristan Hopper, the host of Canada Did What?
00:30:18.460 where we unpack the biggest, weirdest, and wildest political moments in Canadian history you thought you knew and tell you what really happened.
00:30:25.940 Stick around at the end of the episode to hear a sample of one of our favorite episodes from season two.
00:30:31.320 And if you missed it, there are even more episodes from last season.
00:30:34.860 So make sure you subscribe to Canada Did What?
00:30:37.800 Everywhere you get podcasts.
00:30:39.540 Daniel, we've been talking about reform.
00:30:43.040 Their leader is, and has long been, Nigel Farage.
00:30:47.040 He's been a fixture on the disgruntled right, you might call it,
00:30:51.900 running against the Conservatives as much as Labour for many years now.
00:30:55.660 but right now he's running against a man who wears a garbage can for his face or a helmet
00:31:03.740 what why is nigel farage uh running again in an election against someone named bin face
00:31:11.880 yeah very good question count bin face count oh i didn't realize he was a count isn't a
00:31:19.900 a british title earl is is the equivalent of count so the last count to win a by-election
00:31:25.640 uh was an irish nationalist in 1917 who had his comital title from the pope uh count binface
00:31:32.660 would be the first count in over 100 years to win a by-election um i i mean that the the the
00:31:40.080 the answer is nigel farage is in is under fire for having taken money in a personal capacity
00:31:49.800 before he entered Parliament from a supporter.
00:31:55.440 And there was nothing illegal about this,
00:31:58.620 and he was a private citizen when he did it.
00:32:01.500 But there is a sense that he should have declared it
00:32:03.980 and that the rules of Parliament which say,
00:32:05.680 look, if you're in any doubt about this, declare it
00:32:07.560 if it was 12 months before you became an MP or less.
00:32:11.060 The Parliamentary Standards Committee
00:32:13.620 was quite likely to find him guilty
00:32:16.080 of a breach of parliamentary rules,
00:32:18.580 which would have meant that he had to fight a by-election um and so he's if you like taken
00:32:25.820 the initiative and in a in a quite Trumpy way has said you know don't let the establishment
00:32:31.720 silence me I'm going to the people and of course he would have won he's very popular in that
00:32:36.240 constituency so he from a tactical point of view I think did the right thing all the other parties
00:32:41.520 also did the right thing they said we're not going to dignify this right we're not we're not
00:32:45.140 going to let you uh waste everybody's time with a by-election which is all about your ego and you
00:32:50.480 know if you're actually in a special election because of the the parliamentary standards
00:32:54.740 committee then we'll contest that one but we're not going to play your game so they all also did
00:32:59.220 what is tactically astution and didn't contest the seat leaving i don't know maybe half a dozen
00:33:05.680 eccentric independents still in the field one of whom is count binface now i mean i you know
00:33:12.940 it's not really my cup of tea this i there is something i find slightly twee about this i mean
00:33:18.960 i i like the idea of having joke candidates to puncture the pomposity of party leaders right and
00:33:26.780 and we had a long tradition of that there was a a guy called screaming lord such from uh that
00:33:32.840 monster raving loony party was a fixture of our elections from the early 60s and i always thought
00:33:38.400 that added to the gaiety of life but there is something what i mean by twee is the sort of
00:33:46.560 humor that is for children but applied to adults right it's it's the politics of paddington bear
00:33:52.160 it's the it's the politics of are you okay hun it's the politics of having a sign up saying you
00:33:58.080 don't have to be mad to work here but it helps it's just a bit cringe and so i'm afraid there's
00:34:04.320 there's no i mean i'm sure nigel parash will win the seat comfortably but there is no way that you
00:34:07.860 can defeat such a candidate and call it a great victory right so yeah there's no way you know 0.93
00:34:15.720 it's undignified for him let me put it like that whatever the outcome and it can't have been what
00:34:20.180 he wanted is he someone that could be prime minister or is he someone who holds his party
00:34:30.880 back no no no no he's definitely the party is the other way around the party would be nowhere
00:34:37.460 without him he's a very popular politician he's very charismatic he's very energetic
00:34:41.500 uh i've met him and i've interviewed him and i find him you'll know that i mean you're right
00:34:48.080 then he's he's he has a but you know that some some leaders get to a point where
00:34:53.480 they're they're a drag on their party as opposed to leading for us has always been
00:34:59.540 a force of nature right the the no i mean the part you know this is his third party and they
00:35:06.220 form around him personally.
00:35:08.740 His party is falling back a little
00:35:10.400 bit because of the stories
00:35:12.320 about the financial donations.
00:35:15.580 However much his MPs
00:35:20.540 dream of a succession battle, it is
00:35:22.220 difficult to see the party going places
00:35:24.140 without him.
00:35:26.460 Could he be prime minister?
00:35:27.760 That's a really good question. Does he actually want to be prime minister?
00:35:30.440 Does he want the responsibility?
00:35:32.040 He's done really well and has been brilliant
00:35:34.240 at, howling down the system, pointing out its very real flaws, and doing so with a turn
00:35:43.840 of phrase that is memorable and appealing.
00:35:48.240 But it's impossible to see either him or anyone else meeting the expectations that he has
00:35:53.280 raised.
00:35:54.560 When he says, you know, we would deport every single illegal immigrant, I mean, no country
00:35:59.000 in the world has ever managed to do that. 1.00
00:36:00.380 Not deport all of them, right?
00:36:01.500 It's just logistically can't be done.
00:36:03.140 Nope. There's like two million of them, right? I don't think his supporters are ready for the
00:36:10.880 gap between what he has promised and what he or anyone else could deliver. So I wouldn't be
00:36:15.340 completely surprised in an event where his MPs were capable of forming part of a government or
00:36:21.700 even the whole government, where he chose to remain party leader, but put someone else in
00:36:28.320 as prime minister. It's a pattern I've seen again and again in Europe with these kind of
00:36:33.840 populist parties. And it's a way for the leader to maintain his brand without having to enter
00:36:39.060 into the compromises of the government. I'm thinking of another comparison to Canada.
00:36:45.220 Preston Manning led a party that, when it was reformed, that was seen as,
00:36:50.440 It's out there. Could we really do that? And yet, when Jean-Claude Chen decided that he needed to get serious, when the, I believe it was the Wall Street Journal or it was the economist that called Canada a banana republic because of our financial situation, when the lenders in New York started to balk at providing more money to Canada,
00:37:16.380 Preston Manning had an incredible amount of influence on the direction of the government
00:37:23.300 and had he not been there perhaps they wouldn't have gone as far as they did so you can have an
00:37:28.540 outsized influence even if you don't take power and perhaps that's what Farage and reform do
00:37:34.200 even if it's under a labor government if they apply the pressure correctly well all of that
00:37:40.700 is true and indeed preston manning who i think is a very significant politician and underrated for
00:37:46.720 exactly the reason you gave uh was at the reform conference two years ago giving his kind of
00:37:51.680 benediction to the the british reform party um i think he was you know martin was very inspired by
00:37:59.960 by the story of the the way the right came together in canada and i don't think it was a coincidence
00:38:03.880 that he called his party reform i think he he'd studied what happened after 1993 in canada very
00:38:08.800 very earnestly um of course if we tell that story through to the end it really was a victory for
00:38:15.460 preston manning because you know stephen harper came from the reform party pf y liever has
00:38:19.080 so it it kind of they they did end up in power um with policies that he would have recognized you
00:38:27.300 know yes subject to all the compromises you have to make in government but basically the
00:38:30.620 philosophy that he would not have disowned uh so i i think that's nigel's aspiration
00:38:37.940 It's not just to nudge the conservatives in a different direction. 0.69
00:38:41.880 It's that the party that he has founded should in some way get a share of power.
00:38:48.440 The question is whether he will be part of it if that happens.
00:38:51.180 And, of course, the expectation is that he would and that he'd be prime minister and maybe he would like to be.
00:38:57.200 But there's a little bit of me, you know, I've known him for a long time, that wonders whether he actually wants to take that level of responsibility off.
00:39:04.940 do you see the two parties merging the way that ours did in canada or just cooperating
00:39:10.640 in the short term just cooperating if that in the long term and for exactly the same reason
00:39:17.820 as in canada i.e the electoral system i don't think they will have any option but to merge
00:39:23.060 the the first possible system will do it for them i want to switch gears and ask you about
00:39:29.260 brexit that was something that you spent an awful lot of your political career
00:39:33.480 working towards. You were a member of the European Parliament for, was it 16, 17 years?
00:39:40.360 21 years.
00:39:41.540 21 years.
00:39:42.540 I served my debt to society, Your Honor.
00:39:46.300 There's a special place in heaven for you going to Brussels and Strasbourg that often.
00:39:51.760 So if you listen to folks like Mark Carney, who's warning the people of Alberta,
00:40:00.320 don't separate from Canada. Look at what happened in Brexit.
00:40:03.480 I look at it and I say, that's the wrong argument to be making because I, like you, supported Brexit.
00:40:10.100 But the consensus view here in Canada is that Brexit was a disaster for Britain.
00:40:15.000 It was a failure. The economy's never been worse, and it's all due to Brexit.
00:40:20.760 What's your read of it as a supporter of Brexit? Give me your honest assessment.
00:40:24.620 First of all, just very quickly on Mark Carney.
00:40:27.500 it is striking how different his attitude is in canada in the way that actually matters right
00:40:33.960 because the the parallel is not with alberta the canadian economy is about a tenth of the size of
00:40:40.500 the big single market next door just as britain is relative to the eu uh when he was at the bank
00:40:46.660 of england he said we have to just pay any price to go in with that market next door because it's
00:40:52.380 such an important market in canada he's much more sensible about it and he does not argue
00:40:57.120 that canada should merge with the u.s in order to have easier market access and avoid any trumpian
00:41:02.360 tariffs and so on and of course he's he's right the second time the the reason that he takes that
00:41:07.520 attitude the second time around is because he now has voters to worry about whereas when he was the
00:41:11.620 bank of england he could just go along with the kind of elite consensus he had operation fear when
00:41:15.680 he was governor of the bank of england he did trying to scare people he did and none of that
00:41:20.180 came through and this is and this is the point that i really wanted to make so he and it wasn't
00:41:23.580 just him, the IMF, the Treasury, the Bank of England, the OECD, in other words, not the
00:41:28.840 Remain campaign, but the official organs, all predicted an immediate collapse in the
00:41:35.360 aftermath of a leave vote.
00:41:37.920 And so I can say for sure that Brexit did not work out as badly as they thought it would
00:41:45.200 because they told us what they thought would happen during the campaign.
00:41:48.780 And we can measure what happened against what they said.
00:41:51.340 they said that there would be an immediate reception. In fact, the economy grew in every
00:41:57.980 quarter from the vote up until the pandemic. They said that there would be an immediate spike
00:42:03.660 in unemployment. Unemployment fell rapidly right up to the lockdown. And in fact, we created more
00:42:10.780 jobs in that period than in any comparable period in British history. They said that house prices
00:42:15.580 would collapse. House prices rose by 10%. They said the stock exchange would collapse. The
00:42:20.920 stock exchange rose by 7%. They said that there would have to be this emergency budget, a 4,300
00:42:26.480 pound levy on every household in the land to deal with the market reaction to a leave vote. In fact,
00:42:34.140 the deficit continued to fall from 3.3% in 2016 to 2.4% in 2019. So everything they said
00:42:41.620 was untrue. And yet, despite that, they are still sticking to the headline figure that they had
00:42:48.300 during the campaign of the economy will be 4% smaller. And none of the facts that have blown
00:42:55.580 that out of the water have dented their loyalty to that ridiculous figure. And in order to get 0.87
00:43:03.760 to that figure now, they have to get around the awkward fact that Britain, with all of the mistakes
00:43:08.800 we've made and all of the problems we have, has grown faster since the vote or since Brexit
00:43:14.000 than comparable large Western European economies like France and Germany.
00:43:19.980 And so they are reduced to saying, yeah, but we would have done even better.
00:43:24.380 We'd have outgrown these countries by even more if we had been more closely tied to them economically, 0.51
00:43:29.000 which is kind of a ridiculous argument yet.
00:43:31.360 And yet, because people are so invested in this for cultural reasons,
00:43:35.380 you hear it endlessly from the BBC, from the Economist, from the Financial Times,
00:43:39.640 and therefore from the people whose view of the UK is formed by those organs abroad,
00:43:46.160 which is most of the media, even in a kindred country like Canada, which knows us very well.
00:43:53.040 So there is a sort of absurdity with still trying to stick to these doom figures.
00:43:59.700 Let me put it like this.
00:44:01.780 I've been disappointed by how few of the Brexit opportunities we've grasped
00:44:06.520 in terms of commerce, in terms of deregulation. I thought it was disgraceful that we couldn't get
00:44:13.400 a more ambitious trade deal, even with your country, partly because of the usual Canadian
00:44:18.700 protectionism on dairy products, but also because of an equivalent British protectionism about beef.
00:44:25.100 It's absurd in either case that so much of our national interest is being determined by a tiny,
00:44:33.320 tiny portion of our respective workforces, i.e. people employed in agriculture. That's not what
00:44:38.820 a serious country should do, and I've been very disappointed by that. However, my disappointment
00:44:43.700 at the failure to take full advantage of the opportunities of Brexit does not mean that it
00:44:49.060 has failed. And the idea that, you know, Brexit was very successful until the moment when we got
00:44:55.220 a Labour government that started pushing up tax and spending and borrowing, and then suddenly
00:44:58.780 all these delayed effects of brexit kicked in just at that moment i mean come on right so what
00:45:03.960 we're actually seeing is that a government that has made bad domestic decisions especially on
00:45:09.800 spending is now using brexit as its excuse to cover the result of its own failure is there any
00:45:17.580 party pushing to rejoin the eu well they all know that the country wouldn't vote for it in a
00:45:24.220 referendum and that's their problem so that the one that is most the only one that says that they
00:45:28.380 would eventually like to go back in are the green party and the liberal democrats so labor who are
00:45:34.660 you know serious about trying to win elections know that they can't say that uh they can't say
00:45:39.560 that and get re-elected um so what they're doing instead is they're trying to sign up to as much
00:45:44.420 of it as they can without calling it rejoining and uh that in a way is the worst of all worlds
00:45:50.360 because we we might as well be members in terms of forfeiting the opportunities but we we don't
00:45:55.980 have the preferential uh trade with the eu either so we we we lose on both in our country as part of
00:46:04.760 the reaction to um donald trump's um real or perceived threats to our sovereignty the the cry
00:46:11.960 has become from mark carney who says we are the most european of non-european countries
00:46:16.560 he says um people are saying we should join the eu that's how we'll protect our sovereignty is
00:46:22.560 joining the eu and handing over more power to brussels but you know the one thing that would
00:46:28.180 give him the advantage and here here it's worth exploring canada and the uk are in the trans-pacific
00:46:35.260 partnership along with you know japan australia new zealand malaysia and so on um a tie-up between
00:46:43.120 the cptpp and the eu would i think be an obvious boon for both sides and i think there'll be a lot
00:46:51.420 of resistance on the EU side to that. But it's worth pushing to see how much can be done. I think
00:46:56.500 that is worth doing. And in Carney's terms, as a sort of seeing it as kind of containing a rogue
00:47:03.280 US, it would work. But more important, it would work economically. It would maximize opportunities
00:47:10.340 for Brits and Canadians and for Europeans. Well, the only benefit to that is, as opposed 1.00
00:47:15.880 to joining the eu is that politically we'd still be on our own right i don't i don't mind a trade
00:47:22.320 deal i don't want it is not normal in the world when you want to do a trade deal with another
00:47:28.560 country to say and would you like to set up for us right only the european union uniquely insists
00:47:33.480 on that it's absolutely bizarre daniel it's been great talking to you as always and hopefully we
00:47:39.280 get to do it again soon great pleasure brian good luck full comment is a post media podcast
00:47:44.720 My name's Brian Lilly, your host.
00:47:46.620 This episode was produced by Andre Pru.
00:47:48.580 Theme music by Bryce Hall.
00:47:50.300 Kevin Libin is the executive producer.
00:47:52.500 Make sure that you hit the subscribe button, share this on social media, and let your friends know about us.
00:47:57.780 Thanks for listening.
00:47:58.560 Until next time, I'm Brian Lilly.
00:48:03.760 Here's that clip from Canada Did What? Season 2 that we promised for you.
00:48:08.140 In U.S. discourse, you often hear reference to what the framers of their own constitution would think about the state of their handiwork in the 21st century.
00:48:17.260 Things like, sure, George Washington supported Second Amendment gun rights in the age of the musket, but what about an AR-15?
00:48:25.440 Well, the neat thing about Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms is that several of its framers lived long enough to state that all their worst fears about the document had been confirmed.
00:48:37.660 Sterling Lyon died in 2010.
00:48:39.620 At that time, the most outrageous charter decision was one that had mandated
00:48:43.780 that voting rights be extended to criminals serving time in prison.
00:48:48.620 Said Lyon a few years before his death,
00:48:51.540 if anyone had said to us in 1981 that the charter would be used to win voting rights for prison inmates,
00:48:57.900 we would never have believed it.
00:49:00.300 In 2001, former Alberta Premier Peter Lawhead gave an interview
00:49:04.240 in which he reiterated that his chief concern with the Charter had been
00:49:08.260 that it would enable courts to take the place of elected parliamentarians.
00:49:13.500 The aging law he then added, my God, that's what's happened.
00:49:18.600 If you showed them some of the decisions made under the Charter,
00:49:22.100 it would have made the Charter very politically controversial with the electorate
00:49:25.300 and even with some of the advocates, right?
00:49:27.920 Like Trudeau and Chrétien might have been like,
00:49:30.220 okay, well, we don't want that, and we don't want that,
00:49:33.160 And that partly for political reasons, maybe, that now the cat was out, that everyone can see in the future and see what would happen if we did do this and that.
00:49:42.180 And here's Blakeney, the socialist from Saskatchewan in 2005. 0.98
00:49:46.760 Right now, the conventional wisdom is that our splendid parliamentary system with a wise electorate somehow elects only fools and knaves. 0.99
00:49:55.900 Fools and knaves who appoint judges who are wise. 0.99
00:49:59.160 Somehow the judges are invested with superhuman wisdom. 1.00
00:50:02.940 But these things come in waves.
00:50:05.060 The day will come when the public will want more decision-making power back.
00:50:09.740 If you want to hear the rest of the story, make sure you subscribe to Canada Did What?
00:50:15.180 Everywhere you get your podcasts.