TRIGGERnometry - May 05, 2024


My 49 Days as Prime Minister - Liz Truss


Episode Stats

Length

1 hour

Words per Minute

154.98106

Word Count

9,328

Sentence Count

608

Misogynist Sentences

2

Hate Speech Sentences

14


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

Former British Prime Minister Liz Truss joins us on the show to talk about her career and life after politics, including her time as the first female Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, her time in the House of Commons, and the lessons she learned from Margaret Thatcher.

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:00:00.720 Can AI help you do more of what you love?
00:00:04.880 More of the meaningful work?
00:00:06.560 The human work?
00:00:08.080 Like reaching bigger goals, faster?
00:00:10.440 Or growing careers and the bottom line?
00:00:13.160 Workday is the next-gen ERP powered by AI
00:00:16.320 that knows your business.
00:00:18.000 Connecting more dots across your organization,
00:00:20.440 so your people have time to connect to work they love.
00:00:23.520 We all know AI is changing work forever.
00:00:26.520 Now let's change it for the better.
00:00:28.440 It's a new workday.
00:00:30.600 Broadway's smash hit, the Neil Diamond Musical,
00:00:33.720 A Beautiful Noise, is coming to Toronto.
00:00:36.560 The true story of a kid from Brooklyn destined for something more,
00:00:40.040 featuring all the songs you love, including America,
00:00:43.040 Forever in Blue Jeans, and Sweet Caroline.
00:00:45.800 Like Jersey Boys and Beautiful, the next musical mega hit is here,
00:00:49.880 the Neil Diamond Musical, A Beautiful Noise.
00:00:52.680 April 28th through June 7th, 2026, the Princess of Wales Theatre.
00:00:57.680 Get tickets at mirvish.com.
00:00:59.840 I faced really, really quite strong forces pushing against my agenda.
00:01:06.520 We have a situation in Britain where we have a very powerful economic establishment
00:01:12.840 that has a particular set of views and did not like to be challenged.
00:01:16.960 And what I did was challenge those views.
00:01:20.120 Looking back at your time and power, what would you change?
00:01:23.800 I think the biggest thing I could have changed is whether I ran in the leadership election.
00:01:28.440 Looking at the Conservative Party now, I mean, to put it bluntly,
00:01:32.120 they're in pretty dire straits, aren't they?
00:01:35.120 Well, the polls are not good.
00:01:39.960 Liz Truss, thank you for coming on the show.
00:01:41.800 You haven't given many interviews since leaving Downing Street,
00:01:44.840 so we're delighted to have you.
00:01:48.280 Let's get to it. I mean, what happened?
00:01:52.280 We don't do much warm-up here.
00:01:53.280 Yeah, yeah, yeah.
00:01:54.760 So what happened?
00:01:55.960 Well, looking back on 2022, I was frustrated about the direction of the country,
00:02:07.520 the direction of the Conservative Party.
00:02:09.240 I decided that I had to run in the leadership election
00:02:13.800 because I believed we needed more Conservative policies, frankly.
00:02:18.320 Lower taxes, smaller government, we needed to get the economy growing.
00:02:23.680 And there wasn't really anybody else putting that case forward.
00:02:28.560 And I'd been spending quite a lot of time putting that case forward.
00:02:32.240 As a member of the government, you know, you can argue your corner.
00:02:36.720 But the general trajectory, I know that was partly because of COVID,
00:02:42.400 it was partly because of the war in Ukraine,
00:02:44.080 it had been towards higher taxes, higher spending, more intervention.
00:02:52.480 And I thought we needed a change.
00:02:54.720 And I very much believe that's what people in Britain vated for.
00:02:58.400 They vated for that in 2016. They vated for that in 2019.
00:03:03.280 And I wanted to deliver that.
00:03:05.360 And I knew at the time that it would be difficult.
00:03:07.440 I knew that I wasn't going with the grain of what people,
00:03:14.080 or particularly the sort of broader elite and intelligentsia in Britain thought.
00:03:18.640 But I thought it was the right thing to do, so I put myself forward.
00:03:21.840 And what happened, I mean, I write about this at length in my book,
00:03:27.040 Ten Years to Save the West, which goes through exactly what happened.
00:03:31.920 But essentially, I faced really, really quite strong forces pushing against my agenda.
00:03:40.000 And ultimately, those forces were able to stop it happening.
00:03:44.640 We're going to get into the forces, because I think that's a very interesting conversation
00:03:48.400 that we've had with previous politicians on the show.
00:03:50.880 So Ella Braverman was sitting in your chair only a month ago,
00:03:53.760 basically saying she couldn't do anything for the same reasons that you're giving, actually, in many ways.
00:03:58.800 But the first thing I want to get into is this idea of smaller government and lower taxes.
00:04:05.040 That got Margaret Thatcher elected and re-elected numerous times in this country within living memory.
00:04:10.480 But now that seems to be unsellable.
00:04:15.120 I'm not sure if it's true that it got her elected.
00:04:18.000 I think what got her elected was the winter of discontent.
00:04:21.440 It was the fact that things had got so bad that people were saying, we need change.
00:04:27.280 And she offered a coherent vision of change.
00:04:30.720 But she offered that off the back of it was clear that Britain wasn't working,
00:04:35.360 that our industry was doing badly, that our economy was doing badly.
00:04:40.000 And she had an alternative.
00:04:41.600 And I think we've lost those lessons.
00:04:44.480 So all the hard work that was done, getting Britain on track, getting our economy on track,
00:04:51.600 making the private sector successful, has gradually been undone over time.
00:04:57.360 And people don't always learn the lessons of history.
00:05:00.640 And I think people have forgotten what it was that transformed Britain.
00:05:05.120 And therefore, what we need to do.
00:05:08.480 So yes, those ideas have become unfashionable, even though they're right.
00:05:13.280 It's true.
00:05:13.760 Liz, you say forces at play.
00:05:19.280 What does that mean?
00:05:20.240 So what I mean by that is, first of all, I mean sort of general political and ideological forces.
00:05:29.840 Constantine was just talking about how it's not fashionable to believe in supply-side economics.
00:05:35.200 It's not fashionable to believe in monetarism.
00:05:37.600 You know, those ideas that were shown to be correct in the 80s have been superseded.
00:05:46.160 You know, they've become, they're no longer fashionable in our universities.
00:05:50.720 They're no longer talked about free market economics and profit.
00:05:56.000 You know, it has become something that is not popularly talked about.
00:06:00.720 So I think that was one issue that the general tide was not pointing in that direction.
00:06:06.560 But the second thing, and when I say forces, I mean people who are part of the bureaucracy,
00:06:14.640 part of the government administrative state, did not support those policies,
00:06:20.480 and in some cases made it harder for those policies to be delivered.
00:06:24.880 So I think there's a general problem about the intellectual tide,
00:06:28.960 the ability of conservatives to make arguments.
00:06:31.520 But, you know, we have a situation in Britain where we have a very powerful economic establishment
00:06:39.600 that has a particular set of views and did not like to be challenged.
00:06:43.680 And what I did was challenge those views.
00:06:46.160 And so was it also the civil service as well?
00:06:50.160 And do you include them in the bureaucracy?
00:06:53.280 Yes. Yes. So the bureaucracy is, of course, it's the civil service itself.
00:07:00.640 But it's also what I call the quangocracy.
00:07:04.400 So organizations like the Office of Budget Responsibility is part of the quangocracy.
00:07:10.640 The Bank of England is essentially part of the quangocracy.
00:07:13.440 And what do I mean by that?
00:07:14.480 I mean, organizations that are not directly democratically accountable.
00:07:20.000 Organizations that are appointed to have independent expertise.
00:07:24.960 That's what I'm talking about.
00:07:27.680 Whenever we talk to people, and you're not the first person to say this,
00:07:32.640 I keep thinking the same thing, which is, do we really have a democracy in that case?
00:07:38.640 Because we elect leaders to enact certain policies.
00:07:42.400 If those policies can't be enacted because the powers that be,
00:07:45.840 the forces, quote unquote, refuse to let them be enacted,
00:07:50.320 I mean, do we have a democracy? Really?
00:07:52.320 Well, it's not democratic enough. There's no doubt about that, in my view.
00:07:57.360 But that's a very, very serious problem because...
00:08:01.360 It is a serious problem. It's an absolutely serious problem.
00:08:05.280 And the other side of this argument, we'll talk about things like institutions,
00:08:11.680 they'll talk about, you know, tram lines that politicians should be operating in.
00:08:18.880 But what they fundamentally mean is that politicians need checks and balances
00:08:25.520 against enacting things that are democratically decided.
00:08:29.840 And what we've seen, and not just in Britain, right across the free world,
00:08:37.920 is we've seen a growth in the power of unelected bodies.
00:08:43.360 There's no doubt in my mind. And it's not just the Office of Budget Responsibility or the Bank of England.
00:08:50.160 It's also the Environment Agency. It's the Climate Change Committee.
00:08:55.120 It's people who are not democratically accountable are effectively making decisions.
00:09:02.400 And I think that's a problem. I don't think it's democratic.
00:09:05.120 It's a massive problem. And I think, as an ordinary person looking at this, which I am, I'm going,
00:09:10.720 I didn't vote for the civil service. I didn't vote for the OBR. I didn't vote for the Bank of England.
00:09:15.680 I didn't vote for the Environmental Agency.
00:09:18.720 So, at the same time, I'm also thinking, well, the Conservative government has been in power for 14 years.
00:09:25.520 Surely they would have been aware of all of this. Why haven't they done anything?
00:09:29.760 I don't think, well, so I first got elected in 2010.
00:09:34.240 And when you get elected as an MP, you assume a lot of things about the level of power and influence you're going to have.
00:09:43.360 These are not always true. And, you know, I became a minister in 2012.
00:09:49.440 I was, I was a junior minister. I found it frustrating that it was difficult to get things done.
00:09:55.280 But I assumed it was because I was junior in the organisation that if I was a secretary of state,
00:10:01.360 it would be easier to get things done. And as a secretary of state, I was able to do some things.
00:10:07.360 But it was still the case. It was hard going. It was hard going implementing Conservative policies
00:10:14.720 when that was not the broad view of the system.
00:10:18.000 Can you give an example? Sorry to interrupt. Could you give an example where you had a policy
00:10:23.600 that you wanted to be enacted? And then for whatever reason, it was scuppered or diluted
00:10:30.560 down to the point where it was simply unrecognisable?
00:10:36.240 So the first job I had was in the education department.
00:10:40.640 And I wanted to deregulate childcare to make it cheaper. We've got some of the most cumbersome
00:10:47.280 childcare rules in the world. And we've got some of the most expensive childcare. So I wanted to
00:10:52.480 change that. And what you find is that no one ever says, no, we're not going to implement the policy.
00:10:59.200 What they do is they take a long time about it. It's sometimes called consent and evade.
00:11:04.560 So he'll just say, yes, minister, we'll go and look at that. We need to do a bit more work on this,
00:11:09.280 blah, blah, blah. So what you'll find is it takes a long time to do things. And often,
00:11:17.120 the civil servants in the department will be in touch with the so-called sector,
00:11:22.560 which is generally the vested interest within which other area you're talking about, whether it's
00:11:27.360 environmental NGOs or the nursery sector or whatever. And you find yourself ending up having
00:11:37.360 to compromise to get things done quicker. This is also true of things like appointments as well,
00:11:43.600 but you'll have to compromise to get things done quicker. You'll find there's a lot of opposition
00:11:50.240 from the sector or the organization you're dealing with. So in the case of the childcare reforms,
00:11:57.040 I wanted to do, before I even got them out, I'd had to make quite a lot of compromises,
00:12:04.080 so they weren't as good as what I would have wanted to do and what I think is right.
00:12:10.800 Making them more like the system in France, for example, which is actually
00:12:15.520 better than the system in Britain. So it's hard to describe the process, but it's all very
00:12:21.920 long-winded, driven by endless layers of people having to look at things. So it just takes a long
00:12:31.760 time. And then by the time I'd finally got the policy out, Nick Clegg had been so lobbied by the
00:12:39.200 childcare sector and by Mumsnet that he blocked the policy. And therefore, a policy which would have
00:12:46.800 made lives better for families across Britain would have given them more flexibility didn't happen.
00:12:53.200 So that's the kind of thing that happens on each policy you were looking at. Or
00:13:02.160 a lot of the things we're talking about, take the Environment Agency, for example. In order to override
00:13:09.600 the decisions that organisation makes or to change the way the organisation works, you need primary
00:13:15.600 legislation. So that will take you two years to get a bill through. You've got to get the bill approved
00:13:22.800 in advance before you even get to the stage of primary legislation. So unless you are absolutely
00:13:32.080 focused on one thing and absolutely determined to drive it through and prepared to spend a lot of time,
00:13:37.440 it is very difficult to make things happen. And unfortunately, a system is being created where
00:13:43.280 you're operating in that sort of constant confinement, if that makes sense.
00:13:52.160 I mean, so…
00:13:53.280 Sounds like a straitjacket to me.
00:13:55.280 Well, basically, yes. So as Environment Secretary, I was in…
00:14:02.160 You know, the department was in court constantly. So we were in court with the Badger Trust,
00:14:07.280 we were in court with the climate change, the sort of clean air campaign. All sorts of
00:14:15.600 environmental bodies would be suing us all the time. So it's not just that there are civil servants
00:14:22.720 with a particular worldview, and by the way, there are. It's also that they are understandably
00:14:28.960 very frightened of being sued. And the sort of powers of judicial review allow that to happen.
00:14:35.920 So you've got a system that's constantly looking, covering its back, looking at what bad things
00:14:41.520 might happen. Therefore, making it very, very difficult to push a positive policy forward.
00:14:50.000 So reading between the lines then, and coming back to your own story,
00:14:54.560 you're a junior minister, you struggle to get too much done, even though you try. You think,
00:14:58.560 well, I better become a senior minister. You struggle to get as much done as you'd like,
00:15:02.320 so you're like, I better become prime minister. And then you get into 10 Downing Street, and I'm
00:15:06.640 guessing it's probably the biggest trade jacket of all. Is that fair?
00:15:10.000 That's a fair point. And you discover, because I sat there in governments under David Cameron,
00:15:18.720 Theresa May, Boris Johnson, thinking, why doesn't the prime minister do this? Why can't we short
00:15:27.440 circuit this? Why can't we get on with this? And what I discovered in the job as prime minister
00:15:34.080 is how constraining the overall, you know, it's not the case that when you get to the top,
00:15:43.200 there's more freedom of manoeuvre. Actually, there isn't. And what I tried to do,
00:15:50.400 essentially with the growth plan, which I developed with Quasi Quarteng, was to take on that economic
00:15:56.720 orthodoxy, which I think has been behind why Britain has had low growth and stagnation for
00:16:05.280 almost two decades. I tried to take that on. But I found that even at that level, trying to take on
00:16:14.160 these unelected institutions is extremely difficult. And I didn't realise how ruthlessly those people
00:16:21.680 would fight back. Just a very quick question. I thought that, you know, going through the system,
00:16:26.720 well, maybe there are political decision makers above me, you know, pulling the strings, making
00:16:33.920 sure that these things don't happen. You know, maybe there is a... But when I got to the top job,
00:16:40.480 I found that wasn't the case. Very quick question before Francis jumps in,
00:16:44.480 and it's a provocative one. But I think it's a logical one, given everything you're telling us,
00:16:48.640 and one that we know increasing numbers of young people are asking, which is why should I vote at
00:16:53.680 all? If this is the case, why should I vote in the next election? Well, I think it makes it more
00:16:58.560 important people vote. Because? I think it makes it more important. I believe we need to restore
00:17:05.760 proper sovereign parliamentary democracy in Britain. And I think we've drifted away from it. And I think we
00:17:12.240 have become a technocracy. And that is a problem. Part of the problem is, and it's been a sort of
00:17:20.880 chicken and egg thing, part of the problem is, a lot of people have become disengaged in politics,
00:17:26.640 because it has become so technocratic. It's become something for the political class to do.
00:17:32.960 And that has created even more division between what the public actually wants, and what is being
00:17:41.360 delivered by the government. So the only way to fix that is through more democracy.
00:17:48.640 Ultimately, Parliament is capable of changing this.
00:17:53.040 How?
00:17:54.000 We are suffering. We are capable of changing this. Like one example, the Equality Act. The Equality Act
00:18:00.960 creates huge issues for government. We've just seen how Birmingham Council has,
00:18:07.360 because of the public sector equality duty and its own mismanagement, gone bankrupt.
00:18:13.680 The Equality Act has created mountains of red tape across government. It's embedded the idea of
00:18:19.360 identity politics into the way the public sector behaves. And it's also done that in the private
00:18:25.840 sectors, particularly, we could repeal the Equality Act. It is one example of something we could do
00:18:32.560 to make this country work better. The issue is we don't have a parliamentary majority to do that.
00:18:39.840 The issue isn't that democracy doesn't work. The issue is that we need to make the case and get
00:18:47.200 enough MPs who believe things need to change.
00:18:49.440 Liz, there'll be people listening to this who are going, well, isn't it just not going to be the case
00:18:55.280 that you present that? And even if it gets voted through, the blob or the dark forces or whatever you
00:19:02.400 want to call them, are just going to drag their heels to such an extent that you end up back at square
00:19:07.920 one with a watered-down bill, which means that it's not that effective.
00:19:12.720 You see, what I didn't know in 2010, that I know now, is that these things that look benign on the
00:19:24.880 surface, you know, who objects to equality? Who doesn't want to help the climate? Who doesn't believe
00:19:31.520 in human rights? Another thing that we need to repeal is the Human Rights Act, which has been a disaster.
00:19:36.160 But on the surface, none of these things look bad. They all sound reasonable.
00:19:40.160 But what they have done is they have wrapped up Britain in a huge amount of red tape and
00:19:47.280 technocracy that makes it impossible to do things, and also embeds values that are not conservative
00:19:54.640 in the very heart of government. So I didn't know that in 2010.
00:20:00.160 And I know that now. So what I'm saying is, if enough people understand what needs to change,
00:20:07.600 which is why I've written my book, I want to explain to people what needs to change to create
00:20:14.880 pressure to actually make those changes. And parliament is capable of doing that. It's technically
00:20:19.760 capable of reversing all of this legislation. We just haven't done it. We just haven't done it. And
00:20:26.640 maybe it's, for me, it's taken me that time of being in government, of getting to the top,
00:20:36.720 to understand just how big a problem it is.
00:20:39.200 So what do we need to change then?
00:20:44.000 It's a very long list.
00:20:44.960 It's a very long list. But the Equality Act, the Human Rights Act, the Climate Change Act,
00:20:53.520 the Constitutional Reform Act, 2005. I mean, this is a very important part of why
00:21:00.320 Britain doesn't work. We used to have a Lord Chancellor who was appointed by the Prime Minister,
00:21:07.360 who appointed senior judges. That role was effectively abolished by Taney Blair or denuded of
00:21:15.280 its power back in 2005. Instead, the appointment of judges is now down to a quango. So effectively,
00:21:22.240 you've created a self-appointing judiciary, rather than one that feeds into parliamentary sovereignty.
00:21:32.720 And a Supreme Court was created in Britain, which had never existed before, rather than having
00:21:42.480 the senior judiciary in the House of Lords. And I think that has created a problem. And we've seen
00:21:50.560 more activist judges, more activist lawyers. We've seen government policy like Rwanda challenged
00:21:56.560 now by the Supreme Court. So that is another act of parliament that I think we need to reverse.
00:22:04.240 I mean, I could go on for a very long time, but I think you go right back to the 1947 Town and
00:22:09.280 Country Planning Act, which is, why is it so difficult to build things in Britain? It's because we had a
00:22:15.680 group of socialists in government in 19, you know, post-war, who put in this socialist piece of
00:22:23.040 legislation that nobody has since reversed. But this is the type of discussion we need to be having
00:22:28.560 in Britain. And one of my many frustrations with politics is that so much of politics is focused
00:22:35.840 on the absolute superficial stuff. Like, you know, who's going to be the next leader of the Conservative
00:22:41.280 Party? Or why is X unpopular? What has X done wrong this week? Rather than, what are the fundamental
00:22:49.680 things that are stopping people in Britain pursuing happy and successful lives? You know,
00:22:55.520 that's what we should be focused on. I completely agree. And what you've spoken about has led to
00:23:02.240 people losing their faith in the Conservative Party. And I was looking at one bookmaker's odds
00:23:08.160 for the chance of the Conservative Party being re-elected, and it was at one percent. I mean...
00:23:15.600 This is just why I'm talking about the political media commentating on Flimplap.
00:23:19.120 I don't agree with that, actually. I think Francis has a very strong point, which is after 14 years
00:23:24.240 of a Conservative government, that could have done all those things. But you're talking about
00:23:28.000 repealing the Blair right reforms. You had 14 years?
00:23:30.960 I wouldn't just say the Blair right reforms. I think we need to go back to 1945.
00:23:35.680 The 1947 Blair wasn't around, but, you know, the human rights act, the equality act.
00:23:39.280 We can hold Blair responsible for a lot, but we can't hold him responsible for the 1947
00:23:43.760 town and country climate.
00:23:44.560 I agree. What I'm saying, and I think what Francis is getting at quite rightly,
00:23:48.800 is that after 14 years in which you had the opportunity, not you personally, the government,
00:23:55.120 of which you were a part for most of that time, had the opportunity to do all this stuff,
00:23:59.760 is now going to crash out of office, hand the keys to Downing Street over to Keir Starmer,
00:24:05.040 who's going to introduce more Blair right reforms, almost certainly.
00:24:08.320 Yeah, I mean, he's a turbocharged technocrat. You know, the guy wants to strengthen, you know,
00:24:14.400 the OBR. He wants to create new quangos within the Treasury. He wants to put more policy control
00:24:21.920 over to so-called independent bodies.
00:24:24.320 But I think my point is...
00:24:25.680 And more power to lawyers, of course, of which he has won.
00:24:28.240 My point is, Francis' point about the 1% odds of your party being re-elected reflects a failure
00:24:35.520 of the Conservative Party over 14, maybe even 15 years, close to 15 years, to do all the things
00:24:41.680 that you're saying they should do. Why weren't they done in the last 15 years?
00:24:45.440 Well, this is what I tried to do in 2022, is start turning it around. And frankly, I fell at the
00:24:54.320 first hurdle because I found that the economic establishment were not willing to back my policies.
00:25:06.320 They weren't willing to back my policies. You know, on the day before the mini-budget,
00:25:10.640 the Bank of England sold gilts, announced the sale of 40 billion worth of gilts,
00:25:16.080 and failed to raise interest rates as much as market expectations. And when
00:25:20.320 there was the issue with the liability-driven investments, the so-called LDIs,
00:25:26.800 rather than dealing with it, the Bank of England governor sought to lay blame at the government's
00:25:32.560 door. And frankly, it wasn't something I knew anything about. It wasn't something
00:25:36.560 quality knew anything about. So what I found is when I did try and deal with these issues that
00:25:42.800 you're talking about, these long-standing issues, I faced the most almighty backlash and the most
00:25:48.800 almighty pushback. And partly that was from the economic establishment, but it was also from people
00:25:55.360 within the Conservative Party and the Conservative Parliamentary Party. So the basic answer to your
00:26:01.040 question is not enough people in Britain, not enough people in the governing elite, and not enough
00:26:11.360 people in the Conservative Party actually agree that that is the problem. So we haven't even got to
00:26:18.240 first base, which is people understanding what the problem is. So you can't fix a problem if you don't
00:26:24.080 agree it's a problem. And you can't fix a problem if you don't understand what the problem is.
00:26:28.800 And the problem is that not enough people understand that.
00:26:32.320 Broadway's smash hit, The Neil Diamond Musical, A Beautiful Noise, is coming to Toronto. The true
00:26:39.600 story of a kid from Brooklyn destined for something more, featuring all the songs you love, including
00:26:44.880 America, Forever in Blue Jeans, and Sweet Caroline. Like Jersey Boys and Beautiful, the next musical
00:26:51.280 mega hit is here. The Neil Diamond Musical, A Beautiful Noise. April 28th through June 7th,
00:26:57.280 2026 The Princess of Wales Theatre. Get tickets at Mervish.com.
00:27:04.240 I'm going to ask a provocative question. If your diagnosis of the problem is correct,
00:27:10.880 and let's just say it is for the sake of an argument, then basically what you're saying is
00:27:15.200 the majority or a sizable portion of the Conservative Party are kind of clueless, if we're being honest.
00:27:23.280 I'm saying they don't agree. But if your diagnosis of the problem is correct,
00:27:30.720 and they don't understand that, then they don't understand the problem that we've got facing our
00:27:36.000 society and our democracy as a whole. I mean, that's a pretty damning indictment, isn't it?
00:27:41.200 Well, I would say that a lot of people in Britain, a lot of the public understand things don't work
00:27:50.960 and there's something wrong. But I don't think it is widely understood what the problem is.
00:27:58.560 And I think, you know, I've had a unique set of experiences. Being a minister for 10 years,
00:28:03.360 in six government departments, being prime minister, I think I've seen it to an extent other people
00:28:09.600 haven't. So, you know, before I became a minister, I did not know how the government worked or didn't
00:28:17.680 work. I now have a much better understanding of that. So, I think there is a, and as I say,
00:28:24.880 it's a reason I've written this book, is I want to explain to people the issues and problems I faced,
00:28:33.200 and what I think the problem is. But I don't think that there has been. I don't think that is a view
00:28:40.400 that's shared by the whole Conservative Party. Of course, it's not. And also by the commentaria.
00:28:46.400 You know, there are a lot of commentators who say, why doesn't the government just, you know,
00:28:50.240 stop the boats in the channel? Or why doesn't the government just cut taxes? Or why doesn't the government
00:28:54.320 just cut spending? What I'm saying is it's not that easy. There are actual reasons and push, you know,
00:29:02.640 pushback from the bureaucracy that makes these things very difficult, and from the legal profession,
00:29:08.160 and from the legal system.
00:29:10.240 But to me, Liz, that seems like a pretty obvious thing. Now, I get, or I understand,
00:29:16.080 if somebody... That might be why you're doing this podcast, because you think it's obvious. I don't
00:29:19.920 think it is obvious. Really? To somebody working in the government who's trying to get legislation
00:29:25.520 passed and is blocked at every route, that's a pretty obvious thing. I understand if the cabbie
00:29:31.600 outside doesn't know about it. But that's not a difficult concept to grasp for the average
00:29:36.960 person walking down the street, let alone somebody in government, surely.
00:29:40.240 But there's two different things. There's people who agree with the policy,
00:29:45.360 but don't understand how difficult it is to deliver. So they just say, well,
00:29:53.680 if you go in there and you do the right thing and you, you know, you're clear with the civil service,
00:30:00.320 they will do what you want. So there are people who believe that, who believe that the system works.
00:30:05.760 It's just a question of the policy hasn't been implemented correctly, or ministers won't get
00:30:10.720 enough at explaining that. But then there's a whole bunch of people, including in the Conservative Party,
00:30:16.480 who believe that even though institutions have moved to the left, we should accept that.
00:30:22.880 So we should accept wokery. We should accept the full implementation of net zero,
00:30:32.880 even if it's damaging our economy. So there are people who believe that
00:30:38.720 that having a straitjacket is not a bad thing. There are people who believe that in the Conservative
00:30:48.240 Party. So there are different shades of opinion here. And what I'm trying to do at the very least
00:30:56.240 is to say to people, if you do want these policies, if you do want to stop illegal immigration and actually
00:31:02.560 be able to deport people, if you do want to move away from our very rigid net zero policy,
00:31:10.640 it's not good enough just to change the policy. It's not even good enough just to communicate
00:31:15.280 the policy well. You're going to have to change the system because the system, the way it is structured
00:31:20.160 at the moment, will not allow you to even deliver the policy. So I'm not even aiming my argument at the
00:31:26.400 group two of people who basically don't agree with it. And there are some of those in the Conservative Party.
00:31:31.520 My argument is about people who agree with the policy
00:31:34.560 and yet don't appreciate where we've got to with our system in Britain.
00:31:40.000 So coming back to your story, you get elected as Prime Minister. It was a pretty fierce election,
00:31:44.480 pretty intense. What is it like walking into Number 10 Downing Street as Prime Minister?
00:31:50.000 Well, it was all very, very surreal because I'd spent the whole summer traveling the country,
00:31:56.560 making the argument, preparing, but there's no way you can prepare for that. It's a quite unique
00:32:06.800 experience. And there was all the, you know, the Queen being in Balmoral was very unusual because she
00:32:14.800 wasn't very well. So we had all the organization. I think in that type of situation, I was just very
00:32:20.640 focused on what I needed to do. You know, I needed to make a speech on the steps of Downing Street.
00:32:26.320 I needed to do things like appoint a cabinet. And I was just really aware of how big the
00:32:33.280 in-trade got because the Conservative Party had spent several months debating our leadership. Meanwhile,
00:32:39.920 there was some very serious, the war in Ukraine was taking place. You know, you had the rise in energy
00:32:48.800 prices, economic problems, all of these things have been piling up. So I was just very aware of the need
00:32:55.600 to get on with it.
00:32:57.600 And I think one of the main criticisms that people would make about your time as Prime Minister was that
00:33:05.440 actually, some of the policies and viewpoints that you've just espoused, you abandoned when you
00:33:11.040 were challenged on. I mean, 60% of the mini budget was giving money to families and businesses to help
00:33:19.360 with rising gas prices, which doesn't seem like a small government thing to do. Is that fair?
00:33:26.400 Well, that was... The way I would put it is what we did was an energy price guarantee. So we were
00:33:34.400 saying to people, if energy prices go over a certain level, then, you know, the government
00:33:40.480 will underwrite the energy suppliers. And the way I look at it is, over the past 30 years,
00:33:47.040 Britain's energy policy hasn't worked. You know, we haven't built the nuclear power stations,
00:33:52.160 we didn't get on with fracking, we didn't get on with making energy cheaper. And we were headed
00:33:59.440 for a serious recession. I mean, if energy bills had gone up to £6,000, households would have needed
00:34:05.760 money anyway. So the government were going to have to bail them out. And likewise, businesses would
00:34:11.040 have gone under anyway, just because of the sheer strain of those prices. So what I wanted to do is
00:34:16.640 protect confidence and protect business confidence and protect consumer confidence by giving some kind
00:34:22.640 of guarantee whilst we got on as quickly as possible with fixing the supply side. And that's why I
00:34:28.800 wanted to get on with fracking. It's why I wanted to get on with long-term energy deals. But these
00:34:35.120 things are always a judgment about what you need to do and political reality. And the political reality
00:34:41.760 was that there was going to be some kind of energy package. That was just the political reality of where
00:34:50.080 the Conservative Party was, where the country was, where the economic situation was. I mean,
00:34:55.440 it was happening around the world that governments were protecting people against very, very high
00:35:01.520 energy bills. I sought to do it in the most free market way that only paid out if the energy bills went
00:35:10.160 high. What we'd previously been doing is paying out money regardless of what the energy bills were,
00:35:16.480 which I thought was incredibly inefficient. And what I wanted to do was fix the supply issues in Britain
00:35:23.360 so that ultimately Britain became a net energy exporter. And look, I mean, there's always a
00:35:28.560 judgment in these things. But my view was the government was going to end up paying out money.
00:35:33.840 Let's at least pay out money only if the bills go that high. And in fact, the cost of it was far less than
00:35:42.160 was estimated because the energy prices didn't go that high.
00:35:47.040 I agree with your points about failure of government policy over 30 years on energy. And I suppose
00:35:53.280 that's kind of where we are on a lot of issues. You have government failure over a long period of
00:35:57.840 time to deal with certain things. And then, yes, the last resort is for the government to step in and
00:36:02.720 rescue people from the consequences of government failure.
00:36:05.360 But the other thing that really, I think, shocked quite a lot of people, including I know a lot of
00:36:11.600 people who are very, very clued into the financial markets and the economy, was this issue with LDIs.
00:36:19.040 Because I don't think people quite realize how close we came to essentially something resembling
00:36:24.800 another 2008. I mean, this was really, really significant.
00:36:27.920 Absolutely. I mean, what I have since discovered about LDIs...
00:36:32.960 Liability-driven investments, or derived investments, whatever they're called.
00:36:36.640 Yeah, exactly. And what they were is they were a way of pension funds investing in
00:36:44.880 bonds, say government bonds, that would deliver a higher return. But they delivered that higher return
00:36:52.240 on the basis that interest rates wouldn't go up. Which is obviously completely unrealistic,
00:36:57.120 because interest rates have been too low for too long. And the UK had 60% of the global market
00:37:04.800 in these investments. And we were highly exposed to changes in the interest rate.
00:37:11.040 Now, it's the responsibility of the Bank of England and the pensions regulator to maintain
00:37:19.520 proper regulation and financial stability. And it was the effect of interest rates rising,
00:37:28.640 gilt prices rising, on the LDIs that created the market turmoil. And that was something that I didn't
00:37:37.200 know about, Quasi Quarteng didn't know about. So we were blindsided by that. And I think to this day,
00:37:44.800 it's poor that the Bank of England hasn't had a proper investigation into what happened. Instead,
00:37:52.480 what happened was the Bank of England governor and the Bank of England tried to shift blame
00:37:57.680 onto the mini budget for something that was essentially caused by a failure of financial oversight.
00:38:05.600 And given how exposed this country is to these things, and these are pension funds we're
00:38:11.040 talking about. They're quite important in the health of the British economy and to ordinary people.
00:38:15.360 Do you think that the LDI should be banned, more regulated? What do you think should happen?
00:38:23.440 Well, look, a lot of the positions have been unwamped. And that's what happened after the exposure of the
00:38:32.000 LDI. And I'm not somebody who's in favour of banning pension funds, investing in particular products.
00:38:38.560 I think it was partly because they were so restricted on equity investment that they tried to find
00:38:44.160 somewhere else they could make a return. So it was the perverse consequence of overregulation
00:38:50.080 in another part. What I'm saying, though, is that the system didn't work. Why didn't the Treasury
00:38:57.440 know about this, the extreme exposure to changes in interest rates of a lot of British pension funds?
00:39:04.720 And what it seems to me is we've not only created a very powerful bureaucracy, we've also created a
00:39:13.360 very powerful siloed bureaucracy that often doesn't talk to other bits of the bureaucracy,
00:39:18.560 and that leaves us very exposed in those circumstances. So I'm not going to get into which
00:39:26.320 financial products should be regulated. But I think there's a problem if the system isn't talking to
00:39:32.240 the rest of the system about what is a major exposure.
00:39:36.560 Do you regret the way that you handled the issue with Kwasi Kwarteng? Do you think you should have
00:39:42.320 stood by him looking back on it? Well, I think by that point, we were in very serious trouble,
00:39:51.840 to be honest. So I don't think it would have made... Looking back on it, I don't think it would have made a
00:39:56.400 massive difference either way. I mean, the bank had successfully laid the blame on us.
00:40:06.960 Much of the Conservative Party in Parliament wanted to accept their version of events.
00:40:13.360 We simply did not have the support or the strength of support to continue with the policies.
00:40:29.440 As I explained, Kwasi was in the US, I thought it was a mistake for him to go there. I ended up handling
00:40:36.400 it all during that week, which is difficult not being the Chancellor, handling the fallout and the
00:40:44.160 need to change the policy. But essentially, the policy was changed. And the critical thing
00:40:51.120 was corporation tax. That was the absolutely critical policy. To my mind, putting corporation
00:40:57.520 tax up from 19% to 25% is a massive mistake for Britain. It's resulted in investors putting their
00:41:05.840 money elsewhere. It's not bringing into the Treasury what they expected. And I'm a believer in the
00:41:12.880 Laffer curve. I believe if you raise rates too high, you don't get the tax revenue. So the reason we were
00:41:20.640 forced to reverse that policy is because the OBR forecast was leaked of what the alleged hole in the
00:41:30.160 government budget was. So it was a forecast of £70 billion. Now, that forecast has turned out to be
00:41:37.680 untrue and wrong. But at the time, that forecast being leaked, which clearly showed that we lacked support
00:41:46.720 from the economic institutions, because it was either leaked by the OBR or the Treasury,
00:41:50.560 that essentially put huge pressure on us to reverse the corporation tax cut. And that was, you know, I was
00:42:05.360 essentially threatened that if we didn't reverse that, we might not be able to fund government debt.
00:42:11.920 And that would have created a huge crisis. So I couldn't, in all conscience, do that. That's why
00:42:19.600 the policy had to be reversed. Now, I don't know to this day whether or not it was the case that that
00:42:25.840 would happen, but I believed it was a credible threat. And once the policy had had to be reversed,
00:42:30.880 I thought it was very difficult for Quasi to continue, to be frank. So I think the issue was the policy being
00:42:38.640 reversed. Because you think if I put myself forward to be prime minister to deliver a change in Britain's
00:42:48.800 economic policy, to move away from the economic orthodoxy of high taxes, high regulation, close
00:42:55.280 alignment with the EU, high migration, stagnant, you know, stagnant growth. That's what I wanted to
00:43:02.640 move away from. I wanted to move to a dynamic, open for business Britain, lower taxes, keep better control
00:43:11.280 of public spending, don't raise welfare so much. Those are the policies I wanted to adopt. Get on with things
00:43:19.440 like fracking to actually liberate the supply side of the economy. And, you know, by then it was clear I
00:43:25.760 couldn't deliver any of those things. Conservative MPs wouldn't vote for fracking. They wouldn't vote
00:43:32.400 for restraining welfare spending. The OBR was leaking. The Treasury were leaking against the corporation
00:43:42.640 tax policy. So...
00:43:45.760 Do you... I guess what we're getting at...
00:43:48.480 It's all quite tricky.
00:43:49.440 No, no. True, that's a very British understatement. But I guess what we're getting at, and please
00:43:55.200 understand, this isn't a... It may sound like a personal question, but I actually think it's a broader
00:43:59.680 conversation about leadership and principles. Because Francis and I are friends. We started this together
00:44:05.440 six years ago. We have the same vision for it, as you and Kwasi did. If at some point we did something that we
00:44:11.760 both agreed was the right thing to do, and then something went wrong, and I was like, hey mate, actually, I think you
00:44:17.600 need to go. I would feel that one of two things would happen there. Either he'd be like, well,
00:44:23.360 why is it just me? But I myself would have thought, well, we did this together. We should leave together.
00:44:30.800 If I can't deliver the things that I agreed with my chancellor, you know, the game's up, time to go.
00:44:37.200 We gave it our best shot. Because... Are you still friends with Kwasi?
00:44:41.600 Yeah, yeah. And look, I think the... Kwasi had been out of the country all week at this IMF meeting,
00:44:47.840 so that was a very tricky situation. But what I felt was, these policies had been forced to be reversed.
00:44:56.720 I still believe they were the right policies. I still believe that the people who undermined the
00:45:03.120 policies were in the wrong. And that's a great shame. And I feel that Britain is in a worse position as a
00:45:10.160 result of that. But what I had to think about at that point is I had to think about the country.
00:45:18.400 And what I couldn't risk is if Kwasi had stayed on, he hadn't had the credibility in delivering
00:45:25.680 that U-turn, which needed to be delivered, and then we had not been able to fund our debt.
00:45:30.800 Could you not have first resigned, is what I'm asking?
00:45:34.480 That wouldn't have been a serious... If I'd resigned as well at that time,
00:45:39.520 then that would have created a crisis.
00:45:45.520 How much later did you resign?
00:45:47.600 Well, I think a few weeks later. But by then, Jeremy Hunt had been installed.
00:45:53.040 He was essentially following the Treasury orthodoxy. The markets had calmed down.
00:46:00.320 If I had resigned at that moment, when there was about to be a cliff edge on... Because this is
00:46:06.640 another issue. The Bank of England governor, on finding a solution for these LDIs, set a cliff edge.
00:46:15.360 Rather than saying that the Bank of England would support
00:46:18.160 into the medium term, he created a cliff edge, which was the following Monday.
00:46:23.760 Which created, again, a speculation cycle by the markets.
00:46:29.440 So I think it would have been a dereliction of duty, frankly, if I had stood down at that time as well.
00:46:35.200 I mean, I instinctively knew that I wasn't much longer for this world.
00:46:39.600 But the idea that I would just leave the whole thing in a terrible situation and resign,
00:46:50.560 I don't think that would have been the right thing to do.
00:46:53.440 Looking back at your time and power, what would you change?
00:47:00.080 I think the biggest thing I could have changed is whether I ran in the leadership election, because...
00:47:05.040 Do you regret that?
00:47:06.800 Well, I think, knowing what I know now, I think I was in a pretty impossible situation.
00:47:15.200 That there were the types of changes that Britain needed.
00:47:19.680 Probably needed a longer run-up to prepare.
00:47:24.480 And they needed...
00:47:27.840 Well, they probably need now, I believe, a sort of full electoral mandate to deliver.
00:47:32.960 And, you know, I knew it would be difficult, but as I said, I didn't realise how ruthless
00:47:42.560 the sort of forces of the economic establishment would be in taking it on.
00:47:47.200 But there were lots of small things I could have changed about the way we
00:47:52.800 delivered, you know, communicated, etc.
00:47:55.360 But I think it was pretty much impossible to actually deliver that programme that autumn,
00:48:03.760 because of the lack of support for it, both within and outside the government.
00:48:10.960 I mean, it was even hard, you know, it's back to the point we were talking about earlier.
00:48:14.480 It was even hard finding external economists who would back the policies up,
00:48:19.280 even though they exist, it's just not a fashionable thing to believe.
00:48:24.960 Some people in Britain are still saying, you know, the government's not big enough.
00:48:28.000 I mean, it's absolutely incredible when we spend 45% on GDP, but people are arguing for
00:48:34.400 industrial policies, they're arguing for more government spending in every possible area.
00:48:39.360 We're not in a broad atmosphere where supply side economics are seen as the logical thing,
00:48:46.560 which is what they were seen as in the 80s.
00:48:49.440 So, I mean, could I have done something?
00:48:54.240 Yeah, I think the other question is, is there anybody who could have gone in
00:49:03.040 in that?
00:49:04.560 Because, you know, if there was a possible way of doing it, I didn't have the skill set to do it,
00:49:09.200 frankly.
00:49:09.600 I mean, is there somebody who could have gone in that autumn and delivered those policies?
00:49:16.560 Well, I don't think they exist.
00:49:21.280 But what's certainly true is that no other prime minister has successfully cut taxes.
00:49:32.080 I did actually manage to reverse the health and social care levy, which was going to be a new tax
00:49:37.520 imposed on people in Britain. I did do that in my time in office. But what we've seen
00:49:42.880 is constant pressure on the government to spend more and tax more.
00:49:46.560 Before you move on to a different subject, actually, on this thing, Liz, I'll be honest
00:49:51.200 with you. I like small government and I think low taxes are the way to grow the economy. So I agree
00:49:56.960 with you. But if you listen to someone like Matt Goodwin, who's a regular guest on our show, he's a
00:50:01.840 political analyst and pollster and all sorts of other things. He'll tell you the country is not
00:50:06.720 there. The country wants to be right on culture and left on economics. The country wants big government and
00:50:13.120 it wants to be socially conservative. That's where the majority of the public are at.
00:50:17.760 Is it possible that the reason the policies you and I actually quite like
00:50:21.920 are just that it's not what the British people want anymore? They want big daddy government to come
00:50:26.240 in and wipe the bomb. Well, I think it's true that people do want culturally conservative policies.
00:50:33.680 So he's absolutely right about that. He's right on immigration. He's right on wokery.
00:50:39.440 Mm hmm. But if we look, you know, why is the government big? Why is growth stagnant? Well,
00:50:47.200 one reason is net zero and the fact we're not doing things like fracking. One is very high regulation.
00:50:56.480 And certainly a lot of people I speak to in my constituency are frustrated, particularly about
00:51:01.600 the level of regulation on their small businesses or their farms. So I don't think the voters I speak
00:51:08.320 to are not crying out for more regulation on their business or more regulation on their farm,
00:51:12.400 and they're not crying out for higher taxes. I don't agree with Matthew Goodwin on that.
00:51:18.560 But they're not crying out for any of those things. But as we know, you know,
00:51:23.520 the general public often don't connect things. People will demand lower taxes and more money
00:51:29.200 for the NHS in one. Exactly. So this is, it's like the point about fracking. If you ask most people,
00:51:35.360 do you support fracking? I don't think support for it's very high. But if you ask people,
00:51:39.440 would you be prepared to allow fracking if it meant your energy bill is half what it was,
00:51:44.800 then they might support it. Yeah. So it's a question of communication.
00:51:48.640 Mm hmm. Liz, looking at the Conservative Party now,
00:51:52.560 I mean, to put it bluntly, they're in pretty dire straits, aren't they?
00:51:56.320 Well, the polls are not good. I mean, all I can say, though, is, you know, to me, like to me,
00:52:09.520 Conservative policies are still the right policies. We just need to show people we can deliver them
00:52:16.880 and be be clear about what what is the problem. I think that's the start of being able to make the
00:52:25.040 argument as Conservatives, saying, here's why we're not able to currently do this policy.
00:52:31.040 Here's what we're going to do to change it. I think we've got an opportunity to do that in our
00:52:35.360 manifesto. We've got an opportunity to do it with what we say. But we have to be honest about where
00:52:42.240 we are now. Because the average bloke or woman on the street will be going, like Constantine has said
00:52:48.720 many times, you've had 14 years to implement these policies. Why is it going to be any difference if I
00:52:53.920 put an X next to the Conservatives now? We need to explain why. So we have delivered
00:52:58.720 good policies in 14 years. So on education, we've improved English education. You can see
00:53:05.680 by the comparison with what's happened in Scotland that England's maths and reading results have got
00:53:10.720 better. We've delivered Brexit, which is a massive constitutional change. We've delivered trade deals.
00:53:17.920 We've been on the front line of supporting Ukraine. So we've done good things in our period in government.
00:53:23.520 But I think we should be honest and say, the reason we haven't been able to deliver
00:53:28.320 the other things that you, the British public, want, you know, the reason there's wokery in your
00:53:33.920 schools, or the reason we haven't been able to deliver on immigration is because we didn't change
00:53:42.240 enough of the Blair legacy. We should just say that now. We should say, we didn't change enough of the
00:53:47.360 Blair legacy. Of course, we should have realized that quicker. We were wrong to say Tony Blair,
00:53:54.240 you know, as some of the Cameroon said, we were wrong to say Tony Blair was the master. We were wrong to say
00:54:00.160 Cameron was the heir to Blair. Actually, these Blair policies, such as the Equality Act and the Human
00:54:06.240 Rights Act, are part of the problem. We now recognize that and we're going to deal with it.
00:54:11.600 And I think people, you know, the public are not stupid. You know, they appreciate honesty.
00:54:19.680 And it's not easy to be honest as a politician. You often get absolutely hammered, as I've discovered
00:54:24.320 myself. But I think we've got to, we've got to say it like it is. We've said, here are the good
00:54:28.400 things we've done. We recognize in these areas, we haven't done enough. And here's why. And this is
00:54:33.920 how we've changed. But also as well. Because by the way, Keir Starmer has got absolutely no answer
00:54:39.680 to any of these problems. He's got no analysis on why the economy isn't growing. He's got no analysis
00:54:45.760 on immigration. He's got no idea about what to do. But also, I was going to say, is there the
00:54:54.080 political will within the Conservative Party to change it? Because earlier in the interview,
00:54:57.920 you just alluded to the fact that some, there's a sizable portion of the party that don't,
00:55:04.160 that doesn't think this is a problem.
00:55:05.680 For those people, you know, I want to convince them. And I think others need to convince them.
00:55:11.680 I think we need to make the argument.
00:55:14.880 Fair enough.
00:55:16.320 As you can see, I'm an incorrigible optimist.
00:55:19.920 But you know, what's, what's the alternative here? What's the alternative of actually convincing
00:55:25.040 Conservative activists, Conservative members, Conservative politicians, that we need this
00:55:30.960 systemic change? I think that is what we have to do. That is what we have to do. That's the only
00:55:35.920 alternative. No, the only thing that will convince them, I think, is a crushing defeat of the next
00:55:40.240 election. That's what's going to happen. That's what will get them to realize that going along and
00:55:45.200 business as usual isn't going to work. Let's be honest, in the spirit of honesty, as I say,
00:55:51.760 I agree with many of the things that you support. But let's, we, the people who have that point of
00:55:57.440 view have not won the argument. The Conservative Party's time in government is coming to an end.
00:56:04.320 And I think it's, you know, your book, 10 years to save the West, you're going to have five years
00:56:09.520 of a star in my government. And then you'd hope to come in with, let's be honest, a whole bunch of
00:56:15.440 new MPs with a very different set of views. That's the only way this gets saved, isn't it?
00:56:19.440 Well, the book is 10 years to save the West. So I'm talking about
00:56:24.960 the problems we face haven't just faced Britain. You know, they're there in the US. A lot of the
00:56:30.240 bad ideas have actually been imported from the US. If you talk about eco-extremism, transgender,
00:56:37.120 you know, sort of gender ideology, all of this stuff has much of it been promoted in the US. If you
00:56:46.640 look at what's going on in Democrat cities with crime, you know, defunding the police,
00:56:50.720 et cetera, et cetera. So we also need to change what is happening in Western democracies overall.
00:57:00.800 And part of what my book is about is a warning to the US and saying, if you don't change the system,
00:57:08.480 if you allow this left-wing ideology to flourish in your institutions, you are not going to be able
00:57:15.680 to deliver conservative policies. This is not just a problem in Britain. And this is not just a battle
00:57:21.520 that's happening in Britain. It's happening in Australia. It's happening in Canada. And I want
00:57:27.040 people to learn from my experience. I want people to understand. I try and explain in the book what it's
00:57:33.280 actually like being there. The subtitle of my book in Britain is called The Only Conservative in the
00:57:39.280 Room because I was there with people like Biden, Trudeau. None of these people are conservatives.
00:57:45.440 And the ideology that they back is fundamentally undermining the West. So this is, to me,
00:57:52.400 a big battle that conservatives have to win. Will we win the battle this year? Maybe, maybe not.
00:57:59.200 But we've got to keep fighting it. Liz, it's been a pleasure. Thank you so much for coming on the
00:58:05.520 show. The final question we always ask... Before we go to our locals and your questions. Yes.
00:58:11.280 Is what's the one thing we're not talking about as a society that we really should be?
00:58:16.560 I think we have talked about it here, but I don't think we're talking about democracy enough
00:58:33.840 and how under threat it is. And that is what is ultimately... I believe that empowering people more,
00:58:42.320 having a much more direct relationship with the electorate is what will save the West.
00:58:48.080 And what does that mean? What it means is that most people in Britain actually understand what
00:58:55.200 needs to be done. The problem is the transmission mechanism. The problem is that this bureaucratic
00:59:00.960 state... And it's wider. It's not just the state. It's what's going on in big corporations,
00:59:06.800 what's going on in charities, what's going on in the broader sort of London bubble. You know,
00:59:13.760 that needs to be challenged. Perfect. Well, head on over to locals where we ask,
00:59:19.200 Liz Truss, the former prime minister, your questions.
00:59:23.120 While conservatives in the conservative party... Which is put in inverted commas.
00:59:27.680 Yes. Being held hostage to the progressive agenda.
00:59:31.840 Broadway's smash hit, The Neil Diamond Musical, A Beautiful Noise, is coming to Toronto. The true
00:59:41.120 story of a kid from Brooklyn destined for something more, featuring all the songs you love,
00:59:45.840 including America, Forever in Blue Jeans, and Sweet Caroline. Like Jersey Boys and Beautiful,
00:59:51.680 the next musical mega hit is here. The Neil Diamond Musical, A Beautiful Noise. Now through June 7th,
00:59:58.000 it's 2026 at the Princess of Wales Theatre. Get tickets at Mirvish.com.