TRIGGERnometry - September 16, 2026


"Reform is Screwed"- Dan Hodges

9⧸11: The Full Story, 25 Years On with Richard Miniter

Episode Stats


Length

2 hours and 3 minutes

Words per minute

176.42

Word count

21,732

Sentence count

876

People

Guests:
Also mentioned:

Harmful content

Misogyny

8

sentences flagged

Toxicity

46

sentences flagged

Hate speech

75

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 .
00:00:01.000 What is your assessment of reform? 1.00
00:00:03.000 They're screwed. The polls are overestimating reform support. 0.98
00:00:07.000 There is absolutely no way, in my view, it can get from where it is now
00:00:10.000 to actually being potentially a party of government.
00:00:14.000 There is now a clear perception within reform that Nigel Farage
00:00:17.000 is coming to the end of his leadership.
00:00:19.000 So you think he will leave soon?
00:00:20.000 I do, yes. 0.87
00:00:21.000 The sanctions on Israeli settlements, his defence of welfare, 0.72
00:00:26.000 is part of a broader strategy of shoring up his left flank
00:00:30.420 and that with the split on the right,
00:00:32.540 that will be enough to win him a majority.
00:00:35.520 I am pretty certain that what Andy Burnham is currently doing
00:00:38.680 is preparing for a snap general election at some point next year.
00:00:44.660 The British government wants to force YouTube
00:00:47.360 to downrank independent content like ours
00:00:50.740 and replace it with approved messaging from the mainstream media.
00:00:54.800 The only way you can fight back and continue to enjoy our content is to make sure you're subscribed.
00:01:01.300 Like this video and comment below to have your say on what the government is doing.
00:01:06.800 Dan Hodges, welcome to Trigonometry.
00:01:08.920 Thank you.
00:01:09.540 Before we get into the conversation, tell us a little bit about your background and your story and how you come to be sitting here today with us.
00:01:16.720 Yeah, well, I used to work for the Labour Party.
00:01:19.660 I mean, I used to, to be honest, I used to work for my mother, and she was a Labour MP, so worked for her for five years in the 1997 election.
00:01:28.920 Then I went off, did the sort of the PR consultancy circuit for a bit, and then somehow, I'm not entirely sure how, stumbled into journalism and political commentary, which is how I ended up here.
00:01:43.740 Yeah. And you're one of the people I see in the media being very upbeat and positive about Andy Burnham, which is why it'd be interesting for us to chat with you. You're frowning a bit. Is that an unfair...
00:01:56.760 No, no, no. I mean, I think it's being upbeat. I mean, I think last time we spoke, I think it was before he became prime minister, wasn't he? I think Keir Star announced it.
00:02:07.900 It was very clear that he was about to be.
00:02:10.000 And we had you on with Julia.
00:02:11.760 We had the discussion and obviously at the time there were already predictions of imminent sort of doom and gloom and disaster for Andy Burnham.
00:02:20.440 And I just sort of posed a little bit of a corrective saying I wasn't entirely sure that in the short term his premiership was going to collapse quite as precipitously as maybe Julia thought at the time.
00:02:32.200 And that's basically sort of my analysis.
00:02:36.560 I mean, I was saying before that one of the things
00:02:38.960 in relation to Andy Burnham is he's the first prime minister
00:02:41.040 who I know, who I kind of knew him properly
00:02:44.980 before he became prime minister,
00:02:46.940 which, as I said, we used to work together
00:02:48.880 at the House of Commons, and as I said,
00:02:51.640 that has the benefit of making me feel sort of very old
00:02:54.220 and also a great underachiever.
00:02:57.120 So there is a, you know, and I've been completely honest about it,
00:03:00.740 as a result of that, I quite like him.
00:03:02.280 I hope he does well.
00:03:04.220 So what's he like then?
00:03:05.960 He's broadly what you see, actually.
00:03:08.960 There's no sort of great hidden side to Andy.
00:03:16.360 I mean, a lot of people I know are sort of talking about,
00:03:19.600 oh, you know, the sort of the northern,
00:03:22.240 I'm from up north sort of shtick is starting to grey.
00:03:25.560 It's not a shtick, it's who he actually is.
00:03:30.120 He really is a northern who bangs on about being northern.
00:03:32.760 That is the type.
00:03:33.560 He really is from up north.
00:03:35.960 And that very much shapes his political outlook.
00:03:40.960 He's amiable, he's someone you can have a chat with.
00:03:44.960 But also, and I think this is one of the misconceptions that's been about him,
00:03:49.960 and I think we touched on that at the time, there was this whole narrative,
00:03:51.960 oh wait till he comes into Westminster and he's going to find out
00:03:54.960 being Prime Minister is going to be very different from being Mayor of Manchester.
00:03:57.960 But the point was, as I said, we worked together for the best part of five years.
00:04:02.960 he's been in politics basically all his life, and he's a very, very political creature.
00:04:07.440 So this idea of some sort of baby in the woods who'd come into Westminster and go,
00:04:10.360 oh my God, what's going on here?
00:04:12.680 That wasn't, I never expected that to be the outcome.
00:04:17.300 And at the moment, it's not, in my view, turning out to be the reality.
00:04:21.680 Although, as I think I also said before, the reality is whatever you think of Andy Burnham,
00:04:27.300 his skills, whatever, the political fundamentals are no different to him than they were for Keir Starmer.
00:04:32.960 and that's going to be the problem.
00:04:35.100 Well, this is the interesting bit,
00:04:36.620 because you talk to people,
00:04:39.140 well, Francis and I were talking about this over lunch, right?
00:04:41.460 It's like you talk to people, you go,
00:04:43.460 oh, you quite like it, you quite like Burnham.
00:04:45.460 Yeah, yeah, quite, why'd you like him?
00:04:47.420 Because he seems like a nice guy.
00:04:49.180 He seems like a nice guy to me.
00:04:51.060 Genuinely, he seems like a perfectly nice guy.
00:04:52.880 He seems to me like a bit of a people pleaser, to be honest.
00:04:55.460 He seems like he's keen to promise everything to everyone.
00:04:59.180 There's a headline today, I think you were showing me,
00:05:00.920 what was it, him saying national defense can't take precedence over, no, national security can't
00:05:08.420 take precedence over social security, which is fundamentally trade-off denialism, as I call it,
00:05:14.100 which is you pretend everything is possible all at once, which it isn't. But the interesting thing
00:05:19.340 is you talk about his agenda. What is his agenda? What is his vision? What does Andy Burnham believe
00:05:26.040 about the direction the country should go in well i think there are i think there are two things i
00:05:30.860 mean just picking up on what you said about the sort of the denialism it's a slightly more
00:05:35.560 sophisticated position than that because and and i've got to be honest i'm in a very much in a
00:05:43.160 minority view at the moment i am pretty certain that what what andy burnham is currently doing
00:05:48.280 is preparing for a snap general election at some point some point next year and so everything that
00:05:55.400 he is doing at the moment, he's basically starting to align with that and maximise his
00:06:00.240 opportunity to successfully call that election. Of which, although, you know, the terminology
00:06:07.880 that he used in Prime Minister's question is, yes, he was a very bad blunder and obviously gave
00:06:12.420 can be bad or not the opportunity to immediately pounce on him and his other political critics
00:06:18.000 to pounce on him. There is a strategy behind what he was saying, which was, and we saw it
00:06:25.420 also with the statements that was made earlier in the week about the sanctions on Israeli
00:06:32.080 settlements. It's part of a broader strategy that his defensive welfare is part of a broader
00:06:38.860 strategy of shoring up his left flank as we approach the election. Because his calculation,
00:06:46.240 The calculation within Downing Street is if he can shore up his left flank, if he can pull enough votes away from the Greens, if he can pull enough votes away from what I would call the sort of radical Islamist splinter parties, if he can pull away some soft Lib Dems, if he can mobilise the anti-reform coalition which is forming in the country,
00:07:13.880 then he could probably get to around about 31-32% in the opinion polls
00:07:18.540 and that with the split on the right
00:07:20.660 that will be enough to win him a majority
00:07:23.960 that will last him for a subsequent five years
00:07:27.660 and give him a mandate to start to address
00:07:29.800 some of the broader issues that he's identified.
00:07:34.560 So what he's doing needs to be seen within that context
00:07:37.420 in terms of him setting out
00:07:40.020 I mean he's kind of sort of setting out his stall a little bit
00:07:42.400 So obviously, we had a statement about ending, you know, eradicating rough sleeping, which will obviously not be done, you know, with it over the short term, if at all.
00:07:52.300 He's identified the issue, obviously, of social care, which is very much a priority for him.
00:07:57.160 And as I said, obviously, he keeps identifying more broadly a broader sort of distribution of wealth, to put it simplistically, from the South to the North and to the regions.
00:08:08.300 But those sort of, if you like, big ticket items are going to be, if you like, the second stage, as he sees it, in the Burnham Premiership.
00:08:16.360 And what we're seeing at the moment is him basically preparing the groundwork to, as I say, calling an election next year and securing a personal mandate and a workable majority.
00:08:27.320 So just so that I'm hearing you correctly, what you think we're seeing is the reason he's not, you know, giving you the full manifesto and all the details and everything he's going to do is he's actually that's not the job right now.
00:08:40.860 The job right now is to, like you say, see off the Greens, basically, and the far left, get them into the fold, call an election with announce a few popular policy, you know, the cap bus fares and all this stuff.
00:08:56.180 sort of the low throw a few sweets to the to the masses call an election win and at that point you
00:09:02.180 start to actually implement yeah i mean the other thing is i mean i i i've been so i'm being slightly
00:09:08.420 over generous in interpretation the other thing is he hasn't got strategy worked out yet i mean
00:09:14.500 that's now that's a product of a number of things product of the fact that in the run-up to his um
00:09:21.700 him sort of succeeding Keir Starmer a lot of his effort and obviously his focus was on
00:09:29.300 and of those around him was on the mechanics that enabled him to enter Downing Street you know get
00:09:34.900 rid of Keir Starmer at the Downing Street in the first place and if you remember the prevailing
00:09:39.460 narrative sort of at the start of this year um was kind of Andy I mean I remember you know debating
00:09:46.740 this and people saying this you know Andy Byrne doesn't have a path you know Andy Byrne doesn't
00:09:51.940 really have a path to Downing Street Keir Starmer's going to be here for for the next couple of
00:09:56.500 couple of years so that was a big focus of what he's uh of his attention second thing was just
00:10:03.780 the practicalities of the transition timetable he and his team thought they would have up until
00:10:09.140 just the beginning of Labour Party conference at which point Keir Starmer would step down
00:10:13.620 and they would have the the preceding months to sort of put a strategy in place obviously they
00:10:18.820 didn't have that opportunity so they're kind of making stuff up on the hoof which is again
00:10:23.860 why they're sort of going for the lower lower hanging fruit in terms of in terms of policy
00:10:28.420 development but the other thing is as i say he is facing the same strategic political dilemmas
00:10:34.900 that his predecessor and other prime listeners have faced which is how do you actually solve
00:10:40.180 the problems how do you solve the problem of the small boats how do you deal with the with the fact
00:10:46.580 that britain is basically a country that is that is broke how do you deal with the threat of putin
00:10:52.940 how do you deal with the big strategic issues and the reality is andy burnham's no closer to
00:10:58.020 answering those questions than than anyone else and the really worrying thing for me dan is this
00:11:04.520 is you spoke about being broke i think it's genuinely worse than that i think we're on a
00:11:09.680 financial precipice. I don't think either political party has done anything really to
00:11:14.960 address it. I mean, just look at the facts. 2.9 trillion in debt, 100% debt to GDP ratio,
00:11:21.120 a currency that's lost around about 40% in value since 2020. We have doubled the debt that we had
00:11:28.760 in 2008, double the debt after the financial crisis. Wages haven't gone up in real time.
00:11:35.560 and I'm looking at him.
00:11:38.860 I'm going, how are you going to turn this around?
00:11:42.480 And then he goes, oh, he hasn't ruled out tax prices. 0.67
00:11:45.300 And there's me thinking, well, we're even more screwed 0.70
00:11:48.060 than we were before. 0.92
00:11:50.040 Yeah, apart from that, everything's fine.
00:11:51.480 But yeah, no, I mean, that's exactly right.
00:11:56.000 And I think anybody who thinks Andy Burnham
00:12:00.380 is just suddenly going to go, you know, click his fingers
00:12:02.660 and then magically solve all of these problems is deluding themselves.
00:12:08.280 I mean, I think, you know, I talked about the big strategic problems
00:12:12.700 that he's facing, the country's facing.
00:12:15.160 The reality is these are, at the moment, seemingly intractable problems for a reason
00:12:23.080 because nobody's actually come up with a, you know, of any political persuasion
00:12:27.720 has managed to come up with a solution to them.
00:12:31.340 I mean, the one thing I would say as well, though, you know, Andy Burnham is operating with the same constraints that his predecessors operated with, within, which is he has to try and find a solution to these political problems, but also do in a way that is politically viable.
00:12:48.720 In other words, he has to find a way of reducing the deficit whilst protecting public services, whilst reducing the tax burden, whilst stimulating growth, whilst reassuring the bond markets.
00:13:05.280 Now, if any of us has got answers on the postcard, please, if there's an easy solution to doing that.
00:13:10.480 You can't do that.
00:13:11.080 No, and also, I mean, but also a slightly more serious point,
00:13:14.520 and also, and this is the other thing,
00:13:16.640 against the backdrop of a sort of a political debate
00:13:23.340 in which, obviously, populism and the idea
00:13:29.180 that there were really, really simple, easy solutions,
00:13:32.120 if only our politicians had the courage or wherewithal
00:13:35.100 to just pull the very obvious levers,
00:13:38.020 against a backdrop in which that sort of political philosophy
00:13:43.100 has gained, for the reasons we're all aware of,
00:13:47.560 has gained significant sort of political traction
00:13:49.400 and a degree of currency.
00:13:52.480 So you put all those things together.
00:13:54.760 And as I said, you'll say I'm being positive and optimistic
00:13:57.660 about Andy Burnham on a sort of narrow level, yes.
00:14:01.180 But as I say, at the moment, I'm not entirely sure
00:14:05.600 how any politician can find an easy solution.
00:14:08.020 Well, this is a problem. And I think the answer to the question lies in the words easy solution,
00:14:14.780 which is there's no easy solution. And unfortunately, in life, there are a lot of
00:14:21.080 solutions which aren't easy. For instance, if you've got cancer, the solution is chemotherapy.
00:14:28.220 I don't think there is anybody on this planet who would think that chemo is an easy medicine to take.
00:14:33.700 And I think this country is at a position where it needs some kind of intervention, because the way I see it and the people that I talk to, friends of ours who are in economics or in finance, they have made it pretty clear that we are heading towards a financial precipice.
00:14:51.580 yeah i i i don't disagree with that the thing i would maybe slightly character is sort of
00:14:58.640 slightly change the characterization is you're talking about you know there need to be hard
00:15:03.540 choices and i don't disagree with that but for a politician be it andy burnham and any other
00:15:08.600 politician it's not simply a case of saying right there is a very hard choice you have to take take
00:15:14.800 it because the reality is and again this is against the backdrop of the growth of populism
00:15:22.680 but will be the case even without that as a politician you can't take a hard choice
00:15:27.420 unless you get the endorsement of the electorate to take that choice so let's take it let's take
00:15:34.040 an issue such as for example the triple lot you speak to a senior politician of any political
00:15:39.860 party privately they will tell you triple lock is unsustainable but they will equally tell you
00:15:46.500 just explain for people that triple lock well it's it you tell me i mean what where my understanding
00:15:52.200 of the triple like it basically pensions are always going up yeah basically simply simplistically
00:15:58.320 it's a commitment that the pensions will be guaranteed i think it's a it's a hangover from
00:16:04.260 i think it was george osborne wasn't it was it george osborne who first introduced it was it
00:16:07.880 I can't remember. It's been around so long. But you speak to any of them and they say it's not
00:16:12.860 sustainable. It's not financially sustainable. But they equally say, if I stand up and say that,
00:16:18.000 I'm not going to get elected. So what do you want me to do? And therein lies the dilemma.
00:16:26.520 What do you do? I mean, so many problems that are laid at the door of modern politicians,
00:16:34.080 they haven't had the courage to deal with it or whatever. It's not that they haven't got the
00:16:37.580 don't identify the problem in terms of all they don't want to do them is they don't think they'll
00:16:42.980 get a political a political mandate to do it and if you're not going to get a political mandate to
00:16:47.460 do it if you're not going to get the approval of the electorate by adopting a policy you may be
00:16:52.060 brave but you know your political opponents are immediately going to jump up and say ah ha ha
00:16:55.900 well we're not doing that and the people we don't worry we'll protect you know pensioners will
00:17:01.240 protect your triple lot and we know how pensioners pensioners vote as a proportion of the overall
00:17:06.360 electorate what do you do I mean look at the look at the I mean as I said Andy Burnham has
00:17:13.200 has identified and put the whole issue of social care back back on the political agenda because
00:17:19.460 it is something he cares about I remember where are we now when was it so it's the 2017 election
00:17:25.940 so almost a decade ago there was a common there was again there was a settled political consensus
00:17:31.020 that social care and the social care crisis finally had to be dealt and if it wasn't dealt
00:17:36.920 with we were we were facing catastrophe. Theresa May went into that election an election where it 0.99
00:17:44.260 was it was widely perceived she would win she would wipe Jeremy Corbyn out she took the decision
00:17:50.620 right I may lose a few seats on the back of this policy but I think I need to grasp the nettle I
00:17:57.380 need to be brave I need to say right we're going to introduce I'm going to get to grips with the
00:18:04.160 issue of social care Labour turn around accuser of introducing a death tax her support collapses
00:18:09.060 with the result we all we all know so you know when we're talking about there's a difference
00:18:17.140 between a hard decision and what is a politically impossible position that's the that's the that's
00:18:23.360 the problem facing Andy Burnham and all other politicians at the moment. If you only read one
00:18:28.480 side of the news, you're not informed, you're being curated. That's why I use Ground News.
00:18:33.780 Every day they gather thousands of stories from across the political spectrum, compare how
00:18:38.300 different outlets are covering the same story side by side, and contextualize it, including
00:18:43.480 specific differences in how each side is reporting it. That's how you see what whole audiences are
00:18:48.820 not being told. My favorite feature is their blind spot feed. Every day, it flags upwards of 20
00:18:54.360 stories that are being ignored by either the left or the right. Let's look at some examples. Follow
00:18:58.820 along at ground.news slash trigonometry. Take this story. A Pew Research survey found that 56%
00:19:05.160 of Americans now support banning social media for anyone under 16, with a majority of Republicans
00:19:11.780 and a majority of Democrats behind it. Genuine bipartisan agreement is rare enough to be
00:19:17.000 newsworthy on its own. And yet coverage came almost entirely from the right. The left barely
00:19:22.180 touched on it. On the other hand, look at this. An AP poll found that 66% of Americans now say
00:19:28.000 democracy is central to what it means to be American, down from 80% five years ago. That is
00:19:33.840 a serious story about how the country sees itself, especially on its 250th anniversary. And it got
00:19:39.760 three times more coverage from the left than it did from the right. Ground news puts all of this
00:19:44.180 in one place. Headline comparisons, bias breakdowns, ownership insights, and context so you can
00:19:50.240 actually understand what's going on, not just react to what you're told. Go to ground.news
00:19:55.940 slash trigonometry or click the link in the description of this episode. Get 40% off their
00:20:00.900 vantage plan, the same one that we use, and stop being managed by the media. And look, it's a great
00:20:06.700 point, but eventually, Dan, you either get treatment or you die to go back to the cancer
00:20:12.660 a metaphor and at this point financially i don't think people in this country understand where we
00:20:20.240 are because we're about to go broke and when that happens it's going to make these interventions
00:20:27.160 look like the proverbial walk in the park yeah but i mean i think whatever intervention we're
00:20:32.620 gonna i mean look i was having this conversation the other day i mean we can all have an argument
00:20:36.160 about how we go into this space.
00:20:39.000 But one of the things I find incredible is
00:20:41.320 the issue of COVID and lockdown
00:20:46.800 seems to have been erased
00:20:49.460 by some, erased from the national consciousness.
00:20:52.460 It's like, I don't know if you've seen the film
00:20:53.800 Men in Black, where it goes at the end like that.
00:20:56.280 That's almost been done in relation to COVID.
00:20:58.080 So I remember at the time having discussions,
00:21:00.460 we had a situation where the British economy
00:21:02.720 was essentially nationalised for 12 to 18 months,
00:21:05.600 just everything we had a package of financial intervention that mirrored the sort of financial
00:21:11.820 intervention that that you know took the country through the second world war and defeated Hitler
00:21:17.340 and it was but it was very clear that amount of money you know that the vast amounts that were
00:21:25.780 being spent on supporting the economy in the country at the time would have to be paid back
00:21:33.480 And that's true. But no one's talking about that.
00:21:37.760 So in terms of what you're saying, the reality is you don't actually need to convince any senior politician in this country about what you're saying.
00:21:49.700 Andy Burnham, John Healy, they know the state of the public finances.
00:21:54.160 So does Kemi Badnock and her team.
00:21:57.260 So actually does Nigel Farage and Robert Jenner.
00:22:01.040 it the point is are the british people currently prepared to vote for a political party that says
00:22:10.400 i am going to take the radical surgery you're talking about yeah you do need surgery and you
00:22:17.120 at some point you will have to get surgery but if your strategy is to run up to the to use your
00:22:21.700 analogy run up to the the sort of the cancer specialist who's performing that surgery
00:22:26.580 punch them in the face half a dozen times to say,
00:22:29.160 treat me, treat me. 0.99
00:22:32.000 Is that going to work?
00:22:34.100 That's the situation that the politicians are looking at the moment.
00:22:37.260 They're looking at saying, you know, Andy Burnham's sitting there thinking,
00:22:40.760 well, OK, what if I do say I'm going to cut welfare by 20 billion
00:22:45.080 and spend on it, you know, building drones to send to Ukraine?
00:22:50.060 Is that really going to get the support of the people
00:22:53.460 I need to vote for me at the next election?
00:22:54.920 he's not even doing that Dan
00:22:56.760 he hasn't ruled out tax increases
00:22:59.020 and we've already got
00:23:01.200 millionaires leaving this country
00:23:02.920 don't point at me mate
00:23:04.100 I am neither
00:23:06.740 a millionaire nor leaving this country
00:23:08.940 but
00:23:09.280 that is objectively a disaster
00:23:13.200 we've already got a
00:23:14.980 gaping hole in the public finances
00:23:16.560 and you're not even
00:23:17.880 prepared to do even
00:23:21.060 the most simple
00:23:22.520 I think this is a classic
00:23:24.640 example you're talking about um you know people leave you know wealthy people leaving the country
00:23:29.700 i think we've got a bigger we've got a bigger problem than wealthy people leaving the country
00:23:34.740 we've got a really big problem at the moment trying to get wealthy people into the country
00:23:38.300 right yeah well it's the same problem well it's not really i mean the the reality i mean people
00:23:43.080 maybe leave leaving for a variety of reasons of which i think you would argue sort of tax rates
00:23:48.900 Tax, crime, productivity, employment laws, a variety of issues, but equally there are still a lot of wealthy people who want to get into the country but can't get into the country because of where the immigration debate is at the moment.
00:24:09.280 So there's that issue. The other issue in relation to tax, Andy Burnham is in a situation where, and John Healy are in a situation where they obviously need to deal with the financial deficit, the huge debt mountain, but also have to stimulate the economy.
00:24:31.720 Now, as we know, before then, there was a prime minister who thought she had a very simple solution to this, which was to simultaneously cut taxes and stimulate the economy.
00:24:43.600 And it ended up in a disaster.
00:24:47.060 Similarly, it comes back to the issue I'm talking about, which is you need whatever policy agenda you pursue, you need public consent.
00:24:54.920 You are not simply going to get public consent for absolutely slashing Britain's public services.
00:25:00.820 because at the moment a significant amount of the public discontent you will both hear this
00:25:06.100 all the time i hear is things don't work you know you call the police the police don't come you call
00:25:11.700 for an ambulance an ambulance doesn't come if you get on a train it doesn't work it it breaks down
00:25:17.860 so this you know and i keep hearing that you know from people on the right you know the state's too
00:25:23.620 big the state's too big we've got to shrink the state rich public don't want the state shrunk
00:25:28.100 in that way they don't want fewer police officers they don't want fewer ambulances
00:25:31.940 doctors nurses teachers similarly i hear from people on the right you know we need to you know
00:25:38.500 we need to stimulate the market go out and speak to people about what they think about whether
00:25:42.900 whether or not the water companies should be in public or private ownership ask them about what
00:25:47.540 they think about whether the energy companies should be in public private ownership so again
00:25:53.060 Then what you regard as the solutions and what I may regard as some of the solutions are not necessarily what not just a majority of the British people think, but sufficient number of the British people think to enable any political party to actually get into government to implement those solutions in the first place.
00:26:09.860 Well, right. And this is you've made the point that I whenever Francis and I are arguing back and forth about this, people like to blame politicians. I'm sorry. I blame the people.
00:26:19.340 we get the politicians that we elect and if you believe that the solution to a massive debt
00:26:28.300 problem is to to have a bigger state and for the state to do more that costs money there by the
00:26:35.560 way i'm not someone who like wants to slash everything and have zero government i don't
00:26:39.440 think that's true at all you actually need a lot of state capacity and certain things to do anything
00:26:43.420 and government borrowing to invest in productive things at certain points can stimulate the
00:26:49.160 economy and is important. But when you're already at the debt levels that we're at, that's going to
00:26:55.320 be a challenge. And I mean, your point is also right. I mean, look at Starmer. Starmer tried
00:27:00.200 to cut welfare. He tried. And it was Labour backbenchers that stopped him. It wasn't anyone
00:27:04.440 else. So I completely agree with you. I mean, I think the public... Let me just finish this
00:27:11.320 point about the metaphor, because I think the cancer metaphor that France has started was
00:27:14.400 exactly right i think the patient is in denial and that's why we are where we are the patient
00:27:20.460 thinks he has no cancer the patient thinks we're you know we're ticking along okay yeah look i've
00:27:25.520 got a bit of a pain back here and you know every morning i get up and i don't quite have the energy
00:27:29.620 but i haven't got cancer i'm just yeah you know it's i'm aging what's a little blood in the urine
00:27:34.180 between friends yeah no that's that's what's going on absolutely but also to but to extend
00:27:39.900 In the analogy, you may be absolutely right, but if the patient doesn't give them concern
00:27:44.480 for the surgery, there's nothing the surgeon can do about it.
00:27:48.100 What I was going to say is I wouldn't necessarily characterize it as, you know, blame the electric
00:27:52.600 because this is part of the problem.
00:27:54.440 I can entirely understand where the electric are coming from.
00:27:58.020 I mean, we had a degree of relative prosperity throughout the bulk of the 1990s, but for
00:28:08.380 the quarter of a century that's followed, things have got progressively harder and harder
00:28:13.760 in a variety of ways for a variety of reasons. For a lot of people, in particular, a group
00:28:21.480 of the electorate that I would simplistically call working people, who have been at best
00:28:27.520 ignored and patronised by politicians of all persuasions, or treated with outright contempt.
00:28:38.380 And at every stage throughout that, we had a global economic downturn.
00:28:47.660 I think one of the Gulf Wars, we had a global crash.
00:28:53.020 Then we had a banking crisis.
00:28:56.700 We obviously then had COVID and we're trying to recover from that.
00:29:01.340 that. The various crises that have occurred are myriad. But there is one consistent thing,
00:29:10.780 which is at the end of these crises, the people who have been asked to pay the most
00:29:16.160 and bear the worst, the highest burden, in my view, have been the people who have been least
00:29:23.180 able to afford it. I would take issue with you about the issue of, oh my God, it's outrageous
00:29:30.600 that Labour are talking about about raising taxes if we are going to have a situation which I think
00:29:36.680 we both agree on that the country is going to again to use a simplistic analogy tighten its
00:29:44.000 belts I think it's absolutely imperative that some of the richest people in society are asked
00:29:49.980 to pay a little bit more in the same way that throughout the quarter of a century I was talking
00:29:54.660 about working people in this country have been asked to pay a little bit more you know we saw
00:29:59.700 this during the period of austerity. Broadly speaking, the wealthiest were broadly insulated
00:30:06.540 from that austerity, and working people weren't. Well, the wealthy insulated because they have
00:30:11.780 wealth, but they're not insulated by the government. They're insulated by the fact that they have
00:30:17.420 money. Well, no, they were insulated. Let me give you an example. At precisely the point when the
00:30:22.280 country was being told we had to experience austerity, the government of the day, George
00:30:27.580 Jospor and David Cameron decided to cut the top rate of tax from 50% to 45%.
00:30:32.260 Well, what's that not doing?
00:30:34.120 Because that's not insulating the wealthiest.
00:30:37.820 At the same time as working people in various other forms of taxation
00:30:42.500 and the erosion of their public services were shouldering a very significant...
00:30:48.820 Yeah, I mean, look, David, we're going back into ancient history for many people,
00:30:53.520 But the Lib Dems, one of the benefits of having the Lib Dems in the coalition is they force the raising of the tax-free threshold.
00:31:01.980 And so people at the bottom, and I was one of those people at the bottom at the time, so I remember, well, got a big leg up.
00:31:08.400 But the broader point I was going to make is, I mean, the top 10% of people in this country pay, I think, something like 60% of all income and capital gains tax.
00:31:17.740 so the the this narrative about how wealthy people or people it's not even wealthy people
00:31:25.120 it's people who are earning more than others are protected or insulated no they they pay
00:31:30.040 a hell of a lot no but but but yeah i see this argument used a lot and i i get the point but
00:31:35.500 the reality is firstly you have to in my view look at what people are paying in in proportionate
00:31:44.720 terms, not just in relation to their actual income, but the actual experience of their
00:31:49.060 lives. So if somebody who, say somebody in a working class community, let's use an example,
00:32:02.720 their child, because of the various things, their child can't afford to get a house of their own
00:32:07.700 or whatever, means their child has to move in, they have to support their, continue to support
00:32:12.160 their child etc etc that has a direct and significant impact on on their lives if a
00:32:19.440 wealthy person has to sell one of their private jets so they only now have come on three private
00:32:27.820 jets you're just being silly now well no i'm not i mean that is no but that but but this is the
00:32:32.740 thing so you want to bring in a private jet tax no no i'm not i'm not because that's not what 0.92
00:32:36.400 we're arguing i'm not making i'm not making a specific policy point i'm making a broader point
00:32:40.520 I'm contesting the argument you made that, oh, everybody across the board has been facing, during the years of austerity, everyone across the board has been facing the same burden.
00:32:53.380 And even the argument you put forward, which is what wealthy people pay as an overall proportion of the tax take from the state, it's not about that.
00:33:05.460 It's about the direct impact of a period of austerity, of economic hardship, of social hardship.
00:33:14.040 And the reality is, the wealthiest, as you conceded, you said, because they're wealthy, have been insulated from that.
00:33:22.780 By their own financial success.
00:33:26.820 Sometimes because of their own financial success, and other times because of wealth that they've been able to inherit.
00:33:33.220 Yeah, for some people, sure.
00:33:34.300 But the point is, regardless of how or why,
00:33:41.140 we can have a debate about whether every wealthy person
00:33:43.320 in this country is wealthy because of their great entrepreneurship
00:33:46.400 and innovation.
00:33:48.900 There are many examples of that.
00:33:50.540 There are other examples of people who are wealthy
00:33:52.000 because they're basically dodgiest, whatever, or whatever.
00:33:57.220 Yeah, absolutely.
00:33:59.880 But taking it back to the broader argument,
00:34:04.300 it doesn't really matter what we can have the debate about how they created their wealth
00:34:12.340 the reality is if you turn around now you were talking about hard choices if you turn around now
00:34:19.200 and say to the electorate as the politicians have to do we're going to make hard choices now some
00:34:25.040 really hard choices we're going to have to cut back on public spending you are going to you are
00:34:30.680 really going to have to tighten your belt. Oh, but by the way, I'm really sorry. You know that
00:34:35.780 guy who's a billionaire. We'd love to try and get him to tighten his belt, but we can't because if
00:34:41.420 he does, he's going to go and live in Montenegro. So sorry, folks. I'm sorry. The British people 1.00
00:34:47.120 aren't going to put up with that anymore. That's the political reality.
00:34:51.080 Okay. Well, then the British people should know that what they're going to get as a consequence
00:34:55.440 of that is a fiscal crisis when external lenders who are giving us the money we're currently spending
00:35:01.960 go and tell them go and go and tell i'm doing it right now i'm doing it but i don't know how many
00:35:07.260 of them are listening these are people who have heard this every time for the last and they don't
00:35:12.400 care and that's why they're going to get the fiscal crisis they didn't it's not that they
00:35:16.080 didn't care they did care they understood and they said fine okay let's give it a go and they
00:35:20.700 did they did tighten their belts they did tighten their belts on what happened that well austerity
00:35:26.260 cut spending by like one percent it didn't do anything to reduce our debt or even our deficit
00:35:31.020 which has kept growing my point is but if you can i just say on that point again if you go out and
00:35:36.120 you say to the but you know you say to the british people over the last quarter of a century everything
00:35:41.080 everything's been fine you have no no let me tell you what i would but let me make the different
00:35:46.480 argument because you're you're doing this caricature thing of people with private jets
00:35:50.980 when you don't know i'm not it's not no sorry i know because i i i get that's literally what you
00:35:54.980 said no no no word for word private jets no i someone has to sell their second private jet
00:35:59.840 it's not but you were talking about the top rail tax that's people earning like 60 grand a year
00:36:04.240 no it's not a caricature i'm using that as an example of the reality got it and you accept it
00:36:11.200 You accepted yourself it's a reality.
00:36:12.660 No, no, no, no.
00:36:14.220 I completely reject this.
00:36:15.300 This is crazy.
00:36:16.060 No, no, no, no, no.
00:36:16.560 You said they are insulated.
00:36:20.140 You said they are insulated.
00:36:21.320 By their own success, yes.
00:36:22.560 By their own success.
00:36:23.700 But that's what money is for.
00:36:25.980 That's why we all want to make as much money as we can,
00:36:29.120 because it gives us the ability to protect ourselves
00:36:32.140 and our families from the vicissitudes of life.
00:36:35.200 That's why we all want...
00:36:36.680 Yes, but what a wealthy person would regard.
00:36:41.200 as one of the hardships of life
00:36:43.260 is very, very different
00:36:45.100 from what a working class person would do. 0.95
00:36:47.380 Of course, that's why we all want to make more money 0.99
00:36:48.360 because it protects us against those things.
00:36:50.400 Yeah, but lots of very hardworking people
00:36:52.000 can't make that money for reasons other than their own.
00:36:55.300 I'm not criticising people for making more or less money.
00:36:57.160 What I'm saying is you're using the example of private jets,
00:36:59.660 but what we're actually talking about
00:37:01.000 when you talk about the top rate of tax
00:37:03.260 is people earning 60 grand a year.
00:37:05.280 There's a plumber, my plumber,
00:37:06.960 I talked to, he was complaining to me
00:37:10.240 about the top rate of tax. Working people, as you put it, are often the hard-working ones who
00:37:15.780 start a small business or whatever, are the ones that are paying this. And they are the ones that
00:37:20.240 are being told they need to pay their fair share when they already are. As we talked about, they
00:37:25.920 already pay 40 to 45 percent of their income in tax, whereas someone further down the economic
00:37:33.280 ladder is paying 10 or 15 or zero. So why is that fair? Yeah, but we can, well, look, we're getting
00:37:39.680 into a slightly narrow debate, but we can have a debate about what the top rate of tax
00:37:45.920 should be, at what point it would come in, what someone who is generally rich would be.
00:37:53.500 But firstly, the fundamental principle, to go back to my point, is working people have
00:37:59.700 been asked to pay more to the extent it directly impacts their livelihoods, their day-to-day
00:38:06.380 lives in a way that you've conceded wealthy people have been insulated from and what i'm saying is
00:38:12.520 if we are going to have a solution to this issue if we are going to have this dramatic surgery
00:38:17.040 if we are going to have to take the tough choices then with all the implications of that then some
00:38:24.700 of the people who are going to need to be impacted by those tough choices yeah we've got to chase
00:38:29.340 out of the rich people are going to need to be are going to need not just because i'm and i'm not
00:38:33.720 just saying that because i'm some crazy mad socialist i get it but not it's not just but
00:38:38.480 because coming back to the argument you have to build to do any of this the practical reality
00:38:44.580 is in a democracy you have to build a public consensus i get it and if you say the british
00:38:49.340 people again you're going to have to have to pay the guy with the two or three private jets
00:38:54.920 it's not me saying it none of us plan our lives around insurance we plan around whatever life
00:39:01.200 actually throws at us. We had our second child this year, which quickly reorders your priorities,
00:39:06.020 let me tell you. Nobody sent a warning. That's exactly the type of situation where you'd want
00:39:10.140 to use PolicyGenius. They're not an insurance company, they're a marketplace. PolicyGenius
00:39:15.200 is a free service that compares life insurance quotes from America's top insurers side by side.
00:39:20.280 Their licensed team handles the paperwork. No guesswork, just clarity on coverage, price and
00:39:25.080 terms, backed by thousands of five-star reviews on Google and Trustpilot. With PolicyGenius,
00:39:29.920 you can find 20-year life insurance policies starting at just $276 a year for $1 million
00:39:36.060 in coverage. Head to policygenius.com slash trig to compare life insurance quotes from top companies
00:39:42.180 and see how much you could save. That's policygenius.com slash trig.
00:39:47.800 It's not me saying it. I want as much. Look, we just had Dimitar Chalakov, I think his surname
00:39:53.740 is, is a former policeman in the Met talking about the impact of the cuts. And that really
00:39:59.420 had its impact, including on crime in London today, which we're all dealing with. So I don't
00:40:04.580 want public services to be cut. What I'm saying is the reality, what Francis is saying is the
00:40:09.980 reality of where we are is we can't afford the lifestyle that we have at the moment. Doesn't
00:40:15.860 mean it's fair that we can't afford it. It doesn't mean that it's right or moral or whatever. It just
00:40:20.940 is what it is. But this is the kind of just say, I mean, I think, you know, this is perfectly
00:40:24.220 illustrate the point the reality is we are both right you are saying we can't carry on yeah we
00:40:29.840 are going to have to cut you are absolutely right no no i'm not saying hold on i'm not saying we're
00:40:33.880 going to have to cut this is my the different argument that i want to make which is the only
00:40:37.840 way out of this actually is to get growth in the economy actually ultimately in the long run we're
00:40:44.380 going to have to get the economy actually growing it hasn't been growing yeah but we are also going
00:40:48.380 to have to reduce public spending uh there are there are certainly there's an i mean even i
00:40:54.120 We're going to have to produce public spending, so I'm sure you wouldn't contest that.
00:40:57.640 What I'm saying is a lot of people like to present us cutting lots of stuff as the solution.
00:41:04.480 It's not the solution.
00:41:05.940 It's a necessary...
00:41:06.340 No, it's not a long-term solution.
00:41:07.840 Absolutely.
00:41:08.340 I would agree with that.
00:41:09.040 What we have to do is get the economy growing.
00:41:11.040 So when I talk about tax on business, for example, or tax on business and entrepreneurs
00:41:18.320 and wealth creators and job creators, right, you can say, you know, we've got to make sure
00:41:23.820 the people with the private jets don't have as many private jets. But if they leave, like the
00:41:28.840 founder of Revolut, or if they leave like this guy's just left, or other people, if they're not
00:41:33.280 here to create the jobs, it doesn't matter what's morally right or wrong. We're not going to have
00:41:37.780 the jobs. We're not going to have the growth if you tax business. We know this running a small
00:41:41.600 business for trigonometry, right? We would employ more people than we employ today if the rules were
00:41:46.900 not what they are. I don't disagree with that. But the broader point I'm making is, I think you're
00:41:51.760 absolutely right about that but the reality is you were talking before about the need for radical
00:41:57.540 surgery in what now whatever policy solution that is I think you're absolutely right about that
00:42:04.000 but I'm equally right when I say it doesn't matter what form of surgery you want you will not be able
00:42:10.600 to have that surgery without the consent of the patient I agree and to do that that is very
00:42:15.620 difficult against a backdrop of an electorate that has quarter of a century of proper, real,
00:42:22.360 meaningful hardship. But that's what people mean by courage from politicians, though, isn't it?
00:42:26.320 What they mean is... Yeah, but that's the point. Yeah, but that's the easy thing. It's very easy
00:42:30.140 to say, we need courage from politicians. But I was about to explain what... It's for somebody to
00:42:37.020 stand up and have this discussion that we're having, but in the political space, and say,
00:42:42.880 we are going broke. We're going broke. And if we don't do this now, three years from now or two
00:42:49.880 years from now or six months from now or five years from now, we don't know. But we are going
00:42:54.340 to have a situation where the government that you elected us is no longer going to be the people in
00:42:59.280 charge. It's going to be the people who lend us the money and they're going to come in and they're
00:43:03.460 going to force us to cut public services by 30 percent. If you don't want that, we have to do
00:43:09.100 this now. That's what people
00:43:11.100 mean by courage, isn't it? Yeah, no, absolutely.
00:43:13.460 And obviously, I think we would, you know, the easiest
00:43:15.160 model, the model people
00:43:16.960 would point to would be
00:43:19.140 would obviously be Margaret 0.86
00:43:21.180 Thatcher and the way she transformed
00:43:23.380 the political consensus. 0.93
00:43:25.380 But, I mean, she had the advantage,
00:43:27.480 which maybe is an advantage that Andy
00:43:29.140 Vernon might have, which she obviously had a completely 0.98
00:43:31.260 fractured and divided opposition 0.97
00:43:33.040 and obviously
00:43:34.980 also what turned out to be the get-out-of-jail-free
00:43:37.320 card of the of the popular boost that she got from from the Falklands war that gave her the
00:43:42.280 political space and if it hadn't been for the Falklands war you know British history but it
00:43:45.500 would have been very different than that except to Margaret Thatcher would have been would have
00:43:49.100 been very would have been very very different but to again take the conversation right back to the
00:43:54.020 beginning that's kind of what I'm saying in relation to Andy Burnham that's kind of what
00:43:58.560 Andy Burnham's strategy is Andy Burnham knows he can't turn around tomorrow as someone who's come
00:44:03.780 in without a mandate and say, I'm going to introduce this radical surgery. I'm going to do
00:44:09.000 all these things, none of which you actually voted for when you voted Labour. I'm going to do all
00:44:13.900 these things. I know it's hard, but tough, and I'm showing you, I'm going to be very brave. And by
00:44:20.860 the way, I've got, you know, two and a half, just under three years to introduce it. His strategy
00:44:25.860 is, as I said, going back to the original point, that's exactly the strategy he's pursuing. Okay,
00:44:30.840 do this do not the easy stuff but the slightly more popular stuff deal with the politics win
00:44:36.820 a majority give myself five years give myself a working majority and then I'll start to take the
00:44:41.880 take the tough decisions now that's the thinking and I think in terms of our analysis of Andy
00:44:47.080 Burnham and his government it's only when he gets that personal mandate that we will
00:44:52.460 and or majority he may not get one at all you know events could expire against him but the
00:44:58.320 reality is in terms of knowing what Andy Burnham is and what he would be like as a prime minister
00:45:02.660 I think that's that's the only point we'll get at we'll get a sort of a proper and genuine
00:45:07.780 assessment it's a fair point I mean the other issue that people consistently talking about 1.00
00:45:14.020 and are very very frustrated about and understandably so is levels of immigration
00:45:18.680 into this country which is one issue and illegal immigration on the other and it really upsets 1.00
00:45:24.140 people and quite rightly so because they look at people coming to this country illegally and they 0.99
00:45:31.260 think to themselves well this has been happening now for years why has nothing been done to stop 1.00
00:45:36.680 it and by the way it's not a labor problem the conservatives did it as well and people feel that
00:45:42.500 they are in a country which is becoming ever more lawless and I have sympathy with that point of
00:45:47.460 view. Yeah, but now, obviously, we're moving into, you know, this is a good example of the nature of
00:45:56.240 the debate. I mean, firstly, you're absolutely right, politicians of all persuasions have failed
00:46:03.540 to get to grips with the issue. Now, I would put this in, I would divide this into two stages.
00:46:09.780 There was a significant period during the 90s, I'd say broadly during the 90s,
00:46:16.260 turn of the new millennium where there was a there was an arrogant it goes back to what i was saying
00:46:21.600 about the the view of politicians to what i broadly call working people there was an arrogant
00:46:25.940 presumption that there was a consensus that immigration was not a good i mean literally
00:46:31.500 you've been one of the you know you've both been uh sort of pioneering if you like in terms of your
00:46:37.260 your analysis of this problem and i you know and i've held my hand up and said that i was one of
00:46:41.280 those people now i would say in the defense of people like me it's because we i grew up in the
00:46:48.080 70s and 80s where there was very very significant racism and a very still prevailing backlash against
00:46:55.040 against migrant communities that was that was that was toxic and and we were trying to push
00:46:59.580 back on that but it is quite clear that in our desire to do that you know the the the road to 0.99
00:47:05.080 hell be a perfectly good intentions we completely lost lost contact with where the British people 0.99
00:47:12.180 were and as I say working people were in in relation to that so that's the that's the reality 0.99
00:47:17.820 but I think more recently and because again it comes back to this idea of easy solutions
00:47:23.960 the simple political reality is Rishi Sunak knew just how toxic the immigration issue issue was
00:47:35.300 people like Priti Patel not somebody I think who you would call you know you know a sort of
00:47:46.220 particularly liberal shrinking violence issues also knew people across the political spectrum
00:47:52.700 new but they were faced with in their eyes with a trade-off which was yeah we can curtail
00:47:57.500 immigration but that will have a direct economic impact and you know this idea again this lazy 0.97
00:48:05.840 characterization oh well they're all just cowards and traitors and whatever it wasn't that they made 0.94
00:48:10.440 a they made a they made a political calculation and I think obviously you know it's quite clear 0.98
00:48:16.540 certainly in political terms they made the wrong calculation but I think there is another issue
00:48:22.200 And I think it's interesting that we've gone from the broader discussion about politics in general to the immigration issue, which again comes back to what you were talking about.
00:48:32.520 There are going to be a lot of hard decisions that need to be taken.
00:48:36.160 And one of the problems we've got with the current debate is immigration is seen as the magic bullet.
00:48:41.740 So if you speak to anybody in the right, you know, how are you going to pay for this? How are you going to pay for that?
00:48:46.760 So if you look at, and we might come on to reform specifically, but if you look at any policy announcement from reform, for example, every single policy announcement, every single policy area is run through the prism of immigration.
00:49:00.920 This is how we would find the money for defence. We wouldn't be spending it on the migrants. 0.96
00:49:06.780 This is how we'd find the money to properly fund welfare and give it to needy people. 1.00
00:49:10.560 We won't be giving any of it to the migrants. 1.00
00:49:13.760 And aside from the other issues, the nature of the immigration debate 1.00
00:49:18.480 and the certain toxicity around the debate,
00:49:21.960 I think this is one of the most dangerous elements.
00:49:24.260 It is, like I said, it is now seen as the new get-out-of-jail-free card. 1.00
00:49:29.560 Deal with immigration, all of our problems are solved. 0.97
00:49:32.300 And that's just not the reality. 1.00
00:49:35.660 And again, you know, I'm playing back to you what you were playing to me.
00:49:42.200 yeah you're absolutely right again there is a lot of discontent about immigration
00:49:49.040 and a significant part of it is the reality of people's people's lives but also a significant
00:49:55.200 part of it is they are constantly being told this is the magic wand you deal with immigration
00:50:01.860 all your problems are solved and as we all know that's not the reality well look there are
00:50:06.320 certainly people saying that particularly online where it seems to be that you know
00:50:10.460 we'll get rid of everybody who's got a melanin level over this amount,
00:50:14.460 and we're going to be living in an Enid Blyton wonderland,
00:50:17.200 which is palpably false, and we all know that.
00:50:20.560 But you have to have a lot of empathy for the electorate,
00:50:24.660 who effectively, since about the last 15, maybe even more years,
00:50:30.260 have voted time and time and time again that they wanted immigration lowered.
00:50:36.180 What was a Brexit vote if not about immigration?
00:50:39.500 and consistently they were gaslit.
00:50:43.140 Let's be honest, Dan.
00:50:44.040 They were gaslit.
00:50:44.920 They were told that immigration was going to come down.
00:50:47.180 Not only did it not come down, it was raised.
00:50:49.320 No, but I would say it was worse than that.
00:50:50.540 I mean, you said they were gaslit.
00:50:51.640 I mean, there was a point before that,
00:50:53.720 before they were gaslit,
00:50:54.600 that was at a second stage in the process
00:50:56.060 when they were being told,
00:50:57.900 don't worry, we're going to get immigration down.
00:50:59.220 Before that, they were being told,
00:51:00.240 if you raise the issue, it's because you're a racist. 0.97
00:51:02.080 You're a bigger, yeah. 1.00
00:51:02.660 You're a bigger and a racist. 1.00
00:51:03.540 And like I said, all those of us who, 0.99
00:51:06.780 at the time I was on the Liberal left,
00:51:07.980 have to hold our hands up for that.
00:51:09.500 And, you know, we were all, you know, we were all part of that.
00:51:14.600 But the point is, you're absolutely right about, you know, that is not where we are with the debate now.
00:51:21.540 I don't know a senior politician in this country who, if you sit down and speak privately, would not say, we've got a real problem with immigration.
00:51:31.580 It's a genuine problem.
00:51:33.260 people are obviously we appreciate people are very concerned about it and they're right to
00:51:39.700 be very concerned about it now maybe some agree you know a couple maybe zach polanski might say
00:51:44.720 that maybe ed davy may argue a little bit i'm not sure he would but but i don't know of any
00:51:49.860 senior politician the issue in terms of immigration is it's like everything else
00:51:55.200 there is not an easy solution to this problem what about illegal immigration because mass
00:52:01.160 I was going to come on to that. I was specifically going to come on to that. There is a solution to mass migration, but then there is a cost. And as I said, you know, we see it. There is a problem with getting rich people into the country. But let's just look at the issue of illegal immigration.
00:52:19.560 the Tories obviously were aware the Tories a party that traditionally has been very very
00:52:26.880 hard line on immigration forget Labour from this for the moment Tories understood firstly that
00:52:32.400 there was a problem secondly their identification of the problem aligned themselves with their base
00:52:37.100 and their natural support and they particularly understood there was a major problem with small
00:52:42.540 boats if they didn't solve it they would be kicked out of office so in all of the areas
00:52:46.500 both historical philosophical narrow political interest the previous tory government understood
00:52:54.180 they had to do something to get to grip the small boats and they failed now the prevailing narrative
00:52:59.160 from their political opponents labor did this in in opposition reform obviously continued to do that
00:53:05.060 was they were they were either completely completely bumbling incompetence or be they 0.96
00:53:11.040 were traitorous cowards who secretly wanted to undermine Britain's way of life. Both of those 0.99
00:53:17.560 are frankly just not true. I spoke regularly to senior people within the Rishi Sunak government
00:53:27.560 and the government's proceeded. They spent every waking hour trying to cobble together some sort
00:53:32.920 of solution. Eventually, obviously, they came up with the Rwanda plan, which I mean, I was
00:53:39.160 criticised for it at the time, which I actually defended and supported. And some iterations
00:53:44.040 around the plan, I think, is probably what is required. But the reality is, again, for
00:53:51.500 reasons we all know, the Rwanda plan didn't work. But again, when you've got people like, 0.90
00:54:01.440 I say, I think Priti Patel was the person who sort of helped negotiate the plan. When
00:54:06.280 you've got people like that, even Suella Bravman, I mean, you know, Suella Bravman blames everyone
00:54:10.880 else. Even when you've got people like Suella Bravman, who was Home Secretary, who couldn't
00:54:15.300 engineer through government, she again now goes for the, they're all traitors sort of line. When
00:54:21.000 you've got people like that who can't find a solution, and I know these people and these 0.98
00:54:26.260 people who were desperate to find it and who are not all bumbling idiots, but are actually quite 0.73
00:54:31.360 intelligence serious sensible people that says to me this is not the simple this is not an easily 0.94
00:54:39.380 solved soluble problem and again it comes back to it but again as I was saying at the moment do the
00:54:47.480 British people want to hear that at the moment do the British people want to hear that or are they
00:54:52.160 attracted to you know I don't know what's that I don't know what the latest proposal is you know 0.50
00:54:57.760 let's send in the navy and dump them on and invade france and dump them back on the back on the
00:55:01.620 beaches the people who watch this show have generally done more thinking about how governments
00:55:06.920 operate the most but there's a difference between understanding the problem and having actually
00:55:12.400 built insulation against it that's the world michael thorup operates in he's been living as
00:55:17.420 an expat for over 25 years visiting more than 110 countries and calling nine of them home he founded
00:55:23.340 expat money nearly a decade ago to help others do the same when he helped someone build an
00:55:28.220 international plan b the knowledge he brings is entirely first hand every recommendation comes
00:55:33.720 from something he has already done himself expat money works specifically with freedom-minded
00:55:39.240 families and investors who want to reduce their exposure on any one government or any one system
00:55:45.240 second residency second citizenship to offshore banking international real estate legal structures
00:55:50.900 that spread your life across borders.
00:55:52.980 Mikkel has put together a free report
00:55:54.880 called Plan B Residencies and Instant Citizenships.
00:55:58.460 It covers five routes to a second passport,
00:56:00.920 including one that almost never gets discussed,
00:56:03.460 how a foreign residency functions
00:56:05.240 as genuine political insurance,
00:56:07.320 which countries actually make sense
00:56:09.180 depending on what you're trying to protect
00:56:10.820 and what it realistically costs.
00:56:13.100 Go to expatmoney.com slash trigger
00:56:15.740 or click the link in the description of this episode
00:56:18.340 to download the report.
00:56:19.760 There's no charge, no catch.
00:56:22.000 That's expatmoney.com slash trigger. 0.51
00:56:25.840 Why can't we do what Australia did,
00:56:27.960 which is effectively turn the boat around,
00:56:30.600 make sure it has enough fuel to get back to the coast?
00:56:33.700 Because the reality is, if you look at it,
00:56:36.940 there was an attempt at a turn-back policy,
00:56:39.600 but that was limited in success.
00:56:41.640 What actually worked for the Australians
00:56:43.680 was taking the asylum seekers 1.00
00:56:47.160 and basically dump it on a desert island off the coast of Australia. 1.00
00:56:52.500 That was what actually had the maximum deterrent effect.
00:56:56.140 So why can't we do that?
00:56:57.360 Because we can't...
00:56:58.480 Firstly, we haven't got a handy island.
00:57:01.740 You could put them in Middlesbrough.
00:57:03.640 Well, that's what we're doing at the moment.
00:57:06.920 That's what we're doing at the moment.
00:57:08.180 Yeah, I mean...
00:57:09.160 Oh, come on, man.
00:57:09.720 There's enough... 1.00
00:57:10.320 We can find somewhere to put asylum seekers. 1.00
00:57:13.740 Well, no, we can't. 1.00
00:57:14.540 And that's the problem.
00:57:15.180 Come on.
00:57:15.860 Okay, where?
00:57:16.700 Rwanda for a start, right?
00:57:18.660 That's the thing.
00:57:19.960 We got a Rwanda, the government negotiated a Rwanda scheme.
00:57:25.040 The scheme just wasn't, the government wasn't able to make it operational in the sort of number.
00:57:31.780 How many people got returned via the Rwanda scheme?
00:57:33.520 Yeah, but that's because everyone was screaming about how it's, you know, it's against their human rights and all this other nonsense, right?
00:57:39.760 but i think if i was an ordinary person watching this conversation i would be tearing my hair out
00:57:46.980 because it's sort of like there's literally there's nothing we can do about anything because
00:57:51.160 it's just so complicated and whatever me in the meantime you look over the united states they've
00:57:55.800 deported three million people in the last two years i think or under the trump presidency
00:57:59.480 they've closed the border effectively i know it's a different situation because it's a land border
00:58:04.600 But you can get things done if you have the political will to do it.
00:58:07.280 Fine. And what is Donald Trump's current approval rating and how are the Republicans...
00:58:12.920 That's not why. His current approval rating is low, but it's because of the Iran war.
00:58:16.600 It's not low, it's subterranean. 0.66
00:58:17.540 It's because of the Iran war.
00:58:18.920 And his political...
00:58:19.460 It's because of the Iran war and the rising gas prices.
00:58:22.060 No, no, no. There are a wide variety of reasons why Donald Trump is unpopular.
00:58:31.840 But one of the key reasons why Donald Trump is unpopular is he has embraced a populist, there are easy solutions form of governance.
00:58:42.700 And he has said, he has basically said, don't worry, I've got a simple solution to all this, which was superficially popular.
00:58:52.520 And now what he's finding out is that model of governance doesn't work because the American people are withdrawing consent for his model of governance.
00:58:59.720 You're talking about, I mean, there is also the other technical point, which is, you know, in the United States, they share a land border with their main route of migration.
00:59:12.240 So it's much easier to police. That's the practical reality.
00:59:17.380 But, I mean, are you contesting,
00:59:20.540 I mean, are you putting forward the argument
00:59:22.000 that there is actually an easy solution, 1.00
00:59:23.560 just politicians have been too stupid 1.00
00:59:24.900 or too woke to pursue it? 1.00
00:59:30.540 No.
00:59:30.800 Even though it would have been in their direct,
00:59:33.820 narrow political interest, so to do.
00:59:35.620 No, I think that there's probably
00:59:37.780 a kind of ideological consensus
00:59:40.540 which puts the actually simple,
00:59:42.860 I didn't say easy, but simple.
00:59:44.440 There's a big difference between simple and easy.
00:59:46.660 which puts the simple solutions beyond their sort of ideological reach.
00:59:51.760 When we had Soella on to talk about this, the things she said,
00:59:54.420 I was like, well, why can't we leave the ECHR?
00:59:56.500 And I was like, well, the consensus among my colleagues was 0.64
00:59:59.000 that would put us in the same boat as Belarus. 1.00
01:00:01.620 And so we would just become this nasty country. 1.00
01:00:04.700 That's also actually why we've not been able to take action 1.00
01:00:08.700 soon enough on legal migration.
01:00:10.820 I didn't have collective agreement.
01:00:12.400 I didn't have the support of the prime minister. 0.97
01:00:13.740 I apologise if I'm asking stupid questions, 0.91
01:00:15.800 But what is the rationale for your cabinet colleagues to not want to do this? 0.94
01:00:22.980 I don't understand.
01:00:25.020 Well, their argument is that it's far too radical.
01:00:30.580 It would put us in the same category as Russia and Belarus,
01:00:35.380 who have left the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights,
01:00:40.720 and it would be damaging to our international reputation.
01:00:43.560 We could replace the ECHR with our own Bill of Rights, democratically reflective of British people's views.
01:00:48.960 I actually don't disagree with that. And I've said that.
01:00:52.760 I think the idea that it is beyond the wit of us to introduce our own constitutional protections.
01:01:02.820 But whatever way you look at it, whatever constitutional protections you put in place,
01:01:08.880 And I think, you know, in a separate context, you know, in a separate context, people are running around at the moment worrying about, you know, civil liberties, what's what these this, you know, everyone's been locked up for whatever they they tweet.
01:01:20.780 So if you want to strip away all the sort of broader sort of super governmental protections and just simply say, I'll just leave it up to the politicians.
01:01:29.400 We can trust them. I'm not prepared. I'm not prepared to do that with any politician.
01:01:33.700 So the idea I would just strip away all the human rights now. 1.00
01:01:37.280 And replace with a British... 1.00
01:01:39.300 And we can, and we could do. 1.00
01:01:41.060 But if you want to do that, one thing's for certain.
01:01:43.440 If you're talking about putting in place
01:01:45.020 and going back on however many centuries of British history
01:01:48.520 and putting in place...
01:01:49.520 Less than one, yeah.
01:01:51.060 Putting in place a sort of formally codified constitution,
01:01:56.260 that is not something you're going to be able to do in a week.
01:01:59.720 No, no, no, of course.
01:02:00.120 You are looking at probably a decades-long process there.
01:02:05.560 Yeah, I wasn't talking about full constitution, but if you had a British Bill of Rights that was specifically addressing the border situation.
01:02:12.980 Yeah, but if you're looking at drafting a Bill of Rights, which obviously is, you know, to all intents and purposes, a codified constitution, that would be one of the most fundamental changes in British society, in British history.
01:02:26.000 That will take, that will have to be a serious exercise that will have to be done over a period of time.
01:02:31.000 This is like Nick Clegg saying 15 years ago
01:02:33.380 we can't build nuclear power stations
01:02:34.860 because it takes 15 years and now we're here 15 later.
01:02:37.700 No, it's much, much easier to build a nuclear power station
01:02:40.020 than it is to put in place a constitution
01:02:42.160 that replaces, as I say, you know,
01:02:44.340 hundreds if not thousands of years of British history
01:02:46.520 and ensures that we all have the appropriate protection
01:02:49.100 to citizens that we require.
01:02:50.820 Don't you think, Dan, let's just be honest here.
01:02:54.640 I'm being completely honest.
01:02:56.260 No, no, no, no, no, no, but there's something else, right?
01:02:58.820 You put forward this idea of politicians, you know, not wanting to do it because they're too woke or whatever else.
01:03:04.420 And I can't remember the other option. Isn't the other isn't the reality to stupid? 1.00
01:03:09.020 Isn't there's there's a third option here, which is we don't have politicians with the required backbone to actually get these things done. 0.99
01:03:18.720 And I'll tell you why, because the moment there is the slightest pushback, they capitulate.
01:03:23.160 And isn't good leadership actually taking the decisions, facing down the party and going, look, this needs to happen. This needs to get done. And otherwise, the consequences are simply too awful to contemplate, which is where we are as a country.
01:03:42.220 No. I mean, if you genuinely want to be honest, no. And to be honest, what you've done is you've just articulated what is a very, very crowd-pleasing trope, which is frequently peddled.
01:03:56.300 The only solution is the politicians don't have backbone. And that's, I mean, if you want to say that, that's not true.
01:04:02.340 I mean, our senior politicians, all of them, have considerable backbone, which is why they are senior politicians.
01:04:07.740 They've put themselves forward in the public eye.
01:04:10.520 They've put themselves up for election.
01:04:12.320 As we know in the current environment, they do so at significant personal cost,
01:04:18.040 indeed genuine physical risk. 0.99
01:04:20.080 So this sort of, oh, they're all just a bunch of cowards. 0.99
01:04:23.880 You know, no. 0.99
01:04:24.680 I mean, you said you want to be honest.
01:04:26.040 Let's be honest about it.
01:04:26.840 No, that's not easy.
01:04:28.280 Well, why isn't it that I don't see any of them then going up 0.91
01:04:31.860 and tackling the French about their part to play in illegal immigration? 0.90
01:04:36.420 Well, what do you want them to do to the French? 0.95
01:04:39.960 We can't broadcast that, but let's keep it within the realms of the socially acceptable. 0.77
01:04:45.220 Well, saying to them that this situation is unsustainable and we can't do this,
01:04:49.340 and if you are not going to play your part, then there are going to be consequences to pay.
01:04:55.580 If you were a French politician and a British politician came to you and said,
01:05:01.740 look this is look old chap this is a little bit off you know this is this is not a sustainable 1.00
01:05:08.160 position for us you need to keep all those all those nasty illegal immigrants that we 1.00
01:05:14.060 that we don't want these illegal immigrants that we think are coming over here taking our jobs and 1.00
01:05:19.540 raping our women you you've got to stop you've got to deploy huge resources amongst your domestic 1.00
01:05:26.300 security services up the entire french coast to prevent them leaving your country and coming to
01:05:32.980 a house if the situation was reversed what would our answer be what our answer who is the politician
01:05:39.820 who would say here is my here is my policy here is my policy agenda my policy agenda is to kick 0.99
01:05:45.880 all these nasty illegal americans in the uk and stopping them from leaving now we had this 0.99
01:05:50.360 situation i know where reform said they've got this deal with who is it yeah bordella and we 0.94
01:05:56.460 already see this way i mean i did think at the time hang on a second if you're running on a
01:06:00.120 populist program i'm not entirely sure wait so you're saying the french are doing this to us
01:06:03.580 deliberately of course they're doing it differently well that is to me if that you don't think they
01:06:10.680 are of course i think they are but i've never heard someone admit it publicly so if if we know
01:06:15.360 they're doing this deliberately that would necessitate a reaction from our government and
01:06:20.320 what do you think that reaction should be i don't know nuclear weapons as far as i'm concerned if
01:06:24.040 you want to nuke paris not paris i don't think as i say i'm kidding i don't think i know but but
01:06:31.700 what just let's just let's look we talk about these things this is this is why this country 0.99
01:06:37.440 is so fucked because we say all these outrageous things as if they're normal you're saying that 0.98
01:06:42.300 France is deliberately sending tens of thousands of illegal immigrants into our country or letting 1.00
01:06:48.160 them in, allowing them to pass through France and come into our country, facilitating what some
01:06:54.040 people might call an invasion. Now, that's a very controversial word. I'm not saying it's an
01:06:58.320 invasion. Some people might call it that, whatever. In any other time in human history, if the country
01:07:04.600 that was on your border was sending tens of thousands of men into your country without your 0.88
01:07:11.380 consent, that would be casus belli and the cause for war. Fine. So as I say, what is your practical 0.92
01:07:18.300 solution? Do you think we should go to war with France? Well, as a matter of general principle,
01:07:23.520 yes. But I don't know. I'm not an expert in the different levers we have to influence France. But
01:07:30.780 I imagine if we really were prepared to take this issue seriously, there would be things that we
01:07:35.160 But we know, but this is the point, you know, we, as again a separate argument, we took a decision as a country to sort of walk away from some of those levers and to sort of, you know, proudly isolate ourselves from our former European partners when we decided to opt for Brexit.
01:07:59.440 So a lot of the levers we had at our disposal have been removed.
01:08:04.520 But as I said, the reality is, I've, you know, genuinely, I've said to you what, you know, again, I completely understand you've used very emotive language there.
01:08:15.060 But I said, fine, but what is your practical solution to this issue?
01:08:17.860 And again, neither of you have actually given me a practical solution.
01:08:19.480 Well, that's because I don't have the expertise.
01:08:21.060 And I'm not, no, but we might.
01:08:23.360 No, but what I'm saying is lots of people who do have a great deal of expertise have looked at this.
01:08:29.700 Have they threatened them with bans on important certain French goods, for example?
01:08:34.620 And then the French would introduce reciprocal bans?
01:08:38.280 That's absolutely fine. That's absolutely fine. 0.99
01:08:40.020 It's not for the workers that work in those industries.
01:08:45.920 Have we threatened to turn the boats around and dump them on the French beaches back?
01:08:49.240 Well, that's currently what reforming...
01:08:51.640 But has our government threatened them?
01:08:52.960 No, because...
01:08:53.640 Well, that's what I would do.
01:08:54.700 Yeah, well, you might...
01:08:55.520 And I would escalate to the point where they started to take this seriously.
01:08:58.360 No, but as the various sort of naval experts said at the time, when reform proposed this policy, that is not a practical solution, because we don't have the practical means to sort of pick them up and then deposit them.
01:09:14.840 Well, what do we mean?
01:09:15.540 We don't have boats.
01:09:17.060 Well, no, we don't. 1.00
01:09:17.840 That can tow their boats.
01:09:18.200 I mean, firstly, no, we don't have boats, as we saw in the situation with the war with Iran.
01:09:26.880 How long did it take us?
01:09:28.040 It took us the best part of a month to send a single vessel.
01:09:32.680 Yeah, but you're talking about a warship.
01:09:34.780 I'm talking about small boats that can tow another small boat back to the French waterline.
01:09:40.800 But as I said, you're then talking about invading French territory and assuming that the French won't react. 0.99
01:09:46.660 Wait, so they're going to send tens of thousands of people into our country,
01:09:50.340 and if we tow a boat back to them, they're going to start shooting at us.
01:09:54.260 That's what you're saying.
01:09:55.100 And it's not an invasion.
01:09:56.260 Well, it's not an invasion.
01:09:59.080 If they send tens of thousands of people here, you can't say it's an invasion.
01:10:02.900 If we drop one of these people back in France, that's an invasion.
01:10:06.020 Well, if you evoke what it's being called, if you're talking about mobilising,
01:10:13.040 if you're talking about
01:10:14.320 the government
01:10:15.660 you know
01:10:17.540 the French Navy
01:10:18.580 are not landing
01:10:19.700 on the boat
01:10:20.140 on the shores of Dover
01:10:21.180 if what you're talking about
01:10:22.640 is the Royal Navy
01:10:23.660 landing unilaterally
01:10:24.920 on the
01:10:25.260 no no no
01:10:25.720 we tow the boat back
01:10:27.220 to the
01:10:27.800 who tows the boat back
01:10:29.140 the Royal Navy
01:10:30.280 to the line
01:10:31.460 from which
01:10:32.120 the boat is effectively
01:10:33.400 directed to go back
01:10:34.360 to France
01:10:34.880 right
01:10:36.260 and then the boat
01:10:36.920 turns round
01:10:37.660 and then we tow it back
01:10:38.520 yeah
01:10:38.760 and we just keep
01:10:39.880 towing them back
01:10:40.520 over and over
01:10:41.920 until they stop coming
01:10:42.860 But why will they stop coming? 1.00
01:10:44.800 Because we keep towing them back and we're not allowing them into Britain. 1.00
01:10:47.480 We're not giving them hotels to live in. 0.99
01:10:49.080 We're not giving them camps to live in.
01:10:50.420 We're not giving them phones, dental services, food, etc.
01:10:53.860 But how do you physically turn the boat back? 1.00
01:10:57.940 Exactly the way the Australians did. 1.00
01:10:59.480 And how did they do it? 0.99
01:11:00.560 I think when we had Tony Abba on, I don't remember all the details,
01:11:03.560 but what he explained...
01:11:04.760 You give them unscuttable...
01:11:06.720 What's the word?
01:11:07.680 basically you give them
01:11:11.260 rafts that they can't scuttle
01:11:12.960 so the people's mobiles can't sink them
01:11:15.100 my understanding was that the
01:11:17.120 Australian system, which
01:11:19.140 as I said, wasn't
01:11:21.140 seen as being essentially practical
01:11:22.740 was that they actually built
01:11:25.380 big sort of lifeboats
01:11:29.560 dumped them in
01:11:30.860 and sent them back
01:11:32.700 they did do that
01:11:34.100 they did do that and they tried that
01:11:37.120 But what they found was that wasn't actually having a significant impact on the traffic because obviously that was an expensive and complex operation to build weird lifeboat systems and send them back.
01:11:54.420 So as I said, what the Australians eventually did was they found an offshoring solution.
01:11:59.620 If you want a practical solution to this, then the practical solution is, in my humble view, is an offshoring solution rather than the invasion of France or these rather sort of complex naval operations, given we don't really have a navy at the moment.
01:12:20.920 The problem is, Dan, and I'm telling you as the average person
01:12:26.920 who's going to be listening to this,
01:12:28.540 the sound you're hearing is their urine boiling
01:12:31.120 because they will look at problems within our country
01:12:35.540 which have eminently pretty obvious solutions
01:12:40.280 and they're not being done.
01:12:43.100 They're not being done.
01:12:43.820 Sorry, you've just made the great job.
01:12:45.700 I was agreeing with you.
01:12:46.820 You've just done exactly what I said.
01:12:49.000 You just said, oh, yeah, there are very obvious solutions.
01:12:52.180 It's called enforcing a border.
01:12:55.080 We started off this conversation with a degree of consensus
01:12:58.420 that one of the problems we had was that there are lots of very,
01:13:04.300 very difficult problems that are going to require very,
01:13:08.420 very hard and difficult solutions.
01:13:10.520 You've now, because we've got onto the subject of immigration,
01:13:13.780 switched back into, with respect, very lazy,
01:13:16.400 oh there are simple solutions to this and that's why people are boiling. You're right people are
01:13:20.720 boiling. People are boiling because they have identified a problem, they've asked their
01:13:26.480 politicians to solve that problem and their politicians have failed to do so. That's why
01:13:31.020 they're boiling. They are not going to be deboiled with respect by people going around falsely
01:13:37.720 telling them there are easy solutions out there that are simply not simple solutions that are
01:13:43.580 out there that are simply not being implemented
01:13:45.500 because their politicians don't have backbone.
01:13:48.140 Because
01:13:48.520 I think that the
01:13:50.740 illegal immigration thing, 1.00
01:13:53.520 to me, that is eminently
01:13:55.600 solvable. I know, you keep
01:13:57.500 repeating that.
01:14:01.020 Because...
01:14:01.540 I think Dan's point is, how
01:14:03.400 are they... Look, I'll
01:14:05.620 give you an example about it. I'll give you an example.
01:14:07.760 So, they did
01:14:09.600 not want to address this for
01:14:11.540 a long time. Which I completely agree
01:14:13.520 with they did not want to address this yeah so the fact that they did not want to address it for me
01:14:19.260 shows a complete lack of backbone that they pretended this problem didn't exist and invariably
01:14:24.780 in life when you pretend the problem doesn't exist the problem will only get worse yeah and as i and
01:14:30.700 you know i think i was completely open about as i said there are various stages in this debate
01:14:35.200 and at the beginning not again it wasn't that the problem wasn't addressed because of a lack of
01:14:41.340 backbone the problem wasn't addressed because the various politicians didn't want to get into a
01:14:45.540 situation where they were being seen to be bigoted towards migrants in this country but that is i'm
01:14:50.820 sorry dan that is a lack of backbone if you're concerned when you get into politics is people
01:14:56.060 not wanting to be bigoted is a lack of back no no no no not wanting to not wanting people caving
01:15:01.520 to people's perception that is false yeah instead of doing the right thing for your country is a
01:15:06.240 No, no, no. But the point is, as I said, in my view, the attempt not to help fuel bigotry is not something I would characterise as a lack of backbone.
01:15:19.080 I think where you, and I've acknowledged this, but it is quite clear that there was a moment, you can talk around about Brexit, maybe even before Brexit, where politicians recognised, actually, firstly, there were genuine, really genuine concerns by large numbers of people who couldn't by any stretch of the imagination be characterised as bigoted, even though some people on the liberal left still attempted to do so.
01:15:47.580 and there was a recognition that this was a genuine problem
01:15:51.380 that had to be addressed.
01:15:53.300 So we can have a debate.
01:15:55.300 If what you're saying is, look, if you're changing your argument
01:15:59.260 and you're saying, look, the lack of backbone was amongst politicians
01:16:03.340 who failed to initially identify the problem.
01:16:06.880 No, not that they failed to identify, they failed to be honest.
01:16:10.680 That's the lack of backbone.
01:16:11.560 Or fail, fine, or fail to be honest about the problem.
01:16:14.440 I wouldn't characterise it like that, but fine, that's a fair point.
01:16:20.140 But that's very, very different from the argument you're pointing forward now is,
01:16:24.220 given, as I say, there's a context now that we all understand that all the politicians do recognise there's a problem.
01:16:31.280 The difference between that and saying, oh yeah, there's a very simple, in your words, there's a very simple solution,
01:16:37.040 and they're not pushing this button marked simple solution to the small boats crisis because they haven't got a backbone.
01:16:43.760 If it was a simple solution, it would not require any backbone.
01:16:46.660 They'd just press the button and they would reap the plaudits
01:16:50.440 from a grateful electorate and ride off to their 200-strong majority.
01:16:56.700 Let me try it a different way.
01:16:58.440 We obviously have seen in the last few days, in the last couple of weeks, actually,
01:17:03.200 this group in Portsmouth, I think.
01:17:07.980 Group of men, I don't really know much.
01:17:10.600 I don't think anyone really knows much about them.
01:17:12.620 I thought we know a bit about them, but yeah.
01:17:14.360 Well, maybe you can tell us about them in a second.
01:17:16.260 But a group of men who are protesting against allowing illegal migrants
01:17:23.000 who've just arrived from being driven into the country from the coast.
01:17:29.100 And it's a few hundred people there.
01:17:32.780 If over the course of the next week it went from a few hundred people
01:17:37.820 to a thousand people to 10,000 people to 100,000 people to a million people,
01:17:42.620 Do you think the politicians might move closer towards a solution?
01:17:48.120 No, because it doesn't solve any of the fundamentals.
01:17:54.080 But the process you described won't happen because the vast majority of the British people,
01:18:01.900 whilst they have the concerns that we've been talking about,
01:18:04.440 I think we've been talking about boiling anger over this issue,
01:18:07.840 You have to separate them and you have to separate their legitimate concerns from the actions and activities and individuals that we've seen parading around in their sort of...
01:18:18.820 Yeah, it's not a side that anyone particularly wants to see.
01:18:21.760 It was a hypothetical for me making the point that I think I don't agree with you. 0.84
01:18:27.580 I think if you had a million people expressing outright solidarity with people who are preventing illegal migrants from being allowed into the country, you will see from government that they find the solution pretty quickly.
01:18:40.960 what you're saying. Do you genuinely believe that senior politicians such as Andy Burnham,
01:18:50.160 such as Shibana Mahmood, such as Kemi Badnock, Chris Phil, do you genuinely think they do not
01:18:58.920 understand the level of public concern there is about this? No, I don't. I don't think they don't
01:19:05.180 understand the level of public concern. But I think politicians, and we've seen this very clearly,
01:19:09.360 work on a very short time window of prioritization
01:19:13.580 and they care about what's in the news this evening.
01:19:16.500 Well, let me finish the point.
01:19:17.440 You've asked the question, so let me finish the point.
01:19:19.480 So if they are pressured into ranking this issue
01:19:24.180 higher than it already is on the daily basis,
01:19:27.160 I don't think for Andy Burnham,
01:19:29.280 the small boats are the number one priority right now.
01:19:31.620 And you said to yourself,
01:19:32.380 his number one priority is to get himself to a position
01:19:35.620 where he can call an early election
01:19:37.000 and get a working majority at that election.
01:19:39.340 To deal with the fundamental issues of which small boats is.
01:19:42.720 No, you said he has to shore up his left flank,
01:19:45.120 which is not people who care about the small boats.
01:19:48.000 Let's be objective.
01:19:49.000 In fact, many of those people are actually, you know,
01:19:51.680 they think anyone who's concerned about small boats is a massive racist.
01:19:56.080 So it's not on their priority list at the very top.
01:19:59.740 They have other priorities.
01:20:00.680 They have the cost of living, which is a massive issue in this country.
01:20:03.760 And it's also the public priority.
01:20:05.100 Right. Well, of course. Yeah, yeah, I agree.
01:20:07.460 So they have that.
01:20:08.180 they have their own electoral concerns, etc. My point about the hypothetical of a million people
01:20:12.400 being out there preventing illegal immigrants from being allowed into the country is that would 0.94
01:20:17.580 immediately push it further up the priority list. There's no question about that. And it would push 1.00
01:20:21.680 it to number one. And I suspect at that point, many of the reasonably sounding and sensible
01:20:28.760 and mature objections you've been making would evaporate immediately because once something
01:20:34.740 becomes a priority people get we've seen this in our own lives and this is obviously a uh not a
01:20:41.540 like for like comparison remotely but there's so many times when we've sat around the table with
01:20:45.760 our team and gone we really need to do this x y whatever thing and we can't do it just can't do it
01:20:51.460 but then when we get to the point where we're like it has to be done everybody gets together
01:20:56.040 and we find a solution okay i mean there's two things firstly again you you're going back to
01:21:02.400 your central thesis which is there is a solution you didn't say it was simple but there is a
01:21:06.800 solution and all that is preventing the solution being found is a lack of political will but on
01:21:13.980 the specific point you made you're also wrong what firstly on two two two levels firstly you're not
01:21:22.740 going to see a large number of people yeah it was a hypothetical i'm not saying it's going to happen
01:21:26.980 it's a hypothetical no but there is an important point here because i just want to make a broader
01:21:30.260 point because it's an issue i've been discussing a lot the last 24 48 hours and you can see it you
01:21:36.280 can see on the right at the moment particularly within reform there is a a fracture over how to
01:21:45.300 deal with this protest and how to deal with these guys specifically and reform started off with a
01:21:52.340 very in my view correct position and but it was a very clear position nigel farage said they were 0.97
01:21:57.940 disgusting. Robert Jenrick said the police should do their worst on them. That was the line within
01:22:03.480 reform. I did say this would happen within 24 hours. It changed because Restore came out and
01:22:11.400 very clearly backed the guys in balaclavas and black. And at that point, Reform panicked and
01:22:17.940 began to change their position. But for people on the right debating this and people who do seek
01:22:25.740 to reflect and align themselves with public concern about this issue.
01:22:31.420 To go back specifically,
01:22:36.200 if the right does align themselves with guys who are going out in the streets
01:22:42.420 with balaclavas, with black garb parading around militaristically,
01:22:50.600 attacking police officers, vandalising property,
01:22:55.240 causing major disruption, doxing lifeboat workers. Fine, but that will have the opposite effect to
01:23:05.180 the one that you were talking about. That will not increase pressure on mainstream politicians
01:23:10.640 to deal with this issue. What that will do is enable mainstream politicians to take these guys,
01:23:17.180 the leader of this group is a man who was jailed for two years for attempting to kidnap someone
01:23:22.980 at knife point in a row over £10,000 of drugs,
01:23:26.520 it will enable them to take them, take this group,
01:23:31.300 and basically say, see, this is what these guys are really like.
01:23:36.900 This is what people who align themselves with this debate are really like
01:23:40.720 and start to roll the debate back.
01:23:42.820 And as I said, I generally meant it.
01:23:47.520 It is very, very, I agree with a lot of what you've been saying on this
01:23:51.160 And a big part of what I try to do, certainly when I'm writing in social media, is to try and get people on the left to understand, look, this is a very serious issue. People have legitimate concerns. You have to address it. You have to take the lead in addressing it.
01:24:07.940 You can't leave it to, you know, people on the right, 0.96
01:24:11.720 and you certainly can't leave it to people in balaclavas.
01:24:15.700 The practical political reality that is, though,
01:24:18.620 if the right tries to align themselves with these guys
01:24:21.560 and doesn't very, very clearly distance itself from these guys,
01:24:24.940 then people on the left are going to be rubbing their hands.
01:24:28.020 That's the practical political reality.
01:24:30.860 Because my concern is, Dan, and I think why my frustration was showing,
01:24:37.120 is because i think we're in a very precarious position this country it's in a very precarious
01:24:42.420 position economically but it's in a very precarious position culturally and societally
01:24:47.960 and the fact that you have these guys in portsmouth and the fact that there seems to be
01:24:53.960 gaining some traction and some sympathy from the general public is worrying because what it's saying
01:25:01.080 where's the evidence they're getting sympathy from those guys specifically are getting sympathy from
01:25:06.000 i was on the train come this is anecdotal of course i was on the train coming into london
01:25:09.680 this morning uh young guy came and sat opposite me very respectable works in the city you know
01:25:15.760 girlfriend all that and uh he you know he was asking me what i think about it i said look it's
01:25:22.800 not a pretty side it's not something i'm in favor of happening but it shows you the failure of the
01:25:28.240 entire political system to deal with this issue and he was like yeah i totally understand where
01:25:32.080 they're coming from and there's plenty of people yeah but again it's anecdotal that i've spoken to
01:25:38.180 as well who will come up and have a conversation about it my point is this this that is a very bad
01:25:45.580 symptom societally because what that is saying is we do not have trust in the powers that be
01:25:51.760 yeah but i think that the reality is i don't think we needed guys in balaclavas wandering around
01:25:58.680 Dover, take us that.
01:26:00.340 I mean, you guys have been literally banging on about this for years
01:26:03.420 and you've been absolutely right.
01:26:04.460 You've been proven to be absolutely right.
01:26:07.300 The fractures within British society around the issues relating to immigration
01:26:12.540 are very, very real.
01:26:14.420 But the question is, and I think this is again something that people on the right
01:26:19.700 need to start to reflect on, is our aspiration to try and deal with
01:26:25.200 and to directly deal with and address those fractures
01:26:31.180 or is it to attempt to widen them?
01:26:33.240 The reality is there is no solution
01:26:35.580 to any of the problems that we have in society
01:26:38.980 that are solved by mass vigilantes roaming our streets.
01:26:43.120 And let me just say another thing.
01:26:44.520 If we were having this conversation in a different context,
01:26:47.400 and we have all had conversations in this context,
01:26:50.640 in relation to the activities of environmental protesters,
01:26:55.580 anti-capitalist protesters, pro-Palestinian protesters.
01:27:00.180 You and I and the rest of us would not be sitting here saying,
01:27:03.720 yeah, OK, I'm not agreeing with it.
01:27:06.040 Don't get me wrong, I'm not agreeing with it.
01:27:07.300 But you know what?
01:27:08.700 It is a product of the fact that they're not being listened to
01:27:11.480 and it's a product of public concern about these issues.
01:27:13.880 We wouldn't.
01:27:14.320 We would condemn them unequivocally.
01:27:16.480 And that needs to be done with these guys.
01:27:19.260 These are not patriots.
01:27:20.640 They're not heroes.
01:27:21.840 They're not actually really, you know, doing it because, you know,
01:27:28.120 they're enraged by the nature of immigration, 1.00
01:27:32.360 although I'm sure they're all, to a manner, you know,
01:27:35.120 anti-immigration to varying relatively extreme degrees.
01:27:41.400 These guys are putting on balaclavas and dressing up in black
01:27:44.740 and marching around pretending to be soldiers because they get off on it.
01:27:47.400 They enjoy it.
01:27:48.240 They enjoy it.
01:27:48.920 They enjoy being macho.
01:27:49.920 they enjoy the whole thing they enjoy a bit of the publicity that goes around it
01:27:53.740 these are not in any way representative of mainstream opinion on this issue i agree but
01:28:05.060 my point is something else dan my point is when public perception
01:28:09.860 feels that government and these institutions are not taking a problem seriously what that does is
01:28:19.660 it creates a vacuum and when that vacuum when there is a vacuum of it will naturally be filled
01:28:25.400 it's for instance the same with the grooming gangs we didn't want to talk about the grooming gangs
01:28:30.000 anybody who spoke about it openly and honestly was immediately described as an islamophobe a racist
01:28:34.520 a white supremacist okay and then and we shut down and then what happened then other people
01:28:39.420 came in to talk about it and people who a lot of people felt were nefarious and had bad intentions
01:28:44.940 but that is the inevitable consequence of not dealing with an issue.
01:28:48.800 That's fine. I completely agree with you on the groom again.
01:28:52.180 Let me give you another example.
01:28:54.260 Let's take the pro-Palestinian demonstrations,
01:28:56.300 which have intimidated, obviously, significant sections of the Jewish community
01:29:00.880 and actually intimidate me.
01:29:02.220 And I'm not a member of the Jewish community. 0.98
01:29:05.540 They've acted illegally. They've broken the law, etc. 1.00
01:29:08.940 But they are articulating, whether we like it or not, a position that is now shared by an increasing majority of the people.
01:29:21.520 So there was a poll out this morning in relation to Andy Burnham's decision to introduce imposed sanctions on the settlements.
01:29:28.680 60% of the British people supported it, I think 14% opposed. 0.73
01:29:32.400 And I say this as someone who has been a long-standing supporter of Israel.
01:29:37.460 public support for Israel and the activity of Israel
01:29:41.620 post the appalling terror attacks has collapsed.
01:29:45.000 And there is now an increasing clamour
01:29:46.980 amongst mainstream public opinion for the government to act.
01:29:51.280 Now, do you think that justifies the activity
01:29:53.760 of the pro-Palestinian protesters
01:29:55.220 who are intimidating members of the Jewish community?
01:29:57.760 No, well, it depends on what you mean, right? 1.00
01:29:59.280 No, but that's the point.
01:30:00.180 No, no, no, let me just finish.
01:30:02.840 That's it. That's the difference.
01:30:04.160 You just said no. Stop.
01:30:05.820 But there's two of us here.
01:30:07.760 Francis said no.
01:30:08.760 But hang on, we do need to think about...
01:30:11.180 Well, let me say, when Soella called for the marches to be banned,
01:30:14.660 I disagreed with that.
01:30:15.940 People have a right to protest.
01:30:17.520 What they don't have a right is to break the law,
01:30:19.220 and when they break the law, they should be treated.
01:30:21.040 Right, but that's fine.
01:30:22.300 But that's an entirely principled position,
01:30:24.240 but you've got a different position.
01:30:25.280 But you brought up the climate change protesters, right?
01:30:28.560 I've went and documented Extinction Rebellion protests myself.
01:30:34.080 I support their right to participate in those protests.
01:30:36.620 I don't support their right to block ambulances from getting to the hospital.
01:30:41.020 I don't support that.
01:30:42.380 So this is the same with these guys.
01:30:45.320 If they're breaking the law, they should be-
01:30:47.580 Which they are.
01:30:48.240 Then those of them that are breaking the law should be taken away by the police and prosecuted
01:30:53.640 for the laws that they're breaking.
01:30:54.880 If they're protesting non-violently, if they're obeying the law, they have every right to
01:31:00.240 do so, and they should be allowed to do so.
01:31:02.340 Do I like the look of hundreds of men in black clad
01:31:05.380 marching up and down in balaclavas?
01:31:07.100 I do not.
01:31:07.940 But if they're not breaking the law,
01:31:09.660 they're entitled to do that, don't you think?
01:31:10.960 Yeah, no, absolutely.
01:31:11.860 But no one's disputing their right to peacefully protest.
01:31:14.660 And frankly, in my view, they can wear what they like.
01:31:17.240 But the point is, what I'm pointing out
01:31:19.460 is the difference in terms of how the argument is...
01:31:22.760 But I'm entirely consistent in my argument.
01:31:24.440 But with respect, you're adopting a different point of view,
01:31:29.140 which a lot of people is,
01:31:30.400 which is you're not automatically saying...
01:31:33.760 You say that your instinctive reaction is to support
01:31:36.440 the people's right to protest.
01:31:38.620 Yeah, of course. In all cases.
01:31:39.760 But do you support those...
01:31:41.040 But do you support the marches that we've seen?
01:31:43.360 Like, you support the marches that we've seen in Central London.
01:31:45.460 I don't support them.
01:31:46.780 You haven't called for the...
01:31:48.760 I don't believe they should be banned.
01:31:50.280 You haven't said they should be banned.
01:31:51.060 No, I don't believe they should be banned.
01:31:51.800 But I never said that they should be banned, Dan.
01:31:53.540 And what you said is...
01:31:54.740 When you said intimidating, what I thought you meant
01:31:57.960 was that you were holding up placards supporting Hamas, 0.66
01:32:01.560 which is obviously a prescribed terrorist organisation.
01:32:06.160 But that's illegal activity.
01:32:07.340 For now.
01:32:08.680 That's illegal activity.
01:32:09.720 Yeah, but that's what I meant by intimidating behaviour.
01:32:13.060 But what I'm saying is that's fine,
01:32:13.660 but the guys in Balaclavas were also acting illegally.
01:32:17.220 They were causing disruption.
01:32:18.400 They were blocking...
01:32:19.040 No, but I'm just saying it is, you know, literally...
01:32:22.720 When I asked you about an example from the left,
01:32:26.600 you said no and you were unequivocal.
01:32:28.540 Because you're talking about intimidating behaviour.
01:32:30.920 I don't support these guys doing intimidating behaviour.
01:32:33.360 But they are doing it.
01:32:33.840 You certainly wouldn't argue that what they're doing,
01:32:38.340 even if you'd argue, and they were breaking the law,
01:32:40.900 you certainly wouldn't argue that guys wandering around the streets
01:32:43.480 dressed in balaclavas and black and standing in the middle of roads
01:32:45.840 isn't intimidating.
01:32:47.140 If they're standing in the middle of roads blocking traffic,
01:32:49.080 they should be arrested.
01:32:49.500 Okay, what if they're standing on the pavement
01:32:50.520 dressed in balaclavas and black gear?
01:32:54.520 I would personally find that intimidating.
01:32:57.060 Would you?
01:32:57.320 Why? Well, if I know that they're there to prevent illegal immigrants from being allowed 1.00
01:33:02.460 into the country, I'll be honest with you, there's a part of me that's relieved. At least 1.00
01:33:05.660 someone's doing it. If you were a member of Britain's, one of Britain's legally resident 0.96
01:33:10.040 in the UK ethnic minorities, and you were, well, yes, you are, and you saw them, would you feel...
01:33:20.260 If I knew what they're protesting about, I would go over and say what I just said, which is, 0.98
01:33:25.600 i'm relieved someone is at least protesting about this issue but but they should act legally okay
01:33:31.940 but they should act legally well i think there are significant numbers of other members of
01:33:37.500 britain's ethnic minorities who would see those guys and be intimidated by do you dispute that
01:33:42.960 no i don't no no i don't but but people might be intimidated by and and just i would be very
01:33:49.920 Look, hold on.
01:33:50.960 If 300 blue-haired pierced to whatever degree 1.00
01:33:57.800 people marched up and down outside my house...
01:33:59.840 What is your anti-blue-hair prejudice?
01:34:01.920 Well, I have found there's a strong correlation
01:34:04.800 between having blue hair and lots of piercing
01:34:06.440 and not liking Constantine, Kissinger and trigonometry.
01:34:09.840 My point being is, if you saw 300 people
01:34:12.700 who you suspect don't like you personally
01:34:15.480 marching up and down, you'd be intimidated.
01:34:17.920 I suspect they don't like you personally every day.
01:34:19.580 I wouldn't leave the house if that was the threshold.
01:34:21.220 What I'm saying is, but you get my point.
01:34:24.700 People would be intimidated because they ascribe certain views to these people that may or may not be correct, right?
01:34:30.720 We don't know the exact views of those people.
01:34:33.120 All I can see is if the people are protesting, they should do so lawfully, right?
01:34:37.760 Yes, but they're not.
01:34:39.280 And so that would just like people at Palestine marches, I thought, were treated very, very leniently by the police because a lot of them were breaking the law and they were not arrested.
01:34:47.740 Yeah.
01:34:47.880 Right. So we want equality of treatment for all people. And we don't tend to see it a protest, in my opinion. Right. But beyond that, what I'm saying to you is, yeah, you say, you know, a lot of people will be turned off. I agree. I think.
01:35:00.080 I mean, that's a practical. That will be a practical.
01:35:02.080 No, I completely agree. I think I think that's you're entirely right about that. And it gives a lot of people who don't want to talk about the small boats issue a thing to point their finger at and say everyone who cares about the small boats is a balaclava wearing thug.
01:35:15.760 Exactly. I can't even remember how we got onto this issue. But I feel like we've covered the small boats sufficiently. The other thing that it's probably worth talking with you about is it's fair to say you're not Reform's biggest fan. You've made that very clear.
01:35:32.980 I would actually slightly characterize that. It's not that I'm a I'm not a you know, this isn't a football match. I'm not a cheerleader. I'm not a supporter or an opponent. I'm just genuinely assessing where I think.
01:35:44.280 Your genuine assessment is you don't like reform.
01:35:46.760 No, my general assessment, I like lots of people in reform.
01:35:52.100 I wouldn't say I'm a supporter of their party,
01:35:55.560 although I'm not actually a supporter of any political party at the moment.
01:35:58.520 But it is important to say I have written what would widely be regarded
01:36:04.660 as a number of positive pieces about reform.
01:36:06.860 OK, let me just start again.
01:36:08.420 What is your assessment of reform? 0.99
01:36:10.380 They're screwed. It's my assessment of reform. 0.98
01:36:12.440 Why?
01:36:12.640 I think for a number of reasons.
01:36:15.060 I think, let's start with just the events of the last few days.
01:36:26.480 Actually, let's go back a little bit.
01:36:28.700 I think just before we started broadcasting,
01:36:31.440 we were just chatting and I said,
01:36:33.280 how have you been doing?
01:36:33.940 And I said, this has been a surprisingly busy summer politically,
01:36:37.300 of which Andy Burnham and obviously Keir Stammer is a part.
01:36:39.820 But the other reason, certainly through the heart of the summer, was it's actually been a summer dominated by reform and debate about reform, precipitated primarily by Nigel Farage's decision to call that, you know, bizarre by-election in Clapton.
01:36:57.940 And if you remember the narrative surrounding the by-election, the by-election was this had been called primarily as an act of desperation by Nigel Farage.
01:37:09.340 And it was his, I think it was described by some people as his last throw of the dice to achieve two primary objectives.
01:37:17.480 One was to draw a line under the financial scandals, dogging reform, to basically convince the media to stop talking about them.
01:37:25.980 and I would simply put it to get the press to back off.
01:37:31.700 The second thing was to use what he believed would be a strong mandate
01:37:36.560 from his supporters in constituency to transform the broader narrative
01:37:42.700 around reform, to arrest their decline in the polls
01:37:46.060 and arrest the decline in his personal ratings.
01:37:50.780 It is quite clear that he has failed in his objective.
01:37:55.240 Obviously, the questions about reforms, financing and his role in that are intensifying.
01:38:04.480 And that intensifies to an extent that they are cutting through.
01:38:08.200 There was polling, I think, yesterday or the day before, which showed the extent to which now the party is associated with Sleaze.
01:38:14.120 He's associated with Sleaze. This issue is cutting through to the electorate.
01:38:19.260 And as we all know from experience, once a political party becomes tainted with the brand of sleaze, it is very difficult to remove and it can only be removed with a sort of a great overhaul within and sort of rebranding of the organisation.
01:38:38.320 the second thing is that this compounds a fundamental problem that nigel farage has
01:38:45.960 which is if you look at the data he is incredibly popular with around about 20 percent of the
01:38:54.480 electorate and massively popular you know they he walks down the street people pour out pubs
01:39:00.220 they love him his people who are members and activists within reform will walk over
01:39:05.320 broken glass for the guy. But he is also massively unpopular with 60% of the electorate.
01:39:15.660 And these are people, the people who dislike Nigel Farage now really dislike him.
01:39:20.540 And they will simultaneously vote for basically anyone to prevent him and reform securing
01:39:29.660 securing high office and entering Downing Street and those numbers are just simply too toxic
01:39:38.020 and there is a narrative and you know myself and my Westminster colleagues have you know feed into
01:39:45.180 this about Nigel Farage being this great sort of this great showman this man who constantly
01:39:53.060 reinvents himself normal rules of politics don't apply to him that was the case for Nigel Farage
01:39:58.860 maybe 12 sort of 18 months ago that's not the case now nigel farage is now broadly in the
01:40:05.680 situation where boris was somebody who had a similar you know degree of broader public popularity
01:40:12.520 when he was in the midst of the sort of the whole covid crisis and i do not see any way
01:40:22.820 that he transforms his political fortunes as a result but crucially it doesn't really matter
01:40:31.380 whether I think he does he can or can't one thing that we're now seeing inside reform speak to
01:40:38.640 people inside reform it is quite clear that with inside reform that is the perception there is now
01:40:44.160 a clear perception within reform that Nigel Farage is coming to the end of his leadership
01:40:47.960 And that is starting to create and stimulate what is effectively becoming a sort of the leadership election and the race to succeed.
01:40:57.260 Nigel Farage is actually underway now. You can see it in terms of what Zia Yusuf is doing.
01:41:02.760 He is basically setting out his leadership store. We had his sort of virtual leadership campaign video, which he launched at party conference.
01:41:09.760 His interventions, which are increasingly at odds with what Nigel Farage is saying, completely at odds with his colleagues.
01:41:17.960 As a result of that, the other leadership contenders, Robert Jenrick in particular, we'll see it with Richard Tice, they're starting to manoeuvre as well.
01:41:25.760 So you put that whole thing together and that would be very, very difficult for a major political party, a major established political party to sustain.
01:41:38.600 For a party-like reform, a new party, a young party, a party with still a relatively low political base, there is absolutely no way, in my view, it can get from where it is now to actually being potentially a party of government. As I said, I suspect there'll be a general election next year, by a general election next year, and certainly not with Nigel Farage remaining as the leader.
01:42:04.420 So you think he will leave soon?
01:42:05.800 I do, yes. Now, the question is whether or not Andy Byrne calls an election before he basically departs.
01:42:15.260 But as I said, whether I think it or not is irrelevant.
01:42:17.300 One thing I know for certain is people inside Reform think he's going to leave relatively soon,
01:42:21.980 which is why the sort of leadership job is starting.
01:42:25.500 But that, I mean, but surely isn't Reform just a party based around the personality of Farage?
01:42:33.320 You know, I hear this a lot, and I generally don't agree with that.
01:42:38.180 I mean, firstly, for the reasons we've all discussed,
01:42:42.240 you know, we were talking about these people who are watching this programme
01:42:44.760 getting angry and all that sort of stuff.
01:42:47.060 That is a small but still a less significant proportion of the electorate.
01:42:51.920 They've, again, for the reasons you've both articulated,
01:42:55.260 are basically done with the established parties
01:42:57.200 who they think have betrayed them.
01:42:59.480 Or who have betrayed them.
01:43:00.580 Or have betrayed them.
01:43:02.220 It's not that they think that.
01:43:04.020 That's what's happened.
01:43:05.100 Yeah, I'm trying to be sort of going into objective mode here.
01:43:08.340 But if we are going into objective mode, we should say that those parties have betrayed them.
01:43:13.660 If you promise people something and then don't do it, you've betrayed them.
01:43:17.940 Fine.
01:43:18.740 I'll concede your characterization of that.
01:43:23.960 It doesn't change a broader point.
01:43:25.660 I just thought it's important.
01:43:26.780 Yeah, but no, but the reality...
01:43:30.060 You were saying there's still a base of people who view the world the way reform views the world.
01:43:34.040 Yes, and reform will have political influence moving forward,
01:43:38.300 particularly in an environment where to secure a majority of 170,
01:43:41.620 you only need to secure 34% of the vote, as Keir Starmer did.
01:43:43.960 We're not in a situation where you need to get 45% to win an election.
01:43:47.320 So in that context, they will remain.
01:43:49.420 Also, I say this consistently, there are some, what I would regard as serious,
01:43:56.300 other alternative serious political players within reform.
01:43:58.880 I think Robert Jenrick is, whatever you think about, his inability to sort of mask his very naked political ambition.
01:44:05.040 He is a serious political operator.
01:44:07.180 I think Richard Tice has thought, you know, deeply about the professionalisation of reform.
01:44:12.360 And, you know, I've spoken to Richard about, he was on TV yesterday saying, who the hell is Dan Hodges?
01:44:18.840 But Richard and I have actually had some really interesting discussions about how you sort of his strategy for mainstreaming the reform brand, et cetera.
01:44:32.360 And, you know, and he gets it.
01:44:35.780 And, you know, also, you know, somebody like Lee Anderson,
01:44:39.380 who is obviously very much a better noire of the left,
01:44:42.220 can articulate, I think, in a very, very effective way,
01:44:45.840 the genuine hopes and dreams of those people that we were talking about
01:44:49.540 who, as you say, have been betrayed.
01:44:51.660 So the idea it's just the Nigel Farage show,
01:44:55.960 I think is just, I think is just, I think is wrong.
01:45:01.440 And in any case, it can't just be the Nigel Farage show
01:45:05.140 for the reasons that I say.
01:45:08.220 The reality is his numbers,
01:45:10.380 just forget Nigel Farage.
01:45:12.200 If you had a politician,
01:45:13.160 you put in front of me a politician
01:45:14.280 with those levels of approval.
01:45:16.040 Because the key thing is,
01:45:17.080 if you look at other politicians,
01:45:18.300 senior politicians,
01:45:19.700 there'll be a section of the electorate
01:45:20.960 that like them.
01:45:22.560 There'll be a section of the electorate
01:45:23.540 that dislike them.
01:45:24.560 But that section of the electorate
01:45:25.740 that dislike them,
01:45:26.580 as opposed to either not really knowing
01:45:27.880 who they are or being agnostic about them,
01:45:30.840 is much, much lower.
01:45:32.160 That's the problem with Nigel Farage.
01:45:33.580 Everybody says Nigel Farage
01:45:34.800 is necessary to drive reformers' base.
01:45:37.000 The problem for Nigel is,
01:45:38.860 yeah, he does drive reformers' base,
01:45:40.660 but crucially, he drives his opponent's base as well.
01:45:43.860 And when you get into that situation politically,
01:45:45.920 you're basically done.
01:45:46.660 But do you not think whoever replaces him
01:45:49.300 would immediately find themselves,
01:45:51.500 if they were lucky,
01:45:52.560 to be known by the entire country,
01:45:54.140 which they're not, right?
01:45:55.380 Compared to Nigel Farage,
01:45:56.800 nobody knows Vazir Youssef,
01:45:58.240 nobody knows Robert Jennerick,
01:45:59.620 nobody knows even Lee Anderson and Richard Tice, right?
01:46:02.900 but the moment you become leader of reform 60 percent of the country will say you're fascist
01:46:08.540 and evil and will not vote for you and will vote for anyone who opposes you depends it depends the
01:46:14.300 it depends what the strategy depends what the strategy is i mean i think the part of the problem
01:46:19.060 for reform is you know a year ago they were on 31 of the vote so you know and obviously there
01:46:25.780 were people running around saying oh you're fascists you're racist you're all that sort of
01:46:29.040 stuff, and that stuff was just bouncing off. The problem is, the reality is they've played into
01:46:34.460 their opponent's hands. And so what's happened is, as I said, you know, I was speaking to
01:46:38.400 people at the time who were talking me through that the next stage of reform strategy was to
01:46:44.420 broaden and mainstream their message. What happened was, there was obviously then the
01:46:48.860 split with Rupert Lowe and the establishment of Restore. And, you know, I used exactly,
01:46:55.380 We literally saw it this weekend.
01:46:57.540 We literally saw it.
01:46:59.020 Nigel Farage came out with a very, very clear position
01:47:01.820 on the demonstrators, disgusting, etc.
01:47:05.420 Rupert Lowe says, no, actually, I'm putting my arm around him.
01:47:07.900 Suddenly, Nigel Farage shifts his position
01:47:09.620 and reforms shift their position.
01:47:12.100 And what they're doing now is,
01:47:13.760 rather than pursue that strategy of reaching out
01:47:16.280 and mainstreaming their messages,
01:47:18.380 which I think could potentially have been successful
01:47:20.760 and could potentially be successful in the future,
01:47:24.060 they're basically chasing after a stall.
01:47:26.140 No, they're shoring up the right.
01:47:27.600 Well, they're trying to...
01:47:28.960 Like Burnham is trying to shore up the left
01:47:30.320 by doing the settlement thing.
01:47:33.080 Yeah, that's kind of what they're trying to do,
01:47:34.820 but they're doing it from a much lower base.
01:47:37.700 Because the point is, the reality is,
01:47:40.740 Labour's vote sharing in the polls
01:47:42.040 is probably slightly underestimating
01:47:43.560 where Labour are at the moment
01:47:45.180 because there are people who are saying
01:47:46.220 they vote Green and Dem and whatever
01:47:47.860 who won't, it'll come back.
01:47:50.720 But equally, the polls are overestimating.
01:47:53.260 reforms support because obviously whenever you have a party of protest who position themselves
01:47:58.460 as you know with the anti-establishment people obviously when people are asked by a pollster
01:48:02.200 who you're going to vote for it's very easy to say reform but then when it comes to a general
01:48:05.980 election when you're actually formed you know you're actually voting for a government as we've
01:48:09.600 seen with all parties of all persuasions who are minority parties their support then then then gets
01:48:14.720 squeezed and shrinks well just let me push back on that a little bit because what about we all
01:48:20.060 know the shy Tory phenomenon where you know obviously people don't want to admit that they
01:48:25.200 vote conservative because there's a stigma to it shall we say I mean that's got to be 10x with
01:48:31.720 reform hasn't it no because I think the whole point about reform's brand and also you know
01:48:38.020 we're in a different we're in a different space now in the era of populism you know my experience
01:48:43.340 of reform supporters is that you know people who support reform aren't in any way ashamed or
01:48:49.100 nervous about it they want everyone to know it and they want people to know it because that is
01:48:52.860 in a sense part of the deal that you are standing up and you are basically defining yourself
01:48:58.560 as someone who is um someone who is you know is taking a stand against the traditional
01:49:05.920 traditional establishment and the other the other problem is
01:49:09.740 yeah there was in the past a you know shy tori thing but if there is a shy reform uh phenomenon
01:49:18.260 and that is because of the increasing toxicity of the party and the party's brand.
01:49:24.700 And again, I can't remember what the poll was.
01:49:28.160 There was a poll yesterday which shows reform now significantly ahead of Labour
01:49:34.000 in a poll when you're questioned which of the parties do you like least
01:49:39.280 and which of the parties will you go out and make a point of voting against.
01:49:43.280 And this is the problem reform have.
01:49:46.220 Because of their attempt to chase Restore, they are toxifying their brand to the extent that people are now actively going out and saying,
01:50:00.420 look, I'm going to vote for basically anyone if it means Reform won't win.
01:50:05.480 Yeah, it does seem like they, you know, from an outside perspective, they overreacted to the creation of Restore.
01:50:13.760 Yeah, yeah.
01:50:14.460 And I don't understand why.
01:50:15.740 Do you understand why?
01:50:16.720 Yeah, I do.
01:50:17.480 I don't know whether it's personality conflicts.
01:50:19.560 Well, no, I think it's the nature of the online world.
01:50:24.740 I mean, early in the history of trigonometry,
01:50:27.960 we had this episode.
01:50:29.880 We only had about 90,000 subscribers
01:50:32.020 when suddenly we started, you know,
01:50:35.140 we're basically people who thought of us
01:50:37.040 as being in the center.
01:50:38.080 We have a lot of criticisms of the kind of woke thing,
01:50:40.920 but that's kind of where we were.
01:50:42.740 And then we started getting like loads of like
01:50:44.980 Nazi comments in, in our, on our videos, which we were horrified by. So we publicly said, like,
01:50:52.860 you know, basically get out of here. This is not for you. And then it turned out that there was
01:50:57.260 some kind of behind the scenes orchestration between these Nazis who were brigading our videos. 0.81
01:51:03.400 Right. 0.92
01:51:04.260 In order to create this perception that there were loads of them. It was like three people in
01:51:08.620 the basement somewhere. Yeah.
01:51:09.800 but when that happens you it well particularly in our case when you're a small channel 0.93
01:51:15.780 it's you're like oh what the fuck is going on like this is this is not who we are it's not 0.60
01:51:20.300 what we created it for these people are and it took us a little while to just go oh this will 0.99
01:51:25.500 pass because for reform i imagine it would have felt like oh you know uh this guy's left our party
01:51:33.040 and you know i think it is fair to say rupert was treated badly by by reform i don't know exactly
01:51:38.220 what happened but um but suddenly they're picking up x percent of the vote you're seeing them come
01:51:45.260 up with policies you and you know that being a fringe party of opposition has its benefits
01:51:51.940 which you can say things bluntly in a way that you can't if you're seeking that mainstream
01:51:57.100 credibility and so when if you're on on you know on that part of the right and you're seeing
01:52:02.860 rupert lowe talking about certain issues that you care about and he's given it you know 10 out of
01:52:07.560 10 on on powerful rhetoric and presentation and whatever you're kind of going that's a good point
01:52:12.480 you know you said that well etc so i i understand why they maybe panicked a little bit and started
01:52:17.740 but i mean i don't think the majority of the electorate is in that position uh and it does
01:52:23.760 yeah i agree with that i think they definitely seem to over index that wing i mean there is
01:52:30.680 Just one more thing as well, Dan, just the point.
01:52:32.980 I think, look, size plays a part as well.
01:52:37.720 Let's look at the way that the Labour have dealt with the Greens.
01:52:40.960 The Greens have posed just as much, if not more, of a threat to Labour
01:52:45.420 than Restore did to reform.
01:52:47.460 But Labour never panicked.
01:52:49.080 Labour never, I didn't see them behaving,
01:52:53.100 show any of the same behaviours or trying to attack the Greens
01:52:56.860 or do anything like that.
01:52:58.200 Even when the Greens won and Gorton and Denton.
01:53:01.620 Because I think it's about the size of the Labour Party
01:53:04.700 and it's about the history of the Labour Party.
01:53:07.280 The Labour Party has been in existence for over, what is it, 100 years.
01:53:11.540 There are people there with experience who've won elections who go,
01:53:15.360 look, this happened and whenever it was, just chill out.
01:53:19.280 It will be fine. We'll weather the storm.
01:53:21.800 I'm not sure there are those people within reform.
01:53:24.940 And reform is a very, very new party.
01:53:27.340 And when you're very new, when you're much smaller as a political party,
01:53:32.400 you are ultimately going to be less secure.
01:53:34.660 Yeah, you're fragile.
01:53:35.500 Yeah, I mean, also, I mean, you know, I was speaking to somebody at Reform Conference
01:53:41.240 who was basically saying, look, what you need to understand now is
01:53:44.280 we know we're not going to win the next election, right?
01:53:46.860 That is not our objective to the extent it ever realistically was their objective.
01:53:52.580 their objective now is to either is to kind of like overtake the Tories and basically supplant
01:53:59.580 the Tories as the as as the opposition or get even if you want to go like a 10-year strategy
01:54:05.480 get a significant number of seats at the next election that the next stage they're in a position
01:54:11.760 to to supplant the Tories and so to do that they're now adopting a sort of a course vote
01:54:19.100 strategy to have you know what we've got will hold but i think there are two problems for them
01:54:23.460 with that one is that the thing as i said 20 in my view is significantly overestimating reforms
01:54:29.580 current support just if you look historically at what happens to protest parties but the other
01:54:37.460 thing is because they are starting to toxify their brand so much that will start to have a
01:54:45.580 I think, an increasing impact, and we're already seeing it, on the soft levels of reform support.
01:54:56.920 And crucially, something that's happened, which is a small thing, but a very significant thing,
01:55:00.620 is because of the rise of Restore, an increasing number of pollsters are starting to prompt for
01:55:06.620 Restore. So in the opinion polls, we'll start to see Restore's vote going up. And I think we saw
01:55:11.620 in was it the more in common poll i think it was the more in common poll started prompting for to
01:55:16.340 restore immediately restore got i think four or five percent and the tories jumped up jumped ahead
01:55:21.940 of them now the problem for reform is they are clinging on by their fingernails because they are
01:55:30.340 just about at the moment clinging on to a lead over the tories once they drop below the tories
01:55:36.820 into third place in the polls at that point i think it really is game over i think at that
01:55:44.020 point what you would see is a you know a very fast cratering in support because at that point
01:55:50.660 it's quite clear look you may like some of you might may like nigel you may like some of the
01:55:55.780 stuff nigel says but if you want to stop andy burnham you want to stop his you know you know
01:56:00.740 big grand socialist agenda you're gonna have to stick with the tourists and i think that's
01:56:06.180 the danger for them of even having the trying to cling on to you know the base that they they've
01:56:13.060 already got or they perceive it i don't know i think look i think it's important to remember
01:56:16.260 the context of all of this which is for reform to win a hundred seats at the next election would be
01:56:22.100 insanely amazing historically speaking we shouldn't forget this right so of course they were riding
01:56:28.040 high in the polls uh and people were talking they were talking about you know the hundred days of
01:56:32.680 government and that may still happen may not but given that they have five MPs for them to get 100
01:56:39.240 MPs or even 80 MPs of the next election would be a massive result well if they got it to be
01:56:44.120 perfectly honest from from where they are now if they got 40 MPs in the next election I think that
01:56:47.640 would be quite a considerable achievement and that would and that would and that would sort of as I
01:56:52.620 say that would anchor them at that point in right in in British politics but also you know I mean
01:56:58.840 the other thing is if they want to be a serious political party and they they do want to form a 0.98
01:57:07.640 government at some point in the future you know they are going to have to let go of nanny's sort
01:57:15.400 of apron springs at some point you know nigel farage is not whatever you think about nigel farage
01:57:21.720 you know he's not immortal and i think anybody who looked at his you know his interviews he
01:57:26.920 gave at the end of the reform conference got a bit of an insight into what he's thinking about
01:57:32.020 is how long he wants to be in this for. What did he say about that? Well, he was talking about
01:57:39.180 very much, and he introduced the narrative, he was talking very much about how his family had
01:57:44.720 asked him to get out of politics and he contemplated it, etc. And some people were saying
01:57:48.500 this is a kind of like launching a soft resignation. But the reality is, you know, I think this is
01:57:55.140 across the board reform are just going to have to grow up they're going to have to grow up as a
01:57:59.120 as a party you know this you know and this constant narrative oh everyone's out to get us
01:58:04.440 and the establishment and all that sort of stuff when they keep making this succession of ludicrous
01:58:09.440 and goals i mean that was a was a by-election taking place which was supposed to draw draw a
01:58:14.000 line under the funding crisis and there are nigel farage's senior age going around tight
01:58:19.280 for dodgy donations you know these are not at the moment this is not at the moment whatever you
01:58:24.980 think of them a serious alternative party of government at the moment and they you know and
01:58:29.580 can i just ask you one question on that point i mean the the point they're a small party so
01:58:34.560 why head of policy is soliciting donations or why uh pr person is doesn't make any sense to me i
01:58:41.860 don't understand why that was going on but uh i think the point the point that some people have
01:58:47.360 made which is if you subject any party to this level of scrutiny where you've got activist groups
01:58:53.600 doing year-long entrapment things to try and catch people out, etc. I mean, I was reading
01:59:00.740 Michael Crick's biography of Nigel Farage, which is by no means a complimentary book,
01:59:04.780 I don't know if you've read it or not. But one of the things Crick talks about is the extent to
01:59:09.020 which the Tories cheated in their elections against Farage's party, which I think would
01:59:14.000 have been UKIP or Brexit party at the time. So, I mean, don't all political parties get up to
01:59:21.060 this sort of stuff yeah all political parties do but all political parties receive the scrutiny
01:59:26.040 no they don't not like this i mean where where is the right-wing infiltration of labor trying to
01:59:31.420 expose donations it's not happening right whereas this latest channel four thing it wasn't a channel
01:59:36.460 four thing at all you had a bunch of foreign-funded far-left activists who did this then handed it
01:59:43.240 over to channel my memory i mean my memory may be tripping me up but i certainly remember
01:59:48.120 I think there was some sort of undercover
01:59:52.880 there might have been some sort of undercover operation
01:59:54.920 around the sort of the old cash for honours
01:59:57.600 Yeah, but you're going back into what is ancient history
02:00:00.660 for most people
02:00:01.180 It was just the early days of the Blair government
02:00:03.260 No, but I mean
02:00:03.960 Well, no, it was the latter
02:00:05.900 I think it was the latter days of the Blair government
02:00:07.660 Middle days
02:00:08.540 So the point was
02:00:09.260 Tony Blair, you know
02:00:10.580 Tony Blair was interviewed under caution
02:00:12.460 when he was in Downing Street
02:00:14.040 We saw Labour politicians around cash for honours
02:00:16.660 But that's 20 years ago
02:00:17.700 I'm talking about now.
02:00:18.600 Who's investigating Andy Burnham's donations?
02:00:20.900 Nobody.
02:00:21.520 Where's the activist far-right group that's doing that?
02:00:23.920 But the reality is you're not going to get,
02:00:26.620 but this comes back to what we were talking about,
02:00:28.540 about being serious.
02:00:29.420 You're not going to get Andy Burnham
02:00:30.840 or anyone around Andy Burnham
02:00:32.500 sitting down with anyone saying,
02:00:34.920 look, give us some dodgy donations.
02:00:37.100 You know, that's the...
02:00:37.980 They have other people further away doing that.
02:00:39.820 That's the reality.
02:00:40.660 You know, there are different people
02:00:42.240 who deal with the donation side of this.
02:00:44.280 Andy Burnham wouldn't go anywhere near it.
02:00:45.700 Whereas you've got Nigel Farage
02:00:46.900 in the middle of a by-election, sitting there saying,
02:00:48.980 well, I'm boys, isn't this great?
02:00:51.400 You know, I mean, and then saying, oh, God, it's all, you know,
02:00:54.560 they're out to get us.
02:00:55.780 Dan, thanks for coming on, mate.
02:00:57.120 It's good to chat.
02:00:57.780 I appreciate your perspective.
02:00:58.320 Good, thank you for having me.
02:00:59.380 What's the one thing we're not talking about in society that we should be?
02:01:02.980 Oh, my God, the one thing we're not talking about in society.
02:01:07.540 Don't say Andy Burnham.
02:01:09.660 No, I, what I find interesting is the way,
02:01:15.060 it's not one thing the way we jump from a subtle consensus of what the most significant issue of
02:01:23.120 the great intractable issue that we need to solve at the moment is obviously at the moment we're
02:01:28.180 talking about immigration like i said i was told you know social care was the was was the biggest
02:01:36.820 issue i think before that i remember being told you know we had an education crisis that if it
02:01:43.540 wasn't solved, that the country was going to fall apart. Lack of productivity was another
02:01:52.020 great one. I don't think the problem is that there's one thing that we're not talking about.
02:02:04.380 I think the problem is that we only have the capacity to focus on one thing at a time.
02:02:13.520 spend all our time and we're currently talking about immigration and this is that this is the
02:02:16.980 big issue in 10 or 15 years people may not be us may well be us we'll be sitting around this table
02:02:22.760 and there'll be another major political issue and we'll all go why the hell didn't we see that
02:02:25.680 coming you know that's it i mean maybe it's maybe but then again maybe not because we might be all
02:02:31.500 dead yeah exactly so you know yeah uh dan hodges thanks so much for coming on head on over to
02:02:38.920 triggerpod.co.uk, where Dan's going to answer your questions.
02:02:44.100 As a former Labour researcher, this current government must be particularly disheartening
02:02:48.160 for you. Do you believe there's any hope of Labour actually coming up with a working policy
02:02:52.180 on defence, welfare, education, the NHS, net zero, or anything else?
02:03:08.920 You