Furious Farage resigns in two-fingered salute to establishment

0:03The Telegraph.

0:11ACAST powers the world's best podcasts. Here's a show that we recommend. A photographer in Texas earns an extra$47 ,000 a year shooting Star Wars cosplay portraits. A teacher in Maryland turns her woodworking hobby into a five-figure side income without leaving the classroom. And a couple in Pennsylvania will rent you backyard chickens for the season, so you can try the egg-laying life without commitment. My name is Chris Guillebeau. I'm the host of Side Hustle School. I share these kinds of stories every single day, in detail, with full transparency about the numbers. The point isn't just to inspire you, it's to show you what's possible.

0:49Proof that ordinary people are quietly building extra income in surprising ways, including a few ideas you can borrow. Less than 10 minutes a day, every day. Subscribe or follow Side Hustle School wherever you get your podcasts or find us directly at sidehustleschool.com. ACAST helps creators launch, grow, and monetize their podcasts everywhere. ACAST.com.

1:17What a day. Two major breaking stories. First, a by-election. Furious Nigel Farage has triggered one in his constituency of Clacton, telling his voters, if I win, you win, in a scathing statement against the establishment and the press. Plus, Prince Harry suffers yet another legal blow as he loses his privacy case against the publisher of the Daily Mail. Welcome to a special breaking news edition of the Daily Tea with me, Tim Stanley. And me, Camilla Tominey.

1:53Tim, it's two o 'clock. We are waiting for a statement from Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, on his political future. Let's listen to what he's got to say. I've thought about it hard and I've decided today, today I will resign as a Member of Parliament for Clacton-on-Sea, thereby forcing a by-election, which should happen, I hope, in short order. No, I've decided that the people of Clapton should be the judges of my actions. This will be a people versus the establishment by-election. It's a chance to stick two fingers up to the entire establishment, to frankly tell them where to go. And that is why I will be putting my name forward to stand in this by-election.

2:43I will fight to win. I will fight to continue the political revolution that reform has started. And I would say this to you, the voters of Clacton. If I win, you win. Because if I lose, they win. And we will never, with the two old parties, get the type of fundamental change that we need to fix broken Britain. Thank you. Well, Tim, it took him 20 minutes to get there, flanked by two union flags looking very statesman-like, I thought. Nigel Farage, at the end of a diatribe about the state of Britain, the establishment plot to unseat him and his deep frustration with how he's been treated by the media, most notably Sky News, he's announced he's resigning as the MP for Clacton-on-Sea to force a by-election that he then intends to stand in so that he can basically turn around to the political establishment two-fingered salute.

3:42The public has chosen me, not you, and this is how I intend to proceed in my quest on Downing Street. He said he could walk away. I could go to the United States, he says. He says he's had plenty of offers. But by running in Clacton, what is he doing? He's giving us another Makerfield. Makerfield was a test of Andy Burnham. This will be a test of Nigel Farage. And it means that when Burnham enters office, the country's eyes will all instead be on Clacton and whether or not reform can hold onto the seat, which I suspect it will. Now, there are two questions here. One, will this help reform nationally or would it look like a complete destruction?

4:27Or two, will this actually solve the problem of the potential investigation of Nigel Farage for the donations given to him. We'll come back to that in a moment. First of all, the speech itself, I was making notes while we were going through it, it's very interesting. As you say, I thought the style was almost prime ministerial. Yes. He was... Presidential, you could say that. There was, shall we say, a cold, cold fury there, but it never quite boiled to the surface. He talked about getting elected in 2024. He said he had some reluctance about getting back into national politics. Nonetheless, he said, I really enjoyed the job of being an MP.

5:05That was the first hint that he might not be an MP anymore. We looked at each other at that point. I think we're both thinking, why is that in the past tense? He points out the reform has been very popular for 350 opinion polls in a row. It has maintained a lead. But he says the establishment is trying to bring me down by foul means. And he links this really to three separate areas. One, the cancellation of elections. This is local elections, which the government, in collusion with the Tories, he said, tries to deprive people of a vote. Secondly, attacks upon our donors by labelling them as foreign interference.

5:47And thirdly, by all these attacks upon himself, which he says amounts to almost inciting people to go after him, while at the same time removing his security. Just to go in on that, there's a particular example of what he describes as completely unacceptable behaviour by Sky News. Now, people might want to think, are you singling out Sky News because it's the main rival to GB News, which is one of your employers? Put that to one side. We saw some footage earlier of him at an airport. He's just been in America with Donald Trump celebrating July the 4th, met with J.D. Vance there, has posted an image in the Oval Office once again of him with the Donald.

6:28He's come back, he's landed and he's had a right go at a Sky News cameraman, basically saying that apparently they besieged his daughter's house. It's totally unacceptable to get my family involved. And that's the final straw. So for him, this is quite personal. He feels that his family should not be subjected to intrusion on the basis of what he chooses to do for a living. And incidentally, it's interesting to see him list Leveson. Normally, people on the right are quite anti-Leveson because they think it's too much press regulation and oversight. This is happening, of course, on a very busy news day, and you're going to be discussing this with Victoria Ward later, our deputy royal editor, because this has happened at the moment that Prince Harry has lost his£50 million claim against the male newspaper group for invasion of privacy.

7:14So just lock that in. But the point is, I think people will have sympathy with a politician of his recognition, his status, saying, don't bring my kids into this. OK, albeit grown up children, but I don't think the press should be outside the door of one of Farage's daughters. If it's correct, it happens somewhat inadvertently because what he's saying is that the Sunday Times, with his investigation by Gabriel Pogrand, who, as Nigel Farage pointed out, has previously said publicly that he despises Nigel Farage. He posted that on Exit. Nonetheless, by the way, journalists can dislike a politician and still write fairly about them because they're still governed by Ipso and other rules around how you report and you're governed by the law of the land.

7:56But the Times put out photographs of where Farage lives, and it seems that one of these properties is in fact where his daughter lives. And he alleges that the Sky News then turned up. So it may not have been their intention to harass his daughter or harangue his daughter, but that seems to have been what happened. Now, he also brought up again the question of the£5 million donation, and what was that for? This is interesting. He did not bring up the stuff about posh George Cottrell. No. and the donations that may have gone to Nigel Farage in the 12 months prior to his election. Again, we'll come back to that because it's a detail, but it's a very important one.

8:33But he mentioned the five million pounds. What has this money gone on? He still won't actually say, no, this is where the money has been spent or it's sitting in an account. But instead, he's saying it is meant for my security. And he gives us an example of the kind of threat against him. He says that he was in a local pub in Kent and a mob of 30 people showed up. He went to his car. They surrounded it, pushed and kicked it so badly that the car had to be written off. And he also points out that in the aftermath of the Charlie Kirk assassination, the Home Office actually withdrew 70 percent of the funding for his security.

9:11So he was justifying it. So from his point of view, left-wing parties, the Labour Party and the Tory Party, have on the one hand put a target on his back by saying this man represents a force of hate bankrolled by Russia. And then at the same time, they've taken away the money he needs to defend himself. So he's saying this is why I'm receiving money from people. And he used the word unconditional to describe that five million pounds from the crypto billionaire. And that then doubles down on his earlier claim when he did a broadcast round saying it's none of your business how I spent it. If it's unconditional, although some of it's going on security, he's trying to reiterate the point that he could spend that money on what he likes.

9:52He made the example, didn't he, of I could spend it on Ferraris if I wanted to. I thought it was quite clever. And again, this is so Faragean to like appeal to the man in the pub by saying, I went through a period in my career where I left the city where I was making quite good money to campaign for Brexit. I was a member of the European Parliament, doesn't pay comparatively that well to the city, although the common man... It still pays very well and its allowances are particularly generous. Are generous, okay, but whatever. He said that basically he lost out on a lot of earnings because he dedicated his life to politics.

10:27Yes. He obviously takes credit for the referendum result in 2016. And I think we can agree with the statement that it would not have happened without him. Yes, others were involved, but he is the ultimate Mr Brexit. That's a fact. And he said, why are people uncomfortable with the fact that in the last decade, I have made quite a good deal of money. Now, he's trying to make the point and separate himself from the reform operation in the years and months leading up to him standing in Clacton, isn't he? He's trying to say, in that period, I was on the beach circuit. I was on the sort of rubber chicken circuit, so to speak.

11:04I was giving lectures. I was broadcasting. I was writing. I was a social media influencer with seven million followers. Seven million followers, yes. I mean, he was recording those videos and stuff for Cammy and things, fair enough. Yes. So he's trying to say really that he wasn't in politics at all, up until the point that he declared his candidacy. Yes. And he said, do we want leaders who make no money? In other words, contrasting himself with labor ministers who have no experience of the private sector. But I think, I'm sorry, I understand the argument about the threat to his security. And I'm very sympathetic about the idea that the establishment is ganging up on him.

11:46I think it unquestionably is. But he's conflating two different things. The question of personal earnings, about which I don't believe there's any controversy, and the question of donations of cash or in kind to him. Those are two different things. And on the latter thing, the question here is what he received in the 12 months prior to becoming an MP, and whether or not he declared it. The fact of receiving it itself is not necessarily a problem. It's whether or not he properly declared it. Now note that he said, again, this was a very loyally speech. Some people have compared it to Nixon's Chequers speech in 1952 when he was trying to save his spot on the Republican nomination.

12:28And he went through a list of all the donations he had received and finally said, the one thing we're going to keep is this little dog called Chequers, right? But he said, I have not broken the law and then he separately discussed the rules of parliament. Now if it were judged that he had broken the rules of parliament by receiving money and not declaring it properly then he could be suspended for 30 days and that would trigger, could trigger a recall and a by-election in Clacton. So some people will say that what Nigel Farage is actually trying to do here is get ahead of that by holding a by-election in advance.

13:05Now that's significant because when we were at the Spectator Party last week, the talk of the party was this idea that people were gearing up for a by-election in Clacton. Now that could be because... And that was the opposition who were gearing up for it. Precisely. Now that rumour sort of circulated among the event and then people were trying to weigh it up. Well, did it mean A, that the commissioner was minded to suspend him for a period long enough to engender a recall petition? Was it because Farage himself has had enough and is going to stand down. What's that all about? He has taken the wind out of the sails of the investigation because there is no sanction now that he can be slapped with, that he hasn't already preempted.

13:50Ah, but you say that. And this is the thing. If I refer to the House of Commons procedural protocol in respect of the Code of Conduct, it says, if Parliament is dissolved or the member otherwise ceases to be a member while an investigation is in progress. The commissioner will suspend their investigation until the member is re-elected. If the member is not returned to parliament, the commissioner will decide if it is appropriate and proportionate to resume their investigation. So presumably, the investigation would be suspended until after the Clacton by-election. So my reading of this, and I'm happy to be contradicted, is that if he's triggered this by election.

14:31Let's say there's an investigation begun into him. It doesn't go away because he's left Parliament and then been re-elected. Theoretically, the investigation just picks up from where it let off when he is re-elected. There's a precedent for this. Owen Paterson stood down. He continued to be investigated, not just for months, but for years. Right. Having said that, doesn't it nullify any concerns that the Reform Party might have about anything that was given, cash, a benefit in kind, help in any way that could be deemed to have influenced him as a parliamentarian? If you resign, don't you start the clock again on the 12-month period.

15:20I mean, I know it's technical. No, no, no, no, that would make sense. In which case, but then we're 12 months from 2023 and I suppose he's probably been reporting correctly in that time and would report correctly from now on. Sure. Either way, I don't think this is quite the get away from the investigation that perhaps it's intended to be. Get out of jail free card. Well, and of course he's not in jail and we must be careful about this. No, I know. I'm using that talk. But what he's trying to do, and we discussed this yesterday, and it's worth remembering, in 2021, after he had lost the presidential election, not that he accepts that he did, Donald Trump's career went into something of a decline.

16:02Ron DeSantis emerged in Florida. People were talking about maybe the time has passed on Donald Trump. One thing that revived Donald Trump's career were the investigations into him. While this was all going on, a court has ruled in France that Marine Le Pen is going to be subject to house arrest, which I find bizarre. But she will be allowed to run in the presidential election. She just have to do it from home. Well, no, but it'll end before that period. So my point is, this is part of a pattern of the left trying to defeat the right through the courts or through investigative committees. And I'm not sure it works.

16:39It might embolden him. I mean, even if the opposition parties throw everything at Clacton on Sea, he has so much local celebrity. Absolutely. He's going to increase his majority and then be able to turn round to the country, as you said, you made the point right at the beginning of this, and do an Andy Burnham, do a Makerfield and say that Clacton maketh the man. Whereas Makerfield maketh the Prime Minister, Clacton on Sea maketh the future Prime Minister. if only you would come with me and I will give you back your country. Oh, hope in every heart, growth in every postcard. Standing on the white cliffs of Dover, presumably.

17:16Or it could be that as when David Davis in about 2008 triggered a by-election on the issue of ID cards and civil liberties, which he won very easily, everyone just regarded it as a big waste of money. We knew you were going to win that seat. It's a safe Tory seat. Some people in Clacton might be annoyed at the public expense. and that they're being forced to the polls. And there's part of me thinking it might have been better for him to have been forced out, forced into a by-election, so he can say to people, they have tried to actually remove your MP, rather than him triggering one. And some people will be speculating, is that because he really is guilty of something, and he knows he's guilty of it, and so again, he's hoping to get ahead of the committee by going now.

18:03But just to finish on the more macro picture, when it comes to the political future of Nigel Farage, those who were quietly whispering, is he standing down? Is he standing down? Do not quite understand the man, or indeed the politician that he is, do they? Why would he have got to this point, and as you said, be leading in 350 of the latest opinion polls, as far as reform is concerned, and suddenly quit? Yes. Because people were citing personal reasons, and maybe he's doing this, and maybe he's doing that, and it's all become too much. But this is a massive doubling down. I mean, that statement did remind me of the presser that we were both in when he announced not only that he was standing for Clacton, but that he was taking on the helm of reform.

18:50I mean, we remember looking at his deputy now, Richard Tice's crestfallen little face. He had been steadying the ship for that whole period between Brexit and the idea that we were going to have a next general election. and then suddenly Farage sweeps in to the rescue almost on his white horse. So what is this telling us really, Tim? It's telling us that it doesn't matter what is thrown at him. Nigel Farage is going precisely nowhere. I think the press is going to dog him by asking him what are you trying to prove with this by-election? And if I were Labour or the Tories, I'd be minded to effectively pull out of it and just let Nigel get on with it and say to the country, he's wasting your time and he's wasting Clacton's time.

19:36I'm not quite sure what he's proving. Andy Burnham was proving that he could become prime minister. He was proving that he could win in the Red Wall. He was proving that Labour wasn't completely dead among his traditional working class supporters. All Nigel Farage is going to do is prove that the people who elected him by a large amount two years ago still support him. Still quite like him. It's not as if he's testing the reform message somewhere new. The good thing is it's darn sight easier to get to Clacton from my house than Manchester. Which is useful for us when it comes to future daily tea.

20:07I think we will be going on the road. We're going to go to another pier. You and I are going to have an ice cream. We had that wonderful time in Worthing when we did the Royal Special. It writes itself. And Clacton's very nice. And you know what? That's the perfect link. I say the word link because guess where I'm going? I'm heading up to Glasgow to film an episode of The Weakest Link. Yes. What do I have to say? Bank! Bank. I think so. I've forgotten how it works. Well, it's like some contestants together. So I need to trot off to that. Yes. I'm just going to give you my penny worth on Prince Harry now, because you're going to speak to Vicky in a moment to analyse that.

20:44Let's not underestimate just how humiliating this is for Prince Harry, who, sorry for me mixing up sort of English icons, but this was kind of like he wanted to be George slaying the dragon, right? He wanted to be the person who fulfilled his mother's legacy as the most hounded woman of the 20th century by taking on the press and winning. He had a particular animus of all of the newspapers that he has been taking on. It's the male group that he hates the most, right? He feels that the male and the male on Sunday and the male online have made his life a living hell. That this case has now collapsed when he has put so much personal capital into it and so much cash, as ever is the case with these.

21:29The only people who are walking all the way to the bank on this are the lawyers. Yes. On both sides. They always win. They always win in the end. This is a humiliation because part of the Sussex shtick is we are victims. We have been victims and we have been treated appallingly. And Vicky will go through the judgment in its minutiae. But don't forget that part of the Mail's defence was, hang on a minute, you often invaded your own privacy. You weren't careful enough about where you were. You often called up and messaged actual journalists, and then you're worried or you're complaining that they used your personal information against you.

22:08So as he arrives in Britain amid this row over whether or not he could use Buckingham Palace, he now unfortunately has been very badly embarrassed.

22:29I'm joined by Victoria Ward, our deputy royal editor. But before I come to you, I want to pick up on something that Hannah Furness, our royal editor, has witnessed. Because when the ruling was announced, Harry happened to be at an event for the Invictus Games. This was a symposium about military veterans and recovery. and Hannah says that there was no mistaking as he entered the room to deliver his six-minute opening speech there was no mistaking that he had recently been told of the extent of his legal loss he looked shaken swallowing hard and with eyes darting around the room but he plowed on speaking about determination humor and the unconquered and unconquerable spirit of the games and its competitors listen to a little bit of that different languages different uniforms very different stories, yet the same determination, the same humor, the same instinct to keep moving forward, even when the road ahead looks uncertain.

23:30And that unconquered spirit isn't unique to one nation. It belongs to all of us. And recognizing that shared humanity is what has allowed this community to grow beyond an event into a global movement. Each country represented here is writing its own chapter. But Victoria, you've been following the case. Remind us first of all, precisely what was at stake here? Well, there's a huge amount at stake here because for Prince Harry himself, it was the culmination of a seven-year legal fight against the tabloid press. Obviously, he won against Miragut newspapers, he won against newsgroup newspapers, he got a uh settlement on the eve of trial with with that one in january 2025 this was his last big hurrah in this moral crusade that he's he launched in 2019 and he had expected to win um he had made it clear that he thought he his claim comprised 14 articles that were published between um 2001 and 2013.

24:32he had made it clear that he needed one victory in that raft of stories to be able to claim to prove that to show that he proved that associated newspapers had been acting unlawfully and that would have been cast as a victory um and to say he brought this with other people too so it wasn't just harry absolutely it was there were seven claimants so there was sir elton john his husband david furnish liz hurley sadie frost um sir simon hughes and very importantly dorian lawrence the mother of stephen lawrence which is the one name that stands out there as I mean, actually, Simon Hughes was a serious politician, too.

25:08But Doreen Lawrence is the one name that stands out and makes you think this has serious ethical implications. It was a really damaging development in the case when she joined the claim for the Daily Mail, because they've been known, obviously, for campaigning to bring her son's killers to justice, very famously. And she was described in court, though, as a trophy claimant that had been brought in to try and whip up some kind of public support for the claim. And it's massively backfired. In the course of the trial, we already got some hint that Harry might be on shaky ground. Remind us, there were some people who contradicted his versions of events.

25:44Yes, well, he had claimed that various pieces of private information that had found its way into the newspapers could only have been obtained through hacking or other unlawful activity. But the journalists involved made it very clear that they were picking up bits and pieces of this information from legitimate sources, from Harry's friends, from his associates, from his wider social network. And they had some examples of how that had happened. We saw these Mr. Mischief emails that had been sent between Prince Harry and Mail on Sunday journalist Charlotte Griffiths, which showed the level of...

26:21They were kind of on intimate terms. They were obviously... They were flirtatious. It was flirtatious, absolutely. Yes, yes. So that seemed to go against what Harry was trying to claim, that he didn't fraternise with journalists at all. Did Harry think he would get all 14 counts? I don't think anyone was bold enough to think that they were going to win a clean sweep. But he would have claimed total victory on one count? Yes, he only needed one. He made it very clear. His team made it very clear. He only needed to win one of those 14 to prove that a serious 80 newspapers were acting unlawfully.

26:55And he would have claimed a victory if he had won just one. He would have taken to the steps outside Chatham House where he's been this afternoon or somewhere close by later on today, and he would have done a victory speech. And what do you think might have been the material cost? I mean, would the mayor have lost money here? Would there be a risk of a Leveson II-style inquiry into press freedom? If Harry had won, if any of the claimants had won any of these claims, then yes, absolutely. it was going to be used as some kind of stepping stone to try and push for this Leveson 2 public inquiry that a small band of campaigners have been pushing for for a long time, but successive governments have ruled out.

27:30They would have used that as proof that there were lies told at the first Leveson inquiry and that the government should therefore implicate the second inquiry, which Lord Justice Leveson had called for in the first place. However, all that's out to the window now this has been a massive defeat for them so that's unlikely to happen i think when we were discussing this yesterday we were game planning what might happen because camilla couldn't be here today and we're doing that thing can we pre-record something and pretend it's happening on the day and the scenarios we were running through we thought most likeliest was victory on one count yeah some and some yeah or maybe all but we thought yeah he could also win none of them and i think everyone's a bit floored by the fact that they've won absolutely none i I think both sides had honestly, both sides, the publisher and the claimants had thought that it was going to be some kind of grey area where they'd all win some and lose some.

28:23This has completely surprised everybody. Well, in his ruling, Mr Justice Nicklin said the allegations are serious and required more convincing evidence before they could be said to be proven. But the claimants had failed to prove allegations of unlawful information gathering. Rejecting the argument that simply because they could not demonstrate where the information came from does not mean that it was gathered illegally. He says this does not affect the quality of Prince Harry's evidence, which I accept. He concluded adding that as with each of the claimants, Prince Harry has limited evidence to give on the contentious matters in disputes.

28:56In other words, he's not saying Harry was lying. He's not saying that the evidence he brought was false, but rather it's not sufficient. Exactly. He actually accepted, he said in his ruling that he accepted Prince Harry's evidence. He said it was very clear, and I was in court, I agree with this, it was very clear that Harry wanted the court to understand the personal impact that these stories had. And he tried to make that point in very many ways. and he actually kind of tried to veer off course a little bit. He was being asked questions and the judge had to keep reining him in and say, this is not your case to prove, you just answer the questions because he was keen to make his point about the personal impact and how it had affected his friendship groups and his trust in people and that kind of thing.

29:39And the judge said in his ruling that it was very clear that Harry had kind of harboured those grievances and wanted to get that across. But he still had to prove that each of those stories had been obtained unlawfully and he hadn't done that. How do you think he came across in these sessions, Harry? He was quite calm and quite self-assured, but he was also quite angry. You could see in him that he just, all this had been building up in him for years and he was on the stand for two hours and this was his moment to get it all out and try and squash in as much as he could to say to the judge, look, all of this awful behaviour that's been going on in the press, this is the impact it's had.

30:19you've got to sort it out. He was quite bristling at one point. He was quite angry, but he kept, he did keep calm largely, but he just kept veering off because he just had these, he obviously had certain things that he wanted to say. And regardless of the questions that were being asked, he just wanted to try and blurt it all out, which is quite common with witnesses in the stand in those circumstances. And this anger is not just about him, it's also about how his mother was treated. And we know that Martin Bashir and the BBC and the lying that was done to Princess Diana when she was alive. And he also feels that the press hounded Meghan Markle when she was in this country too.

30:54Yes, and actually he was close to tears just at the end of, although none of these stories involved in this claim concerned Meghan Markle because they predated their relationship, he did right at the very end of his evidence make a comment to the judge just saying the press have hounded my wife and they've made her life a misery. And he was very close to tears. You could see it in his face. It was like he just reached breaking point and he got up and left the court and that was the end. But yes, there are layers and layers here that date back to his childhood and his mother. Absolutely. But we have to defend our role in all of this because, of course, we are the press.

31:29Is what we do harassment? I don't think so. I absolutely not. Right. I don't believe so. But also, if you can't prove that something's done illegally and if something is deemed to be in the public interest, which is a test we always have to apply, then what would the coverage that harry was given is standard press coverage of a very well-known person i don't think anyone's going to take away from him the fact that it has obviously these stories are obviously about his private life he's got 11 of the 14 articles in his claim were about his former girlfriends and his relationships so i don't think anyone can deny that of course that is going to have an impact and it's not very nice to hear to read in the press but that's not the same as a unlawful activity because that's what this group of people have always wanted to prove, isn't it?

32:12Because they don't like something, and I entirely understand why they don't like it, and I wouldn't like it. I'd be angry about it too. But because they don't like it, they're looking for a conspiratorial element to it so that they can prove it's not just distasteful, but it's immoral and possibly get it banned in the future. Because they want to punish the newspapers because of what they've been through. But they've ended up pulling together one-on-one and making five, I guess, in this particular case. Now, had he won this case or any element of it, Well, this trip really would have been one marked by celebration for Harry because he's not just here for Invictus for this case.

32:47He's here from Invictus. But also there has been a back and forth attempt to be in touch with the family, which has not gone well. The Buckingham Palace offered an invitation to stay. He said no. Then he said yes. And they said it was too late. Now that he's here and he lost the case, how does this trip for Harry look? Well, the Buckingham Palace was very keen to ensure that it didn't have any links to this case at all, to Harry's reaction to the ruling, to any of it. It wanted to keep as far back as it possibly can. We know that the King and the Prince of Wales didn't really support the idea of bringing litigation against the newspapers.

33:26It's not something that they would ever do. So I think we'll have to wait and see whether it means anything in terms of the Prince meeting his father. I assume it probably won't. I'm sure that probably that meeting is going to happen at some point this week or next. And I'm sure this will be something that's on the table to discuss. But I mean, just the tenor of the trip. I mean, it's got to cast a shadow over it. Absolutely. Yes, he could have. I mean, this is the first day that he's appeared in public today. And he could have been jubilant and triumphant for the rest of the week, couldn't he?

33:56And now this is certainly going to cast a shadow. And it's an unexpected shadow that he wasn't expecting. And almost everything he does, there seems to be some controversy that sticks to him. he's also attended a premiere with a south bank boss who's been embroiled in an anti-semitism miss n harriman yes last night so he landed in the uk just after 6 p.m and then some photographs emerged of him at this event at the south bank center with miss n harriman is one of his good friends he takes photographs of harry and megan quite often um so yes there were questions raised immediately but why why is he aligning himself with these people why is he why is he it's it almost seemed like a political statement or it could have been interpreted as that.

34:34So I don't think it really helps his cause. Just to explain, Misson Harriman, chairman of the South Bank Centre, has said that he would step down from his role later in the year after becoming in broadener controversy over remarks he made online reported by this newspaper, which included a claim that news outlets had admitted a Muslim victim from coverage of attacks in Golders Green, North London. Now, in terms of what happens in the future, let's talk about the costs of this trial. Very, very expensive. The figure that I have in front of me is an estimated£50 million. Who is going to pay that?

35:08Well, it now looks like the bulk of the costs are going to land with the claimants. Right. Which is absolutely terrifying, I imagine, for all seven of them. Especially for poor Simon Hughes. I can't imagine that the former Lib Dem MP has got that kind of cash. They all had some kind of special insurance that covered them to a certain extent. But whether it goes to this extent, we're yet to find out there's a cost hearing that's already been scheduled for July the 29th and 30th where these issues are going to be thrashed out. but um in a at a hearing a cost hearing last year the judge specifically warned that this case could spiral out of control and he expressed some concern about the the seven claimants and wanted to know whether they fully understood the risks because he was concerned they weren't fully abreast of exactly the financial cost and the implications if if they lost and there was some concern that they might have been kind of swept along because the campaigners and the lawyers wanted them on board without being fully across the worst case scenario, which has now come to pass.

36:15The court previously heard that claimants were only insured to cover costs of up to 14 million, which would leave them with an additional 36 million pounds to have to cover. Now, does even Harry have that kind of money? I don't. I mean, we don't know. We don't know. But given the fact that they've had to work and they've had to sign contracts with Netflix and others just to pay the mortgage and pay for their security bill, you would assume that this is going to come as a, this is going to be problematic for most of these claimants, I think. Baroness Lawrence isn't going to have millions of pounds sitting in the bank, we assume.

36:48So how are they going to cover it and who's going to put the bill and whether there's been some kind of assurance by some of the claimants for the others, perhaps, that they might help cover costs if they were to lose? We don't yet know. Now, if Camilla were here, she'd be gloating over this. She'd be loving all of this. Of course she would. Let's be honest. But I feel a bit sorry for him because I feel Harry is angry with the whole country, with its establishment at least. Angry about his family, angry about the press, and that he's always been looking for some kind of catharsis in all of this.

37:19He wants someone to say, you are right. And he often seems to want someone to say, you are right. and here's a lot of money to prove it, be it providing his security or providing a room at Buckingham Palace or him winning this case. Where do you think this leaves poor Harry and his relationship with our country? Well, it'll be interesting to see what happens and whether he decides to pursue this and appeal or whether he just wants to draw a line under the whole thing and just accept defeat here, accept that he won the first two big cases against the other newspaper groups and walk away. he's going to feel bitter, he's going to feel angry, isn't he, as you say.

38:01He's already crossed with the government for refusing his police protection, he's crossed with the Royal Institution for refusing his accommodation, he's now going to be crossed with the court system, and he's already warned of an establishment stitch-up when he lost his security case against the Home Office, hasn't he? So he's likely to be furious, but where that leaves him in the longer term, we'll have to wait and see. Victoria, thank you very much. We'll be back tomorrow at 5pm.