"Reform is Screwed"- Dan Hodges

27:21Francis Foster:But when you're already at the debt levels that we're at, that's going to be a challenge. And, I mean, your point is also right. I mean, look at Starmer. Starmer tried to cut welfare. He tried. And it was Labour backbenchers that stopped him. wasn't anyone else. So I completely agree with you. I mean, I think the public... Can I just say one? Let me just finish this point about the metaphor, because I think the cancer metaphor that France has started was exactly right. I think the patient is in denial, and that's why we are where we are. The patient thinks he has no cancer. The patient thinks we're ticking along okay.

27:54Francis Foster:Yeah, look, I've got a bit of a pain back here, and every morning I get up and I don't quite have the energy, but I haven't got cancer. I'm just, yeah, you know, I'm aging. What's a little blood in the urine between friends? Yeah, no, absolutely. That's what's going on. Absolutely, but also to extend the analogy, you may be absolutely right, but if the patient doesn't give them concern for the surgery, there's nothing the surgeon can do about it. What I was going to say is I wouldn't necessarily characterize it as, you know, blame the electric, because this is part of the problem. I can entirely understand where the electric are coming from.

28:28I mean, we had a degree of relative prosperity throughout the bulk of the 1990s. But for the quarter of a century that's followed, things have got progressively harder and harder in a variety of ways for a variety of reasons. For a lot of people, in particular, a group of the electorate that I would simplistically call working people, who have been at best ignored by, best ignored and patronised by politicians of all persuasions, or treated with outright contempt. And at every stage throughout that, we had a global economic downturn. I think one of the Gulf Wars, we had a global crash. Then we had a banking crisis.

29:26We obviously then had COVID and we're trying to recover from that. the various crises that have occurred are myriad. But there is one consistent thing, which is at the end of these crises, the people who have been asked to pay the most and bear the worst, the highest burden, in my view, have been the people who have been least able to afford it. I would take issue with you about the issue of, you know, oh my God, it's outrageous that Labour are talking about raising taxes. If we are going to have a situation, which I think we both agree on, that the country is going to, again to use a simplistic analogy, tighten its belts, I think it's absolutely imperative that some of the richest people in society are asked to pay a little bit more in the same way that throughout the quarter of a century I was talking about, working people in this country have been asked to pay a little bit more.

30:29You know, we saw this during the period of austerity. Broadly speaking, the wealthiest were broadly insulated from that austerity, and working people weren't.

30:40Francis Foster:Well, the wealthy are insulated because they have wealth. Exactly. But they're not insulated by the government. They're insulated by the fact that they have money. Well, no, they were insulated. Let me give you an example. At precisely the point when the country was being told we had to experience austerity, the government of the day, George Osborne, David Cameron, decided to cut the top rate of tax from 50 % to 45%. What's that not doing? That's not insulating the wealthiest. At the same time as working people in various other forms of taxation and the erosion of their public services were shouldering a very significant.

31:19Francis Foster:Yeah, I mean, look, the 20, David, we're going back into ancient history for many people, 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. 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. 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. So this narrative about how wealthy people or people, it's not even wealthy people, it's people who are earning more than others, are protected or insulated.

31:59Francis Foster:No, they pay a hell of a lot. No, but I see this argument used a lot and I get the point. But the reality is, firstly, you have to, in my view, look at what people are paying in proportionate terms, not just in relation to their actual income, but the actual experience of their lives. So if somebody who, say somebody in a working class community, let's use an example, their child, because of the various things their child can't afford to get a house of their own or whatever, means their child has to move in, they have to continue to support their child, etc. That has a direct and significant impact on their lives.

32:49if a wealthy person has to sell one of their private jets, so they only now have three private jets...

32:58Francis Foster:But come on. You're just being silly now. Well, no, I'm not. No, but this is the thing. So you want to bring in a private jet tax? No, no, I'm not. Because that's not what we're arguing about. I'm not making a specific policy point. I'm making a broader point. I'm contesting the argument you made. But this is a... No, no, no. Oh, everybody across the board has been facing... During the years of austerity, everyone across the board has been facing the same burden. 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.

33:35It's about the direct impact of a period of austerity, of economic hardship, of social hardship. And the reality is the wealthiest, as you conceded, you said, because they're wealthy, have been insulated from that. By their own financial success. Sometimes because of their own financial success, other times because of wealth that they've been able to inherit.

34:03Francis Foster:Yeah, for some people, sure. But the point is, regardless of how or why, we can have a debate about whether every wealthy person in this country is wealthy because of their great entrepreneurship and innovation. There are many examples of that. There are other examples of people who are wealthy because they're basically dodgiest. Whatever. Yeah, absolutely. But taking it back to the broader argument, It doesn't really matter what... We can have the debate about how they created their wealth. The reality is if you turn around now, you were talking about hard choices. If you turn around now and say to the electorate, as the politicians have to do, we're going to make hard choices now, some really hard choices.

34:56We're going to have to cut back on public spending. You are really going to have to tighten your belt. Oh, but by the way, I'm really sorry. You know that guy who's a billionaire. We'd love to try and get him to tighten his belt, but we can't because if he does, he's going to go and live in Montenegro. So sorry, folks. I'm sorry. The British people aren't going to put up with that anymore. That's the political reality.

35:21Francis Foster:Okay, well, then the British people should know that what they're going to get as a consequence of that is a fiscal crisis when external lenders who are giving us the money we're currently spending. Go and tell them. Go and tell them. I'm doing it right now. I'm doing it. But I don't know how many of them are listening to you. I'm doing it right now. These are people who have heard this every time for the last... And they don't care. And that's why they're going to get the fiscal crisis. But that's the point. It's not that they didn't care. They did care. They understood. And they said, fine, OK, let's give it a go.

35:50And they did tighten their belts. They did tighten their belts. And what happened?

35:55Francis Foster:Well, austerity cut spending by like 1%. It didn't do anything to reduce our debt or even our deficit, which has kept growing. My point is... Can I just say on that point? Again, if you go out and you say to the... But, you know, you say to the British people over the last quarter of a century, everything's been fine. You haven't really felt that there's no cost of... No, let me tell you what I would... But let me make the different argument because you're doing this caricature thing of people with private jets. When you talk... No, no, I'm not. It's not... No, sorry. No, because I get... That's literally what you said.

36:25No, no, no, no, no.

36:25Francis Foster:Word for word, private jets. No, I... Someone has to sell their second private jet. No, it's not... But you were talking about the top rail tax. That's people earning like 60 grand a year. No, it's not a caricature. I'm using that as an example of the reality. Got it. And you accepted yourself it's a reality. No, no, no. I completely reject this. This is crazy. No, no, no, no, no. You said they are insulated. You said they are insulated. By their own success, yeah. By their own success. But that's what money is for. That's why we all want to make as much money as we can, because it gives us the ability to protect ourselves and our families from the vicissitudes of life.

37:05Francis Foster:That's why we all want... Yes, but what a wealthy person would regard as one of the hardships of life is very, very different. Of course, that's why we all want to make more money because it protects us against those things. Lots of very hardworking people can't make that money for reasons other than their own. I'm not criticising people for making more or less money. What I'm saying is you're using the example of private jets, but what we're actually talking about when you talk about the top rate of taxes, people earning 60 grand a year. There's a plumber. My plumber, I talked to, he was complaining to me about the top rate of tax, right?

37:42Francis Foster:Working people, as you put it, are often the hardworking ones who start a small business or whatever, are the ones that are paying this. And they are the ones that are being told they need to pay their fair share when they already are. as we talked about, they already pay 40 % to 45 % of their income in tax, whereas someone further down the economic ladder is paying 10 % or 15 % or zero. So why is that fair? Yeah, but we're getting into a slightly narrow debate, but we can have a debate about what the top rate of tax should be, at what point it would come in, what someone who is generally rich would be.

38:22but firstly the fundamental principle to go back to my point is working people have been asked to pay more to the extent it directly impacts their livelihoods their day-to-day lives in a way that you've conceded wealthy people have been insulated from and what I'm saying is if we are going to have a solution to this issue if we are going to have this dramatic surgery if we are going to have to take the tough choices, then with all the implications of that, then some of the people who are going to need to be impacted by those tough choices are going to need to be, are going to need, not just because I'm, and I'm not just saying that because I'm some crazy, mad socialist, but not, it's not just, but because coming back to the argument, you have to, to do any of this, the practical reality is in a democracy, you have to build a public consensus.

39:18I get it. And if you say the British people again, you're going to have to pay the guy with the two or three private jets. It's not me saying it.

39:27Francis Foster:None of us plan our lives around insurance. We plan around whatever life actually throws at us. We had our second child this year, which quickly reorders your priorities, let me tell you. Nobody sent a warning. That's exactly the type of situation where you'd want to use Policy Genius. They're not an insurance company. They're a marketplace. Policy Genius is a free service that compares life insurance quotes from America's top insurers side by side. Their licensed team handles the paperwork. No guesswork, just clarity on coverage, price and terms, backed by thousands of five-star reviews on Google and Trustpilot.

39:59Francis Foster:With Policy Genius, you can find 20-year life insurance policies starting at just$276 a year for$1 million in coverage. Head to policygenius.com slash trig to compare life insurance quotes from top companies and see how much you could save. That's policygenius.com slash trig. It's not me saying it. I want as much. Look, we just had Dimitar Chalakov, I think his surname is, is a former policeman in the Met talking about the impact of the cuts. And that really had its impact, including on crime in London today, which we're all dealing with. So I don't want public services to be cut. But what I'm saying is the reality, what Francis is saying is the reality of where we are is we can't afford the lifestyle that we have at the moment.

40:45Francis Foster:It doesn't mean it's fair that we can't afford it. It doesn't mean that it's right or moral or whatever. It just is what it is. But can I just say, I mean, I think, you know, this is perfectly illustrated the point. The reality is we are both right. You are saying we can't carry on. We are going to have to cut. You are absolutely right. No, no, I'm not saying, hold on. I'm not saying we're going to have to cut. This is the different argument that I want to make, which is the only way out of this actually is to get growth in the economy. Actually, ultimately, in the long run. We're going to have to get the economy actually growing.

41:16Francis Foster:It hasn't been growing. Yeah, but we are also going to have to reduce public spending. There are certainly... God, I mean, even I admit we're going to have to reduce public spending, so I'm sure you would contest that. What I'm saying is a lot of people like to present us cutting lots of stuff as the solution. It's not the solution. It's a necessary... No, it's not a long-term solution. Absolutely. I would agree with that. What we have to do is get the economy growing. So when I talk about tax on business, for example, or tax on business and entrepreneurs and wealth creators and job creators, right?

41:50Francis Foster:You can say, you know, we've got to make sure that people with the private jets don't have as many private jets. But if they leave, like the founder of Revolut, or if they leave like this guy's just left or other people, if they're not here to create the jobs, it doesn't matter what's morally right or wrong. We're not going to have the jobs. We're not going to have the growth if you tax business. We know this running a small business for trigonometry, right? Yeah, I know. We would employ more people than we employ today if the rules were not what they are. I don't disagree with that. But the broader point I'm making is, I think you're absolutely right about that.

42:23But the reality is you were talking before about the need for radical surgery. in whatever policy solution that is. I think you're absolutely right about that. But I'm equally right when I say it doesn't matter what form of surgery you want, you will not be able to have that surgery without the consent of the patient. I agree. And to do that, that is very difficult against a backdrop of an electorate that has quarter of a century of proper, real, meaningful hardship.

42:53Francis Foster:But that's what people mean by courage from politicians, though, isn't it? What they mean is... Yeah, but that's the point. Yeah, but that's the easy thing. It's very easy to say we need courage from politicians. But I was about to explain what... Yes, sorry. It's for somebody to stand up and have this discussion that we're having, but in the political space, and say, we are going broke. We're going broke. And if we don't do this now, three years from now, or two years from now, or six months from now, or five years from now, we don't know. But we are going to have a situation where the government that you elected, us is no longer going to be the people in charge.

43:29Francis Foster:It's going to be the people who lend us the money and they're going to come in and they're going to force us to cut public services by 30%. If you don't want that, we have to do this now. That's what people mean by courage, isn't it? No, absolutely. And obviously, I think the easiest model people would point to would obviously be Margaret Thatcher and the way she transformed the political consensus. But I mean, she had the advantage which maybe is an advantage that Andy Burnham might have which she obviously had a completely fractured and divided opposition that and obviously also the what turned out to be the get out of jail free card of the of the popular boost that she got from from the Falklands war that gave her the political space and if it hadn't been for the Falklands war you know British history but it would have been very different than that perception to Margaret Thatcher would have been would have been very would have been very very different but to again take the conversation right back to the beginning, that's kind of what I'm saying in relation to Andy Burnham.

44:27That's kind of what Andy Burnham's strategy is. Andy Burnham knows he can't turn around tomorrow as someone who's come in without a mandate and say, I'm going to introduce this radical surgery. I'm going to do all these things, none of which you actually voted for when you voted Labour. I'm going to do all these things. I know it's hard, but tough, and I'm showing you, I'm going to be very brave and by the way I've got you know two and a half that's part just under three years to introduce it his strategy is as I said going back to the original point I think exactly the strategy he's pursuing okay do this do not the easy stuff but the slightly more popular stuff deal with the politics win a majority give myself five years give myself a working majority and then I'll start to take the tough decisions now that's the thinking and I think in terms of our analysis of Andy Burnham and his government, it's only when he gets that personal mandate that we will, and or majority, he may not get one at all.

45:25You know, events could expire against him. But the reality is, in terms of knowing what Andy Burnham is and what he would be like as Prime Minister, I think that's the only point we'll get at, we'll get a sort of a proper and genuine assessment. It's a fair point. I mean, the other issue that people consistently talking about and are very very frustrated about and understandably so is levels of immigration into this country which is one issue and illegal immigration on the other and it really upsets people and quite rightly so because they look at people coming to this country illegally and they think to themselves well this has been happening now for years why has nothing been done to stop it and by the way it's not a labor problem the conservatives did it as well and people feel that they are in a country which is becoming ever more lawless.

46:15And I have sympathy with that point of view. Yeah, but now, obviously, we're moving into, you know, this is a good example of the nature of the debate. I mean, firstly, you're absolutely right, politicians of all persuasions have failed to get to grips with the issue. Now, I would put this in, I would divide this into two stages. there was a significant period during the 90s, I'd say broadly during the 90s, the turn of the new millennium, where there was an arrogant, it goes back to what I was saying about the view of politicians to what I broadly call working people, there was an arrogant presumption that there was a consensus that immigration was none other good.

47:00I mean, literally you've been one of the, you know, you've both been sort of pioneering, if you like, in terms of your analysis of this problem. And I, you know, I've held my hand up and said that I was one of those people. Now, I would say in the defense of people like me, it's because we, I grew up in the 70s and 80s where there was very, very significant racism and a very still prevailing backlash against migrant communities that was toxic. And we were trying to push back on that. But it is quite clear that in our desire to do that, you know, the road to hell be a perfectly good intentions, we completely lost contact with where the British people were and as I say working people were in relation to that.

47:45So that's the reality. But I think more recently, because again it comes back to this idea of easy solutions, the simple political reality is Rishi Sunak knew just how toxic the immigration issue was. people like Priti Patel, not somebody I think who you would call a particularly liberal shrinking violent on these issues, all so new. People across the political spectrum knew, but they were faced in their eyes with a trade-off, which was, yeah, we can curtail immigration, but that will have a direct economic impact. And, you know, this idea, again, this lazy characterisation, oh, well, they're all just cowards and traitors and whatever.

48:39It wasn't that. They made a political calculation. And I think, obviously, you know, it's quite clear, certainly in political terms, they made the wrong calculation. But I think there is another issue, 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. There are going to be a lot of hard decisions that need to be taken. And one of the problems we've got with the current debate is immigration is seen as the magic bullet. So if you speak to anybody in the right, you know, how are you going to pay for this?

49:15How are you going to pay for that? So if you look at, and we might come on to reform specifically, But 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. This is how we would find the money for defence. We wouldn't be spending it on the migrants. This is how we'd find the money to properly fund welfare and give it to needy people. We won't be giving any of it to the migrants. and aside from the other issues the nature of the immigration debate and a certain toxicity around the debate I think this is one of the most dangerous elements it is like I said it's it is now seen as the new get out of jail free card deal with immigration all of our problems are solved and that's just not that's just not the reality and again you know you know I'm playing back to what you were playing to me.

50:12Yeah, you're absolutely right. Again, there is a lot of discontent about immigration. And a significant part of it is the reality of people's lives. But also a significant part of it is they are constantly being told, this is the magic wand. You deal with immigration, all your problems are solved. And as we all know, that's not the reality. Well, look, there are certainly people saying that, particularly online, where it seems to be that, you know, we'll get rid of everybody who's got a melanin level over this amount, and we're going to be living in an Enid Blight and wonderland, which is palpably false, and we all know that.

50:50But you have to have a lot of empathy for the electorate, who effectively, since about the last 15, maybe even more years, have voted time and time and time again that they wanted immigration lowered. What was a Brexit vote if not about immigration? And consistently, they were gaslit. Let's be honest, Dan. They were gaslit. They were told that immigration was going to come down. Not only did it not come down, it was raised. No, but I would say it was worse than that. I mean, you said they were gaslit. I mean, there was a point before that, before they were gaslit, that was at a second stage in the process when they were being told, don't worry, we're going to get immigration down.

51:29Before that, they were being told if you raise the issue, you're a bigot and a racist. And like I said, all those of us who, at the time I was on the liberal left, have to hold our hands up for that. And we were all part of that. But the point is, you're absolutely right about, that is not where we are with the debate now. 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. It's a genuine problem. People are, obviously, we appreciate people are very concerned about it and they're right to be very concerned about it.

52:11Now, maybe some agree, you know, maybe Zach Polanski might say that, maybe Ed Davey may argue a little bit, but I'm not sure he would. But I don't know of any senior politician. The issue in terms of immigration is it's like everything else. There is not an easy solution to this problem.

52:29Francis Foster:What about illegal immigration? Because mass immigration... No, 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, 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. The Tories, obviously, were aware. The Tories are a party that traditionally has been very hardline on immigration. Forget Labour from this for the moment. The Tories understood firstly that there was a problem, secondly their identification of the problem aligned themselves with their base and their natural support, and they particularly understood there was a major problem with small boats that if they didn't solve it they would be kicked out of office.

53:14So in all of the areas, both historical, philosophical, narrow political interests, the previous Tory government understood they had to do something to get to the small boats and they failed. Now the prevailing narrative from their political opponents, Labour did this in opposition, reform obviously continued to do that, was they were either completely, completely bumbling incompetence or B they were traitorous cowards who secretly wanted to undermine Britain's way of life. Both of those are frankly just not true. I spoke regularly to senior people within the Rishi Sunak government and the governments proceeded.

53:59They spent every waking hour trying to cobble together some sort of solution. Eventually, obviously, they came up with the Rwanda plan, which I was criticised for at the time, which I actually defended and supported. and some iterations around the plan, I think, is probably what is required. But the reality is, again, for reasons we all know, the Rwanda plan didn't work. But again, when you've got people like, I say, I think Priti Patel was the person who sort of helped negotiate the plan. When you've got people like that, even Suella Bravman, I mean, Suella Bravman blames everyone else, Even when you've got people like Sue L.

54:43Abram, who was Home Secretary, who couldn't engineer through government, she again now goes for the they're all traitors sort of line. When you've got people like that who can't find a solution, and I know these people and these people who were desperate to find it and who are not all bumbling idiots, but are actually quite intelligent, serious, sensible people. That says to me, this is not the simple, this is not an easily solved, soluble problem. and again it comes back to it but again as i was saying at the moment do the british people want to hear that at the moment do the british people want to hear that or are they attracted to you know i don't know what's i don't know what the latest proposal is you know let's send in the navy and dump them on and invade france and dump them back on the back on the beaches the people who watch this show have generally done more thinking about how governments operate the most But there's a difference between understanding the problem and having actually built insulation against it.

55:44That's the world Mikhail Thorup operates in. He's been living as an expat for over 25 years, visiting more than 110 countries and calling nine of them home. He founded expat money nearly a decade ago to help others do the same. When he helped someone build an international plan B, the knowledge he brings is entirely first hand. Every recommendation comes from something he has already done himself. Expat Money works specifically with freedom-minded families and investors who want to reduce their exposure on any one government or any one system. Second residencies, second citizenships, offshore banking, international real estate, legal structures that spread your life across borders.

56:23Mikkel has put together a free report called Plan B Residencies and Instant Citizenships. It covers five routes to a second passport, including one that almost never gets discussed. how a foreign residency functions as genuine political insurance, which countries actually make sense depending on what you're trying to protect, and what it realistically costs. Go to expatmoney.com slash trigger or click the link in the description of this episode to download the report. There's no charge, no catch. That's expatmoney.com slash trigger.

56:55Francis Foster:Why can't we do what Australia did, which is effectively turn the boat around, make sure it has enough fuel to get back to the coast? Because the reality is, if you look at it, there was an attempt at a turn-back policy, but that was limited in success. What actually worked for the Australians was taking the asylum seekers and basically dumping them on a desert island off the coast of Australia. that was what actually had the maximum deterrent effect. So why can't we do that? Because we can't, firstly, we haven't got a handy island. We could put them in middle. Well, that's what we're doing at the moment.

57:37That's what we're doing at the moment. Oh, come on, man.

57:39Francis Foster:There's enough, like, we can find somewhere to put asylum circuits. Well, no, we can't. And that's the problem. Come on. Okay, where? Rwanda for a start, right? That's the thing. we got a Rwanda, the government negotiated a Rwanda scheme. The scheme just wasn't, the government wasn't able to make it operational in the sort of number. How many people got returned via the Rwanda scheme? 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? But I think if I was an ordinary person watching this conversation, I would be tearing my hair out because it's sort of like there's literally, There's nothing we can do about anything because it's just so complicated and whatever.

58:23Francis Foster:In the meantime, you look over at the United States, they've deported 3 million people in the last two years, I think, or under the Trump presidency. They've closed the border effectively. I know it's a different situation because it's a land border, but you can get things done if you have the political will to do it. And what is Donald Trump's current approval rating? That's not why. His current approval rating is low, but it's because of the Iran war. It's subterranean. It's because of the Iran war. It's because of their run war and the rising gas prices. No, no, no. There are a wide variety of reasons why Donald Trump is unpopular.

59:02But one of the key reasons why Donald Trump is unpopular is he has embraced a populist, there are easy solutions form of governance. And he has said, he has basically said, don't worry, I've got a simple solution to all this, which was superficially popular. 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. 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. So it's much easier to police.

59:44That's the practical reality. But I mean, are you contesting, I mean, are you putting forward the argument that there is actually an easy solution, just politicians have been too stupid or too woke to pursue it? No. Even though it would have been in their direct, narrow political interest so to do.

1:00:05Francis Foster:No, I think that there's probably a kind of ideological consensus which puts the actually simple, I didn't say easy, but simple. There's a big difference between simple and easy. which puts the simple solutions beyond their sort of ideological reach. When we had Soella on to talk about this, the thing she said, I was like, well, why can't we leave the ECHR? And I was like, well, the consensus among my colleagues was that would put us in the same boat as Belarus. And so we would just become this nasty country. That's also actually why we've not been able to take action soon enough on legal migration.

1:00:40I didn't have collective agreement. I didn't have the support of the prime minister.

1:00:43Francis Foster:I apologise if I'm asking stupid questions, But what is the rationale for your cabinet colleagues to not want to do this? I don't understand. Well, their argument is that it's far too radical. It would put us in the same category as Russia and Belarus, who have left the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights, and it would be damaging to our international reputation. We could replace the ECHR with our own Bill of Rights democratically reflective of British people's views. I actually don't disagree with that. And I've said that. I think the idea that it is beyond the wit of us to introduce our own constitutional protections.

1:01:32but whatever way you look at it whatever constitutional protections you put in place 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 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 we can trust them i'm not prepared to i'm not prepared to do that with any politician so the idea i would just strip away all the human rights now i i and replace with a british we can and we can and we could do but if you want to do that one thing's for certain if you're talking about putting in place and and going back on however many centuries of british british history and putting less than one yeah putting in place a a sort of formally codified constitution that is not something you'd be able to do in in a week no no you are looking at a probably a you know a decades-long process there yeah i wasn't talking about full constitution but if you had a

1:02:38Francis Foster:british bill of rights that was specifically addressing the border situation yeah but if you're looking at you're looking at drafting a 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. That will have to be a serious exercise that will have to be done over a period of time. But this is like Nick Clegg saying 15 years ago we can't build nuclear power stations because it takes 15 years and now we're here 15 later. No, it's much, much easier to build a nuclear power station than it is to put in place a constitution that replaces, as I say, you know, hundreds if not thousands of years of British history and ensures that we all have the appropriate protections as citizens that we require.

1:03:20Don't you think, Dan, let's just be honest here, I've been completely honest. No, no, no, no, no, no. But there's something else, right? You put forward this idea of politicians, you know, not wanting to do it because they're too woke or whatever else. And I can't remember the other option. Isn't the reality... Too stupid. Too stupid. Isn't there's a third option here, which is we don't have politicians with the required backbone to actually get these things done. And I'll tell you why. Because the moment there is the slightest pushback, they capitulate. And isn't good leadership actually taking the decisions, facing down the party and going, look, this needs to happen.

1:04:02This needs to get done. And otherwise, the consequences are simply too awful to contemplate, which is where we are as a country. 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. 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. I mean, our senior politicians, all of them, have considerable backbone, which is why they are senior politicians. They put themselves forward in the public eye. They put themselves up for election.

1:04:42As we know, in the current environment, they do so at significant personal cost, indeed genuine physical risk. So this sort of, oh, they're all just a bunch of cowards. You know, no. I mean, you said you want to be honest. Let's be honest about it. No, that's not easy. Well, why isn't it that I don't see any of them then going up and tackling the French about their part to play in illegal immigration? Well, what do you want them to do to the French?

1:05:10Francis Foster:We can't broadcast that, but let's keep it within the realms of the socially acceptable. Well, saying to them that this situation is unsustainable and we can't do this, and if you are not going to play your part, then there are going to be consequences to pay. If you were a French politician and a British politician came to you and said, look, this is, look old chap, this is a little bit off. You know, this is not a sustainable position for us. You need to keep all those nasty illegal immigrants that we don't want. These illegal immigrants that we think are coming over here taking our jobs and raping our women.

1:05:52You've got to stop, you've got to deploy huge resources amongst your domestic security services up the entire French coast to prevent them leaving your country and coming to a house, if the situation was reversed, what would our answer be? Who is the politician who would say, here is my policy agenda. My policy agenda is to keep all these Nazi illegal Americans in the UK and stopping them from leaving. Now, we had this situation, I know where Reform said they've got this deal with, who is it? Bardella. Yeah, Bardella. And we already see this. I mean, I did think at the time, hang on a second, and if you're running on a populist program, I'm not entirely sure.

1:06:32Wait, so you're saying the French are doing this to us deliberately?

1:06:35Francis Foster:Of course they're doing it deliberately. Well, that is, to me, if that is... You don't think they are? Of course I think they are, but I've never heard someone admit it publicly. So if we know they're doing this deliberately, that would necessitate a reaction from our government. And what do you think that reaction should be? I don't know. Nuclear weapons, as far as I'm concerned. If you want to nuke Paris... Not Paris, Calais. that. I'm not a new Calais. I don't think, as I say. I'm kidding. I don't think, I know. But what, just, let's just, let's, look, we talk about these things. This is, this is why this country is so fucked, because we say all these outrageous things as if they're normal.

1:07:11Francis Foster:You're saying that France is deliberately sending tens of thousands of illegal immigrants into our country, or letting them in. I'm letting them in, yeah. Allowing them to pass through France and come into our country, facilitating what some people might call an invasion. Now, that's a very controversial word. I'm not saying it's an invasion. Some people might call it that, whatever. In any other time in human history, if the country that was on your border was sending tens of thousands of men into your country without your consent, that would be casus belli and the cause for war. Fine. So as I say, what is your practical solution?

1:07:48Do you think we should go to war with France?

1:07:51Francis Foster:Well, as a matter of general principle, yes. But I don't know, I'm not an expert in the different levers we have to influence France. But I imagine if we really were prepared to take this issue seriously, there would be things that we could do. But we know, but this is the point, you know, we, as a, you know, it's 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. So a lot of the levers we had at our disposal have been removed.

1:08:34But as I said, the reality is, you know, genuinely, I've said to you what, you know, again, And I completely understand you've used very emotive language there, but I said, fine, but what is your practical solution to this issue? And again, neither of you have actually given me a practical solution. Well, that's because I don't have the expertise. And I'm not...

1:08:51Francis Foster:No, but... We might... No, but what I'm saying is lots of people who do have a great deal of expertise have looked at this. Have they threatened them with bans on important certain French goods, for example? And then the French would introduce reciprocal bans. That's absolutely fine. That's absolutely fine. It's not for the workers that work in those industries. Have we threatened to turn the boats around and dump them on the French beaches back? Well, that's currently what reforming... But has our government threatened? No, because... Well, that's what I would do. And I would escalate to the point where they started to take this seriously.

1:09:28But 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.

1:09:44Francis Foster:But wouldn't we... We don't have boats. Well, no. They can tow their boats. I mean, firstly, no, we don't have boats, as we saw in the situation with the war with Iran. It took... How long did it take us? it took us best part of a month to send a single vessel. Yeah, but you're talking about a warship. I'm talking about small boats that can tow another small boat back to the French waterline. But as I said, you're then talking about invading French territory and assuming that the French won't react. Wait, so they're going to send tens of thousands of people into our country, and if we tow a boat back to them, they're going to start shooting at us.

1:10:24Francis Foster:That's what you're saying. And it's not an invasion. Well, it's not an invasion. If people leave... If they send tens of thousands of people here, you can't say it's an invasion. If we drop one of these people back in France, that's an invasion. Well, if you evoke what it's being called... If you're talking about mobilising, if you're talking about the government... You know, the French Navy are not landing on the shores of Dover. If what you're talking about is the Royal Navy landing unilaterally on the... No, no, no. No, we're not. We tow the boat back to the... Who tows the boat back? The Royal Navy.

1:11:00Francis Foster:To the line from which the boat is effectively directed to go back to France. Right, and then the boat turns round. Then we tow it back. Yeah. And we just keep towing them back. Over and over, until they stop coming. Why will they stop coming? Because we keep towing them back, and we're not allowing them into Britain. We're not giving them hotels to live in. We're not giving them camps to live in. We're not giving them phones, dental services, food, etc. But how do you... I'm sorry. How do you physically turn the boat back? Exactly the way the Australians did. And how did they do it? I think when we had Tony Abba on, I don't remember all the details, but what he explained...

1:11:34Francis Foster:You give them unscuttable... What's the word? Basically, you give them rafts that they can't scuttle, so the people's muddlers can't sink them. My understanding was that the Australian system, which, as I said, wasn't seen as being essentially practical, was that they actually built big sort of lifeboats, dumped them in and sent them back. But as I said, they did do that. Yeah, they did do that and they tried that. 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.

1:12:24So, as I said, what the Australians eventually did was they found an offshoring solution. 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 in the moment. The problem is, Dan, and I'm telling you, as the average person who's going to be listening to this, the sound you're hearing is a urine boiling because they will look at problems within our country which have eminently pretty obvious solutions and they're not being done.

1:13:13They're not being done. Sorry, you've just made the great job. I was agreeing with you. You said, you've just done exactly what I said. You just said, oh, yeah, there are very obvious solutions. It's called enforcing a border. We started off this conversation with a degree of consensus that one of the problems we had was that there are lots of very, very difficult problems that are going to require very, very hard and difficult solutions. You've now, because we've got onto the subject of immigration, switched back into the, with respect, very lazy, oh, there are simple solutions to this, and that's why people are boiling.

1:13:49You're right, people are boiling. People are boiling because they have identified a problem, they have asked their politicians to solve that problem, and their politicians have failed to do so. That's why they're boiling. They are not going to be de-boiled, with respect, by people going around falsely telling them there are easy solutions out there that are simply not simple solutions. that are out there that are simply not being implemented because their politicians don't have backbone. Because I think that the illegal immigration thing, to me, that is eminently solvable. I know, you keep repeating that.

1:14:31Because... I think Dan's point is how are they... Look, I'll give you an example. I'll give you an example. So they did not want to address this for a long time. Which I completely agree with, yeah. They did not want to address this. So the fact that they did not want to address it, for me, shows a complete lack of backbone. That they pretended this problem didn't exist. And invariably in life, when you pretend a problem doesn't exist, the problem will only get worse. Yeah, and I think I was completely open about, as I said, there are various stages in this debate. And at the beginning, again, it wasn't that the problem wasn't addressed because of a lack of backbone.

1:15:11the problem wasn't addressed because the various politicians didn't want to get into a situation where they were being seen to be bigoted towards migrants in this country. But that is, I'm sorry, Dan, that is a lack of backbone. If you're concerned when you get into politics, it's people... Not wanting to be bigoted is a lack of backbone. No, no, no, no. False, not wanting... Not wanting people to...

1:15:31Francis Foster:Caving to people's perception that it's false instead of doing the right thing for your country is a lack of backbone. No, no, no, but the point is, as I said, Yet, in my view, the attempt not to help fuel bigotry is not something I would characterise as a lack of backbone. I think where you, and I've acknowledged this, but it is quite clear that there was a moment, you can talk about, roundabout Brexit, maybe even before Brexit, where politicians recognised, actually, firstly, there were genuine, you know, 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.

1:16:18And there was a recognition that this was a genuine problem that had to be addressed. So we can have a debate. If what you're saying is, look, if you're changing your argument and you're saying, look, the lack of backbone was amongst politicians who failed to initially identify the problem. No, not that they failed to identify, they failed to be honest. That's the lack of background. Fine, or failed to be honest about the problem. I wouldn't characterise it like that. But fine, that's a fair point. But that's very, very different from the argument you're putting forward now is, given, as I say, there's a context now that we all understand that all the politicians do recognise there's a problem.

1:17:01The difference between that and saying, oh yeah there's a very simple in your words there's a very simple solution and they're not they're not they're not pushing this button marked simple solution to the small boats crisis because they haven't got a backbone if it was a simple solution it would not require any backbone they just press the button and they would reap the plaudits from a grateful electorate and and ride off to their 200 strong majority let me try it a different way we obviously have seen

1:17:29Francis Foster:in the last few days, in the last couple of weeks, actually, this group in Portsmouth, I think. A group of men, I don't really know much. I don't think anyone really knows much about them. We know a bit about them, but yeah. Well, maybe you can tell us about them in a second. But a group of men who are protesting against allowing illegal migrants who've just arrived from being driven into the country from the coast. And it's a few hundred people there. If over the course of the next week it went from a few hundred people to a thousand people to 10 ,000 people to 100 ,000 people to a million people, do you think the politicians might move closer towards a solution?

1:18:17No, because it doesn't solve any of the fundamentals. But the process you described won't happen because the vast majority of the British people, whilst they have the concerns that we've been talking about, I think we've been talking about, you know, boiling anger over this issue, 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... Yeah, it's not a sight that anyone particularly wants to see.

1:18:51Francis Foster:It was a hypothetical for me making the point that I think I don't agree with you 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 they find the solution pretty quickly what you're saying do you genuinely believe that senior politicians such as Andy Berman such as Shibana Mahmood, such as Kemi Badnock, Chris Phil, do you genuinely think they do not understand the level of public concern there is about this? No, I don't think they don't understand the level of public concern, but I think politicians, and we've seen this very clearly, work on a very short time window of prioritisation and they care about what's in the news this evening.

1:19:46Francis Foster:Well, let me finish the point. You've asked the question, so let me finish the point. So if they are pressured into ranking this issue higher than it already is on the daily basis, I don't think for Andy Burnham, the small boats are the number one priority right now. And you said to yourself, his number one priority is to get himself to a position where he can call an early election and get a working majority at that election. To deal with the fundamental issues of which small boats is the benchmark. No, you said he has to shore up his left flank, which is not people who care about the small boats.

1:20:18Francis Foster:Let's be objective. In fact, many of those people are actually, you know, they think anyone who's concerned about small boats is a massive racist. So it's not on their priority list at the very top. They have other priorities. They have the cost of living, which is a massive issue in this country. And it's also the public priority. Right. Well, of course. Yeah, yeah, I agree. So they have that. They have their own electoral concerns, etc. My point about the hypothetical of a million people being out there preventing illegal immigrants from being allowed into the country is that would immediately push it further up the priority list.

1:20:49Francis Foster:There's no question about that. And it would push it to number one. And I suspect at that point, many of the reasonably sounding and sensible and mature objections you've been making would evaporate immediately. Because once something becomes a priority, people get it. We've seen this in our own lives. And this is obviously not a like-for-like comparison remotely, but there's so many times when we've sat around the table with our team and gone, we really need to do this X, Y, whatever thing. And we can't do it. We just can't do it. But then when we get to the point where we're like, it has to be done, everybody gets together and we find a solution of some kind.

1:21:27Francis Foster:Okay. I mean, there's two things. Firstly, again, you're going back to your central thesis, which is there is a solution. You didn't say it was simple, but there is a solution. And all that is preventing the solution being found is a lack of political will. But on the specific point you made, you're also wrong. Firstly, on two levels. Firstly, you're not going to see a large number of people. Yeah, it was a hypothetical. I'm not saying it's going to happen. It's a hypothetical. No, but there is an important point here because I just want to make a broader point because it's an issue I've been discussing a lot the last 24, 48 hours.

1:22:05And you can see it, you can see on the right at the moment, particularly within reform, there is a fracture over how to deal with this protest and how to deal with these guys specifically. And reform started off with a very, in my view, correct position, but it was a very clear position. Nigel Farage said they were disgusting. Robert Jennerick said the police should do their worse on them. That was the line within reform. I did say this would happen within 24 hours it changed because Restore came out and very clearly backed the guys in balaclavas and black and at that point Restore, Reform panicked and began to change their position.

1:22:49But for people on the right debating this and people who do seek to reflect and align themselves with public public concern about this issue. To go back specifically,

1:23:06if the right does align themselves with guys who are going out in the streets with balaclavas, with black garb parading around militaristically,

1:23:22attacking police officers, vandalising property, causing major disruption, doxing lifeboat workers, fine, but that will have the opposite effect to the one that you were talking about. That will not increase pressure on mainstream politicians to deal with this issue. What that will do is enable mainstream politicians to take these guys, the leader of this group is a man who was jailed for two years for attempting to kidnap someone at knife point in a row over £10 ,000 of drugs, it will enable them to take them, take this group, and basically say, see, this is what these guys are really like, this is what people who align themselves with this debate are really like, and start to roll the debate back.

1:24:12And as I said, you know, I wasn't, you know, I generally meant it. It is very, very, I agree with a lot of what you've been saying on this 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 you can't lead it leave it to you know people on the right and you certainly can't leave it to people in in in balaclaba The practical political reality that is, though, if the right tries to align themselves with these guys and doesn't very, very clearly distance itself from these guys, then people on the left are going to be rubbing their hands.

1:24:58That's the practical political reality. because my concern is, Dan, and I think why my frustration was showing is because I think we're in a very precarious position, this country. It's in a very precarious position economically, but it's in a very precarious position culturally and societally. And the fact that you have these guys in Portsmouth and the fact that they seems to be gaining some traction and some sympathy from the general public is worrying because what it's saying... Where's the evidence they're getting sympathy from? Those guys specifically are getting sympathy from the general public.

1:25:36Francis Foster:I was on the train, this is anecdotal, of course, I was on the train coming into London this morning. A young guy came and sat opposite me, very respectable, works in the city, girlfriend, all that. And he was asking me what I think about it. I said, look, it's not a pretty side, it's not something I'm in favour of happening, but it shows you the failure of the entire political system to deal with this issue. And he was like, yeah, I totally understand where they're coming from. And there's plenty of people, again, it's anecdotal that I've spoken to as well who will come up and have a conversation about it.

1:26:11My point is this. That is a very bad symptom, societally, because what that is saying is we do not have trust in the powers that be. Yeah, but I think that the reality is I don't think we needed guys in balaclavas wandering around Dover. Take us that. I mean, you guys have been literally banging on about this for years and you've been absolutely right. You've been proved to be absolutely right. The fractures within British society around the issues relating to immigration are very, very real. But the question is, and I think this is again something that people on the right need to start to reflect on, is our aspiration to try and deal with and to directly deal with and address those fractures, or is it to attempt to widen them?

1:27:03The reality is there is no solution to any of the problems that we have in society that are solved by mass vigilantes roaming our streets. And let me just say another thing. If we were having this conversation in a different context, and we have all had conversations in this context in relation to the activities of environmental protesters, anti-capitalist protesters, pro-Palestinian protesters. You and I and the rest of us would not be sitting here saying, yeah, okay, I'm not agreeing with it, don't get me wrong, I'm not agreeing with it, but you know what, it is a product of the fact that they're not being listened to and it's a product of public concern about these issues.

1:27:44We wouldn't, we would condemn them up unequivocally. And that needs to be done with these guys. These are not patriots. They're not heroes. They're not actually really, you know, doing it because, you know, they're enraged by the nature of immigration, although I'm sure they're all, to a manner, you know, anti-immigration to varying relatively extreme degrees. These guys are putting on balaclavas and dressing up in black and marching around pretending to be soldiers because they get off on it. They enjoy it. They enjoy it. They enjoy being macho. They enjoy the whole thing. They enjoy a bit of the publicity that goes around it.

1:28:25These are not in any way representative of mainstream opinion on this issue. I agree. But my point is something else, Dan. My point is when public perception feels that government and these institutions are not taking a problem seriously, what that does is it creates a vacuum. And when there is a vacuum, it will naturally be filled. It's, for instance, the same with the grooming gangs. We didn't want to talk about the grooming gangs. Anybody who spoke about it, openly and honestly, was immediately described as an Islamophobe, a racist, a white supremacist. Okay. And then we shut down. And then what happened?

1:29:08Then other people came in to talk about it and people who a lot of people felt were nefarious and had bad intentions. But that is the inevitable consequence of not dealing with an issue. That's fine. I completely agree with you on the agreement. Let me give you another example. Let's take the pro-Palestinian demonstrations, right? which have intimidated, obviously, significant sections of the Jewish community, and actually intimidate me, and I'm not a member of the Jewish community. They've acted illegally, they've broken the law, etc.

1:29:42But they are articulating, whether we like it or not, a position that is now shared by an increasing majority of the people. So there was a poll out this morning in relation to Andy Burnham's decision to introduce, impose sanctions on the settlements. 60 % of the British people supported it. I think 14 % opposed. Right? And I say this as someone who has been a longstanding supporter of Israel. Public support for Israel and the activity of Israel post the appalling terror attacks has collapsed. And there is now an increasing clamour amongst mainstream public opinion for the government to act. Now, do you think that justifies the activity of the pro-Palestinian protesters who are intimidating members of the Jewish community.

1:30:27No. Well, it depends on what you mean, right? No, but that's the point. Hold on. No, no, no, let me just finish. That's it. That's the difference. You just said no.

1:30:35Francis Foster:But I... You didn't say... But there's two of us here. Francis said no. But hang on, we do need to think about... Well, let me say, when Soella called for the marches to be banned, I disagree with that. People have a right to protest. What they don't have a right is to break the law, and when they break the law, they should be treated. Right, but that's fine. But hold on, hold on. That's an entirely principal position, but you've got a different position. But you brought up the climate change protesters, right? I've been, I've went and documented Extinction Rebellion protests myself. I support their right to participate in those protests.

1:31:06Francis Foster:I don't support their right to block ambulances from getting to the hospital. I don't support that. So when, this is the same with these guys. If they're breaking the law, they should be - Which they are. Then those of them that are breaking the law should be taken away by the police and prosecuted for the laws that they're breaking. If they're protesting non-violently, if they're obeying the law, they have every right to do so, and they should be allowed to do so. Do I like the look of hundreds of men in black clad marching up and down in balaclavas? I do not. But if they're not breaking the law, they're entitled to do that, don't you think?

1:31:41Yeah, no, absolutely. But no one's disputing their right to peacefully protest, and frankly, in my view, they can wear what they like. But the point is, what I'm pointing out is the difference in terms of how the argument is... But I'm entirely consistent in my argument. But with respect, you're adopting a different point of view, which a lot of people is, which is you're not automatically saying... You say that your instinctive reaction is to support the people's right to protest. Yeah, of course. But do you support those... But do you support the marches that we've seen? You support the marches that we've seen in Central London.

1:32:15I don't support them. You haven't called for the... You haven't said... I don't believe they should be banned. You haven't said they should be banned. No, I don't believe they should be banned. But I never said that they should be banned, Dan. And what you said is, when you said intimidating, what I thought you meant was that you were holding up placards supporting Hamas, which is obviously a prescribed terrorist organisation. But that's illegal activity. For now. That's it, yeah. That's illegal activity. Yeah, but that's what I meant by intimidating behaviour. But what I'm saying is, that's fine, but the guys in Balaclavas were also acting illegally.

1:32:47They were causing disruption. and they were blocking it. No, but I'm just saying it is, you know, literally, when I asked you about an example from the left, you said no and you were unequivocal. Because you were talking about intimidating behaviour. I don't support these guys doing intimidating behaviour. But they are doing it. You certainly wouldn't argue that they're not, you certainly wouldn't argue that what they're doing, even if you'd argue, and they were breaking the law, you certainly wouldn't argue that guys wandering around the streets dressed in balaclavas and black and standing in the middle of rows isn't intimidating.

1:33:17If they're standing in the middle of roads blocking traffic, they should be arrested. Okay, why are they standing on the pavement dressed in balaclavas and black gear? I would personally find that intimidating. Why?

1:33:28Francis Foster:Well, if I know that they're there to prevent illegal immigrants from being allowed into the country, I'll be honest with you, there's a part of me that's relieved. At least someone's doing it. If you were a member of Britain's, one of Britain's legally resident in the UK ethnic minorities... I am. Well, yes, you are. You are. And you saw them. Would you feel... If I knew what they're protesting about, I would go over and say what I just said, which is I'm relieved someone is at least protesting about this issue. But they should act legally. But they should act legally. Well, I think there are significant numbers of other members of Britain's ethnic minorities who would see those guys and be intimidated by them.

1:34:11Do you dispute that?

1:34:13Francis Foster:No, I don't. No, no, but people might be intimidated by... And just to... I would be very... Look, hold on. If 300 blue-haired pierced to whatever degree people marched up and down outside my house... What is your anti-blue-hair prejudice? Well, I have found there's a strong correlation between having blue hair and lots of piercing and not liking Constantine Kittin and trigonometry. My point being is, if you saw 300 people who you suspect don't like you personally marching up and down, you'd be intimidated. I don't like you personally every day. I wouldn't leave the house if that was the threshold.

1:34:51What I'm saying is, but you get my point.

1:34:54Francis Foster:People would be intimidated because they ascribe certain views to these people that may or may not be correct, right? We don't know the exact views of those people. All I can see is, if the people are protesting, they should do so lawfully, right? Yes, but they're not. And 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. So we want equality of treatment for all people, and we don't tend to see it a protest, in my opinion. But beyond that, what I'm saying to you is, yeah, you say a lot of people will be turned off.

1:35:28Francis Foster:I agree. I think... I mean, that's a practical, that will be a practical. No, I completely agree. I think that 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. 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 is 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. I would actually slightly characterise that.

1:36:05It's not that I'm not a football match. I'm not a cheerleader. I'm not a supporter or an opponent. I'm just genuinely assessing where I think reform are. Your genuine assessment is you don't like reform. No, my general assessment, I like lots of people in reform. I wouldn't say I'm a supporter of their party, although I'm not actually a supporter of any political party at the moment. But it is important to say, I have written what would widely be regarded as a number of positive pieces about reform. Okay, let me just start again.

1:36:38Francis Foster:What is your assessment of reform? They're screwed. It's my assessment of reform. Why? I think for a number of reasons. I think, let's start with just the events of the last few days. actually let's go back a little bit i think just before we started broadcasting i you know we were just chatting and i said how you've been doing and i said this has been a surprisingly busy summer politically of which andy burnham and obviously kirsten was a part 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 bizarre by-election in Clapton.

1:37:28And 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. And it It was his, I think it was described by some people as his last throw of the dice to achieve two primary objectives. One was to draw a line under the financial scandals dogging reform, to basically convince the media to stop talking about them. And I would simply put it to get the press to back off. The second thing was to use what he believed would be a strong mandate from his supporters was in constituency to transform the broader narrative around reform to arrest their decline in the polls and arrest the decline in his personal ratings.

1:38:20It is quite clear that he has failed in his objective. Obviously the questions about reforms, financing and his role in that are intensifying and And that, and intensify them to an extent that they are cutting through. There was polling, I think, yesterday or the day before, which showed the extent to which now the party's associated with Sleaze, he's associated with Sleaze, this issue is cutting through to the electorate. 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 organization.

1:39:09The second thing is that this compounds a fundamental problem that Nigel Farage has, which is if you look at the data, he's incredibly popular with around about 20 percent of the electorate and massively popular. You know, he walks down the street, people pour out pubs, they love him. His people who are members and activists within reform will walk over broken glass for the guy. But he is also massively unpopular with 60 % of the electorate. And these are people, the people who dislike Nigel Farage now really dislike him. and they will simultaneously vote for basically anyone to prevent him and reform securing high office and entering Downing Street.

1:40:04And those numbers are just simply too toxic. And there is a narrative, and myself and my Westminster colleagues that feed into this, about Nigel Farage being this great showman, this man who constantly reinvents himself, normal rules of politics don't apply to him. That was the case for Nigel Farage maybe 12, sort of 18 months ago. That's not the case now. Nigel Farage is now broadly in the situation where Boris was, somebody who had a similar degree of broader public popularity, when he was in the midst of the sort of the whole COVID crisis. And I do not see any way that he transforms his political fortunes as a result.

1:40:59But crucially, it doesn't really matter whether I think he does, he can or can't. One thing that we're now seeing inside reform, speak to people inside reform, it is quite clear that with inside reform, that is the perception. There is now a clear perception within reform that Nigel Farage is coming to the end of his leadership. And that is starting to create and stimulate what is effectively becoming the sort of the leadership election and the race to succeed. Nigel Farage is actually underway now. You can see it in terms of what Zia Yusuf is doing. He is basically setting out his leadership store.

1:41:35We had his sort of virtual leadership campaign video, which he launched at party conference. his interventions which are increasingly at odds with what Nigel Farage is saying, completely at odds with his colleagues. As a result of that, the other leadership contenders, Robert Generic in particular, we'll see it with Richard Tice, they're starting to manoeuvre as well. 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. 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.

1:42:25As 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. So you think he will leave soon? I do, yes. Now, the question is whether or not Andy Burnham calls an election before he basically departs. But as I said, whether I think it or not is irrelevant. One thing I know for certain is people inside Reform think he's going to leave relatively soon, which is why the sort of leadership job is starting. But that, I mean, surely isn't Reform just a party based around the personality of Refarad? I hear this a lot, and I generally don't agree with that.

1:43:08I mean, firstly, for the reasons we've all discussed, we were talking about these people who are watching this programme getting angry and all that sort of stuff. That is a small but still a less significant proportion of the electorate. They've, again, for the reasons you've both articulated, are basically done with the established parties who they think have betrayed them. Or who have betrayed them. Or have betrayed them. It's not that they think that.

1:43:34Francis Foster:That's what's happened. Yeah, I'm trying to be sort of going into objective mode here, but yeah, yeah. But if we are going into objective mode, we should say that those parties have betrayed them. Right. If you promise people something and then don't do it, you've betrayed them. Fine. I'll concede your characterization of that. It doesn't change a broader point. I just thought it's important. Yeah, but no, but the reality... You were saying there's still a base of people who view the world the way reform views the world. Yes, and reform will have political influence moving forward, particularly in an environment where to secure a majority of 170, you only need to secure 34 % of the vote, as Keir Starmer did.

1:44:14We're not in a situation where you need to get 45 % to win an election. So in that context, they will remain. Also, I say this consistently, there are some, what I would regard as serious, other alternative serious political players within reform. I think Robert Jenrick is whatever you think about his inability to sort of mask his very naked political ambition. He is a serious political operator. I think Richard Tice has thought, you know, deeply about the professionalisation of reform. And, you know, I spoke to Richard about yesterday saying, who the hell is Dan Hodges? but Richard and I have actually had some really interesting discussions about his strategy for mainstreaming the reformed brand, etc.

1:45:04And he gets it. Also, somebody like Lee Anderson, who is obviously very much a betterment of the left, can articulate, I think, in a very effective way the genuine hopes and dreams of those people that we were talking about who, as you say, have been betrayed. So the idea it's just the Nigel Farage show, I think is just, I think is just, I think is wrong. And in any case, it can't just be the Nigel Farage show for the reasons that I say. The reality is his numbers, just forget Nigel Farage, if you had a politician, you put in front of me a politician with those levels of approval. Because the key thing is, if you look at other politicians, senior politicians.

1:45:49There will be a section of the electorate that like them. There'll be a section of the electorate that dislike them. But that section of the electorate that dislike them, as opposed to either not really knowing who they are or being agnostic about them, is much, much lower. That's the problem with Nigel Farage. Everybody says Nigel Farage is necessary to drive reformers' base. The problem for Nigel is he does drive reformers' base, but crucially, he drives his opponent's base as well. And when you get into that situation

1:46:15Francis Foster:politically you're basically dumb but do you not think whoever replaces him would immediately find themselves if they were lucky to be known by the entire country which they're not right compared to nigel farage nobody knows vizier yusuf is nobody knows robert jennerick nobody knows even lee anderson and richard tice right but the moment you become leader of reform 60 percent of the country will say you're fascist and evil and will not vote for you and will vote for anyone who opposed it depends it depends the it depends what the strategy depends what the strategy is i mean i think the part of the problem for reform is you know a year ago they were on 31 of the vote so you know and obviously there were people running around saying oh you're fascists you're you're racist you're all that sort of stuff and that stuff was just bouncing off the problem is the reality is they played into their opponent's hands and so what's happened is as i said you know I was speaking to people at the time who were talking me through that the next stage of reform strategy was to broaden and mainstream their message.

1:47:16What happened was there was obviously then the split with Rupert Lowe and the establishment of Restore. And, you know, I used exactly, we literally saw it this weekend. We literally saw it. Nigel Farage came out with a very, very clear position on the demonstrators, disgusting, etc. Rupert Lowe says, no, actually, I'm putting my arm around them, suddenly Nigel Farage shifts his position and reforms shift their position. And what they're doing now is, rather than pursue that strategy of reaching out and mainstreaming their messages, which I think could potentially have been successful and could potentially be successful in the future, they're basically chasing after a store.

1:47:56Francis Foster:No, they're shoring up the right, like Burnham is trying to shore up the left, by doing the settlement thing. Yeah, that's kind of what they're trying to do, but they're doing it from a much lower base. Because the point is, the reality is, Labour's vote sharing in the polls is probably slightly underestimating where Labour are at the moment because there are people who are saying they vote Green and they're dead or whatever who won't, they'll come back. But equally, the polls are overestimating reform's support because obviously whenever you have a party of protest who position themselves as, you know, we're the anti-establishment people, obviously when people are asked by a pollster who you're going to vote for, it's very easy to say reform.

1:48:34And then when it comes to a general election, when you're actually voting for a government, as we've seen with all parties, with all persuasions who are minority parties, their support then gets squeezed and shrinks. Well, just let me push back on that a little bit, because what about, we all know the shy Tory phenomenon, where obviously people don't want to admit that they vote Conservative because there's a stigma to it, shall we say. I mean, that's got to be 10x with reform, hasn't it? No, because I think the whole point about Reform's brand, and also we're in a different space now in the era of populism.

1:49:12My experience with Reform supporters is that people who support Reform aren't in any way ashamed or nervous about it. They want everyone to know it, and they want people to know it, because that is, in a sense, part of the deal, that you are standing up and you are basically defining yourself as someone who is taking a stand against the traditional establishment. And the other problem is, yeah, there was in the past a shy Tory thing, but if there is a shy reform phenomenon, that is because of the increasing toxicity of the party and the party's brand. and again I can't remember what the poll was there was a poll yesterday which shows reform now significantly ahead of Labour in a poll when you're questioned which of the parties do you like least and which of the parties will you go out and make a point of voting against and this is the problem reform have because of their attempt to chase restore they are toxifying their brand to the extent that people are now actively going out and saying, look, I'm going to vote for basically anyone if it means reform won't win.

1:50:35Francis Foster:Yeah, it does seem like they, you know, from an outside perspective, they overreacted to the creation of Restore. Yeah, yeah. And I don't understand why. Do you understand why? Yeah, I do. in their head right i don't know whether it's personality conflict well no i i think it's um it's the nature of the online world i mean i early that early in the history of trigonometry uh we had this episode we only had about 90 000 subscribers when uh suddenly we started you know we're basically people who thought of us as being in the center we have a lot of criticisms of the kind of woke thing but that's kind of where we were and then we started getting like loads of like Nazi comments in our on our videos, which we were horrified by.

1:51:20Francis Foster:So we publicly said, like, you know, basically get out of here. This is not for you. And then it turned out that there was some kind of behind the scenes orchestration between these Nazis who were brigading our videos. Right. In order to create this perception that there were loads of them. It was like three people in the basement somewhere yeah but when that happens you it well particularly in our case when you're a small channel it's you're like oh what the fuck is going on like this is it's not who we are it's not what we created it for these people have and it took us a little while to just go oh this will pass because for reform i imagine it would have felt like oh you know uh this guy's left our party and you know i think it is fair to say rupert was treated badly by by reform i don't know exactly what happened but um but suddenly they're picking up x percent of the vote you're seeing them come up with policies you and you know that being a fringe party of opposition has its benefits which you can say things bluntly in a way that you can't if you're seeking that mainstream credibility and so when if you're on on you know on that part of the right and you're seeing rupert lowe talking about certain issues that you care about and he's given it you know 10 out of 10 on powerful rhetoric and presentation and whatever, you're kind of going, that's a good point.

1:52:42Francis Foster:You know, you said that well, et cetera. So I understand why they maybe panicked a little bit and started. But I mean, I don't think the majority of the electorate is in that position. And it does. I agree with that. I think they definitely seem to over-index that wing. I mean, there is just one more thing as well, Dan, just the point. I think, look, Look, size plays a part as well. Let's look at the way that the Labour have dealt with the Greens. The Greens have posed just as much, if not more, of a threat to Labour than Restore did to reform. But Labour never panicked. Labour never... I didn't see them show any of the same behaviours or trying to attack the Greens or do anything like that, even when the Greens won and Gorton and Denton.

1:53:31because I think it's about the size of the Labour Party and it's about the history of the Labour Party. The Labour Party has been in existence for over, what is it, 100 years. There are people there with experience who've won elections who go, look, this happened and whenever it was, just chill out. It will be fine. We'll weather the storm. I'm not sure there are those people within reform. And reform is a very, very new party. and when you're very new, when you're much smaller as a political party, you are ultimately going to be less secure. Yeah, you're fragile. Yeah, I mean, also, I mean, you know, I was speaking to somebody at a reform conference who was basically saying, look, what you need to understand now is we know we're not going to win the next election, right?

1:54:16That is not our objective to the extent it ever realistically was their objective. their objective now is to either is to kind of like overtake the Tories and basically supplant the Tories as the as as the opposition or get even if you want to go like a 10-year strategy get a significant number of seats at the next election that the next stage they're in a position to to supplant the Tories and so to do that they're now adopting a sort of a course vote strategy to what we've got will hold. But I think there are two problems for them with that. One is that the thing, as I said, 20 % in my view is significantly overestimating reforms, current support, just if you look historically at what happens to protest parties.

1:55:06But the other thing is because they are starting to toxify their brands so much, that will start to have, I think, an increasing impact. and we're already seeing it, on the softer levels of reform support. And crucially, something that's happened, which is a small thing, but a very significant thing, is because of the rise of Restore, an increasing number of pollsters are starting to prompt for Restore. So in the opinion polls, we'll start to see Restore's vote going up. And I think we saw it in, was it the More In Common poll? I think it was the More In Common poll started prompting for Restore immediately.

1:55:48Restore got I think 4 or 5 % and the Tories jumped ahead of them. Now the problem for reform is they are clinging on by their fingernails because they are just about at the moment clinging on to a lead over the Tories. Once they drop below the Tories into third place in the polls at that point I think it really is game over. I think at that point what you would see is a very fast cratering in support because at that point it's quite clear, look, you may like Nigel, you may like some of the stuff Nigel says, but if you want to stop Andy Burnham, you want to stop his big grand socialist agenda, you're going to have to stick with the tourists.

1:56:35And I think that's the danger for them of even having the trying to cling on to, you know, the base that they've already got or they perceive it.

1:56:44Francis Foster:I don't know. No, I think it's important to remember the context of all of this, which is for reform to win 100 seats at the next election would be insanely amazing, historically speaking. We shouldn't forget this, right? So, of course, they were riding high in the polls and people were talking, they were talking about, you know, the 100 days of government and that may still happen, may not. But given that they have five MPs, for them to get 100 MPs or even 80 MPs at the next election would be a massive result. Well, look, if they got it, to be perfectly honest, from where they are now, if they got 40 MPs in the next election, I think that would be quite a considerable achievement.

1:57:19Very respectable. And that would sort of, as I say, that would anchor them at that point in British politics. But also, you know, I mean, the other thing is, if they want to be a serious political party and they do want to form a government at some point in the future, you know, they are going to have to let go of Nani's sort of apron spring at some point. You know, Nigel Farage is not, whatever you think about Nigel Farage, you know, he's not immortal. And I think anybody who looked at his, you know, his interviews he gave at the end of Reform Conference got a bit of an insight into what he's thinking about is how long he wants to be in this for.

1:58:06Francis Foster:What did he say about that? Well, he was talking about very, much he and he introduced the narrative he was talking very much about how his his family had asked him to get out of politics and he contemplated it etc and some people were saying this is a kind of like launching a soft resignation but the reality is you know i think this is across the board reform are just going to have to grow up they're going to have to grow up as a as a party you know this you know and this constant narrative oh everyone's out to get us and the establishment and all that sort of stuff when they keep making this succession of ludicrous and goals.

1:58:40I mean, that was a by-election taking place which was supposed to draw a line under the funding crisis, and there were Nigel Farage's senior aides going around tight-tatt for dodgy donations. You know, these are not at the moment. This is not at the moment. Whatever you think of them, a serious alternative party of government at the moment. And they, you know...

1:58:59Francis Foster:Can I just ask you one question on that point? I mean, the point, they're a small party, So why head of policy is soliciting donations or why a PR person doesn't make any sense to me. I don't understand why that was going on. But I think the point that some people have made, which is if you subject any party to this level of scrutiny, where you've got activist groups doing year-long entrapment things to try and catch people out, etc. I mean, I was reading Michael Crick's biography of Nigel Farage, which is by no means a complimentary book. I don't know if you've read it or not. But one of the things Crick talks about is the extent to which the Tories cheated in their elections against Farage's party, which I think would have been UKIP or Brexit party at the time.

1:59:48Francis Foster:So, I mean, don't all political parties get up to this sort of stuff? Yeah, all political parties do, but all political parties receive the scrutiny. No, they don't. Not like this. I mean, where is the right-wing infiltration of Labour trying to expose donations? It's not happening, right? Whereas this latest Channel 4 thing, it wasn't a Channel 4 thing at all. You had a bunch of foreign-funded far-left activists who did this, then handed it over to Channel 4. I mean, my memory may be tripping me up, but I certainly remember... I think there was some sort of undercover...

2:00:28Francis Foster:Yeah, but you're going back into what is ancient history for most people. Well, not... It's the early days of the Blair government. No, but I mean... Well, no, it was the latter... I think it was the latter days of the Blair government. Middle days, yeah. So the point was, Tony Blair, you know, Tony Blair was interviewed under caution when he was in Downstreet. We saw Labour politicians around cash farmers. But that's 20 years ago. I'm talking about now. Who's investigating Andy Burnham's donations? Nobody. Where's the activist far-right group that's doing that? It's not happening. But the reality is you're not going to get...

2:00:56But this comes back to what we were talking about, about being serious. You're not going to get Andy Burnham or anyone around Andy Burnham sitting down with anyone saying, look, give us some dodgy donations. You know, that's the... They have other people further away doing that. That's the reality. You know, there are different people who deal with the donation side of this. Andy Burnham wouldn't go anywhere near it. Whereas you've got Nigel Farage in the middle of the by-election sitting there saying, well, I'm boys, isn't this great? You know, I mean, and then saying, oh, God, it's all, you know, they're out to get us.

2:01:25Francis Foster:Dan, thanks for coming on, mate. It's good to chat. I appreciate your perspective. Thank you for having me. What's the one thing we're not talking about in society that we should be? Oh, my God. The one thing we're not talking about in society. Don't say Andy Burnham. No, what I find interesting is the way, it's not one thing, the way we jump from a subtle consensus of what the most significant issue of the great intractable issue that we need to solve at the moment is obviously the moment we're talking about immigration like i said i was told you know social care was the was was the biggest issue i think before that i remember being told you know we had an education crisis that if it wasn't solved that the the country was going to fall apart um lack of productivity was another another another great one I I think the thing it I don't think the problem is the thing that there's one thing that we're not talking about I think the problem is that we we only have the capacity politically to focus on one thing at a time and you know we spend all our time and we're currently talking about immigration and this is that this is the big issue in 10 or 15 years Pete may not be us, may well be us, we'll be sitting around this table and there'll be another major political issue and we'll all go, why the hell didn't we see that coming?

2:02:57You know, that's it. I mean, maybe it's, maybe it's, but then again, maybe not because we might all be dead. Yeah, exactly. So, you know.

2:03:06Francis Foster:Dan Hodges, thanks so much for coming on. Head on over to triggerpod.co.uk where Dan's going to answer your questions. As a former Labour researcher, this current government must be particularly disheartening for you. Do you believe there's any hope of Labour actually coming up with a working policy on defence, welfare, education, the NHS, net zero or anything else?