Up next in 10
Veteran Labour MP Diane Abbott has claimed the threat posed by Russia was a "NATO fiction" being used to justify increased defence spending.
00:00 | Nick Ferrari is joined by Tan Dhesi, Chairman of the Defence Select Committee and Labour MP for Slough, who emphasises the importance of raising defence spending.
04:31 | Shadow Defence Secretary James Cartlidge says that Diane Abbott has not been to Ukraine recently to see 'the horror of what war is really like'.
07:43 | Border Security Minister Anna Turley says 'Diane Abbott is wrong on this'.
09:26 | Former Deputy National Security Adviser Paddy McGuiness says 'there is none so blind as those who will not see', criticising Ms Abbott's comments.
13:47 | Texter Nigel thinks Ms Abbott has 'rarely been right on any subject in 39 years'.
14:28 | Caller Andrea debates with Nick Ferrari about 'whose tanks went in first - Russia or Ukraine?'
18:04 | Caller Matthew believes 'Russia is shouting loud because there's no substance behind them'.
19.34 | Caller Chris brands the comments 'disgraceful'.
21:22 | Caller Cormac doesn't see how this can be 'NATO fiction', if Ukraine isn't a member of that alliance.
Show More Show Less View Video Transcript
0:00
Let's bring to the conversation first Tan Dacey, who chairs the Defence Select Committee and is Labour MP for Slough
0:04
Credit to you, sir. You're not letting go of this, and well done to you. We heard from the Prime Minister, quotes, I've made that commitment very clear
0:11
Do you take that on board, Mr Dacey? Good morning. Well, good morning, Nick. Thank you for your kind words
0:16
And look, you and I have been consistent on this issue. You've interviewed me on several occasions. We've spoken about this
0:23
And this is incredibly important. And the context in which I made those comments, Nick, during Prime Minister's questions
0:30
is that the British people need to understand that there is a significantly raised threat level
0:36
We've got threats not even veiled from the Russian leadership. And we've got a US leadership for whom European security is no longer a focus or a priority
0:46
And that is why people within Parliament, especially the government, needs to step up to the plate
0:51
They need to reach that 3% of GDP spent on defence by 2030
0:57
And my understanding, Nick, is that there hasn't been any such commitment from government
1:02
And that's why I asked that question. And the only commitment that we have, by the way, that we as a country are signed up to is under the former prime minister
1:12
when we signed up to the 3.5% NATO agreed target of 3.5% on conventional defence spend by 2035
1:23
But there needs to be staging posts. It needs to be done in a well-managed way because if
1:27
everything is backloaded, if we leave it all to the next parliament or if we leave it all to the
1:33
mid-2030s, we will not get value for money for the British taxpayer. A lot of that money will get
1:40
eaten up through defence inflation and that's why we want to get that three percent by 2030 and
1:45
that's something by the way nick that it's not just me saying it our cross-party defence committee
1:50
which has been elected by mps from across the house that's one of the beauties of our parliamentary
1:55
democratic system is that we can on behalf of the house say certain things that we feel are very
2:02
important and that's when we've said that that issue needs to be settled in this parliament
2:06
not to kick the can down the road to the next parliament. Well, let me ask you, Mr Dacey
2:11
how satisfied were you with the response from the Prime Minister? Well, look, the Prime Minister said that he is committed to that
2:19
Are you buying that, Mr Dacey? I understand that subsequently there has been a clarification from Number 10
2:24
that there isn't a commitment as yet to reach 3% by 2030
2:31
So what do you plan to do next, Mr Dacey? So look, I've laid out what needs to be done
2:37
and I think it's up to the government now to clarify their position
2:41
And by the way, this isn't just for me or for our parliament. This is incredibly important for our defence industrial base
2:47
We need to increase capacity because we can only feel safe and be safe
2:51
if we can mobilise our defence industrial base. It's also important as a clarification, as a signal to our allies
3:00
many of whom are expecting us to step up to the plate. And it's also important to send that signal to our adversaries, such as Putin, who are making those threats to us, that will send that clear signal that we are serious about our defence
3:15
And ultimately, Nick, defence is the primary duty. It is the number one duty of any government
3:21
And the government owes it to the British people to actually come good on this
3:25
And by the way, some of our allies are also pointing out that if we don't spend effectively on defence, we've got the likes of Donald Trump making threats about the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands and so much more besides
3:38
So we need the government to clarify and move forward on this
3:43
Just lastly, you reference our allies. I have to put to you that one of your senior colleagues or veteran colleagues, Labour MP Diane Abbott, says that the threat from Russia is a NATO fiction
3:52
How do you respond to Diane Abbott's views? Well, that's not the view of the Labour government
3:57
I think there's been clarification on that. That's not the view of the Labour Party
4:01
Why are you saying that? You know my own personal views. Look, the Labour Party obviously is a broad church
4:06
Different individuals will subscribe to different opinions. But I know that as far as the Labour Party is concerned
4:12
or the Labour government is concerned, on me as an individual, we recognise the threats
4:17
and that's why we're speaking up about them. OK, stick with it, Tan. I sense you will
4:21
But credit to you yesterday and thank you. And I sense we will talk again. And Tan Dacey, Labour MP, chairs the Defence Select Committee
4:28
The folk of Slough are probably quite lucky to have such a dedicated bloke. Thanks, Mr Dacey. Listening to that, James Cartlidge, who is Conservative MP and Shadow Defence Secretary
4:35
You and your party leader have worked out a financial plan, how you could fund the missing money
4:40
Can you briefly work your way through the numbers for the benefit of my listeners? Good morning to you. Good morning, Nick
4:45
And first of all, and I will do, but first of all, it is, you know, as a parliamentarian
4:49
a privilege to follow someone like that, Tan, who has risen above party politics and done something very special
4:54
Hear, hear. But then it's... Don't think he's earned himself any favours at number 10, but on you go, James
4:58
I think you're right, but he's done the right thing, and that's important in politics where people are cynical about us at times
5:03
Indeed. But one of the reasons they're cynical is because we say things, but we don't follow it up with action
5:08
So we've set out today an actual funded plan to get 3%. We've been working on it for some months
5:13
The biggest part is welfare. It's restoring the two-child benefit cap. It is reforming housing benefit
5:19
It's also reforming motability, and it's also repurposing money into defence from other areas of government spending
5:25
So, for example, the National Wealth Fund was set up for net zero primarily
5:30
We've taken 11 billion of that for defence. And finally, the British Business Bank will be taking some money
5:35
We would take money from that for defence as well, all of which would boost our economy. But ultimately, most importantly, we'll boost our defence and send that signal to Putin
5:42
Because, you know, as Tan said, there's been a lot of talk and it's very unclear where the government are
5:48
But ultimately, it's money that buys those missiles. It's money that invests in our defence and sends that signal
5:54
And that means taking the tough decisions and the sort of leadership we've seen from Kemi today. How do you respond to the responses from the Prime Minister to both Tandes and to your party leader yesterday in the House
6:05
Well, I think, I mean, first of all, I don't think he gave very clear responses. You know, it's all well and good for him to criticise the past
6:12
I feel very proud, actually, of what we did as a party in terms of Ukraine. We showed extraordinary leadership
6:17
I don think there a parallel universe where had we not been in government some other party would have magically spent billions more on defence Quite the opposite But that the past The point now Nick as Tan put more eloquently than I could I have to say
6:29
is the threat is very clear. You've got a leader in the Kremlin who is willing to take levels of
6:36
casualty. That is like the Eastern Front of the Second World War. That is a serious problem for
6:41
our country. We have to stand up to these people. And the best way to do it and to avoid war is to
6:45
prepare for it and invest in our armed forces. Lastly, Mr. Cartlidge, Diane Abbott says this is all fiction
6:50
and she wrote in the Morning Star in July, the reason there's such a hue and cry about military spending
6:55
is not because Russian forces are in Ukraine. The reason is outlandish claims about an imminent Russian invasion
7:00
because Trump is demanding more military spending from NATO members. Mr. Cartlidge
7:05
Well, I have to say, I don't think Diane Abbott has been to Ukraine recently
7:09
and seen, you know, when you go there, you see the horror of what war is really like
7:14
what aggression from a dictator really amounts to. I'm passionate about our support, and it's cross-party
7:19
The Labour Party, you know, to be fair, do not agree with that position. I think Tan spoke well on it
7:24
I think what you've seen, what your listeners will have heard, hopefully today, is that rare thing
7:28
unity of view across party lines, that we need to go to 3%, but what we've done as a party today
7:33
is said where the money would come from, and that's the key thing. Yes, you delivered the sums. Grateful for your time. Thank you
7:37
James Cartlidge is the Conservative Shadow Defence Secretary. Can you clarify, yesterday
7:44
the Prime Minister told MPs in the House he would commit to spending 3% of GDP on defence
7:48
but then Downing Street later clarified it was not confirmed. Can you tell us how you view that
7:53
Have we got this confirmation or have we not? Yes, I think he was very clear in his response
7:57
to Kemi Badenok. It's 3.5% by 2035, which is our NATO commitment. We've absolutely committed to that
8:04
and the Prime Minister is very, very clear that that is our commitment, the NATO commitment. But what about your colleague Tan Dacey, who wants 3% by 2030? Yeah, and you have a lot of respect
8:12
for TAN. He does a terrific job as... Top bloke. Yes, as head of the Defence Committee
8:16
He's a good guy. And I think we're going to have the spending review next year, which is
8:20
going to set out the path to that 3.5%. So that's when we'll hear what the
8:25
various... Are we going to hit the 3% by 2030? That's not what the
8:28
Prime Minister committed to. He's committed to 3.5% by 2035. That's really clear. That's the answer he gave to
8:34
Kemi Badenok, and that's the commitment that he's made, fulfilling our NATO obligation
8:39
And the sort of route map to that will be set out next year. Of course
8:42
Another of your Labour colleagues might suggest we don't need any of this spending. Diane Abbott is saying that it's a fiction and we don't need to spend this money
8:50
because Russia isn't a threat. How do you respond to the veteran MP
8:54
Well, I've got a lot of respect for Diane, but it's not the first time I completely disagree with her
8:58
I think she's wrong on this, I'm afraid. And I'm really proud that both this Prime Minister, the previous Prime Minister
9:04
and actually cross-party, this country has been really united and really solid in its defence and support for Ukraine
9:09
We'll continue to do that. We stand by Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression
9:13
And I'm proud that this country has stood shoulder to shoulder with them and will continue to do so. Will someone contact Ms Abbott and tell her how wrong she is
9:19
What happens now? I'll leave that to the whips to deal with Nick. I've got enough on my plate
9:26
It's fiction, says Ms Abbott. How would you respond to someone who's effectively been at the coalface
9:31
Good morning. Good morning. There's none so blind as those who will not see
9:37
I mean, we've got so much evidence of the Russian posture and they want us to see it
9:42
They want us to feel pressured and that's why they're probing because that is their mindset
9:47
and she doesn't seem to be able to take account of it. My personal experience of Diane Abbott
9:53
and those of officials who I know dealt with her when she was shadow home secretary
9:57
and had to be briefed on things is that she is prone to what I would call a priori reasoning
10:02
She sees the world a particular way and then seeks to find evidence for it
10:06
and there are several things even in that brief comment you gave which are wrong, which I hope you'll ask me about
10:12
And go ahead, Paddy. Well, so, look, you only have to look at Russia's naval posture
10:20
the ships that sit off our shores deliberately in range to be able to hit us with their weapon systems
10:25
the way the survey ship Yantar hovers over subsea tables into Ireland and into the UK and does nefarious things to them
10:35
the cyber presence we find on routers and networks, the reports of attacks on power stations
10:43
the fire at East Midland Airport, the poisonings in Salisbury, to know that Russia is not sitting back and prodded by the UK
10:51
but it's prodding us. So there's all of that. And then the second thing that I think she's really, really got wrong
10:58
and which is actually profound and interesting, is she says, we've capitulated
11:04
and Trump says we must spend a certain level, which we absolutely should because we're not adequately equipped now
11:12
And she then says to buy American weapons. And the really interesting thing is Europe has palpably lost a proportion of trust in the United States and its reliability
11:23
And this time is looking to spend a proportion of its spend on European developed systems
11:31
many of which will be made with British components and will be of advantage to the United Kingdom
11:37
So there's actually a much bigger thing going on, which she doesn't recognise, and her a priori reasoning doesn't capture
11:44
Paddy, can you take us inside the mindset, inside the Kremlin, and the instances you cite
11:51
because you always want to keep your enemy nervous, you always want to keep them off balance
11:54
is that why Russia is doing what Russia is doing? Absolutely. And I hope you're not just asking me that
12:01
because I look a bit like Vladimir Putin if I take my glasses off. Actually, you do
12:06
I've never seen the two of you in the same room, actually, Paddy. So I'm a little nervous. If we start doing that, I'll think who you look like, Nick
12:12
You won't have me on again. I'm very happy to say I look like Christopher Biggins. On you go
12:17
Very kind. Look, absolutely. It has long been the approach of the people I would call the Czechists
12:25
so the people who come out of the Russian intelligence apparatus, and Vladimir Putin does
12:29
to keep your opponent off balance by any means you can. There is something called the Gerasimov Doctrine
12:36
Gerasimov was a military leader and he developed the concept which we would describe as hybrid warfare
12:41
which is what we're suffering from at the moment. And what really powerful about this approach is rather than trying to influence your opponent to do a particular thing you just do anything you can to complicate their life and that is a victory
12:56
And of course, that's much more easy than doing a focused influence campaign
13:00
which people always assume they're doing. So if they interfere in an election, yes, they might prefer one party over another
13:06
but they just want us to be unhappy with elections. Last question, moving you away a little bit
13:10
The row over defence spending, whether we get to 3.5% by 2035
13:16
whether we get to 3% by 2030, what should we be hearing, Paddy
13:20
We should be hearing a radical spend now to create deterrence so we don't have to spend more and lose lives later
13:29
And Labour used to be and has a part which is hard-minded about defence
13:34
Diane Aberdon's is the other end of the spectrum. We need that Labour, the Labour that led us at Potsdam
13:40
We need that Labour to step forward and understand we need to build the Terence
13:44
Grateful as ever for your time. Let's look at a couple of the texts and emails that are coming in
13:50
Nige in Sandbach says, Diane Abbott, an MP who has rarely been right on any subject in nearly 39 years
13:57
Meanwhile, Andy says, I can't believe this, but I partly agree with Diane Abbott
14:01
For my point, we should stay out of the Russia-Ukraine situation. It's nothing to do with us. Then we would not have hostility from Russia
14:07
if we don't poke the Russian bear they have no reason to have a go at us I don't think that's right Andy remember the poisoning
14:14
down in Salisbury that was way before the Ukraine conflict ever began
14:19
and they poisoned people as well here in the UK prior to that so
14:23
I think actually that's you have to review your position on that
14:27
Andrea's in Leighton what do you want to tell me Andrea good morning Nick yes pleasure thank you much first time talking to you
14:32
now I want to put a position that's far more stronger in its criticism of NATO
14:37
and basically what, because I'm a Marxist, Leninist, we might call British patriarchal capitalist imperialism
14:44
Wow, there's a lot of isms going on here. This project Ukraine is basically a NATO attempt to corner Russia
14:51
into having to respond. And secondly, we should be basically leaving NATO
14:56
and abandoning our useless nuclear defence force, which is basically under American control anyway
15:02
And instead we should be trying to restore the rule of international law, international courts and international peace
15:08
In other words, instead of asking militarists and voices from the military industrial complex
15:12
to say how can they get rich by killing people, we should think where can we form win-win alliances
15:16
with Russia, with China, with India, with rising powers? And also, how can we handle what, in fact
15:22
is a decaying, very dangerous power called the United States, which, as we've seen, is stealing oil from Venezuela
15:28
kidnapping presidents and their first ladies? If we come back to the situation between Russia and Ukraine
15:34
who jumped first? Well, I'm going to give you what I regard as the correct explanation
15:40
Ever since 2008, when there was a crisis in capitalist profiteering, people in the city have been looking for ways to basically milk resources in Russia
15:48
much as they did with Yeltsin. So to understand what's happening in Ukraine, you need a proper sort of economic and imperialist ysis
15:55
Would you answer the question, though? Well, let me put it another way. Will you accept that Russia moved first in the situation between Russia and Ukraine
16:02
Well, that's like holding a gun to someone's head and saying, I'm going to shoot you or you need to do something. So it's childish to say..
16:07
Whose tanks went in first? Well, I mean, who toppled Moshek? No, no, no. Just answer my question
16:13
The Russian tanks went in first. No, because there's a mistake to think that Britain is not an imperial power
16:19
and that NATO is not an imperial instrument. You haven't answered about Ukraine four years ago. No, no, because we need to go back a long time to understand the imperialism
16:25
But I only need to go back four and a half years ago. Whose tanks went in first? OK, but that's like saying when we declared war on Germany in 1939
16:33
we then invaded in the phony war. So there's no point saying who actually declared war first
16:39
because don't forget Britain declared war twice on Germany in the First World War and the Second World War. So were we the aggressors and are we responsible
16:45
No. So you need to have a more intelligent ysis of how people start wars
16:49
and provoking enemies into doing things is a classic way of starting a war
16:53
when you're looking to benefit from it. I mean, I can't believe we're going back to the Second World War. It was the German aggression
16:58
that brought about the Second World War. That is certainly true. Hitler and his gang are a bunch of lunatics
17:04
We've got one. We've got one over the line with Andrea. I'm not a fantasist about how wicked people are
17:11
It's just that the British and NATO are very wicked people as well. And you don't think the Russians has a degree of wickedness with Russia
17:17
They're very... I mean, Mr Yeltsin... No, no, no. Mr Putin, Mr Lavrov and Mr Mavridia, they are ruthless nationalists
17:25
And when they poison British nationalists, or people living in Britain, sorry, when they poison... No, yeah, British nationals
17:30
How should a nation react? Well, again, we need to ask how many people did Britain kill in India
17:35
No, no, no, never mind that. Let's just think about the victims of Salisbury. How do we react to that
17:41
OK, so how should India react to the fact that we probably killed about 65 million? No, no, no, no
17:45
The fact that Russia decided to launch poisonous, fatal attacks in Britain
17:50
We just accept that, do we? Because we've had a rather troublesome past. OK, I'll ask you a parallel question
17:56
Why can't you answer my question? Are you a politician? LAUGHTER Matthew in Stockport. What would you say to Ms Abbott and her claims here? Good morning
18:08
So, Russia are aggressive in that stance, and they tend to shout loud
18:15
but they've got no navy to actually physically attack the UK. They've got no aircraft carriers
18:20
They have got the navy. Most of it's destroyed in the Black Sea. They don't have any aircraft carriers
18:26
How they can actually get there? I've been privileged to be on missions on the Baltic with the Royal Navy
18:32
to try and counter what the Russian Navy is doing in trying to target our undersea cables
18:37
They have got a navy, Matthew. Yeah, no, but it's significantly depleted
18:41
because most of it's been destroyed in the Black Sea. And how do they get one million soldiers from the Russian border to the UK
18:49
What I'm saying is that they overestimate their... They make themselves seem more scarier than they are
18:56
I absolutely agree that NATO is a defensive alliance and we all need to, the European powers need to be resilient and strong in the face of Russia
19:04
But I feel that there no substance behind it The person that shouts the loudest is the weakest So you think broadly speaking Lassie Matthew that Diane Abbott right on this one No no no So I think I don think it a NATO war I think NATO are doing the collective defence which is correct but actually strong to Russia
19:23
But actually Russia's shouting loud because actually they've got, there's no substance behind them
19:28
They want to make themselves stronger, appear stronger than what they are. Chris in Richmond, thanks for hanging on the line. Chris, the point you want to make. Good morning
19:37
I mean, this is a disgraceful comment, frankly. I mean, as you said, look at the scribbles
19:42
Look at the chap that was poisoned years ago. Oh, yeah, Ljvinenko
19:48
Yeah, Ljvinenko. You know, what about this week alone, we've had a drone strike on a German airport
19:54
Can you imagine what that could have done? It was Leipzig, I think, wasn't it? Exactly. I mean, it's just outrageous
20:00
And someone like Andrea, who's clearly a very bright man, very well-read, probably well-educated
20:05
but certainly very well read. How would you reason with a view such as that, Chris
20:10
Well, go and talk to people of Ukraine. You know, go to the Ukrainians that have come to this country
20:14
We've got quite a few in Twicken and we've got a great, great Twicken. Yeah. Oh, you've got a Ukrainian restaurant in Twicken
20:19
just for the petrol station. Correct, great. You should come down one day and we'll see you there. And I think it's a great, obviously it's a great, it's a great
20:25
we welcome lots of people. I've got a friend I used to work with who's, you know, she's got a house there that she can't go back to
20:30
she's got a family member they can't see. Yeah. It is outrageous, you know, and it's typical leftist propaganda
20:35
it's all about NATO. Russia invaded Ukraine. It is stealing children. It is raping women
20:42
And it's disgusting to see Diana say that. I mean, what is Andy Burnham doing
20:46
not kicking her out of the Labour Party? I think this is a huge test for his leadership
20:52
Well, of course, it was... Well, she was kicked out, of course, in July last year
20:56
You may recall for comments she made about Jewish people she have subsequently apologised following her suspension
21:02
So it's interesting, Chris. I think you're right. I don't see this as the same level as those appalling comments about Jewish people
21:10
It's not on the same level, but it shows a shocking naivety for someone who's meant to be, of course
21:15
a veteran MP and a voice to whom we should all listen. Chris, thanks. Good to hear you on the show
21:22
Great to hear. Was it Paddy McGuinness? Yes. Who was your guest earlier on
21:26
Yeah. Yeah, agree with absolutely everything you said. And taking out of this, he talks about the Gerasimov Doctrine
21:31
Now, I've been trying to tell people about the Grasimov Doctrine for nearly 10 years since I started studying Russian hybrid warfare
21:39
And a large part of Russian hybrid warfare is disinformation. And Russia tells a number of great lies to justify their invasion of Ukraine
21:48
And one is, surprise, surprise, it was because of NATO expansion. And they say Ukraine is full of Nazis and so forth
21:54
So there are two people, there are two types of people who amplify Russian disinformation for the Kremlin
22:02
There are useful idiots and there are out and out Kremlin assets
22:08
Now, I'm not going to say anything that would have me up in court about Diane Abbott
22:13
Right. I don't know whether she's a useful idiot or whether she has some other reason for directly amplifying, for describing the invasion of Ukraine as a NATO operation
22:25
Ukraine isn't even a member of NATO. It's absolutely appalling, Nick. Isn't it going to be down to what I imagine is her political posture towards Donald Trump and the US
22:33
Isn't that what's going to be fuelling her thoughts, do you think? I'm not even sure
22:37
I'm not even sure of that. Miss Abbott is what we call a tankie
22:42
and Tanki's our kind of old-style far-left socialists who have a yearning for the old Soviet Union
22:50
I know you have links with the Ukraine. What is the current situation
22:54
Is Russia starting to be pushed back? Is it the stalemate that we seem to have been witnessing over the years
22:59
What's the current state of play between the two countries? It's absolutely, well, two points
23:05
On the front line, and I've been listening to some very good ysis from some of our military people only this morning
23:11
on the front line, Russia is making absolutely incremental advance for up to 1,500 casualties, and most of them will die per day
23:25
They are losing more in Ukraine. They're losing twice as many in Ukraine in one month
23:33
as the Soviet Union lost in Afghanistan in 10 years. Think about that and let it sink in
23:39
Cormac, I will. We'll talk again soon. You may remember some years ago, Nick, our then-Chancellor, Frau Merkel, flew to Moscow
24:14
It was well known. She did not like dogs, least of all large dogs. You may remember the pictures
24:19
I know this story. To finish the story, I know. Yeah, she was sitting in Mr. Putin's living room, and he let a large dog roam around Frau Merkel
24:29
although it was well known, and he would have been briefed. Well, I understood she was bitten quite badly as a young woman, and they researched that
24:36
and she was spooked by big... And he came in with something like a wolfhound, is what I've been told. Yeah, and that's the thing
24:40
And I thought then, Nick, I'm going to show me age here, I thought then, Putin, I didn't like the cut of his jib
24:46
And since what's happened in the meantime, I like it even less
24:50
I refer to the multiple poisonings, not only in Salisbury, but the man is ruthless beyond belief
24:57
Let us look at the example of that mercenary leader that briefly tried to sort of offer some..
25:02
Oh, yes. He was ruthlessly murdered. with innocent members of his crew on that plane
25:09
The man is ruthless. Now, we've got a very similar politician here
25:13
Her name is Sarah Wagner. Wagner, I think you refer to, is that right? Yeah, that's right, yes
25:18
But until recently, the beginning of the Ukraine war, she was riding high in the polls
25:23
She displayed a similar, staggering lack of judgment. She claimed that Russia was not going to invade Ukraine
25:32
Since then, she has been in the political wilderness. Rob, I love the picture from Germany, as ever. Thank you
#news