Up next in 10
Does Starmer really have what it takes to be PM? | James O’Brien - The Whole Show
Apr 23, 2026
This is a catch-up version of James O'Brien's live, daily show on LBC Radio from the 22nd of April 2026. 00:00 - Does Keir Starmer have what it takes to be prime minister? 48:28 - Half of young people would never fight for Britain - what would they be fighting for? 01:34:53 - PMQs – Natasha Clark, LBC’s Political Editor 02:05:52 – U.S. Round Up – Simon Marks, LBC’s Washington Correspondent 02:22:47 - Survey reveals the scale of anti-immigrant views and misinformation, and the toll on staff and tenants - Katharine Swindells, Features Editor at Inside Housing #jamesobrien #politics #LBC LBC is the home of live debate around news and current affairs in the UK. Join in the conversation and listen at https://www.lbc.co.uk/ Sign up to LBC’s weekly newsletter here: https://l-bc.co/signup
Show More Show Less View Video Transcript
0:00
It's three minutes after ten, and thank you for choosing James O'Brien on LBC today
0:09
I hope that I live up to the confidence that you are showing in me
0:13
And I mention that because I am poised, I think, to annoy pretty much everybody with the introduction to this programme
0:22
I've been thinking about footballification, which is a word I think I invented, but it's certainly not a concept I invented
0:28
It's just a slightly layered way of saying tribalism. The difference between tribalism and footballification
0:35
is that in football there are only two teams on the pitch
0:39
whereas tribalism can accommodate a myriad of tribes. And I was thinking about the Keir Starmer-Peter Mandelson vetting story
0:49
which is no longer the Keir Starmer-Peter Mandelson vetting story, is it
0:53
It's the Keir Starmer-Olly Robbins sacking story. And I think, I'm fairly confident that the sacking of Ollie Robbins is now a bigger problem for the Prime Minister in the perceptions of, most importantly, many of his colleagues, never mind the public or voters or his enemies, but many of his colleagues, the sacking of Ollie Robbins is now looking more problematic than the supposed alleged failure in vetting of Peter Mandelson
1:21
But I was thinking that footballification doesn't work at the moment, does it
1:28
Because there aren't two teams. It's quite a moment for me, this
1:32
I've found footballification to be an incredibly helpful key with which to unlock almost all of the big political movements of the last few years
1:41
In fact, it's probably worth reminding ourselves Brexit, right? Utterly binary. Entirely footballification
1:47
footballification. There was a little bit of dabbling around in the shallows at one point with
1:52
you know, left-wing leavers, the Lexit idea, or the we're not going to leave everything
1:57
we're only going to leave this or that, which the leavers said, but they were all a little bit
2:02
deluded. It was either you want to stay in the European Union or you want to leave. And I wonder
2:09
whether that, I wonder whether that has coloured us all a little bit. Well, when I say us all
2:17
I quite often mean me. I wonder whether I've become a little bit too binary
2:21
as a consequence of Brexit. Because I was thinking about this Keir Starmer story
2:26
and I was reflecting upon some of the... My particular exposure to social media is incredibly limited now
2:34
My Facebook goes nowhere near politics. I haven't been on Twitter for years
2:38
And I'm a kind of king of the centrist dads on Blue Sky
2:43
So my feed at the moment is dominated by Starmarists or Starmarites or people who cannot accept that Keir Starmer is really messing up an awful lot of things on an extraordinary scale
2:57
And it occurred to me that there are many tribes now in politics, but also in this story
3:05
It's not pro-Starmar or anti-Starmar, is it? Let me run through a few for you, okay, before we get to the question of where we are today, because goodness only knows
3:16
So I'll give you, if you like, the Corbynites, and I don't want to use any nasty words today to describe tribes
3:22
because as I've said to you on a few occasions, I don't like causing unintended offence
3:27
I'm a huge fan of intended offence, but not unintended. So you have your Corbynites, who are persuaded and have been persuaded for some time
3:34
that Keir Starmer is close to the devil incarnate, that he is an entirely dishonest, untrustworthy, dissembling, demonic politician
3:44
who has betrayed principles and people with gay abandon. So the Corbynites who hold him in the lowest of regard
3:54
but would still be loosely, or not loosely, but would still be completely described as left-wing
4:00
And then you have what I will call today the Starmerites, and that is the people who
4:05
I don't know how representative they are of broader tribes, but they seem to be labouring under the delusion
4:09
that Keir Starmer is doing well, even as his approval ratings and the Labour Party's poll position
4:16
is close to catastrophic. These are the people who would argue that he's not a very naughty boy
4:23
he is in fact the messiah. Those are the two polls on the left, right
4:29
The Corbynite, and these are loose, but I hope helpful generalisations. This is where if you don't like my characterisations
4:36
just give me a break because I'm not trying to offend you or upset you
4:40
I'm just trying to find the right catch-all terms. I'm trying to find the right
4:44
umbrellas. Have I told you about my new umbrella? Did I tell you I've got an umbrella
4:48
Anyway, I digress. I'm trying to find the right umbrellas under which to assemble quite
4:53
disparate people. They may not agree with each other about everything but they do agree
4:58
that Starmer is a wrong-un and they probably think that Corbyn was a man more sinned against than sinning
5:04
so we will call them the Corbynites the Starmorites, not the Starmtroopers
5:08
because that seems to be a little bit unfair but the Starmorites
5:12
who are, well maybe Starmtroopers is okay, I don't know actually it doesn't at second glance
5:18
sound like a particularly pejorative term but they are the people who seem to be
5:22
similarly, in my humble opinion similarly detached from observable reality the idea that of course he's going to be attacked by right-wing media but this is not a story about
5:35
being attacked by right-wing media there's about six pages in the guardian today examining the mess
5:39
that he got himself into yesterday as a consequence of oliver robbins's testimony so i listen i've
5:44
written books about how they create the ecosystem in this country which can allow a population to be
5:50
persuaded to vote against its own interests and while i'm always happy to learn from others i don't
5:56
think I'm minded to take any lectures on what right-wing media does to left-wing politicians
6:02
Ed Miliband's dead father was maligned by the Daily Mail. Jeremy Corbyn, as many people in
6:09
Category 1 will be shouting at the radio at the moment, hardly got an easy ride. So the idea that
6:14
Keir Starmer has been singled out for particular abuse by right-wing media is unfortunately not
6:20
true. By dint of being Prime Minister, the abuse assumes a slightly different flavour. But if
6:25
for example, you're saying, why is everyone talking about this? And not talking about
6:29
the Sunday Times revelations regarding Richard Tice's tax affairs, you are missing a rather
6:35
large point. And that one of them is a Prime Minister, and one of them is a
6:39
plump. So, and until the plump becomes Prime Minister, you cannot expect similar levels of scrutiny
6:45
or attention to be paid to both of them. So, the Corbynites, the Starmerites
6:51
then you've got the people I'm going to describe, I haven't got a tribal
6:55
name for them, apart from idiots. People who use phrases like LIBOR
7:00
to describe Labour, or two-tier KIA, because they've been given these phrases. They can't really
7:07
justify them. What do you mean, two-tier? Oh, people get treated differently
7:12
if they can... Do you have any proof of this? No, no proof whatsoever, but
7:15
I'm 100% certain that it's right. My inbox is full of people who use the phrase two-tier
7:19
KIA, 30P Lee might say in the House of Commons and therefore it must be true Ditto LIBOR So these are your people who are I don quite what the word is close to radicalised in their hatred of everything everything full stop actually except really if we honest racism
7:38
So they are the most sharp blade, they are the most useful weapon for politicians dedicated to protecting wealth
7:46
You persuade people that the real problem is foreigners and that anybody who doesn't dedicate their entire political platform
7:53
to the demonisation and the denigration of foreigners is the enemy. And that is how you can see words like lefty
7:59
become simultaneously meaningless and abusive, as if it's some sort of catch-all term to describe people who aren't racist
8:06
So if you're using Libor or two-tier care, you're a racist. So that's the next tribe. They're the racists
8:13
So we've got the Corbynites. We've got the Starmorites, we've got the racists
8:17
Then you've got what I will describe as the mail-stroke telegraph contingent
8:22
who might flirt with racism, or a kind of middle-class racism, but they have been brainwashed in a slightly different way
8:29
They might be susceptible to the idea that foreigners are a problem, but they really worry about things like the redistribution of wealth
8:38
or they are unhappy, even though they haven't got much in many cases. They're convinced that there are scroungers around the corner
8:44
There are scroungers everywhere. People are inventing disabilities. People are claiming to have problems that they don't really have
8:51
Everywhere you go, they're trying to pick your pocket in order to fund this mythical, extraordinary lifestyle
8:57
that they've never encountered or witnessed except in the comments section of their favourite newspaper website
9:04
So they are not the out-and-out racists, but they are also likely to use words like lefty
9:12
or even liberal these days to describe a sort of unspecified enemy
9:18
that is dedicated to the idea of doing them harm, even though the harms that they fear don't really exist
9:25
So you've got your Corbynites who think he's the devil incarnate. You've got your Starmerites who think he's the messiah
9:32
You've got your racists, your two-tier racists, who don't really think at all, actually
9:37
but they are very, very angry with Keir Starmer because there's some brown people living next door
9:43
And then you've got your Daily Telegraph, Daily Mail right wing who are terrified of the redistribution of wealth
9:51
even though they're currently, almost certainly, not on the beneficial end of that redistribution
9:58
So, I don't think there's a male-female breakdown here particularly. The Corbynites, the Starmerites, the two-tier racists
10:06
and the Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph bigots, let's say, to be kind
10:12
So, what do the Corbynites think of Keir Starmer and has it changed at all over the last few days
10:16
Well, they think he's awful and no, it hasn't. What do the Starmerites think of Keir Starmer
10:20
and has it changed at all over the last few days? They think he's brilliant at most
10:25
and a man more sinned against than sinning at least. And have their views changed at all over the last few days
10:29
No, if anything, they've hardened. What do the two-tier Keir racists think
10:33
Well, again, as I said, they don't actually think about anything, but their opinions regarding Keir Starmer won't have changed at all
10:39
and nor would their ability to justify them or explain them, because they can't
10:43
And then your Daily Telegraph, Daily Mail people, well, they can't, can they, be genuinely morally outraged
10:49
because they were all big Boris Johnson fans. So the idea that they are genuinely convinced
10:54
that Keir Starmer has done something deeply questionable or egregiously wrong is palpably absurd
11:00
Of course, being palpably absurd doesn't stop people from doing it, but have they changed their opinion regarding Keir Starmer at all
11:06
In the last few days, no, because as with the two-tier racists
11:10
their opinion isn't built on facts, it's built on very carefully cultivated feelings
11:15
That is how they could make excuses for. These clowns are still claiming that Boris Johnson lost his job over cake
11:21
rather than over a succession of calumnies and catastrophes, causing death in many cases and criminality
11:29
But they are so bent and so carefully groomed by members of my profession
11:33
that they cling to these little life rafts of plausibility rather than face the deluge of nonsense and danger
11:41
that they have unleashed and simultaneously been caught up in. So the Corbynites, the Starmerites, the two-tier racists
11:48
and the Daily Telegraph, Daily Mail, bigots. Who's left? Seriously, who's left
11:59
I'm none of those things. Clearly. um are you with me here's where i am right i walked into my um office yesterday and it doubles up as my sort of man cave
12:19
and there's a large pile of clothes on the floor which happens almost organically i don't know how
12:26
it happens right the thing i've never got my head around despite having over half a century
12:32
on this earth is if you wear something but it's not dirty you're going to wear it again so it
12:40
doesn't go in the laundry where do you put it do you hang it up again do you fold it again and put
12:46
it back in the folded drawer or the folded show so i'm looking at this pile of clothes on the on
12:51
the um it's on the sofa actually i'm not an absolute animal not on the floor and i actually
12:56
found myself at the age of 54, I found myself asking internally
13:02
what do grown-ups do? What do grown-ups do? And that is the question I could, what do you do when you've
13:10
worn something but it's not ready to go in the laundry yet? It feels wrong to hang it up back with
13:14
all the clean clothes. What if you forget that it's got one... What do grown-ups do
13:21
And I thought Keir Starmer was a grown-up. I thought he's the kind a guy I could ask, what do you do with your clothes
13:26
when you've worn them once but they're not ready to go in the laundry yet? He's exactly the guy I could
13:30
ask because he always looks quite, I like his casual look. He's got quite a good middle-aged
13:34
centrist dad, football fan thing going on. Well, I thought he was
13:38
a grown-up, right? I honestly thought he was the guy who I don't know, wouldn't have a drink
13:44
when we were in the pub and he'd drive everybody else home. Maybe he is that guy
13:49
I think he's a good man at base, but the problem with the base is that there's an awful lot of layers you need to go through to get to the base
13:57
right? And the layers are not grown-up layers. The sacking of Ollie Robbins speaks to something
14:06
that has been bubbling away in the back of my brain for quite a long time now. And it speaks to
14:12
I've got various words beginning with P jostling for prominence in my mind at the moment
14:17
A petulance seems a little bit too strong. Peevishness. I don't know
14:23
Impatience. I know that doesn't begin with P, but you take my point. Just this..
14:29
He's not very good at it. And it's a personality issue. It's not a policy issue or even a political issue
14:37
It's a personality issue. Nothing's ever his fault. He's too enthralled to the media
14:45
that you're quite right to remind me attacks him unconscionably, but ignore them or tell them to sling their hooks
14:52
Don bend to the campaigns that they love You can stand up to Donald Trump You can stand up to the Daily Mail So I just find myself now jettisoning or recognising those four tribes right
15:10
And wondering who is left. You're not a Corbynite who thinks that Starmer is the Antichrist
15:15
You're not a Starmorite who thinks that Starmer is the Antichrist. You're not a Starmorite who thinks that Starmer is the Messiah
15:21
You're not a two-tier racist who doesn't really know what you think
15:25
but you hate whatever you've been told to hate today. You're Orwell's, actually, creatures, aren't you
15:31
Or you're the sort of slightly more middle-class version of that, which is terrified that unidentified individuals or institutions
15:38
are going to come for what you have. Who's left? Answer, people who aren't in a tribe
15:51
And maybe, I don't know, centrist is a tribe, isn't it? But I don't know which of those four camps
15:57
Who's left? The tribeless? The dispossessed? The politically homeless? No. People who are Labour or Tory are perfectly capable of forming interesting opinions
16:11
about what has happened in the last few days. But it was Ollie Robbins yesterday
16:16
It was as if the man I thought, and when I say a grown-up, I mean process
16:21
I thought he was just going to do things right. So even if he got it wrong, or even if things weren't perfect
16:29
he's just going to do things right. He's not going to cut corners
16:34
He's not going to pass bucks. He's not going to be economical with the actuality
16:39
He's not going to play games. I saw him standing across the House of Commons from Boris Johnson
16:45
and I thought I saw chalk and cheese. But as Ian Dunt writes in the iNewspaper today
16:51
Starmer has squandered his advantage. Unbelievably, he can now be compared to Johnson
16:57
And in some ways he can. Because this is finagling. This is sharp practice
17:03
This is moving the goalposts, changing the story, passing the buck. Ending up with Ollie Robbins
17:09
who conducted himself yesterday with dignity. And sympathy, empathy. I felt sorry for the man
17:17
He's lost his job for doing his job. the idea that he should have done more or could have done more
17:22
doesn't really stand up to scrutiny. The idea that Keir Starmer would have banjacked the entire appointment of Peter Mandelson
17:29
if he'd been told about the questionable vetting result, that doesn't stand up to scrutiny either, I'm afraid
17:34
because they'd already got the king to announce it, which explains why so much pressure was brought to bear
17:39
upon the Foreign Office to clear the appointment. So, is it unrealistic of me, unwise of me or unfair of me
17:54
to ask people who are in none of those tribes you're not a Corbynite, a Starmerite, a two-tier racist
18:01
or a Daily Mail bigot to answer the question of whether you currently think
18:07
Keir Starmer is up to this job and crucially what the events of the last few days have done
18:16
to your answer to that question. And this is not a conversation about
18:22
well, who is going to replace him, or who is doing this, or who is doing that, or the sharpening of the knives
18:27
It's just a question about you, actually. You, as a non-member of any of the tribes we've identified
18:35
and if I've missed any tribes, feel free to stick them on the list. He got Iran right, of course he did
18:40
But as Emily Thornberry has said overnight, he seemed to be digging himself out of a hole
18:44
by getting Iran right, and now he's fallen straight back into it. And Emily Thornberry is a Labour MP
18:49
on the centre of the party. She's not a fascist or a fully paid-up member
18:54
of the two-tier care racist club. She's certainly not a Corbynite. She's not a Starmer
19:01
She's called it correctly. She's the chair of the committee that took Ollie Robbins' evidence yesterday
19:06
So, is he up to the job? Convince me that he is
19:12
Because today it just doesn't look like he can do this, he can't turn this round
19:18
And if he can't turn it round, then the argument for getting somebody else in place sooner becomes irresistible
19:24
And I've been here before, a couple of times, I've been on the precipice that I'm teetering across now
19:30
thinking, because it's a massive thing to think. We've got PTSD, I think, decent people in this country
19:36
people who saw that Brexit was awful, people who saw that Boris Johnson was awful, people who saw that Donald Trump was awful
19:41
people who saw that Liz Truss was awful. We've got PTSD. I'm not underplaying the seriousness of that condition
19:48
when you've sustained it in warfare or something like that but we've got a mild form of post-traumatic stress disorder
19:53
because we need peace, stability, calm, quiet and we thought Keir Starmer would provide it
20:01
and he hasn't call it political trauma stress disorder and it's continuing now
20:08
and it is Keir Starmer's fault it just is, isn't it? 03456060973
20:17
If your answer to this question has changed since he became Prime Minister
20:22
then I want to hear your take on this. And if it hasn't changed, but you are convinced that your arguments are as solid as houses
20:32
then I want to hear from you as well. Is he actually up to the job
20:41
03, it's post-Tory stress disorder. There it is. Post-Tory stress disorder. Right
20:47
And Keir Starmer isn't curing it. And that is a problem for me
20:53
Is it a problem for you? Or, if it's not, can you help me through my recovery
21:00
Good Lord, is that the time? The number you need is 0345 6060973
21:05
Hit the numbers now. You will get through. I need your help with this, especially if you're not in any of those tribes
21:09
James O'Brien on LBC. 26 minutes after 10. I don't know that we've missed any tribes
21:16
but, you know, it's the opposite of what you're supposed to do when you present a phone-in programme
21:22
I mean, more interested in minds that change, minds that are capable of changing
21:25
people that respond to evidence by reviewing their own position. The traditional medium is just to sort of shout the odds
21:34
and invite people to ring in for... You could do this job for 25 years
21:37
and not change your mind about anything if you were possessed of a very peculiar and particular type of brain
21:43
The same brain you need to be a columnist in a tabloid newspaper. But equally, you can't be blowing in the wind like a weather vane
21:51
You've got to have convictions, and you've got to have evidence to back those convictions up
21:56
I thought Keir Starmer was solid, safe, and he isn't. I think he's a good man, and I think he's done some really good things
22:07
I think that the historians of the future will assess his handling of the Iran crisis
22:12
as being exemplary. I think it is a textbook display from a prime minister aware of the lessons of Chilcot
22:20
But I afraid that this latest scandal and I changed my mind now about it twice but it was Ollie Robbins talking yesterday about what he presides over that made me think he just not very good at this he is not up to this job listen i spent years
22:39
being passionately opposed to donald trump and waiting for him to suddenly shed the hideousness
22:47
that seemed to typify his politics and become something more normal waiting for him to become
22:53
president, as all the right-wing papers would write. Today is the day he became the president
22:57
and it never happened. So I'm not giving up on Keir Starmer necessarily at this stage in
23:01
proceedings, but I am, I think, the furthest I've ever been from a position of confidence and or
23:07
support. So where are you? Steer me back, if you want, to where I have been before, or confirm my
23:15
conviction, my fear, that where we are now is the land of denial, and I don't mean Egypt
23:23
Tala is in Rossendale. Tala, what would you like to say? Hi, James
23:27
Hello, mate. In the run-up to the election, I had my doubts about Starmer
23:32
especially when he threw Bengali's under the bus, unfairly, I think. But then I sort of, I was under the impression that
23:39
okay, every sort of politician takes their opportunities, and although it's fair, he probably is going to steer the ship
23:47
Since then, everything just seems to me to be placating certain groups because he seems scared almost
23:55
And because of that, it just seems like he is sort of letting everyone down
23:59
And then this recent thing, to me, it just seems, you know, he doesn't take responsibility
24:04
He doesn't take accountability. Everything that happens, everything he does, it seems to be opportunism, if that makes sense
24:11
It's a weird one. I have to guard myself against pushing back too hard
24:15
against things on mornings like this because I haven't got really firm position myself
24:21
I don't, I don't, is he an opportunist? I mean, that's quite a nasty word
24:25
Boris Johnson was an opportunist. I don't see Starmer as an opportunist. I see it as a bit weaker than that almost
24:32
It's as if he is easily blown in the wind as opposed to always being in it for himself
24:39
or looking for the main chance. I think you're right. I think opportunist, what I mean by opportunist
24:46
is that he caves to pressure, I think. Not that necessarily he is just a malignant individual
24:54
who is in there because he wants to be some, you know, career politician who's there for however long
25:01
I think, for me, it's just that he seems terrified of everything, I think
25:05
And especially Trump. He seems terrified of Trump. Again, I'll push back slightly on that. I was about to agree with you
25:11
But he has stood up to Trump in a way that is impressive and absolutely distinguishes himself from all the other parties
25:18
Well, not Ed Davey, but it absolutely distinguishes him from Bedanoch or from Farage
25:23
who might be changing their story now, but they made it pretty clear that had they been in power when Donald Trump launched his illegal war against
25:29
his ludicrous war against Iran alongside Benjamin Netanyahu, then they'd have been in lockstep and almost certainly sending anything
25:37
that Donald Trump asked for in return. So that takes some guts, that takes some backbone
25:42
And I'm not for a minute suggesting that he is without qualities
25:46
just that the qualities he's got are not enough for the job. 10.31 is the time
25:52
And I think it's fair to say, Talha clearly isn't in any of the tribes that I've identified who..
25:57
And, you know, there's an awful lot of different opinions in those four tribes
26:00
but I think what you all have in common is close to an inability to change your mind about anything
26:05
up to and including Keir Starmer. Here's Lottie Morley, anyway, with your headlines
26:09
James O'Brien on LBC. It is 10.34, not for the first time
26:14
Ian Dunn puts it better than I can. Starmer was opposition leader during Boris Johnson's time in office
26:20
He seemed genuinely outraged that someone of Johnson's personal defects should be Prime Minister
26:25
that British politics was dominated by tiresome who-said-what gibberish at a moment of national decline
26:32
But by behaving this way, he has been forced, Starmer has been forced into precisely the same position
26:37
and for no discernible gain. Starmer was a man with a reputation for integrity and decency
26:43
allies and opponents agreed that he was fundamentally honourable and motivated by public service
26:49
but, and this is exactly where I am this morning I hope I'm not here forever
26:53
but if I am, I need to make my mind up pretty quickly his recent behaviour makes a mockery of that reputation
26:59
instead of taking responsibility for his actions he blames others instead of admitting his error
27:05
he blames a culture he himself helped create And I'm afraid all the whining, and I use that word as a whiner
27:12
I'm a fellow whiner, all the whining about right-wing media or about the lack of scrutiny of Richard Tice's tax affairs
27:18
or Boris Johnson's security status or Nigel Farage's mysterious house in Clacton
27:23
all of the whining about that doesn't change the simple fact that he is blaming others and instead of admitting an error
27:32
he is blaming a culture he himself helped create, best explained, like this, right
27:37
Number 10 made it clear that they wanted Mandelson in Washington no matter what
27:42
The Foreign Office ensured that Mandelson went to Washington. And now, after it emerged that Mandelson should never have been allowed anywhere near Washington
27:51
Ollie Robbins has been handed the can. And, indeed, his sandwich is wrapped in a roadmap
27:56
And that is unfair, unkind, and very much at odds with that reputation for integrity and decency
28:03
that saw many of us hoped that he would mark the end of PTSD
28:08
post-Tory stress disorder. Nicholas is in Amsterdam. Nicholas, what would you like to say
28:15
Hi, James. How are you doing? I'm all good. What's on your mind? Well, as I told your producer, I tend to disagree with you slightly
28:24
This is my first time calling. I live in Amsterdam. I follow a lot of UK politics
28:29
I like this. An American in Holland, an American in the Netherlands
28:33
It's a perspective. It's probably rare, but I'm fascinated to hear it
28:39
And by no means do I consider myself to be an expert, obviously, on UK politics. Sure
28:43
But I do listen to your program and have... Well, then you're an expert. Then you know more than most of this country
28:47
Carry on, Nicholas. Okay. Well, coming from the United States, it's been a frequent occurrence
28:54
where the president will nominate somebody for a position, say it out loud, present them to the US Senate
29:00
and then something comes along in vetting where that has to be rescinded
29:04
Now, the president's not the king, but you said this morning that the prime minister had the king announce this
29:10
and it seemed like a foregone conclusion. Where I come from, it's not a foregone conclusion
29:17
Where you come from, you ain't got a king, mate. So the constitutional crisis that would be evinced by a king making an announcement
29:26
and then a prime minister having to say, oh, I'm terribly sorry, it seems we've made a terrible mistake
29:31
You're going to have to unannounce that. And I don't want to sound post-colonial
29:35
but it is probably something that the American political system can't accommodate or process
29:41
Yes, it's certainly a little bit different. I mean, it's perhaps even a lot different, right
29:45
But the notion of the scrutiny occurring after the announcement is not a strange occurrence
29:53
In fact, it's quite normal. It's normal in the president's cabinet, and his staffers doing it
29:59
the ysis. And then, of course, Congress has to do it themselves. So withdrawing a nomination
30:06
is considered somewhat rote or at least at least normal. And I understand there's greater pressure
30:12
when the prime minister may have to do it in the UK versus the president. But that's where I say
30:18
it falls on to the civil service, not the prime minister. And that's where I think the prime
30:24
minister, while he's not my favorite prime minister. And in fact, two months ago, I thought
30:28
that he should probably be resigning. Right. I do not think that this row
30:33
still amounts to something where he should resign. And in fact, I think Sir Ali Robbins was
30:39
I think he should have been sacked, to be perfectly honest, having watched his testimony yesterday
30:43
I mean, we're coming at this from slightly different angles. I don't think this is a resignation issue
30:48
This is a culmination question for me. This is a, you know
30:52
an accumulation of issues. and I would disagree with you about the Ollie Robbins thing
30:59
I think that sacking him was particularly unfair but again more details might emerge in the coming days
31:05
or the coming weeks but the crucial question is whether or not this is a big enough
31:11
straw to break the camel's back not is this a big enough issue
31:15
to break the camel's back alone and obviously you don't think it is but just to be clear I don't think it's a resignation
31:21
issue but it is that line there about passing the buck, about not doing the process, about essentially creating a system
31:29
and then blaming the system for what happened. I don't know that you can get off that particular
31:35
hook, Nicholas. So that's where I look at this as Sir Ali Robbins was in the position to make
31:43
the determinant as to whether this should go forward or not. And he said in his testimony
31:48
that he felt overwhelming pressure to approve it. Yes. While simultaneously saying he did not bow to pressure
31:56
And those two statements are somewhat incompatible. Yeah, I give you that
32:00
They are. You either, if you felt the pressure and you ignored it
32:05
then how did you end up at the result that this was a risk worth managing
32:09
because the prime minister is pressuring me? That doesn't make any sense to me
32:14
And that's where I see the responsibility falling on Ali Robbins, not so much on the prime minister. And I would even posit that the prime minister has taken
32:22
responsibility, and I would posit he's taken responsibility repeatedly for the nomination
32:28
in the first place. I think he has said that I should have known better from the outset
32:33
and that is my fault, right? But I also should have been told about this process that rendered
32:41
Lord Mandelson to pass vetting without actually passing vetting. That's the part
32:48
where I think it's right and proper for the Prime Minister to lay that at Holly Robinson
32:54
I'm loving this because you've been paying attention and there's a couple of things. Right, the first one
33:00
I think is going to be cultural and we won't agree on that. I think you underestimate the significance
33:04
of this announcement being made by the King before the vetting had been complete
33:08
and it is an announcement rendered inevitable by the enthusiasm for the appointment that number 10 was displaying
33:14
and that enthusiasm is also what created the pressure that Olly Robbins thought he was under
33:18
Your points about simultaneously being under pressure and resisting pressure, he maintains that he made the right decision, that stands
33:24
But, if he made the right decision, which he did under both his own reading
33:29
and, if you like, precedent, then why did he get fired? He got fired because of the Epstein connection
33:38
connection that emerged after the appointment that is what has embarrassed the prime minister
33:42
that is why the prime minister is apologizing forever forever appointing him in the first place
33:47
what we learned yesterday was that the vetting was not called into question as a consequence of
33:53
mandelson's relationship with jeffrey epstein it was called into question as a consequence of
33:57
unspecified associations through either personal or business connections in my opinion almost
34:02
certainly with either China, Chinese players, Russian players, or both. So Oli Robbins looked at that evidence and said
34:10
it's okay, we can go ahead. He hasn't been sacked for that. He's been sacked because of the public perception
34:15
that Mandelson never should have been in the job because of his associations with Epstein
34:20
So however you dice it, Nicholas, I put it to you that Robbins has been appallingly treated
34:27
maybe I missed something in the news yesterday I think you might have missed the bit about
34:36
I might have skipped something I think you missed the bit about what the vetting revealed
34:43
and the categorical denial that it had anything to do with Epstein
34:48
so if Epstein hadn't happened Mandelson would still be in the job
34:52
and yet the vetting was failed for completely different reasons. And he's been fired because of the Epstein angle
35:01
There it is. We've got it. We've got it. We've got it. You've helped me get there, but that's the absolute crux of the matter
35:07
OK. I still don't agree. You have to agree. It's just true
35:11
This isn't an opinion. It's counting. You have to agree. There's no way he would have been fired
35:15
if the associations with Epstein hadn't been re-inflated and re-ignited a few months ago
35:22
But the issue with the vetting... It had nothing to do with the prime minister. I'm going to stop talking
35:26
Sorry. No, the issue to me, and again, this might be my misinterpretation
35:31
but the issue that I see it and as I've heard it and I've read it and what have you
35:35
is that the issue with the vetting, regardless of what the issue was
35:39
whether it was Epstein, whether it was China, whether it was Russia, has to do with the prime minister not being fully informed of a failure in the vetting
35:47
Now, maybe this all became to light because of Epstein, and that may well be true
35:52
but Ali Robbins, in my opinion, was tasked with making a decision
35:56
as to recommend this or basically to stamp this person's nomination for this diplomatic rank to the United States
36:05
and Ali Robbins said yes. And at that point in time when there were clear national security
36:12
let alone pedophile issues... No, but there weren't any pedophile issues. They were not part of the..
36:18
We did learn that. I think you did miss that. That was stated yesterday. I must have missed that part
36:22
In committee. So the vetting failure is not about Epstein. And I'm not going to give any ground on the conclusion you've led me to
36:31
But the sacking of Ollie Robbins was all about Epstein. Even though he's never going to say so
36:36
Starmer is sitting there tearing his hair out that he was ever daft enough, stupid enough, craven enough, advised, misled, cajoled into appointing Mandelson
36:48
when it was already in the public domain that he had maintained contact with Epstein after conviction
36:54
level, extent of contact perhaps not fully appreciated, but the existence of continuing contact was known
37:00
he's sitting there going, what the hell happened? How did I do that? I can answer that question, I think partly because
37:05
it was such a widely, warmly greeted appointment that they kind of dialed down the care and concern
37:11
and the due diligence that they would normally display. Everyone loves it. Oh, let's just relax about it
37:16
Even the Epstein stuff, well, everyone knows about the Epstein stuff. and they don't seem untruth, so let's just crack on with the appointment
37:21
He sitting there in 20 hindsight benefit of retrospect going what the fudge were we doing How did we ever send Mandelson to DC I mean what were we doing And then this story comes along and he failed the vetting right let sack someone
37:35
Because the emotion inside him was created by the Epstein scandal, and the outlet for that emotion was the sacking of Ollie Robbins
37:45
who was in the firing line because of a completely different set of circumstances
37:51
And that is why Ollie Robbins has been abominably treated. because he's been fired because of Peter Mandelson's associations
37:59
with Jeffrey Epstein, which were known to Keir Starmer when he appointed him to the job
38:05
And that, Nicholas, is the end of my TED Talk. James O'Brien on LBC
38:10
49. Listen, I can't provide a bespoke response to every misinterpretation that comes into the studio
38:18
but if you're questioning what I said about Epstein and Mandelson's relationship being in the public domain
38:22
the continuing relationship after the conviction, as a couple of you are
38:27
then you really need to Google or just do the most cursory research
38:32
I don't want to sound condescending, but to go to the trouble of texting me to say you're wrong, it wasn't in the public domain
38:38
And Jim Pickard was reporting in the Financial Times in January of 2024
38:42
that Mandelson stayed at Jeffrey Epstein's Manhattan townhouse while Epstein was in prison
38:50
And the idea that this wasn't in the public domain already is, I'm afraid, ridiculous
38:55
And it doesn't reflect well on you. And you've now wasted 90 seconds of my programme
38:58
while I've had to set you straight. But it was the emails that emerged in February
39:05
that really blew up that contact, that connection. It didn't reveal the contact or the connection
39:12
it just blew it up because they were so slimy. And that is when the appointment of Mandelson
39:17
started to look abominable. And that is when Keir Starmer started having
39:21
conniptions or a fit of the vapors. And that is why the appetite to do something
39:29
when the next story emerged about the vetting failures resulted in the almost immediate sacking of the man
39:36
who had done what he was told to do and helped Kirsten get Mandelson into the embassy in Washington, D.C.
39:41
something that was announced in full knowledge that the vetting had not been completed
39:46
So I'm afraid however you dice it, you can't paint this as anything other than bad all right we can argue about how bad but it's
39:56
really bad in my view and it gets worse when you add it to the already fairly long charge list and
40:03
yes there's other stuff on the other side of the scales most obviously and most recently brilliant
40:07
handling of iran and of trump but he sacked ollie robbins because he was kicking himself
40:13
over appointing mandelson and that is petulant it is peevish and it is profoundly unfair
40:17
and if you can just loosen your scarf for long enough to let the blood reach your brain
40:24
you'll realise that I'm right he says with characteristic arrogance Lloyd's in Lewisham
40:29
Lloyd, what would you like to say? Hi James, I normally agree on everything
40:33
I don't often call but I believe that someone was aware of what risk he was taking
40:44
and he took the risk immediately for what he believed was good of the country
40:49
Yeah. But if that risk blows up, it's entirely on him. Yeah, I agree with you
40:55
Well, there you go. You thought you disagreed with me. Turns out we agree about this as well
40:59
Yeah, so I don't think... All this stuff about him being blindsided
41:03
not being told things... He's an intelligent man. He knows the risk
41:10
He believes the risk was worth it. It didn't work out. You carried the can
41:15
whether that means resigning or whatever you've got to do. Oh, OK, so we disagree about whether or not
41:21
this is itself a resignation issue, but we agree that he shouldn't have sacked Ollie Robbins
41:26
Oh, I don't know whether he should resign or not. I think if he had approached this in the right way
41:34
it wouldn't be a resign issue. I think when the appointment was first made
41:39
which was a bit hard to do, I know, you kind of acknowledge this as a risk I'm taking
41:44
for the good of the country. And then maybe he would have had it out
41:49
But I think the way he's gone about it, especially up to now, I can't see how he..
41:57
How is that labour of being a man of integrity anymore? No, and this is the problem, isn't it
42:03
I mean, it may be that he's been pushed into this position by events
42:07
and that he is... You know, if we were to somehow get a bead
42:12
on his actual character, the DNA of his personality, the integrity would be plain to see
42:20
But he has turned it off for the duration of this episode. And some of his critics would argue for other episodes as well
42:27
And other critics would argue that it was never there in the first place. For the avoidance of doubt, I think he is an honourable man
42:32
I think he has been... I think he has failed to reach for his integrity
42:40
when it was needed. And just for the avoidance of doubt, thank you, Lloyd
42:45
let's pop back to January of 2024, when Jim Pickard of the Financial Times
42:51
joined us as he was embarking upon a very well-mannered and measured lap of honour
42:57
given that the subject matter is so grim, when the rest of the world finally caught up
43:03
with what he was doing in 2024. The FT did a report this summer on a JP Morgan report which suggested that Peter Mandelson
43:13
had stayed at the New York townhouse of Jeffrey Epstein in 2009 when he was de facto Deputy
43:20
Prime Minister and while the financier was imprisoned for soliciting prostitution from
43:25
a minor. Do you think that Lord Mandelson, who is of course a close political ally of yours, has
43:30
some questions to answer? On Peter Mandelson, look, and I do try to give pretty full answers in these sessions
43:38
I don't know any more than you do. And therefore, there's not really much I can add to what you already know, I'm afraid
43:47
And, you know, that's simply the state of the affairs. Thank you, Jim
43:54
Not really much of an answer, was it? Although, of course, 20-20 hindsight is a wonderful thing
43:59
but I just want to clarify that anybody sending me messages saying, for example
44:02
it wasn't in the public domain that he maintained contact. It was classified in the Epstein files, come on, man
44:08
as somebody had the audacity, the effrontery to send to me, then there it is. You haven't been paying attention. That's not my fault
44:16
I can only go so far. I can explain things to you. I cannot understand them for you. Kate's in Camden. Kate, what do you reckon
44:23
Hello, James. Thanks for taking my call. You're very well. Kirstama is not just my PM, he's my local MP
44:32
And he was very successful, in my view anyway, as a local MP
44:38
He helped me personally on several occasions with some serious issues. And also other people within the community never looked for praise for it or anything like that, you know
44:49
and I just think he just wasn ready or prepared to be thrust into the position of Prime Minister I really don think he will It a sad conclusion that you reached I sense Yes
45:05
You are sad to reach that conclusion. I am sad. I liked him. I liked him. I like him very much
45:12
I've met him on many occasions and I think he's a very nice and very honourable man
45:18
But soon after, I voted for Labour. soon afterwards with the business
45:25
I'm 72 and I had long COVID, just to explain. Yes. Soon after the election
45:32
with the cutting of the winter fuel allowance and then going for the disabled
45:37
I was so hugely, not just disappointed, but bewildered as to why they would do that
45:44
And I did email him and say, what are you thinking of
45:48
You know, this is madness. you're a Labour party you're the Prime Minister of a Labour party
45:56
you're not Tory Mark 2 and I've had occasion to email him
46:03
on several occasions since I have been very disappointed with his performance
46:07
and what about the latest episode? the latest episode well because in between that
46:12
I was very happy with him when he kept us out of Trump's war
46:18
I thought that was a great decision. With the latest decision, I think this kind of highlights the fact
46:26
that he just wasn't ready to take on this huge role that people are probably pressuring him
46:32
Who would be? Because I've got a couple of messages that are tilting at the same windmill
46:39
This is from Matt, who's in Durham. Have we made the job of Prime Minister impossible
46:45
Brexit, COVID, austerity, Trump, social media. And Paul in North Yorkshire, half an hour previously, sent me a message saying
46:52
is anyone up to the job, James? Well, that's a good question. I mean, Tis Dahmer, his life was in law, you know
47:02
He was a barrister and then he was head of CPS and so on. And in a sense, he's kind of a new boy to politics
47:11
Yes. And it was on the lower level, you know, when he was a local MP
47:19
I don't know what is the difference between that and... Yes, no, of course there is
47:23
And I think you're being very generous, actually, because I think in these moments..
47:28
If we were to really boil it down to the absolute essence of this story
47:35
this combination of stories, he should never have sent Peter Mandelson to Washington
47:40
and everything that follows from that is consequence, not action. He should never have..
47:46
And when you hear Jim Pickard asking that question, he stayed in his house when he was in prison
47:52
He was so untroubled by the original conviction that he stayed in his house, sending him emails
47:59
offering sympathy and support even as he was convicted. And, of course, that was the mother of all plea deals
48:05
And Peter Maddelson is many things, but stupid he ain't. or ignorant of the news
48:10
or not au fait with current affairs and recent developments, he is not
48:14
He is absolutely, across all of it, took a view, for whatever reason
48:18
to stand by the man, to stand by his friend. And all roads lead back to that
48:22
And everything that comes from that is just horrible. James O'Brien on LBC
48:28
Three minutes after 11, you're listening to James O'Brien on LBC. Sometimes the attention that you pay
48:35
or that I pay to a headline It depends upon the newspaper that it appears in
48:39
But despite appearing in a hideous newspaper, this statistic appears to be solid
48:45
Half of under-30s would not fight for their country under any circumstances, a poll has revealed
48:52
Right. Caveat number one. This is conducted by the University of Glasgow
48:57
sponsored by Nationwide, and is part of the UK Youth Poll. So, caveat number one
49:04
And, you know, if people dressed as stormtroopers, and I'm thinking of Nazis now, not Darth Vader
49:12
were marching up Pall Mall, then I imagine that some of the young people
49:18
currently persuaded that they would never fight for their country would give their heads a wobble and sign up immediately
49:23
It's about the perception of threat, but it's also about the perception of what is worth protecting
49:30
And this is something that I think is massively underpriced in current conversations
49:35
partly because they're dominated by old gits like me. If you look at that neat statistic
49:42
that I am enduringly fascinated and heartbroken by, and that's on a personal level
49:50
but on a professional level, I am eternally frustrated by my failure
49:55
to get to the heart of the issue. I've tried and tried and tried again
49:59
Last time we did it, phone lines lit up like a Christmas tree, and with the greatest of love and respect to everybody that contributed
50:05
we didn't get any closer to the truth than on all the days when I haven't managed to light the switchboard up like a Christmas tree
50:13
in pursuit of the answer to the question of why nearly a million young people are not doing anything in this country
50:19
Part of the problem, of course, is that there will be many answers to that question
50:22
maybe not quite a million, but there will be many answers to that question
50:26
There is not a Rosetta Stone or a skeleton key that unlocks the whole issue
50:31
But there must be some fairly hefty consensus in certain groups as to why so many young people are not doing anything
50:40
They're not in education, employment or training. And I think that these two stories are practically conjoined
50:49
I think these two stories are absolutely inextricably intertwined. this sense of it not being worth it so the closest i've got to a theory on neats young people not in
51:10
education employment or training the closest i've got to a theory on this and i have not backed it
51:15
up i'm afraid with either your anecdotal evidence or with data because it is impossible to get the
51:21
data that you need to arrive at the conclusions that you want. But here's my theory, and feel free
51:27
to pick it apart, or even, should you be minded, to give it a thumbs up, a metaphorical thumbs up
51:33
I think, and I'm about to become a parent with no children at school for the first time in the
51:40
best part of 20 years, but I think that young people leave school and carry on living exactly
51:49
the same life that they were living before, but without the school bit. So I think they carry on
51:56
living in the same bedroom and having their dinner at the same table or in front of the same TV
52:02
living with mum or dad or both, and just living on the same amount of money, the same amount of
52:09
income that they had when they were at school, maybe a little bit of cash being made on the side
52:14
through some internet trading or similar or maybe slightly more nefarious activity
52:23
And they just carry on. And it is a temporary arrangement until it isn And for most of these young people this is where the statistics can be misleading for most of these young people it is a temporary arrangement
52:37
but by the time they move on to do education, employment or training
52:43
there is a new cohort of young people, because it happens every year, coming up behind them to fill in the gaps that they've created by moving on
52:50
or moving out, of course. They might be moving into a different age group
52:55
or they might be moving into education, employment or training. But their place will then be filled
53:00
by the next generation of teenagers. And the reason why they do this
53:06
the reason why this happens, and this must be one of the hardest things in the world for some people to understand
53:12
if you haven't got children of the relevant age or your privilege is such that you can't see
53:16
this particular wood for the trees, is that they cannot see the point in doing anything else
53:22
So, yes, there might be a job available, but you are not going to earn enough money
53:27
to make a meaningful change to the life that I've just described. You are not, for example, going to be able to leave home
53:35
If you look at rents now, particularly in the South East, I suppose
53:39
but elsewhere as well, you look at rents, you look at what is needed
53:43
without seeking state support, then you're not going to have anything left
53:49
If you're on the national living wage and you're paying an average rent, you look at those numbers
53:54
why would I do that? So why don't you work and then carry on living at home
53:58
Well, because, again, I mean, what am I going to do? I'm going to have a few more quids
54:04
but I'm probably never going to be able to save enough to get a deposit on a house
54:09
And I quite like my life now. Or I don't like it, but I've just..
54:14
and lockdown sort of taught us all that we can actually just stay in bed all day
54:19
or we can actually never leave the house, we can actually live. I'm not suggesting that, I'm not advising you to pursue this course
54:26
I'm trying to understand the people that have. Lockdown sort of caught us by surprise in what we learned from it
54:36
without realising what we were learning. And this is a generation of people who learned that
54:40
well, you don't have to join the rat race. If you can opt out with her, I mean, what was furlough
54:47
I know you got your money, but a lot of people didn't, and we almost all survived
54:52
So what's the point? I'm still sleeping in the same bed. I'm still eating the same food
54:58
I'm still watching the same programs. I'm still joshing with the same parent or parents
55:03
I'm still living the same life I led when I was at school. I just haven't got the inconvenience of having to go to school
55:09
And you might slide back into that after getting your A-levels and thinking they'd be a boost into something else
55:14
and then discovering that they weren't. You might have gone off to university
55:18
and then come back thinking your degree would open doors to you, but the only doors it's going to open are not big enough doors
55:23
to justify leaving the door that you're currently living behind. This is the closest I've got
55:28
I think technically you're right. It's a hypothesis, not a theory. But this is the closest I've got to an answer
55:34
to the question of how we've got nearly a million young people who are currently not in education, employment or training
55:41
And the answer is that they cannot see the point. They cannot see the point
55:49
You can shout at them all you want. You can talk about, I don't know, national service and press gangs
55:53
and, oh, they don't know they're born. But you should really be feeling incredibly sorry for them
55:59
So we've stolen something from them, not consciously or deliberately, and sometimes we've stolen it through our political choices
56:07
unintentionally. But in some ways we have taken hope from them or hope has been taken from them
56:14
And I can't read this story about a half of under-30s who would not fight for their country under any circumstances
56:20
without thinking of the million young people who are currently not in education, employment or training
56:28
Because, and I mean this, it's not a question I have ever contemplated before
56:34
What would they be fighting for? 03456060973
56:43
I want you, if you're in this category, if you're under 30
56:48
and you don't think, you cannot conceive of circumstances in which you would risk your life for this country
56:56
then I really want to hear from you about A, why you think that is and B, where you sit on my ysis
57:05
They're looking at wages, affordable housing and career opportunities as things that make them feel detached from society
57:15
And I am going to struggle to argue with them. I'm going to struggle to argue with them
57:23
It's not laziness, because that's such an easy... We're all quite lazy
57:28
and yet the equation that we're offered at that age is that the rewards will outweigh the temptation to stay in bed all day
57:38
I watched just by complete coincidence that final Kevin and Perry scene
57:43
when Kevin finally gets a girlfriend and he comes downstairs the next morning
57:47
and he's turned into the son of the year. He's like, hello, mother, would you like some help with the shopping
57:51
Hello, father, should we go to the football this afternoon? And Perry, of course, is still stuck in adolescent mode
57:56
and he's got a girlfriend. It's not laziness. It's just, what am I supposed to be doing instead
58:06
Well, you're supposed to be going to work and getting a job. Okay, why? Because then you'll get this and you'll get that
58:11
except, ah, yeah, you won't. My first lesson in In My Day-itis was to do with house prices
58:17
When I would take calls, and I think I was probably quite rude to these people at the time
58:21
which was a bit disrespectful to my elders, but I was probably on the right tip
58:26
Oh, young people today, they don't know they're born, I worked three jobs, or we did that
58:30
and all you do is you say to people, what did you earn? And they'll say, well, I earned £1,500 a year in 1960
58:36
and what did your house cost? £3,500. What's £3,500 divided by £1,500
58:44
Well, two point something. And guess what it is now? The income of these kids is, say, £30,000
58:49
and the average house is £300,000. I'm generalising. And what's £300 divided by £30,000
58:55
Even Keith can do that. You're right. Both hands, Keith. It's 10
59:00
So why draw comparisons? Why pretend that the lessons you learned when you were their age
59:05
have any relevance whatsoever to what they're facing now? Because it is, by definition, three, four, five times harder
59:11
for them to get on the housing ladder than it was for you. And spoiler alert
59:15
if you had the financial situation you had then now, you wouldn't be getting on the housing ladder
59:20
You might not even be able to afford to rent anywhere, and if you can't afford to rent anywhere
59:23
you might as well stay at home, because what is the point of schlepping your guts out for national living wage or minimum wage or a little bit more
59:30
if the rewards at the end of that particular tunnel are pitiful? And now they want you to go to war
59:39
To defend what? So, we'll do both conversations. I'll take calls on the neats and I'll take calls on the war
59:48
Because I don't think you can separate one from the other. any questions that have prompted themselves in your mind already that you're minded to answer
59:55
i'll take your call 03456060973 but at the heart of this question, it's almost like the polar opposite of shinning up a lamppost to hang a flag
1:00:05
outside the house of somebody who doesn't want you to. At the heart of this question, what would you
1:00:11
be fighting for? What would they be fighting for? So, if you're in this cohort, if you're under 30
1:00:19
and you would fight for your country, or if you're under 30, and you would not fight for your country
1:00:25
under any circumstances, I wonder if you would mind having a crack
1:00:29
at telling the rest of us why not. And as for the rest of us
1:00:33
because we're older or we're, I don't know, safer, look them in the eye
1:00:41
Look this lad in the eye or this young lady in the eye. They say to you, I'm not fighting for this country
1:00:46
under any circumstances. And you tell them why they should. In the absence of a specific enemy
1:00:53
it's easy to say because otherwise you'd be living under this or be living under that it's not that
1:00:58
i want to know what they're fighting for not what they're fighting against it's a crucial distinction
1:01:02
so i the second world war is actually really unhelpful in many conversations about matters
1:01:07
military because it was pretty close to a fight between good and evil
1:01:10
most wars aren't like that most wars are because i don't know a couple of cousins have fallen out
1:01:17
or somebody wants more taxes so they're going to try and take over some territory in order to get
1:01:20
the taxes from that territory. The Second World War, certainly in retrospect, even if it didn't
1:01:25
seem so at the time, was a battle between good and evil. You knew what you were fighting for, and you
1:01:29
knew what you were fighting against. But today, in the absence of an
1:01:32
identified enemy, what would these young people be fighting for? Look them in the eye and tell them
1:01:37
you've got to fight for your country because what? 0345 6060 97
1:01:44
Keith, look at the time. I know it's a bit late, but goodness me, it's
1:01:50
way earlier than we've done for about, what, a year and a half? And now I'm making it even later by drawing attention to how not late I am
1:01:58
despite actually being late. James O'Brien on LBC. It's 18 minutes after 11
1:02:06
Hey, I could have got it completely wrong. Maybe you don't think that the news today
1:02:11
that a half of young Britons would refuse to fight for their country is in any way linked to the recurring story
1:02:17
of almost a million young people not currently being in education, employment or training
1:02:22
And I'm open to persuasion that I'm wrong to tie these two stories together
1:02:26
but I can't currently untie them. 50% say they wouldn't fight for the country under any circumstances
1:02:33
And as one of the people from the University of Glasgow that conducted this research said
1:02:38
they will say to you, why fight for a country that isn't fighting for you
1:02:44
Locked out of the housing market, pinned down by low wages, loaded by student debt
1:02:48
increasingly worried about the rise in AI. Young people today feel a growing sense of unfairness
1:02:53
about the world around them. They're describing the status quo. And the invitation is to go and risk your life
1:02:59
to defend the status quo. You're going to struggle, aren't you? To tell them why they should ignore that inner voice
1:03:06
and pick up a musket. Jennifer is in Chiswick. Jennifer, what would you like to say
1:03:12
Morning, James. Hello. So I am one of the people in that cohort
1:03:17
who would not want to fight for the country. It's not a question of wanting to
1:03:21
I don't know that any of us would want to. It's that you would categorically refuse to in any circumstances
1:03:27
Well, yes, I would refuse to. For context, I'm 22 years old
1:03:33
I still live at home, which isn't rare for somebody living in London of my age
1:03:38
Of course. And from my position, I'm actually in a privileged position
1:03:44
I have a job. I've saved up significant amounts. I could afford a deposit on a place
1:03:51
but I wouldn't be willing to do that just because it's so much money for so little value
1:03:58
And you'd have so little left to live on at the end of every month. Exactly. I missed that out of the equation as well
1:04:03
even people who've got the deposit but can't see the point in buying a property. Yeah, mortgage rates, I think, are close to 5% now
1:04:12
It's pretty rough. Well, they were in double figures when I was your age
1:04:16
Or not your age, when I was a few years younger than you. So, I mean, some of these things are cyclical
1:04:21
But, of course, wages were much higher then as well. What, I mean, because you realise there's going to be people listening to this
1:04:28
who can't pick a hole in what you're saying, but who feel in their bones that this is traitorous talk
1:04:33
this is treacherous talk, there's an enemy at the gate. But that question of why fight for a country that isn't fighting for you
1:04:39
is one that I don't think they could answer any more than you could. I think the issue is, obviously, a lot of political discussion is around triple lock pensions
1:04:51
winter fuel allowance, which obviously is important, but I do think young people feel left behind
1:05:00
And if Vladimir Putin, I know I said I wasn't going to do specific enemies
1:05:03
but if Vladimir Putin's forces were massing on the beaches of Normandy
1:05:09
having conquered all of continental Europe, would your mind change then, Jennifer
1:05:14
possibly in that extreme example, then maybe. But as it stands, no
1:05:21
I mean, it's not there. What would you be fighting to defend? Hey, what are Ukrainians fighting for
1:05:26
Freedom. But, of course, your generation doesn't actually feel free in the sense that my generation did
1:05:33
that it had options, that it had choices. And where are the choices today
1:05:37
So, there you go. Jennifer's put it well. You tell her why she should fight. No, not why she should fight
1:05:42
but what she should be fighting, what she would be fighting for
1:05:47
11.22 is the time. James is in Chippenham. James, what would you like to say
1:05:53
Hello there, good morning. Very passionate about this. School teacher. And so I'm dealing with children
1:05:58
My own tutor group are 16 years old and they ask me these questions
1:06:03
and it's really difficult to argue against what they've had to experience
1:06:08
So bear with me just 10 seconds. Of course. In their lifetime
1:06:12
2008 crash, austerity, Brexit, Boris, Covid, Liz Trust, scandals, lack of job and career opportunity
1:06:20
huge student fees, rip-off repayment rates, boomers who didn't have to go out and fight
1:06:25
had the social and economic benefits of the EU. They now have protected pensions
1:06:29
They have huge house prices, which boomers also benefit from. And then we asked the children who didn't have any of that to go out and fight for them to continue all of that
1:06:39
And ultimately, that is all the children and that age group have seen and experienced
1:06:44
And it is outrageous now that we just say, why don't you want to go out and defend all that
1:06:49
They've had nothing from the system. Oh, well, thanks a bunch. That's it, isn't it? That's it. The phone-in's over now
1:06:56
Yeah. Well, the rest, Keith, give them a round of applause. There we go
1:07:00
I am so passionate about this. I've, you know, and I have to obviously be professional in the workplace
1:07:07
But I had children, 16 year olds coming to me, and you know, I feel emotional now
1:07:11
I know you do. And they say to me, oh, I want to, you know, I'm going to join the army, or I'm thinking
1:07:16
of joining the RAF, what do you think? And I look at them and I say, God, what has this country ever given you so far that makes
1:07:22
you want to go and do that? And it really gets to me And yet at the same time there something in that ambition that is admirable necessary And that possibly is what is worth fighting for
1:07:35
Just that little bit of hope, you know, that hope that's remaining. Good Lord
1:07:40
And above all, let me say this, the people that send people to war never go to war themselves
1:07:48
And often their children don't either. Well, the United States getting an abject lesson in that particular principle at the moment
1:07:56
from a man who dodged the draft multiple times, but has recently taken to claiming that he would have won the Vietnam War
1:08:02
had he been president in about, I think, 27 minutes was the estimate that I most saw
1:08:07
That was an extraordinary list of things. Where do you derive hope, or where do you derive challenge to that narrative
1:08:15
if indeed you do? do you know what ultimately believe it or not it is the children yeah it is the children because
1:08:23
they are the they are the future all right whitney and and you know well they were yes
1:08:28
indeed um but but but they are that they are the future and they have the hope but one of the
1:08:34
reasons they have that hope is because you know they they can't they do struggle to project ahead
1:08:39
because they have they you know you know they only see so much but they they do have that chance to do
1:08:45
to do something different and to make positive choices for their lives that ultimately so many
1:08:50
people haven't um and there are so many arguments out about at the moment and the children are really
1:08:55
forgotten about and i said when i say children you know this this survey goes up you know young
1:09:00
and young people um and and you say you know they they you know they might go back to bed you know
1:09:05
and they think this is a better offer because ultimately what else are they being offered well
1:09:10
Well, that is the same question. It's the same question. I mean, whether it is specific to the refusing to fight for your country
1:09:18
why would I fight for a country that doesn't fight for me? If it's just the question of needs, it's, well, what is the alternative
1:09:24
What would I get in return for my attention or my labour or my efforts
1:09:28
And we've presided over politics for generations now that has been paring away at the rewards
1:09:35
And as you've identified, the people who were on the right side of this historical cycle have no clue really what it's even even jason and you may not have
1:09:43
experience of this specifically but i think that even people who've got children in the in the drop
1:09:49
zone that you describe who still can't quite see how different things are for them because they're
1:09:55
sort of thinking comforting thoughts about how they well we pulled our socks up norman bloody
1:10:00
tebbett we got on our bike we did this we did that why can't you and the answers are pretty clear
1:10:05
but there's none so blind as those that cannot see. And it's exactly the point you make particularly
1:10:10
and I know Lewis Goodall also makes this point as well when people say sort of like
1:10:15
oh, well, you know, but I had a difficult time and I had to pay for a house
1:10:19
You did not have to pay so much. You did not pay five, six, seven times your salary
1:10:24
to buy your house. And then you say that the people don't deserve a leg up to get theirs
1:10:30
And you didn't even mention the climate. I don't think you even mentioned the climate, did you? No
1:10:35
The climate crisis weighs heavily on their minds as well. And with the rise of the Green Party
1:10:39
with the rise of the Green Party, you know, this is important for the younger generations as well
1:10:45
And that actually, the climate argument, goes back to the 60s and the 70s as well
1:10:50
Yes. What are we leaving them? We are leaving them a mess, because the people that make decisions now
1:10:55
will not be here when the chickens come home to roast. Wow
1:10:59
And that's the issue. I bet you're a brilliant teacher, James. Oh, thank you
1:11:04
That is kind. I really do. I really do. Well, you clearly do try. And that is probably half of the battle, frankly
1:11:11
when it comes to being inspiring to young people. And also, you care so deeply about them
1:11:15
Absolutely brilliant call, writes Adam. It's made me emotional just listening to him
1:11:20
It's all gone a bit dead poet society in the studio, hasn't it? 1127 is the time
1:11:25
Look up Don Perlman, all right? This is something I should be hitting you over the head with on a regular basis
1:11:30
Ed Miliband came out yesterday saying we're doubling down on net zero
1:11:33
because, listen, have a look at the world and what happens to countries that are reliant upon fossil fuels
1:11:41
I don't care where they come from, but just have a look at what happens because there's not a planet, there's not a universe
1:11:47
in which the North Sea is going to miraculously provide or cater to all our energy needs for the foreseeable future
1:11:54
But guess what? There are energy sources that are going to eventually cater for all
1:12:00
if we're still around, all our energy needs for the foreseeable future. and indeed the unforeseeable future
1:12:05
and those energy sources are sustainable. So Ed Miliband comes out and says something
1:12:10
that is so utterly uncontroversial that, frankly, you should barely have noticed
1:12:15
and yet in this crazy country that we've allowed to be created around us, largely for the reasons and by the people that James has just critiqued
1:12:22
net zero is becoming the new Brexit. No, none of these clowns can tell you why
1:12:27
unless they just lie through their teeth and deny the existence of anthropocentric climate change
1:12:34
or man-made climate change, in which case I'd invite them to go and wrap their lips
1:12:37
around the exhaust pipe of a diesel car and then come back and tell me that
1:12:42
well, actually, I think you'll find the Thames used to freeze over in the 19th century. Of course we are poisoning the planet with what we do
1:12:49
and of course safety lies in the direction of non-polluting energy sources
1:12:55
and Ed Miliband is on a one-man mission, it sometimes feels. And if you want to understand the pushback on this, just Google these two words
1:13:06
Don, D-O-N, Pearl Man. Pearl as in clutching, as in necklaces, and man as in human
1:13:16
Don, Pearl Man. Two words, Don, Pearl Man. Google it, look him up, find out who he was, what he did
1:13:23
and then have a little look around at the consequences of that man's mission
1:13:28
still in place today. No Tufton Street without Don Perlman. No lobby groups calling themselves think tanks
1:13:38
pretending to have some sort of academic rationale behind their ludicrous propaganda
1:13:44
getting booked by the BBC, getting booked by LBC, getting booked everywhere, despite not being able to tell you who pays their wages
1:13:49
because their wages are paid by fossil fuel companies or tobacco companies or fast food companies
1:13:55
He almost invented this. Don Perlman. Look it up. And then, of course, come back to the question
1:14:03
of what you would tell these young people that they would be fighting for
1:14:08
Here's Lottie Morley with your headlines. James O'Brien on LBC. It's 33 minutes after 11
1:14:14
You're listening to James O'Brien on LBC. I mean, Jason, I love your answer
1:14:19
not least because it makes me homesick. But I also don't think that this is necessarily going to reach
1:14:26
many of the people that we're talking about, but I'm going to read it in its entirety. Hi, James. My son is an RAF cadet in Kiddy
1:14:32
Woo-hoo! Where is that? Is that in the shrubbery, Jase? Is it the shrubbery
1:14:39
Because it's the old TA place next door to my old school, next door to the convent on Birmingham Road
1:14:44
I don't know where the RAF cadets congregate in Kiddyminster, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's there
1:14:49
He is in peacetime gaining friendships discipline flight experiences and training I joined the RAF cadets at my school because they promised us we go flying in I think Chipmunks was the type of plane that they used It was a lie It was one of my first introductions to authority lying Just trying to sign us up I don know whether
1:15:09
they got paid more, the school's liaison officers or whatever it was. They said, well, because
1:15:13
they all got a pitch. You had to do, I think it was on Tuesday afternoons, you had to do
1:15:19
CCF. Looking back, I was surprised I didn't plead conscientious objection just to sort
1:15:24
of course trouble, which was my modus operandi during my school days. But I signed with the RAF
1:15:29
The Navy made some good... The Navy actually went on ships. They had like a trip to a ship
1:15:34
And the army got to fire guns quite a lot. RAF, they told us we would go on planes. We would go
1:15:41
on chipmunks. And it never happened. In fact, I remember wing commander, I can remember his name
1:15:47
but I don't think it would be fair to say it out loud. The wing commander that would come in to
1:15:51
educators as RAF cadets, I remember him saying, Cadet O'Brien, you are the worst
1:15:57
cadet it is my misfortune to have encountered in 30 years as schools liaison officer
1:16:04
And I said, but you told us we were going to go flying wing commander. You told us we would go on planes
1:16:09
And I said, yeah, yeah, you did. You never went on a plane
1:16:13
So Jason's boy's already doing better than me as an RAF cadet. He's got flight experiences
1:16:17
training, engineering, electronic skills, teamwork. We chose the Air Force based on two factors. It's statistically
1:16:23
the safest of the forces and he loves aviation. And then you
1:16:27
go on, I'd like him to go to a commercial flight school or do an engineering degree when he
1:16:31
grows up rather than go into active service. That being said, service does offer
1:16:35
rewards and skills that can be life-changing rather than life-ending. So oddly
1:16:39
there's two questions, isn't there? I mean, going into the military, and James in Chippenham
1:16:43
touched on this, can be a very attractive or a very good
1:16:47
option for some young people, but oddly, and Jason unwittingly makes this point
1:16:54
that doesn't necessarily mean that you'd want to go to war. Or indeed that you would want your child
1:16:59
to go to war. But if half of under-30s are saying they wouldn't fight for this country
1:17:03
under any circumstances, if you're troubled by that statistic, you need to tell them what they would be fighting for
1:17:10
11.36 is the time. Stu's in Western Supermess. Stu, what do you reckon
1:17:15
Good morning, James. Hello, yeah, 49-year-old father of three. I have a 26-year-old son
1:17:23
who have absolutely no interest in politics. They will probably be... I am very political
1:17:31
Okay. He and they've been brought up in that sort of environment
1:17:35
It hasn't stuck. I think they're all left of centre, but they have no real political identity, which is fine
1:17:45
Well, partly because of what we're talking about, I imagine. Exactly. Right, sorry, I shouldn't have interrupted you
1:17:50
No, no, that's fine. I mean, he has no interest in buying a property
1:17:56
He bought a Luton van, has converted that, he lives in that, and he's a tree surgeon
1:18:01
He works, then he goes travelling around the world. This leads me on when I speak about my two daughters
1:18:09
Yes. He has no real identity or affinity to this country. which I understand
1:18:16
my 17 year old daughter is at college struggling terribly at the moment
1:18:22
with all sorts of mental health issues I'm sorry yeah it's tough
1:18:28
and it's tough for you as well I know you won't be comfortable with me saying that
1:18:32
but I know that it's tough for you as well and you need to acknowledge that
1:18:36
it really is but I also think she represents a massive swathe of people
1:18:42
of her age who will sit in their room on their phones
1:18:48
And that... Making some of the issues worse. Yes, I've no doubt on that
1:18:55
And again, that sort of leads me, James, into... Again, she's lost at the moment
1:19:01
I'm very confident that will turn round in time. But she has no affinity
1:19:07
She has no... What would she be fighting for? And this is the thing
1:19:12
they look at it and think, well, what would I be fighting for? What do you say? Or can you say something? Can you say
1:19:20
Well, I would say, you know, it was much easier previous generations
1:19:26
I think you touched on it, the good versus evil. You know, and I'm by no means a military man, quite the opposite
1:19:33
However, I always thought if, for example, Putin invaded, you know, in the way he did in Ukraine
1:19:40
if I was of an age I would probably sign up because I would see that as good versus equal
1:19:46
I would do that no way I could see my son or eldest daughter
1:19:52
doing that so you'd be simultaneously understanding and what's the other word Stu
1:20:00
because it's not disappointed is it because that involves an apportion of blame or negativity
1:20:05
so you'd rather they lived in a world where they didn't feel like this
1:20:09
and how does that make you feel? Well, yeah, it's a rabbit hole I would like to get out of
1:20:17
I would like us all to get out of that rabbit hole, because I do..
1:20:21
Well, the other alternative is to ignore it, or to pretend it's not there
1:20:25
to not look up and just shout things like, get on your bike, or in my day, or they're lazy, or it's cosseting
1:20:30
or it's your fault as a parent that they're not like... I mean, which is just in ignorance of the facts
1:20:37
but we've lived in an era... Yeah, it's just where we live now. A completely fastball point of view
1:20:43
I would suggest completely escapes of reality for these kids and what they're going through
1:20:49
and what they've been through and what they will go through. And we're not, we're not
1:20:54
I mean, James in Chippenham, the teacher, was so powerful, wasn't he? And he didn't even mention
1:20:59
he didn't mention climate change and he didn't mention social media. So even with his litany of troubles
1:21:06
the two arguably of the very biggest weren't even on his particular page because he's talking about
1:21:11
the people the young people that he's working with every day and we never really acknowledge
1:21:15
any of this and this must be so it doesn't necessarily describe any of your kids directly
1:21:21
but had they chosen to not be in education employment or training it would be largely
1:21:27
for the same sort of reasons that you're describing for some of the year your boy isn't of course if
1:21:34
he's off travelling. Yes. So he's not off-grid, but he is off the conveyor belt
1:21:41
Very much so, and has zero interest in joining that conveyor belt
1:21:46
where I think, you know, like I said, I'm 49. In my working experience
1:21:52
it was all about getting on that conveyor belt. Because you could see where it went
1:21:57
I don't want to turn into Ray Davis, but even if it did lead to a sort of regimented existence
1:22:03
it was still quite pleasant. I've got my own home, I've got my own car
1:22:07
I've got my own hair. All right, I'm getting a bit carried away now. But you can't, that idea of an Englishman's home
1:22:13
being his castle, it's a cliche for a reason. And yet he can be perfectly capable of earning a living
1:22:19
but not seeing the living being worth the work 24-7, or rather you know eight hours a day five days a week for the rest of his natural And this is missing Earlier I mentioned Lewis Goodall brilliant on this subject
1:22:35
He's quite a bit younger than me, so he's a lot closer to the action than I am. But it is absolutely crucial
1:22:40
And politically, I glanced to my left and Nigel Flippin Farage is on my telly again
1:22:45
And the idea that he is going to be of any use whatsoever to these people
1:22:49
or to this picture that we paint, he's one of the biggest architects of it
1:22:53
He's one of the people most responsible for it. But we don't talk about them
1:22:58
We talk about triple locks. We talk about, you know, pensions. And we talk about winter fuel allowances
1:23:05
Correctly, I suppose. But we never talk about this. And that's why the problem isn't going away
1:23:11
Thank you, Stu. MJ is in Edinburgh. MJ, what would you like to say? I would like to say I completely agree with the teacher you had on earlier
1:23:19
But one point that I think is being missed, I'm a 25-year-old myself
1:23:24
one point that I think is being missed is we've grown up with, well, the internet
1:23:29
and a bit later on. So we're seeing all of these people who we would be fighting against
1:23:35
It's unlike the days of, like, World War II, I would say is a completely justified war
1:23:40
But pretty much every war since then, you look at it and go, who was fighting for what
1:23:46
Like, what were we fighting for? And also, we're seeing the people we would be fighting against online
1:23:53
We feel more kinship to the world, I think, than even our parents did
1:23:57
Oh, I hadn't thought of that. Because we've grown up in a more globalized world. So, why are we fighting for these people who have, like..
1:24:04
Why are we killing these people? When, arguably, we share a lot more in common with people in our own situation abroad
1:24:14
That's extraordinary. And I wonder if it's relevant to something that I nearly talked about today
1:24:18
but I preferred this story in the moment when I made the decision, which is two things that have happened recently
1:24:24
One is that many people in the United States and beyond who call themselves Christians have expressed way more outrage
1:24:31
at Donald Trump styling himself as Jesus or insulting the Pope than they did when ICE agents were shooting people in the face in Minneapolis
1:24:39
or deporting and rounding up entirely innocent people, as if the imagery was somehow more important than the humanity
1:24:46
and similarly in Lebanon the IDF soldiers who filmed themselves attacking a crucifix with an axe I think
1:24:55
have caused more outrage and more apparent remorse on the part of Benjamin Netanyahu
1:25:03
than killing 75,000 Palestinians and I wonder whether that's a generational thing
1:25:08
and that your generation would find that absolutely ridiculous Yeah, I was thinking about this in the shower this morning
1:25:14
it made me so angry yeah because i'm like i was raised christian like church of england i like i
1:25:21
probably wouldn't consider myself like a practicing christian anymore but i grew up with a lot of those
1:25:26
values and i look at that and go if jesus were here what would he care about a statue or a
1:25:31
crucifix of him being defaced or all of the innocent people that are just being killed
1:25:35
to settle an ideological difference like that situation is very complicated i have a lot of
1:25:42
sympathy basically for the people of Palestine, but for anyone that is being killed for no reason
1:25:49
What has the world come to? What are we doing where we care more about an image of God
1:25:55
that said, no, we shouldn't worship false idols than the actual people
1:26:01
How dare you bring the Ten Commandments into your critique of Christianity? This is absolutely outrageous
1:26:06
You should be quoting Pulp Fiction in the current context. What a lovely call. Thank you
1:26:10
It just feels like the world's gone backwards. Well, it has. It has. And, of course, the thing that you're describing
1:26:17
or the thing that we're all trying to describe in words, that feeling, that sense
1:26:21
is the one represented by the clowns climbing up lampposts to stick flags up outside houses whose residents don't want them
1:26:29
They think that's somehow patriotic, whereas what it really is is a sort of..
1:26:33
It's the equivalent of dogs weeing in the street in order to tell other dogs that they've been here
1:26:40
or that they have, um, that it's their territory or whatever it is
1:26:44
Everybody knows that. It's just that we're such a backwards country at the moment
1:26:48
that people are pretending not to understand it. 11.46 is the time
1:26:53
James O'Brien on LBC. Here's 11.49, without troubling Idiot's Corner, um, half a dozen texts coming in
1:27:01
talking about how it's all the fault of immigrants, um, which is, you know, that's the land that Nigel built
1:27:06
So, by coincidence, actually, I've got a guest coming in after PMQs from Inside Housing magazine
1:27:13
I said to you a while ago, as our media circled ever more violently
1:27:17
the plughole of irrelevance and misinformation, that the trade press is where you get the stories
1:27:22
The trade press is where you get the truths because they can't indulge in propaganda or client journalism
1:27:28
They just have to deal with the facts as they discover them. And Inside Housing have been looking at the scale of anti-immigrant views
1:27:35
and misinformation in the housing world and the toll that these racist lies
1:27:40
take on both staff and tenants. It's an extraordinary report, the author of which will be joining us
1:27:48
at about 10 to 1 today. Simon Marks joining us shortly after half past 12
1:27:53
for the latest from the United States of America. I posted something on Blue Sky the other day
1:27:59
about does anyone know yet whether it's a ceasefire day or we're going to obliterate your civilisation day
1:28:05
And of course, many people replied, both James. So today is an extend the ceasefire day
1:28:10
I don't know whether you're aware of this. This is the ceasefire in the war that was only going to take six weeks
1:28:16
and that he said a month ago would be over in two. Is that about right? Does that cover things
1:28:20
Straight to Hormuz, ships being hit. The question of why we can't all just go back to where we were before
1:28:26
is yet to be answered. But on we go. Lies about nuclear capabilities
1:28:32
of course, Benjamin Netanyahu insisting since the 1970s that Iran was seven seconds away
1:28:38
from building a nuclear bomb Donald Trump reduced latterly to joining in that nonsense
1:28:44
just six months after claiming that he'd obliterated any capabilities of doing so anyway
1:28:48
and completely ignoring the fact that the deal that was put in place
1:28:53
under Barack Obama is now I'm afraid, out of reach best case scenario for a while
1:28:58
just pretend it never happened. Best case scenario, for an even shorter while, get some sort of deal in place that looks
1:29:06
a lot like Barack Obama's deal, but nobody dare say that in front of Donald Trump. That ship seems
1:29:11
to have sailed now as well. Everything will be worse. 1151 is the time, but I don't know that
1:29:17
that is a particularly contributing factor to the question that we're asking this hour, which is
1:29:23
what would you say to a young person who said that they wouldn't fight for their country? Imagine
1:29:26
watching your son go off to fight for Donald Trump in Iran, or your daughter
1:29:31
and having to ask yourself, what are they actually going to fight for? So that Donald Trump's mates can
1:29:36
make money on the markets by placing enormous bets shortly before he
1:29:40
makes his latest announcement? Is that a topic we could do tomorrow
1:29:45
What do they think they're fighting for? American troops being sent to
1:29:50
Iran? Oh, it might be too bleak, actually. But it kind of plays into the conversation we're
1:29:56
about the half of young Britons who would refuse to fight for this kind of... Morgan is in Andover in Hampshire. Morgan, what would you like to say
1:30:03
Hi James. I think my wider point is less about perhaps the specifics of your conversation
1:30:09
but more about the youth voice in this country as a whole. I'm a young person, I'm 18, and I can't help but feel like young people can talk to young people about their views
1:30:19
Everyone loves to talk about young people's views and opinions, but there's no connection between the two
1:30:24
and almost we need young people to tell others what they think
1:30:29
and give them a voice so that they can sort of communicate perhaps more effectively
1:30:35
and perhaps come to better conclusions about broader topics. Maybe we would have something to fight for if..
1:30:42
This isn't a new... ...with a communication between the two. Yeah, it's a brilliant point
1:30:46
It's not a new thing, but the situation in which young people find themselves is new
1:30:51
Yes. so we need a new model of discourse to recognize i mean to be fair i'm doing my best morgan but
1:30:58
i'm just one radio show i'm one radio station and and hearing from people in precisely the
1:31:03
catchment area that we're talking about what do you think are the biggest things that my generation simply don't get well i think it's often just the question asked i think
1:31:14
we often lump all young people in so like in one lump
1:31:21
whereas I'm very different from perhaps a 24 year old I'm very different from my 19 year old
1:31:27
brother just from our COVID experience from our school experience those things
1:31:33
have all changed so rapidly and we just can't seem to keep up with that
1:31:37
as an idea I seem to think maybe that we should have
1:31:41
like I don't know maybe a rotating youth, almost, in my mind
1:31:46
I picture it like we could have a youth panel for a big newspaper
1:31:50
of some kind. It would have to be print media, not social media. Why would it have to
1:31:55
reach the older generation? To reach the older generation. To reach the people
1:32:00
who aren't talking to young people on a daily. Not just parents and teachers
1:32:03
and people in public services, but everybody who should have an understanding of the other people
1:32:10
they occupy the world with. Yes. And I mean, you just get dismissed
1:32:15
You just get people writing columns in the Daily Mail about how you don't really have concerns
1:32:21
or you don't really have... I'm not speaking about you directly now. You're making up neurodiversity
1:32:25
or we didn't have depression in my day or they're just... I don't know what they're..
1:32:29
You're always being told what you're doing and what you're thinking. You're never being asked
1:32:33
Exactly. Gosh. That's pretty grim, actually. What about one danger of a sort of false..
1:32:41
homogeneity, if that's even a word. The idea that someone like me
1:32:46
and I have daughters your age or thereabouts, and I know that, for example, they're two years apart
1:32:53
like you and your brother are one year apart, and I can't, there's not a lot I can say
1:32:58
that would hold equally true for both of them. So we talk about young people
1:33:03
It's a fairly unhelpful categorization, but it's the only one we've got
1:33:07
What would they almost all have in common? answer, well you tell me Well
1:33:13
I think maybe that's a tricky question is that misunderstanding and feeling misunderstood
1:33:22
or misrepresented by the media is the link more than anything I think that would have to be my answer
1:33:28
I mean there's a line that I think it was an Estonian
1:33:32
caller talked about when we first started discussing the war in Ukraine
1:33:36
and they were talking about the post-war settlement, the post-Second World War settlement
1:33:40
and that phrase that really stuck with me was that all of the negotiations
1:33:44
all of the conversations were about us but without us and that's what you're describing
1:33:50
to me about your generation in this country, about us but without us Slovakian
1:33:56
I think she was, Slovakian but anyway, thank you and listen, you're always
1:34:00
welcome here, it's not a lot but it's better than nothing Morgan Yeah, thank you very much
1:34:05
You're very welcome, 1156 is the time. PMQ's imminent. Listen, whatever your politics are
1:34:12
what were those four tribes we identified at the top of the show this morning? It is a very interesting political moment
1:34:18
More interesting for people like Natasha Clark and indeed myself than it is for people
1:34:23
who are struggling to put food on the table or wondering about how they're going to get through the day
1:34:28
But if you are interested in the daily to-ing and fro-ing of politics
1:34:33
then you cannot but be interested in the situation that Keir Starmer currently finds himself in
1:34:38
In fact, the size of the open goal that Kemi Bader not will find herself
1:34:43
limbering up in front of in a few minutes' time cannot be exaggerated
1:34:48
cannot be overstated. And indeed, Natasha Clark, our political editor, is here
1:34:56
I mean, six questions all on the same thing today. Do you think
1:35:01
Maybe. Maybe she'll ask the same six questions that she asked Keir Starmer a couple of days ago about Lord Wellington
1:35:07
She said that she had taken an unprecedented step in giving them to him beforehand
1:35:12
in an attempt to try and get an answer out of him. And I think it is fair to say that he has, in PMQs in the past
1:35:19
hasn't he, struggled to answer some of these questions and tried to dodge and deflect. But equally, he spent Monday answering two and a half hours of MPs' questions
1:35:28
and trying his best to sort of, you know, do what he could to try and draw a line under this whole sorry saga and move on, you know
1:35:36
And as some of your callers have been saying this morning, he's apologised for this and appointing Mandelson time and time and time and time again
1:35:43
What more can he do? What more does Kemi Baden not want to hear? Which might she call for Ollie Robbins to be reinstated
1:35:50
or something a little bit unexpected like that? Some people are. Yes, Lord Sedwell has written in the Times today, hasn't he
1:35:56
Saying that he believes that he's unfairly dismissed. And actually, I think that will probably be part of an ongoing HR case, at least according to that letter that Ollie Robbins sent to the committee yesterday, which said, you know, this is all to do with my HR contract and I can't really get into this at the moment
1:36:11
So I imagine he will be pushing to see if there is a case there for unfair dismissal
1:36:16
I don't think we've seen the end of that, but I don't think Keir Starmer is going to turn around and you turn on that one, is he, and reinstate this guy
1:36:23
it's really difficult once you lose the trust of the Prime Minister that you're serving
1:36:27
to sort of make the case for your sort of reassessment, isn't it
1:36:31
Yes, it is. I mean, you know that I have, I don't think wobbled is quite the right word
1:36:35
I've veered quite violently from position to position on this. I think we all have
1:36:41
Well, quite rightly, because the facts keep changing. The facts keep changing, so then you change your mind
1:36:44
It turned out that the vetting hadn't been failed in the sense that we all thought it had been failed on Friday
1:36:48
but it had been sort of failed in a slightly different sense. So, you know, it's been almost impossible to hold the same line throughout
1:36:55
and dangerous to try to do so. Which brings us back to Cami Bader-Naut, who doesn't really do nuance
1:37:03
No, and she also, I don't know if she's going to sort of do what she did in the Commons yesterday
1:37:07
which I did think was quite good yesterday. She was quite forensic in just setting out the arguments from Ollie Robbins
1:37:12
and what he said and just getting the reaction from the Prime Minister on the things that he said
1:37:17
And there are still a few, of course, there are still major unanswered questions
1:37:22
I think the Prime Minister what she will want to push him on is why did you decide that this guy was going to be the full guy for this whole saga And as you were talking about is this really to do with Jeffrey Epstein or not You know will she decide to push him on the nuance that is between his links
1:37:39
his business links to other places and other people, which we believe is the reason he failed that security vetting
1:37:45
Or will she continue to push Epstein because that's the more sort of politically convenient excuse that she can use
1:37:50
The reason why Ollie Robbins got the boot in the first place
1:37:54
in that it is a sort of emotional response to a situation
1:37:58
rather than a process or fact-based one, which is what everybody who voted for Keir Starmer
1:38:03
thought that they were voting for. Exactly. I mean, it's an almighty mess. And would you agree that the Ollie Robbins story
1:38:10
is now a bigger problem for the Prime Minister than the Peter Mandelson, or at least the vetting story
1:38:16
I think so, because I think it's going to cause him lots of problems later down the line, right
1:38:20
If your civil service aren't on your side, you're going to find it very difficult
1:38:23
to deliver the policies that you want to do. And one of the biggest concerns and the biggest criticisms of Keir Starmer so far
1:38:29
and you actually heard this from Angela Rayner last night, she was giving a speech to the Good Growth Foundation
1:38:34
and she was talking about how she feels that this Labour government needs to be much bigger and bolder in their ideas and their policies
1:38:39
If you don't have the civil service on side, if they can't trust you, how are you going to push through this big, bold, radical agenda
1:38:45
that people think you want? And that's going to, I think, really come back to bite him
1:38:49
especially as a man that's made so much of his political career on being... That's a great point
1:38:52
That's that guy that you can trust, right? That's a great point. And Dave Penman, the head of the FDA
1:38:57
the sort of trade union for civil servants, has made, I think it was on with Sheely yesterday
1:39:01
making no bones about how unimpressed he is by events recently. We're at that point in the programme
1:39:08
where I remind you that we will cross live to the House of Commons imminently
1:39:13
when Kemi Bader not gets to her feet and starts putting her questions to the Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer
1:39:19
So, what are the odds on PMQs this week not standing for Prime Minister's questions
1:39:24
but standing instead for Peter Mandelson questions. Oh, yeah, very good. Nice
1:39:28
Yeah, whenever I do write... You've been working on that all day. Whenever I write my notes, I write PM for Peter Mandelson
1:39:33
But then sometimes I get confused because it also stands for Prime Minister. But it's unlikely that she'll mention inflation or mention..
1:39:40
Look, potentially. The government... She can't, but if she mentions... Sorry to talk over you
1:39:44
I'll just get my own thought out before you respond. Inflation and the rest of it
1:39:48
almost all give Starmer the opportunity to mention the war. about the war. Exactly, yeah. But equally, he's desperate to talk about it. She might be
1:39:55
you know, of the opinion that I think a lot of people are, that we need to stop talking about
1:39:59
Peter Mandelson now and sort of draw a line under this story and now sort of look to other areas
1:40:04
around the world. So, and that is Iran, the cost of living crisis, all the other things the
1:40:08
government have got on their plate. So, potentially, both leaders may, and I say may, decide to move on
1:40:14
and talk about inflation, cost of living. You know, if I were the Prime Minister, what would you do as
1:40:18
a sort of dead cat scenario here. I would come forward with my RAM cost of living plan right
1:40:22
now to try and give someone else and the media and everybody else a bit of something else to talk about. But there's blood in the water. So, I think, so, Kemi Badenok, exactly. It
1:40:31
feels like this is the opportunity to push him again on Peter Mandelson. Too young, I
1:40:35
think, to, did you ever read Viz magazine? Viz? No. There was a strip in Viz magazine
1:40:40
called the Pathetic Sharks. And I don't know why when I just mentioned, I just thought of
1:40:45
When I mentioned that there was blood in the water, I thought of the pathetic sharks in Viz magazine
1:40:51
which is a little cultural nod for probably, what, 15% of the listenership to this programme
1:40:56
Or maybe a little more, I don't know. Arguably, she has done well on Mandelson. She's done very well. I don't think it's arguable
1:41:00
Exactly. So she might just be thinking, it's time to capitalise on that politically again with what's been happening
1:41:06
But she does have a terrible habit of snatching embarrassment from the jaws of such
1:41:10
Oh, very good, very good. Yeah, but she will obviously make this again about her
1:41:14
and, oh, I called for Peter Mandelson to resign, I've repeatedly said this, but it does feel a bit like Groundhog Day, doesn't it
1:41:19
We're having the same conversations again and again, and, you know, where do we draw the line under this Peter Mandelson debacle
1:41:24
When is it going to stop? When is it going to end? And speaking of Groundhog Day, I still can't get past the insight
1:41:29
that popped up during our conversations either on Friday or on Monday. Oh, hang on, I may not hear it ever again
1:41:35
Thank you, Mr Speaker. Does the Prime Minister stand by his statement at the dispatch box
1:41:43
on the 10th of September last year, that full due process was followed in the appointment
1:41:50
of Peter Mandelson as our ambassador to Washington. Yes, I do. Mr. Speaker, let me make clear at the outset that the appointment itself was a mistake
1:42:02
It was my mistake. I've apologised to the victims for it, and I do so again
1:42:08
What I said out to the House on Monday is that Foreign Office officials granted security clearance to Mandelson against the recommendation of UK security vetting
1:42:18
Yesterday, Sir Ollie Robbins was asked if he shared that decision with me, Number 10, or any other ministers
1:42:26
He gave a clear answer, no. Mr Speaker, that puts to bed all the allegations leveled at me by those opposite in relation to dishonesty
1:42:36
I believe, last week they were all saying that it must have been shared with me
1:42:43
Sir Oli was very clear yesterday it was not. I believe not sharing it was a serious error of judgement
1:42:50
That information should have been shared with me and other ministers. And if it had have been, Mandelson would not have been committed to post
1:42:59
Mr Speaker, it does not put to bed anything. On the 11th of November 2024, long before any vetting had happened, the Prime Minister received advice from Simon Case, the then Cabinet Secretary
1:43:14
The advice said the appointment would require, and I quote, the necessary security clearances before confirming the Prime Minister's choice
1:43:25
This advice was ignored. So how can the Prime Minister still believe that confirming Mandelson before the security clearances was following full due process
1:43:39
Mr Speaker, this was looked into by Sir Chris Wormald. I asked him to review the appointment process, including the vetting
1:43:48
He confirmed, Mr Speaker, his words, appropriate processes were followed. She's put great weight on the order of events
1:43:55
I remember a reminder of what Sir Chris said last November in evidence to the House
1:44:01
He said this, and I quote, When we are making appointments from outside the civil service
1:44:06
the normal thing is for security clearance to happen after appointment, but before the person signs a contract and takes up post
1:44:14
That is what happened in this case. Sir Ollie Robbins himself, Mr Speaker, also gave evidence
1:44:20
and he said, and I quote, as is normally the case with external appointments in his department
1:44:28
the appointment was made subject to obtaining security clearance. Mr Speaker, on top of that, Sir Ollie Robbins has made clear
1:44:35
that the fact that developed vetting was after the announcement made, in his words, no material difference to the conclusion that was reached
1:44:44
And Mr Speaker, I add this, that what Sir Ollie Robbins wrote to the committee yesterday was this
1:44:50
and I quote, when the Prime Minister informed the House that the proper process had been followed in respect of national security vetting he was correct It very interesting that he mentions Chris Wormald He is relying on advice given to him
1:45:10
after Mandelson was sacked by a cabinet secretary, the prime minister then sacked
1:45:17
That is not relevant. I'm talking about the advice he was given before the appointment
1:45:23
He keeps mentioning Sir Oli Robbins. Sir Oli Robbins told us that the Prime Minister even sought clearance from His Majesty the King before the vetting
1:45:31
He'd already got agreement from the US administration. The chair of the Select Committee said that
1:45:36
Mandelson was a done deal. Yesterday, Sir Oli Robbins said that the focus was on getting Mandelson out to Washington quickly
1:45:45
He said the Prime Minister's team showed a dismissive attitude to vetting
1:45:51
And they even argued Peter Mandelson didn't need any vetting at all
1:45:57
This clearly wasn't proper process. Why was due process not followed? Mr Speaker, let me deal with this directly, particularly this question of pressure in relation to the decision to appoint and to put into post Peter Mandelson
1:46:15
Sir Ollie Robbins could not have been clearer in his evidence yesterday. He said this
1:46:20
I didn't feel under pressure personally in terms of my judgment. His words
1:46:27
Mr Speaker, he went on to say, he went on to say
1:46:32
I have complete confidence that recommendations to me and the discussions we had and the decision we made
1:46:39
were rigorously independent of any pressure. Mr Speaker, on top of that
1:46:44
He was asked if any conversations led him to believe that Mandelson needed to take up the role regardless of vetting outcome
1:46:54
He said, I can say with certainty it was never put to me in that way
1:46:59
No pressure existed whatsoever in relation to this case. What is unacceptable is that the recommendation of UKSV was not given to me before Mandelson took up his post
1:47:11
Mr. Speaker, we all heard what Sir Ollie Robbins said yesterday. The fact of the matter is that the Prime Minister spent a lot of time telling us just how furious he was
1:47:24
to learn that Mandelson failed the vetting, the same Prime Minister who was trying to get into Washington
1:47:29
without any vetting at all. It's just unbelievable. The reason the Cabinet Secretary advised the Prime Minister to carry out full vetting before the appointment
1:47:39
This is common sense, Mr. Speaker. Carry out full vetting before the appointment was to protect our national security
1:47:46
The due diligence document said Mandelson remained on the board of the Kremlin-linked
1:47:53
defence company Systema long after Putin's first invasion of Ukraine in 2014
1:48:00
The Prime Minister told us on Monday that he'd read that due diligence report
1:48:06
Why did the Prime Minister want to make a man with links to the Kremlin our ambassador in Washington
1:48:13
Well, Mr Speaker, let me deal with the first allegation she put in that question. It was always the case that would be developed vetting in this case
1:48:21
That was the understood process that was carried out. It was reviewed by Sir Chris Wormald and he said it was the appropriate process
1:48:30
Sir Ollie was absolutely clear that nobody put pressure on him to make this appointment
1:48:36
Whatever the sequence, a developed vetting. In relation to what was in the due process
1:48:44
any issues of national security are dealt with in the developed vetting process
1:48:50
I knew that. Peter Mandelson received clearance through that process. The problem was, as I said to the House
1:48:57
I was unaware that UKSV recommended against clearance. That is information that should have been brought to my attention
1:49:06
Mr Speaker, they recommended with red flags that there shouldn't be clearance and it was high concern
1:49:17
That information should have been made available to me at the time and subsequently
1:49:24
The fact that it wasn't was a very serious error of judgment
1:49:30
I don't know what planet the Prime Minister is on, Mr Speaker. appointing someone with no links to the Kremlin is not full due process
1:49:39
If anybody had brought that sort of name to me when I was a Secretary of State
1:49:44
I would have said no way. The Prime Minister thought someone with Kremlin links was still probably okay
1:49:50
Let's do some vetting. Why does this matter? He keeps leaning on Sir Ollie Robbins, a man he sacked
1:49:56
He keeps leaning on him. Sir Ollie Robbins said yesterday that Peter Mandelson was given access to highly classified briefings even before he'd received clearance
1:50:09
That was a clear national security risk. How can the Prime Minister still maintain that full due process was followed
1:50:17
Mr Speaker, as a member of the House of Lords and Privy Councillor, and in accordance with guidance, documentation could have been provided to him and was provided to him
1:50:33
Strap material comes after developed vetting. But because he was a Privy Councillor, he could have access to other material before developed vetting
1:50:41
This is a joke. He says a member of the House of Lords
1:50:46
does he mean people like Matthew Doyle? I'm amazed, I'm amazed. Yes, right
1:50:52
I am amazed at the level of chuntering from Labour MPs. He promised them probity
1:50:59
What he's given them is cronyism and an old boys club where Matthew Doyle is being proposed as an ambassador
1:51:05
Ridiculous. It's ridiculous. Mr Speaker, we all heard Sir Ollie Robbins' testimony yesterday
1:51:13
The head of the Foreign Office was sacked for the Prime Minister's own failings
1:51:20
His backbenchers know that is not fair. Even his most loyal Cabinet members won't defend it
1:51:28
The Prime Minister did not follow the process the Cabinet Secretary set out in November 2024
1:51:35
He knows he did not follow due process, yet he told the House he had
1:51:42
Mr Speaker, I cannot accuse the Prime Minister of deliberately misleading the House
1:51:48
but everyone can see what has happened here. This was not due process
1:51:54
Everyone knows the price of misleading the House. Will the Prime Minister finally take responsibility and go
1:52:02
Well, Mr Speaker, let's be absolutely clear. Before Mandelson took up his post, UKSB recommended with red flags that clearance should be denied
1:52:15
And there was high concern that that was not brought to my attention or the attention of the Foreign Secretary at the time or subsequently is a very serious error of judgment And anyone in my position would have lost confidence in the former permanent secretary But Mr Speaker the leader of the opposition claimed on Friday that Mandelson could not have been cleared against security advice
1:52:40
She was wrong about that. She said that ministers must have been told. She was wrong about that
1:52:46
She claimed there was deliberate dishonesty. She was wrong about that. Wrong, wrong, wrong
1:52:52
she rushed to judgment as she always did just like the iran war
1:52:57
mr speaker i was elected by the british people because they let the country down for 14 long years
1:53:06
whatever she says whatever noise they make nothing is going to distract me from delivering for our
1:53:13
country in contrast to the preoccupations of the leader of the opposition my constituents
1:53:22
are more concerned with the NHS and waiting lists. As to this government, across England, waiting lists are coming down
1:53:30
In my part of the country, waiting lists have fallen by 13,000 in the past year alone
1:53:37
After years of Tory failure, we're getting the NHS back on its feet
1:53:43
Can the Prime Minister share with me what further plans we've got to get waiting lists down even more
1:53:48
and to make sure that we've once again got a health service to be proud of
1:53:52
All the party officers would hang their heads in shame at the state they left our NHS in
1:53:58
And I'm proud that this Labour government is fixing our NHS across the country
1:54:02
Waiting lists, Mr Speaker, the lowest for three years. Best A&E waiting times for five years
1:54:08
Fastest ambulance respond times for half a decade. Cancer patients getting diagnosed in the shortest time on record
1:54:15
Lots done, more to do. That's why we're delivering neighbourhood health centres in every community to speed up care
1:54:21
We did that because we invested. What did they do? They broke the NHS and then they opposed the investment that we put in
1:54:29
David, leader of the Liberal Democrats. Mr Speaker, can I associate myself, my party
1:54:36
with the comments of the Prime Minister on our wonderful late Queen? Can I also agree with him on the need to confront anti-Semitism
1:54:43
wherever it is in our society and also remembering Stephen Lawrence and his family
1:54:49
Mr Speaker, I'm sure many of us in this House were shocked by the new revelations from Ollie Robbins yesterday
1:54:56
He said Number 10 told him to find a plum job for Matthew Doyle
1:55:01
another Labour crony friends with a convicted sex offender. Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister was asked on Monday
1:55:08
whether Number 10 had proposed any political appointments other than Mandelson. Perhaps the last few hours have jogged his memory
1:55:17
Will he confirm today? did he know his office was lobbying for a diplomatic job for Matthew Doyle
1:55:24
And were they doing it on his authority? Mr Speaker, as I said earlier, Matthew Doyle worked for many years in public service
1:55:33
For me as Prime Minister and other ministers. When people leave roles in any organisation
1:55:39
there are very often conversations about other roles they may want to apply for
1:55:45
In this case, nothing came of it. Mr Speaker, the House and the public watching will note the Prime Minister failed to answer my questions
1:55:58
But Mr Speaker, the chaos in this government mustn't stop us from focusing on the cost of living crisis hitting our country
1:56:06
President Trump's idiotic war with Iran has already pushed up inflation in our country to 3.3%
1:56:13
And the Prime Minister knows there's far worse to come for the British people here on in
1:56:19
They need help now. So will the Prime Minister follow other countries and use the Treasury's extra revenues from higher fuel prices
1:56:27
to cut rail and bus fares and slash prices at the pump by 12p a litre
1:56:34
Mr Speaker, everybody can see that the conflict is causing serious economic damage
1:56:40
in this country and countries around the world. His claim of a windfall for the government
1:56:46
are politically misleading and economically illiterate. Thank you, Mr Speaker. And we're back in the room
1:56:57
Well, I don't know where to start, but I'd have to decide after this
1:57:02
James O'Brien on LBC. 21 minutes after 12 is the time. The one thing that I was not expecting that PMQs to be was boring
1:57:14
But somehow Kemi Bader-Knot rose to the challenge and delivered. We had an interesting evolution of ogy, Natasha and I, during the news bulletin
1:57:23
And one of us suggested that it was a score, that it was a nil-nil draw
1:57:27
And the other person pointed out that we had described Kemi Bader-Knot as facing an own goal, an open goal
1:57:32
So if it was a nil-nil draw, then the person that missed the open goal probably comes off the pitch
1:57:38
in rather worse shape than the person who did not miss an open goal
1:57:42
For sure. And she should be leaving the chamber going, didn't really nail him on anything really, did I
1:57:47
And she didn't. There was no standout moment. What you did see is both of them rising to each other, didn't you
1:57:54
They both clearly hate each other, don't they? They both really dislike each other
1:57:59
And that was evident. I mean, she clearly hates him. Oh, no, I think he hates her
1:58:03
You think he hates her? Yeah, I think... He certainly had a problem with Boris Johnson. I think he finds her a bit ridiculous
1:58:07
But also, you sort of saw him in some of his responses raising his voice in the way that she has done
1:58:13
time and time again at PMQs, which I don't think suits her style and I don't think works
1:58:17
And actually, I kind of wanted to see him put a little bit more fire in his belly in his fight
1:58:22
but maybe this isn't the week for that. Maybe it was all about keeping the ball away
1:58:26
from the open goal, if we will go down this ogy. It's all about footballification, isn't it
1:58:31
There's not a lot. I mean, most weeks it's about, obviously, the nature of people who get in touch with the programme
1:58:38
is going to be self-selecting. So a good week for Cammie Badenot would be 50-50
1:58:43
I can't see any positive yses of how she... Oh, here's one. Oh, no, it's a joke. Sorry
1:58:48
It's an amazing performance by Cammie. Three swings and three misses in a swing and a miss tournament
1:58:54
Flogging a dead horse, it was so dull. She doesn't understand that the only thing she can't get Starmer on
1:58:59
is following the process. Andy says Keir was on form today, took no prisoners
1:59:04
knew the timeline inside out. For goodness sake, can't she move on
1:59:08
And open goal, writes Gary. She's hit the corner flag. Look, he was prepared, right
1:59:13
And he has had two or three days in the House of Commons answering questions on this to prepare himself for this moment
1:59:19
And he clearly was. And he had answers to every single question that she had
1:59:23
Yeah, that's the point, isn't it? But equally, he did what he does every week
1:59:27
and very artfully dodges answering the questions that he doesn't want to answer
1:59:30
Not today. I think he did, and you saw that with Ed Davey, right
1:59:34
So you didn't want to answer the question about Matthew Doyle. Not with her, not with Kemi Bader. No
1:59:38
And, you know, the idea of due process, well, why is due process, you know, not followed
1:59:43
I think everybody feels like the process is the problem, right? That's why it was followed
1:59:47
The process was wrong. The Prime Minister said he's changed it. Yes, exactly. So, therefore, it's not that the process wasn't followed, it's the process was rubbish
1:59:53
It's the strangest political balloon I can remember, the way that it has been inflated
1:59:57
and deflated. several times in the same day, let alone just in each news cycle
2:00:04
I think we could all spare a thought for Tony, who took the day off, because Sky News said that PMQs was going to be big box office today
2:00:10
Tony, what were you thinking? I mean, it's slightly odd, set of priorities at the best of times, Tony
2:00:15
Also, what kind of a job are you doing, Tony? You just take a little random day off? That's great, good for you
2:00:19
Probably self-employed. Probably. And on it goes. So, I mean, has it gone to bed now
2:00:25
No, it's absolutely not going to bed. And Kemi Bade not went on this because she knows that it's not
2:00:29
But equally, she found herself reverting to asking questions about documents that came out two months ago and that actually happened two years ago when she's talking about why did the Prime Minister appoint him in the first place? Why did the Prime Minister ignore the advice from Simon Case not to pre-vet him? These are all questions that, to be fair, I don't think he's really answered
2:00:48
And actually, you've got that from Pat McFadden today, who gave very good answers, I thought, about why
2:00:53
The situation we were in, about why Bandleson was appointed in the first place
2:00:57
it's something that most ministers at the moment, it's an argument they're not going anywhere near
2:01:01
But at the time, we needed somebody to handle Donald Trump. And the Prime Minister now feels scared of making that argument, I think, in public
2:01:09
because he's so politically exposed by it. The question of error of judgment, the Prime Minister mentioned again
2:01:16
Olly Robbins and why he sacked him. There are still questions about that and MPs
2:01:20
are saying that they do feel that it might be unfair and Pat Mofadden again today
2:01:24
couldn't say whether he thought it was fair to sack Olly Robbins. So he's in your account, James
2:01:28
He thinks that he should potentially not have been sacked at all. Yeah, well I'm coming
2:01:32
this is why I talk about balloons being inflated and deflated. Starmer did enough there to
2:01:38
tempt me back from the precipice of thinking he needs to go sooner
2:01:44
rather than later. He's taken some of the sting out of this story, but by no means all of it
2:01:48
But the two questions I'm left with now almost cancel each other out
2:01:53
I think these are the two biggest questions left on the table. Why did he sack Olly Robbins
2:01:59
And why didn't Olly Robbins tell him that Mandelson had failed elements of his vetting
2:02:05
So I think we have the answer to question two. We heard it from Olly Robbins time and day again. He thought that he couldn't do so
2:02:09
So that's his. I've got Sir Maurice Oldfield in my back pocket this morning
2:02:15
This is another reference I'm not going to get. Yeah, well, it's up there with the pathetic sharks
2:02:19
although it's a little bit more political than... So, Sir Maurice Oldfield, and I actually learned this from Tom Watson
2:02:25
the former deputy Labour leader's substack. Sir Maurice Oldfield was the head of the security service
2:02:34
the head of the secret intelligence service, which is MI6, from 1973 to 1978
2:02:39
Widely regarded as being one of the inspirations for George Smiley from the John le Carré novels
2:02:43
And when Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister in 1979, she appointed him security coordinator in Northern Ireland, at which point after his appointment, his vetting clearance was reviewed because he would already have been vetted as head of MI6
2:03:01
And he lost his job. The vetting threw up new developments that Margaret Thatcher was told about
2:03:10
Okay. So that's a really good historic precedent there. It's a heartbreaking story because he was gay
2:03:17
And he hadn't revealed that when he was first interviewed to join the security services
2:03:21
But by 1979, when he was re-vetted, the subject came up. And he answered it honestly
2:03:29
But because he had been dishonest in his original application, it did for him
2:03:33
It's an incredibly poignant tale. And he died shortly afterwards. Margaret Thatcher actually visited him in hospital
2:03:40
I've definitely heard about this guy before. His brother asked him why he seemed so distressed after she left
2:03:45
and he said, Mrs Thatcher asked me if I was homosexual. I had to tell her
2:03:50
As the light was fading on their eldest brother's life, this was the only time his family had ever heard any suggestion of that kind
2:03:56
in relation to him, and it had come from the Prime Minister. And according to all of Oldfield's family
2:04:02
Margaret Thatcher conducted herself throughout this episode with extraordinary kindness and sensitivity
2:04:08
but the point is that somebody told her he had failed his vetting and look that was a long time
2:04:14
ago maybe maybe laws have changed maybe civil service codes have been updated but you know
2:04:19
that argument is exactly what number 10 are pointing to to that sort of argument they're
2:04:22
saying that that's why he was sacked yeah and they're saying that he should have been told and
2:04:27
look you know reticent to put myself in ollie robinson's position but i you know if i if i were
2:04:33
I think I might have felt the same way. So it's tough. But also, you know, why did the Prime Minister sack him
2:04:41
Because he didn't tell him about the vetting. Sure, exactly. So we do have a little bit of answers
2:04:45
We can cross that question off the list. Yeah, I think so. And we're left with why didn't he tell him
2:04:48
to which his answer is, I didn't think I was allowed to. Yeah, but like I say, it's all a matter of..
2:04:53
And my balloon's deflated again, so to speak. Yeah, OK. Sorry about that
2:04:59
Staying with Viz Magazine, Ty's been in touch. He says, a random pointless fact for you, James
2:05:03
David Bowie was an avid reader of this magazine for all of his life
2:05:08
I've got an... I know, I knew that, actually. I'm a big Bowie fan, but I've got a random pointless fact for you, Ty
2:05:13
which is that David Bowie's son Duncan is such a fan of comic art
2:05:17
that he actually wrote a graphic novel. It's the sequel to his film Moon
2:05:22
It's called Mady, M-A-D-I, Once Upon a Time in the Future, and it's a thing of absolute beauty
2:05:28
And I know that because Duncan sent me a copy of it for my 40th birthday
2:05:32
would you believe? Oh, nice guy. But was it my 50th? No, it was my 50th birthday. It was only about four years ago. When was it published
2:05:38
I think I'm getting confused. Viz Magazine, there was a magazine when I was growing up called Miz
2:05:42
which is a teen girl magazine. This is not the same, right? No, definitely my 50th birthday
2:05:46
Definitely Viz, not Miz. Definitely time for the headlines with Matt Hewitt
2:05:50
James O'Brien on LBC. Three minutes after 12. Simon Marks standing by
2:05:56
I just thought I'd draw your attention to the Ten Commandments before we talked to Simon
2:06:00
I mean, the real ones, not the Ten Commandments of journalism. or anything like that because Donald Trump has been espousing his Christian beliefs
2:06:07
by reading a passage from the Bible. And it's easy to forget what they are, even if you go to church every Sunday
2:06:14
They rarely remind you, I am the Lord your God. You shall not have any other gods before me
2:06:21
I'd say he'd broken that one with the picture of him depicted as Jesus
2:06:25
It's debatable, but I'd say that was 52-48. There's no idols next
2:06:31
You shall not make or worship graven images. He's broken that one, hasn't he
2:06:36
Posting pictures of himself as massive statues, wanting big graven images. Do not take God's name in vain
2:06:43
Swears like a trooper. Keep the Sabbath holy. I don't think many Christians do that anymore
2:06:49
but he's broken that one as well. Honour your father and mother. He's probably all right on that
2:06:53
Do not murder, or thou shalt not kill if you prefer. I don't think he's killed anyone personally
2:06:58
but he's boasted about his willingness to do so, of course. and then you've got the rest
2:07:02
Thou shalt not commit adultery. Wah-wah. Thou shalt not steal. Wah-wah. Thou shalt not bear false witness
2:07:10
which means lying or testifying falsely against your neighbour or indeed anyone else
2:07:14
Wah-wah. And finally, thou shalt not covet. It's not just your neighbour's wife, by the way
2:07:19
It's anything that your neighbour has got. But Donald Trump does more coveting than the king of covet land So when it comes to the Ten Commandments not the biggest Christian on the planet but Simon Mark at great pains today or yesterday to point out just what a real Christian he is This is because the Jesus stuff and the Pope stuff has hit him in parts that other scandals
2:07:39
that actually involve offending or hurting real human beings have not hit him
2:07:45
Yes, I think that's absolutely right, James. I think there will be those people who wonder whether Donald Trump has not indeed breached the thou shalt not kill commandment
2:07:56
I mean, this is the president of the United States who, during his first term in office
2:08:02
dispatched a record number of federal death row prisoners to the execution chamber
2:08:08
And, of course, as the commander-in-chief of the American military, and now clearly desirous of using the American military to advance what he thinks are America's national security goals, there will be many families of innocent victims in various theatres, including now, of course, Iran, who would argue that he absolutely has breached that particular commandment
2:08:30
commandment. The section of the Bible passage that he read out yesterday was not coincidental
2:08:40
It was from the seventh chapter, and I'm no expert on this, believe me, it's from the seventh chapter
2:08:47
of 2 Chronicles, which is a book in the Old Testament portion of the Bible, the 14th verse
2:08:54
And it has been articulated by numerous figures on the right here at numerous events over the last several years to sort of underpin the notion that America actually should terminate the constitutional historical separation of church and state that exists here
2:09:17
It is a passage that has been used to promote the notion that America was created as a Christian nation and needs to repent of its sins and return to God
2:09:30
So, you know, stung as he absolutely has been by the ludicrous effort last week to depict himself as Jesus healing the sick
2:09:40
and then to claim, oh, I thought I was dressed up as a doctor in that image
2:09:46
possibly because one of his White House aides told him it was a doctored image
2:09:51
and he didn't quite understand what he was being told. This is an effort, I think, to redouble and to double down
2:09:59
and to reestablish a firmer underpinning of his relationship with Christians who were enraged last week in their thousands
2:10:11
even on his own social media account, by what many of them argued was an act of blasphemy
2:10:16
We should have a little listen to it, because I think we can fairly say that the next time the audiobook contract comes up for renewal
2:10:22
I don't think he's going to be at the front of the queue. But, I mean, under your account
2:10:26
bringing Thou Shalt Not Kill back into the picture, he's arguably on the hook for eight, nine or ten
2:10:31
of the Ten Commandments being broken in the course of one pitiful life
2:10:35
But anyway, here he is trying to make amends. And as for you, if you will walk before me as David, your father, walked and do according to all that I have commanded you and shall observe my statutes and my judgments, then will I establish the throne of my kingdom according to as I have covenanted with David, your father, saying there shall not fail you as a man to be ruler in Israel
2:11:04
but if you turn away and forsake my statues and my commandments which i have set before you
2:11:12
and shall go and serve other gods and worship then okay so last week i mean no one's mentioned
2:11:20
today that he's criticized kia starmer for appointing peter mandelson to ambassador which
2:11:24
i think only the daily mail has picked up on in this country because of course this is a man that appointed Pete Hegseth, Kash Patel, J.D. Vance, and sundry others, and Robert F. Kennedy
2:11:35
In the last week, we've learned that his health secretary once stopped to pick up some roadkill
2:11:42
cut the penis off a dead raccoon, and took it home to study at a later date. His war secretary thought he was quoting from the Bible when he was actually quoting from the
2:11:51
Quentin Tarantino film, Pulp Fiction. The head of the FBI is now taking legal action
2:11:58
against a magazine article that I think cited 20 or 30 sources
2:12:03
describing his alleged drunkenness in the office. I've read that they're no longer making influenza vaccines
2:12:12
compulsory for members of the military. Off the top of my head, Simon Marks, I apologise
2:12:18
I can't remember how many US troops died as a consequence of the massive influenza outbreak of the First World War
2:12:24
or in that rough era, I think it was 35,000. I mean, we gave up, almost, on their coming a moment
2:12:34
when it would all become unsustainable, and yet, lo and behold, it feels as if that moment has arrived
2:12:40
culminating this week in reports that his own aides, his closest aides
2:12:45
aren't really telling him anything about what is going on outside of his own brain
2:12:50
Yeah, look, I mean, I think it is tempting, obviously, to find humour in a lot of the things that have happened over the course of the last week
2:12:58
And indeed, some of them are, on their merits, very funny. A raccoon's penis is always going to be funny, Simon. It doesn't matter what the context is
2:13:06
It can't not be funny, right? No, exactly. Can't not be funny. But, you know, this is deeply, deeply worrying
2:13:14
This is an administration that evidently now has lost the plot, lost its way, lost its direction, cannot articulate still why the United States, in a fact-based way, decided to engage with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in going to war against Iran, putting American lives at risk
2:13:38
already more than a dozen American service personnel have lost their lives in that particular
2:13:43
theatre and this is a president whose own actions on a daily basis demonstrates deep-rooted
2:13:52
instability that we now know senior figures within his inner circle are struggling to kind of protect
2:14:01
the government from. So every single day there is an absolute storm of activity on his truth social
2:14:09
account often going on until 2.30 in the morning. An array of absolutely completely contradictory
2:14:16
messages particularly over Iran. We see the president still unable to understand why Iran
2:14:26
has not bent to his will and demonstrating that he doesn't even understand really the nature of the
2:14:34
Iranian regime. I mean, if we take a look at what happened yesterday beyond truth social
2:14:39
he gave an interview around this time yesterday to CNBC, spent 37 minutes on the telephone. How
2:14:46
he had the time to do that, who knows? And this time yesterday morning at that particular moment
2:14:52
He was itching to unleash the US military on Iran electrical power plants and their bridges Take a listen to what he said to CNBC about that issue 24 hours ago
2:15:06
Well, I expect to be bombing because I think that's a better attitude to go in with
2:15:10
but we're ready to go. I mean, the military is raring to go
2:15:15
Whoa. So absolute bravado there from President Trump 24 hours ago at a point where it appeared that Vice President J.D. Vance was about to be dispatched on Air Force Two
2:15:27
flying 17 hours to Islamabad for more face-to-face talks with the Iranians
2:15:32
There were doubts about whether those talks would take place, but the plan was still for J.D. Vance to go
2:15:37
And then later in the day, around lunchtime here, they conceded it wasn't going to happen
2:15:43
because the Iranians had essentially said to Trump, if you're going to keep blocking the Strait of Hormuz
2:15:48
and remember it's the American Navy now blockading the Strait of Hormuz
2:15:53
and putting the world economy at risk. If you're going to carry on doing that
2:15:57
we're not ready to have any conversations until you reopen the strait
2:16:01
So it became apparent the Iranians weren't going to go to Islamabad
2:16:06
So J.D. Vance, Steve Wyckoff, Jared Kushner, you know, this relatively motley crew that he sent into the first round of negotiations
2:16:14
with, by the way, four PhDs from Iran, they decided they weren't traveling either
2:16:22
But listen also to what the president had to say yesterday in that interview with CNBC
2:16:28
that is such an insight into his approach to this Iran conflict when it began on February the 28th
2:16:38
and which inadvertently, I think, helps explain why the United States and all the rest of us
2:16:44
find ourselves in such a jam. I just looked at a little chart. World War I, four years and three
2:16:50
months. World War II, six years. Korean War, three years. Vietnam, 19 years. Iraq, eight years
2:16:57
I would have won Vietnam very quickly. I would have, if I were president, I would have won Iraq
2:17:03
in the same amount of time that we won because essentially we've won here
2:17:08
essentially we've won here he said again that regime change has already occurred when it
2:17:15
blatantly obviously has not uh and and then this notion that if he'd been president during vietnam
2:17:22
or iraq you know he would have solved both of those problems in a matter of weeks not
2:17:26
not many many years when he has walked into a trap that the iranians continue to set him
2:17:35
on a daily basis. He's found himself leading the US military into another quagmire, having promised
2:17:42
the American voters that is exactly what he was not going to do. And now the Iranians are simply
2:17:49
not giving him the opening that he desperately needs to exit this conflict at a time, James
2:17:56
when it is costing him monumental amounts of support here in the United States among his own
2:18:04
supporters and followers what's the pivot there i know there's some new polling from ap nor the um
2:18:10
the key question really has been for a while when will the republicans open their eyes
2:18:15
yeah and the key question is being answered partly in that ap poll first of all it shows
2:18:20
it was published last night the president's overall approval rating cratering to 33 percent
2:18:27
that's the lowest point it has yet been at but when you dig into the poll and you see what
2:18:33
Americans are saying about Trump's handling of the economy. Only 30 percent of Americans
2:18:39
approve of his handling of the economy. That is nine points that the president has lost
2:18:46
since the war on Iran began. And we also saw polling late last week that suggested
2:18:53
among Republican voters, just 52 percent of Republicans now say they strongly approve of
2:19:02
his presidency. And again, that was down six or seven percentage points since the war began
2:19:08
And then we've also seen, you know, the ludicrous, laughable pivot by Tucker Carlson
2:19:14
former Fox News star, now a very successful podcaster, who has now recognised that, you know
2:19:21
tying yourself to Trump's wagon is no longer viable. And so this week has apologised to the
2:19:26
american people ever for having promoted trump in the first place accepting uh that he has
2:19:33
incriminated himself by doing that but he's clearly uh now completely ditching trump because he
2:19:38
recognizes that his own future relies on no longer being tied to an increasingly unpopular american
2:19:45
president who is leading his own party to all but certain defeat in the midterm elections in
2:19:50
November. I'm afraid I missed that somehow. Well, a full, what's the word? Oh, full apology
2:19:57
Full apology. He had a conversation. Repudiation. A full repudiation. He was recording a conversation
2:20:05
with Joe Kent, the former national security official who quit the government over the
2:20:11
war in Iran. And it was during the course of this extended conversation that Carlson
2:20:19
formally dropped the boom on Trump and separated himself from him. Well, at least Dick Littlejohn is still loyal
2:20:26
So, you know, Donald Trump's got that, at least, I suppose. Well, I mean, the notion that Tucker Carlson is now suffering
2:20:33
from Trump derangement syndrome, I'm sure we're going to be seeing those accusations on our respective social media feeds
2:20:38
is a moment that I think neither of us expected to find ourselves relishing
2:20:43
Any minute now. And just to prove the point that we often make about there being too much to keep up with
2:20:48
We haven't touched upon the newly appointed head of, or newly appointed holder of a senior role at FEMA
2:20:56
the Federal Emergency Management Agency, former far-right, well, not former, a far-right conspiracy theorist who
2:21:03
and I read these things, Simon, and I think it must be April the 1st, and I check and I double-sourced them
2:21:08
and this has been around for a month. Greg Phillips claims that he was teleported to a Waffle House
2:21:14
well i mean among us is not uh at some point yes i mean to a waffle house yes what what more can
2:21:23
can can one say i mean this of course the federal emergency management agency uh that donald trump
2:21:29
and people on the right of the republican party have argued should be shut down should be scrapped
2:21:35
because the last thing you need in a country that is beset by hurricanes and all sorts of other
2:21:40
uncertainties including possible national security emergencies is a federal emergency management agency. That all of this should somehow
2:21:48
be relying on the... Well it's poor people that need help, isn't it
2:21:52
It's poor people that need help in crises and emergencies. Rich people can just hop on
2:21:56
a yacht or jump on a plane or where did that fella go during the... was there a hurricane
2:22:00
in his own state and he went on holiday to Mexico? Was that Rubio or one of the other
2:22:04
ones? Ted Cruz. Ted Cruz in Texas. Ted Cruz is never in Texas when there's a hurricane
2:22:09
Well, that's why you don't need FEMA. That's why you don't need FEMA. Exactly
2:22:14
Oh, man alive. Simon, always a pleasure. We'll do it again, I think, before the week is out
2:22:18
But once again we doing a little bit more than scratching the surface but a sense of jeopardy now moving up a level If people like I mean that is a big rat to flee the sinking ship in the case of tucker carlson but as i say dick littlejohn over the daily mail he still there with his little polyester donald trump flag insisting that he the best thing since sliced bread and extraordinarily
2:22:39
vikant rothermere is still paying him for it so make of that what you will the time now is 10 to
2:22:44
one james o'brien on lbc 152 and um i've said to you on a few occasions that the one saving grace
2:22:52
of the UK media at the moment is the trade press. Inside Housing, of course, covered itself in, well, glory
2:23:02
for want of a better word, given the horrific nature of the story that I'm about to refer to in the aftermath of the Grenfell Tower fire
2:23:09
But they really do extraordinary journalism. And it is to one of their journalists, Catherine Swindles
2:23:13
that we turn next because, Catherine, you have been looking at the scale of, well, anti-immigrant views and misinformation on social media
2:23:22
that is very much dog bites man territory. But the impact that they're having specifically on staff and tenants
2:23:30
in the world of social housing is something that hasn't really had
2:23:34
the spotlight shone on it before. Why did you decide to shine this spotlight and what did you find
2:23:40
Yeah, absolutely. And thanks for saying such nice stuff about inside housing. We've been hearing a lot across the sector
2:23:45
so housing associations and council housing departments about, particularly around this narrative that, you know, all social housing is going to migrants. And so we wanted to dig into
2:23:57
it further and find out, you know, how that's spreading and what the impact is on residents
2:24:01
and on staff. And most significantly, we found that we surveyed hundreds of staff across the
2:24:06
sector and found two thirds of staff said they'd come across this kind of misinformation
2:24:10
and 72% had come across it online. And it's frankly not true
2:24:16
So it's, you know, really important that the sector addresses this. The story that you opened the article with you points to how in the world of social media
2:24:24
not being true doesn't matter. You find a customer service officer at a Liverpool housing association
2:24:29
who is kind of ambushed, which is the tactic of these characters, by, you know, people wielding phones and filming them
2:24:35
asking about whether it's true that homes in a new development are going to be given to migrants over local people on the waiting list
2:24:43
She explains that that's not true at all. And the next thing you know, she's on a YouTube film entitled
2:24:48
The Great Replacement Is Here, having her video or her face attached to the ludicrous claim
2:24:54
that 95% of the homes in the new development are going to go to migrants. I mean, that is what reality or the truth is up against
2:25:01
But the personal toll on individuals like this one must be quite considerable
2:25:05
It's a horrible thing to happen. Absolutely. Like, can you imagine kind of you're in your workplace and you're, you know, you have to respond in the moment and try and stay level headed
2:25:14
And then you see yourself. I mean, I've watched the video and some really, really awful kind of Islamophobic and racist claims in there
2:25:21
So really upsetting just to have your face attributed to that. And the Chartered Institute of Housing calls this myth a zombie myth
2:25:27
It just refuses to die that all housing is going to migrants
2:25:33
when in reality the figures show only one in ten new social tenancies goes to a non-UK national
2:25:39
and only seven percent of social housing tenants across England and Wales have a non-UK passport
2:25:44
Let's say that again actually just to drive the point home. This is not an opinion, this is counting
2:25:50
This is the government figures as cited by the policy advisor at the Chartered Institute of Housing
2:25:55
who states that one in ten new social tenancies in England goes to a non-UK national
2:26:02
and that the last census found that only 7% in total of all tenants across England and Wales
2:26:09
had a non-UK passport. For people outside London, because London is such a melting pot and a metropolis
2:26:17
no one has put it better than Mrs Brown in the Paddington Bear books, when you take London out of the picture
2:26:22
those percentages and those proportions will fall exponentially. So it is a relatively tiny proportion of all tenants and all recipients of new homes
2:26:33
And yet it continues to be the hottest of political footballs. Should politicians be doing more to burst this balloon of bile
2:26:41
Yeah, I think they need to make it absolutely clear, especially, you know, asylum seekers are singled out for this kind of attention
2:26:48
But they, asylum seekers are not eligible for social housing. They receive a very, very small amount of basic support
2:26:55
And if, you know, after months or even years they get refugee status, then they do become eligible
2:27:00
But they're on the list the same as everybody else, which is a very, very long list, 1.3 million people across the country
2:27:08
And how does it manifest against people who are inhabiting their homes entirely legally and fairly without passport inspections going on
2:27:16
And what else can these characters rely on but skin colour to pontificate or reach conclusions about the origins of people living in social housing
2:27:26
Exactly. We heard some really upsetting stuff in the survey. Things like I talked to a staff member who said she was showing a Muslim family around a property and they had residents bang on the door and say, you know, that family is not welcome here
2:27:41
things like that obviously that family then you know didn't feel safe moving in there even though
2:27:45
they you know they waited their turn on the way less same as everybody else we heard about
2:27:50
you know huge england flags painted on people's houses and death threats posted through people's
2:27:54
doors um so yeah really really scary uh hate crimes and you know some of the first stuff that
2:28:01
i encountered in this job here's one from ellis every single property that comes available on my
2:28:05
girlfriend's estate and then he uses capital letters goes to a migrant which is a something
2:28:10
that would be impossible for Ellis to establish, not least because he has an IQ in single figures
2:28:15
and B, and quite dangerous. My first phone call on this subject about 20 years ago
2:28:20
came from someone telling me, live on the radio, that if you were an immigrant in their borough
2:28:25
you got a free shop, Catherine. You got given a shop. Literally
2:28:30
I said there's a parade of shops. I think they even mentioned where it was, and you weren't allowed to have them if you were British
2:28:35
but if you were an immigrant and you wanted a shop, you could just go down the council, and they'll give you a shop
2:28:42
Can people be disabused of these prejudices? I mean, work like yours is powerful and important
2:28:48
but inside housing is unlikely to be dropping through Ellis's letterbox any time soon
2:28:55
Yes, I think, you know, we focus on the staff and, you know, how stressful and difficult this is for them
2:29:00
and specifically for staff who are black, Asian or of minority ethnicities
2:29:05
obviously that are particularly scary for them. I think we found 40 percent of them felt they've been discriminated against by residents in the past year
2:29:13
But we've seen examples of housing associations doing really clear FAQs for their residents
2:29:19
really laying out the reality of exactly how these things work, how the system is
2:29:24
and the fact that there just isn't enough houses to go around. And that means it can feel really, really frustrating, really upsetting to wait a long time
2:29:31
But that is not the fault of migrants and, you know, kind of reassuring people that there's a fair system
2:29:36
and then what we need is more homes. What we need is more homes and of course impacting on tenants
2:29:40
and as you remind us on staff and ethnic minority staff coming under attack from the people that they are
2:29:46
in the business of helping on a professional basis. Catherine, it's a fantastic bit of journalism
2:29:52
Thank you for doing it and thank you for finding some time to talk to us today
2:29:56
Catherine Swindles from Inside Housing Magazine, which as I say continues do incredible work in areas that many journalists on national newspapers with a rather higher
2:30:05
profile and much higher budgets should, well, frankly, feel a degree of shame that they're
2:30:10
not either emulating or following up. If you missed any of today's show, you can listen back on our free Global Player app
2:30:17
or the LBC app, where you can also stay up to date with all the latest news, videos and opinions
2:30:21
You can listen to a range of podcasts, including James O'Brien Daily, the best bits from my
2:30:25
LBC show every day. and you can download the official LBC app for free from your app store now
2:30:31
Coming up at four on LBC, it's Tom Swarbrick, but now it's time for Sheila Fogarty
2:30:36
James O'Brien on LBC
#news