Up next in 10
Lewis Goodall debates caller Lucy on Nigel Farage’s £200k god bullion pay-out. The Reform UK leader faces questions after he was paid £270,000 for 12 hours of work promoting gold bullion. Farage is already facing the heat over his £5 million donation he received from Thai-based billionaire Christopher Harborne, which he claims was for security and not personal use. Caller Lucy doesn’t know what all the fuss is about, telling Lewis he earned the £270,000 fair and square. But when she starts to get frustrated over Starmer’s free ‘gifts’, ranging from glasses to concert tickets, Lewis Goodall is keen to point out the hypocrisy… Listen to the full show on the all-new LBC App: https://app.af.lbc.co.uk/btnc/thenewlbcapp #lewisgoodall #farage #reform #ukpolitics #starmer #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
I'm not a Nigel Farage supporter, and I wouldn't be voting for him
0:05
But I really don't have an issue with the money. I think that if he's a marketable commodity and he is worthy of that much money
0:16
then the company would rather pay him than, I don't know, John Smith down the road because he doesn't have that profile for their product
0:25
I think that's fine. You think it's fine? Okay, so would you have thought it was fine if, for example, Rachel Reeves or Ed Miliband when he was Shadow Energy Secretary, if it turned out that he was getting money from renewables companies
0:41
No, the issues I have, I have a problem with the freebies where they're getting free suits, free clothing, dodging tax, paying capital gains tax, etc
0:53
I do have a problem with that. But if you're, irrespective of the amount
0:58
if somebody wants to employ you, whether it be for an article that you've written for them in the newspaper
1:05
and give you £100 or £200,000 for that, if that is how much they think that you're worthy of
1:13
then that's good enough. But Lucy, sorry, I might just be being thick into my dotage
1:18
but what's the difference between, I don't understand why you'd be comfortable with freebies
1:22
but perfectly comfortable with freebies. Oh, sorry, that you're not comfortable with freebies
1:28
No, I want them to be doing something. I want them to actually be doing something for their money
1:35
But what's the difference between, but you could argue, I mean, what's the difference? All money is is a means of buying stuff, obviously, right
1:41
Buying potential stuff. So what's the difference between receiving money and receiving gifts
1:46
Because if you're receiving the money, I mean, the $5 million, as I understand it, was before he was an MP
1:52
but I believe that with regards to being paid by the bullion company..
1:58
But five million was a gift. That was basically a freebie. So were you angry about that
2:04
Five million I thought was a gift as opposed to a freebie i that was prior to being an MP But Lucy what the difference between a freebie and a gift Surely they the same It a synonym for the other isn it Like you could say that when Keir Starmer got some glasses as a freebie
2:22
another way of saying that is he received a gift of some glasses. Yes. So what's the difference
2:26
Well, I don't think it was a gift. I think that the person was buying. I mean, they gave the person a ticket to, you know
2:32
or a pass to go into Downing Street after when he chose the person that was doing it
2:37
But that was one person, and obviously they said that was unrelated
2:42
But that's my point, isn't it? I'm sure you've obviously got a problem with the idea of someone potentially receiving favours as a result of a freebie
2:51
And that is also the case with huge amounts of money. I mean, you could argue that, frankly, Farage is doing so little work for this money that, A, it's not a freebie or a gift, but it's maybe somewhere in between
3:03
And secondly, that at some point that company might expect something for such a huge amount of money being given to him
3:10
Well, no, because I think that perhaps that's what they think that his profile is worth for their product
3:16
But you could have said that about all of the freebies. You could have said that those companies thought it was worth giving those gifts, those freebies
3:24
because of the profile of Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves. What's the difference? Well, no, I had an issue because the person was walking in and out of Downland Street as and when his age..
3:33
For all of them. Like Rachel Reeves, for example, received free tickets, and that was nothing to do with Lord Ali
3:37
Like, it wasn't all that, so what's the difference? In the corporate world, people are always receiving free tickets for things
3:43
I mean, I don't have a problem with a ticket. I have a problem with people not paying for their clothes and not paying for their spectacles and things like that
3:51
Okay, so if it turned out that someone, and there's no suggestion to this at the moment, it's just a thought experiment
3:57
But if it turned out that Nigel Farage had given access to the parliamentary estate to someone from this gold bullion company, would you have a problem with that
4:07
Yes, I would. So it's basically you're saying that the problem is that it's in receipt of something in exchange for something
4:14
That's the problem. Yes I think he being paid by them in the same way as I don know David Beckham is being paid to model something for a company or be the front man for a whiskey company or whatever that you know they deem fit that he worthy of you know sort of And you honestly think and you think Lucy that money worth or half a million pounds
4:38
or it could be, you know, whatever it is, let's just make it really theoretical, not just about Farage, any MP
4:42
You wouldn't have a problem with, say, an MP receiving a million pounds
4:46
for doing some very light work for a corporation. you wouldn't think there was any hint of impropriety or potential impropriety there
4:53
But there was a problem with Keir Starmer receiving a pair of free specs. Yes. I think that if Keir Starmer wanted to be the front man for, I don't know, modelling some suits
5:04
and he was paid modelling the suits, that would be fine. Trying to think which company would want that, but yeah, go on
5:09
But I'm just using that as a example. I know, I know, I know, I know. But they wanted his profile, and they thought that his profile was worthy
5:16
But Lucy, and you don't think that there's any problem, because we're not just talking about a random politician here
5:22
we're talking about a guy who says he's going to be the next prime minister. You really think that a pair of glasses which might be worth 200 quid
5:29
is a greater potential problem in terms of conflict of interest and impropriety
5:36
than, say, receiving £1 million for 10 hours' work? But they obviously think his profile is worthy of that
5:44
It's not just about profile, is it? The question is, is whether, and the accusation that could be made
5:49
is that it's not just about profile, it's about buying access. Well, it's not really buying access
5:54
Well, it could be, couldn't it? There's been plenty of examples of that over the years. So is that not a problem
5:59
No, if they want him as the face of their company, and they think that his profile is worthy of that
6:06
and it's like I said, if, you know, I don't know, a company in Savile Row, you know
6:10
decided that Savile Row suit wanted Keir Starmer as, you know, to be the profile for their suit
6:17
So let's put it a different way. If Nigel Farage had received a gold watch worth £400,000 in exchange for that
6:25
that wouldn't be a problem. But Starmer taking £200 worth of glasses, that would be a problem
6:32
No if Nigel Farage was receiving a Rolex as a gift and someone just turned up with a gift wrap for him and gave it to him as a gift I have a problem with that
6:44
If they said, oh, he's going to be fronting out, doing a few adverts
6:48
for us and he's going to be wearing one of our watches
6:52
and we're going to pay him, I don't know, £200,000. So you wouldn't have a problem with
6:56
let's say, reform of 20 points ahead in the polls and before
7:00
the next election we see Nigel Farage as a brand ambassador for Rolex
7:04
and Lee Anderson as a brand ambassador for, you know, I don't know
7:09
whatever it would be. And we had Robert Jenrick being a brand ambassador for this, that and the other
7:13
and Sue Ella Braverman being a brand ambassador. And they're all getting paid. They're all getting paid because on your logic, that's what they're worth
7:20
You wouldn't have a problem with that. You wouldn't think there was the remotest hint of potential conflicts of interest or corruption
7:25
Not at all. Not at all. Not at all. But it would be a problem if they became Prime Minister
7:31
and they received a pair of glasses for £200. Or a Rolex watch or something, yes
7:36
Or came down with a brand new... So companies should be allowed, in your view
7:41
companies should be allowed to buy politicians, buy politician services in the run-up to an election
7:46
No, they're buying their profile for their project. But that's just another way of saying buying them
7:50
That's a way of saying that they think that they're charismatic and they want, oh, guess what, look, he's wearing our watches
7:56
or he's wearing our suits, like I said. But they're not Jude Bellingham, Lucy
8:00
They're not Jude Bellingham. They're going to be legislating over all of us. And don't you think that they owe it to us
8:04
They owe it to us not to even have the remotest hint of impropriety
8:08
rather than thinking about what's in their bank balance. Well, I mean, if you take that line
8:13
I mean, an awful lot of them are doing after-dinner speeches, etc
8:17
Not when they're Prime Minister. Not when they're Prime Minister, they're not. Not doing it for money
8:22
I think Boris Johnson was doing things. Not for money, he wasn't. No, even Boris Johnson wasn't taking corporate money
8:27
when he was Prime Minister. like that. Sorry. All right, Lucy. Well, look, I don't know
8:32
if I... Look, I really... I respect the... Thank you for talking to me and on this day of all days. I'm not sure..
8:38
I'm sure, as I say, maybe it is my ailing brain. I'm not sure I quite got to the bottom
8:42
of how you saw it, but grateful to you, nonetheless, for trying to explain it to me and to
8:48
us. I'm sure this will be coming up again and again and again
#news