What will the King's state visit to the U.S. achieve? | James O’Brien - The Whole Show

Three minutes after ten is the time. A very good morning to you

I wonder whether we can conduct conversations at moments like this in the way that we used to

It would once have been a fairly reliable presumption that we had almost all seen some of the footage of the King and Queen arriving

in the United States of America to be greeted by Donald Trump and his wife

But I don't think that's true anymore, is it? People derive their news from so many different places

So much of it is from social media, which is, of course, algorithmed into feeding extant appetites

So it's not as if everybody watched the 9 o'clock or the 10 o'clock news last night

and therefore saw the state visit with whoever is the latter-day equivalent

of Nicholas Wichell pontificating on the importance of the visit. And, you know, isn't it odd that we are probably one of the greatest constants

in the UK media? I've never noticed that before. I've never noticed that before

Uh, newspaper circulation, uh, continues to plummet. Television news programmes are nowhere near the required viewing that they used to be

You've got more noses in the trough fighting for fewer, um, uh, fewer and fewer eyes

And, um, and, and we continue to rise. We continue to go up

We, we haven't changed much over the years. We still, uh, deal in more or less the same stuff

We talk about the news. You give me a ring. I have a chat with you, you move along, someone else comes on

It's really weird. I've never actually spotted that before. Media, news media in particular, is in an extraordinary state of flux and largely decline

And yet here we are still doing what we do. But doing it, I suppose, in slightly different ways

Because I would once, when I started here, have been fairly confident that we would all have seen

or listened to some fairly hefty chunks of this visit. The first official visit to the United States

since the last Queen's in 2007. They have made yesterday's show entirely redundant

I don't know if you were listening yesterday. Would you like to know a secret? It's a very different phone-in

when you are speculating on something that's going to happen than it is when you are talking about something that has happened or is happening

I haven't mastered the art of selling the speculative to you. Even after all these years, I haven't quite mastered the art of selling the speculative

In other words, what do you think of this thing that is about to happen

Eleanor very kindly points out that it's possible nobody has actually mastered the art of selling the speculative

but you know how my brain works. I take that as a challenge. although I am reminded of a conversation I had with Joseph Heller many years ago the author of

Catch-22 when someone I was with I don't think it was me but it was a while ago asked him how he

felt about the fact that none of his subsequent books had done as well or were as good as his

breakthrough novel Catch-22 to which Joseph Heller replied something a lot well nobody else has

written one as good as that either so why should I beat myself up which I always thought was a

wonderful um response i don't think he was unveiling it for the first time when when i was

in his his hallowed presence but i'd never mastered the art of selling you the speculative

um i don't know why i'm mentioning that just that today we have now seen

things happening and it occurred to me that we we can't be as confident that we will all have seen

them as um as i would have been once so let me tell you what i have seen i i have seen i think

donald trump trying to do that thing that pathetic men through the ages have always done which is to

sort of translate some sort of physical supremacy into a handshake and two you know however you cut

it two very old men one of whom has uh has been treated for cancer uh and and one of them trying

to sort of intimidate the other by doing that mad sort of handshake. Do you remember

I saw it on some dreadful programme like, I don't know, The Apprentice or something a million years ago

You turn your hand over when you're shaking hands with someone to establish dominance

I mean, you'd do the opposite, wouldn't you? You'd just establish a word I can't say on the radio, unfortunately

but you'd just establish the fact that you were one of them if you were doing that. Trump obviously got it programmed into him many, many years ago

to do that, establish your dominance in a handshake. And the king, if you watch it, the footage that I'm referring to

the king appears to resist, to sort of give it the whole, no, I'm not stepping back or turning my hand

Anyway, that's one of the things that I have seen. The way in which they have made yesterday's show entirely redundant

is by revealing after we came off air that they will not be having a kind of public

what do you call it? It's not quite a press conference, but there won't be any opportunity for the king to humiliate the

for the president to humiliate the king. And that's what I mean about the difficulty

in selling you a speculative conversation as opposed to an ytical one

It didn't cross my mind yesterday that the concerns, the obvious concerns about Donald Trump doing something entirely inappropriate or entirely wrong

would be mitigated by not actually having any moments where they were speaking ad lib, as it were

in the presence of the cronies and cretins that surround the president

and crucially, the world's television cameras. So they have done that. Again, you may have missed this

They have made the decision not to have any press conference-style encounter

where Donald Trump would be able to say something entirely inappropriate about Diana, Princess of Wales, about Prince Harry

probably more likely about Keir Starmer, about, I mean, who knows what he would do

because absolutely anything is possible with this character. But they have made the decision not to have any cameras

at Trump's meeting with the king. One newspaper reports it this morning

King Charles will be spared the potential humiliation of being upbraided in public by Donald Trump

during his state visit after the White House agreed that any meeting between the two men should be held off camera

So there goes yesterday's phone-in about what's the worst thing that can happen

or the best thing that could happen in the context of that meeting in front of cameras

We've had a sort of early heads-up on what the speech that the King is scheduled to give to Congress

later today is going to contain. and it seems to be stressing that time and again our two countries have always found ways

to come together you can also expect him to express sympathy for the attack in the hotel

on saturday night but it is references probably to great international challenges and the importance

of standing together to defend democratic values that could be read as quite coded he will call

we are told for reconciliation and renewal of the US and UK partnership and possibly reference both NATO and the protection of Ukraine which is a potentially controversial point given that Donald Trump has made no secret of his contempt for Ukraine and its leader

and indeed his contempt for NATO. The speech is written on the advice of the government

I don't know whether that quite means it is written by the government

I suspect that some of the King's people will be involved in the process

and it will be a sort of speech by committee, and it will be delivered to Congress, and that will be a moment

one that we haven't seen for the best part of 20 years in the context of a UK monarch

But what's the point? What is the point of all this? Seriously

Why is he there? Why is the king there? I know it's the 250th anniversary of US independence, but that oddly doesn't seem to be a massive part of the scheduling. I'm sure there'll be a visit to a military base, or they would have landed in a military base, wouldn't they

there doesn't appear to be a great deal of pageantry or celebration

of the 250th anniversary of independence. So, I mean, even if there were

the likelihood of it buttering any parsnips with Donald Trump is pretty slim, isn't it

So why is he there? 12 minutes after 10 is the time

You have a variety of scenarios that could have played out publicly

but they're not going to arise. He's going to deliver a speech to Congress

that will be, by definition and by diplomatic demand, relatively anodyne. And if you could get Keir Starmer in the room

and distract him briefly from the continuing quizzing of senior civil servants

by Emily Thornberry at the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, Agui Shambre will be joining us later

to talk about that, and you could ask him why the King has gone

what do you think he would say? Should we start with that question

So I'm interested in why you think he's gone but let's start with, because this is all on Keir Starmer

this, as I alluded to yesterday I don't think that the dimble would have been activated

without approval from on high and they or he was speaking about

the whole undertaking being ill-advised because Donald Trump is such a... Well, is Donald Trump

Because Donald Trump is Donald Trump. So you're exposing the king to potential diplomatic disaster

potential humiliation. I think we had one caller yesterday who questioned that

but I think the fact that they've now agreed to conduct the conversations in private, rather

gives the lie to the idea that the king could have expected any special treatment from Donald Trump

due to his special status or something like that. they are conducting conversations in private and away from cameras in order to spare the king

the potential humiliation that Donald Trump might either deliberately or accidentally expose him to

And then you'll get the 20-minute speech to Congress. I don't even know how big a deal this

is in the United States. Do you? Is this on the front page of the Washington Post? Is it on the

front page of the New York Times. It seems unlikely to me that the special relationship

is as special on that side of the Atlantic as it is on this one. But when I ask you this

question, I want you to take a moment and then put together your answer. If Keir Starmer

was here now, and we said to him, why have you sent the king to Washington? Probably

or possibly or perhaps whichever P word you prefer against his will

why have you done it? Why has Keir Starmer sent the king to Washington

And you can do that either in your own words or in a

kind of an idea about what Keir Starmer would say if we were to put the question to him

It's quarter past ten. I'm going to hit the numbers now. 0345 6060 973 is the number that you need

What actual rationale is there for this trip? It might be different now from what it was when it was announced

but I actually found myself unable this morning to answer the question

of what he's actually doing there, because an awful lot of the answers that might immediately suggest themselves in that space

don't actually make sense when you remember who it is that we're dealing with. So why has the king gone to America and to the United States

And crucially, what does Keir Starmer think is likely to be achieved

0345 6060 973 is the number that you need. I sort of assemble as many answers as possible on this one

Why is he there? In your own words. What is Keir Starmer hoping to achieve

in, um... Well, also in your own words, that's how speaking works

but in your imaginings of what Keir Starmer would say if we could administer a truth serum

and ask him what on earth he's playing at. It's 10.16. James O'Brien on LBC

It is 18 minutes after 10, and it's a trip that must have been undertaken

with a very, very heavy heart by the king and his wife, the king and the queen

What on earth is the point of it? What on earth is hoped

will be achieved. What is the rationale behind Keir Starmer's decision to, I suspect, against the king's will

insist that he undertakes this trip to the White House? The other story from the sort of Trump land

that I am interested by is this one about them demanding that a comedian be cancelled

for making a joke. This is from the wife of a man

who greeted the death of Robert Mueller. I don't know if you're aware that Robert Mueller

was a recipient of both a Purple Heart and a Bronze Star

for heroism in the service of his country. But when he died, Donald Trump announced, I'm glad he's dead

Jimmy Kimmel made a joke on late-night television about the fact that because Donald Trump is so much older than his wife

she's likely to be a widow sooner rather than later. He made that before the events of Saturday night

for the avoidance of any doubt. And Melania Trump has broken cover

to demand that Jimmy Kimmel be fired. I couldn't see a way into that as a conversation, except to ask, what on earth could possibly explain such extraordinary levels of hypocrisy and self-deception

But we may find a way to nibble away at that later in the hour as well

But first, on this question of why on earth has he gone? Simon is in Preston. Simon, what would you like to say

Hello, James. First of all, thank you for not doing the teeny tiny violin, which put me off last time

What was that? With regards to... You had a teeny tiny violin moment

My noise. No, that was a horrible noise. I don't think I'm going to inflict that on anybody ever again

I do apologise. Thank you. You're very welcome. Anyway just a quick point I feel deeply uncomfortable with it all I really don see the point because there a real conflict of interest with Prince Charles with his own family connection with Jeffrey Epstein and obviously Trump connection with Jeffrey Epstein

but also as well I'm rather glad that we've fallen out with somebody to start after Trump

and actually call him out for what he is so I don't see the point

and it just puts King Charles it must be very difficult having to

sit with that fool I nearly do you know, I'm not a massive fan

of opening up the phone lines and asking people how they feel I don't know why, it's probably something I need to

work on but it's interesting that that's the first thing you said, because I nearly did today

How does it make you feel? And it makes me feel ever so slightly. I think soiled is too strong a word

But I feel very cringey, as the kids, or cringe, I think

the kids say. They don't have an E on it. Yeah, same as. And that is because he is such a sort of

disreputable character. He's a cringeworthy person. He's so cringeworthy. He's beyond cringe

He's beyond cringe. And if we had Starmer in the room, and we said

why have you made him go, what would he say? I think probably... Demeaned. Demeaned is a good word, isn't it

Demeaned. I feel demeaned. The king is demeaned. Can you try and wiggle your way back, get us back in so we're on speaking terms or something

I don't know. I'm very disappointed with Keir Starmer at the moment. Yeah, a lot of people are

And, I mean, it's amazing how the... I stuck up for him last time. Last time I phoned up, I said I'd stuck up for him

But again, he's let himself go with this dreadful business that rumbles on and on and on

And it's rumbling on as we speak, actually. we'll be catching up on those latest rumblings a little later this hour

Let's add that question to the list. Not just what word would you use

but why has Keir Starmer done it when it feels so demeaning

It's all very well saying he's not shaking hands with Donald Trump, he's shaking hands with the office of the United States President

the President of the United States of America. But he is shaking hands with Donald Trump

Rebecca uses the word the ick, it gives you the ick. It does, doesn't it

And that all adds to the power, really, of the question of why on earth Keir Starmer is doing this

Why has Keir Starmer sent the king to undertake this demeaning exercise

22 minutes after 10 is the time. Josh is in Scarborough. Josh, what would you like to say

Hi, James. Morning. How are you doing? Very well, thanks. What's on your mind? I'm thinking about what Starmer would say, effectively

And my kind of view is just like, I've got no other options. it's kind of the stasis where

we sent Mandelson to do the dirty dog version of trying to get in and get into

Trump's level. He's tried it himself to go there and that really

didn't get us very far. You know, the whole dropping of the papers and he looked at..

It did actually. It was a really... I mean, it was widely regarded as a glorious... This is what I

meant a minute ago when I talked about how far and how fast the pendulum swings

when he announced the state visit and Trump was like, you know, wagging his tail and he was absolutely

delighted with it and Starmer we thought was playing him like an old piano

it fell apart relatively quickly but that visit was a success, the fact that it fell apart relatively

quickly adds to the confusion about why they've decided to roll this particular

dice again I think they rolled it literally it was just a case of we've tried

the middle ground, we've tried the low ball in and now we have to go into

a top ground. Why do we have to? um well i i'll never understand the special relationship thing myself i mean i don't think

it's viewed that special from across the pond to be honest with you um well i'm not from across

there so i wouldn't know i don't think it is either i mean obviously there's a there's history

involved and there's a degree of reverence oddly for royalty given that they dispensed with it but

there's not anything like the sort of well there's no dependence is there it's not a symbiotic

relationship. And as well, it's obviously, you know, the whole, it's 250

years of being independent. It's like, well, why would you go over there

Yeah, well done. It's like, yeah, you've been away from this for 250 years. Why would you want to

celebrate that by bringing our king over and being like, look what we've done without you, kind of thing

It doesn't make sense to me. How demeaning, I like this word

demeaning, how demeaning is it for the king to be, and this is what I think

perhaps his allies in the media who were clearly given permission to speak up, this is what I think they were

concerned about. You know, he's a dignified man, albeit that he's imperfect

and he will carry a lot of our opinions of royalty in general. But it's demeaning

to see him and his wife having to cosy up to these characters

I don't think it's going to be demeaning to be honest with you. I think, like

I say, it's our kind of last attempt because I don't, I think

it's a madman. Yeah, I mean, that's that's the bit that I don't

that's where it all falls apart, isn't it? In that you're trying to appease someone who is unappeasable

And even if he is, you know, all jolly hockey sticks, at some point in the next three days

then on day four, he could return to a position of contempt

and hideous abuse of our democratically elected prime minister. 10.25 is the time

Why? Why is he there? 0.345.60.60.973 is the number you need. And you've got that sort of parallel mystery at the moment

J.D. Vann's coming over to Europe to announce that we don't have any free speech

while the president and his wife are calling for a comedian to be sacked for making a sort of half-decent joke about the age gap that exists between the president and his wife

There's a few mentions of Epstein. Simon Marks played us a little clip yesterday that has..

It kind of stayed with me a bit in the way that clips sometimes do. I don't know what a psychologist would make of this

but he's subsequently come out and attacked the woman asking this question

about the reasons given by the shooter in Washington for undertaking the actions that he appears to have undertaken

The idea that a journalist would not speak about a criminal's or a suspect's or a terrorist's manifesto

when the manifesto was in the public place, was in the public space

is absolutely unthinkable. I mean, it would be literally like sitting down with a politician

and not asking them what their policies were. So you sit down with someone who has been the target, apparently, of an attack

or the people around him have been the targets of attack, and you say, look, here are some of the reasons given by the guy who did it

What do you think about that? But referring back to what I said a moment ago at the top of the show

about no longer being confident that everybody is watching the same news or everybody is getting the same footage in front of them

this is worth hearing. Again, Nora O'Donnell, the CBS journalist, journalist who has come in latterly for hideous personal and misogynistic abuse from Trump

in an interview on CBS 60 Minutes that Simon Marks brought to our attention yesterday

He also wrote this. I'm no longer willing to permit a pedophile, rapist and traitor to coat

my hands with his crimes. What's your reaction? Well, I was waiting for you to read that because

I knew you would because you're you're you're horrible people. Horrible people. Yeah, he did

write that I not a rapist I didn rape anybody I not a pedophile Excuse me I not a pedophile You read that crap from some sick person I got associated with stuff that has nothing to do with me I was totally exonerated Your friends on the other side of the plate are the ones that were involved with let say Epstein or other

things. But I said to myself, you know, I'll do this interview and they'll probably I read the

manifesto. You know, he's a sick person. But you should be ashamed of yourself reading that because

I'm not any of those things. Mr. President, these are the gunman's words

Excuse me, excuse me. You shouldn't be reading that on 60 Minutes

You're a disgrace. But go ahead, let's finish the interview. They are the gunman's words

I play that because it tallies a little bit, ties in with the Jimmy Kimmel conversation

and it adds to this sense that the king has been sent into a situation

that is just really unseemly, demeaning, sleazy, having to treat these people with respect

Trump sued a woman for the record who accused him of rape for libel and lost

make of that what you will there's a lot of semantic to-ing and fro-ing in some ways

influenced by Donald Trump's litigious nature but those are the facts of the matter

a woman accused him of rape, he sued her for libel he lost, she won and that Jimmy Kimmel thing

trying to silence even jokes now there is an air here and of course accusing the other side of doing what you're doing yourself

oh, you've got no free speech in the United Kingdom. Have you been to a Jimmy Carr concert

Have you watched the Netflix specials that British comedians do? Have you seen Ricky Gervais recently

Our comedians can say pretty much whatever they want, and sometimes especially when it upsets others

You're calling for Jimmy Kimmel to be cancelled simply for making a joke about the age gap between the president and his wife

So you can't talk about what the gunman said, You can't talk about what has happened in courtrooms

You can't talk about what's in the Epstein files. You can't make jokes about Donald Trump

Oh, and here's the King of England to treat you like a hallowed figure

to treat you like a respected figure. Why is he there? And what is it either hoping or likely to achieve

0345 6060 973. Keith, I hope you've noticed I'm hitting all my junctions on time today

it won't last but here's Lottie Morley with the headlines James O'Brien on LBC

it is I mean extraordinary isn't it the speed with which everything falls apart as

as WB Yeats observed the I mean the blatant lie that he's been completely

exonerated over Epstein that he said in that ill-tempered exchange on CBS News a couple of days ago

it's just a blatant lie and glossing over the fact that E. Jean Carroll, her name is

the woman that he sued for libel after she accused him of rape, he lost that case

which leads to some fairly clear and obvious conclusions. And yet he sits there on live television

in front of America and, by association, the rest of the world

and simply states things that are known not to be true. He has not been exonerated over his inclusion in the Epstein file

And yet here we are, sending the king to visit, who, of course, has his own embarrassments associated with the Epstein files

on the part of his brother, Andrew Windsor. So what? What is the point of this trip

What is the point of this trip, given that any arguments, unless you can make them more powerfully than I can

about the necessity of restoring warm relations are rendered relatively ridiculous by the fact that

Donald Trump will tell you that you're the best thing since Cy's bed

at ten past twelve on a Tuesday, and by half past he's calling you scum. And of course he does use language like that

all the time. As they call upon, as they call for the sacking of the comedian

and late night TV host Jimmy Kimmel, they themselves talk constantly in the most violent, violent of ways

Most recently, probably, if you leave the insults levelled at British war dead to one side

something that King Charles is probably going to be required not to bring up today

That's awful. Absolutely awful. But you would probably think to the recent death

of the former FBI chief Robert Mueller, who as a Marine, as a member of the United States Marine Corps in Vietnam

received both a Purple Heart and a Bronze Star for heroism in the service of his country

in a war that Donald Trump faked a medical condition to avoid

It is often alleged. I don't even know what bone spurs are

But the idea that he says, I'm glad he's dead. And now we're supposed to clutch our pearls

and call for the cancellation of a comedian who made a joke about his wife becoming a widow relatively soon

because he's so much older than her? These are the moments where you have to hang on to your hat

You have to keep talking about it. And you heard in that clip that I played you

how much nastiness and unpleasantness he'll put into trying to stop people saying things he doesn't want to hear

So a gunman, apparently, as he seems to believe, considered Donald Trump to be a rapist and a paedophile

and therefore decided to undertake an attack upon a hotel in Washington

That's what Donald Trump has chosen to believe as a consequence of reading that manifesto, but he doesn't want anybody else to read it or refer to what's in it

It's mad, right? So why is the king there? Martin is in Aldershot

Martin, what would you like to say? Hi, James. I think we're looking too much into it, to be honest

Go on. He's been sent over there to kiss butt and suck up

Is that a deliberately American turn of phrase that you've sought to employ there, Martin

No, that would be for him not to swear. Yes, fair enough. I mean, I get that, and respectfully, you're not thinking into it enough

I should counter your accusation that I'm thinking in it. Because what will that involve, and what is it likely to achieve

This is a man who you could shower with, you know, gold coins

or you could give him a FIFA Peace Prize on a Monday, and on a Tuesday he'll turn around and spit in your face

So what's the point of trying to kiss his, excuse me, ladies and gentlemen, kiss his butt

Yeah, it's a pretty gross thought, but... What's the point? It's to play to his ego, to make him feel more important

And, you know, like you just said, he's going to throw it back in either the king's face

or the country's face within the next 24 hours anyway. It's there for..

Starmer sent him over to basically try and build the relationship between the two countries

or make it a little better than it already is. But it's not going to work

It's just going to make the king... This is Occam's razor, isn't it

This is the only thing that's really going to fit the space available is that they think that it will restore relations

or bring back some warmth to relations that has disappeared particularly since Keir Starmer refused to get involved in that illegal war

It's the diplomatic equivalent then of what journalists do. Because I've said a million times in the last 18 months

we don't know what to do as a professional. You have to report him like you would any other president

even as he does and says things that no other president would contemplate doing

And if they did, they would have been impeached. He's sort of broken everything in that way

And we don't know what to do. Journalists still have to report his every utterance

as if it was reliable or true or based in fact and evidence

even as we know that it isn't. The diplomatic corps, the royal family, the foreign office

they have to seek to restore relations with a fractious White House

regardless of the fact that the bloke in it is utterly unreliable. He reminds... Trump reminds me of the man in the pub

that everyone kind of pretends to like, and he thinks that he's friends with everyone, you know

Yeah. And as soon as he leaves. Yeah. And you kind of put up with him whilst you have to

say hello and be nice. Again, play to his ego. Laugh at his jokes

Yeah, and then as soon as you're out the room, you're like, oh, thank God he's gone, or, you know

It's one of them. And for the relationship for the country, I mean, how long's Trump got left in power

A couple of years at most, unless he manages to change the Constitution

I think the relationship will go back to how it was once him and his..

I mean, I'm not so sure, actually. and certainly not militarily. I kind of lean towards

former NATO chief George Robertson who's talked quite a lot of rubbish recently

but on this one thing I think he was right that that dependency that we have

and I think this probably holds true across all of Europe that's going to go forever now because you know what can happen

You can't be dependent upon someone who has revealed and by someone I mean a country

who has revealed that they are perfectly prepared to cut that umbilical for no particular reason

You could get another drooling Genghis, which is a rather wonderful phrase deployed by Emma, who has texted me while you were talking, Martin

He's a drooling Genghis. They're trying to use the old playbook of dazzling the dictator

But Trump is a demented warlord, a drooling Genghis. You get another drooling Genghis in the White House

And if we're still militarily reliant upon the United States of America, we will only have ourselves to blame

Because once is careless, but twice is a... I've forgotten the figure of speech

What is it? Once or twice is terrible. Tom's in Hemel Hempstead. Tom, what would you like to say

Ah, good morning. Hello. Yeah, so I know we're focusing a lot this morning on Trump the man

and there's no doubt he's disreputable. However, I strongly believe that Charles has gone to America

with a far, far longer view of the world and our place in the world

and our relationship with America. So we're probably not going to get any short-term benefit

from Charles having gone to America. But in the longer term, Charles is there to remind the American people

that actually our nations are bonded, certainly militarily by blood, over the last hundred years

Do you think they feel that? Do you think they still feel it? They feel it a bit, don't they

Yes, they do. I believe them. And actually, I think Charles of the Royal

who they have an incredible fondness for, of the Royal family, is there to demonstrate dignity under fire

who's there to demonstrate statesmanship, who's there to demonstrate that actually the sort of

British way of doing things quietly and just getting on with the job at hand

is actually still going to be the most important thing when Trump leaves office, because

the man won't be there for more than another three years, we hope. And actually once we get to that point

there'll be somebody else sitting in the Oval Office, and we still need

to be able to... We will have a crude, goodwill. If you were selling, I would buy what you are selling. Because I would like this to be

true. But it is a decision taken by Keir Starmer, not by the king, not by the palace. That is a

matter of fact, not a matter of opinion. And I can't quite see Keir Starmer potentially demeaning

the king in pursuit of goodwill that will only kick in when quite possibly neither of them are

in the post anymore, you know? It could be that we have a different

Prime Minister and a different monarch when the dividend that you describe is received. That's

what makes me think you're being a little bit rose-tinted. No, that's a fair point

to make, however I counter that by saying... Hang on a minute, this is far too polite

What are we doing making fair points and countering each other in a respectful fashion

It'll never catch on. Carry on, Tom. You monster. I'm being overly respectful

So, you know, When Trump is gone, and no question, Starmer will be gone possibly in the relatively near future

Actually, the person that remains, or the body that remains, if you like, is the royal family

And by going there and by extending the hand of friendship, not to Trump, Charles has to do that

but to American people, it just reminds them that we're still here

We're still friends. And actually, individuals, Starmer, Trump, Vance, all the other people running around the Oval Office

they will not and cannot break that bond. Plus also, James, if you look at it absolutely realistically

on the global stage, we can't turn east. There's nothing there for us

We have to keep our eyes to the west. And the long-term relationship is so much more important

than the short-term relationship. We can turn to the Near East. Well, yes, but not the Far East

No, I just wanted to clarify that you weren't maligning France. Oh, no, no, no, no. Not at all, sorry

I didn't have a far, I don't give a pardon. I thought you did. I mean, that's a normal subject, and I've got other things to say about that

Well, you know, I'm tempted to have that conversation sooner rather than later, Tom

so I look forward to your contribution, because a few people pointing out this morning that the United States can't go back to what it was before

which kind of means our relationship with the United States can't go back to what it was before

So what will our relationship be in a world where NATO has been denuded

and quite possibly a European army is building and we face a decision as a country

whether or not we want to sort of move our chips away from NATO and towards the near, but most definitely not the far, east

It is 10.44. You're listening to James O'Brien on LBC. Emma is in Liverpool

Emma, what would you like to say? Hi there. I was disconcerted there

because Tom, the last guy, sounded a bit like Nigel Farage. No, you can't say that about people on this programme

He'll sue you. He did not sound anything like Nigel Farage. For a start, I don't think he lied

He didn't have an argument already. He didn't lie once. So, I wanted to say that the king

he's kind of really emotionally intelligent. I think he's fully aware of the tenuous sort of world situation

because it's basically in the hands of a dangerous narcissist. Yes, a drooling Genghis

Well, whatever. They tend to get really offended very easily. but they also kind of say and do whatever they like

And they file things under all good and all bad. So Starmer has been filed under all bad, hasn't he

By Trump he has, yeah. I think his personal situation is probably irredeemable

But he should wear that as a badge of honour. He shouldn't be trying to reverse it

No, no, no, but of course not. But the king is thinking, well, look, this could go really wrong

if he gets any more of the hump with Starmer. So I'm going to go out and smooth it all over

And he knows that as a narcissist, the biggest thrill for Trump is to get the royal stamp of approval

He's my good friend. I'm not doing impressions. I'm rubbish at impressions

He my good friend That is when I don think I ever felt sorrier for a monarch than I did when Donald Trump announced that King Charles was his good friend You can almost you know when he does that face he does that sort of wince doesn he

He looks a bit like Wallace or Gromit. He does that thing with his mouth. He's like, oh God, God, can you believe it

I know, I mean, he's literally got so much supply from this visit

You can see in the pictures, he's kind of elevated on his already elevated shoes about 50 inches

Yeah, and then doing a ludicrous handshake. Yeah, I think the King's done exactly the right thing

and I think it will really put the UK in a safer place, because at the moment, he's got the heart

You sweet summer child, Emma. Really? I hope you're right, but I think you might be a little optimistic

That's why I thought he was going to really tell me off for this. Does the fact that they have decided not to do anything in front of the cameras

the King and the Queen, King Charles will be spared, the potential humiliation of being upbraided in public by Donald Trump

They have decided he can't be trusted in front of the camera. Does that change your view

Does that make your position stronger or weaker? No, no, he knows exactly what he's dealing with

So there's pictures of Moretti, if you look at the times. Yeah, and they'll be halfway around the world

Pictures are fine, but we don't need to listen to them. Yeah, but he's not going on camera because he knows that he'll get stitched up

by, you know, looking like he's a mate of his. but he's just going there to try and steer the UK's position

out of the enemy box into the sort of ally box again

Yeah, I owe you an apology. Do you? Yeah. Why? Because loads of people think that Tom sounded like Farage

Oh, really good? I'm sorry, Tom. He made loads of good points and the guy before him did as well

That's something else you'd never get from the original Farage. But the M's been..

I just ended a phone call. I tuned back in and I thought you were talking to Nigel Farage. Exactly

I mean, he's always welcome on the programme. I'm so glad about that. Well, you know, you were right

Jim says he did sound like him. Ismael says he did sound like Nigel Garrard. He did

He was quite... Well, I didn't pick up on that myself. I shall listen more closely next time Tom rings in

If he ever does now, you've probably offended him mortally and he'll go and listen to North Norfolk Digital

or something like that. Thank you, Emma. Aggie Chambre will be with us shortly

to have a little look at what has been going on at the Foreign Affairs Select Committee today

and the question of a slightly desperate dance around the studios this morning by Kemmy Badenock

when no one is really suggesting that Keir Starmer has consciously misled the house

So I suspect we're looking at a semantic pinhead on whether or not pressure means pressure

or whether the pressure that he said hadn't been applied had been applied or different pressures were applied

but they would always be applied so he didn't say anything out of the ordinary. But Aggie will bring us up to date, up to speed, up to sniff after this

James O'Brien on LBC. Everybody needs a hero. And my hero this week, until something probably emerges about him

is a senior talent agent in the United States of America called Michael Glantz

who has an heir of another senior talent agent, who is better known on this side of the Atlantic, called Michael Whitehall

father of Jack, husband of Hillary, and stone-cold legend. He's my guest on Full Disclosure this week

And I mention that solely because he is literally on the latest episode of Full Disclosure

and he was a senior talent agent. But Michael Glantz, who works for Creative Artists Agency

is the chap that you may have seen finishing his dinner, eating salad as the secret service in the hotel

the Hilton Hotel in Washington, where that attack took place on Saturday night

He just utterly unmoved by the whole thing. He stayed there eating his burrata salad

that's a fancy cheese Keith eating his burrata salad as everyone else was sort of being evacuated

from the building if they were important or running away themselves if they were not considered to be important enough

I'm a New Yorker he told the New York Times in a brief interview

after Donald Trump was bundled to safety amid a scene of chaos we live with sirens and activity

happening all the time I wasn't scared there are hundreds of secret service agents

hurtling themselves over tables and chairs and I wanted to watch and he said this is why I love the man

and this is what reminded me of Michael Whitehall he said first of all I have a bad back

I couldn't get on the floor and if I did get on the floor they'd have to bring in people to get me off the floor

which reminds me of a letter to the Times the other day

in response to an elderly reader revealing details of him and his wife's sex life

and the Times reader replied he wrote in and said I was delighted to read about John Bloggs' sex life

and my wife was inspired She said, I want you to take me upstairs. I want you to go upstairs and make love to me

To which I replied, well, I can't do both, darling. Such is the plight of a bad back

There's an introduction for you, Aggie Chambrae. What's been going on at the Foreign Affairs Select Committee

Well, James, we have had Sir Philip Barton, who of course is the former civil service boss at the Foreign Office

and he's been answering questions before Morgan McSweeney will take over that role of answering questions in just six or so minutes' time

But there are two key questions today because of this vote later

And those two key questions are, number one, was there pressure from number 10 to get the appointment of Lord Mandelson approved

This is what Sir Philip Barton replied to that. During my tenure, I was not aware of any pressure on the substance of the Mandelson DV case

Question two, was there pressure? Absolutely. And I've described it and I also have seen what the Foreign Office said to you last night

and recognise what is said in that letter about the pressure to get it done, i.e. DV clearance, by a particular timescale

So effectively saying there was pressure on the timescale but there was not

pressure on the substance of whether or not Lord Mandelson would be approved

on developed betting? It's almost as if I knew what I was talking about when I

said we were heading for a dance on a semantic pinhead so I mean it depends

doesn't it? It's in the ear of the beholder. If I said to you I'd like you on the show at 10.55 today could you come down at 10.54 you would be under

pressure to come down at 10.54 and appear on the program. If I said to you I want

you to announce live on air that that kemi badenock is a is a burst balloon and you would say i can't

possibly do that i'm far too professional and i said i'm terribly sorry but if you don't do that

then it's curtains for you aggie charnbrake that would be a very different sort of pressure that

would be unacceptable and unexpected but saying to someone uh here's what we want get your skates on

is what we have i think that that is the argument he's making i suppose maybe it's sort of you

saying to me a few different times are you going to be down here come on hurry up don't forget 10

10.54, 10.54, come on, Aggie. I think that is... Pressure, it's still pressure

It's still pressure, absolutely. And, you know, Keir Starmer said over the weekend there are different types of pressure, and actually..

He did say that in the Sunday Times. This account here from Barton actually supports

what Starmer said at the weekend. I think that's probably right, and I think it's worth saying at this stage, James

because there was this report, actually, from the Foreign Affairs Select Committee

that Morgan McSweeney, the former Chief of Staff, who we are going to hear from shortly

had phoned up Sir Philip Barton and said just flipping approve him He didn say flipping Well apparently he actually didn say anything at all So he already denied that but Sir Philip Barton was asked about that today

and basically said that he'd heard different versions of the story. He's really racked his brains

but he can't recall Morgan McSweeney ever swearing in a meeting at him

I don't know. It's a curious tell because it was actually never really reported, but the Foreign Affairs Select Committee said it had been reported

It actually hadn't been reported, and now it seems to have been denied by all parties

slightly bizarre yes um also sir philip barton was asked whether there was what um would happen

whether there was a possibility that lord mandelton would have failed vetting after he had been

announced it would have you know it would have been a crisis if we got to the point where he had

no vetting clearance that would have been a crisis so i don't really a publicly announced

uh political appointment as the next ambassador to washington uh not being able to go that would

have been a big problem. So that really about whether or not, because of course Lord Mandelson

was announced in the December and the developed vetting had not been done at that stage and him

being asked, you know, would it have been possible for them to actually, at that stage, which Sir

Keir Starmer has said he would have done had he known what the outcome of the vetting, then he

would have pulled Lord Mandelson from being ambassador. But Sir Philip Barton saying there

that would have been a crisis. James, we dealt with one of the two things that the Tories are

pushing for this vote later today on the Privileges Committee. Number one, of course

was there pressure? Keir Starmer saying no undue pressure. And number two, was due process

followed? And listen, so Sir Philip Barton was asked that question, and listen as well

to the pause at the beginning of his response. you know i i'm i'm gonna dodge i'm really sorry but i just actually don't think it's for me to sit

here in yeah it's not for me to it's for others you know including you know all of you as members

of parliament to come to come to view on that so i think that was quite an interesting response

from him basically refusing to say whether or not can we hear that again let's just hear that again

with the silence as well well just you know i i'm i'm gonna dodge i'm really sorry but i just

actually don't think it's for me to sit here in yeah it's not for me to it's for others you know

including you know all of you as members of parliament to come to come to a view on that

and so that is again the idea of pressure is is a mutable term it's it's it's not a binary issue

You can't say yes, there was, no, there wasn't. He's saying I can't decide whether or not this is what his critics say it was

Well, that's about due process. And I think that will be really interesting for Labour MPs

who are making that decision later on how to vote in the Privileges Committee inquiry

That's the worst bit of the exchange for Starmer's point of view, I think

I think so, because he won't just say yes. Nothing to see here. Ollie Robbins did, essentially

Exactly. Right, okay. So that I think is worth noting. And finally, from Sir Philip Barton

there was this big news line or big news nugget, I should say

out of Sir Orly Robbins, where he said that Number 10 had talked about the possibility

and asked him about potentially giving Lord Doyle, Matthew Doyle, who was the former head of comms in Downing Street

a job in the diplomatic service, but not to tell David Lammy

Sir Philip Barton was basically said that sometimes permanent secretaries are told to keep things from their Secretary of State

It is not unheard of for a permanent secretary to be privy to something that they don't pass on to

or are asked not to rather, pass on to their Secretary of State. So I would describe it as not unheard of, but I don't want to give the impression that this is going to stand at operating procedure

This is extraordinary. It's absolutely extraordinary. So the Foreign Secretary, so the permanent Secretary at the Foreign Office can be told

don't tell your boss about this when they are the Foreign Secretary

Is that, I mean, does it, honestly, have you, honestly, has that ever happened to you before, before this

Uh, yes, it has. Really? Yeah. Well, you learn something new every day

She went full Lady Bracknell there, didn't she, Emily Thornberry? That's extraordinary

A handbag. Just a quick word on the importance of the civil service

because of course very bad actors in the political world like to use words like blob and deep state

um and despite the fact that they're all quite mad um some of these discourse some of this

vocabulary takes a hold these are the guys who um kind of keep an eye on everything aren't they and

and so his response surprisingly uh sanguine yes i mean it's all very well you madam chair having

a fit of the vapors over this but it it does happen it happens all the time yeah carry on

that's it really I think that's it and I think lots of people

looking forward to Morgan McSweeney who will be speaking in the next few minutes

as someone that really hasn't been heard from well really ever and was of course

Sir Keir Starmer's right hand man for so long former Chief of Staff up until a few months ago

and who knows whether Keir Starmer would be where he is at the moment

without this man absolute hate figure for the left of the left

so he will be asked presumably What talks did he have about vetting

And did he press the Foreign Office to speed up? I mean, it's extraordinary, to paraphrase Dame Emily Thornberry

that that just effing approve the appointment has entered into the sort of national mythology

despite the fact, as you've pointed out, absolutely nobody involved at either end

of the alleged phone conversation has said that it happened. In fact, they've all denied that it happened

or insisted they have no memory of it happening at all. I'm going a bit Emily Thornberry here

I find that extraordinary. Has this ever happened before? Well, it's honestly so odd

because the Foreign Affairs Select Committee said to Ollie Robbins that Sky News had reported it

But then they said... Did they name Sam Coates? They named Sam Coates

said Sam Coates from Sky News reported this. And then a couple of days later

when Cat Little was in front of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, they said, oh, by the way, Sam Coates never actually reported that

Anyway, moving on. Has anyone checked with Sam Coates? Yes, he didn't report it. I'd say, what the hell is going on

Curious here and curious, has said Alice. And speaking of Lady Bracknell, that quote I was searching for and failing to find earlier

was also from The Importance of Being Earnest, and of course I got it the wrong way round

Ah, dear. Once is unfortunate, twice is careless. Unfortunately, me being me

I can't remember what I was using that quote to illustrate about 40 minutes ago, but if you can remember

well, there you go. And if you can't remember, you can listen back live on The Global Plath

James O'Brien on LBC. Six minutes after 11 is the time. I suspect Aki Shambra will be back in the studio before the hour is out

because Morgan McSweeney is now giving evidence to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee

the Prime Minister's ex-Chief of Staff, widely regarded as the Machiavelli, I don't know, that might be a bit pejorative

or the brains, if you prefer, behind Keir Starmer's successful bid for the leadership of the Labour Party

and subsequent purge of the people that had caused such problems during Jeremy Corbyn's tenure

That an observation of fact You can have a personal view on whether it was for good or for ill But I never heard his voice which is extraordinary isn it really for somebody who been at the heart of political conversations for the longest time So we will dip in very

briefly and hear it. Through public institutions, MPs, ministers, civil servants, diplomats, security professionals

and many others whose work is demanding, often unseen. In the Cabinet Office, the Foreign

office and 10 Downing Street, there will be many people working long hours now to understand

what happened here and to ensure lessons are learned. They deserve fairness and respect

as they do that work. Chair, I'm here to assist the committee in its work. I made a serious

mistake in recommending Mandel's appointment. I accept the consequences and hope today I

can help the committee to establish the facts and to make sure the right lessons are learned

Thank you. Now, why was it necessary to... And as I say, I get Sean Brewer keeping an eye on that for you

I'm probably going to embarrass myself now with my Irish listeners. Limerick, is he? Is he Limerick

It's not Cork. Anyway, eight minutes. A lot of people probably didn't realise he was Irish

Well, I hope he's Irish, otherwise my accent radar. Is he Cork? Is he Cork? Not Limerick

Oh, okay. Eight minutes after 11 is the time. Something completely different now

A conversation I don't think we've ever had before. And it is a suggestion from the Chancellor of the Exchequer

that all private sector homes that are rented have a one-year rent freeze imposed from above

So landlords in England would be banned from raising rents for a limited period of time under the proposals

This is part of the looming cost of living package that the government is due to launch in the coming weeks

as a direct consequence in many ways of the privations caused by Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu's ludicrous exertions

murderous exertions in the Middle East, in Iran particularly. I despair the way that fuel prices have been discussed

not just by members of the media who lost something precious in 2016 and have never really got it back

but also by politicians of all complexions about petrol prices and conducting conversations without any mention of the Strait of Hormuz

as if it's Keir Starmer's fault that the price of petrol is going up

Or that there's an awful lot that can be done about it without taking money away from other parts of public spending

It's a symbolism. It's a pathetic symbolism that I've ignited a massive conversation now about Irish accents

It would appear that nobody thought he sounded like he came from limericks, so I won't be doing that again

But the idea of a rent freeze speaks directly to two things

It speaks directly to, and this is really interesting, it speaks directly to the cost of living crisis

or the cost of living problems, let us say, that are being exacerbated by the war in Iran

but it also speaks directly to things chancellors of the Exchequer can do

that are not immediately obvious. So, you know, it would be a rise in VAT or an increase in capital gains tax

or the removal of mortgage relief. You know, the kind of thing that essentially depends upon the tap of money

making its way from the public to the Treasury and then the tap of money or the hosepipe of money

making its way from the Treasury to the public. That is government. That is the essential part of government

You collect the taxes and then you spend them. Because if you didn't collect the taxes

there would be no society to speak of. You'd only ever be interested in laying down tarmac

that you drove on, so you wouldn't be able to... Anyway, you know how the world works

But this is different, because this doesn't actually involve taxation in the first instance

It doesn't involve clear taxation. And it posits a really interesting notion

It posits the notion that if you are a landlord, you need to take a hit to help your tenant

It takes away your choice. I always think it's important, and of all the things I do that cause a curious reaction from you sometimes

saying that not all landlords are bad has always struck me as one of the least controversial things to say

Some people can't buy a house, and some people don't want to buy a house. Some people don't want to own their own homes

and if it wasn't for landlords, they wouldn't have anywhere to live. And some landlords are great

Some landlords do not ramp the cost of their rent up to the highest possible pip-squeaking total

And they do fix your washing machine when it's broken, and they'd be mortified if there was black mould in the back bedroom

And, of course, some other landlords are the opposite of that. to speak about landlords as a homogenous cohort of human beings

is not necessarily helpful. But it is a commercial exercise. Being a landlord is almost always a decision taken

in the hope of financial reward. There are a few of us who have been landlords over the years

almost by accident, because you were moving house and you hadn't sold the one before

and you didn't want to lose the next one you were going to, so you were able to get a bridging loan

and then you still didn't sell the old house so you had to bring tenants in in order to service the interest on the..

But I digress. The point is this. Landlords are in a powerful financial position

even if they think they're not. Compared to their tenants, they are financially healthier

That is a truism. There will be exceptions but they are exceptions to the rule

They will be financially healthier than their tenants. unless they are appalling at being landlords, okay

If the population is facing squeezes as a consequence of the impact of the Iran war

then people renting will be, again, I generalise, but people renting their properties will be

more vulnerable to increases in the cost of living than other people

because they are, by definition, less financially healthy than people who own properties or people who have mortgages

If you've got a mortgage, you are able to accrue a deposit. These are generalisations, but they are truisms

Most people renting will be more financially fragile than people paying mortgages

You might not like that, but that's why I use the word most, not the word all

So, as the landlords face the pinch, as the landlords feel the consequence of the Iran war on their budgets

and they find themselves thinking, I need a bit more cash to sustain the status quo of my life

We go all Mr. McCorber on this. I need to bring in a little bit more money in order to meet the increase in my outgoings

How does a landlord do that? by putting rent up on the property or properties, plural, that they own

So, a landlord is asking a tenant, the healthier partner in this financial relationship

is demanding from the less healthy partner that the less healthy partner helps the healthy partner

meet the increased demands upon their income. So, there are two things going on here

Either the renter helps the landlord through the financial crisis and suffers themselves as a consequence

or the landlord is compelled to help the renter through the financial crisis

and they suffer the consequences. I like this policy. For what it's worth, if you are a landlord, I don't think they will do it

I suspect if it hasn't happened already, then the massed ranks of our right-wing media will be deploying vast reserves of tiny violins

and insisting that people who are in a position to ask tenants to buy houses for them

are actually the real... It'll be like the VAT on school fees all over again

I don't believe in poverty. There's no such thing as poverty in 21st century Britain

But, my God, those poor people who are going to have to pay VAT on their children's school fees

we really... Won't somebody think of them? You're going to get that. And you'll get it in the Telegraph, you'll get it in the Mail

It will influence discourse elsewhere. where people who sort of snort up ludicrous coverage in those newspapers

and then spew it out on broadcast platforms, they'll be doing it as well

because there is nothing that the right-wing media exists for if not to protect wealth

And although you will deny that you are wealthy if you are a certain type of landlord

you are wealthier than your tenant. How do I know that? Because you've got an asset, and they haven't

But the right-wing media exists to protect wealth, and often to do little else

to do little else, just protect wealth, make sure the plebs don't come for us

let's get them angry about immigrants or welfare claimants or single mothers or whatever it is this week

The two-minute hate is directed at as long as it's not wealth, as long as it's not the owning class

And yes, some landlords will be... will not be comfortably off even

There may be difficulties, financial circumstances may have changed. You might still have a rental property

but you got made redundant last year or you lost your job last month. And so the idea that you are home and dry or over the line

or doing really, really well is a little bit naive. But tell me why I shouldn't like this measure

Rent control has been called for for years by various people. I think Sadiq Khan has even had a crack at that particular principle

but the idea of a freeze, a one-year freeze on private sector homes

will, Tufton Street will go bonkers. Of course they will because they exist exclusively, as I said, to protect wealth

Oh, here you go. Here's someone from the Centre for Policy Studies

saying this feels like a mind-boggling scale of intervention in the private market

If the government wants to bring rents down, it should build an awful lot more houses

Yeah, what? Within the next six months? These people are nothing if not predictable

Hello, is that Tufton Street? Yeah, it doesn't matter which outfit you're from. You're all the same, really

Could we just get a quote from you on why this attempt to redistribute a little bit of wealth

from the owning class to the rentier class is absolutely disgusting and outrageous

Oh, yes, certainly, says Robert Colvile, the head of the Centre for Policy Studies

This feels... Is this OK? Will this do? This feels like a mind-boggling scale of intervention

in the private market. If the government wants to bring rents down, and it should build an awful lot more houses

Yeah, that's great, thanks. And that's in The Guardian. So God knows what they'll get quoted in The Telegraph or the Daily Mail

So tell me why I shouldn't like it. A 12-month freeze on private sector rents

until the heaviest impacts of the war in Iran have passed. Why a rent freeze is a good idea

0345 6060 973. Or a bad idea? It's 18 minutes after 11

And I'll take personal testimony as well. As a landlord, tell me why this will crush you, this will destroy you

Because that is evidence for the defence. That is a reason why I shouldn't be in favour of it

There'd have to be quite a lot of you, I suppose. But, um, what do you think

What do we think of a British Chancellor in 2026 doing something that I don't remember ever having been done before in this country

and introducing a 12-month freeze on private sector, not public sector rents

Here are the numbers now. You will get through. 0345 6060 973

James O'Brien on LBC. It is 21 minutes after 11. Of course, if you were to phone up Tufton Street for a response to an announcement

that the government is going to increase taxes in order to build more houses, they would respond with similar outrage to how they responded to the suggestion

from the government that private sector rent be frozen. What do we think? Because, look, I want to be absolutely clear

It might be a daft idea. I don't think there's any guarantee that just because it's new

it might be a really stupid idea. And not just from the perspective of greedy or non-greedy landlords

who resent the idea of not being able to ramp their rents up for 12 months

It might be a stupid idea. It might be a very silly idea. But I need you to tell me why

I need you to explain the deets to me. 1121. Richard is in Brentford

Hooray! God's own country. Richard, what would you like to say? Hello

Hello. I think I saw you in your favourite pub, but let's not go there

Well, you can if you want. Which one? The black dog? Yes. Oh, there you go. Yes, you did

Say hello next time. Buy me a pint. Well, I didn't want to disturb you. That's true

Very kind. Carry on. I'm a landlord. I've got one property, which I rent out

I'm subject to interest-only mortgage. Okay. And my monthly costs right now are something like £1,400 a month

plus any unforeseen, you know, repairs or bills or whatever. So £1,400

My more, those are my costs. My rent is £1,200. So why are you, well, not you, but why..

You can use me if you want. The thing is I'm going to have to buy you a pint now. You are

Why would you want me to subsidise people? I don't get that kind of protection from the building society

I can't say, oh, I want a mortgage. But you're losing £200 a month on your investment

Yeah, and I actually reduced my rent a couple of years ago. But of course, the hope would be that the equity goes up

even if you're losing money on a monthly basis, which is not guaranteed at the moment in the way that it has been

for the last 25 years or so. I don't want to fall out with you. And so I put this very much in interrogative tone

It's very much a question. But doesn't this just mean you are one of the very small band of people

I referenced a moment ago as just being not very good at this landlording lark

How can you say that? Well, I'm just asking you. I said I wasn't saying it

I was asking it. I'm going to punch you in the eye. You can't punch me in the eye

It's a genuine inquiry because most landlords would expect a ton of profit of sorts upon their rental investments

You want people to work to make their way in this world don you Yes and your tenants do And your tenants work to help you make your way in this world Yeah yeah but I one of those

I'm one of those who, I actually have five properties at one point, and I've sold them all over the years

But what I'm asking you is why should I be in a worse position

having worked hard, having invested in something? But your tenants work hard as well. Yeah, but I've invested in something, and they haven't

But they're buying it for you. No, they're not. They are. No, they're not. They're not, James

1,200 quid they give you towards your 1,400 quid mortgage. You're only paying £200 a month for that

I've got an interest-only mortgage, so I'm not buying the house with that money

What on earth? How on earth have you got outgoings of 1,200 quid then? Sorry

How can you have outgoings of 1,200 quid? Is that just on the interest? That's the interest, and there's service charge

It's a flat, so I have to pay service charge. So you're keeping it there in the hope that it goes up

and when you sell it, you get all the money back. Well, that's what I've been doing, but actually the value's gone down

But why should I do it? Why would you want me to do it? To work hard, to get a property, to rent it and be a good landlord

I don't know if you are a good landlord. I'm not against landlords in general

but why are you against the rent freeze for 12 months during this particularly tricky time

Because you said yourself that you reduced your rent not long ago, So I don't know why you're getting upset about this

I think you'll be able to accommodate it quite easily. I don't think you need to worry. You're joking

No, I'm not. If you put rents down, what was it, two years ago, 12 months ago? Yeah

Okay, and now they're just saying you can't put them up. So if you put them down a year ago, you're hardly likely to put it up again a year later

That would be grossly unfair on your tenant. That's not very logical. That's incredibly logical

It costs me X amount. It's costing me 1,400 pounds a month

and you're expecting me, a normal member of the public, on a pension, uh, to subsidise people that I like

Yeah. But why would I do that? Because you are buying a house

Yeah, but it's gone down in value. I've lost money. Well, that's why I think you might not be very good at this landlording lot, Richard

But that's because the government have brought in a whole load of rules. Did you know that a few years ago the Conservatives brought in a rule

where you can't claim the interest as a cost anymore? Yes. It depends on your tax band

Yes. So you can't even recoup the money you spend out on the interest

I mean, we've got a category error. I look forward to having a tin of anchovies with you in the black dog at the first opportunity

But we've got a category error here because I'm looking at this objectively

I'm seeing landlord and tenant. You're seeing landlord exclusively. And some of the people who are blindly supportive of this

because they just love it from a sort of citizen-smith power to the people kind of point. We'll be seeing it exclusively through the lens of tenant. But this doesn't

seem to me to be a particularly punitive suggestion, a freeze on what your status quo currently

is for 12 months. That's what I mean. It doesn't seem to me as if they're coming after you

or demanding that you hand over some of the money that you've already got or give some

equity to your tenants, just a rent freeze for 12 months as

an act of national interest, as an act of social good. Social not due, well, it

would become duty. That's the bit, I don't see it as being the guillotine that you

seem to be visualising. As an act of kindness, I reduced the rent

two years ago from £1,400, which is what I had been getting, to £1,200

to help these tenants in the belief that I would keep them, I would

avoid the extra agent's costs. And that's it then. I can't afford it anymore

Oh, I see. So you need to put it up already before this was announced. My fixed-rate mortgage is coming to an end

Yeah, so you do. So even before this was announced, you were going to have to put the rent up again

And the Building Society won't listen to me and won't listen to you saying

oh, let's have a freeze for a year or two. And this is where I honestly don't know

whether or not it's time to break out the world's tiniest violin

or to say, Rachel Reeves, you need to get back to the drawing board

and come up with a better idea. And the Tories, they're just as bad

I mean, you must acknowledge it. Won't somebody think of the landlords

It's quite a tricky refrain to be singing in the current climate

Good landlords are providing good accommodation for people who can't afford to buy their own

And there are lots of unscrupulous... They can afford to buy their own. They're buying it for you

They're meeting... They're not buying it for me. When they were paying £1,400 a month, they were meeting the interest payments on your mortgage

They just couldn't afford... But not buying the house. No, because they couldn't afford to cobble a deposit together

because their landlord was charging them so much rent. So where else are they going to live

Well, that's the question. I mean, that might be what happens. I think that's happening already as a consequence of the Renters' Rights Act

People are moving out of the sector. So something conceived politically in a good place

ends up potentially having a very negative impact on the people it was designed to help

I mentioned this about six months ago because my friend Scott was looking for a new place to rent

and saying loads of landlords are moving out of the market. This is going to be big in a few months' time

And it gets as it gets nearer. So I mean it. I mean it's a good-natured exchange with Richard

not least because I might bump into him in the pub next weekend. But it is not necessarily a binary issue, this

If he ends up having to put his property on the market because it no longer is financially viable for him to be a landlord

to be renting it out, then his tenants get slung out, potentially

as tenants have to find somewhere new to live in an environment where

landlords are moving out of the rental sector at a rate of knots

But, on the other hand, a temporary freeze on rent until the worst bits of the Iran war impacts pass

is going to help a hell of a lot more people than it's going to hurt. And that is utilitarianism in action

So Richard becomes the negative utility. his plight is the price that society pays

for the benefit that will be accrued by every tenant in the country and depending I suppose on where your pendulum is at the moment

you will either be comfortable with that while sympathetic to Richard or you'll be outraged by the very prospect

and think that the greater number of tenants should suffer in order to protect him from the potential suffering of a rent freeze

half past eleven is the time I told you this was interesting And I hope you'd agree now, not obvious, not binary, actually

Here's Lottie Morley with your headline. James O'Brien on LBC. This is often what happens in the context of conversations about rent

We've never had one, I don't think, specifically about rent freezes before. But my switchboard tends to be populated by landlords pleading, if not poverty

then certainly they deserve to be treated differently from how many people perceive landlords

Well, my texts and tweets, or WhatsApps, in fact, become populated by people very, very much in the opposite camp

For example, Don writes, who forced this poor man, talking about the last caller, Richard

who forced this poor man to be a landlord? It's just not fair. And then another, if he says he works hard again

you should electrocute him down the phone and on it goes including quite a few of you picking up on something I probably should have pointed out which is that if it an entirely interest mortgage on a buy property

then you are doing more damage to the property market or to the ability of younger people

to get onto the housing ladder than I think anybody realises. But none of these are arguments

that make a freeze on private sector rents a slam dunk. So I don't know. Is it time to tell

rachel reeves to go back to the drawing board or is it time to crack the world's tiniest violin out

of its tiny little case stephen is in snares brooks stephen what would you like to say

oh good morning uh i have to say absolutely love your show oh you're very kind that's a good start

well done carry on now i'm in a a peculiar position in that i am both a landlord and a tenant Oh

So I'm really not quite so sure about how I feel about this

because with my landlord hat on, I think that the rent freeze, particularly in my circumstances

which is similar to your previous caller, would be quite disastrous when my mortgage comes up for renewal

I haven't put the rent up on the property that I rent out in five years

But if you're outgoings on that property increase, you would expect to pass some or all of that increase

onto the people living in the property? Yes, I would. That seems reasonable, doesn't it

Yes, it does seem reasonable. Until your current landlord needs to renew his or her current mortgage

Exactly. Exactly. So you can see that I've got one leg either side of the fence

Yes. Because... I mean, you also, we're going to offend everybody who rings in today

you're also not very good at this landlording lark. No, because I became an accidental landlord

which is why I rented out. I had to move because of personal circumstances

Yes, I understand. Couldn't sell the property that I was in within the time frame that I needed to move

But you needed to service the mortgage, so you had to get someone in to pay rent. Exactly

And the lady that I have in there, my property is absolutely pristine

Obviously, you can't see it, but you'll have to take my word for it. I do, yep

No reason to doubt you. Absolutely pristine. And she loves being there

She's got a couple of boys. She couldn't afford the mortgage on a property that she needed for her family

Yes. So she rented out. Well, she could, though, because she pays yours

Well, exactly. But... What do you mean? I just contradicted you, and you said exactly

Exactly, but it's not that she can't afford it. She can afford the money, because she pays the rent every month

Yes, exactly. So she can afford to buy her house. But she can't afford to buy a house because she doesn't earn enough

to get the mortgage that she requires to be able to purchase the property

To get a deposit together. One, to get the deposit together. Two, to get the mortgage

Yeah. Yeah. So it suits her, in a way. That's the system that we inhabit

So, well, you're just going to do some sums then, aren't you? You're going to wait and see if your landlord increases it and you..

No, if your landlord is frozen and you're frozen as well, are you going to be better off or worse off than you are currently

Well, I know that I'm going to be worse off because my mortgage comes to an end in November

Right. And it was on a particularly good rate. Yeah. So this is all on Liz Trust

or maybe not all on Liz Trust, but certainly I think we underestimate the impact she's had on these matters

And also the tax regime punishes landlords. Punish is a strong word

It's the only sector where you can't claim your mortgage interest rate

It's the only business that you can't. Is it getting the violin out now

I always think of it as being different from other businesses, and you don't, and that's fine

It's just a category disagreement, isn't it? Yes, but that isn't how it used to be

You used to be able to claim your mortgage interest, and that, I think, is what is forcing rents up as well

I haven't increased my rent because of the current state. I said I'm not going to increase the rent

But the property, I mean, it may not be in this current hiccup

and let's all hope it's a hiccup, but we're forgetting about the capital growth, aren't we, in this ysis from you

There's been no capital growth on my property in five years. It's gone up and it's gone back down again

Yeah, I mean, that is unfortunate. And that is, yes, you're absolutely right

that is what I put my eggs in the basket in relation to the capital growth

because I expected there to be capital growth or even to one day move back into the property

because it's a lovely property. Yes. But that's where I put my eggs

and I've been hit... And then you'd get hit again with a rent freeze

and a remortgage. You'd be hit quite hard. And, you know, again, I said this was going to happen

and I've got no idea how representative it is, Stephen. So you and Richard, I mean, you possibly a little bit more than Richard

make quite a strong case for giving the landlords a break. but on the other hand, people are queuing up in my inbox

to express sarcastic sympathy for you while playing some of the world's tiniest violins

I guess if you've never been a landlord, it feels very different from how it feels if you have

It feels like a sort of fruit machine that always comes up with three melons when you're a landlord

You put 10p and, oh, look, I've won again. I know you can't play fruit machines with 10p anymore

but you take my point. If you've never been a landlord, it looks like a hacked fruit machine

If you have been a landlord, it looks very different from that. Yeah

And with the whole changing the regime, I feel like now I'm trapped

Yes. I have that property, and in a sense I have to keep it

because it's going to be very difficult to ask her to leave. Not that at this stage I would be even contemplating asking her to leave

But it becomes harder under the Renters' Rights Act. And how do you respond? because you're really interesting, actually

because of the curious sort of fork that you're caught on. Just the very simple political principle

that there will be a plurality of landlords who can suck this up quite easily

even if they want to plead difficulty, they will be fine. And then there will be a minority of landlords like you

who will be caught in quite a tricky little situation. But every single renter in the country

is going to benefit from this. So from a utilitarian point of view, it's, you know, thank you, but tough to you

Well, it's a case of the greater good, isn't it? Yeah. I suppose, is what you're saying

Yes, exactly what I'm saying. That's utilitarianism in a nutshell. It's the greater good, but I've still got to think of me and my family as well

And that is the fundamental flaw in utilitarianism. I in what you might call a reasonably paid job I actually subsidise In fact I look upon it as subsidising the government not subsidising my tenant

Because if I look at how much I receive in rent and how much I pay out in mortgage

and I can't claim that against my income tax, I've actually worked out that last year

I paid £174 more in tax then I received actually the difference between the two

And when my mortgage comes around for renewal and it will inevitably go up

because of the interest rate change since then, I will be paying more towards that

That's something that I'm prepared to suck up because I'm in a reasonably well-placed job

I can tell you, you're not atypical. Not going to be in that position

Not well, and they're certainly not going to be as community-minded as you are

or as patriotic as you are, actually, if you see it as a choice to not maximise your income

some of which, of course, could be subsidised by the state, in order to promote harmony in the lives of other people

Stephen, thank you. It's nuanced. I think it's really nuanced. I think it's more nuanced than I thought when I was a younger man

And for the record, I am not a landlord, although I have been. Like Stephen, by accident, which sounds a little bit with Nell and I

How can you be a landlord by accident? It's like that scene where Richard E. Grant and Paul McGann say

we've come on holiday by accident. I've become a landlord by accident

But the utilitarian argument is the one that suffers from the medium in which we're having this conversation

Because a long queue of landlords making, to varying degrees, pleas for sympathy and understanding

and therefore the rejection of a rent freeze, is not representative of society

There'd be a much, much longer queue of tenants to whom if you said, Would you like a rent freeze

They would shout back, hell yes! Adam's in Wandsworth. Adam, what would you like to say

Hi there, James. First time, big fan, a little nervous. It's only me

You're very welcome. I am a landlord and my finances are in absolute tatters

There is nothing more that would help me than a rent increase to give me more money personally

And I still support the policy of freezing rents for tenants. Gosh

I mean, if I were of a certain political complexion happily I'm not, I'd point out

isn't it extraordinary that all these landlords are able to ring me when everybody else is down the pit doing a hard day's work

but you also sound like in the capitalist tradition you also sound like a rubbish landlord

because you're clearly not in it to maximise your income otherwise you would be opposed to a rent for sale

No, I don't agree with that completely I do have a degree of self-interest and I do want to make an income

I think my point is that governments have to make rules and laws in generality

And in generality, we are an asset-owning class. We can afford to take a bit of a hit

And if we can't, we have an asset to sell. Yes, and for every landlord who says, well, I can't, there will be a thousand who can

Then, yeah, if the rent doesn't give you the economic outcome you want, sell the asset

And move along, move on. Yeah. So you are being selfless in your, you're being utilitarian, aren't you, actually

It's been said that I have strong values, James. and perhaps that is true

What a lovely thing for people to say. Who said it? Your mum? My therapist

Well, then it's definitely true. That's a lovely thing to hear from anybody

but if you're hearing it from a therapist, then you can cash that check whenever you want

And you've proved it there, because this will, in the short term, impact negatively on me

but it will be for the betterment of the whole society, or at least for the greater good

And that's why I've said the word utilitarianism seven times already this hour

James O'Brien on LBC. It's 11.49. Morgan McSweeney still giving evidence to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee

over the appointment of Peter Mandelson, something he began his testimony, if you weren't with us at 11 o'clock

by describing as a terrible mistake. So we'll let Aggie keep an eye on that and catch up with her when it is over

If I tell you that the conversation I want to have in the next hour speaks to a subject that used to be one of my all-time favourites

and in some ways still is, but is not one that I come around to anywhere like as often as I used to do

I wonder if those tiny, tiny little clues, someone who's been listening to the programme for a long time

will be able to hazard a guess at what the subject might be. Remember, you can give yourself a bit of an advantage in that

by having a look at the news and finding out what is in it

Ten to twelve is the time. Back to... But I mean, this is it

Have I got anyone who's not a landlord saying, not me, please spare me? Well, actually, that's not fair

The last lad was saying, yeah, of course, it's going to hurt me personally, but I'm still in favour of the general good

Landlords, landlords, landlords, landlords. Landlords, landlords. Landlords to the left of me, landlords to the right of me

All right, not many landlords to the left of me, but you take my point. Steve's in Newcastle

Steve, what would you like to say? Morning, James. I'd like to make one specific point

to challenge something you said earlier on, and one general point, if I may. Of course

Yes, sadly, I normally agree with you. On this occasion, I don't. A landlord to the right of me

Well, I've been one for 40 years, in which time I've had two tenancy disputes, so I must be doing something right

Anyway, so what you suggested was that the lady, the gentleman rang in and said

look, his tenant couldn't afford a mortgage on a property. And you said, she's paying your mortgage

That may or may not be the case. The fact is that the outgoings on a property, it ain't just the mortgage

We're talking about council tax. We're talking about maintenance. the idea that buying a property, you pay your mortgage

and there you go, you're all right, mate. One of the joys of renting a property from a decent landlord is

it gets maintained and you don't pay anything. You have no way of knowing whether he was a decent landlord or not

Well, may I give you an example? Also, if you rent a whole property

you normally pay your own council tax as a tenant. Yeah, that entirely depends, but yeah, you do

Well, hang on, either it entirely depends or you do. So let's park that one. And generally speaking, if you rent a whole property, a house or a flat, and you live in it as your main home, then you'll be paying the council tax yourself

You'll pay the council tax. Okay. So that one. So sayonara to that observation

Well, hang on. No, I'm hanging. I'm hanging. Go on. So I've just re-roofed a property in which there are four properties and a total of 15 occupiers

The roofing job was £24,000, for which the tenants quite rightly had to pay nothing

I'm not moaning or crying about it. I'm simply making the point that were they occupiers

they would have been paying for that. So that one of the benefits in renting from me

is that they didn't have to. I also recently had to employ a drain jetting company

to deal with the main sewer where there was a problem. Again, I don't expect any sympathy because I don't want any

But the fact of the name is, owning a property isn't just about paying them all

No, I mean, I don't have to put... This quite diplomatically, I don't think anybody else listening to the programme thought that that's what I was saying

Okay. I mean, it's obvious, isn't it? I mean, anyone who's been a tenant knows what it's like, let alone anybody who's been a landlord

Obviously, there are outgoings that a landlord has while maintaining the property that he owns and somebody else pays him for the privilege of living in

I mean, that just, that goes absolutely without saying. But we're back to Mr. McCorber territory, aren't we

Where, you know, if your income is a tiny bit lower than your outgoings, result happiness

if your income is a shilling higher than your outgoings, result misery. So the only point, really, at which this mooted rent freeze becomes controversial

is if it moves your balance sheet from the black to the red. Because if all it does is reduce the black a bit, then, you know, you've got to suck it up, Steve

Right. Equally, I'll suck up a rent freeze. But what is being ignored, of course, is the root and branch of the problem

which was that two successive governments, Labour, Tory and Labour, did not allow local authorities to retain the money

from council housing that they were forced to sell off, which is why we're not building enough housing

at non-market rent levels. That's 110% true. Which Labour government did that then? Blair's

Well, they didn't change it. That was my argument. They had the chance to change it. They didn't change it

Blair and Brown failed to change it. The current government has failed to change it

and the previous Tory government failed to change it. They absolutely should have changed it. Yeah

Of course I should. No, I'm with you on that. There you go. We part as friends, Steve. And you sound like a great landlord as well, for the record

Well, I hope I am. That's what I've tried to be for 40 years. And if you've got HMOs, which you have, I think

then you are, by definition, you are serving people who are not in the position

to be able to buy a property for themselves under any circumstances. Yeah. Oh, good man

And that's the point. Some people think I'm being tongue-in-cheek when I talk about nuance in the context of something

as traditionally binary as landlord and tenant, but I'm not. I can say with a degree of certainty that the so-called think tanks

that style themselves as academic institutions or researchers or centres for policy studies, they exist solely to protect wealth

And that is fine, as long as they're honest about it and tell you exactly who funds them

But that doesn't mean that all wealth is... I know you said Watton. All wealth is Watton

It doesn't mean that all wealth is rotten. It doesn't mean that everybody who is a landlord

is a sort of, you know, Dickensian figure sucking the marrow from the bones of Tiny Tim's parents

in order to fund their Qatar bolt hole. So, but a rent freeze is a binary suggestion

And it means that some people who we'd rather not see penalised are going to be penalised because more people are going to benefit

And I'm still there at 11.55. Chloe is in Lewisham. Chloe, what would you like to say

hi hi um well i agree with this policy sort of i'm a landlord i i'm also going to add that i have

a kid at private school because that was mentioned earlier um you don't have to i mean what's your

no no no it's relevant it's relevant okay carry on but what sort of niggles with mayors i'm probably

as left as you maybe more so maybe i don't know yeah um but i feel that labor is being a bit

populist here. They're finding groups of unpopular people, like landlords or private school parents

and that really, they need to tax the wealthy more. And that's breaking a manifesto

promise, but I think by singling out certain groups, you've got the problem you have with your previous

caller, who you don't want to penalise him. You know? No, I don't mind. I don't mind

I just, I mean, it's a little bit more nuanced than some of the coverage allows, but I think

Steve's good for the rent freeze. I don't think it's going to do him anyhow. It's a bit odd, I think

to pick up your point, we heard in the news that BP's profits have gone up to

about £7 gazillion. And you hear that, and you think, hang on

why are they sticking VAT on my school fees and a rent freeze on my rental properties when BP

just made £7 gazillion billion dollars? Yeah. And I look at the water industry, and I

look at the division of wealth increasing, and I look at all these things. Now, I

am in a middling higher tax bracket, but I'd be happy to pay more tax if I then felt my kid, who's got some quirks

but is a well-behaved, nice boy, would get the education he needs and reach his potential in the state sector

He was in the state sector. I moved him because I was like, oh, God, this isn't working

And I'm privileged enough I can afford it. I've also had moments I've had to pay for private health

or fought battles about SEN with the local authorities and paid lawyers. I'd just rather pay the tax

And have a system that is fit for purpose for everybody, even, to use your word, even the quirks in the system

Exactly. And walk out the front door and feel society works. And I feel Labour is losing sight of its core base

partly because it doesn't want to go against its manifesto pledge of not raising tax

Right. But I feel they need to because the division of wealth is so extreme

It's causing divisions. It's divisive. We don't need more of that. The problem is that nobody, I mean, with a few obvious exceptions, like BP, which isn't a person, nobody thinks they're wealthy

I was taking the mickey on Blue Sky yesterday out of another one of those articles in the Mail or the Telegraph saying something like

I earn £155,000 a year, but I'm not wealthy. And, of course, that may be true in one sense, but somebody reading that who earns £25,000 a year is going to collapse in fits of hysterical laughter, aren't they

So when you say they've got to raise taxes, whose taxes do we mean

The thresholds are already, compared to other countries, quite punitive for high earners

It's because we don't tax wealth, we don't tax assets as effectively as we could

That's what you're talking about. Yeah, and they've brought things like capital gains taxes getting a bit better addressed

But I do think you've got this asset class where there's a massive problem

And you need to increase the capital gains tax on the income they're receiving from those assets

And not maybe go after small property landlords, like landlords and landladies with just one or two properties

It's not either or. You can do both. But if you're not doing the other one... Exactly, but it feels a bit like the private school fee

so let's single out that group, when really what you're doing is putting a wealth tax on parents

I think that was ideological as well as financial. I think moving society towards a place

where privilege and wealth does not actually allow you to give your children things that other children don't get

It was born of the same principle that makes you want to pay more tax, to have a system where everybody gets a fair crack of the whip, oddly

The problem is this, and I don't know enough, we must have another conversation about this another day

but one of the reasons why you're never going to have really meaningful legislation regarding property and landlords

is the royal family and the Duke of Westminster and all of the enormous swathes of the country

that are owned by people who came over with William the Conqueror in 1066

If you think you're going to be able to turn that upside down, then I've got a bridge I want to sell you

although the Labour government will chip away at elements of it and is doing so

And then similarly, I think you also have a problem when you talk about a wealth tax or asset taxes is that we don You kind of who who who I mean people it is the people with loads and loads of money are going to pay a few quid to cover it in loopholes and offshores and trusts

and all that sort of thing. So it will end up being you and me that pay the wealth tax again

on what assets we have, while people who've got a hundred times more than us will be like the Duke

of Westminster, who's probably got a million times more than us put together. They'll be fine. They

won't even pay inheritance tax. Yeah, and that's my issue. That's my issue too

Is that the middle class get more and more squeezed and the wealth gap gets bigger

and bigger and the people earning £120,000 or whatever in London feel they're

poor because London housing costs and everything are so insane that they end up believing that

even though the person who's earning £25,000 I don't know, in rural Lincolnshire

is going, what the hell do you mean? Yeah, and watching it on their payslip disappear

down what they think is a plughole, which of course we know it isn't a plug hole, but it certainly feels that way

when you're seeing a significant slice of it disappear every month. Thank you, Chloe. You know, you'll never

guess who I had a similar conversation with about three months ago. You'll never guess. Go on, have a go

I don't know. I listen to you quite erratically in snippets in the car. It wasn't on the radio

It was privately. I went to a fancy dinner. He's American. He's Gary's economics, man

No, no. Scaramucci. Yes, it was Scaramucci. Look at that. The Mooch himself was making very similar points to you

Oh, he had a brilliant line yesterday about when his parents got the first washing machine

Yes. With granny and mum, and he lived in a multi-generational house, and he came home, and he was about five or six

and it was like one of the happiest days of his life because everyone was so excited, and it was all about how they could afford

to no longer walk to the laundry, and how their kids were going to college, and how they were blue-collar aspirational

Well, that's where he's coming from. Yeah, and the problem that's now occurred is you've got blue-collar desperational, he called it

That's strong. And it's exactly that. I thought so, yes. It's a massive problem, and I'm your age exactly

in fact, very similar to you, Irish Connection, boarding school, la-da-la. There we go

And I just look back to where I grew up and go, hang on, the 1970s was so much more equal

so much more equal. Yes, I was still privileged within it. The gaps were much smaller, and the slightly unbelievable levels of wealth

that seem to be dominating discourse now were, I mean, they still existed

You still had the Duke of Westminster and the Duke of wherever else and all of the 1066 families, but it didn't feel as if society was attuned

to maximise their finances as opposed to everybody else's. I'm only cracking on because of the news, and because I'm still slightly gobsmacked

that you managed to call that correctly. It was absolutely first class. Thank you, Chloe. We'll talk again

James O'Brien on LBC. 12.06 is the time. Slightly busy hour. Agui Chambre will be with us at half past 12

to bring us up to speed with what's happened at the Foreign Affairs Select Committee

where Morgan McSweeney was giving his evidence regarding the Peter Mandelson situation

the vetting and the various claims and counterclaims that have typified this story

and then the Mayor of London, Sadiq Carnall join us at 12.45, I wonder if he knows

that thing we were talking about yesterday about how London is the only place in the United Kingdom

where the healthy life expectancy is going up at the moment has gone up over the course of the last 10 years

where for everywhere else in the country it has gone down by an average of two years

he's going to be explaining why, warning that Londoners could be more highly exposed to the march of AI than any other region, according to a new report

So, more on that a little later. Speaking of London, it's becoming a bit of a..

It's really odd to me that I find myself having to do this

I was out again in London last night, and my goodness me, the vibe was beautiful

I don't normally spend much time around the Westminster part of town

I like going into the West End. I get out in the West End once or twice a week. But I was around Westminster

and there were two or three things going on that reminded me why this is the best city in the world

One was the number of people who still had their medals on. They'd gone out to take in the sights

people from outside London, in some cases I think from overseas, on the day after the London Marathon

but they were still wearing their medal. I saw a bunch of four people

looking at the pelicans in St. James' Park, and they all had their medals on, and there was just a real

I'm never going to run a marathon. There's no prizes for that observation or prediction

but it's such an extraordinary achievement. Yeah, I'm sure. I'm never going to run a marathon

It's such an extraordinary achievement, isn't it? And the joy that was still being felt by these people

and conveying to others as they made their way around London. And then in Parliament Square, just outside the House of Commons

where I was attending a function, I'd never seen this before. I've lived in London for, good Lord, a very long time

I'd never seen people queuing up outside the House of Commons simply to, like, a self-styled queue

there's no one organising the queue or presiding over the queue it's just tourists queuing up

to take their photographs either alongside or in red phone boxes so there's, like, decommissioned red phone boxes

just off St Stephen's Green and there was a queue one of the queues had about eight or nine people in it

just taking turns to get to the front and take a picture and then, of course, you've got all the people

on the green itself photographing the House of Commons of the House of Lords, the Houses of Parliament

You've got a lot of Big Ben stuff going on, people posing, you know, in a special way

like you do at the Leaning Tower of Pisa where you pretend you're propping it up. It's just lovely

And it's odd because I'd never noticed how wonderful this stuff is

when people, racist liars on social media weren't pretending that London is awful

I don't know whether it's a backfire effect because I presume racist liars on social media

are still garnering loads of support from other racist liars. But since this weird misrepresentation of our country in general, but our city in particular, has gained so much traction, and you speak to Americans in particular who are persuaded of all sorts of madnesses, all sorts of nonsense, you probably don't notice how good things are until you're noticing how wrong the racist liars are

So anyway, London, absolutely wonderful. last night. It's a bit colder again today

It was also clement weather. That's the third part of the triangle, probably last night

You've got the post-marathon, you've got the lovely tourists, and then you've got the

rather clement weather that meant everyone was wandering around in their shirt sleeves

Ten minutes after twelve is the time. As Dr. Johnson famously observed

if you're tired of London, you are tired of life. I like this story a lot

but I am going to need your help with it. I told you a few times

if you're relatively new to the programme you may struggle to believe because you probably think I'm still quite obnoxious

but I used to be really obnoxious and I had a few pet subjects

where my obnoxiousness was off the charts I've told you before sadly and to my shame

obesity was one of them but also on a slightly less serious note

things like tattoos and pet ownerships veganism and vegetarianism I used to be performatively obnoxious on these subjects in that I didn think too deeply about them I adopted a strong position that provided weapons with which me to bop you over the head if you were unduly fond of your pets or you were a vegan or a vegetarian or you were obese or you were

a long list of things, heavily tattooed and I'd be really really rude in what I thought was quite

an amusing fashion and many people took it in good heart or good spirit but some people got

really, really upset with me. And to my enduring embarrassment and shame, that didn't really

affect me very much until it did. And that's why I don't do it anymore. There are a few little signs

on that path, a few little milestones on that path. I think the fellow that got in touch with

me when I'd been going off on one of my riffs about how your dogs would eat you if you were

dead on the sofa, they'd be tucking into your toes within 24 hours. And a chap got in

touch very simply by email to say just just to let you know that if it wasn't for my dashands

um my wife died six months ago i don't think i would have got through it without them and i

suddenly thought why have you made this dude feel bad and he's not exactly having a great time of it

at the moment why have you made him feel bad about how much he loves his dogs and how much they love

him so i stopped doing that there was a nurse who said to me i was top of my class at pediatric

nursing, and I'm covered in tattoos. You bring a child into A&E

who do you want to look after? The best nurse there or the one with the least tattoos? And I thought, yep, James, you're an idiot

The obesity stuff, rather more profound moments of recognising that you have become something

of a bully and that that is not pretty. The other one, I wonder if you can remember

or if you have worked it out. I used to get so

so up on my high horse about marriage and of all of those subjects that I've just run through that

sort of quick guided tour of my hopefully abandoned bigotries marriage is the one that I still

struggle with I still struggle not to be that person I don't think or at least I hope I won't

be performatively obnoxious about it by saying things like well he obviously doesn't love you

as much as I love my wife, otherwise he would have wanted to marry you. Or she's obviously keeping her options open

otherwise you'd have been up the aisle by now. And that kind of slightly lazy..

What would the word be? Provocation. That slightly lazy provocation. But two things make it different, I think, from the other subjects

The first is the number of people who've got in touch with me, including people who've become friends of mine

as a consequence of us meeting through the programme, who used to think I was absolutely ridiculous

when I waxed lyrical about how marriage was the gold standard of relationships

and everything else was by some measure inferior. People who used to think that that was a ridiculous and obnoxious position

getting in touch with me subsequently to say that they have got married and I was right all along

And I'm not being a wally. I can think of three people off the top of my head who fall into that category

So that gives me pause, because I don't think anyone is ever going to make me think that I was right all along about the other issues that I just shared with you

And the other element of this is that I haven't shed my gut feeling, which will not be there for rational or logical reasons

It will be there for emotional reasons. It will be there for long, distant childhood-related issues

and the things that form our opinions that have nothing to do with facts or evidence

and everything to do with feelings. And I still have this sense that marriage is something worth cherishing

worth protecting, worth championing in the context of all other relationships. And if it is, if marriage is worth doing all of those things

then it can only be because it is, quote, better, end quotes, than other relationship statuses

No? Well, I think so. And I'm a bit embarrassed that I still think that

But I kind of do. And then we come to a story today that says cohabiting couples are demanding the same rights as those who are married

as more people choose to live together without tying the knot. So it's a poll of more than 2,000 people that has found 60% believe that unmarried couples should have the same rights as those who marry

to leave assets to each other free of inheritance tax. 52% oh my lord it's 52

said that cohabiting couples should be eligible for the rights enjoyed by

married people within the first five years of living together it's commissioned by a law firm

and it's been done by YouGov who are a reputable polling company and

I don't get it I just don't get it if you want

to be married get married No? If you want to have the rights and privileges

that marriage bestows upon a relationship, then you get married, right? If you're not ready to get married

but you want to be together, you can cohabit, you can move in together. But society reserves special treatment for married couples

And the egalitarian in me should really bulk at this. Well, is it just a meaningful piece of paper

Why on earth does it matter? What do we need for this? I kind of see that intellectually

but this story I think allows me to revisit this territory without offending anybody

you don't have the same status there's not really any such thing

as being a common law spouse and some people discover this in the most hideous and tragic of circumstances

you're not recognised by the legal system you don't have the same rights

and protections as married couples and I kind of struggle to join the next dot on this page

which is, well, hang on, I want the same rights and privileges as married couples

I want the same rights and protections as married couples to which there's a really easy solution, right

Get married. Oh, I don't want to get married. Well, then you don't want to have the rights and protections that marriage bestows

Yeah, no, I do. Oh, okay, good. Get married then. No, but I don't want to get married

But I want to have the rights and protections that marriage bestows. Well, that's fine. You can have them

You just get married. No, but I don't want to get married. Well, what do you mean you don't want to get married? What does marriage mean

If it doesn't mean the bestowal of rights and protections under our legal system that you don't get in any other circumstances

And, you know, what if you move out on a Friday night? you move in with someone new on a Saturday

who's got the rights then? That's a slight exaggeration or simplification of the system

But you move out of one relationship on a Saturday night, you move in with your new partner on a Sunday morning

who are you married to? Who has the equal rights and protections

The person you left on Saturday or the person you moved in with on Sunday? If you're getting divorced and married

those questions are really easy to answer But if you not they impossible to answer I accept I might sound a bit old and I accept I might sound a little bit out of touch but I also want you to acknowledge that I genuinely sound confused Why would you not do it What would

the obstacle be? People living together demand same rights as married couples. It's a bloody

great headline in the Times newspaper, to which I can't help thinking the answer is staring

is in the face. People living together demand same rights as married couples

Oh, that's fine. Yeah, cool. Get married. So, what's wrong with my ysis

0345 6060 973. I must be missing something here. Why would you not want to get married

But you would be sufficiently certain that you've made all the right choices, that you deserve

the rights and protections that currently, under our legal system, only marriage

can bestow. What is it that is... What is it that is happening

in this story. I really want to have all of the benefits of marriage

Great, get married. No, no, no, no, no. I don't want to get married. I just want all the benefits of marriage

Oh my God, it's sounding like Brexit. Isn't it? I don't want to be in

the European Union. I just want to have all the benefits of being in the European Union

There's a word for people like you. You're an idiot. You can't have all the benefits

of being in the European Union if you've left the European Union. Whatever Nigel Farage and

Jacob Rees-Mogg might have told you, it was obvious from the start that you weren't going to be able to carry

on using the rowing machine and the sauna after you'd cancelled your membership at the bloody gym oh no but i want to be married

i don't want to be married i just want to have all the better come on i've got a sense that i

am missing something here because otherwise it wouldn't have been such a big story but what

exactly am i missing 0345 6060 973 more and more people living together without being married

um i mean you can have a civil partnership as well there's lots of things you can do to enjoy

all of the you don't have to go up the you know up the aisle in westminster abbey or anything like

out what on earth is going on? It doesn't have to be a religious contract anymore

either. So all of the options are in place for you to enjoy all of the rights and

protections of marriage without any of the historic problems with religion or

patriarchy or whatever it may be. Why? Why would you not want to get married

if you want to have all the rights and protections of being married? 0345 6060 973

is the number you need. It's 20 past 12. James O'Brien on LBC

It's 12.22. When I predicted that the imminent collapse in immigration to this country

would provide a very brief problem for racist provocateurs, and they would inevitably turn their attention to the welfare state next

I wasn't expecting the Tony Blair Institute to join in. A very disappointing story from them

You're much better off listening to the spokespeople for Mencap and similar charities quoted in the same

stories in the news today, but it's almost an unhinged headline, because I hate to tell you this

I am going to be proved completely correct, and that people who are in receipts of disability benefits

sickness benefits, personal independent payments, they're going to be the new immigrants

You are, and I'm very sorry about this, you are going to be the people who everybody else is encouraged to hate

and blame for the fact that they haven't got as much money as they think they should have

And if you're a young person with ADHD, or depression or crippling anxiety

I know how hard it is to get a PIP assessment, but loads of people who don't care about how hard it is

or pretend not to understand how hard it is because they need to attack somebody

It's what their job is. They're coming for you. But I wasn't expecting the Tony Blair Institute to join in

And what's extraordinary about the way this so-called research has been conducted is that it reports only

that loads of people believe the benefit system is too easy to game

It provides no proof whatsoever that it is too easy to game. It simply reports that lots of people believe it is

which is a little bit like reporting that lots of people believe it would be a good idea

to leave the European Union, which was true. They did, but they were completely wrong

It's not a story to say that people who have been carefully groomed and gaslit

into believing things that are not true believe things that are not true

But you will encounter, if you haven't already, deeply irresponsible people who will pretend that this research is somehow evidence of something

that it isn't even claiming. It is simply describing a state of affairs in which people

have been persuaded to believe something. So just keep your eyes and ears open for that as we turn

our attention to the bizarre question of why you wouldn't get married if you really, really want to

have the rights and protection that only marriage can provide. There you go. Don't know why it took

me 20 minutes to do that. Could have done it in two. Ashley's in Swindon to kick things off

Ashley, what would you like to say? Hi there, James. Sorry, standard, yeah, nervous first-time caller

It's only me. It's only you. It's only me, etc, etc. Carry on

But, I say, I've been engaged now for just over a year

I would say, from my experience, I would say that the main thing is probably

the cultural and societal expectations of you having the big, lavish wedding

You invite everyone. It has to be a big do and everything like that

So I'm thinking it's cost, essentially. When we're living in a cost of living crisis at the moment

I think that's holding a lot of people back. So I do absolutely believe

marriage is... But how would this work? How would this work? So if you and your

fiancé were to be afforded the rights and protections of marriage, what would you have to do

to activate that? What do you mean, sorry? Well, because, I mean, God forbid that she leaves you tomorrow

and moves in with Keith. Yes. Would those... Yeah, I know, you're right to laugh

But still, would those rights and protections be immediately transferred to the new relationship

Would they now be in the... Exactly. So what threshold has to be met

in order for you to achieve the rights and protections that marriage would convey

but your fiancée wouldn't get them if she moved, she wouldn't get them tomorrow

if she up sticks and moved in with Keith in the morning. So my point is to why the barrier is there in the first place

Yeah, but you've got to answer the question. I mean, I understand some of the barriers

I did these phone-ins 20 years ago and people would say, oh, it's too expensive or I blame Jordan because everyone expects a Cinderella carriage now

and £250,000 worth of hospitality and I can't do this. And there's some truth in that and it is expensive

but no one is forcing you to do it on a Hello magazine scale

or anything like that. Well, I think what I'm trying to say is that

there needs to be almost like a culture of... It's not happening. I'm just laughing at Keith, actually

Poor fellow. I think there needs to be like a culture of societal change

like an attitude, so people do feel they can just go up to a registry office

just sign the papers, and there you go. You got it. Yeah, so you're agreeing with me. You are agreeing with me

I am agreeing with you, absolutely. I just wanted to bring that into the conversation. Yes

So do you think you might do that then, given that presumably the sort of fairytale wedding

feels a little bit further out of reach than you were expecting it to? Yeah, absolutely

But yeah, as I said, I do agree with you. I just wanted to bring that into the conversation

I think because of how people view what weddings are meant to be like

weddings on these reality TV programs and I think that's what people expect

and that's what's putting people off so I don't think it's an unwillingness to actually get married

I think it's an unwillingness to basically fund it well you say that

it will be in some people's cases but if they want the rights and protections of marriage

I guess you're possibly right that everybody just is intending to do it one day

but just when they can afford to do it on a much grander scale than they currently can but there's more to it than that

There's no way these numbers would be where they were unless there was a weird mindset

In my view, it's weird, and I'm happy to be disabused of that conclusion, that you deserve all the rights and protections of marriage

despite not being in any way, shape, or form married. Because the obvious problem with that is the threshold

that has to be met for those protections and rights to kick in. And as Ashley says, there's nothing to stop you going down the road

by picking up a witness in Wetherspoons, popping into the local registry office

and you'd be married by T-type. And then you get all the rights and protections. And if you want to have a massive party in 10 years' time

then have a massive party in 10 years' time. And then I worry I'm sounding like Ian Duncan Smith

because, of course, I'm worried about marriage itself being diluted or denuded or tarnished

And that's when I do begin to feel a bit ridiculous. Ashley, great call. I apologise for planting that hideous seed in your mind

but I can assure you you've got nothing to worry about. Kieran's in Hackney. Kieran, what would you like to say

Hi, James. Hello. Yeah, so first-time caller, long-time listener, and, yeah, big fan

Top man. I, yeah, to be honest, I thought my first call, if I ever called

would be to air my theories on Brexit. Second call, Kieran. Second call

Okay, sure. It's a date. So you, I just have to, yeah, I want people to, yeah

the reason, surely, for people both wanting to get married and not wanting to get married

which you don't think to have gotten into, is divorce. No, it's not

Well, actually, you should tell me why. Well, because this wouldn't change that

If you've got the same rights and protections as married couples, then when you split up

you'd have the same rights and protections as a divorce. It's not about getting the right decision

The pain and difficulty of breaking up when you are married versus the non-pain and difficulty

but greatly, greatly reduced when you're not married. And you're talking about the emotional impact

rather than any of the logistical or financial. I'm talking about the emotional and possibly the financial impact

This is why I did push back a little at the outset, because I don't think that the financial impact would be any different

if you had the full recognition of rights and protections as married couples

But the idea of... Well, not necessarily. It depends where you are

I'm reading the story in front of me, which is simply saying that they want to be treated identically

to cohabitants, want an identical status to their married counterparts. And that will be about rights and protections

which are going to be most obviously financial. So assets to each other free of inheritance tax

and then in the context of divorce divides would be similar. But we can park that as a known unknown

Yeah, I think it's because it's not made completely clear what... No, I hadn't. You're right

I hadn't contemplated what you're describing, and that is the sense that if you think that you're in it for the long haul

and you commit in every way except maritally, then when things hit the buffers

it's going to somehow be more manageable than it would be if you had committed maritally

Yes, you're simply marriage. marriage is a way of, for certain people

or maybe for a lot of people, of, well, circumventing trust. Yeah

And making it harder and feeling safer to be with someone for the long term

Making it harder to split up and feeling safer. So are you, and forgive me if I'm misunderstanding

are you saying that people might not want to get married because they don't want to put that level of trust in someone else

No, I'm saying, well, you can see it from both ways, can't you? Yes, I can

They might not want to get married because they do trust someone enough not to get married

I think I understand what you're saying. I think I feel I'm not, I'm doing a bit of a disservice by not understanding it better

I don't know if that's my fault or yours. I've been thinking, I phoned mainly because it's just something that I've been thinking about. Yeah

a fair amount. And it just feels like... I mean, for some people, marriage is

a declaration of trust. So you're saying, I want to be with you forever

But for other people, it might be the opposite. It might be

well, you need this because it makes it more difficult for us to end our relationship

if one of us changes or if, you know, as things often do

I think you're answering a slightly different question. Okay. No, I do

I think you're explaining why some people might not want to get married. You're not explaining why some people who don't want to get married

want the same rights and protections as married couples. I don't want to get married

Yeah, exactly. But I want the same rights and protections as a married couple

You don't want those. I don't think they want all the same. Well, then we're back to the known unknown

Yeah. No, okay. I think I get it. But I think there is a point to be made about how much people want marriage for that reason or don't want marriage for that reason

And therefore, they feel that marriage is maybe, yeah, it's not necessarily purely ideological

No, I hear you. I think I do. I think in some ways your call is a companion piece to Ashley's, actually

as a call for society's impositions and expectations to be changed or to be dialed down and diluted because of the heft

that a commitment of marriage carries for good or for ill. And you remind us that sometimes it will be for ill

Kieran, thank you. It's a brilliant debut. I look forward to your call on the wriggles of Brexit

Matt Hewitt is here first with your headlines. James O'Brien on LBC

12.36 is the time. You are listening to James O'Brien on LBC

We may return imminently to elements of this conversation about marriage. For example, some of the answers

It costs £10,000 to £15,000 to get married, James. It doesn't. It costs £10,000 to £15,000 to have a certain type of wedding

which is why I'm confused by the number of people who want to have the rights and protections of marriage

without having a marriage. And I'm still confused, despite really powerful calls

But, um, Aggie Chambre has been observing events at the Foreign Affairs Select Committee

You're too busy to listen to this programme every day. I fully accept that

So you probably not aware of Osborne Razor I actually am not That fine Osborne Razor was invented by a listener to this program called James not me and it posits the idea that whenever we are discussing a particular problem in our country many roads will lead back to George Osborne

Now, usually, this applies to austerity. But bizarrely, it also applies to today's evidence from Morgan McSweeney

to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee about the appointment of Peter Mandelson to the ambassadorship to the United States of America

Tell me more. Indeed, there is this alternative timeline where George Osborne is picked as the ambassador instead of Peter Mandelson

and everything would just be going swimmingly. The two. That's it. That's the country

That's what this government could come up with. Two characters. The man arguably more responsible than any other for the financial climate that we currently inhabit

I give Liz Truss the nod on that one. But the man who shut the Shaw Start centres, the libraries, who denuded social capital from every corner of the country

He was option one and the paedophile's friend was option two. And apparently, actually, George Osborne was the preferred option, at least for a while

But Peter Mandelson won out. Yeah. What else have we learned? Well, Morgan McSweeney has been talking about that and so much more, the former Chief of Staff, of course, to the Prime Minister speaking at the Foreign Affairs Select Committee

And he began his appearance just after 11am with a pre-prepared statement

The appointment of Mandelson as ambassador was a serious error of judgment

I advised the Prime Minister in support of that appointment and I was wrong to do so

As I said in my resignation statement, I resigned because I believe responsibility should rest with those who make serious mistakes

Accountability in public life cannot apply only when it is convenient. The Prime Minister relied on my advice and I got it wrong

It is also important, however, to distinguish between what I did do and what I did not do

What I did do was make a recommendation based on my judgment that Mandelson's experience, relationships and political skills could serve the national interest in Washington at an important moment

That judgment was a mistake. What I did not do was oversee national security vetting, ask officials to ignore procedures, request that steps should be skipped or communicate explicitly or implicitly that checks should be cleared at all costs

Sir Morgan McSweeney sat there saying that the appointment of Peter Mandelson was a serious error of judgment

He of course saying there, and it has been reported previously, he very much recommended Lord Mandelson

They'd been friends for a long time. But he also said when asked questions by members of the committee that it wasn't just him who was pushing for Peter Mandelson

If the Prime Minister was hearing overwhelmingly against Mandelson, he might have made another decision

but he was getting a lot of views at the time he was listening to people he does listen to his

senior staff he does listen to his ministers before we reach his decision so i think if it

was just me arguing for it i don't think he'd have made that appointment he was also asked james who

put lord mandelson's name forward first and he said which did elicit some uh laughter from the

committee i think the first person to put mandelson's name forward was mandelson you talk to

many people making it clear he was interested in the job um but on a more serious note he also

talked about the relationship between uh jeffrey epstein um and uh lord mandelson and said some of

it really really took him by surprise when that came out after he'd already been appointed

the nature of the relationship that i understood he had with epstein was not a close friendship

how i understood it at the time was a passing acquaintance that he regretted having and that

he apologised for what has emerged since then was way way way worse than i had expected at the time

and it was when i saw the pictures when i saw the bloomberg questions in september 2025 i have to say

it was like a knife through my soul i did not expect that level of connection that he was talking

about there saying a knife through his soul um to see some of those revelations about the relationship

that had endured between Jeffrey Epstein and Lord Mandelson. And as well, I should say, in that statement at the very beginning

he did begin with an apology to the victims of Epstein II

and said that he was sorry if any part of the controversy made this worse for them

Elsewhere, James, he said that Lord Mandelson was not his hero. He said he wasn't trying to get a job for him

But he also admitted there wasn't a contingency plan. So had they known that Lord Mandelson did not pass developed vetting, there was no contingency plan

He said probably they would have asked Karen Pearce to stay on and admitted it would have been embarrassing to pull him after that

If Mandelson's DV had been a problem, it would have been an embarrassment for us

It would have been a much bigger problem for him. But there's an alternative scenario, which is that we had, say, we're going to do DV before we talk to the palace or before we talk to the US administration

The chances of, unfortunately, the chances in government of there being a leak anyway would have been a problem

Either way, if your lead candidate fails DV, it is embarrassing, but it's far preferable to pull that candidate at that point than to go any further

He also did say that he didn't feel he'd got the full truth back from Peter Mandelson on his links to Jeffrey Epstein

Yes, clearly. But he was appointed anyway, conditional on developed vetting, which, of course, we know wasn't actually the case

And Lord Doyle was brought up. We talked about that an hour or so ago

And that came out in the Ollie Robbins, Sir Ollie Robbins, appearance last week that he'd been asked to look into getting a job for Lord Doyle

and Morgan McSweeney was asked about this too. And Emily Thornberry, the chair of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee

was, I would say, less than impressed about this. Have you heard the phrase, jobs for the boys

I mean, this is so far from any equal opportunities policies that I've ever heard of

I mean, don't you think this is a little odd or shameful

Well, the same was true if we had to exit. Women, senior women from the team as well

would have said to them, if you want to stay in government, and some did. but Matthew Doyle

Matthew Doyle would have had I don't want to I'm just saying, talking about senior women

what job was she given, for example? Sir of the region Sue Gray is now

in the House of Lords but this isn't about he wasn't promised a job

and had he applied for the job then the Foreign Office would have considered

his application the same as anyone else Okay So I mean in terms of Keir Starmer position and I appreciate that Kemi Bader has to do something to justify her salary

not a lot changes in the context of this vote later this afternoon as a consequence of anything that Morgan McSweeney has said

I think that's right, James. I mean, I think we always expected Morgan McSweeney to... What are the... She repeatedly misled the House of Commons. What is she actually talking about

Well, she's talking about those two things of the due process and the pressure. Those are her points

And of course, you know, we heard that clip earlier of Sir Philip Barton when he was asked whether due process was followed

and there was that big pause and then he didn't or couldn't answer that question

And there have been Labour MPs who've been really felt so uncomfortable

with this scandal and how it's played out. But I think you're right. I don't think much of what we've heard this morning

has put more pressure on the Prime Minister. But I think that due process answer is probably one of the key things

to have come out this morning? I think you would traditionally wait until this process at Select Committee was complete

before deciding whether or not you needed a further level of investigation. But if there is political capital to be made

there is political capital to be made. Who knows what happens later this afternoon

although it will be something of a shock to the system if Akir Starmer is..

if he does lose this vote that will happen later today. Great stuff, Agi Chambrae

Thank you very much indeed. 12.45 is the time. You're listening to James O'Brien on LBC

and the Mayor of London is up next. James O'Brien on LBC

It's 12.48, you're listening to James O'Brien on LBC. The Mayor of London is in Madrid

for an artificial intelligence summit and we will turn our attention to that imminently

But before we do, an arguably slightly bigger story in the news

at the moment, Sadiq Khan, is the King's visit to Donald Trump

as one of the American president's most tireless chroniclers and critics. Do you think this trip should have gone ahead

I do. I mean, look, good afternoon. We're celebrating this year two or three years of American independence

Park for a second, King Charles' third forefathers and how they felt about the independence

250 years ago. But he's arguably the best diplomat in the world

The relationship we have with the USA is enduring and I hope longstanding

It's not about personalities, who the current president is, but also the events of the last few weeks

what's happening in Iran, what's happening in the Middle East, us trying to put pressure on President Trump to support us

in terms of Ukraine, shows the ties with America in terms of defence, in terms of military

in terms of national security, are really important. And King Charles III is, you know, as important as doing this

and he's, as I would say, taking one for the team. On a personal note, are you relieved that the conversations are going to be had in private rather than in front of the world's television cameras because of fears that Donald Trump might say something deeply inappropriate about, I don't know, off the top of my head, you

the office of president of the united states of america is one where you uh are a statesman i'm

afraid the way president trump has conducted himself in the white house is not very statesman

uh like his behavior towards a war hero uh president zelensky his behavior towards other

world leaders uh embarrasses american friends i have not just politicians and business people but

ordinary americans as well and i think uh had president trump treated king charles the way

he's treated some others many of us not just me and progressives wouldn't have forgiven him so he's

done the smart thing in agreeing to this request to speak without you know microphones hot mics or

cameras um you find yourself today warning that london could be hit harder the london workforce

could be hit harder by the impact of artificial intelligence than anywhere else in the country

it's almost as if the lord giveth the lord taketh away because yesterday we were talking about how

healthy life expectancy in the UK has gone down on average by two over the course of the last decade

but it's gone up in London. So, reasons to celebrate, but it only lasted 24 hours because

now we're all worried about losing our jobs to AI. Why is London more vulnerable than the rest of the

country? Well, firstly, can I just start on yesterday's good news? One of the reasons why

London's doing so well when it comes to life expectancy, yes, we've got huge inequalities

is because of lawful migrants coming to London who are healthy, who are fit, who work in the NHS and live long lives

contributing economically, socially and culturally. And so confirming once and for all

they're not a drain on public resources. So you can't have it both ways. On the one hand, people denigrating London

for diversity and lawful migrants. On the other hand, saying, oh my God, they're living too long

They're not relying upon public services. So it proves the benefits of lawful migration

In relation to AI, look, there are basically three groups of people when it comes to AI

There are AI evangelists. It's all fantastic. Isn't it wonderful? You know, they've got the rosy glasses

There are... Tony Blair. I'll put Tony Blair in that category, shall I? Well, there are AI alarmists

It's all doom and gloom, almost Luddart-like, you know, inspired. And what I'm trying to be is an AI realist

in terms of, look, London has a knowledge-intensive workforce in terms of the jobs we have

entry-level jobs, graduate-level jobs, medical jobs, white-collar jobs, finance professional services public admin ai unlike previous huge disruptions industrialization

college industry to factories globalization mill towns closing down factories closing down in

mill towns because of cheapest t-shirts made in eastern southeast asia this will affect white

collar jobs and so what i've announced today uh you know in my speech at this forum is firstly

we've set up a task force led by a cross-bencher, you know, Baroness Martha Lane-Fox

We should look at the future of work in London, what we can do to make sure AI helps us rather than hinders us

I'm also announcing today free training for all Londoners in AI, really important

And thirdly, London should be really proud that we are a founder member of the World Cities AI Forum

working together with 10 cities across five continents to see what we can do to make sure we use AI to our advantage

And what I'd say to your listeners is, look, in my view, I don't think people's jobs will be replaced by AI

I think people's jobs, if they aren't using AI, will be replaced by those people who do use AI

And that's why all Londoners to be skilled up and trained so no one's left behind. And what will that mean on the ground

Is it going to be in schools? Are people going to be able... What about older people

Are they going to be able to access it? Great question. So we're already using AI in London to deal with a number of issues, to do with censoring

down the mould, diagnosing cancer, reducing congestion, live facial recognition, and so

forth, so forth. In the private sector, jobs will be changed. If you're, as I was 34 years ago, doing legal research, your job in the future is going

to be different. If you doing public administration work if you doing financial work as a bookkeeper so we going to train people so they can use AI to help in their job uh we going to focus on adults because i worried about people losing their jobs uh the phrase i

used in a recent speech is you know it could be a weapon of mass job destruction we need to start

early though and the good news is the government is is has seized this and it started early i'll

give you a simple example james if you and i speaking 10 years ago when i first became mayor everyone's talking about the importance of learning coding, right

Everyone's learning coding. It's the hottest, you know, ticket in town. AI can now do coding

This job, within 10 years, has been invented and almost made redundant

And that's quite chilling, isn't it? Do you worry about it on a personal level? We've got children of similar ages

and the paths that we thought were opening up for them are closing at a rate of knots at the moment

I mean, you might have had an ambition when you were 15 that by the time you're 25 doesn't even exist anymore

or if it does exist, it's been transformed beyond all recognition. I worry about young people on a more profound level

I think when you look at what social media has done, young people's mental health, online abuse, the rise in disinformation, misinformation, you can now underage women, sexualize women and so forth

I worry about that on a profound level. In relation to work, I think when you and I left university, you could have one career for life

um now i think you'll have three four five six ten twelve careers i'm not saying jobs careers

within a working uh life which i think is both exciting and daunting and that's why i'm saying

uh as far as london's concerned we've got to be ahead of the curve we've got to have a first

move advantage i want people to be trained in ai so they're not replaced by ai but they can use ai

to help them do their uh job think about the person who works in hospital who looks manually

via x-rays or, you know, blood tests, that can now be done with AI

So you're checking for accuracy and whether this is working well. I think, by the way, James

in the future, forget diagnosing cancer because of AI. I think we'll find a cure to things like cancer

and other illnesses using AI. Wow. I was going to end by asking you

how, when technology is so new, you actually identify the people that are worth listening to

how you actually know who the experts are, given that the technology is both new and moving so quickly

But I've just noticed that my old mate, John Amici, is on your list. So I don't want to cast aspersions on the wisdom of appointing him to a key role

But the question stands. How do you know who the people... There's an awful lot of people claiming to know everything about AI

and making all sorts of predictions. How do you pick your team for a task like this

Well, firstly, he makes even you look short. That's a very good question

So not just am I short in his presence, but so is James O'Brien. Great question

So we've mentioned we've got a cross-section of people in the task force. those from the trade union are really important, right

Because they represent workers who could be out of a job because of AI

People like Martha, she set up lastminute.com for those who are vintage of you

and I will know what lastminute.com was, the difference it made, rather than going to a travel agent, doing it online

But also people from different sectors as well. We've got a cross-section of people on the task force

I want them to have a realistic view about, you know, map out what the workforce in London is like now

map out what the future of AI is, speak to the big tech companies who are developing AI

speak to employers. I was at a recent visit to, for example, Goldman Sachs

and it's fascinating how they're using AI in terms of helping them do their work

The same applies to public services. Look, when money's tight, if you're a council

if you're the mayor, if you're the government, AI can be a game changer in targeting public services

to people who need it the most. I'll give you an example, just a simple example. One of the issues that we've talked about in the past

when I've come on Speak to Sadiq with you, people ringing in with damp and mould in their homes

They've got a ring that the council takes ages for an inspector to come around. They do a rapport. A landlord then doesn't take action but serves them a notice to quit

We can have now, we are having now, sentences inside people's homes that detect when damp and mould is there

That lets the council or the landlord know. And by the way, this Labour government's changed the law

so landlords got to take action. They've also changed the law, by the way. A landlord can't serve you a section that's on notice of eviction

So, God willing, we will not have a situation where a two-year-old like Awab Ehsan

lost his life in Rochdale because of dampened mold. That's the power if AI is used properly

There's some breaking news for you. You're probably not aware of, but an attack upon a memorial wall in Golders Green

dedicated to Iranian people who have been killed by that country's regime

I've just been told that counter-terror police are investigating, but that the Met have said the incident is not being treated as terrorism

Officers are keeping an open mind about the motive behind the attack

This would appear to be an attack aimed at Iranian dissidents and indeed victims of the Iranian regime

but the fact that it's taken place in Golders Green, traditionally a very Jewish area of London

will draw a lot of people's attention back to some of the apparently

and in some cases obviously, anti-Semitic attacks upon properties in the capital

There are some dark forces abroad, Sadiq Khan. Well, one of the joys of those that don't know God is green is you've got a London population of Jewish faith, Jewish background

but also living cheeked by jail with a population of Iranian heritage as well

Those that fled the Shah, beg your pardon, fled the Ayatollah Khamenei when the Shah was deposed in 1978

So these communities really get on. actually you're right to remind listeners over the last um six weeks we've had a number of attacks

on those who are against the iranian regime and our jewish neighbors friends and colleagues as uh

well and um the police have been public with this i'm not bridging confidences there is a real

concern uh there are the phrase used is thugs for hire paid by supporters of the current iranian

regime. And it's really important, I say this to anyone who's listening who isn't of Jewish

background, Jewish faith, Jewish culture, or of somebody who is anti-Iran regime. Now is the

opportunity for us to show allyship, friendship, and understanding with how our Jewish friends and

neighbours are feeling. There was a fight and fear amongst Jewish people across the globe

and we've got to show them solidarity. We've got to ask them how they are, visit a synagogue

break bread with Jewish friends and neighbours because they're frightened. And actually, events over the last six weeks

show they've got every reason to be frightened. We've got to be good Londoners, good Brits

and show them some love. Sadiq Khan, Mayor of London, speaking to us live from Madrid

Thank you very much indeed. I'd echo certainly the final piece of the Mayor's comments as well

If you missed any of today's show, you can listen back on our free Global Player app

or the LBC app where you can also stay up to date with all the latest news, videos and opinion

you can listen to a range of podcasts including James O'Brien Daily the best bits from my show every day

download the official LBC app for free from your app store now coming up at 4 on LBC it's Tom Sawbricht

but now it's time for Sheila Fogarty James O'Brien on LBC