0:10

Gripped. By the tendrils of

0:13

rising crime the metropolis to

0:15

do on the brink of

0:17

k eyes. Terrorizing.

0:22

Second call later. Goes

0:28

out to justice. Goes-dark.

0:33

Knight ride around. Death

0:36

Welcome to Oh God what now and

0:38

apologies if this is a particular long

0:40

episode, but we're all too scared to

0:42

venture back out into the dystopian wasteland

0:44

that is City. Cons: London Object Jarvis

0:46

And first we want say a quick

0:48

thank you to everyone who's joined our

0:50

Patriot based over the past few weeks.

0:52

Advertising has got a bit tighter in

0:54

podcasting lately, so we need your support

0:56

more than ever and you have really

0:58

responded amazingly and we truly sincerely do

1:00

appreciate it. A Law: If you want,

1:02

sign Up Tobaccos or just step up

1:04

your support. Maybe from the two pounds the

1:06

free punter such oh god, what now patron

1:08

or click the link in the show notes,

1:11

you could even do it was you're listening

1:13

to this very episode on today's show during

1:15

the same thing over and over again is

1:17

said to be the definition of insanity. The

1:19

Tories have decided to simply go completely insane

1:22

as a new thing to do after the

1:24

party release the weirdest video on the internet.

1:26

Well, maybe not quite, but you get my

1:28

point. We ask what is driving them so

1:30

far to the brink. Plus Jeremy Hunt who's

1:32

net worth is reportedly upwards of fifteen million.

1:35

Pounds has said one hundred thousand pounds isn't

1:37

that big salary. How deluded as the and

1:39

has he basically it made the toys, screwing

1:41

the middle classes over just as much as

1:43

they are the working classes and in the

1:45

extra bit for supporters. What could Labor's new

1:47

ring walk music be? it's time to replace?

1:49

Things can only get better and we have

1:51

some suggestions Now let's meet the panel. First

1:53

up is the host of John Tomorrow and

1:56

over of the Future of Dress. It's Ross

1:58

Taylor hi Ros I know so that. BBC

2:00

is looking to reform the licensee we learned

2:02

this week and part of that might mean

2:04

them hoovering up a bit more

2:06

money from the podcast industry which doesn't make us

2:08

particularly happy. What did you make of the announcement

2:10

from Tim Davie and what stood out to you?

2:13

Yeah, you're right about the podcasts. I must

2:15

admit I was a bit disappointed by the

2:17

BBC's latest announcement of its new season of

2:20

podcasts. I mean there are things like Off

2:23

the Tele, which is a new pod with two

2:25

people chatting about what's on TV, which

2:28

is nice, but I don't feel it's actually core

2:30

content that the BBC really has to be doing.

2:32

And there's not a lot of risk taking and

2:34

there's a lot of celebs and well I'm biased,

2:36

okay listeners you know I'm biased, but hey. Having

2:38

said that, there was some good stuff in this.

2:40

They're going to double down on BBC Bitesize, which

2:42

is a fantastic revision tool when you

2:44

have kids who are trying to pass exams

2:47

and BBC Verify, which is also

2:49

really, really good service. He

2:52

is basically pressing Tim Davie for the world

2:54

service to be paid for through general taxation

2:56

because he thinks that the Foreign Office ought

2:58

to fund it and taxpayers shouldn't be funding

3:00

it through the license fee. I tend

3:03

to agree with that because it's part

3:05

of the UK soft power essentially. But

3:08

there's also inevitably going to be some

3:10

kind of renegotiation of the license fee

3:12

and what the BBC exactly should and

3:14

shouldn't be doing. And there's this endless

3:16

dilemma about how to reach a younger

3:18

audience that the BBC really needs to

3:21

reach or it's going to become irrelevant

3:24

without stifling competition and you know

3:26

independent companies that are trying to

3:28

do stuff in the same sphere.

3:31

So it is a tough one but it's

3:33

time for a really good discussion I think about what the BBC

3:35

does and what it ought to be doing and what it does

3:37

well and what it doesn't do so well. And I would suggest

3:39

Off the Tele is perhaps not key

3:42

to its content. Hopefully they can

3:44

do some politics podcasts where it's two older

3:46

blokes talking about politics and fill a void

3:48

which you know the commercial sector simply isn't

3:50

managing to do. Yeah there is actually what

3:53

there's the BBC Today podcast with Nick Robinson

3:55

and Amal Rajan which I think you'll find

3:57

fits that bill fairly well. What can't Amal

3:59

Rajan do? I ask. Next

4:02

up, we liked him so much last time, we've loaned

4:04

him back from our sister podcast paper cut. It's John

4:06

Ellidge. John, hello. Hello, thank you for rescuing me. You

4:09

wouldn't believe what they made me talk about today. Yeah,

4:12

no, I was, when I was seeing

4:14

the headline about pegging, I did feel

4:16

somewhat, somewhat sorry for you, so I

4:18

thought we'd bring you into a more

4:20

lofty conversation here. So, SUNAC was forced

4:22

into a bit of a mini reshuffle

4:24

after junior education minister Robert Halphin and

4:26

armed forces minister James Heepee both resigned

4:28

from the government. There was also a conspicuous

4:31

promotion, which we can discuss a little bit

4:33

more later on. But on this, does it

4:35

feel like SUNAC is losing the battle to

4:37

convince his party he's right for the job,

4:39

not just convinced the public he is? I

4:42

mean, it's not looking good, is it? And

4:44

the problem is those are kind of the same thing. It's

4:46

like the fact that he's failing to convince the public is

4:49

what has the party in such a flat, I think it's now 63 MPs

4:52

have said they will not be standing in the next

4:54

election. And some of them would just want to retire,

4:56

but a lot of those guys, it's just like, I'm

4:59

going to lose, it's not worth it, we're going to be

5:01

out. And you know, there's

5:03

plenty of evidence for that, like polls are

5:05

still trending downwards, reforms seem

5:07

to be going up. There was

5:09

one from you go last week, which have the

5:11

Tories on 19, they don't, I don't have fallen

5:14

before, 20, I don't have fallen below 20% before.

5:17

If that poll was actually replicated at a

5:19

general election, there's a few of them 100

5:21

seats. And that's before tactical voting is taken

5:23

into account, like they're the

5:25

fucks basically. And the

5:27

problem with being fucked is like, there's

5:30

no power of patronage anymore. Like sin that can't kind of

5:32

dangle things in front of people and say, well, if you're

5:34

good, you'll get this, because he's not

5:36

going to have that power very soon. And everyone knows

5:39

that. So everyone's just running around like headless chickens and

5:41

it's brilliant. And also, everyone so far has probably already

5:43

had a cabinet job, I suppose. I mean, there's only

5:45

so many jobs you can give grant shops to keep

5:47

them on size, isn't there? I don't know. There were

5:51

sciences theorized that grant shops could one day

5:53

be doing every job. And

5:56

finally, with us, it's political correspondent for the

5:58

independent Zoe Grinnevold. Hello. Johnny

6:01

Mercer is being pushed to hand over the

6:03

names of those who told him about alleged

6:05

war crimes in Afghanistan by an independent inquiry

6:07

looking into this. Failure to

6:09

comply could result in a prison sentence.

6:12

How do you feel about this? I mean, as a

6:14

journalist, does the idea of identifying sources make you wince

6:16

a bit? Yeah, it's one of those

6:19

things where you immediately

6:22

understand why he would be asked to

6:24

provide this information. You know, it's a

6:26

statutory inquiry. He is a

6:28

minister. They are alleged

6:30

war crimes of a really serious

6:32

nature, you know, the murder of

6:34

Afghani citizens. So you can

6:36

understand the severity of the situation, but at

6:38

the same time, you would think

6:40

they're protected by virtue of being whistleblowers, just

6:43

like journalists wouldn't reveal the sources of someone

6:45

who told them something quite serious and then they're reported

6:47

on it. You have to ask

6:49

whether it's in the sort of public interest

6:51

for Mr. Mercer to reveal the identities

6:55

of these people. And

6:57

you know, the fact that he could potentially go to jail

6:59

for this for not complying with the demands of a statutory

7:01

inquiry is quite serious. It's not really something we've ever seen

7:04

before. And he suggested he won't comply. And he suggested

7:06

he won't. Well, there was some

7:08

talk yesterday of him being

7:11

in conversations with the whistleblowers about whether

7:13

or not he could supply their identity.

7:15

That was reported somewhere. I don't know if that's definitely

7:17

true or if that has gone any

7:19

further. There's

7:22

also the suggestion that maybe the judge will back

7:24

down. He'll understand the seriousness of it. He'll

7:26

understand that they are whistleblowers and they are protected

7:29

in that sense. But

7:31

you know, it's a really it's a difficult

7:33

situation. You have to question what the government

7:35

will do. You have to question what roads

7:38

Johnny Mercer decides to take. So

7:41

I think this is going to play out in quite an

7:43

interesting way. And it definitely presents a whole new issue for

7:45

the government that we've not really seen before.

7:51

For reasons known only to themselves, the Tories decided

7:53

to release some of the most unhinged political campaign

7:55

videos of all time this week. They

7:57

suggest life under labor will be a

7:59

dystopian. future, which doesn't sound all that much

8:01

different to life under the Conservatives. Perhaps

8:04

someone at CCHQ is trying out the three-word

8:06

slogan, Devils you know, with focus groups as

8:08

we speak. The first video

8:10

in question talked about life under Labour

8:12

Mayor Master Sadiq Khan, and

8:15

portrayed London as a 28-day later-esque hellscape, which came

8:17

as quite the surprise to me when I watched

8:19

it on my morning commute. They

8:21

then turned their sights on Birmingham, which didn't look

8:23

like an apocalyptic wasteland the last time I visited.

8:25

So, what is pushing the Tories so far to

8:28

the brink, and can they really keep this up

8:30

for very long? John, I see you made it

8:32

through London safely to get here, which is a big relief to

8:34

all of us. We're fighting with

8:36

our hands. When I saw the video, I

8:38

was shocked it wasn't a parody, to be

8:40

honest. What did you think? I

8:44

mean, have you seen Batman Begins? Yes.

8:46

It very much reminded me of that kind of series of

8:48

it. It's the Dark Knight, isn't it? The other thing, no,

8:50

actually what it really reminded me of is about 40 years

8:52

ago, Telly Savallis,

8:55

bear with me on this, who played Kojak,

8:57

did a series of short films about

9:00

cities around the UK as promotional

9:02

things. And it's just these absolutely

9:04

baffling things with the voice of Kojak talking about

9:06

the Birmingham in a ring road and stuff. It's

9:08

got to become a cult thing. It feels like

9:10

someone in CCHQ has seen those and decided to

9:12

do the Evil Mary universe version. I

9:17

mean, I suspect what is going on is they've

9:19

given up on winning any votes

9:21

in cities. They know the people they're losing

9:23

are the ones who are now fleeing to reform.

9:25

And they are the kind of people who are

9:27

really worried about Sudhique Khan and knife crime

9:29

and their frightened pensioners basically,

9:31

aren't they? So are they trying

9:33

simply here to widen some sort

9:35

of geographical political divide? I

9:38

mean, it is a continuation of a strategy that's

9:40

been going on for since at least 2016, like

9:44

possibly earlier. But it is

9:46

sort of interesting how the Tories have tried

9:49

to run this country while attacking its

9:51

capital where they all live. Yeah. Are

9:54

they just using London as a tool then because

9:56

they also don't think they can win the mayoral

9:58

race? So Susan Hall, I'm sure, is a fantastic.

10:00

candidate but she looks like she's fighting

10:02

an uphill battle. Susan Hawley's like nearly 30

10:04

points behind according to the last poll. She's

10:08

at the labor apparently more worried than

10:10

you would expect given that polling but

10:13

it is not looking great for her so

10:15

I suspect what this is actually about is

10:17

shoring up the vote elsewhere in the country.

10:20

Although one of the weird things is like the

10:22

the mayor of the West Midlands who is responsible

10:24

for Birmingham is a Tory and he's

10:26

straight. He's a moderate Tory but he is nonetheless now

10:29

the anti-bermian video is attacking Labour's management

10:31

of Birmingham City Council which sits under

10:33

that combined authority but nonetheless

10:35

that feels like quite a confused message. Yeah it

10:38

feels strange also to be having a go at

10:40

London but then also any other city that they just

10:42

feel like at the same time doesn't really quite work.

10:44

Yeah I do wonder if these are the first in

10:46

the series and like you know by the end of

10:48

the next week we'll be looking at Plymouth or like

10:50

Oxford or it could run and run. Yeah I'm waiting

10:52

to hear what exactly is wrong with Manchester. That's

10:55

going to be nice. And he's woke I'm sure as well

10:57

we'll add him to the list. So

11:02

Ross the tone of the videos were almost

11:04

comical but did you find the language used

11:06

to be quite sinister in

11:08

some ways? I mean the suggestion that Khan

11:11

seized power and he was described as the

11:13

Labour mayor master which just feels a bit

11:15

almost like a sort of conspiracy theory style

11:17

language to me. It's bloody insane

11:20

the language and actually the Birmingham video is

11:22

even worse than the first one. This is

11:24

the strange thing that they do a really

11:26

bad video they get mocked for it and

11:28

the following day they put out another one

11:30

that is even more ridiculous. The Birmingham one

11:32

contains the words the

11:35

scales of justice are balanced by

11:37

a force beyond mortal comprehension. It

11:40

doesn't even mean anything. Can we just get a

11:42

kick there? Yeah because you actually want the scales

11:44

of justice to be balanced right? I mean I

11:46

thought that was the whole idea of Lady Liberty

11:48

balancing the scales of justice but

11:50

they're balanced by a force beyond

11:52

mortal comprehension. What the Labour

11:54

Party? What? It's just the whole

11:56

thing is insane it's like it's been written by AI

11:59

and it's very very odd,

12:01

but I think Politico was

12:04

reporting something that was anonymous, obviously Tory

12:06

MP had said today, that

12:08

they thought the ad was aimed at Stevenage,

12:11

which for those who don't know is a

12:13

commutator outside London, rather than Streston, which for

12:15

those who don't know is part of South

12:17

London. And that is the really pathetic thing

12:20

about it. But they

12:22

actually think that they

12:25

can fight a local election campaign, a

12:27

mayoral election campaign on the basis of

12:29

appealing to people who don't even live

12:31

in the capital. Yeah, yeah, it's

12:33

very sure. I mean, I've been to Stevenage

12:35

and it's, I don't see why this would

12:37

particularly appeal to them. I've got some friends

12:39

who live there, I'll have to

12:41

ask them. So could you pick out some

12:43

of the key false bits from the videos

12:45

other than that they used footage from totally

12:47

different places to the places they were referring

12:49

to? There's so much here, it's

12:52

hard to know where to begin. So to

12:54

start with, they claim that Khan is responsible for

12:56

police. And it's actually joint responsibility that

12:58

he has with the Home Secretary for

13:01

the Met. They talk

13:04

about him implementing attacks

13:06

on driving, forcing people to stay inside

13:08

or go underground. Do they mean take

13:10

the tube? Or do they mean some

13:13

sort of strange sewer existence?

13:16

And there's the claim that knife crime has

13:18

gone up 54% since 2016. That's not true. It's gone up 31%,

13:20

which is far too much. And knife crime

13:25

is a problem in the capital. And if it

13:28

was predominantly white boys rather than black boys

13:30

getting stabbed every couple of weeks, we would

13:32

be taking it an awful lot more seriously

13:35

than we do. There is a problem in

13:37

knife crime in the whole

13:39

of England, and that does need attention.

13:41

But to lie about the stats is

13:43

unforgivable. And then there's even stuff about

13:45

drug death rate at a record high. And

13:47

again, it's like 56.6 deaths per million,

13:52

which is claimed to be the

13:54

highest on record. It's not the

13:56

highest on record. It was higher in

13:58

the year 2000. And

14:00

it's a bit higher at the moment because we've got

14:02

a problem with fentanyl starting to come into the country.

14:05

But it's still not high and it's much less than

14:07

it is, for example, in the Northeast, which has a

14:09

massive drugs problem. The

14:11

whole thing is just riddled with lies,

14:13

frankly. I noticed with that as well, they

14:16

used a sort of screenshot of an article about

14:18

Steve Kahn saying he wanted to potentially legalise cannabis.

14:20

And I'm not saying there aren't problems around cannabis

14:22

and drug-induced psychosis and all that sort of thing,

14:25

but I don't imagine it's likened to particularly many

14:27

drug deaths. So it kind of didn't make

14:29

very much sense in any way there,

14:31

really. No. So a lot of

14:33

MPs will have gone back to their constituencies over the

14:35

recess. Is this just an attempt

14:38

to give them something to talk about that isn't

14:40

how rubbish Zunac is doing? I

14:42

think someone, probably somebody quite junior,

14:45

thought, what if we

14:47

went full Republican attack ad? What

14:50

if we even had the US voiceover? Would

14:52

it work? You know, would that kind

14:55

of thing really shake up British politics?

14:57

Do basic standards matter anymore of accuracy?

15:00

What the hell? Things are so bad for the

15:02

Tories in the polls right now. Why not? Let's

15:05

give it a go. Let's see how this goes down in

15:07

the country and if people like it. I think that was

15:10

the only motivation and the only

15:12

reasoning behind these videos. I

15:14

have an alternate theory, if anyone's interested

15:16

in my boring on, which is like,

15:18

it's so bad. I think it's deliberately

15:21

ridiculous. Like when they use Comic standards in

15:23

their memes and stuff like that. It's an attempt

15:25

like they knew if they made it really over

15:27

the top, then everyone would share it to mock

15:29

it. And therefore it's more

15:31

likely to reach the people who with whom that will

15:34

resonate. I don't think it being ridiculous

15:36

is a side effect. I don't think they're looking

15:38

at this thinking, oh, this is a really

15:40

smart video we've done. I think they're looking at this thinking people are

15:42

going to share this for us. And I think as

15:44

well, if you're sharing it around, even if you

15:47

think that the tone is ridiculous, the things like

15:49

the highest drug death rate or the knife crime

15:51

stuff might stick with you. You know, you might

15:54

take that bit away and believe that even if you

15:56

think the rest of it is ridiculous. So it's kind

15:58

of like drip feeding. backs into people's

16:01

brains so that when they do go to the

16:03

ballot boxes they'll think hmm, you know Maybe

16:06

Susan Hall who herself has been a victim of

16:08

crime having misplaced her oyster card on the

16:10

tube. Yeah Would

16:12

be the right person to represent me and the

16:14

victim of crime for that front page evening standard

16:16

photo remember as well That that kind of the

16:19

crime against her I'm sure you've also when

16:21

you're talking about London and you need to having

16:23

any absolute stats as opposed to you know per

16:25

million But when you're talking about say the number

16:27

of knife crimes, you've got to bear in mind

16:29

The population of London has increased quite fast and

16:31

it's a million more than it was a decade

16:34

ago That's not inevitably going to affect the stats.

16:36

But of course they never mentioned that So

16:39

we're on to the mini reshuffle quickly Jonathan

16:42

Gullis aka 15 P

16:44

Lee as he's been called by some people on

16:46

the internet God, I may sound old thing

16:48

on the internet. But anyway worldwide. Yeah on the worldwide

16:50

web Now I

16:52

could see Lee Anderson was a bad idea myself at

16:55

the time to be honest And I don't think I'm

16:57

really some sort of political savant of any kind and

16:59

now they've gone to his Discount version

17:01

in his old role. What are they

17:04

thinking? I think they're trying to

17:06

fill the gap with somebody who they think is

17:08

likely Anderson You know, he's stoke on Trent MPs.

17:10

He fits that kind of you know,

17:12

red wall type constituency

17:16

He's part of the 2019 intake He's

17:18

you know got some of Lee Anderson's fighting

17:21

spirits I would say not to the same

17:23

extent, but he definitely can be quite punchy

17:27

And of course, he's a clean he

17:29

rails against woke in May 2022 He

17:33

said that his constituents were left flabbergasted

17:35

that the woke wet and wobbly lot

17:37

Opposite are on the side of their

17:39

lefty woke warriors who are making sure

17:41

these rapists and pedophiles remain in this United

17:43

Kingdom Rather than standing up for

17:45

British people in their safety that was regarding Home

17:47

Office deportation flights So he uses the same language,

17:50

you know, the same the same sort of signal.

17:52

I think they think he sends out I

17:55

saw a really funny anecdote going around on Twitter earlier.

17:57

I'm not sure if it's true because it was a

17:59

screenshot from Reddit of somebody who

18:01

said they used to be taught by

18:03

Jonathan Gullis and when, because he of course used to be

18:05

a teacher before he was an MP, and

18:07

he apparently went into a fit of

18:09

rage once because they

18:12

printed, someone printed off a picture of his head

18:14

and stuck it on a picture of a seagull

18:16

and posted it around the store. And I just

18:18

thought that was great. And I could totally, you

18:20

know, I'm not saying it's true, but I could

18:22

totally see him responding like that. Yeah, he does

18:24

get very angry about things. And I saw he

18:26

tweeted go woke, go broke about Birmingham today. So

18:28

we need to kind of add that to the

18:31

list of things which are woke alongside any

18:33

colour that isn't red, white or blue. The

18:36

rest of the read shuffle, it seems

18:39

a bit barrel scrapie to me, to be

18:41

honest, but is there anyone interesting or anyone

18:43

I should think, hey, they're talented. No,

18:46

well, I don't want to be too harsh. I

18:49

mean, Kevin Hollen, I'll be too harsh. Well, Kevin

18:51

Hollen, Rake has been in the news quite a lot

18:53

recently, because he's obviously been sort of

18:55

standing in for the a lot of the post

18:57

office horizon stuff. So I guess they found him to

18:59

be quite an impressive communicator. He's now Minister of State

19:01

in the Department of Business. And

19:03

there's Gani is an interesting one. So

19:05

she's now Minister for Europe. She's

19:08

been sanctioned by both Russia and China. So

19:10

an interesting choice for a Foreign Office Minister.

19:12

Yeah. And then the rest, you know, they're

19:15

all you wouldn't have heard of them. They're

19:17

not household names. Leo Doketi, Minister of State,

19:19

Minister of the Armed Forces, Luke

19:21

Hall, Alan Mack. I mean, none of them, as you

19:23

say, are people that anyone would know these are

19:25

fairly junior ministerial positions. But

19:28

it does kind of suggest to you that we really

19:30

are, you know, we've got over 60 Conservative

19:32

MPs now saying they're going to stand down

19:34

before the next election. It really is giving,

19:37

you know, the bottom

19:40

of the pile. Yeah, yeah, exactly. I mean,

19:44

Jonathan Gullis was the sort of headline, I would

19:46

say, and that's only because he is 15 Peely.

19:49

Yeah. And I mean, that does also feel like

19:51

a sort of rat that just can't find the

19:53

cheese and wants to keep electric, electrocuting

19:56

itself. So, Jon, is it the

19:58

sense of just total rejection? that's

20:00

making the Tories get a bit weird. The polls

20:02

are completely diapolical, there's no election

20:04

in sight and it doesn't really look like

20:06

anything is going to turn it

20:08

around. Are they in quite a weird place psychologically,

20:10

which is gonna make them act strange? I mean

20:13

they must be. I mean just like knowing everyone

20:15

hates you is gonna do weird things to you,

20:17

isn't it? But I think it's a couple of

20:19

different things. I think firstly there

20:21

is no policy, there is going to be no

20:23

policy. We are just in one long

20:25

election campaign so there's a vacuum, no one is

20:27

governing the country. In other words,

20:30

it's very difficult for them to kind of make the

20:32

case for their record because you know things are visibly

20:34

falling to bits. And

20:36

the further is just this sense of desperation, as

20:38

Ross was saying, things are so bad

20:40

for them. I can see why they're

20:43

thinking, well we really might as well try just

20:45

throwing shit at the wall to feel sick basically.

20:48

Yeah, they feel like someone that's really upset

20:50

about being dumped and just kind of won't

20:52

leave the person alone, sort of desperately clawing

20:54

back to them. Yeah, leaving like you know

20:56

three minute voice notes sobbing at 4am. Yeah,

20:59

I'm really sorry about that. I didn't

21:01

mean it. Someone opening WhatsApp and it's

21:03

just the whole screen they have to scroll through the edge.

21:06

So there's a piece in Conservative Home which

21:08

asked the question, which I found quite enjoyable

21:10

to read really, the what if the polls

21:12

are right? Which I mean even

21:14

if they're a little bit not right, it's

21:16

still pretty bad for them. Are

21:19

they having a bit of a, whilst going

21:21

into this sort of realm of non-reality, they're

21:23

also having a bit of a reckoning with

21:25

reality. So Paul and Guru John Curtis has

21:28

said it's 99% certain that Labour will win,

21:30

which I think we all thought but it gives it a

21:32

bit more gravitas, doesn't it? I mean the

21:34

idea of the sort of wipeout, though like not just a

21:36

bad result but a really bad one for the Tories has

21:38

been kind of creeping up the agenda. It was kind of

21:40

like a fringe thing that was discussed

21:43

on bits of the internet. And

21:45

then it started popping up on sub-st and

21:49

then so the left wing writers, hello, we're doing it. And now finally it's kind of made it

21:51

to the actual sort of Tory blogosphere. So

21:54

the next thing is look out for a column in the

21:56

Telegraph or something I guess. But yeah, no it does kind

21:58

of feel like gradually reality is dawning. that

22:00

they would have to recover by, I think it's about 12% in

22:03

the polls for it to be as bad

22:05

as 1997. And they may well

22:07

do that, like the polls may move,

22:09

it wouldn't be that weird if there's a bit of kind

22:12

of closure between the two parties as we get closer to

22:14

the action, that does tend to happen. But

22:16

to be 12 points off a

22:18

generational defeat like 1997, it's

22:20

like this is really quite bad. For us,

22:23

is there a bit of kind of, I don't know, justice

22:26

is maybe the wrong word, but here that the

22:28

Tories have sort of dug themselves

22:31

into this spot by using

22:33

the tools of degrading the way we speak

22:35

about politics so much. But I

22:37

suppose like any sort of tool, if you use it

22:39

too often, it becomes less and less effective.

22:42

So now, you know, even resorting to

22:44

videos which really draw on people's base

22:46

fears won't help them, will it? No, I

22:49

don't think it will. But they are basically torn

22:51

at the moment, they are squeezed from

22:54

both, from two directions from both voters

22:56

who are leaving for labour and voters who are

22:59

leaving for reform. And they've already

23:01

the switch to labour happened

23:03

already. Labour support is pretty much consistent

23:05

in the polls now, what's actually ticking

23:07

up and further eroding the tourist support

23:09

is reform. So they are

23:11

looking at that and thinking, right, people,

23:13

and I won't refer to reform as far

23:15

right, because they're pursuing a lawsuit, because people who are

23:18

referring to them as far right, further

23:20

right is obviously the place to be

23:22

because we're losing more votes there. And so that's

23:24

why they're putting out videos like this. But of

23:27

course, the key problem is that they incapable

23:30

of running the country properly. And everyone can see

23:32

that. And some people take from that that we

23:34

need to move much further to the right. And

23:36

some people take from that to the way that

23:38

we need to move to the centre or the

23:41

left. But the problem is the same one, they're

23:43

still losing votes. Yeah, so the the hot

23:45

thing there is for them, they're looking to win

23:47

an election and the practical thing that might be

23:49

better for the country would be

23:51

them going more into the centre. But that would

23:53

probably see them lose literally everyone because that ground

23:56

has been dominated by labour. And the right would

23:58

hate them. I think they're actually slightly wrong. because

24:00

I think reform voters are surprisingly

24:03

promiscuous. And they're

24:05

often not, you know, instinctively pretty right wing

24:07

at all. Quite a lot of them are

24:09

keen on a quite an interventionist state, certainly

24:12

for the people they like in that state,

24:14

not for the people who they don't. But

24:16

nonetheless, they expect certain standards from public services,

24:19

for example. And you even

24:21

get some weird crossover between people who are

24:23

thinking of voting green and people who are

24:25

voting reform. And that shows to what extent

24:28

it is a protest vote as well.

24:30

So do you think as well as being

24:32

desperate, the Tories are just bored. I'm

24:35

finding some of this quite boring to dig into. The

24:37

video shocked me, but at the same time I just

24:39

thought, oh, for fuck's sake, they're doing it again. Are

24:42

they just bored of it? They can't run things,

24:45

they can't make things better. They're worn

24:47

out. I think there's different feelings

24:49

amongst different parts of the party. I don't

24:51

know if it's so much boredom. I think

24:53

it's probably more what Ross said, which is

24:56

that at this point, they just have nothing

24:58

to lose by throwing

25:00

shit at the wall and seeing if it sticks, essentially. And

25:04

there are also lots of people in the party who have different

25:07

strategies for how they want to bring back power.

25:09

And I think you can see this a bit from

25:11

how Sunak is responding to things. One

25:14

minute he's pursuing quite right wing

25:17

legislation or making quite right wing sound

25:19

bites. The next he's standing on the

25:21

steps of down the street doing a

25:24

message of unity and calling

25:26

for everyone to come together and stand up in the face

25:28

of extremism. It's like

25:31

he's surrounded by young

25:33

advisors and the right

25:35

of the party and everybody's chewing his

25:37

air off. He's just going for lots

25:39

of different approaches depending on what day

25:41

of the week it is and who's convinced him

25:43

this week. I guess there might be to some

25:46

extent, if you look at the sort of people

25:48

who are doing conservative comms or if you think

25:50

about people who aren't politicians but work in the

25:52

Conservative Party, they're all going to be

25:54

thinking about their futures, what sort of jobs they want.

25:56

And some people might want to have on their CV.

25:58

I did this really well known. own conservative

26:01

campaign where we made all these insane videos

26:03

and they got all this outreach. They were

26:05

shared millions of times on social media. So

26:08

I don't know if it's boredom. I think it's just

26:10

lots of people seeing this as an opportunity to try

26:12

out lots of different things. And it comes across confused.

26:15

Someone at CCHQ desperately wants to be hired

26:17

by LadBible. Now

26:33

let's have a question from one of our

26:35

Patreon backers in But Your Emails. If you

26:37

support us on Patreon, you too can submit

26:39

a question for the panel. So make it

26:41

a good question. Sarah Vaughan this week asks,

26:43

does the panel think there will be a

26:45

UKIP-slash-reform-style disruption on the left? And what would

26:47

be the potential impact on the incoming touchwood

26:50

Labour government? We don't have any wood in the studio,

26:52

but rest assured we're all suggesting that we are touching

26:54

wood here. Roz, what do you think of that? I

26:58

think there will certainly be some protests on

27:01

the left when, as if we

27:03

do, John Curtis is right, Labour

27:05

takes power. I think they will

27:07

sniff the opportunity to disrupt and

27:09

to push the agenda further to

27:11

the left or further back to

27:13

the left and resist

27:16

what Keir Starmer is doing because

27:18

they'll sense it's kind of their last chance, right? And

27:21

that is a risk. However,

27:23

I do think Starmer's

27:25

grip on the party is such

27:28

that he will probably be

27:30

able to resist that. A

27:33

similar thing recently has been the dissent

27:36

over Gaza in the Labour ranks and

27:38

that has been problematic and it's been difficult

27:40

for many in the Labour Party. And

27:44

we saw some fallout in terms

27:46

of George Galloway's victory, but I

27:49

don't think ultimately it will really

27:51

affect the election result. So

27:54

there will be flashes. The thing is, and

27:56

the media will very much seize on these divisions

27:58

because the Tories will be absolutely nothing

28:00

probably and nowhere and no one will be interested

28:02

anymore in who's plotting against who, although there will be

28:04

a certain amount of excitement for a while

28:06

about who's going to be the next leader of the Tory party,

28:09

are they going to go right, are they going to go status,

28:11

are they going to go all-bound, are they going to go blah

28:13

blah blah. So there will be

28:15

that excitement, but most of the media's attention

28:17

will be on Labour and its internal divisions,

28:19

so they will very much play it up.

28:21

But given the likely profile

28:23

of most of the new intake of

28:25

Labour MPs and the fact that most

28:28

of them, not all as we saw

28:30

with the case of anti-Semitism in Rochdale, but

28:34

most of them have been very highly vetted, I don't

28:36

think that they will want to rock

28:38

the boat that much. John,

28:41

what do you think? I

28:43

think there's probably sort of a sweet

28:45

spot for a Labour majority, if I don't

28:47

know where it is maybe, so there's like hundreds, something like

28:49

that. I think if it's too small then

28:52

obviously that will give the socialist campaign group a

28:54

certain amount of power, like it won't be a

28:56

veto or anything, but they will know that they

28:58

have the power to defeat

29:00

the government and that will make their

29:02

voice heard. I assume there will be MPs

29:04

who will do that and will want

29:07

to drag the government to the left. But

29:10

also I think if they get such a big majority

29:12

that like, if it is one of these insane

29:14

results we're kind of seeing in some of the

29:16

polls, then no one

29:18

is better at opposing the Labour party than the Labour party.

29:20

I think it unlikely there'd

29:23

be a formal split, but I can totally imagine

29:25

kind of like an internal factivism, because as

29:28

Rishi Sinak is finding now, like a

29:30

lot of the Prime Minister's power comes from

29:33

patronage. And if you have

29:35

400 Labour MPs,

29:37

they're not all going to get to be

29:39

ministers, they're not going to be able

29:41

to be on that track, there just won't be

29:43

enough jobs out there. So it makes it much

29:45

harder to kind of like tell people, if you

29:47

behave well and vote for government, then

29:49

you know, somewhere down the line there'll be like a

29:51

nice juicy job for you. And also

29:53

it won't matter so much if people rebel and they

29:55

will know like they can rebel safely without

29:58

actually risking bringing the government. So

30:01

I think too big a Labour victory probably

30:03

actually makes the party harder to run. The

30:06

other issue that's worth thinking about is

30:08

whether that external force already exists and

30:10

it's the Green Party. I mean

30:13

like Owen Jones' intervention a few

30:16

days ago where he said he's after the

30:18

Labour Party, he's going to be supporting independent

30:20

and Green candidates. I think that will probably

30:22

be a certain amount of the energy that

30:24

previously backed Corbynite candidates is going to end

30:26

up. It would be nice

30:28

to think that we could have a political force that kind

30:30

of like drags Labour maybe a little bit to the left,

30:33

just as like Farage and Co have dragged the

30:35

Tories to the right. I

30:37

am not quite so convinced

30:40

that left-wing politics works like that. I think

30:42

a lot of people around Stalmer are very,

30:44

very anti-being dragged in that direction. They will

30:46

dig their holes in. Plus

30:49

a lot of the Green vote is not necessarily

30:51

left-wing these days. It's increasingly its rural NBS on

30:53

and so on. But that force

30:55

does already exist out there. Zoe.

30:58

I think the power that Stalmer has

31:00

on the Labour Party but also just the fact

31:02

that a lot of people know that the best

31:04

way to kind of keep the Conservatives out is

31:06

to vote Labour or to vote in a way

31:08

that would put Labour in government means that I

31:11

don't think we're going to get any significant challenge

31:13

to the Labour Party. But I do think there

31:15

are going to be pockets of dissent and I

31:17

think there's a few issues. I mean people are

31:19

talking a lot about Gaza and obviously that was

31:21

a factor in the Rochdale by-election. But when I

31:23

went and I was talking to voters there, a

31:25

lot of them were actually really angry with the

31:27

Labour Council. You had a lot of small

31:29

business owners there who were furious with what

31:31

they perceived as Labour Council failings that had

31:33

affected their business. They changed the roads. They'd

31:36

installed cycle lanes. Now nobody was coming to

31:38

their shops. Nobody could stay. They

31:40

were losing business. Potholes, litter, all those things,

31:42

those kind of local issues. And

31:46

I think George Galloway knew there was anger

31:48

there and some of it, you know, some

31:50

of it he did capitalise on on Stalmer's

31:52

approach to Gaza. But some of it was

31:54

actually. Nobody cares about Rochdale except

31:56

me. That was The message he was sending

31:58

out. I do think

32:01

any know it's interesting because the the

32:03

the times that he got the second

32:05

largest sites have was they the telly

32:07

Completely independent Local Rochdale? Yeah man I

32:09

think three or four generations his family

32:11

lived in Rochdale at everything he was

32:13

campaigning on the local issues and I

32:15

do think there is this disenchantment with

32:17

with with Westminster politics this fear me

32:19

at M P's in Westminster and how

32:21

they think how people perceive that they

32:23

look at certain areas and I think

32:25

it's more and more we might see

32:27

people turning to independent candidates. Local Ponds

32:29

It's who. They think represent their interests. But.

32:31

I don't think that's gonna be six and of. Jeremy

32:42

Hunt has enough money so bad that around

32:44

the decade ago it was reported he had

32:47

a sprung floor on which he can practice

32:49

dancing, the lambada installed, and his home.

32:51

I honestly with some as a total joke,

32:53

but it's not so. His footwork fell afoul

32:55

recently though when he suggested that one hundred

32:58

thousand pounds a year is not a

33:00

huge salary in his sorry constituency? at least

33:02

I imagine most news to a lot of

33:04

people, but is there something we can glean

33:07

from his comments or even the he

33:09

realizes the Tories have made the middle and

33:11

upper middle. Class is worse off despite

33:13

having been meant to be that champions

33:15

don't It's easy to call hung an

33:18

idiot or worse as many newsreaders have

33:20

a points and on on trying Desperately

33:22

held Not so but has he actually

33:24

revealed her something? quite honest about how

33:27

badly the Tories have. The.

33:29

Screwed people over financially. The idea of

33:31

them saying one hundred thousand pounds when

33:33

you salary would have seemed completely last

33:36

but when they came at apparently paused

33:38

enough seats though be natural inflation Gemini

33:40

but it still is No bought long

33:42

ago. know I have to says income.

33:44

Jeremy Hunt com is the sweetest. Surprised

33:46

me because I did twenty years ago

33:48

now but they did work for his

33:50

company. How causes know I have to

33:53

suffer as is Hop is British Army

33:55

of yeah but like they're like a

33:57

hundred thousand pounds was definitely consider the

33:59

huge. amounts money, £20,000 would have been

34:01

considered an enormous amount of money. There was

34:03

an army of staff living on 15k

34:06

or less, and yeah, this was 20 years ago, but

34:08

even so, that was not very much money. So

34:10

I think Hunter

34:12

2003 might have been surprised by the views

34:15

of Hunter 2024. I

34:18

mean, a lot of it's housing, isn't it? I

34:20

don't want to kind of preempt, but so much

34:22

of this is like the exact comment

34:24

from Hunt, which you know, £100,000 is not necessarily

34:27

that much if you have a mortgage in this

34:29

area. And looking at house prices

34:32

in Godalming, which is the largest town in

34:34

his constituency of South West Surrey, you are

34:36

looking at half a mil for a fairly

34:39

bog standard three bed house. And

34:41

that's just not, you're not going to be able to buy

34:43

that on an average salary. You either need a huge lump

34:45

of family money, or an incredibly

34:47

high salary, or preferably both. So

34:51

yeah, this is the economy the Tories have

34:53

presided over. I think the Christian

34:55

Hunt should probably be worrying about itself. Why is it

34:57

so bad that like £100,000 is not enough anymore, to

35:01

get you a fairly reasonable family life in

35:04

somewhere like Surrey? And what could his chance

35:06

for maybe do about that? Ross,

35:08

this time to the first section where we were

35:10

talking about just the Tories are

35:12

having to make themselves increasingly detached from reality.

35:14

And so when they try and talk about

35:17

tangible things like this, they're just, they're

35:19

such a massive disconnect. Well,

35:22

as John was saying, I think this is, this

35:24

is a reality for some people living in Surrey,

35:26

particularly, you know, someone who's working in London

35:29

and might well be pulling in 100 grand

35:31

a year commuting in, and they've

35:34

got a huge mortgage. And

35:36

they've also got huge childcare expenses, you can

35:38

easily drop to grand a month on childcare,

35:41

even more, that's 24 grand a year, you're

35:43

earning 100 grand, you're paying

35:45

40% tax on anything over 50

35:47

grand, you're paying a large

35:49

sum into your mortgage, it's actually not surprising

35:52

that you know, the money, the money does

35:54

go when you've got those kinds of expenses.

35:57

And of course, only 4%. of

36:00

working people in Britain do earn more than

36:02

100k, so yes, he is absolutely out of

36:04

touch on that level. But I can completely

36:06

see where he's coming from in the context

36:09

of his constituency and the amount that people

36:11

are having to pay just in order to

36:14

carry on working because that's what you do

36:16

when you have small kids. You work in

36:18

order to carry on working. So

36:20

that's the existence. On the other hand, 105k

36:23

is the sum that Hunt has walked

36:28

over to his local constituency association

36:30

in the last five years. So in that

36:32

case, maybe it isn't a lot, or maybe

36:34

it is. Is this a bit of a

36:36

weird thing, I suppose, for Hunt, of being that position of

36:39

being Chancellor and speaking very much to the nation in that

36:41

role? But then, as you say, this was meant to be

36:43

him speaking to the people of Surrey,

36:45

and he's having to sort of think that way

36:47

around, you know, he obviously doesn't want to lose

36:49

his seat, either, I imagine. Yeah, it's a

36:51

dog whistle. It's saying to people who are earning

36:53

100k in his constituency, I understand how

36:55

hard it is for you right now.

36:57

As John

37:00

was saying, there are reasons why it's so hard for them

37:02

right now. Yeah, there's focus

37:04

on salaries here. But what about pensions? There's a lot

37:06

of talk around the triple lock going on at the

37:08

moment. What implications are we going to see

37:11

if there are changes around that? It's

37:14

going to be more

37:16

of a live issue because the triple

37:18

lock is frankly unsustainable. And this is

37:20

why this week there was a plan,

37:23

there were rumours that they might raise the

37:26

retirement age for people between 47 and

37:28

48, earlier than they thought, to 68,

37:30

rather than 67,

37:35

which is obviously bad news for those people. I

37:37

think I might just escape this fate by about

37:40

three months. But

37:44

it's not going to be welcome news. And

37:46

it's not the triple lock.

37:49

It's hugely popular among pensions,

37:52

but it simply isn't sustainable

37:54

in a world where you've got

37:57

child poverty at the levels you have at the

37:59

moment. got a situation where

38:01

I think it's one in

38:03

four kids in Britain now is living in absolute

38:05

poverty. And of course the great success of the

38:07

last 15, 20 years has been to ensure that

38:12

relatively few pensioners are now in poverty

38:14

and that's really good. But

38:17

there are quite a few pensioners now who

38:20

are very definitely not in poverty and

38:23

we still haven't addressed the

38:25

issues of elderly people social care. We need

38:27

to talk about how to build better places

38:29

for people to spend the last decade or

38:31

two of their lives. Because

38:33

at the moment we have a situation where

38:36

social care at home is often

38:38

completely inadequate unless it's extremely expensive.

38:41

And then people have to go into a

38:43

care home which is also extremely expensive. And

38:46

there are so many things to discuss. I think pensions

38:48

are only the least of it when it comes to

38:50

caring for elderly people in this country. So

38:53

as our token young person on the panel today, do

38:55

you feel that salaries which once sounded good? I mean

38:57

I'm sure £100,000 still sounds pretty good. Sounds really good.

39:00

But do they seem less

39:02

and less liveable? I can't imagine, you know,

39:04

I moved to London five years ago on

39:06

an entry-level wage and to be honest

39:09

now I'm not sure if I would make

39:11

that move. I'd have stayed up in Leicester

39:13

where my living costs were far, far less

39:15

than they are when would be down here.

39:17

It was a jump then but now it

39:20

would be just a monumental jump. When

39:22

I moved to London in 2019 I was

39:24

also on a graduate level salary in the

39:26

civil service. So it was all right but

39:28

it wasn't, you know, it

39:30

wasn't really high or anything. And I

39:32

was paying about £700 a month rent.

39:36

It was about a third of

39:38

my salary. And you know, you had to

39:40

be careful but it was kind of the fun

39:42

of it. Like everybody you were

39:44

with didn't have that much money so you

39:46

found the cheap spots and you moaned about

39:48

it but you kind of hoped you were

39:50

on a path to earning more and that

39:52

just seems to have evaporated. I

39:55

mean I didn't get a pay

39:57

rise, a substantial pay rise for years. even

40:00

if I had, the pace of

40:02

rents has just completely outstripped

40:04

how it used to be if you

40:06

were a graduate and you would expect your

40:08

wage to go up. Now, the

40:11

average room rent in London is over £1,000 a

40:13

month. If you are moving to

40:15

London on £26,000, that is

40:19

just going to be an extraordinary proportion of your

40:21

living costs. And then of course, everything else in

40:23

London is extremely expensive as well. But I think

40:25

there's something that we don't talk about here, which

40:27

is really important. And I've seen it amongst my

40:30

peers and I've felt it as well, which

40:32

is that this insecurity around money locks people into

40:34

decisions a lot earlier in their life than I

40:36

think they would have done a decade

40:39

ago, even. So people are now being locked

40:41

into jobs because they're too afraid, they're too

40:43

financially insecure to start again. So people are

40:45

following career paths feeling like I can't go

40:48

back to square one. People are also

40:50

committing to moving in with partners way earlier

40:52

than they would have done for the financial

40:54

security of splitting half a rent.

40:57

People are locked into house shares with people they don't

40:59

like because they're afraid to go back on the rental

41:01

market. And all of these things, I mean, they sound

41:03

fairly part

41:05

of life, but actually they are hugely

41:08

stressful for people. And I think

41:10

that feeling of being locked into

41:12

a life or you're on

41:14

a path that you can't get out of

41:16

is a huge source of anxiety and stress

41:18

for young people. People don't have the

41:20

freedom they used to have to explore. And when you're

41:22

18, you don't really know what you want to do.

41:24

And I mean, lots of people change their minds. You

41:26

change your mind about the sort of person you're with,

41:28

you change your mind about your friends, but people aren't

41:30

able to do that as freely anymore. And I think

41:32

that is quite significant. In 2022,

41:34

so the Bank of England boss at that

41:36

time suggested that rising salaries will boost inflation,

41:38

which we know Hunt is desperate to get

41:40

down. It feels strange for him

41:42

then to basically be making a case that would

41:45

suggest basically everyone

41:47

in the country needs to be paid more

41:49

money than they are being paid for them

41:51

to be able to be comfortable. It's

41:53

Like that cognitive dissonance we were talking about

41:55

earlier, which is that he'll say one thing

41:57

to his constituents who are particularly wealthy and.

42:00

Live in survey and that's another thing. When

42:02

he sending it says dispatch box telling people

42:04

that they just all have to in. I

42:06

get it together and asked for higher wage

42:08

because we're we're we're all in this together.

42:10

Everybody's feeling the pinch when slices. How can

42:12

he say a hundred thousand pounds is not

42:14

that substantial yet? He's asking nurses in a

42:16

to be happy on that, their salary when

42:18

they haven't had a pay rise and and

42:20

ten years old or what have I. Really,

42:23

it doesn't feel like a outset that I

42:25

think it goes. that's what you were saying

42:27

which is in one capacity: hear the constituency

42:29

am, pay and. In another capacity he

42:31

has the chancellor but it also

42:33

does gives a sense as in

42:35

a base the chancellor on the

42:37

prime minister all million you get

42:39

a sense that. When.

42:41

You're not really mingling in those circles which

42:43

the Tories are famous for, that you all

42:45

than and maybe. Not be so sure what is

42:47

actually like to live on thirty? Kane has. Dependents.

42:51

And I think I think not is a i

42:53

think fundamentally the and said the party's very else

42:55

touch with the plight of where he people in

42:57

this country. So. As well

42:59

we we talk about the last

43:01

year the the political divides which

43:03

conservatives have created by We sing

43:05

them they were obsessed with class

43:07

in Britain, the other use splintering

43:09

the class structure as well as

43:11

this the the middle classes. Of.

43:14

More people are middle class would like to refer to

43:16

themselves most I was working class. We see that the

43:18

all they actually. Being. Dragged out

43:20

of the class or perhaps used to

43:22

being in and then different the people

43:24

in the working classes that that been

43:26

pushed further to the publicity we seeing.

43:29

More. Devices in the class system that we may

43:31

be have had in the past. I think

43:33

we're seeing that between generations. I think

43:35

within quite a few people who look

43:37

at the lifestyle the parents had her or

43:39

current the house and say that's a

43:41

lot better than on as going to get.

43:44

So you're saying a switch down. Between.

43:46

generations, And.

43:49

the way we talk about class and brightness

43:52

insane it doesn't make any sense at all

43:54

of course because nobody hardly anybody thinks that

43:56

upper class people who think that they pull

43:58

themselves up from the bottom would never refer

44:01

to themselves as middle class. Plenty

44:03

of people towards the bottom don't want

44:05

to be thought of as towards the bottom. So

44:07

it ends up being the case that almost everybody

44:10

describes themselves as working class on the basis that

44:12

they've done a job during their lives. There

44:14

are alternative ways of thinking about class as

44:16

something that Mike Savage at the

44:18

School of Economics has done a lot of work

44:21

on this. And he identified a group

44:23

that he calls the precariat, which I think is

44:25

really important to think about and that we don't

44:27

think about. Because those people don't have a voice

44:30

in the media. They are in absolute

44:32

poverty generally. And that's not a small

44:34

number of people, nearly a fist of

44:36

people now are struggling with basic needs.

44:39

And as I mentioned earlier, 4 million

44:41

kids are in poverty, 4 million.

44:44

It's just appalling.

44:47

We don't talk about the people at the

44:49

bottom, because we don't like to think about them.

44:51

And that is the real problem. And that's why

44:53

here we are talking about Jeremy Hunt weighing

44:57

in about whether 100k is a large salary

44:59

or not. And that is in

45:02

a way, that's a way for Jeremy Hunt not

45:04

to think about those people at the very bottom

45:06

of society. Good

45:13

news, your favourite history nerds are

45:16

back. Yes, we as We Are History

45:18

have been trawling the history shelves of

45:20

our local bookshops. Well, I

45:23

am John, you mostly went around finding your

45:25

books and moving them to the front of

45:27

the displays. If I can find them as

45:29

a bonus, we are ready to tell you

45:31

all about what we've learned, from the revolting

45:33

French to some revolting women. Via some Brits

45:35

abroad and a foul-mouthed Irishman. So

45:38

download We Are History. Our

45:40

laughable attempt at a silly history podcast.

45:42

With me, John O'Farrill. And me,

45:45

Angela Barnes. Wherever you get

45:47

your podcasts. We've

45:55

reached the end of the show, so what are the stories

45:57

that we've learned? Gone

46:00

under the radar this week. Rose was was.

46:03

A. Little more bad news that suis out

46:05

for today and how many there are.

46:07

But the good news is that there's

46:09

a big nice Super Super that's just

46:11

been completed in London is massive. It's

46:14

sixteen miles long, it seven point two

46:16

meters wide. He diverts thirty four the

46:18

less polluting sow, a sewage out falls

46:20

away from the time this, where they

46:22

would previously have been discharged into stuff.

46:24

Course, what that really means is that

46:27

awfully large amount of shit sitting in

46:29

a tunnel for a long time after

46:31

heavy rainfall, which perhaps isn't ideal, but

46:33

nonetheless, It's better than the current situation

46:35

and all this has been paid for

46:37

naturally through our bills on time sorta.

46:40

But it's these are things that. Are

46:42

going to have to be built

46:44

more and more across the country

46:46

if we are going to be

46:48

able to stop pumping sewage into quarter

46:50

horses everywhere. Cool the Thames tight way.

46:53

Once all hail the Super Suicide

46:55

John. I

46:57

really enjoyed the story. Be present Botswana

46:59

threatening to release thousands of elephants in

47:01

the Hyde Park. Yes sir, see how

47:04

we blasio My sister turn to Saddam

47:06

plays a British wildlife activists from like

47:08

being like upset about labels woman's like

47:10

killing innocent elephants because they're trampling their

47:12

their crops. I like Amazon setting as

47:14

is great but nonetheless I pulled. this

47:17

is excellent pieces. Policy can give a

47:19

new prisons Botswana. I'm sure it would

47:21

be going until the Sun said they

47:23

weren't. Respect for us of the Diana

47:25

Memorials. Of they come as a

47:28

trump, allows our problems and Zoe

47:30

and. My mind is a

47:32

cherry story as well. I'm just a

47:34

lovely story at slay. So adamant a

47:36

woman best into an animal rescue center

47:38

earlier in the week with a baby

47:41

had showed that Seat speaks helps us

47:43

and say the side of the road

47:45

consent hadn't moved or paypal night and

47:47

end of told a it's not hedgehogs

47:49

it's a hot bubbled slutty part of

47:51

the hot and it was a great

47:53

quote from the that in the story

47:55

they said it was pretty obvious to

47:57

us by can see how she was

47:59

mistaken. I went back out and

48:01

explained. I'm sorry. It's just a bubble. She

48:03

said you're joking. Oh my goodness How did

48:05

I do that? She was so concentrated on

48:08

doing the right thing She was concerned it

48:10

hadn't moved or even pooed that would be

48:12

spooky if it had Well

48:16

on the on a sewage theme so

48:18

mine is in a in a former

48:21

life I wrote a story about eels

48:23

in the Thames Apparently

48:25

being high from cocaine with the headline that

48:27

cocaine in the Thames is another problem eels

48:29

don't need did you did you break that

48:31

story? I love that story Yeah,

48:35

I feel quite bad. I ran out some

48:37

very nice sort of environmental guy And

48:39

I just I really put him I was like, would

48:42

you say it's just another problem? I don't need and he said yes

48:44

And I remember going to my new editor and being like right I

48:47

could write quite a boring eel story here

48:49

Or we could do the headline and I

48:51

just ran with it So

48:53

yeah, it's not only that it's bad for

48:55

eels I'm saying it's bad for other fish

48:57

at the moment as well according to some

49:00

new reports fish are apparently full of contraceptive

49:02

pill Anticipresents and cocaine after sewage spills It

49:05

was quite amusing how this emerged on

49:08

good morning Britain those bits of Susanna Reed

49:10

having to ask and be like Can you

49:12

really repeat that and get that get that

49:14

for me? But yeah, I mean There's

49:17

sort of raw sewage going into

49:20

Langston Harbor Pretty much

49:22

constantly appears and has left marine species

49:24

in the water full of drugs I

49:27

mean that just seems wild you'd imagine

49:29

some of that come through your system is processed

49:31

that has to be a huge amount of Shit

49:34

and sewage for that to transfer to

49:36

animals and be found in tangible amounts

49:38

So yeah, super sewers have

49:40

to happen much more quickly and much more widely

49:43

I would say That

49:47

brings us to the end of the show on

49:50

that on that note so thank you very much

49:52

to Zoe Thank you. Thank you Ross. Thank you.

49:54

And thank you John. Thank you very much Stick

49:56

around for the extra bit after demon is a

49:58

monster by corner shop and a big thanks

50:01

to our generous supporters. We've been unindated with

50:03

new backers and faithful supporters boosting their backing

50:05

since we mentioned that things are getting a

50:07

little bit tricky in the advertising

50:09

world for podcasts. We're truly grateful for every penny,

50:12

so if you'd like to add your voice to

50:14

the sound of the crowd and get extras, including

50:16

additional shows and a shout out on the show,

50:18

search Oh God, What Now? Patreon or try the

50:20

link in the show notes. Now let's hear some

50:22

of those shout outs. Hello,

50:28

welcome to the podcast conspiracy and

50:30

many thanks for your generosity to

50:32

Hallam Lewis, Kate, Peter

50:35

McQuillan. Thank you so much

50:37

for looking down the back of the set for

50:39

a few spare coins from me to Yasmin Tukmachi,

50:42

Alan P Harrison and the mysterious Joanna.

50:44

Thank you. And a

50:46

big shout out from me to the

50:49

following newly inducted supporters, Ben Priest, Ollie

50:51

Masters and Bethan. And finally,

50:53

welcome aboard to Sophie Sam Holmes,

50:55

Tom Carey. Thanks very much

50:57

for listening and we will see you next time. Oh

51:07

God, What Now? was written and

51:09

presented by Jacob Jarvis with John

51:11

Ellidge, sorry, Grinnevold and Ross Taylor.

51:13

The producer was me, Chris Jones,

51:15

with audio production by Robin Leiburn.

51:17

The group editor was Andrew Harrison.

51:19

The managing editor was Jacob Jarvis.

51:21

Video production by Kieran Leslie and

51:24

art direction by Mark Taylor and

51:26

James Parrott. Oh God, What Now?

51:28

is a Podmasters production. When

51:37

I was at Labour Conference, the sound of

51:39

the song Things Can Only Get Better, frankly,

51:41

got a little bit tedious. There's no doubt

51:43

it's pretty iconic when it comes to the

51:45

notion of an era of Labour being electorally

51:47

successful, which has been a while, but couldn't

51:50

they just pick something new and

51:52

then they just went on to the next stage and

51:54

they just started to play. Well, we thought we could

51:56

try to suggest some alternatives in our extra bit this

51:58

week. Starmer, if you're listening, to get these

52:01

added to a playlist somewhere. Ross,

52:03

is it actually possible to replace that song? Or

52:05

was it, you know, it's kind of a time

52:08

which Labour can't really recreate, isn't it?

52:10

No, it's not possible. I mean, it's

52:12

a totally different era. You

52:15

know, it's a different world. There's

52:18

Russia, there's the climate emergency, there's

52:21

falling life expectancy, there's all the stuff that we've

52:23

just been talking about on the podcast.

52:25

It's just not possible to,

52:27

you know, it sounds glib. And

52:29

there's something a bit unserious about that

52:32

song anyway. It's not very Keir, quite

52:34

frankly. It's Tony, but it's not Keir.

52:36

But right, so imagine we actually live in a

52:38

brave new world where we're surrounded by super sewers

52:41

and things are going really well. If

52:43

you had to pick some songs, what songs would

52:45

you go for? Let's see, what

52:47

are we gonna get from a Labour government? Well, we have been

52:49

promised that there will be more building. We don't know much else,

52:52

but there will be more building of houses. So I think it

52:54

has to be on that theme. So I'm thinking-

52:56

That was a teaser for the bonus bit of this

52:58

week's podcast. If you'd like a little bit more Oh

53:00

God What Now every week with our ads and the

53:02

day early, then sign up to Backers on Patreon for

53:04

as little as £3 a month. You'll

53:06

also get our exclusive extra episodes and some

53:09

merchandise. Thank you for listening and we will

53:11

see you next week. It's

53:14

a busy world out there. Once you've woken

53:16

up and got on top of all your

53:18

WhatsApps, your texts, your emails, and your DMs,

53:20

then you've got another pile of stuff to

53:23

get through. The news. Honestly, who's

53:25

got the time? That's where Papercuts,

53:27

the brand new podcast, comes in. Papercuts

53:30

is your fast, funny tour of all

53:32

the best bits of the papers, from

53:34

the biggest scoops to the weirdest headlines

53:36

to the definitely not made up showbiz

53:38

gossip. And it's out every weekday with

53:40

me, Miranda Sawyer, and a host of

53:43

guests, including tip-top comedian, Marcus

53:45

Brinkstock. Marcus, what's your favourite thing

53:47

about Papercuts? It's the puns. It's

53:51

obviously the puns. I mean, when we go

53:53

through the papers and you see what creative

53:55

beauties the people who work particularly in the

53:58

tabloids have come up with. I

54:00

think it's pun first then story for them.

54:02

I've got one find a story to match

54:04

this but it's a really fun part of

54:07

the Podcast to see what they've come up

54:09

with every day, especially the Daily Star Oh

54:11

the star proud to love animals So

54:13

if you want to be on top of the

54:15

news and have a laugh while you're doing it

54:17

get paper cuts every day on Your favorite podcast

54:20

app. We're out around lunchtime Monday to Friday Perfect

54:22

for a bit of me time in the middle

54:24

of a busy day paper cuts

54:27

We read the papers so you don't have

54:29

to