Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.
Speaker 2: Hello and welcome to the Bloomberg UK Politics podcast. I'm
Speaker 2: Caroline Hepge and today on this episode, I'm joined by
Speaker 2: Bloomberg's financial reporter Will Shaw for a conversation with the
Speaker 2: Reform UK leader Nigel Farage. Welcome to Bloomberg, and thank
Speaker 2: you so much for your time.
Speaker 1: Good to be here.
Speaker 2: So you're the architect of Brexit, of course well known
Speaker 2: to many. You have now won a seat in the
Speaker 2: British Parliament after eight attempts. Your party is sitting just
Speaker 2: below the ruling Labor Party in the polls here in Britain,
Speaker 2: and you are poised to go to the inauguration of
Speaker 2: the US President Donald Trump despite a recent row with
Speaker 2: Trump advisor and perhaps hoped for Donut Elon Musk. But
Speaker 2: today I want to spend a bit of time with
Speaker 2: Will and you, Nigel, talking about where the Reform UK
Speaker 2: has the kind of long running the kinds of answers
Speaker 2: to the long running economic challenges that Britain really has
Speaker 2: that we've seen in the recent GDP figures, in the
Speaker 2: concerns around stagflation. You're finally an MP, though scoring highly
Speaker 2: in the polls, the political mood across Europe has moved
Speaker 2: in your favor.
Speaker 3: You must feel like you've really made it.
Speaker 1: Now what about made it? And by the way, thank you,
Speaker 1: it was a very accurate introduction. We're doing well, We're
Speaker 1: on the up and you know why, because we're optimistic.
Speaker 1: You come to a reform meeting. I've done four rallies
Speaker 1: this year already, all complete sellouts of our members around
Speaker 1: the country, and I'll expand that to big public rallies
Speaker 1: as the year goes on. And it's like the rock concert.
Speaker 1: They're not depressed. They actually believe that with the right leadership,
Speaker 1: with the right vision, with the right courage, we can
Speaker 1: turn the country around. So yeah, we are very upbeat
Speaker 1: at the moment. I think the Unior Party, if I
Speaker 1: can call them that, just look labor look morose, The
Speaker 1: Conservatives bitterly divided. I mean they still all hate each other.
Speaker 1: So there is a massive gap there in British politics.
Speaker 1: And you know in your intro you made the point.
Speaker 1: It's very good point. Do reform have the right economic
Speaker 1: answers and social answers to the problems we're in? Well,
Speaker 1: you can't find the answers until you first identified the problem,
Speaker 1: and I think we've had so many policy missteps over
Speaker 1: the last couple of decades, and I think the parties
Speaker 1: are kind of say, wedded to what they've done already
Speaker 1: that I don't believe they're in a fit state to
Speaker 1: put us right.
Speaker 2: You've only got five MP's in Parliament overall, though, so
Speaker 2: you're still quite a.
Speaker 1: Joy is of the first part of the post electoral systems? Yes?
Speaker 3: Absolutely.
Speaker 2: But perhaps one of the key issues, of course is
Speaker 2: you know you're going to Washington. We know that the
Speaker 2: Labor Party has appointed Peter Mandelson as ambassied Ambassador to Washington.
Speaker 2: I suppose the first thing that I'd like to understand
Speaker 2: is whether you've spoken to Manderson where you've got plans,
Speaker 2: you know, to try to help Manus well get the
Speaker 2: best deal for Britain.
Speaker 1: Look, I don't discuss private conversations I have with people,
Speaker 1: and never have done, never will do, which is why,
Speaker 1: by the way, I'm trusted and I've survived twenty five
Speaker 1: years in this game. What I will say is this,
Speaker 1: and I've said it publicly and I've said this privately
Speaker 1: to the most senior Labor figures, that it isn't just
Speaker 1: Trump that I've known for a long time and get
Speaker 1: on very well, which you know, which I do. Half
Speaker 1: his cabinet. I know, some of them are good friends.
Speaker 1: You know, this whole movement. You know, they are people
Speaker 1: I've worked with for a long long time. So if
Speaker 1: there's anything I can do for example, well, so.
Speaker 2: So you must know Lord Mandelsson very well. Obviously he's
Speaker 2: a veteran politician. So what do you think of his appointment?
Speaker 1: And can you wish Madison and I were in Brussels
Speaker 1: at the same time, Yes, you know when he was
Speaker 1: a commissioner.
Speaker 2: That.
Speaker 1: Look, Madison is bright and clever, wily possibly too. Nobody
Speaker 1: could ever doubt that Mandelsson is not a good operator.
Speaker 1: I mean he was part of the genius behind you know,
Speaker 1: new Labor and the rebranding of the party. All I
Speaker 1: would say is this that if you really want to
Speaker 1: get on with the Trump administration, you need somebody who
Speaker 1: is an entrepreneur. You need somebody who's a businessman or businesswoman.
Speaker 1: You need someone who thinks outside the box. And kind
Speaker 1: of what we're doing is we're going down the traditional
Speaker 1: Foreign Office governmental route of appointing somebody from within our
Speaker 1: governing circles, and I think we could do better.
Speaker 4: I mean, look, you know you're obviously at odds with
Speaker 4: the labor governments. Yes, are you going to work together
Speaker 4: with Peter Mandelsson?
Speaker 1: And will you brief.
Speaker 4: Against him and the labor government Donald Trump?
Speaker 1: If you differ on I will get back to the
Speaker 1: original question. I've said privately and publicly to senior labor
Speaker 1: figures that if they need help with the relationship, particularly
Speaker 1: in terms of negotiating tariffs or maybe sexual free trade agreements,
Speaker 1: which I do believe are possible with the Trump regime,
Speaker 1: I of course would help because that is in the
Speaker 1: national interest. And I have to say, sitting here this
Speaker 1: morning with you, how relieved I am that the Chagos
Speaker 1: Island surrender of sovereignty as I see it, isn't going
Speaker 1: through before the inauguration. I think if that had happened,
Speaker 1: we would be in a very, very bad place. So
Speaker 1: we've got a bit of a reprieve. And remember that
Speaker 1: Trump is the most instinctively pro British president we've seen
Speaker 1: for decades, and we ought to use that to our advantage.
Speaker 2: How does that really translate though, in terms of how
Speaker 2: hard Trump is going to be on taris globally and
Speaker 2: especially in the UK.
Speaker 1: I can tell you that in twenty sixteen and pass
Speaker 1: the inauguration into the early part of twenty seventeen, the
Speaker 1: team around Trump were really anxious to get a trade
Speaker 1: deal with the UK and to do it as quickly
Speaker 1: as possible. Why they wanted to show that they're not protectionists.
Speaker 1: They believe in fair competition, but not as they see
Speaker 1: an unfair competition with China other countries that undercut them
Speaker 1: on wages, on environmental standards and everything else. So of
Speaker 1: course we couldn't do it because we were still part
Speaker 1: of the European Union. But now we're freed. We're not
Speaker 1: part of the EU's Common Commercial Policy. We can negotiate
Speaker 1: our own trade deals. These are the prizes that are
Speaker 1: on offer. But you know, if the Prime Minister wants
Speaker 1: to have a reset with the European Union and get
Speaker 1: closer to the failing economically European Union, it's going to
Speaker 1: be very difficult.
Speaker 4: If we turn to Elon Musk So I thought you
Speaker 4: about it. Yeah, Joe Biden was speaking overnight. He warns
Speaker 4: Americans of a dangerous concentration of power in the hands
Speaker 4: of a very few ultra wealthy people that he feared
Speaker 4: could have an impact on the country's democracy through your
Speaker 4: friendship with Elon Musk, is there a risk of you
Speaker 4: introducing a similar threat into the UK in terms of
Speaker 4: like the interests of one very very rich, tach billionaire
Speaker 4: and his concern and taking a priority over the concerns
Speaker 4: of regular voters, and you know, the potential of someone
Speaker 4: being seen to try and buy an election in the UK.
Speaker 1: Well, first things first, I think Biden's record on defending
Speaker 1: the American constitution, on the way that he used the
Speaker 1: judicial system, that doesn't bear much scrutiny. I think things
Speaker 1: went backwards during Biden's time and we concentrated so much
Speaker 1: power in Biden's hands that he gave Afghanistan back to
Speaker 1: the Taliban. So you know, we can throw this stuff
Speaker 1: back and forth. In America, you know, billionaires have more
Speaker 1: influence over society than mid Dow in Britain as culturally,
Speaker 1: there's no question about that. Musk is a very powerful figure,
Speaker 1: but that there's no doubt. But I also think he's
Speaker 1: a hero. I mean, if you think back to the
Speaker 1: last election in twenty twenty in America where the hunter
Speaker 1: Biden laptop was there. The evidence was clear of criminality
Speaker 1: for which he now been convicted in one or two things.
Speaker 1: The evidence was all sorts of things were there that
Speaker 1: deserved to be in the public domain, especially his father's
Speaker 1: close relationship and telephone calls with That's a separate issue, isn't. No,
Speaker 1: it isn't at all. I tell you why all the
Speaker 1: social media channels forbade any conversation about that subject. The
Speaker 1: Americans had an election with no debate on this issue.
Speaker 1: Mask has come along and bought Twitter, albeit for quite
Speaker 1: a high price, and free speech is coming back to
Speaker 1: America and the Western world. You've even seen Meta in
Speaker 1: this week. I'm an extraordinary u turn that has been made.
Speaker 1: So Mask is a forced for good in terms of
Speaker 1: open democratic argument. When it comes to power influence, I
Speaker 1: think the important thing. The important thing is he mustn't
Speaker 1: be seen himself to be dictating what the Treasury Department do,
Speaker 1: and that is important.
Speaker 2: A lot of people would disagree with the point around,
Speaker 2: you know, free to speech, particularly the Europeans are deeply
Speaker 2: concerned about misinformation.
Speaker 1: The wee misinformation. I know, yes, yes, yes, we must
Speaker 1: all support globalism, we must all support open borders. If
Speaker 1: we don't. It's misinformation. I don't buy it.
Speaker 4: On Elon Musk with him and the other tech billionaires
Speaker 4: who support visas for highly skilled workers into the US,
Speaker 4: that's pitting them against the MAGA movement and people like
Speaker 4: Steve Balon who are opposed immigration much more broadly.
Speaker 1: Who is right in that debate? Well, I'll talk from
Speaker 1: a UK perspective. You know, we've always favored I've always
Speaker 1: favored high skilled immigration, people that come in our net,
Speaker 1: contributors to the country, and crucially who integrate to greater
Speaker 1: or lesser extent in our culture, our values. I've never
Speaker 1: had a problem with that. But of course we've done
Speaker 1: the opposite to that. Isn't it amazing of the last
Speaker 1: three million people that settled here in Britain from outside
Speaker 1: the E the last three million twenty two percent of rimwork,
Speaker 1: only twenty two percent of RIM work. So how you
Speaker 1: manage immigration is becoming an increasingly crucial political issue. Bannon
Speaker 1: is sort of almost saying no immigration into America. I
Speaker 1: tell you what, if we want the city of London
Speaker 1: where we're sitting right now, if we want our tech
Speaker 1: sector to be a world leader, if we want to
Speaker 1: turn this place into one of the crypto trading centers
Speaker 1: of the world, all those things. There's a lot we
Speaker 1: can do with British people, but we will need some
Speaker 1: highly skilled people from other parts of the world. I
Speaker 1: have no problem with that. Adult.
Speaker 2: The issue with that though, in terms of the immigration debate,
Speaker 2: is this. On the one hand, your manifesto ahead of
Speaker 2: the election last year talks about freezing immigration.
Speaker 1: No no, no, no, no no no. Hang on, how amazing.
Speaker 1: Hang on. Let's just be clear about what we're talking about.
Speaker 1: There are always people leaving the country. You know. You
Speaker 1: set a three bed semi in the suburbs of London
Speaker 1: and you can go and live in Spain for the
Speaker 1: rest of your life, Portugal for the rest of your life,
Speaker 1: or whatever it may be. What we're talking about is
Speaker 1: not to have overall population explosion due to immigration. So
Speaker 1: there's still plenty of room for people to come on
Speaker 1: either work visas or in some cases come to saddle.
Speaker 1: So I'm not you know, we are not putting up
Speaker 1: the barriers entirely. What we are saying is that low
Speaker 1: skilled migration and those people bring independents has net been
Speaker 1: a negative for the UK economy.
Speaker 2: How is that any different from the policy that the
Speaker 2: last well this government and the previous government have tried
Speaker 2: to enact because.
Speaker 1: That's what they told people in manifestos and then did
Speaker 1: the complete opposite, which is why we're doing well in
Speaker 1: the polls. Trust has gone. Don't forget. Don't forget. The
Speaker 1: Conservative Party in twenty ten, twenty fifteen, twenty seventeen, specifically
Speaker 1: in the manifesto said net migration of tens of thousands
Speaker 1: a year. In twenty nineteen, we've got control of our
Speaker 1: borders backwre Brexit numbers will be lower, and the twenty
Speaker 1: twenty three number before the revision and by the way,
Speaker 1: all the revisions are upwards, is nearly a million. This
Speaker 1: is this is where we are the biggest problem that
Speaker 1: those two traditional parties have is trust.
Speaker 4: If we turn to the UK economy, and Britain obviously
Speaker 4: has got deep seated and long running economic problems. Those
Speaker 4: have asserted themselves in recent days in the turbulence in
Speaker 4: financial markets. How would you create economic growth in Britain?
Speaker 4: Everybody says they want to achieve that, it seems exceptionally
Speaker 4: hard to actually make it happen. How would you bring
Speaker 4: that back?
Speaker 1: I mean Rachel from Accounts is not going to achieve
Speaker 1: that is she? I mean clearly utterly clueless. I thought
Speaker 1: that from the start, actually utterly clueless, completely out of
Speaker 1: a depth.
Speaker 3: And there seems to be they want in a landslide election.
Speaker 1: Well they did it, but but it wasn't really it
Speaker 1: wasn't really a pro labor vote was it was just
Speaker 1: an anti Tory vote that dominated the election. And remember this,
Speaker 1: it was a fairly loveless victory and they only got
Speaker 1: a third of the votes and two thirds of the seats.
Speaker 1: Again we're back to our friend, the electoral system. I
Speaker 1: was amazed how little scrutiny Labour's economic plans came under
Speaker 1: in the run up. What is clear is this, What
Speaker 1: is absolutely clear is this. They are increasing the size
Speaker 1: of the public sector and the measures they've taken is
Speaker 1: already even before April the first, when all this really
Speaker 1: kicks in decreasing the size of the private sector. And
Speaker 1: there seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding on the center
Speaker 1: left of British politics as to how economics works. If
Speaker 1: you don't create private sector wealth, you are doomed. So
Speaker 1: she can talk, as she did when she came back
Speaker 1: from China on Monday, of this week, she can say
Speaker 1: growth is our number one priority. Everything they're doing is
Speaker 1: anti growth, including the key component, and the key component
Speaker 1: is confidence, and there isn't any If we.
Speaker 4: Look at the reform manifesto, it talks about a department
Speaker 4: saving fifty billion pounds a year by cutting wasteful spending
Speaker 4: PROXY and improving procurements. So that would be about ten
Speaker 4: percent of departmental budgets every year for five years. How
Speaker 4: would you bring that about with that huge cuts to
Speaker 4: the NHS education.
Speaker 1: It's very interesting you raised that. It's very interesting you
Speaker 1: raised that because that was part of our contract that
Speaker 1: we put out with the people. We were told it's impossible, nonsense,
Speaker 1: it would be massive cuts to frontline services. Guess what,
Speaker 1: it's now government policy. So we're very good at leading
Speaker 1: arguments on this. What I have no doubt about, and
Speaker 1: this is going to be difficult for some industries to accept,
Speaker 1: and I think that could be the next big battle
Speaker 1: with the trade unions will be over the use of AI,
Speaker 1: the use of advanced technology and how actually we can
Speaker 1: increase productivity with fewer human beings. And therein lies your
Speaker 1: real answer. And I think what you're going to see
Speaker 1: with Musk. You know, if he's fully focused on doje
Speaker 1: this project in America, you will see technology increasingly replacing
Speaker 1: a lot of human beings and that never all through
Speaker 1: the history of modern mankind. That never comes without something
Speaker 1: of a fight.
Speaker 2: But is your economic tender actually a real plan, because
Speaker 2: you're also promising one and a half percent extra growth
Speaker 2: in terms of what can be delivered to the economy
Speaker 2: as well as that fifty billion pounds in expended cults.
Speaker 3: I mean partly.
Speaker 2: You know, the issue is that the government is already
Speaker 2: in trouble with its own fiscal policies for exactly that reason.
Speaker 2: And are you going to be able to convince the
Speaker 2: bond markets anymore? I mean one and a half percent
Speaker 2: in terms of extra economic growth is pretty much the
Speaker 2: same as what Liz Trust was offering.
Speaker 1: Well, let's put it like this. What we have right now,
Speaker 1: and not just the rich leaving London and leaving our
Speaker 1: big cities, which they are in their thousands people are relocating,
Speaker 1: we're also losing the thirty something entrepreneurs they're going. They
Speaker 1: can't see any prospect of Britain being a pro business community.
Speaker 1: And I returned to that word confidence. You know that
Speaker 1: there are things that make markets work at times that
Speaker 1: you can't a ways rationalized. But it's about confidence, it's
Speaker 1: about optimists, it's about optimism, it's about direction. And I
Speaker 1: would say this to you. Do you know there's not
Speaker 1: a single person on the labor front, Bak, not one
Speaker 1: who's ever set up or worked in private business, not one.
Speaker 1: The tour is not much better. And what we're saying
Speaker 1: is that we are and we're not Elon Muss billionaires.
Speaker 1: But what we're saying is we're a practical group of
Speaker 1: people who have among us several successful business people. I
Speaker 1: think we've got more idea of what makes the economy
Speaker 1: tick than either the current labor or Tory parties.
Speaker 2: Yeah, confidence is a very difficult thing obviously to gauge
Speaker 2: and to inspire and quite quick to sort of disappear.
Speaker 2: But the thing about your economic policy, can you sell
Speaker 2: this to voters? Can you actually sell a plan that
Speaker 2: is promising a lot of growth which may or may
Speaker 2: not happen. But he is definitely offering enormous tax cuts
Speaker 2: now which definitely brings in.
Speaker 3: Less the timing cuts to the revenue.
Speaker 1: Well, let's be clear about the tax and with.
Speaker 2: Bond markets, by that and also that it does mean
Speaker 2: effectively cutting the size of the state, and that is
Speaker 2: definitely not clear in your manifesto.
Speaker 3: You know there's four point.
Speaker 2: Two million adults now on health related benefits in the UK.
Speaker 3: Do they have to go back to work? I mean will.
Speaker 1: Carrying to inform uk wor we need carrots and sticks, right?
Speaker 3: But does the electric know that that's actually the stick?
Speaker 1: Hang on the carrots very easy. The big tax cut
Speaker 1: we want is to raise the threshold of which you
Speaker 1: start paying tax up from twelve and a half thousand
Speaker 1: a year to twenty thousand a year. That is the
Speaker 1: big that.
Speaker 2: Is enormously costly. You cannot do that. It massive cuts
Speaker 2: to government.
Speaker 1: That is enormously costly unless what it does is give
Speaker 1: people on benefits the real incentive to go back to work.
Speaker 1: Because the number of doors I've not so.
Speaker 2: How is that electorally possible? It's a little bit like
Speaker 2: have you a malaise plan? It is very difficult to
Speaker 2: sell that to a broad sway.
Speaker 1: The vice I would say to London based media come
Speaker 1: out and knock on doors in the poorer parts of
Speaker 1: the country because the number of people that have told
Speaker 1: me to my face you know, I want to go
Speaker 1: to work. I want us to be better off as
Speaker 1: a household. But as soon as I work more than
Speaker 1: sixteen hours a week, I lose all of my benefits.
Speaker 1: There is this terrible welfare trap.
Speaker 2: So you think that that tough message of get back
Speaker 2: to work is actually very palatable to the British population.
Speaker 2: For example, you know the star I mentioned Argentina, have
Speaker 2: you Melley, which again by the Republicans and Donald Trumpandi
Speaker 2: and Alomas think that that has been immensely successful, and
Speaker 2: a lot of markets that might agree.
Speaker 3: I do, yeah, and you do too.
Speaker 2: The cost of that economic success that is not as
Speaker 2: well touted is that poverty within Argentina has jumped from
Speaker 2: forty percent of the population to fifty percent of the population.
Speaker 3: That is the cost of doing that.
Speaker 1: Well, what I'm trying to do is keep people a
Speaker 1: way out of povercy by making work pay. And I
Speaker 1: accept that it comes at a big initial cost.
Speaker 5: I absolute accept a big initial cost on day one.
Speaker 5: Absolutely no, I absolutely accept that. But I also think
Speaker 5: the stick, Yeah, there has to be a stick. I mean,
Speaker 5: what is all this nonsense about four day weeks work
Speaker 5: from home?
Speaker 2: And how can it be to Umber ten on that
Speaker 2: promise to the electorate that you have to get back
Speaker 2: to work. Anybody who's suffering from depression, who has you know,
Speaker 2: benefits coming in, you have to give that very hard.
Speaker 1: Would they vote about the working population? What about those
Speaker 1: people I see on the m twenty five at half
Speaker 1: past five on a Monday morning, right hang on heading
Speaker 1: off to work, working much longer hours than their parents
Speaker 1: or grandparents ever did, paying ever higher burdens of town.
Speaker 1: What about them? No one ever talks about them, No
Speaker 1: one ever talks about hard working Britain and the burdens
Speaker 1: they're under. And you know what, I think they'll vote
Speaker 1: for us, I really really do. And I think you'll
Speaker 1: find there are people on benefits who know they shouldn't
Speaker 1: be on benefits, who will see what we want to
Speaker 1: do as being a way to help them to be
Speaker 1: better off.
Speaker 2: But if your voters had the manifesto, which you call
Speaker 2: a contract with voters.
Speaker 3: As well as we have, do.
Speaker 2: You think that that is actually what is being communicated
Speaker 2: on the doorsteps.
Speaker 1: It's more devoted for us. I suppose we need a
Speaker 1: bit of honesty about this. Why don't we Why don't
Speaker 1: we tell young people at the university in the school
Speaker 1: that actually the only way you will ever succeed in
Speaker 1: work in life is to work hard. That hard work
Speaker 1: is good. Success is good, making money is good. We
Speaker 1: need a change of culture.
Speaker 4: The people, the people that you're talking about meeting on
Speaker 4: knocking doors. Of course, that's extremely important. Those people do
Speaker 4: need the numbers to add up if your policy is
Speaker 4: going to work and it is going to benefit. The
Speaker 4: memorial terms the ifs said of the proposals in the
Speaker 4: reform manifesto, spending reductions would save less than stated that
Speaker 4: tax cuts would cost more than stated by a margin
Speaker 4: of tens of billions of pounds a year. The problem
Speaker 4: is if you if you don't have the kind of
Speaker 4: rigor of the economic plan, you can't help the people
Speaker 4: that you're making the promise.
Speaker 1: Well, you can, because there are many other things you
Speaker 1: can do about cutting the sides of the public sector.
Speaker 1: I talked about the use of AI, I've talked about
Speaker 1: procurement changes and cuts already. But the thing we're all
Speaker 1: forgetting is the just enormous dead hand of the quangocracy
Speaker 1: on everything from financial services to fisheries. The extent to
Speaker 1: which businesses are scared on a day to day basis
Speaker 1: scared that some unaccountable person comes in tells them they're
Speaker 1: doing everything wrong, demands extra costs for them. Again, you see,
Speaker 1: unless you have unless you have frontline politicians who are
Speaker 1: actually in business, they don't. And maybe what this is doing.
Speaker 2: There may be a case for cutting regulation here in
Speaker 2: the UK, but you're not going to find fifty billion
Speaker 2: pounds by cutting quangos.
Speaker 3: That is simply not this.
Speaker 2: But the idea also is that Britain has been through
Speaker 2: this now twice. The promise of cutting taxes now and
Speaker 2: feeling the benefit later, cutting taxes now and getting growth later.
Speaker 3: It did not last for Liz Trus.
Speaker 2: The October budget, you know, even though it was much
Speaker 2: more conservative with a small scene, also has not withstood
Speaker 2: the market pressure well either. And so that's why we
Speaker 2: go back to the figures. The figures are not credible.
Speaker 2: You're offering something that's not possible.
Speaker 1: You will notice you will notice that actually on tax
Speaker 1: for example, which you both talked about to me, that
Speaker 1: we're being much more cautious than Liz Truss was. You know,
Speaker 1: Liz Trus was going for big bang right everything at once,
Speaker 1: and clearly way too much at once without corresponding initial
Speaker 1: spending cuts actually put big spending cuts in. Although something
Speaker 1: may have objected to it, it might have been a
Speaker 1: different outcome. What we are saying is we want to
Speaker 1: reduce the overall burden of taxation. Right, yes, but the
Speaker 1: first big tax cut, the important first tax cut, is
Speaker 1: that one at the lower end of the tax spectrum.
Speaker 1: All right, So we're not promising everything at once.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 2: There are a whole number of other very big pledges
Speaker 2: in terms of you know, net ZERI might get into
Speaker 2: that later, but well, one that is very very much
Speaker 2: of interest to our audience, you knew speaking to an
Speaker 2: investor audience. The manifesto talks about slashing interest payments on
Speaker 2: what the Bank of England pays to commercial banks for
Speaker 2: the QB program.
Speaker 3: I mean it's something that does have.
Speaker 2: Some support racket, Okay, that's your view. It does have
Speaker 2: some support amongst economists. Put you basically peg the savings
Speaker 2: at thirty five billion pounds. Some economists say yes, you
Speaker 2: could do that, Barkley's, for example, twenty billion pounds. That's
Speaker 2: the problem also with the figures is that it promises
Speaker 2: more than it could deliver. How could you keep control
Speaker 2: of your monetary policy.
Speaker 3: If you don't pay the banks.
Speaker 1: Give us credit. Okay, give us credit. We were the
Speaker 1: first people on the political stage to expose this racket.
Speaker 1: Nobody else even talked about it because they'd be living
Speaker 1: on Q like a drug addict. All right, So you know,
Speaker 1: we're actually quite good. Are putting some arguments and putting
Speaker 1: some debates out there that nobody else dares to have.
Speaker 1: And whether Barkley say twenty or thirty or whatever they say,
Speaker 1: it shows you that we were in the right ballpark
Speaker 1: to begin to expose what was going on.
Speaker 4: Park.
Speaker 1: Well, look, we weren't going to win the last election.
Speaker 1: What we wanted to do with the contract was to
Speaker 1: set out our vision broadly of where we want to go. Now,
Speaker 1: the responsibility that is upon me now is very very different.
Speaker 1: We're now in a completely different place, and I fully
Speaker 1: accept that. Between I fully accept the point you're making
Speaker 1: that between now and the next election we've got to
Speaker 1: be more specific rather than general. I fully accept.
Speaker 4: That if we turn back to the US, I mean,
Speaker 4: presumably nobody in Britain is as close to Donald Trump
Speaker 4: as yourself. What in four years from now, like, what
Speaker 4: can the British public expect you to have achieved from
Speaker 4: that relationship in the national interest. What's like the best
Speaker 4: case scenario of like how you will of levels in.
Speaker 1: A short term. In the short term, we have a
Speaker 1: seas far coming in the Middle least just because of Trump. Great,
Speaker 1: let's hope there is an end to the extraordinary blood
Speaker 1: letting a million battle casualties. It's like the song were Drones.
Speaker 1: I mean, it really is awful Ukraine and what is
Speaker 1: going on. Let us hope some equitable solution can be
Speaker 1: found there. I think you'll see Saudi Arabia drawn back
Speaker 1: towards Israel. I think you'll see the Abraham Accords extend.
Speaker 1: I hope you'll see Iran isolated on the world stage
Speaker 1: as being the really bad actors that they are. And
Speaker 1: all those things, of course are in our interests, maybe
Speaker 1: not hugely directly in many cases in terms of what's
Speaker 1: in it for us. That's what you're really asking. And
Speaker 1: I understand that, Look, this really is up to the government.
Speaker 1: You know, if if this government is intent on being
Speaker 1: run by human rights lawyers which are happy to give
Speaker 1: away potentially the nuclear capability of America's most important single
Speaker 1: base in the world outside mainland America. It ain't going
Speaker 1: to go well. If this government is determined to reset
Speaker 1: our relations with Brussels in the sense that we start
Speaker 1: to mirror single market rules that come onto a statute book,
Speaker 1: they were going to find it very, very difficult. But
Speaker 1: it was interesting. I thought the other day that Starmer
Speaker 1: gave the AI speech. It's all a bit of functory,
Speaker 1: but he gave the speech about AI and he was
Speaker 1: asked the question. One of the journalists asked him, well,
Speaker 1: because of Brexit, we're now free and you mentioned European
Speaker 1: attitudes towards tech. So Starbar got to make his mind
Speaker 1: up which way do we go? And the closer we
Speaker 1: tie ourselves to Brussels, the more difficult it is. At
Speaker 1: the end of that four years, as you've asked to
Speaker 1: have achieve economically what we could. I am certain that
Speaker 1: in terms of intelligence, I'm certain that in terms of
Speaker 1: special forces working together, I'm sure in terms of those
Speaker 1: things the next four years will be a great success.
Speaker 1: But it's on the economics that people want to see
Speaker 1: some results. I am certain that with the right government
Speaker 1: we could have free trade deals negotiated on booze, motorbikes,
Speaker 1: financial services, and maybe agriculture, we just leave because maybe
Speaker 1: it's too difficult. I don't know, but I think it's
Speaker 1: an awful lot of progress that we can make with
Speaker 1: an administration that wants to do it.
Speaker 4: Is there a risk that Donald Trump's quite mercurial and
Speaker 4: he he'll listen to He'll listen to yourself and be
Speaker 4: influenced by that, and then we'll move on to the
Speaker 4: next person.
Speaker 1: Something about Donald Trump, He's not really influenced by anybody.
Speaker 1: He listens to people, He makes his own mind up.
Speaker 1: He's very very good at making his own mind up.
Speaker 1: He's also very good at seeing the big picture. And
Speaker 1: I think one of the things maybe people don't like him,
Speaker 1: and I get it. He's a New York occurrent. It's
Speaker 1: not everyone's style. But one of the things I think
Speaker 1: that people should credit him for is that the big
Speaker 1: thinking in the first four years with Trump presidency was
Speaker 1: on foreign affairs, and it was a huge success.
Speaker 4: Have you spoken to Donald Trump directly about Tommy Robinson.
Speaker 4: I mean, obviously, Elon Musk is a big fan of
Speaker 4: Tommy Robinson. Tommy Robinson is someone with a criminal record.
Speaker 4: His supporters have associations with street violence. He's sort of
Speaker 4: rooted in the EDL and the British National Party. You
Speaker 4: obviously have differences with Tommy Robinson.
Speaker 1: I won't have that fundamental differences. You know. Tommy Robinson
Speaker 1: has nothing to do with me, has never been anything
Speaker 1: to do with me, and never will be anything to
Speaker 1: do with me. My brand of politics is non sectarian,
Speaker 1: non racist. It always has been and it always will be.
Speaker 1: And mister Robinson can deal with the head he likes,
Speaker 1: but he'll never have anything to do with my party.
Speaker 1: Want to be absolute clear about.
Speaker 4: Have you spoken to Donald Trump directly or Donald Trump's
Speaker 4: team directly about that?
Speaker 1: I think Donald Trump's team have got bigger things to
Speaker 1: worry about than Tommy Robinson. There is an element of
Speaker 1: the there is an element of the conservative right in
Speaker 1: America that view Robinson as a hero figure right because
Speaker 1: they see him as the man that fought the grooming gangs,
Speaker 1: all right and by the way, a topic that does
Speaker 1: need more debate and does need more sorting out. What
Speaker 1: they don't see is all the rest of it, and
Speaker 1: they don't know the full story.
Speaker 2: In my opinion, you talk a lot about your closer
Speaker 2: relationship with the US and how important that relationship is.
Speaker 3: Our closest trading partner is.
Speaker 1: Still the EU only in your mind. I mean, you
Speaker 1: knowest our biggest country relationship is not trading. No, Well,
Speaker 1: Germany is a country still, isn't it.
Speaker 2: Yeah?
Speaker 3: There you are the EU as a whole.
Speaker 1: Who's the biggest foreign investor in Britain?
Speaker 3: Who do you think?
Speaker 1: Who?
Speaker 3: I also talked about the rise of.
Speaker 2: With similar views of anti migration parties across Europe.
Speaker 1: It does who said I'm an anti migration.
Speaker 3: Party, Well, you did yourself.
Speaker 1: I didn't. I said the opposite. I said, we're prose.
Speaker 1: You asked me about high skilled, high skilled people, and
Speaker 1: I said, if they come into Britain, bring high skills,
Speaker 1: pay taxes and integrate, I've got no problem. You know,
Speaker 1: our brand of politics, my brand of politics is different
Speaker 1: to many of the other European pastes. All right, that's
Speaker 1: really clear about that. There are similarities that are a
Speaker 1: crossover points, but there are differences. But let me just
Speaker 1: come back to Europe very quickly, in the economics and
Speaker 1: the statistic that I think everybody following this podcast needs
Speaker 1: to just get embedded in their minds. I think it's crucial.
Speaker 1: In two thousand and eight, the American economy was exactly
Speaker 1: the same size as the Eurozone today. It's double the size,
Speaker 1: double the size. And that's what you get if you
Speaker 1: have economic policy based on idealistic but I'm realistic net
Speaker 1: zero goals, over regulation, welfare ism as being a really
Speaker 1: good alternative to go into work, and that's what you've
Speaker 1: got a failing Europe. One of the reasons I wanted
Speaker 1: Brexit was to give us an opportunity to get away
Speaker 1: from that failing model. I'm not saying we have to
Speaker 1: be identical to America, but I think in terms of
Speaker 1: business culture as a heck of a lot we can learn.
Speaker 2: Okay, n I know a whole another shooting person you
Speaker 2: just started.
Speaker 3: Nie of Ours.
Speaker 2: Thank you so much for joining us on the Bloomberg
Speaker 2: UK Politics podcast, The Reform UK Leader joining us alongside
Speaker 2: the Bloomberg's Finance.
Speaker 3: Report at will.
Speaker 2: Sure if you like the program, don't forget to subscribe,
Speaker 2: give it five stars so that other people can find
Speaker 2: it on Apple, Podcast, Spotify or wherever you listen.
Speaker 3: I'm Caroline Hepgar.
Speaker 2: This episode was produced by James Walcock, audio engineer with
Speaker 2: Shan Gustamachia. We'll be back with more on Monday, This
Speaker 2: is Bloomberg