Q&A: Departures, diplomacy, and an unused motorhome

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Story — Q&A: Departures, diplomacy, and an unused motorhome
Published June 25, 2026 | Host: Luke Jones (The Times)

---

Episode Overview

This episode is a fast-paced, insightful Q&A special, with host Luke Jones fielding listeners’ questions covering a whirlwind week in UK and world news. Key topics include the political transition from Keir Starmer to Andy Burnham, the ongoing Iran peace talks, fallout from the Peter Murrell/SNP embezzlement scandal, and the cognitive effects of AI platforms. Jones is joined by news editor Lizzie Dean, foreign editor Rebecca Myers, Scottish political editor Daniel Sanderson, and tech correspondent Mark Selman to provide on-the-ground expertise and sharp analysis.

---

1. Political Upheaval: The Road to a New Prime Minister

Guests:

• Luke Jones (Host)
• Lizzie Dean (News Editor, The Times)

Key Points

• Transition in Leadership:

  • Keir Starmer’s resignation has set the stage for Andy Burnham’s likely unopposed rise to Prime Minister. (02:36)
  • The process is formal, even if uncontested: nominations open in early July, with a week for potential challengers. If none emerge, Burnham will essentially be “crowned” as leader. (03:21)

• Public and Party Disillusionment:

  • Listeners express fatigue over the UK having seven prime ministers in a decade, questioning if the system or the politicians are to blame.
    • “Nothing is getting done and we are just drifting.” — Listener Jared (03:42)
  • The churn is attributed less to party members and more to cabinet ministers ousting their leaders in periods of disarray (04:48).

• Media & Voter Impatience:

  • “We want to see instant change and big change and that’s what leaders promise when they come. But… even with his enormous majority, Starmer’s found it pretty much impossible to deliver.” — Lizzie Dean (05:20)

• Burnham’s Platform — Still a Mystery:

  • Despite his high profile in Manchester, listeners feel Burnham’s policies remain vague, aside from transport reforms.
    • He’s already reversed himself on issues like compensation for WASPI women and Brexit.
    • “If we're not gonna have a contest… he's gonna get into Number 10 without us knowing very little at all about what his platform is.” — Lizzie Dean (06:23)
  • Further clarity is expected from his upcoming economic policy speech and initial cabinet appointments.

Notable Quotables

• “It's looking increasingly like no one will put their name in the hat to run against him.” — Lizzie Dean on Burnham's path to leadership (02:36)

---

2. Diplomatic Drama: Iran Peace Talks

Guests:

• Rebecca Myers (Foreign Editor, Sunday Times)

Key Points

• Stalled Progress and Conflicting Narratives:

  • Talks with Iran are caught in a “he says, she says” pattern, with the UN, Iran, and US all issuing contradictory statements.
  • Notably, US Senator Marco Rubio’s Gulf visit highlights how Gulf countries have endured repeated Iranian strikes and are wary about peace negotiations and requests for reconstruction aid (08:00).

• Control of Strait of Hormuz Is Critical:

  • The strategic waterway remains a point of tension; periodic closures/border disputes could shape who holds tangible power in the negotiations (09:42).
  • Trump claims US could charge a toll as “guardian angels of the strait”; Iran asserts similar intentions, creating uncertainty.

• “Who’s in Charge?”

  • The process is marked by decentralized, chaotic leadership, with the Iranian regime, Donald Trump, Gulf states, and Benjamin Netanyahu (via Lebanon’s dynamics) all exerting influence.
    • “Who’s in charge here? Everyone and no one, honestly.” — Rebecca Myers (11:05)

• Role of the Board of Peace:

  • The international Board of Peace’s role seems ambiguous, with finances in flux and a possible shift towards becoming an international NGO.
  • Hillary Clinton, while a vociferous Trump critic, wrote that the Board “is our best option” for peace, adding weight to the institution despite its imperfections. (12:30)

Notable Quotables

• “There is a sense of limbo. It is a sort of deadlock.” — Rebecca Myers (11:18)
• “The relationship between the two countries goes back a long way … This is not a kind of nice to have for them. They believe it’s existential.” — Rebecca Myers on Israeli perception of Iran threat and US ties (13:48)

---

3. The SNP Embezzlement Scandal: Peter Murrell’s Mystery Motive

Guests:

• Daniel Sanderson (Scottish Political Editor, The Times)

Key Points

• What Happened:

  • Former SNP CEO Peter Murrell was sentenced to five years, three months for embezzling more than £400,000 over a decade (17:43).
  • Spending included “extraordinary” purchases—from salt and pepper shakers and multiple coffee machines to an (almost unused) motorhome (19:06).

• Motivation Remains Unclear:

  • “He was very sorry, he accepted responsibility, but we didn’t really get an explanation as to the motive.” — Daniel Sanderson (18:13)
  • Judge and party insiders alike are baffled, noting many items were never even used (19:06).

• Financial Recovery and Investigations:

  • A proceeds of crime hearing is scheduled (September); Murrell has assets that could repay some or all funds (20:26).
  • Debate around whether the SNP or the public purse should get the recovered money, given lax internal controls and costly police investigations.

• Calls for Further Inquiry:

  • Opposition parties want deeper investigation by the Scottish Affairs Committee or Holyrood. First Minister John Swinney resists, aiming to “move on” and minimize further embarrassment (22:04).
    • “...the idea of [an] inquiry…where Nicola Sturgeon and John Swinney…are dragged before MPs…that’s just gonna prolong this.” — Daniel Sanderson

Notable Quotables

• “One of the most striking things is you'd almost understand, you get one pair of salt and pepper shakers... he was buying salt and pepper shakers again and again and again.” — Daniel Sanderson (19:06)
• “The campervan…drove four miles...and that's where it sat and never moved. So, yeah, really, really bizarre.” (19:51)

---

4. Listener Q&A: AI and Its Cognitive Impact

Guests:

• Mark Selman (Tech Correspondent, The Times)

Key Points

• AI Platforms and Human Cognition:

  • Platforms like ChatGPT and Gemini might erode core human skills if we “outsource” too much to them, echoing risks of infinite scrolling (24:37).
  • MIT research suggests a potential “knowledge collapse” if society relies solely on AI rather than shared human learning.
    • “...if we offload or subcontract too much to AI...human knowledge is potentially destroyed.” — Mark Selman (24:37)

• Potential Loss of Motivation:

  • The convenience of AI makes people less inclined to figure things out for themselves, potentially eroding critical thinking abilities.

Notable Quotables

• “It makes us less motivated to try and figure things out in future for ourselves. And that is obviously a great worry.” — Mark Selman (26:08)

---

Notable Quotes & Moments (with Timestamps)

• “Nothing is getting done and we are just drifting.” — Listener Jared (03:42)
• “It's looking increasingly like no one will put their name in the hat to run against him.” — Lizzie Dean on Burnham (02:36)
• “He was buying salt and pepper shakers again and again and again... The campervan…drove four miles...and that's where it sat and never moved.” — Daniel Sanderson (19:06–19:51)
• “Who’s in charge here? Everyone and no one, honestly.” — Rebecca Myers (11:05)
• On AI: “A potential ‘knowledge collapse’ where human knowledge is potentially destroyed because we are offloading too much of our shared understanding of the world to AI.” — Mark Selman (24:37)

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 00:30 — Overview of Breaking News: Starmer resigns, Iran peace talks, Peter Murrell sentence
• 02:36 — Lizzie Dean on the state of the leadership race, Burnham, and Labour politics
• 04:04 — Listener Jared on leadership churn; analysis of party and media impatience
• 05:51 — Discussion of Burnham’s shadowy platform
• 07:26 — Rebecca Myers on the latest in Iran peace talks and Gulf state involvement
• 09:29 — Questions around control and leadership of peace process
• 11:18 — Board of Peace and Clinton’s op-ed
• 13:02 — Israel’s security and US-Israel relationship “fissure”
• 17:09 — Daniel Sanderson introduction; recap of Peter Murrell’s sentencing and spending
• 19:06 — Bizarre patterns in Murrell’s purchases
• 20:26 — Will the money be recovered? Proceeds of crime update
• 22:04 — Debates over subsequent investigations and political damage
• 24:37 — AI’s effect on cognition, infinite scrolling parallels (Mark Selman)
• 26:15 — Closing remarks

---

Summary Tone & Style

The language throughout is direct yet conversational, with a brisk, analytical Times-style tone—wry in the political segments, precise in the reporting, and reflective in the technology segment. Major guests offer expert, candid context while Luke Jones adeptly channels listener concerns into pointed questions.

---

Perfect for listeners seeking a sharp, broad-spectrum update on the week’s major UK stories—full of context, analysis, and that signature Times thoroughness.

Transcript

[PwC Announcer]

At PwC, we optimize the systems that put your data to work so you can scale your AI from proof of concept to competitive edge and accelerate your tech evolution so you can redefine what's possible from blueprint to breakthrough. We take you further with tech so you can out think, outpace and outperform PwC. So you can PwC refers to the PwC network and or one or more of its member firms, each of which is a separate legal entity.

[Daniel Sanderson]

Then I thought, what if I've scaled businesses? What if I scaled my philanthropy? What if I did as much in one year as I've done in my whole life?

[Luke Jones]

See how your wealth could have even greater [e-mail] impact. From the Times and the Sunday Times this is the story. I'm Luke Jones. It is the time of the month where Manveen and I answer some of your questions, some of you listening, some of you reading the Times. But Manveen has selfishly gone on holiday. So in a very busy news period, I have been marauding the corridors of the Times newsroom, contacting colleagues up and down the country to try and answer some of the questions that you have sent. Because a lot has happened. We've had a Prime Minister resign.

[Daniel Sanderson]

When I leave the biggest job in the country, I shall spend more time on the most important job, being the

[Luke Jones]

best husband I can. Many are wondering what is happening with the Iran peace talks.

[Mark Selman]

If Iran doesn't live up to their agreement or if they're not behaving, I will do what I have to do.

[Luke Jones]

And then we have also had the sentencing of the former SNP Chief Executive Peter Morrell.

[Daniel Sanderson]

Last month you pled guilty to a single charge of embezzlement. I impose a sentence of five years, three months imprisonment. That is all

[Luke Jones]

the story today, your questions answered. The biggest story of the week, of course, has been Keir Starmer saying he is ready for off. We've seen Andy Burnham come down on a delayed of anti west coast train to Westminster to stake his claim to run the country. But there are a lot of questions still around how that works, what that will entail. Lizzie Dean is news editor at the Times and has joined me in our podcast Cupboard. Thanks for joining us, Lizzie. This is just one of many things on your beat at the moment. Can you sort of, how would you summarise at time of recording where we are with things?

[Lizzie Dean]

So we're pretty sure that Burnham will be our next Prime Minister. It's looking increasingly like no one will put their name in the hat to run against him. But we still have very little idea of what Burnham. What his policy agenda is. We're hopefully gonna learn a bit more about that in the next three weeks. And then in the meantime, we sort of have Starmer running this sort of utterly powerless government, essentially, while we all basically wait until the nominations open at the beginning of July.

[Luke Jones]

And so even if it is just Andy Burnham and it's clear as day, even by just the end of this month, that no one's gonna challenge him, we're going through all those motions still about nominations, opening, affiliated unions and everyone having their say and all of that.

[Lizzie Dean]

We absolutely still to have the process. Yeah. So until the start of July, when Burnham can finally formally put his name forward and say, look, I've got the numbers to stand. And then we have to wait a week until those nominations close, at which point we suspect that we'll find that nobody stood against him, and then it will basically be a coronation.

[Luke Jones]

So we've got some questions from Times readers, listeners. This one first from Jared. He says, how can we have had seven prime ministers or will have had seven prime ministers in 10 years? Is it the way we choose them or is it the lack of substantial candidates? The change seems to be driven by the party membership rather than the voters. Nothing is getting done and we are just drifting.

[Lizzie Dean]

Well, I think he would speak for Britain there, actually, Gerard. I mean, it is extraordinary, the change that we've seen. We did a really interesting piece from our data team on this recently, and they looked at how for, you know, the Blair years and the Cameron years, there was quite a high level of stability. They served their full terms, in some cases more than one term. But ever since Cameron, we've just rattled through prime ministers at quite an incredible rate. And as we say, seven, it would be seven in 10 years. And I don't know that it's necessarily about the caliber. I think, you know, often we found that they're being ousted by their own cabinet ministers.

[Luke Jones]

It's not necessarily party memberships getting ousted.

[Lizzie Dean]

Exactly. You know, the ministers would argue that they're acting on behalf of, you know, the feeling in the country or their members. But in most recent cases, you know, T.R. boris and now Keir Starmer, it's been ministerial resignations that have really, really done for them.

[Luke Jones]

Yeah. And do you. I mean, you see all of this up close from your vantage point on the news desk. What do you make of the argument that some people say about, you know, we've all become too impatient, journalists have become too Impatient and just the churn of things and the expectation is no promise to keep pace.

[Lizzie Dean]

I think there's complete merit in that argument. You know, I do think we have. We want to see instant change and big change and that's what leaders promise when they come. But even with his enormous majority, Starmer's found it pretty much impossible to deliver. But unless you give people a bit of time, then it's quite hard to deliver that long term change, isn't it?

[Luke Jones]

Another question, this is from Nikolai, who's in London. They say we didn't know what Starmer stood for. Do we know what Burnham stands for apart from Manchester and its buses?

[Lizzie Dean]

Well, I'm from Manchester so have you

[Luke Jones]

felt the benefit of the new bus network?

[PwC Announcer]

You know what?

[Lizzie Dean]

Well, I haven't lived there for a few years but whenever I do go back I do. There's things you could never do that you could do down here, like tap on with a card. But now you can. But yeah, the future has arrived, it really has. But yeah, I mean we don't know a lot, do we? I mean he's sort of, you know, slightly fleshed things out during the Makefield campaign, but not really. And we've also seen him do a number of U turns already on things that he had committed to, for example, like compensation for the WASPY women. And he's had to row back on his position on a number of things including Brexit as well. But really we're yet to see him properly lay out a platform and you know, if we're not gonna have a contest over the summer, then it basically means that he's gonna get into number 10 without us knowing very little at all about what his platform is really. It's just the next three weeks that we're gonna hopefully see him flesh it out a little bit. I know there's a big speech on the economy that we're expecting is that

[Luke Jones]

just next week at some point.

[Lizzie Dean]

We don't know when next week at some point. Yeah, we don't know when at the moment. And you know we'll be able to read things into who he appoints into his number 10 team and the Cabinet. But yeah, the actual detail is very thin.

[Luke Jones]

Lizzy, thank you very much.

[Lizzie Dean]

Thank you.

[Luke Jones]

Rebecca Myers is foreign editor for the Sunday Times and is like many, keeping a very close eye on the will they, won't they us Iran peace talks. She popped into our studio Wednesday morning. We have long been following on this podcast what has been happening with the war in Iran at time of recording

[Rebecca Myers]

where are we at time of recording? Being a very key caveat. At time of recording, we're in a he says, she says, holding pattern, as we have been for a lot of this war today. The sort of latest is that the head of the UN's nuclear watchdog has said that they will be able to inspect Iran's nuclear sites. Tehran have said they won't, and Donald Trump has said they. So, as we've seen a lot, there's very conflicting messages coming out. But beyond that, also today, which I do think is a very significant development, Marco Rubio is visiting countries in the Gulf, which is quite a big moment. The Gulf countries, a lot of them have been incredibly badly hit during the war by Iran. I read an amazing stat the other day that the UAE had taken 45% of all Iranian strikes themselves. So these countries have really suffered. They've suffered economically, and now they're being told, you know, well, will probably have some sort of peace, and how about contributing to £300 billion worth of reconstruction funds, which, if I were them, I'd be probably not thrilled about. So I think this is a significant set of meetings today. He's kind of, you know, moving country to country to meet these leaders, I think, to discuss concerns with him, to discuss their point of view. And I think that will be quite interesting to see how that pans out.

[Luke Jones]

But the clock is still ticking on that 60 days to get to a point where they have to have all these details ironed out with the Iranians.

[Rebecca Myers]

The clock is still ticking. The Strait of Hormuz obviously remains. You know, is it open, Is it not? I mean, I think, as at time of recording, it is open, but we're not seeing a lot of ships get through. Some have, but certainly there's been some reporting in the past kind of 24 hours that there's quite a big buildup of ships now ready to go through at the moment that it is open, but as ever, we are just kind of waiting to see whether that takes place.

[Luke Jones]

Let's get to some Times reader questions. This person says, who's in charge here?

[Rebecca Myers]

What a great question.

[Luke Jones]

And I assume they mean, what of the entire process, or just of a particular side like the Iranians? There's a question about who's actually sort of leading things.

[Rebecca Myers]

It's such a good question. And honestly, it's one that I think I ask myself almost every day in my job. No one, Everyone. I think both are true. I mean, certainly, I think Trump thinks he's in charge. I think a lot of it comes down to who's in charge of the Strait of Hormuz. Crucially, Iran sort of is. We saw that on Saturday, which was. I was editing, and Iran announced halfway through the day, well, we've closed it. We've closed it because of what's going on in Lebanon. We don't think that the ceasefire agreement is being adhered to properly. So we've closed it. And then by Saturday night, Donald Trump was saying. I mean, the US Initially said, no, it's open. Then Donald Trump later that day said, well, the US could charge a toll if we wanted to. We're the guardian angels of the strait. We could charge a toll. So whoever ends up controlling the strait will have huge amounts of power in this, and we don't know yet who that will be. There's still questions over whether Iran might be able to charge tolls in the future. Certainly the regime thinks that they should be able to and is saying very clearly that they will. Trump is saying very clearly that they won't. But also, it's worth saying, I think, you know, Benjamin Netanyahu has quite a lot of control over the situation. You know, what he does in Lebanon, what Hezbollah do towards the Israeli forces there has a huge amount of sway over how this 60 days plays out, how the negotiations work, whether they happen, to what extent they happen, and also whether peace is lasting.

[Luke Jones]

Even though he's not necessarily party to them. No, even though he was affecting events around them.

[Rebecca Myers]

He consulted and really, because he wasn't consulted. So I would say, who's in charge here? Everyone and no one, honestly.

[Luke Jones]

We've got another question from Alastair. What has the Board of Peace been up to while all of this has been going on?

[Rebecca Myers]

That is such a good question. And I actually had to really look into this, which tells you a lot in itself, I think. I do think there's a sense of limbo. It is a sort of deadlock. I actually had a look on the Board of Peace's official X account to get my latest updates on what they're doing. It's quite interesting. They're posting a lot of photographs, sort of welcoming soldiers from various different countries to their, quote, unquote, international Stabilization Force. So there is a sense that they're doing something, but it's not entirely clear what exactly they've been up to. There was some interesting reporting about a month ago that there was no money in the board's official fund, which is a bit surprising because the big headlines at the time were that there was like a billion pound of fees to join if you wanted to be a member. The board kind of came back and said its funding was in a JP Morgan account, which is a separate account. So that in itself was really interesting. I know there's been in recent days an international think tank has been looking into reports of its change of status. The fact that it might become an international NGO rather than a public organization, more like the U.N. which would change the oversight. But I think actually the most interesting development on the Board of Peace in recent days is a piece that Hillary Clinton wrote. So she wrote for the Financial Times, rival newspaper, but she wrote an op ed in which she basically said the Board of Peace is our best option. Like, I'm the biggest Trump critic, everybody knows that. But even I think this is what we should do and everyone should get behind it. And just because it isn't perfect, which doesn't mean it isn't the right thing to do, which I thought was a very surprising intervention.

[Luke Jones]

Finally, for now, this from James, a reader in France. Hello, James. If a lasting fissure were to open in the US Israel relationship, what would the consequences be for Israeli security?

[Rebecca Myers]

Yeah, this is such an interesting issue and a little, you know, plug for some of our analysis. Recently we've had Matthew Gould, who's the former British ambassador to Israel, and Mark Urban, who's one of our brilliant top writers and a fantastic expert on the region, writing about this quite a lot recently. And certainly both of them have been saying that the Israeli security establishment is really concerned about not just kind of the US relationship, but what state Iran has been left in. You know, the way that Iran has been left to the point that we are now, the fact that, you know, there's no conditions in the deal, as we have it at the moment, about their missiles, which was a huge factor for Israel going in, but also their nuclear capabilities, huge open ended questions about that. And that is Israel sees that as an existential threat.

[Luke Jones]

Right.

[Rebecca Myers]

This is not a kind of nice to have for them. They believe it's existential. Interestingly, just yesterday Netanyahu was saying that we're very grateful for our US relationship, but we as Israel need to independently basically arm ourselves. We need to move away from dependence on American arms, which I thought was very interesting as a kind of latest development in that. So I think there'll be a lot more to see here. I mean, Israeli intelligence are world famous. They from various reporting, we understand that it was Israeli intelligence that was behind a lot of the sort of quote unquote, successful strikes early in the war. The fact that they were able to kill the ayatollah, the fact that they were able to have militarily quite a lot of success in the early days. But it will be a huge impact because the relationship between the two countries goes back a long way.

[Luke Jones]

Rebecca, thank you.

[Rebecca Myers]

Thank you.

[Luke Jones]

Coming up, we'll have more questions, including on the sentencing of the former S and P Chief executive Peter Morrell. What did he spend that £400,000 on and why? We'll hear from the Times's political editor in Scotland in a moment.

[PwC Announcer]

At PwC, we optimize the systems that put your data to work so you can scale your AI from proof of concept to competitive edge and accelerate your tech evolution so you can redefine what's possible from blueprint to breakthrough. We take you further with tech so you can out think outpace and outperform PwC. So you can PwC refers to the PwC network and or one or more of its member firms, each of which is a separate legal entity.

[Daniel Sanderson]

Par le tu francais hablas espanol parl italiano.

[Babbel Announcer]

If you've used Babbel, you would. Babbel's conversation based technique teaches you useful words and phrases to get you speaking quickly about the things you actually talk about in the real world. With lessons handcrafted by over 200 language experts and voiced by real native speakers. Babbel is like how having a private tutor in your pocket. Start speaking with Babbel today. Get up to 55% off your Babbel subscription right now at babbel.com acast spelled B A B B E L.com acast rules and restrictions may apply. High interest debt is one of the toughest opponents you'll face unless you power up with a Sofi personal loan. A Sofi personal loan could repackage your bad debt into one low fi fixed rate monthly payment. It's even got super speed since you could get the funds as soon as the same day you sign. Visit sofi.compower to learn more. That's S-O-Fi.com p o w e r loans originated by Sofi Bank NA member FDIC terms and conditions apply and MLS 696891.

[Luke Jones]

Right, there we go. That is recording. Can we start? Duncan, the easiest question can you introduce yourself?

[Daniel Sanderson]

Hi, yeah, I'm Daniel Sanderson. I'm the Scottish political editor for the Times and Sunday Times.

[Luke Jones]

And while people maybe have been distracted by what's happening in Westminster, obviously the big issues in Hollywood have been slightly clouded over by what's been happening with Peter Morrell. He admitted to embezzling more than £400,000 from the SNP.

[Rebecca Myers]

Yes, the party's former chief executive funds to buy goods ranging from cars to kitchenware and toiletries between 2010 and 2022.

[Luke Jones]

Just for anyone who's not been paying attention, what has actually happened? He's now been sentenced.

[Daniel Sanderson]

Yeah, that's right. So it was the conclusion of this sort of long running saga, at least in terms of the legal process, on Tuesday. So Peter Morell has been remanded in custody since he pleaded guilty to embezzling around £400,000 of S& P funds last month. He appeared on Tuesday and got five years and three months in prison.

[Luke Jones]

Is there anything new that we've learned in the sentencing? I mean, there was some quite good footage of him being interviewed and no commenting.

[Daniel Sanderson]

I saw the answer. That is not really. I mean, one of the things that people, especially in the snp who knew him were hoping this hearing would give an answer to was the question of, you know, why he did it. We know how he did it, we know he had the opportunity and the means, but no one quite understands why, you know, this was someone on a high salary. You know, a lot of the things he bought he could easily have afforded. And we didn't really hear that. You know, his mitigation was fairly brief. He was very sorry, he accepted responsibility, but we didn't really get an explanation as to the motive that I think a lot of people were sort of expecting and hoping to hear.

[Luke Jones]

When you look at some of the items, the thousands of pounds being spent on just things like pens or salt and pepper shakers, they're quite extraordinary purchases, aren't they?

[Daniel Sanderson]

They really are. And I mean, one of the most striking things is you'd almost understand, you get one pair of salt and pepper shakers, like a posh pair that, that you proudly display. He was, he was buying salt and pepper shakers again and again and again. He was, you know, gardening gloves, repeatedly buying the same pair of gardening gloves, you know, coffee machines. How many coffee machines do you need? He bought multiple. And actually the judge in the case, Lord Young, said he said he was struggling to understand why he'd done it. You identified possible factors arising from your background, working life and personal circumstances. But in truth, it is very difficult to get a clear picture for what drove your actions. And the fact was that many of these items had apparently never been used. So the campervan, which is obviously the most sort of famous purchase, drove four miles, you know, he went to pick it up when it was delivered by the dealership, he drove, drove it four miles to his mother's house in Dunfermline and that's where it sat and never moved. So, yeah, really, really bizarre.

[Luke Jones]

Well, lots of unanswered questions as far as Times readers are concerned as well. So let me throw a few at you. This one first. This person says, I was wondering about the money that has been embezzled and spent. Is this going to be recovered in any way?

[Daniel Sanderson]

We've already got a date in September, I think, for a proceeds of crime hearing. So Morell pleaded guilty to embezzling £400,000, which is a slightly lower amount than he'd initially been charged with. The SNP have said they're keen to get the money back. Now, we know that he does have assets, so he has around £600,000 in, in pension pots. He's got the. His share of the home he jointly owns with Nicola Sturgeon, who of course is his wife. So he has said he will be in a position to, to repay this money. Now, there could be some sort of interesting dynamics here. The SOP obviously want to be repaid. They are the, you know, the victims in it, but at the same time, some of their processes weren't as tight as they should have been and allowed this to happen. And, you know, this case has cost the taxpayer. I think that. I think the police investigation was alone was well over £2 million. So, you know, there is an argument there that, you know, should it be the SMP getting this money or should it be the, the public purse? But, yeah, I think the proceeds of crime here and is the first one's due for September, but I don't think this will be resolved for quite a few years. So, yeah, we'll be writing about this for a while.

[Luke Jones]

Yeah, I'm sure. And then just two final ones which kind of get to the question of, like, what other investigations might happen. Now, one person asked, now that sentencing is out of the way, there's surely nothing to stop the Westminster Scottish Affairs Committee launching inquiry into this and the decision to delay the trial until after the election. And then someone else on a slightly similar theme, says, why on earth has Sweeney John Swinney, the First Minister, decided not to carry out an investigation?

[Daniel Sanderson]

Well, on the second point, I think, you know, this has been a really damaging episode for the snp. John Swinney just wants this to go away. He says, you know, it was a one, one bad apple. He's been dealt with. We know what happened. You know, let's everyone move on. You can completely understand why he'd want to do that. You know, the idea of. Which I guess brings us back to the other question, the idea of Westminster or Holyrood Committee, where, you know, Nicola Sturgeon and John Swinney and the former treasurer Colin Beatty and various police officers are sort of dragged before opposition MSPs or MPs, and asked under oath what they knew. I mean, that's just gonna prolong this. So that's the reason John Sweeney doesn't want it happen. Now, obviously, the opposition parties do want it to happen. There are clearly still unanswered questions. You know, there's still the outstanding questions around culture in the snp. You know, why were people who try to raise concerns about the finances shunned and ostracized? You know, to what extent did the fact that he was married to the party leader play into this? So, yeah, there are a huge number of questions. The consensus among those who want an inquiry was that Holyrood would be the best place for it. Now, Labour recently tried to pass a vote that would secure one. It was voted down by the SNP and the Greens. So now, yeah, eyes turned to the Scottish Affairs Committee at Westminster. They've said they're going to consider this. They've written to various bodies, you know, the, the Electoral Commission and others. So we're waiting to hear what, what they're going to do. But clearly, you know, labor dominate that committee. So if, if they wanted to do this, they, they absolutely could dance.

[Luke Jones]

Anderson, Scottish political editor for the Times. Thank you. Finally, we turn to the other big issue du jour. Artificial intelligence and what on earth it's doing to us, good or bad. We had this comment on Spotify from Layla, who listened to an episode we did partly about infinite scrolling. I'm sure you know what that is. She asks, are platforms like Chat, GPT and Gemini as dangerous to our brains? The way some of the models keep you relentlessly engaged in conversation reminds me of infinite scrolling. To answer that, we asked Times technology correspondent Mark Selman.

[Mark Selman]

Yes, this commenter's question is something that researchers are desperately trying to answer at the moment, because from a layperson's point of view, obviously, you are starting to outsource a lot of your cognitive load to large language models. And that's obviously part of the attraction for some companies is that you can automate and scale these kind of tasks and leave, you know, other, hopefully more sophisticated tasks or different tasks to the humans to do. That is part of the sell of AI. But there have been certain papers that shown that we are losing potentially core skills if we offload or subcontract too much to AI. In fact, there was a paper in February by a Nobel Prize winning economist at MIT and he and his colleagues talked of a potential knowledge collapse where human knowledge is potentially destroyed because we are offloading too much of our shared understanding of the world to AI. This happens because, you know, when we take human effort to learn things, we also share things as well and that may not happen in the future. And you know, whilst it's very good that AI can give us a personalized advice right now, it makes us less motivated to try and figure things out in future for ourselves. And that is obviously a great worry.

[Luke Jones]

That was Mark Zelman. That is it from us today. Thank you very much for joining us. If you have any questions at any point. Thanks. Our email, as ever, is the story. Our expert question answerers were Rebecca Myers, Foreign Editor at the Sunday Times, Lizzie Dean, News Editor at the Times, Daniel Sanderson, our Scottish political editor and Mark Selman, who is Tech Editor at the Times. The producers today were Harry Bly and Olivia Case. The Executive producer is Sophie McNulty and sound design and theme composition was by Marlisetta. I'm Luke Jones. See you soon.

[PwC Announcer]

At PwC we optimize the systems that put your data to work so you can scale your AI from proof of concept to competitive edge and accelerate your tech evolution so you can redefine what's possible from blueprint to breakthrough. We take you further with tech so you can out think outpace and outperform PwC so you can PwC refers to the PwC network and or one or more of its member firms, each of which is a separate legal entity for

[Luke Jones]

investors at the highest level of sophistication, those with strong advisory support. The natural outcome is two distinct portfolios, one public, one private. Each plays a different role in the overall strategy. Uncover new investment opportunities for [e-mail] NEW.