C (2:12)

Yeah. Well, tell us more about your story, because you kind of skipped over. You said it's a long story, but actually it's really relevant and interesting in terms of all the stuff that we now talk about.

B (2:20)

Right.

C (2:21)

So you're a mother of seven. I think five of them are yours. And you've got two step kids, used to play basketball professionally.

B (2:28)

My dream was to play professionally. And I thought, you know, when I went to America, I thought I'd kill it, but actually, because I'm quite tall for, you know, someone in Britain, but actually I was quite short in the US I don't know what they feed women there. And, you know, my parents wanted me back. They didn't want me all the way in California, so I went to play there. But then I wanted to come back. I came back here. And the way basketball works is that if you're not willing to get injured, you're not a good player. So when my teens, I was. I was. I'd go for it, you know, strong defender. I'd go for the basket. But, you know, as you got older and injury just took longer, you become a less better player. And I'm quite competitive on the pitch, on the court. And so I was playing kind of in this league, and then I popped my achilles in my 20s. And after that, it was such a long, tedious recovery. In fact, it's still kind of there. I kind of gave up on it, sadly. But, you know, my first when I became a counselor, I went to teacher in my local school. I love basketball because what basketball taught me, actually, it was a really important lesson, was teamwork. And I find that you don't only rely on your team for so many things, but also you can't let your team bounce. So if someone, you know, you had a teammate who smoked a problem cigarettes, you'd be like, Christ's sake, please stop smoking, because you're so breathless. You can't run down the court, you know, and you learn that it's not only about you. Your actions, you know, if you're part of a team have consequences for others.

C (3:53)

Perfect setup for politics, huh?

B (3:55)

Yeah, yeah. Some politicians are in it for themselves.

C (3:58)

Oh, really? Shocking. And so why did you decide to get into politics?

B (4:07)

You know what, it was just a natural progression. I've always been involved in. Interested in politics. You know, I was my. My other siblings. My eldest sister's 20 years older than me. She was actually the doctor when I was being born in the same hospital. So I was really the last with my Mum. And my mum really didn't watch a lot of TV except the news. So I grew up watching the news. I used to, I remember I used to plait her hair as we watch, you know, news at Thames, Spitting image, all kinds of stuff. And, and she loved Margaret Thatcher and we discussed politics and, and, you know, it was under Margaret Thatcher that her life changed. They came from a communist Egypt to England in the 60s, so politics really shaped a lot of the conversation at home. And I was acutely aware of the effects that different political leadership can have on people's lives. And yeah, it was just, it was always a natural progression. You know, I went to work at the CPS at some point in my life and I realized, gosh, there's so much that needs to be changed. And it was so frustrating actually to be part of something when I knew that things could be changed and I couldn't do anything about it. And I joined my local Conservative branch. You know, in fact, in fact, they needed legal advice at the time, so I gave them some free legal advice and then I just, you know, volunteered and it was a natural progression. And then they were looking for candidates and crime was really rampant in my area and I'm like, God's sake, you know, how can we do something about it? And said, you know what, I'll run and try and make my area crime free. And I became, you know, I was known as a crime fighting counselor. And I, you know, I said, I'm going to try and really do something with this. And so I held, you know, the first public meeting between the police and residents because you find there is a disconnect between the police and residents where they could actually hear from the police what they're doing because they do do good work and they can tell them the issues. And then I set up different WhatsApp groups where I would feed intel from the residents to the police. You know, you know, sometimes at four o' clock you have a dodgy car outside your window and, you know, it's dealing drugs, but you can't really call 999. They'd feed me those license plates and actually, you know, we managed to kind of break up some organized crime operations in the area. I went after criminals myself, wouldn't advise anyone to do that. You know, there were a bunch of Roman gypsies that would particularly come to the area. They'd have the women there who would beg for money and the men would come all dressed nicely and follow people and unzip their pockets, you know, their Bags. And so I would film them and say, listen, I'm with the police, I'm the counselor here. I don't want to see you here. I know what you're doing. And then I asked the police to do an undercover operation and catch them, and they did so. And that was my council work in terms of getting crime down in my area. And as I was telling you before, crime is rampant in my ward. I had, you know, people were sending me literal photos of people hiring a prostitute and having sex in their courtyard, in their building, on their way to school to take their children to school. I had another one in A Beautiful Muse, where the drug dealer would set up shop, you know, at about 1pm in the afternoon. Set up a whole. Set up a clinic. So. And I had videos of this where the drug dealer, the drug addict would come, he'd be injured. The drug addict, the drug dealer would help heal him, give him drugs. All this, you know, in front of a cctv. No shame in their game because there are no police. And all this was happening and I couldn't believe it. I had one truck that was inhabited by two foreign guys and they were running a brothel at night from it. So, you know, I would tell the council, please, can we do something about it? And they'd be like, well, you know, they pay their tickets. We don't really tow. The police would be like, well, you know, it's a council matter, because they're paying their tickets and we haven't had any complaints of illegal activity. It was just back. It was infuriating. And so, yeah, that's. But that was when I became a counselor. But I kind of started seeing all these things and I said, well, maybe I can run and try and do something about it.

A (8:00)

So, Layla, I'm really excited to have you on because we get to talk about London. I'm a London. I've been a Londoner for all my life, 43 years.

B (8:07)

Where from?

A (8:08)

South London, near Morden. So not the best. No, I like that. Okay, right.

B (8:14)

Yeah.

A (8:15)

But I've seen my city change and you've said that, so let's actually talk about it. What does it mean that the city's changed? And particularly, let's look at crime, because if you ask the average Londoner, they wouldn't be able to say, oh, stats have gone up by this percentage or that percentage, whatever else. But we all feel it's a very different city.

B (8:35)

Yeah, we do feel it's a different city. And the thing is. So when I announced my candidacy to be mayor, you know, Sadiq Khan came out of hiding finally, all guns blazing, saying that actually homicide rates are down. Homicide rates is the only stat that has gone down. And knife Crime's up by 68% in the past 10 years. A rape is reported every hour. We are going through a robbery epidemic. You know, all. Every crime metric is actually through the roof. Shoplifting is literally a form of shopping. Robbery, knife crime, everything. And what's really upsetting to hear, I think even more than that, is that the charge rate, the amount of offenses that end up in a charge apart from homicide, which is obviously 95%, because you can't really ignore a dead body, is 6%. So 94% of victims in the city do not even get a look in.

C (9:25)

Right.

B (9:26)

And I actually spoke to a lady who was raped and she told me that the police said, we're not going to investigate. And I actually emailed the police for her and said, why aren't you. Why aren't you putting this to charge? And they said, because she was smiling on the CCTV before she went up to his house. And they said, we are not confident this with the words that a jury would convict. And I said, you are not to act as judge and jury, but that's what's going on. They are so focused on metrics, so focused on getting convictions, that they are not putting things to charge. And that is the police. I said, you're not even going to send it to the CPS to charge? And they said no.

A (10:01)

And the CPS is a Crown Prosecution Service.

B (10:03)

Yeah. So what normally happens, and I was a Senior Crown Prosecutor in London, and what normally happens is the police collect all the evidence and they submit it to the Crown Prosecution Service if it's deemed worthy of a charge. They're not even doing that. And that's what I want to change. I just feel Londoners don't feel the police have their back. I honestly speak to small supermarkets who tell me that the police are screening their calls. They don't answer their calls anymore because they're calling every half an hour. And I'm sure you've seen this in supermarkets where they have a who's who of who's robbing, who's coming to steal from their shop because they feel they have to do it themselves. The social contract between the police and the state and the people is broken because the only thing you can't provide privately for yourself is the police. Right. Nothing. Everything else you can, if you've got the money, do it. And that's, I think, that is why it's the government's first duty and they failed.

A (10:59)

And how much of that? Because, look, I'm all for blaming Sadiq Khan, right, let's be honest. But how much of that is actually Sadiq Khan's fault? And how much of that. Look, I talk to coppers all the time. You only have to mention the words Theresa and May together and they all collectively blow a gasket because of the way the police was defunded and the cuts. So how much can we really appropriate to Sadiq Khan and how much of this is just cuts that have happened to the police service generally?

B (11:26)

So let's break it down. So after 2008, after the financial crash, the criminal justice system did take the biggest hit in terms of lack of funding and they did cut policing. And what Theresa made it even worse was that she really politicized Stop and search and said it was targeting certain ethnic communities more and that we had to stop police forces, had to reduce it. And, you know, on any data, you know that stop and search prevents knife crime because you remove that knife from the person before they've committed the offence. So that is true. They shut a lot of magistrates courts down, which, in case your viewers don't know, all criminal proceedings in this country start in the magistrates and then if it does go up to the Crown, so they cut them all. So, for instance, I was a senior Crown prosecutor about, you know, 10 years ago in Surrey, in Guildford, and I worked, you know, the Crown. The courts were in Staines, Woking, Guildford, and I forget the other one, they were all cut. Only Guildford remains. And so, number one, people from other parts of Surrey don't have representation in the magistrates. Victims have to travel a very long way to go to the magistrates. And there has been a lack of focus on keeping people safe. So that is that one. And then in terms of Sadiq Khan, he is the police and Crime commissioner and he sets the budget, he sets the priorities and he sets the direction. So he actually, all the blame lies at him. And he also appoints the police and Crime Commissioner with the approval of the Home Secretary. But he sets, you know, he created a specialist unit to fight hate crime, right? While violent crime was going up, women were getting raped. He set up a unit to fight words, and which he does very well. You know, he's very good with these identity politics, but that's not what matters to people. We're not interested in division, we're interested in unity because we all suffer the same crime. And I think people want him to police violent crime as opposed to words.

A (13:35)

And I think one of the most frustrating things as a Londoner is obviously violent crime is awful, but it's simple things like you're walking outside Vauxhall Station, which is a major trains and tube station, it's a major transportational hubs, and you just see the kids with their faces covered, dressed all in black, the hoodie. And you know, and you see for yourself, they go around nicking phones and you're going, where is the police? Where are the police?

B (14:01)

Well, so my kids were targeted by those masked gang of youth gangs and, you know, you can't recognize. And I prosecuted people in masks, by the way. It's very difficult to prove. So you go on clothes, you go on evidence that is not 100%. And you have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they committed it. So it does provide a cloak of anonymity and a protective cloak of anonymity against consequences. In fact, last, you know, I said, one of my main policies, I'd want the police, if you are covering your face, for that to be a reason for stop and search for precisely that reason. You know, they come out against me saying. And they said, would it be the burqa? I said, yes, actually, I speak to some shops in central London in Mayfair, and they say people come in burqas and steal and leave, you know, and it has to be indiscriminate. If you cover your face in an open society, that has to be a reason for stop and search because the rest of us are suffering. And then they want to bring in facial recognition. Right. Labor has said across the country, what's the point if people are. If they don't ban face coverings, if they don't make face coverings are reasons for stop and search. Because you and I, the normal person, we're going to be tracked for life. Right. Tracked and criminals won't.

A (15:12)

And that's a really good point because you look at the way things are going in London and you look like. You said, I was in Finsbury park recently. I saw people going to a pret. A manger and quite literally stealing and walking out. And we were talking before this recording started about California, where it seems theft has been legalized. And I'm seeing the same thing happen to London.

B (15:34)

Yeah, I mean, so I was. So what happens is I was a senior crime prosecutor, right. And we did a lot of theft, obviously in the courts. And what happens is.

C (15:44)

Prosecutor, Prosecutor.

B (15:46)

Yeah, sorry, sorry. People might misread that one. And what happens is someone comes in, right. And they've stolen a bunch of stuff. The punitive element of it is almost removed because they try and look at the offender. Oh, you know, he's a drug addict. He's trying to fund his alcohol addiction. He's trying to fund his drug addict. What can we do for him? And so the shoplifting, even if they are prosecuted, which I'm know only 6% are, it almost takes a back goes. It, it goes. It's not prioritized. So you're like, oh, you know what? I. I robbed it because I have a drug addict. So they're like, you know what? Let's get you into a drug program and probation. Let's see what we can do. And then I remember I once stood up and I said, hang on, you know, he. He hit a security guard. And security guards are never. And they're like, okay, you know what? We'll give the security guards £50 compensation. Exactly, exactly that. It's insulting.

C (16:40)

It is insulting.

B (16:41)

It's insulting, right? And then people, you do hear the police and politicians say, well, you know, security guards need to do their work. You know, they need. Why should they? Because they don't feel the courts have their back when it does come to prosecution. But on the flip side, we do have a fundamental problem in this country where a lot. A big section of criminals are not really criminals, they're drug addicts. And I think you probably have the same in California. And some of them come in the doc, some of them are veterans, and they say, I beg you, I don't want to be here. Help me. You know, and it's heartbreaking because there is no tool to help them. What happens is you're like, okay, you're a drug addict. We're going to give you a drug rehabilitation order. That might sound effective, but all it means is, I think, you know, speaking to probation or an alcohol rehabilitation. They come in and they're like, have you drank today? They're like, no. Have you had drugs today? And they leave. Right? And this is my personal opinion, it's not. It's not reform policy, but you would almost want a prison that's like the Priory, you know, where you do not leave until you are clean. And they'd love that. It's very hard to get pure drug rehabilitation on the nhs. I know because a friend of mine has a son who had it. She had to send him Thailand. It was so expensive. And I think that could reduce a lot of the problems. Petty crime, you see, and they're desperate for help.

C (17:59)

The News doesn't just tell you what's happening, it often tells you what to think is happening. And these days the biggest red flag isn't what's said, it's what gets left out. That's why I use Ground News. It's the only app that compares how the same story is covered across the political spectrum and show you what whole audiences are not being told. The Blindsport feed is one of my favorite features. Every day it flags upwards of 20 stories that are being ignored either by the left or the right. Follow along at Ground News Trigonometry like this. A new study from UC San Diego found that climate change cost almost twice as much as we thought because earlier estimates left out damage to the oceans. That's a pretty big update. And yet no coverage, literally zero, came from right leaning outlets. All this, a recent Gallup poll found trust in the media has hit a record low with just 28% of Americans saying they trust newspapers, radio and TV to report the news accurately and fairly. That's a staggering result. But if you only read left leaning news, you likely never saw it at all. Go to Ground News trigonometry to get 40% off their unlimited vantage plan, the same one we use, and stop being managed by the media. I mean, this is one of the big challenges I think in policy work sort of going in direction I didn't expect, but I think. No, no, but this is good because it kind of shows that you've got some original ideas which I think is really great for when you're talking to political candidates. Because Francis and I have talked for a long time about the fact that treating drug addiction as a crime, rightly or wrongly, moral blah, blah, blah aside, it just doesn't work in practical terms. And if you could treat people for their drug addiction, Portugal, for example, has done some good work on this. You'd find you're solving the actual problem as opposed to, you know, one of the problems obviously we have is we don't have enough prison places. And that's partly because there's some people who really need to be in prison for a very long time, far, far longer than they're going there now. But there's also a lot of people that ending up there who just got a drug problem and if they could get that help and get help with that and then be able to be reintegrated into society, we'd address a lot of those issues. So why, why isn't that a reform position?

B (20:07)

Well, I think there's costings involved. We haven't we haven't discussed it. Obviously, policy is being. Is being drawn out. But I do think that you're right. You know, if you address some root cause, they're just criminals and they're just horrible people that need to be put in prison. Others, you know, it really is a drug addiction through circumstances of life. You know, I speak to some veterans who say after, you know, the ptsd, they did become drug addicts. And number one, that, for me, that's. That's shameful. You know, the fact that. The fact that our veterans are not put on a pedestal and treated like kings is a blemish on any country. But, yeah, they deserve help to stop. To stop it, as opposed to this roundabout of going to prison, going to prison. And, you know, they go to prison for a day here, a day. There's. What they do really need is help with stopping drug addiction. Whereas in San Francisco, I think they're giving them the drugs. Right.

C (20:57)

I don't know exactly what their latest policy is, but I think it's refreshing to hear because I think in this country in particular, there's this sort of thing about being perceived as being soft on drugs by talking about the things that we're talking about, whereas what we're really talking about is pragmatic solutions to actual problems.

B (21:14)

So you have the drug addicts who really are vulnerable victims, I think, sometimes, and you have the drug dealers. Right. And that's what we need to go hard on are the drug dealers. And like you say, you know, they'll serve half their time or they'll deal drugs within prison. And that's what you need to go after a lot. And I know, for instance, that a lot of candy shops, souvenir shops across London, they are dealing drugs and they're not being shut down. They're not being shut down by the council, they're not being shut down by the police. There is a massive proliferation of these kind of shops. And you've got to ask yourself there in central London, how are they affording rent? There's no one in there. I mean, just in my area. I mean, there's all the high streets full of it. And so I think we have to have. I don't feel there is a coordinated police emergency unit to deal with the massive proliferation of drug dealing.

C (22:05)

It does kind of feel like across the country now, but in London, I think it's more noticeable than anywhere. There's just a toleration of crime. There just is.

B (22:13)

Yeah. And what you find with the two other parties is it can no longer Be business as usual. Right now, every party is like business as usual with a little tweak. It has to be a fundamental change. I mean, my teenagers are approached regularly, just when they're in their school uniform. Guy in a Covid mask gives them a card with just a mobile phone number. Any drugs you want, you know, from the age of 13, they're given that, you know, and he lifts it, you know, ketamine, coke. I mean, people don't realize. Actually, I had to prosecute a lot of, like, delivery drivers who also deal drugs, you know, and a bag of Coke is like £5 now. Remember, it used to be like, for the. For the rich bankers. It's actually so cheap and easy to get all across London, and no one's dealing with that. No one's dealing with actually breaking these kind of organized crime that has permeated everything. I mean, you've got kids in private schools, state schools, all doing drugs.

C (23:10)

And you mentioned delivery drivers. I mean, one of the things that anyone who's ordered a Deliveroo in London has experienced is the person who turns up is not the person on the app who it's supposed to be. And that's. We know that's illegal immigrants buying identities to then use within Deliveroo. How much of an issue is illegal immigration in London, in your opinion?

B (23:32)

I think illegal immigration is a massive issue. Number one, London has the largest number of illegal migrants housed in hotels. The government likes to call it asylum seekers, but they entered this country illegally and they are illegal migrants. Just because you say the word asylum, it doesn't kind of neutralize the fact that you enter the country illegally. And London has the largest share. You know, where we saw a murder of the guy walking his dog in Uxbridge. Uxbridge, actually Hillington has the largest amount in hotels. And what's really sad is that you have Londoners whose kids can't afford to live in London, right? And yet they're working in London, but they can't afford it, are paying taxes for these people to stay in the hotels in the city that they can't afford to stay in themselves. So illegal migration has a huge effect. We've even got, you know, now we have council. So what the way it works is you're an asylum seeker and then when you're granted asylum, you're deemed a refugee. And what we know is that the approval rate for certain countries is over 90%. You know, Somali, Ethiopia. I don't have the facts here, but it's a very high approval rating. So you. What happens is you come on a boat, you're an illegal entrant, you say the word asylum, this magic word, it's like open sesame. It neutralizes illegal entry. You're deemed an asylum seeker and you get all the benefits paid for by the British taxpayer. You're put in a four star hotel, you know, and then your claim is again, all that public resources is granted, you become a refugee and you go to the top of the housing list in London because successive legislation, Theresa May is one of them, has said that you cannot discriminate for social housing on the basis of nationality.

C (25:18)

It's quite an extraordinary thing if you think about it. So I'm an immigrant. Your parents were immigrants. Frances mother came here as well. I have never understood why it is that anyone who is not a British national should get access to any benefits whatsoever.

B (25:31)

But also, if you're not prioritized in your own country, where are you supposed to be prioritized?

C (25:36)

Right.

B (25:36)

If your parents aren't going to love you unconditionally, who is?

C (25:40)

Right.

B (25:41)

So it is shocking. And also when they say discriminate against nationality, fine, put foreigners in that bracket. But British people, of course, should be prioritized. And that's not discrimination. If you flip it, discrimination is actually prioritizing the people who built this city.

C (25:58)

Wait, so are you in principle okay with foreign nationals getting benefits?

B (26:02)

No, I'm not.

C (26:02)

No. You're not?

B (26:03)

No. I don't think foreign nationals should get any benefits. Yeah, of course not. Why? We have the highest tax burden since World War II and the lowest productivity in the public sector. So you've got to ask what? No, I don't think so. And, and as it stands, British people are not being prioritized for social housing in this city. And I, I actually make. It actually makes me angry because again, where are you supposed to, you know, I speak to people who are like, their son is on number 400th on the list, but someone who's just arrived, doesn't speak English, gets a three bedroom house for free. And then if you say that you're racist, by the way, which I did, I said in one of the council meetings I was called racist. So I think that there has to be. I think we've been led by political cowards. Political cowards who have been voted in to represent British people, but have been too cowardly to do so.

C (26:59)

You know what's interesting, and I'm sure you know this, you've traveled extensively abroad. It's funny, in this country, if you say that you might be called racist by some people. If you tell people in any other country that in Britain we actively discriminate against our own population in favor of foreigners, they all think we're crazy. Everyone around the world thinks what we are doing is insane.

B (27:22)

I know, I know they do. And they also think, how do we put up with it?

C (27:27)

Yeah.

B (27:27)

You know, and what, what, what is that? What is the aim and that. But I think that's why reform's doing so well, you know, and that, that, that's why I think people are like, I'm so sick and tired of. Of being put on the. On the back. On the back. I'm so sick and tired of being divided. You know, they're very good at dividing us as well. And I think that's why reform's doing so well, because we're unashamedly for British people. You know, I was unashamed. I don't feel. When I say London's changed as well, I go to certain parts of London and it doesn't really feel like a British city. It really doesn't. It doesn't feel. It feels more like a Muslim city in some areas. You know, you go to Whitechapel, that.

A (28:09)

Feels like a Muslim city. That doesn't feel like London.

B (28:11)

No, it doesn't. And I speak to people who are from there who have moved out because they feel, you know, they grew up there. They feel they've been eradicated, you know, that their way of life, their values have been eradicated. And they've got burqa markets in town hamlets, you know, and listen, I, I could do. My parents are Muslim and, and. But they didn't move for that. You know, so many Muslims, we didn't. They didn't move to London to find some, some Egyptian village in London. No, they moved to London because it is the capital of the United Kingdom and everything that Great Britain represents. And I don't feel the capital city represents that anymore. And I feel we've lost that identity. Yeah.

C (28:55)

What can you do about that, though?

B (28:57)

Well, the mayor doesn't really have any control over social housing, but, you know, he has failed to build so much housing, and I'd like to see more British workers have been priced out of London. So I'd like to see, you know, he has a huge mandate to build so many homes. You know, he has failed to build on all the brownfield sites that he could. He gets a huge allocation from local government, central government to build. He hasn't. For instance, there's a lot of industrial sites in London that really house very Low wage, low skilled work and because of labor ideology that, you know, you can't take this from workers. He has the power to make that into homes. He hasn't. And that's why you find people and the demographics because there's such a big social housing and so many refugees are housed in London, in certain parts of London. And British people who work in London can no longer afford to live here. You found an influx of foreigners who don't really want to live in a. British who want to live in Britain but don't want to live in Britain, if you know what I mean. And British people are priced out of, of the uk. I mean, you remember London. I remember growing up in London. Hackney was so cool. Do you remember? It was all the artists. Yeah, yeah, it was the murder capital. But you know, we kind of put up with that. You go see studios, it was cool. You know, I find that kind of coolness to London's gone. You know, there's no independent shops on the high street. No, it's all. It's either candy shops, vape shops, but you don't get little cool boutiques or yeah, coffee shops have proliferated. I actually did the math. I think it's a massive markup on coffees. So I get that. But that eclectic element to London I find has changed.

C (30:38)

Universities are a bad deal. Six figures of debt for a bachelor's degree. That signals less every year. Four years spent navigating ideological rules instead of learning how to think. Grades are inflated, standards are lowered and dissent is punished. We call it higher education, but it's mostly expensive daycare with a credential attached. University of Austin, also known as uatx, is different. Admissions at UATX are based on test scores alone. No essays, no resumes. Nobody cares who your parents know. If you're smart enough, you're in. UATX students turned down UChicago and fled Barnard to complete a demanding great books core, including Aristotle, Shakespeare, Tocqueville, alongside real math, science, economics and AI Classes are small professors actually know your name. Grades aren't padded. Excellence is measured and rewarded from day one. Students work directly with top founders, investors and institutions, building companies, doing serious research and landing real internships. And here's the part that changes everything. There is no tuition, thanks to private donors. Every UATX student graduates debt free, free to take risks, start companies and build a life instead of paying off loans. If you want a credential, look elsewhere. If you want a serious education that actually prepares you to lead, apply to the University of Austin. Visit youaustin.org that's you austin.org Most days for us are jam packed. Meetings, shoots, research, script reviews, everything happening at once. Honestly, half the time I used to just skip meals and then crash a couple of hours later. That's why I started using this high protein starter kit from Huel. It's five black edition ready to drinks plus the Black edition chocolate powder. And it's honestly the first thing that's made it easy for me to stay consistent. So here's how I use the bundle. On days I'm running out of the door, heading to the studio, to the gym. I just grab a black edition ready to drink. It's a complete meal. 35 grams of protein, 27 essential minerals and vitamins, no artificial sweeteners and it actually tastes good. Plus it's surprisingly filling for something you don't have to prep. Then on days when I'm home or I want something thicker or colder or just a little more customizable, I, I use the black edition powder. Sometimes I make a whole smoothie, sometimes I just shake it with water. It still hits that protein goal I'm aiming for. Having both the ready to drink and the powder in my kitchen keeps me from falling off my routine. Honestly, it just makes hitting your protein goals a lot less stressful. Get Huels full high protein starter kit online with our code trigger20 for 20% off@huel.com trigger20 new customers only. Thank you to Huell for supporting trigonometry. That site again is huell.com trigger20.

A (33:23)

They were bringing in a lot of changes and this is something I'm actually very interested to talk to you about because when David Lammy announced this particular policy, my jaw was on the floor when they were talking about getting rid of jury trials.

B (33:36)

Yeah.

A (33:37)

So there's a lot of people who haven't heard about this. You work for the Crown Prosecution Service. What are David Lammy's plans and why are they, in my opinion, so egregious?

B (33:48)

So as your viewers, I don't know if your viewers know, but we create the Magna Carta created trial by jury, you know, to be, to be tried by 12 of your peers. Because let's face it, the judge's state is part of the state, prosecutor's part of the state. The only part of the judicial system that is really not part of the state is the jury. It protects you against the state. And in this country we do have a magistrate system where up to 12 months there is no jury. But you do have a bench from lay people mainly, which is kind of like a mini jury. And what he's saying is that to reduce the backlog, he's going to remove jury trials. What he really is removing is people's power, you know, because right now, what they've also done, and a lot of those three year trials where you get a three year conviction is when you say hateful content. You know, look at people who've been prosecuted after the Southport trials. And what you found is when it has been a jury, they've acquitted them in five minutes because they're like, it's ridiculous. And when you have had a judge, they've had a very, very harsh penalty. So they're almost, they're, they're upping the, the chance of you being prosecuted for something they don't like you saying, and they're removing the protection from you being acquitted. And it's draconian, but it's all a form of control. You know, they don't, they don't trust the people. And they even said actually that in fraud cases the jury's too stupid, so they shouldn't be on the panel. But the jury consists of people like you and me who've had families, who've had businesses, who've run a household, who've had. And they bring a wealth of life experience that a judge doesn't. And actually what they found is during fraud cases, the jury actually had very clever questions, very clever notes, but this just. It's an authoritarian regime that doesn't trust the people and wants to control every outcome. That's why they're bringing in facial recognition without removing face coverings. It's all an excuse, it's a guise. And when you, when you lose, I think rights, fundamental rights under the guise of safety or convenience or expedience, you end up with neither.

A (36:11)

Now, David Lammy would go, well, hang on a moment, Layla. Because of COVID we now have cases that have years to be. Victims have to wait years to get their moment in court. And these are very serious crimes. These people, this is suffering. These people are waiting years, literal years, for things like rape, murder, whatever, and it's not acceptable. This is a policy that the government is doing. We're going to streamline it and we're going to ensure that people get their day in court and victims get justice. What's wrong with that?

B (36:42)

Because the judicial system only works if it's fair and reliable, not if it favors the states. And when you remove jury trials, it will invariably favor the state and the government. You can't remove people's fundamental rights for expediency. It's not our fault that there's a backlog, that's the government's fault. They have to sort it out. And you know, what's happened is. And I go back to hate crime because it's a real bugbear of mine. So you have magistrates trials which if you, let's say I hit you, right, just push you, that's an assault, quite a minor thing. It goes to the magistrates. Magistrates are very quick. If I hit you and call you with a racial slur, it becomes an either way offense and the criminal can then pick Crown Court. Right. And the, the, and he invariably picked Crown Court because of the massive delay. So then the victim pulls out, he's got three years, it's not an imprisonable offense, he's on bail, he can relax. And that is a huge part of the backlog is that they've made minor offences into more serious offences if they're racially or religiously aggravated. And that has to go back to the magistrates. It's a huge backlog and they've really prioritized words over violent action.

A (38:02)

So that being the case, what is reform's policy? How would you sort out this huge backlog that we now have in the Crown Prosecution Service?

B (38:10)

I'd have Crown Courts sitting in the weekend. You know, you clear the backlog just like we did in the Southport trials. You clear the backlog, you have Crown Court in the weekends, you reduce you all the minor offenses that are racially or religiously aggravated go back to the magistrates and that's how you clear it. But you don't clear it, you never clear it. By removing people's rights. That's not what a government does and it wasn't even in their mandate. You know, they're bringing in incrementally more and more state control without ever asking us to vote on it. If they really believe that was the case, then we should have voted on it. And I can guarantee most people wouldn't.

A (38:45)

So there's a lot of people going, well, what type? What do you mean by state control? Give me some examples. What is the Labour government doing to bring in state?

B (38:52)

So they're bringing in a digital id, right. Initially they said it would be to so illegal migrants couldn't work and then they realized that didn't wash because yeah, they're like, oh, hang on, we try that for a week or two. Obviously you can get away, you can get around with it. I mean, you know, if I'm hiring an illegal migrant. I'm not like, give me your documents. If you. If you don't have your documents, I'm not hiring you. Weak argument. And then they actually said it was going to be easier to buy a house, right? And then that didn't wash. And now they're saying, you know, I don't know, it's just so you can have. Initially they said, you know, so you couldn't work without getting it, and now it's so you can get all your benefits. And what happens is, when you have a centrally controlled digital platform that dispenses all your rights that you now treat as rights, they will become privileges on the basis of you behaving, you know. Oh, you didn't, you didn't. You said something against the government last year. We're not sure if you're allowed this. You didn't pay your HMRC tax because you're in dispute. Until you pay it, you're not going to be allowed to get an NHS appointment. All the rights I think that we deem now as rights will become privileges on the basis of us behaving. No one asked again for this central control of everything we do. Why wasn't it in the mandate? Why wasn't it in their manifesto? I mean, the election was just 14 months ago. Let's look at how they're canceling. They're canceling trial, they're canceling elections for 4 million people, 6 million people. On what basis? On reorganization. You reorganize after the election. You don't reorganize before. And by the way, reforms, polling to win every single one of those elections and those nine mayoral positions as well. This is a government that doesn't trust the people. It's a status government. It's a socialist state. They believe in a bigger, bigger state and they reward dependency. I mean, you've seen it in their budget. Well, the more you're dependent on the state for welfare, that's what they're relying on. They're relying on to grow the pie of people on welfare. Because if enough people are on welfare, they're always going to vote for more government intervention.

A (40:42)

But my pushback to that is Leila. Yeah, but you can carry on doing that. Eventually we're going to go bankrupt. And let's be honest, this country is pretty close to, to put it, partly going fucking broke.

B (40:52)

Yeah, of course we are. Because also debt finally matters, right? Before, debt didn't matter because it was at zero percent, but debt, it's not. It's not free anymore. But they don't believe in that. They just want more and more people. The more you're reliant on the state, it's like you're reliant on drugs. You're relying on a drug addict. Right. They want to get you hooked. Once you're hooked on welfare, you'll vote for them for life. They don't want you to own anything. They don't want you to make money. That's what they're betting on. They don't. They're not rewarding risk, they're not rewarding people who are working. They don't care about that.

C (41:24)

And how's reform going to fix all this? Because it's. I. Look, I agree with you 100% about hooking people on welfare, but getting people off drugs is pretty hard, as we've discussed. How are you going to unhook Britain off the welfare?

B (41:38)

Well, right now we have. So in some cases, you earn more on welfare than you do working. And you know, we have imported so much foreign cheap labor that wages have become stagnant since 2008. So you're like, what the hell am I working for? I'm not getting anything and there's no reward, so I can't own a home. It's like 10 times my salary. So I think you have to make wages go up. And the way you make wages go up is that you stop importing foreign cheap labor. You encourage businesses to open. You know, we're number 20 in the world to listen. Your company behind Mexico, they take all their jobs, all their taxes, everything you deregulate. I mean, Revolut left us to go to France. As I'm sure you know, businesses aren't really excited to open up shop here. You know, I speak to young people. They're leaving university. My teenage kids, friends, they're not like, oh, I'm gonna. I wanna stay in London. So exciting. I wanna stay in England and get a job. No, they all wanna leave. Yeah. And so we didn't invest in skills, we didn't invest in technology. We relied solely on foreign cheap labor. We're the least automated country in the G7. Why is, you know, we have the best universities in the world. Why, why is that? And that's what I think, I think we need to do. We need to make work pay, not. They punish work.

A (42:56)

And I mean, the problem is, Leila, and let's be really blunt about this is it's not just labor. It's 14 years of a. I wouldn't say useless. Cause that's actually A compliment to the previous Conservative government, but let's say you're gonna have another four or five years of labor. So that's the best part of two decades. I mean, if reform were gonna come in, you were gonna be faced with one hell of a challenge. It could be argued that it's even more of a challenge than Thatcher faced.

B (43:27)

Massive challenge, massive challenge. But you have to have someone who is, who is. So we haven't had a radical leader in such a long time. Thatcher was radical. She wasn't scared to do what it takes. She wasn't scared to stand up to the unions. She wasn't scared to be unashamedly pro capitalist. And we have had leaders who are not like that. They're internationalists, you know, they favor international relations. And I think that's got to stop. You know, we had Brexit, I was a big Brexiteer because I do believe in a sovereign, free Britain.

C (44:02)

And you were married to a Frenchman.

B (44:03)

And I was married to a Frenchman.

A (44:04)

That was always good.

B (44:06)

The less French the better. But we have a government, we have governments that didn't believe in it. You know why we should be. We should be a country that rewards companies deregulate, allow the markets to pick the winners and losers. Right now we have governments and regulation that are picking the winners and losers. I speak to young, to small companies who can't compete just because of regulation. They can't compete with the big companies. And that's a shame. That's not a thriving economy. You do get monopolies at the top. Who can afford all the regulatory requirements that this government has imposed on them. And what you find is small startups are struggling to survive here.

A (44:44)

I spend a stupid amount of time at a desk writing, researching and prepping for trigonometry episodes. After a while I realized the setup I had just wasn't good enough. The wobble, the wrong height, the back pain. If your desk is making your day worse, you feel it. That's what's pushed me to upgrade properly. Anyone who works long hours knows that sitting all day is brutal. You need a workspace that adapts to you, not the other way around. That's why I switched to the E7 Pro from Flexispot. The E7 Pro is built for people who actually use their desk properly. It has a 440 pound static load capacity, a height range from 25 inches up to just over 50 inches, and a dual motor three stage leg system that keeps the whole thing rock solid even at full height. You can tap on it Lean on it or load it with your gear and it doesn't wobble. I tested it the way any normal person would. No movement, no flex, no irritation. It's the first desk I've had that feels genuinely stable. And with a 15 year warranty and a 30 day risk free return, they clearly trust their own build quality. If you want a better workspace for yourself, something that actually fits your body and your day, check out the E7 Pro from FlexiSpot. Go to FlexiSpot.com and use our code Trigger30 to save an extra $30. They also offer special discounts for medical workers, students, graduates, teachers and military personnel. That site again is blexispot.com or click the link in the description of this episode.

C (46:25)

Leyla, you talked. Well, Frances talked about the worse than useless Conservative government. You were in support of that party when it was useless and several of your recent MPs were in fact ministers in that very useless government that we've just had 14 years of. And one of the talking points in the last few days has been the sort of the torification of the Reform Party. And a lot of people are, I think, wondering whether, you know, in, in supporting reform, they are effectively going to get more of the same.

B (47:00)

I understand the concern and I understand the concern when they see, you know, the people that they associate with a failed Tory government representing us. But I will tell those people there is one fundamental difference and it's the same when you're in a company and that's leadership, right? It depends what leader you have. They had a leader who didn't really believe in anything. They had five leaders actually, right? They, who would sway with the wind. You know, you felt, you felt that they were serving a party, right? Now you have a leader whose convictions. I don't think anyone can doubt Nigel's convictions. They've always been the same and it's always been to put British people and our country first. And he won't tolerate anything else. You know, and we're all, we all respect our leader. There's no, there's no chat in the back to get rid of him. And I think when you have strong leadership with strong convictions, strong priorities, whoever joins recognizes that that's the aim of the party. And I think that's what the Conservative Party failed to do. They didn't have, nobody really knew what they stood for. You know, they'd look us and go, you know, we're the party of low taxation, highest tax burden since World War II, were the party of home ownership, lowest tax Home, you know, if 30 and 40 year olds who don't own a home never will. The party of law and order. Law and order, as we just discussed, you know, crime was rife. You know, we're the party of business. You know, they deliberately removed the non dominant policy just to beat Labor. This was a party that was there to serve, a party they forgot to serve the British public. Their main aim was to stay in power.

C (48:37)

I agree with you, but the question I think people are asking is why would reform welcome so many of the people who were part of the very thing you're describing? And I take your point about Nigel's leadership. I think you're right about his convictions. We've had him on the show a number of times. Never basically changed his tune at all because he believes what he believes and that's admirable in a politician. I totally agree with you. But I also think a lot of people might be saying, well look, I think it's quite obvious reform needs more high caliber people to stand in all sorts of constituencies around the country and then to form a cabinet. What happens when the party has 200 MPs, most of whom are formally part of the failed Tory party and the weight of the balance of power within reform has shifted so heavily towards those people? Isn't reform going to face exactly the same problem as the Tories where you effectively had a liberal wing of the party holding back actual Conservatives? Well, now you're going to have people will say Tory Wetz holding back those of you who are actually sort of native reformers.

B (49:40)

So to be fair, Tory Wetz aren't joining us.

C (49:44)

What about what's his face, Jake Berry last time, he's a foot soldier. Hold on a second. Last time I saw Jake Berry, we were on Question Time together and his exact words when I challenged the idea of net zero, which I think is economic suicide, and I'm sure you'd agree with me. He said, you're totally wrong, Constantine. Net zero is not the problem, it's the solution. That's who you now have in reform.

B (50:06)

So anyone can join. I mean, I'm serious. It doesn't mean that they'll have a role in government. Right, right. And it doesn't mean that they, you know, we have lots of ex Tories who have joined us as foot soldiers. And you say, yeah, I was part of the Conservative Party because, and number one, there was no other choice on the, on the rights. And although I don't even think it's right, I just think for me I wanted A party that was patriotic. Believe. You know, my mum always taught me, and I know it sounds corny, you work hard, you shall receive. You don't work hard, you're not going to get anything right. And I wanted that. I wanted that, you know, mirrored in a party where, you know, we will reward you going out, leaving your family at 5am, we will reward you putting half your savings in a company. We're going to reward that risk and we're going to reward that effort that you take to support yourself and not rely on the state. But we've had the opposite. And I was part of the Conservatives because I think, and a lot of people who are still part of the Conservatives who haven't had the guts to leave is because we still think of it as the party of Margaret Thatcher. We really do, and we try and ignore everything it's done and think that maybe, maybe, just maybe, they might become conservative again. And then you're like, hang on, there's this other party that is actually saying everything that I believe in and is the real Conservative Party with a small C. And that's why they're joining. But as I said, everyone who joins won't be in government. But anyone can join. You know, we could have, you know, we've had a Green councilor defect because.

A (51:43)

Look, I'll be honest with you.

B (51:45)

Also, also, by the way, politics is not, is not a permanent damnation. Right? It's not a life sentence.

A (51:51)

It is, as far as I'm concerned.

B (51:52)

It'S not a life. Well, well, no, I'm joking. It's not a life sentence. Right, so, so, so, so it's almost like even in crime, you know, you can atone for your sins.

C (52:01)

Yes, but there are these people atoned for their sins.

B (52:03)

The party hasn't atoned for its sins. But, but for instance, you mentioned gendering. I mean, one thing he did say, so I was quite skeptical. And then his speech, he said something that really resonated with me and he worded it better than I ever could, where he said, they are so compromised that they can no longer speak to the people. And that's how I feel the Conservative Party is. They are, so. They are the architects of all the issues we face now, but they can't admit it because it's like a criminal being caught red handed and saying, I'm innocent. He can't really admit it.

C (52:33)

But what I. Layla, all I'm trying to get you to address is you're welcoming these criminals into your party. According to some people, I'm Continuing your metaphor. So it's like a criminal has been caught red handed and what you now have is a criminal gang who is now bleeding former members to your party. That's how some people see it and.

B (52:54)

I can understand it. All I can say is Nigel. Nigel's political view and sense, I've always trusted, and he made the decision. And I think it's the good decision. Because what it signals, forget the reflection on reform, which I can see some people have their doubts, but what it does signal is that the Conservative Party is effectively finished. And if that thought process accelerates Nigel Farage being Prime Minister, then for me, anything that does that is in the national interest. And when you have big players, whether you like generic or not, but he is a big player in the Conservative.

C (53:35)

I wasn't criticizing Generic. I was talking about Jake Berry.

B (53:38)

I didn't. I mean, Jake Berry. Yeah, listen, I haven't really heard what he said.

C (53:42)

That's fine, carry on.

B (53:44)

But when you have big players joining and really eviscerating the Conservative Party, if that accelerates a reform government, then for me, it's a patriotic duty for me to support it because it's in the national interest for everyone that we do have a reform government.

A (54:00)

There must be a part of you that is worried when you have someone like Nadeem Zahawi joining reform and particularly his behavior during COVID with vaccine passports. We've spoken about civil liberties. That was one of the most egregious infringements of civil liberties that has happened in all our lifetimes. And I think we can agree with that.

B (54:21)

I agree with that 100%. I do, I do. I mean, my teenagers are not. My kids are not vaccinated. I remember I was pregnant during COVID and I had. I had every single strain, literally. And every two days I'd get a call from the nhs, please, can you get vaccinated? In the end, I'm like, for God's sake, this is harassment. I've had it. They didn't take in natural immunity at all. It was completely disregarded. Which is the most, you know, the most. Anyway, as I said, and I think Nadim said in his press conference, he is a foot soldier. Anyone can join. And I think Nadim is a very successful businessman. If you remove that aspect of his political career, which I agree, I did not agree with at all. In fact, it's during that period that I started inching away from the Conservative Party and having my doubts. You know, I'd gone. We could only walk in those days and I'd go on long walks. One of my closest friends is a. Is a real lefty. You know, she's an Oxford grad and environmentalist. And we used to have long, long, I think I did like literally half a million steps. And I'd be like, who the hell does this government think it is? You know, who are they to tell me what to do? And then you'd hear, you know, the number six was an arbitrary number that you could have at your house. But he is a successful businessman and I think successful businessmen who have created something from nothing could be a benefit. But again, he did say he was a foot soldier and that's how it is. As I said, anyone can join. You know, we're not a closed shop.

A (55:50)

And I tell you why this is so important, Leila. And it's because one of the great privileges of doing this show, both for me and Konstantin, is we get to talk to ordinary people about what's going on in the world. And they invariably, a lot of the times less so now, which is very heartening. It's a one, two, over the shoulder and then asking or saying something. The reason we're pressing you about this particular issue is because I feel the next general election, this is it. We're drinking in the Last chance alone, 100%. We're drinking in the last chance saloon, culturally, economically, societally. And one of my fears is that we're looking at the same people coming in and going, we're just making the same mistake here. And when I talk to people on the streets, these are ordinary, regular people. They've lost faith in democracy, they've lost faith in democracy, they've lost faith in party politics and they've lost faith in politicians. And that is a very dangerous place for society to be in.

B (56:46)

100%. I mean, until reform, I'd lost faith in democracy, to be honest, because I felt I was voting for something and getting the complete opposite. And I campaigned under the Tory banner across the country and the year before the general election. And the number one message I got, it wasn't like cost of living, it was, you lot are in it for yourselves. And that really resonated with me. Me, people really felt that politicians were doing politics for themselves and the Conservative Party was there to serve itself and, and people, that is, for me, the main difference between reform. No, we're not some 100 year old, 200 year old party that's, you know, badge of like, honor to, to be reform is not why we're there. We're there because we really have had Enough. And we want what's best for the country. And people who come over from the conservatives are doing the same. You know, they want to fundamentally fix what they were part of breaking. And, you know, who am I to say no to that? They're like, yes, we messed it up, we got it wrong. Please can we help fix it?

C (57:58)

Leila, one other issue I want to raise with you. You actually alluded to it a number of times. You talked about Berkus and you talked about parts of London feeling like a Muslim. I don't remember the words you used exactly, but Muslim city, Muslim ghetto, whatever you want to call it. There's obviously, I think if we look across Europe, there's been a dramatic rise in the concern about what people might call Islamification, etc. Why do you think that's happened?

B (58:22)

I think so. We saw it across the Middle east over the past few decades. You saw it in Egypt, where my parents are from. You know, my mom showed me pictures where people were in bikinis and swimsuits on the beach. Now you go to a beach, everyone's in full burqa in the sea, all in black. In the Middle east, it's because they. There's no social mobility at all. Wealth is really accumulated very much at the top. There's no welfare, there's nothing. And people turn to religion and it's exploited by radical Islamic leaders in that sense. And I think the reason it is here is because we have let people into the country in massive amounts of numbers with no filter who hate the country. You know, you have let people in. Some of the people we've let in would be considered radical Muslims in the parts they are and would be nowhere near government. You know, we're near local government, but we haven't had that. I mean, we've let in, we let. Muslim Brotherhood is not prescribed in this country. We let in someone, a convicted bomb maker from Egypt and considered his claim and put him in a four star hotel in Ealing for 18 months, paid for by the taxpayer. This is someone who was part of the Muslim Brotherhood and convicted Muslim Brotherhood, for your viewers, they are the founding fathers of ISIS and Al Qaeda. You know, you just say that word in some parts of the Middle east and you're imprisoned here. We grant them asylum, put them in the middle of towns and villages. He went on to rape someone in Hyde Park. As I said, for me, that is treacherous from a government. And that's what you have. You have people. And I know Merkel led in all the Syrian refugees despite other European countries begging her not to into our country. We don't have a government whose sole purpose is, is to protect the British public and the British way of life. We don't. We don't have that. And we've let in too many people from certain countries and certain cultures who not only hate the country, but want to change it.

C (60:31)

Why do they hate the country?

A (60:34)

One of my goals for 2026 is to feel in control of my money. Less stress, clearer goals and no more wondering where it goes at the end of the month. Managing your money doesn't have to be a struggle this year. Monarch is the all in one personal finance tool designed to make your life easier. It brings your entire financial life, budgeting accounts and investments, net worth and future planning together in one dashboard on your laptop or phone after the holidays. Monarch makes it easy for me to reset. Monarch allows me to review spending, set budgets I can actually stick to and start tracking progress towards real goals. The weekly recaps are huge. You get a clear snapshot of what's happening without having to obsess over it. What really separates Monarch is how it helps you stay proactive. It guides you towards realistic goals based on your finances and keeps you accountable all year, not just in January. Start your new year on the right foot financially and get 50% off your monarch subscription with code Trigger this new year, achieve your financial goals for good. Monarch is the all in one tool that makes proactive money management simple all year long. Use code trigger@monarch.com for half off your first year. That's 50% off your first year with code triggeronarch.com why do they hate the country?

B (62:02)

Because it's not a Muslim country.

C (62:04)

They want it to be a Muslim.

B (62:06)

I speak to some, you know, I don't speak, I hear some. They do want it to be a Muslim country, but not only that, they somehow blame Britain for all the woes of, of the Middle east or the woes of their country or, you know, what's going on in Palestine or what's going on, I don't know where, and they blame it. And they don't come with a love of country or Great Britain. They don't come being. I want to come, I want to embrace it, I want to work, I want to do well. You know, I want my kids to grow up British. That's not why they come. You know, they come and they're like, you know what, I can go there, I can bring in 20 of my family members, I can live for free, I can do what I want I can say what I want. And if the host nation, you know, and if anyone from the host nation complains, they actually call them racist, they get the blame. That's what's going on.

C (62:55)

Do they think they see us as weak?

B (62:56)

Do I think what?

C (62:57)

Do you think they see us as weak?

B (63:01)

I think they see us as suckers.

C (63:02)

Yeah.

B (63:03)

You know, as big. You know, I had to prosecute one guy literally had, like, receding hairline, almost white hair. And he'd come into the dock, and he was from Kuwait. I was like, why the hell is someone from Kuwait as a refugee? It's such a rich country. But anyway, no war there. And he would be charged with robbery, burglary in the house. Guess what he said he's 16 years old. So he was treated as not an adult. And when you're not an adult, you can't be remanded in custody for a crime. So he'd commit crimes on a grand. And the public prosecutor would stand up and go, he's a child. And you could almost see him laughing. You could almost see him calling his mates in Kuwait going, mate, man, I come here, I've got a free house. I rob houses. And they're arguing for hours over whether I'm 16 or not. You know, it's farcical. And the public prosecutor would stand up and say, he cannot be reminded in custody he's underage. And then the judge would be like, well, we're going to have to assign a publicly paid age assessor. God knows what that entails. That's how ridiculous it is. And for your viewers, I was in court once, and a woman turns up in a burqa in the dock, and I'm like, I make an application to the judge. I'm like, judge, could you please remove her burqa? I have no idea who this person is. And the judge says, no, these are religious sensitivities, Madam Prosecutor. We cannot allow her to remove her burqa. And at that moment, I realized we're not equal under the law. Actually, you cannot go to court with a hat. Right. This person, I don't even know if it was a lady, sounded like one, had her complete face covered, and I had to conduct a hearing with it. As I said, we have cowards running the whole system who are too cowardly to stand up for us and stand up for our country. And I think you have seen in other parts of Europe as well. But I think people are recognizing they don't want to be run by cowards anymore.

C (64:56)

And when we're not being run by cowards. What will our immigration and also domestic policy in this area look like to address these challenges that we now face?

B (65:05)

So I think there will be. So, for instance, there will be. No, if you're a foreigner, you can't access benefits.

C (65:13)

Tick. You'll get a lot rid of a lot of illegal immigration.

B (65:15)

A massive, massive amount. And a lot of legal immigration as well.

C (65:19)

It's not contributing.

B (65:20)

Yeah, of course, because.

C (65:21)

So big Tick. Congratulations.

B (65:23)

So we will not rely on foreign cheap labor, because what happens when you rely on foreign cheap labor? They come. Oh, yeah, they're working. But it's so their salary is so low, the cost of living is so high they're still in that drain that they're getting benefits.

C (65:34)

Agreed. Right, okay. So sorted. No benefits, foreign nationals. What else?

B (65:38)

No benefits for foreign nationals. And when you. When you remove that, you will have British people put into social housing. You will put British people at the top of the queue for everything. And I think you will see a fundamental change. You will remove ourselves from the echr, because the ECHR was never meant to prevent us from deporting illegal migrants. It was never meant to undermine our sovereignty. And I think that is. I think the world needs to know that we don't really care. All we care about is what happens in our country. We don't care what you think of us. And we're not, definitely not going to let a judge in Strasbourg tell us what to do or who we can and cannot keep. And we want Britain to thrive again. We have massively de industrialized as a result of net zero. It's madness. And China's clever because it doesn't go into war. It just slowly de industrializes the world and supplies us with everything. We're so reliant on it for things. We used to be the workshop of the world, and now everything we used to make, we import from China. So I think I'd like to see an industrial plan that puts Britain back on the industrial map, you know, and we don't have that right now. We don't make anything. And I think once we have a thriving economy, we only see 60. So I speak to farmers who are. We speak about the inheritance tax for farmers, but there are also tenant farmers who have been told to stop growing food and start growing trees because the landlord gets more money for it. And so we only have. We only realize 60% of our food is homegrown, 40% is not. And I'd like to see that flourish. I'd like to see us grow More food. I'd like to see less focus on environmental almost removed because it's weakened us and a focus on what we can make, what we can grow. And British people focused on it, upskilling British people. If you need a coder right now or someone to build you an AI platform, you don't look for someone in Britain, you look for someone abroad. It's demand and supply, Right. We don't have enough. Even my kids who are taking computer science, let's say in A levels or gcse, they're at one. It's so bad because those that teach it are not the best, obviously, because otherwise they'd be working in a high tech job. So we're not even teaching the kids the jobs of the future at all. My kids, I still get called because my kid's handwriting is bad. You know, I'm like, don't tell me about his handwriting. I want to know how quick his touch typing is. You know, I want to see touch typing competitions, hackathons all across schools. We don't have that. In fact, I went to speak at the Adam Smith Institute last week and I spoke to amazing young guys who have hackathons across and they're like, we've spoken to the government, we want to support them, but they're not. And they're like, we're getting poached from Dubai. You know, I want us to be leaders in AI and technology, but I know that relies. We need obviously, a new energy plan because, you know, that's, it's heavily reliant. But we also need to embrace that if you're, if you are disabled or if you cannot go into work, but you are, you can learn technical skills, you know, you can learn data analysis, you can learn AI engineering, you can learn all this at home. And that's what I want to see. I want to see those 9 million people that cannot go to work back into work one way or another.

A (68:56)

I think also one of the main, one of the, a real significant change, not the main challenge, but it's a challenge that we see in our society politically, is a rise of sectarian politics.

B (69:06)

Yeah.

A (69:06)

And I find that terrifying, if I'm being honest with you. The fact that you get MPs in parliament talking about helping to build an airport in a remote region of Pakistan. I'm going, is this some kind of weird satire that I've found myself watching?

B (69:22)

And that, again, goes in with immigration, you know, you have put a certain demographic from a certain country, you've flooded a certain area that they've managed to control the electoral process of it. And that's why it's got to change.

A (69:37)

It's not just the electoral process.

B (69:39)

Well, they vote the people in.

A (69:40)

Yeah, they vote the people in, but it's also, you look at what's happened with Maccabe Television Aviv.

B (69:44)

I know. And then he gets to resign. He's not even fired the head of the police.

A (69:50)

I think we should talk about it very briefly and you should tell people, because there's people in America who are really interested in this and I don't think it's got enough coverage, if I'm being honest.

B (69:59)

No, I mean, so what happened is, was that the police canceled Maccabi Tel Aviv fans coming to a football match because they said that they'll be, you know, there'll be fights, there'll be riots, there'll be protests. And they, they basically the message they sent to Jewish people was, if, if you're in danger, we're going to ban you. We're not going to stop the danger that presents to you. And that is a horrible message for Jewish people. And, and, and the, the head of the police actually presented false evidence, lied about something that happened in Amsterdam and he admitted it. What would your viewers think should happen then? He should be fired with shame. What happened? He got to resign at 52. That is the problem. There is no accountability. But even amongst MPs, you know, they get it wrong and they're like, you know, we're really sorry we got it wrong, we'll get it right next time. But they still stay in their jobs. It's the same with the rape gangs across the country, you know. Well, we're really sorry, we're going to do a review, we're going to do this. We're only talking about going after the perpetrators. The perpetrators are one slice. I want to go after the social workers, the politicians, the police officers. And now you learn, by the way, that Maccabi Tel Aviv, the head of the police, who was on his recruitment panel, who recruited him, the head of the local mosque, and it all starts to come into play that it's all one cabal, right? What is the head of the mosque doing appointing the head of the police? And then you think, well, hang on, there obviously was a police cover up of the grooming gangs and if they're so interlinked with communities that also covered up the grooming gangs, that their job relies on it. And sometimes you think about it, you think it's so big and it's so entrenched, there's so like you say there's so much to do, but I think it has to come down to accountability. And that's what I'd like to see in London. You get it wrong, you're out. There's no sorrys, you know, because this is public money. Not only public perception and public trust, but it's also public safety. For instance, Mark Riley looked us in the eye and so did Sadiq Khan and say, there are no grooming gangs, there are no rape gangs in London. Nothing like that exists here. Yet I read victims, testimonials, one from Oxford saying that she was driven to London, there were hundreds of men and she was never asked about them. Another woman, another girl said she was bundled up in the boot of a car, driven to London from, I think the Midlands, driven to a house because her abuser owed people in London and she was gang raped in that house. And yet, and that was in Wasidique Carnival just before he became to power. And yet they looked us in the eye and said nothing happened here. But only under public pressure did they say, oh, hang on, we're reviewing 9,000 cases just because it was public. How do you get 9,000 cases of sexual, of rape gangs wrong? How do you get that? How do you get that wrong? But he's still in power, right? And the police is gonna review the cases that they originally discarded. It's, they're doing their own homework. And I think that's what people feel is that there is no accountability. I don't wanna hear sorry anymore. I want people to lose their jobs. I want people to be prosecuted for their mistakes.

A (73:05)

Because the fact that he said I wasn't aware, I mean, I was aware that he said something akin to that, but when I was teaching, I taught a victim of the grooming gang.

B (73:14)

Did you?

A (73:15)

Yeah.

B (73:16)

Wow.

A (73:16)

And that was in East London.

B (73:17)

Wow.

A (73:17)

That was in East London. And that was 10 or so years ago, maybe a bit more so that, and that was that. We knew that because we were, we were coordinating with social workers. So he must have known.

B (73:27)

Oh, he must have known. And, and I don't know if you read the Express did an article, basically what happens is that they, they fly in men from a certain part of Pakistan to come and gang rape these girls. They, they, they, they send photos of the girls and to the guys in Pakistan and they bring them in to gang rape the girls. And that's why I wrote an article saying if Shabana Mahmood is really serious, then she would, and Pakistan's not taking back these people. If she was really serious, which she's not. She would issue visa bans against Pakistan until they took these people back. We don't want them in our country. But she hasn't done that, obviously. And you've got to ask yourself why.

A (74:10)

I mean, she talks a good game.

B (74:11)

It's so easy to talk a good game. You know, she said, oh, you know, these are the toughest measures we've ever had. And she, she issued visa bans from drc, Congo and Angola. What? Why? Hardly any of those come on a boat. No, we want to see from Afghanistan, Somalia, Pakistan. But they're not doing that. They always talk a good game. And actually, you know what? You know what would be really a good game is that if you come on a boat, the moment you enter a boat in France, that you know that if you arrive here, you will be prosecute. She said, no, well, instead of a five year visa or, you know, we'll give you a two year stay in a hotel and keep reviewing it. That's what they call far reaching. They just tinker around the edges. You need someone to come and literally blow it up. Not, you know, just. It's got to stop. It cannot be business as usual. And that's what we have with the two parties. It's just business as usual because the status quo suits them.

C (75:07)

Leila, thank you so much for coming on. Before we head to substack, where our supporters get to ask you their questions, what's the one thing that we're not talking about that we should be?

B (75:17)

I think people are not talking enough about how successive governments have managed to divide us into different sections. You know, you're Muslim, you're Jewish, you're Christian, you grew up in a council estate. You didn't, you're gay. You're not. And that's got to stop because in London anyway, we're all Londoners. And I want to be the candidate, the mayor that unites everyone under the banner of London. I don't want to divide and conquer. And that's what I think. That's what they've managed to do in the past few years. And you've seen it across the world. You know, we're all put into our own little demographic box and we're all meant to pit against each other for certain rights, certain privileges, or even just political attention. And that's got to stop. We're all human beings and I don't want us divided anymore.

C (76:07)

It's a good message to end on. Thank you so much for coming on the show. Head on over to substack where Leila is going to answer your questions.

A (76:14)

What will it take for you to attract support to defeat Sadiq Khan? Because London is pretty lefty liberal remainer. How are you going to beat him.

B (76:25)

Sam?