140. Making Gifts for Nigel

Summary

---

Where Politics Meets History

Episode 140: "Making Gifts for Nigel"

Date: July 7, 2026
Host: Iain Dale
Co-host (standing in for Dr Tessa Dunlop): Natasha Clark

---

Episode Overview

In this lively, insight-packed episode, Iain Dale is joined by Natasha Clark (LBC), sitting in for regular co-host Tessa Dunlop, to dissect the week’s headlines through the lens of history—though, as Iain admits, “we’re not gonna do a lot of history on this podcast, it has to be said” [01:31]. Top stories include England’s rollercoaster World Cup win, the latest controversies encircling Reform leader Nigel Farage, speculation over Andy Burnham’s political strategy as incoming Prime Minister, and the latest chapter in the ongoing saga of Prince Harry and the Royal Family. Expect sharp banter, frank exchanges, and grounded, behind-the-curtain perspectives on politics and personalities.

---

Key Discussion Points

1. England’s World Cup Win & Football Fandom

[02:06–12:09]

• Natasha confesses she only caught the last five tension-filled minutes of the match, waking at “4:04, which I think was like some sort of sign that actually something was happening” [02:14].
• Conversation turns to generational and national loyalties in sport, referencing Norman Tebbett’s infamous ‘cricket test’ and questions of belonging and dual support for home nations.
  • Natasha: “Why can't you support more than one team?” [10:16].
  • Iain counters: "In the end, you have to pick one, though. There's one that you like more than the other.” [10:39].
• The duo tease each other about the appeal of England squad members, with Natasha admitting, “I think Harry Kane's quite attractive” [11:27].

Notable quote:
Iain, reflecting on national loyalty in sport: “Once you get a reputation as a politician for any form of lack of transparency or financial... It's very difficult to shake that reputation off.” [16:38]

---

2. Farage's Gift Controversies and Transparency in Politics

[13:13–19:13]

• Iain lays into Nigel Farage over recent revelations, including an undeclared £270,000 gold marketing payment and a £5 million donation, expressing concern about his “sole aim in life should be to win the next election” but instead “he's spending hours doing cameo videos, he's spending hours doing this... He needs to start behaving like [a Prime Minister]” [13:33].
• Discussion of Farage’s long-time associate George Cottrell, author of “How to Launder Money,” and the political fallout from the Sunday Times exposé [14:17].
• Natasha points out Reform Party sources reject the possibility of a by-election but notes, “when you look at [the rules] at a glance… it does seem like he’s broken them” [15:06].
• Both agree the perception of sleaze can be fatal:
  • Iain: "Once you get a reputation… it's very difficult to shake" [16:38].
  • Natasha: “It risks, you know, destroying his… ‘I’m a man of the people’ vibe.” [17:44]

Notable quote:
Natasha on public scrutiny: “If the British public are going to vote someone into number 10, [they] want to know this kind of stuff and they want to know whose pocket you might be in.” [17:44]

---

3. Will Andy Burnham Call an Early Election? “Bottler Burnham” and Political Precedent

[19:13–24:31]

• Natasha sets out both “prosecution” (reasons Burnham might seek a fresh mandate) and “defence” (advantages to waiting) [19:34].
• Historic parallel with Gordon Brown’s 2007 “bottler” reputation for not calling an election is explored:
  • Iain: “Had he done so, it’s entirely possible that he would have won that election… and he didn’t. And therefore he got a reputation as a bottler.” [21:43]
  • Natasha spins the alliteration: “Bottler Brown, Bottler Burnham—you can see it.” [21:47]
• They both conclude Burnham will likely “go long,” but expect the debate to re-emerge in the autumn.

---

4. Farage’s Low Profile & Reform’s Prospects

[24:31–25:23]

• Natasha reports Westminster gossip about Farage’s health (“furiously denied” by Reform), suggesting his reduced appearances and preference for home video messages have raised eyebrows [24:43].
• Reform’s polling position is slipping: “they’re now down to about 24%. Labour and Conservatives, both up at 20 on the last poll I saw… [Labour] will probably overtake Reform in the polls in the next few weeks.” [18:54]

---

5. Andy Burnham’s Political Persona: “Ordinary Andy” or Performer?

[25:23–30:58]

• Iain and Natasha critique Burnham’s “ordinary bloke” image strategy:
  • Iain: “Some of [his] social media videos… I kind of wince at… ‘I’m an ordinary person, I’m just like you.’ Well, no, you’re not, mate. You’re about to become Prime Minister.” [25:23]
  • Natasha references Russell Kane’s parody: "I'm just Andy Burnham. I'm a normal bloke. I'm gonna make some toast... It's gonna be with gravy" [25:51].
• They weigh the challenges of taking the leadership without robust democratic debate, with Natasha warning: "It’s terrible for democracy. It's not how democracy should be run. We should have a contest where Andy Burnham's ideas should be tested.” [27:08]
• Analysis of Burnham’s policy gaps—"there's lots we don't know about what Andy Burnham thinks about all of these issues"—and the fine line he must walk to avoid alienating both Labour’s broad coalition and the wider electorate [28:11–30:22].

---

6. Parliamentary Style & PMQs: What Changes?

[30:58–33:03]

• Discussion pivots to whether Burnham’s leadership will truly reset the tone at Prime Minister’s Questions.
  • Iain: "Loads of politicians say that before they get into power. David Cameron, I think, certainly did... Is Andy Burnham going to do Prime Minister's questions differently?" [30:58]
  • Natasha believes Burnham is “quicker on his feet,” likely to excel at the Commons set-piece [31:30].
• Burnham's potential for cross-party cooperation, including social care and welfare reform, is highlighted, but tribal loyalty within Labour could be a limiting factor.

---

7. Prince Harry: Security, Reconciliation & Royal Drama

[33:19–39:19]

• Natasha recaps the “he said/she said” over Prince Harry’s London security arrangement, linking it to broader questions of Royal privilege and public penny [33:19].
• Lively debate over taxpayer-funded security versus celebrities like Taylor Swift, with Iain quipping, “Taylor Swift isn’t a working royal either... And does she get British taxpayers?... She does.” [35:09]
• The stalemate between Harry and the Royal Family, post-Oprah and “Spare”, is discussed with mild sympathy but little optimism that fences can be mended soon.
  • Natasha: “It’s going to be really difficult to repair that relationship. And if you can’t even get a date in the diary to have a conversation... then I don’t see how this relationship can ever be repaired.” [39:19]
  • Iain: “You’ve got to have two to tango. And I do wonder sometimes whether the King has really played his part in trying to affect this reconciliation.” [37:09]

---

Timed Highlights & Memorable Moments

• [01:22] Natasha: “Why was I your first choice, Iain?” / Iain: “Because you went down very well last time you came on.”
• [13:13] Iain launching into Farage critique: “Last week I did a phone in where, much to Corey's amazement, I really laid into Nigel Farage... last week, I thought, no, he's gone too far this time.”
• [16:38] Iain: “Once you get a reputation as a politician for any form of lack of transparency... very difficult to shake that reputation off.”
• [17:44] Natasha, on Farage: "It risks, you know, destroying his... I’m a man of the people vibe."
• [21:47] Natasha: "Bottler Brown, Bottler Burnham—you can see it."
• [25:51] Natasha, channeling Russell Kane: "I'm just Andy Burnham. I'm a normal bloke. I'm gonna make some toast."
• [27:08] Natasha: "I think it's terrible for democracy. It's not how democracy should be run."
• [31:30] Natasha: "Andy Burnham will be better at Prime Minister's questions. He thinks quicker on his feet..."
• [35:09] Iain: “Taylor Swift isn’t a working royal either... And does she get British taxpayers?... She does.”
• [39:19] Natasha: "It’s going to be really difficult to repair that relationship. And if you can’t even get a date in the diary to have a conversation... then I don’t see how this relationship can ever be repaired."

---

Tone & Takeaways

• Tone: Conversational, sharp, occasionally irreverent, always grounded in the realities of Westminster and Whitehall; the banter between Iain and Natasha is warm but not shy of pointed digs or honest critiques.
• Core themes: The enduring importance of transparency and perception in politics, the pressures of public persona vs. private ambition, and the challenges posed by political and personal estrangement.

---

For New Listeners

This episode stands out for its balanced look at the week’s major moving stories, laced with personality and well-grounded historical perspective—even if the history is “half [Iain’s] strong point” [01:38]. Whether you’re a politics junkie, a lover of drama, or just someone wondering how the past echoes through every headline, you’ll get sharp analysis, new angles, and a bit of a laugh.

---

Next episode: Dr. Tessa Dunlop returns to the fold for more “rested” debate.

Transcript

[A]

This is a global production.

[B]

Nigel Farage. If I was an ordinary Reform Party member, I would feel that I was being cheated by my leader because he's obviously not spending enough time on the day job. And his sole aim in life should be to win the next election. And the opinion polls show that he could. But then he's spending hours doing cameo videos, he's spending hours doing this. And he's not an ordinary backbench mp. He is a party leader. He's a putative Prime Minister, and he needs to start behaving like one. Hello. It's Monday afternoon. It's where politics meets history. But not with the good doctor, who is, as we speak, flying back from this wonderful cruise that she's been on. She's been texting me over the last few days telling me what a wonderful time she's had. And believe it or not, she feels very rested. I've never seen Tessa Dunlop in a rested state, I have to say. So she has done two lectures, she sold lots of books and got a bit of sun, I think. What is not to like? Anyway, she will be back on the podcast at the end of the week. So today I thought, well, who can we get to replace Tessa? And I have chosen, and she was my first Choice. Natasha Clark, LBC3.

[A]

It's so good to know I was your first choice, Ian.

[B]

It's not. It's not even a lie.

[A]

It's not even a lie. Why was I your first choice, Ian?

[B]

Please do explain, because you went down very well last time you came on.

[A]

Good to know. Good to know. Thank you. Thank you, Tessa. And thank you.

[B]

You. Not at all. Well, there's a lot about today. We're not gonna do a lot of history on this podcast, it has to be said. That's good.

[A]

Cause it's not my strong point.

[B]

Well, it's half my strong point. But there are so many news stories around at the moment. So we're going to talk about Donald Trump and his intervention in the World cup, which gives me an excuse to talk about England, England, England. And we're also going to talk about Keir Starmer, Andy Bur and Prince Harry, and whether he will be laying his head on a Buckingham palace pillow or. Possibly not.

[A]

Possibly not. It sounds like, doesn't it?

[B]

It does. But before we start, as you know, we always do a bit of fluff at the top. So let's talk about the World Cup. Did you watch it last night?

[A]

I didn't watch it, Ian. As you know, I'm usually an early bird. Breakfast girl. So I have to be on and call in case Nick Ferrari calls me. Very early doors. And luckily I didn't get a call. But that did mean that I didn't stay up to watch it. But I did wake up at 4:04, which I think was like some sort of sign that actually something was happening. So I watched like the last five minutes, which obviously was very tense. And everybody, you know, it was three, two at that point, and I was like, oh, my gosh. Okay, not. Not long to go. They've just got to hang on for a few more minutes. And then they did and I went back to sleep for another hour. So happy days.

[B]

And you can go back to sleep when you. When. When you've woken up and effectively properly woken up because you've been watching tv.

[A]

Yeah, sometimes go back to sleep sometimes, yes. It depends. I've been. I've been away for weekend at a festival where I was camping, so I think I was quite tired.

[B]

Are you mad?

[A]

I know I'm mad. I don't really camp. I'm not really a camping guy. So it was. My back came, but I came back.

[B]

Festival.

[A]

It was called Love Trails, which is like a running festival. So you run in the day and then party in the night. God, it's quite exhausting, to be honest. I think I'm probably too old for it, to be quite frank, because you

[B]

are a bit of a runner, aren't you?

[A]

I am a runner around about 45k over the. Over the three days. So I was pretty happy with that.

[B]

Do you do that because you enjoy it or just to keep fit?

[A]

A bit of both. Yeah. I do enjoy. I think it's good thinking time. And I actually ran without headphones for the entire time, which is good. So there's lots of chatting to people, but also just lots of time to

[B]

think, you know, I'd be too knackered to chat.

[A]

Yeah, well, sometimes when you're. When you're running slowly and you're sort of getting into a rhythm, it's nice. And the whole point of the festival is like, you meet other people and there are people there from all over the country, actually. Very. Like lots of people outside of cities. So it's nice to talk to people outside of the metropolitan elite bubble. It was in South Wales, in the Gower. Oh, yeah.

[B]

I wasn't expecting that.

[A]

Yeah, no, it's really nice.

[B]

Beautiful love trails in the Gower.

[A]

Exactly. That was exactly. This is a really.

[B]

Did you find love?

[A]

I did not find love. I literally. I know, Ian. I Feel like I should have my own dating podcast. But everybody I talked to was either married or had a girlfriend, so sadly not to be. But, you know, I did try, I tried to meet some people, but. But there were some very nice people there that I did meet.

[B]

Well, it's good to do stuff like that. I've never, I've always hated running. Well, at my advanced age now I can barely trot, let alone running.

[A]

You say that, but there were some, there were some a little older people there that were. That were genuinely like, you know, and especially sort of endurance training. They say that you actually can get better as you get older and that actually the people in later in life are very good at it. Like that long distance endurance stuff. So. But yeah, I think it's good. It's good to meet some people, talk to some LBC fans and, you know, told them what I did and, you know, it's fascinating hearing about what people think about LBC and the stuff that we do outside of it. It's good, it's good focus group activity.

[B]

It actually is, isn't it? Because. And they're not shy in giving you their opinion on who they like and who they don't like and what they think people should say and what they shouldn't say.

[A]

Exactly. So it was good.

[B]

I get most of my feedback from taxi drivers.

[A]

Yes. And so I actually had a taxi driver on the way there. I didn't tell him who I worked for, but he would have been. He was exactly the type that you would want to get. Oh, what do you think of this?

[B]

It's usually, yeah, I like that Nick Ferrari. But I mean, once ten o' clock comes.

[A]

Exactly. I would try to switch off or it's the completely the opposite. It was, oh, I don't like that Nick Ferrari bloke. It will turn on as soon as James o' Brien gets on.

[B]

I've never had anyone in the town who say that.

[A]

Oh, no, I have. I genuinely have a lot of people that love that love James o'. Brien. Genuinely that Most, most of the time these days I'm having people go, oh, James o'. Brien.

[B]

I suspect they don't. We're talking about taxi drivers here.

[A]

Oh, sorry. Specifically taxi drivers. It definitely more Nick fans than James. Probably.

[B]

They know my politics so they automatically assume that James and I are daggers drawn.

[A]

Yes, exactly. What they really don't know is exactly who your daggers are drawn with, Ian.

[B]

Well, feel free to enlighten me. Who my daggers are drawn with.

[A]

Oh, no, we couldn't possibly. That's one for the next episode. Keep the listeners on their toes.

[B]

So are you one of these women?

[A]

Oh, gosh, where's this gonna go? Where's this gonna go?

[B]

Who actually do get interested in the World cup but don't. Don't really watch a lot of football other than the World Cup.

[A]

Yeah, I don't really watch a lot of football, but I think I will now we're through. I basically said I would get excited about it if we got through to the. The quarterfinals.

[B]

So you're now with.

[A]

Yeah, I think so. That's fine. I think that's fine. And yeah, so I think I will watch Saturday also. Saturday's game is. Is 10 o'. Clock. Right. It's much more friendly time.

[B]

Yeah. I've got a bit of a problem

[A]

on Saturday, 2am, 1am it's just too, too late for me.

[B]

If you live in, you might like to come and watch me and Naz Shah have a little chat at the Bradford Literary Festival on Saturday afternoon. But my train doesn't get back into King's Cross until 20 past nine.

[A]

Oh, so are you thinking you might watch, sit in a bar in King's Cross somewhere? Maybe there's lots of nice little pubs around there. No, but it's a good atmosphere, though.

[B]

So I have booked a luxurious hotel room at the Premier Inn Hub. Oh, beautiful Tothill street by.

[A]

I do like the Premier Inn. So do I. Yeah, they're nice.

[B]

I just hope it has a TV in the room. I'm pretty sure. But you know how much that costs because it's Wimbledon in London at the moment. I mean, the hotel prices just shoot up. So bear in mind that the Premier Inn Hub is supposed to be a bit of a cheapo one.

[A]

It is, yeah.

[B]

£286. Because I'm doing Trevor Phillips and Camilla Tominey's program.

[A]

Oh, so it's Sunday morning. Yeah.

[B]

So I'm thinking, well, the fee I'll get from Trevor Phillips. That's good, that'll cover it.

[A]

Did I tell you about the time I stayed in a pot? One of those pods in central London?

[B]

No.

[A]

Zwell hotels do these little, very mini pods. It's basically like an underground bunker where you sort of stay in like a. I don't want to say a coffin, but it is kind of like a coffin. You basically have this little. It's basically barely bigger than a bed, but you've got like room to put like.

[B]

Watched a documentary about this.

[A]

Oh, really? I haven't seen it.

[B]

I mean, if you're Claustrophobic. It probably doesn't matter.

[A]

Oh, definitely not. But it was £30 or £35. So really, honestly, if you're a fan of tight shoestring, which you're obviously not in, you don't need to worry about that. But if you. If you are, I was just very curious to see how it was and I really quite enjoyed it.

[B]

Resent paying over £200 for a hotel room.

[A]

I think an ideal world, somewhere in between would be my preference, rather than the Coffin and the £200 Hotel. But it was good for what it was for 35 quid. Although I would recommend you take earplugs because lots of people come in quite late at night and use it as a bit of a crash pad if you're going out in central London.

[B]

Right.

[A]

Anyway. So, no, not a World cup fan, but I will be watching the Norway match. A friend of mine I used to work with Ryan Sabie at the Sun. His wife is Norwegian, so I don't know what his kids are going to do.

[B]

Lewis Goodall's wife is Norwegian.

[A]

Is he? Well, yeah. Well, they don't have children, but. So, you know, we can't be support, like, you know, they can just equally both support their own team. That's easy, isn't it?

[B]

Brilliant. Instagram reel. It was a British, black British guy who's of Jamaican heritage and he was. I can't. I mean, it was basically a London accent. So I'm not going to be accused of being racist if I do a Jamaican accent. I'm not going to.

[A]

I can do my Welsh accent afterwards, if you like.

[B]

Yeah, no, we'd love that. And he was going on about. He says, what I don't get, what I don't get. If Jamaica play. I'm gonna support Jamaica, obviously, because my parents are from Jamaica, but I'm English, it's my country and I support England. What is all this stuff about? We're not allowed to support our own country and if Jamaica play England. Fuck Jamaica. That's what I say.

[A]

Are Jamaica in the World Cup?

[B]

No.

[A]

Oh, well, it doesn't matter then, does it? He can support whoever he likes.

[B]

Is absolutely the attitude. Yeah, but it goes back. I mean, to introduce a little bit of a morsel of history into this podcast. It goes back to Norman Tibet's cricket test when he got very vexed by the fact that lots of Indians and Pakistanis who lived in this country who were essentially British supported India or Pakistan when they're playing test match cricket against England. And it was a really really big story at the time. And he was accused of being racist and all the rest of it.

[A]

The perceived lack of loyalty to the England cricket team.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

In April 1990, Tebbett suggested those immigrants who support their native countries rather than England are not significantly integrated into the United Kingdom. There you go.

[B]

Well, I think that it overthinks it because I'm thinking if Norman Tebbett went to live in Australia and England played Australia at the mcg, he would support England.

[A]

Of course he would.

[B]

Yeah. So would I. Yeah. So people get very exercised about these things.

[A]

Yeah. And like, why can't you. Why can't you support more than one team?

[B]

Again, I did laugh, though.

[A]

Maybe I'm not a sports person. I'm saying that.

[B]

No, I glossed over that because it's a ridiculous.

[A]

Sorry. It's a ridiculous.

[B]

Probably one of your least insightful things you've ever said in front of a PC microphone.

[A]

I'm English, I'm British. If I were, you know, dual nationality, I'd have no problem with. With supporting multiple teams. I think that's fine.

[B]

I think in the end, you have to pick one, though. There's one that you like more than the other.

[A]

That's. But what if. What depends. I guess it depends where. Where you grew up, where you reside, what, you know, what affinity you feel most strongly to, what your parents support, what your friends and family support. There's lots of factors, really, isn't there?

[B]

So I did think it was funny, though, when they were singing the national anthem before the game against Mexico and the pan. The camera panned along the row of players and Anthony Gordon, bless him, who played brilliantly in that match. He was singing God Save the Queen.

[A]

Oh, goodness. Sometimes it's hard to. I still sometimes say God Save the Queen by accident. I think it just sometimes slips out. We had. It. Had her for such a long time. Didn't.

[B]

But he does look a bit like Princess Diana.

[A]

Oh.

[B]

Are there any of the England team you quite fancy?

[A]

I think Harry Kane's quite attractive.

[B]

Do you?

[A]

Yeah, I think I know a lot of people. It's a bit Marmite character, but I think he is. I think they're quite a good looking team, actually, generally.

[B]

With one or two exceptions. Him being one.

[A]

Oh, no, I think he's all right. What's the. What's the sort of guy, the other. The sort of main guy, black hair, slightly shorter. Bellingham. No, not him. Harry Maguire. I don't fancy him.

[B]

No. No, you're not thinking of Harry Maguire. Harry Maguire isn't playing in the World Cup. And he's not short, is he?

[A]

Not short. I'm really showing my moment. No, I am thinking of. Is Harry Maguire on Not the England team?

[B]

Well, he was.

[A]

Oh, he's not on this. He's not on the team. Okay, well, we should not turn this into a dating podcast because that's not really what it's been built. It's not history and it's not politics. So.

[B]

No, but anyway, should we go on?

[A]

Should we talk on the meetings? Discussion?

[B]

You can get out of your uncomfort zone. Right, let's have a look and let's have a short break and have messages from our advertisers. Let's talk about Nigel Farage for a moment because last week I did a phone in where, much to Corey's amazement, I really laid into Nigel Farage. I'm normally accused of being a bit of a Farage apologist because I know him, I regard him as a friend. I quite like him. I recognize he has flaws. Doesn't everybody? But last week I thought, no, he's gone too far this time. The Christopher Harborne 5 million donation. I could Gift, gift, gift. Sorry, yes. I could kind of explain that, even though I think he should have declared it after he became an mp, but all of this gold bullion stuff that came out in the register of his interest last week, where he was being paid £22,500 an hour for consultancy to this company, total £270,000, plus all sorts of other income that he's got. And I'm thinking, if I was an ordinary Reform Party member, I would feel that I was being cheated by my leader because he's obviously not spending enough time on the day job and his sole aim in life should be to win the next election. And the opinion polls show that he could. But then he's spending hours doing cameo videos, he's spending hours doing this. And he's not an ordinary backbench mp. He is a party leader. He's a putative prime minister and he needs to start behaving like one. And then, of course, in the Sunday Times, we have further revelations about his relationship with a man called George Cotterell, who is 32 years old. He's British, but he's a close friend of Nigel Farage and has been for many, many years. And he made money through, well, I don't know, only by money laundering. But he's written a book which.

[A]

How to Money Launder.

[B]

How to Launder Money, published by my old company, Bite Back, which I must admit, had I been there, I'm not sure I would have published that book. But anyway, leave that to one side. So the Sunday Times have done this great expose which I'm not sure there's a huge amount of new in it. The new things in it that we didn't know before, apart from the fact that he also hasn't declared a lot of the things that George Cottrell gave him before he became an mp. So he might be in a bit of trouble over this. And the other aspect of this is that there was an article in one of the papers, I think on Friday or Saturday, saying that Farage now fears a by election in Clacton, that if the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner finds against him there could well be a by election. And I think that's probably true, but he could use it to his advantage. I mean, it's not necessarily a bad thing that for him.

[A]

No, I think you're right there. I was surprised to read that fears of by election and I don't know how founded those allegations are because everybody I've talked to in Reform isn't really on that bandwagon, doesn't really believe that Nigel Farage is at risk of a by election. The people I've spoken to anyway genuinely say this is our interpretation of the rules. Nigel Farage does everything by the book. He's got many advisors looking into all of his finances and declaring everything they think think that he needed to declare. And they say that they're convinced that he will be found not guilty by the. By the Commissioner. Obviously we don't know that yet. But equally, you look at the rules and it does seem like he's broken them when you look at them at a glance. The idea that you do have to declare every sort of interest, whether it's a gift, a donation, whatever it might be. That's the whole point of being an MP is that these transparency rules are there so that we can see, we as the British public can see where you are being paid and who by. And this gold donation gift that you, you refer to is 270000 pounds from a gold marketer. It's his biggest single payment as an MP that's, you know, three times his salary that he's being that he's been paid, plus the 5 billion, 5 million pound gift. It's a lot of money and I think it does raise questions about Nigel Farage's transparency. The fact that he has decided not to declare this because he believes that they're not within the Rules. Whether he's correct or not, we. We have yet to find out. But it does raise questions because he clearly doesn' either thinks that he doesn't have to declare these. These. Well, this money, this financial money.

[B]

Once you get a reputation as a politician for any form of lack of transparency or financial. What's. I don't know what words use here. Financial dealings. Let's. Let's be careful. It's very difficult to shake that reputation off.

[A]

And the Tories found this, didn't they, because they had sleaze allegations coming out of the.

[B]

You know, I've got an awful feeling of deja vu.

[A]

I don't.

[B]

About 10 years ago, when I've had a similar conversation with somebody about this very sort of thing related to Nigel Ferrars.

[A]

Really.

[B]

Anyway, maybe I'm just imagining that, but of course, also one of the papers published that he owns five houses now. I'm not sure that's the biggest scandal in the world.

[A]

No, I don't think so, no.

[B]

If he's letting them out, he has to declare that income.

[A]

Yes. And I. I don't believe that there is any. I don't. I haven't checked his register of interest to see whether he is renting out those properties. I don't know if that's the case. But, yes, I think it is the case that he does have multiple properties. So obvious questions that were asked by the Mirror newspaper and others sort of around six, six to nine months ago about which was his secondary house and how he'd paid for that and. And whatever stamp duty he had or hadn't paid. So there are lots of questions. But the thing is, for Nigel Farage, this is just going to keep coming, right, the scrutiny of his, what he calls private affairs. He said, you know, to LBC's Nick Ferrari last week, this has nothing to do with you. What business is it of yours? But actually, the British public, if they are going to vote someone into number 10, want to know this kind of stuff and they want to know whose pocket you might be in. And there is a question, transparency there. If some gold marketing company is paying you thousands of pounds, of course you don't understand and expect them to be in the front forefront of that politician's mind if and when they go into government, because they've got. Basically got these. These interests in the same way as labor unions. People get accused of that all the time. You're in the pockets of the unions because they're donating to you or your party or something personally. And the problem for Nigel Farage is that it risks, you know, destroying his. I'm a man of thought. Exactly. People vibe. And it means that he is chucked with allegations of sleaze and chucked with allegations of. You're just like the rest of them. Which is exactly what happened to Keir Starmer when he came in with the whole glasses and the suits scenario. And I think it was really damaging for him then. And this will be really damaging for Anja Farage going forward. It's really hitting, as you know, is hitting callers and texters who. Who all have something to say about it.

[B]

Well, it's also hitting reforms leading the polls. They're now down to about 24%. Labour and the Conservatives, both up at 20 on the last poll I saw. But I suspect that there will be a burn and bounce and I think Labour will probably overtake reform in the polls in the next few weeks. I'm not sure that will last very long.

[A]

I'm not sure it will, but people I was speaking to in Labour do expect that to happen. But that leads us nicely onto our next question, Ian, which is, will Andy Burnham call an election this year?

[B]

Well, let's leave that question hanging before we go to a break. It keeps people listening, you see. It's a radio thing.

[A]

This is a radio thing.

[B]

It's called teasing, love it.

[A]

Will Andy Burnham call an election? What do you think, Ian? No, I also agree with you, but I can see the case. Should we lay out the case of the prosecution and the case of the defence? The case of prosecution being in which, if Andy Burnham does get a bounce, which we do think he probably will get, considering Keir Starmer is leaving office with not a fantastic poll rating. If he does well, say he gets a stonking eight to 10 points in the polls, which is probably unlikely. Say you've got a couple of months in and you start to lay out your agenda for change and you've got people calling for an election. You've got Nigel Farage coming in saying you've got no mandate. Say you introduce a couple of big policy platform ideas, you start the ball rolling on change and your hope and your agenda and your civil service shakeup and whatever it might be. Is there an argument to then say, well, I don't have a mandate, so I'm going to go for one. I want to do things, you know, I've decided that I've got into government and things are trickier than I thought, but actually, I need the mandate for this change. You know, I want to Deliver change. And the 2024 manifesto doesn't allow me to move quickly and fast enough. So let's go. This is. This is me. I'm different from Sakir Starmer and I'm going to go to the country and seek my mandate.

[B]

You see it with gravy. Of course, we have been around this course before in 2007 and lots of

[A]

people say, well, that was a mistake.

[B]

I think it probably was a mistake on Gordon Brown's part not to call an election. This was three months after he became Prime Minister. He became Prime Minister on 27 June 2007. And then just before the Conservative conference. Was it just after the Conservative conference?

[A]

I think it was. Was just before. You're thinking of a trip, I think was that was taken.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Where he did a newspaper interview.

[B]

Yeah. And he was going to call an election. And everyone who was involved in the decision making process will confirm this, but Gordon Brown still denies it in public and had he done so, it's entirely possible that he would have won that election. I think David Cameron and George Osborne thought that he probably would and he didn't. And therefore he got a reputation as a bottler.

[A]

Oh, so you know, what rhymes with. Sorry, you know, the alliteration works well here. Bottler Brown, Bottler Burnham. You can see it.

[B]

Absolutely. So I think when you've got a majority of 170 or whatever it is now, I think, I think it's. I mean, you're basically saying to a lot of your MPs, I know you supported me to be Prime Minister, but I'm not going to make you lose your seat because there is no way that if he, if he won an election, be anything like 170.

[A]

That's the thing. Everybody admits that they're going to lose seats.

[B]

Right. Yeah. And given that we're in five or six party politics now, it's impossible to predict what would happen. Even if Labour say Labour was four points ahead in the polls, that doesn't mean to say that they would win an election.

[A]

No, it doesn't. Not anymore. Not in these days.

[B]

Very interesting, though, that he has been quite vociferous to say that he's fully in favour of proportional representation. And that would be in the next Labour manifesto.

[A]

Interesting. Well, they do. Lots of people say that, don't they? And equally, you know, Keir Starmer went in on a manifesto of Lords Reform and that's completely been ditched, by the way.

[B]

Well, they got rid of the hereditaries.

[A]

Well, yes, that's about the only thing. But yes, you're right, the case for the defence does seem stronger, especially for the fact that he's got a big majority already and there will be lots of MPs saying, please, please don't call an election because I'm going to lose my seat and I've got a few more things I want to do and I don't have a plan or a backup plan or whatever. And obviously he'll just have got into office, he won't have had many achievements under his belt. But the other sort of side of equation is. Is Nigel Farage, and as we were just talking about, reform, obviously have been leading the polls for the last year or so, and if they do, if you can see them being overtaken, would you not just take your. Your chance and go for it? Because if you think that reform are a particularly weak point because of either the donations row and whatever might be going on in the Reform Party, we're seeing less and less of Nigel Farage over the last few months. Whatever, you know, your reasoning behind that might be, he's not out and about as much as he was. Was. He's not making as many press conferences, he's not talking as much. He definitely feels like he's hiding a little bit more than he was. And, you know, if you sense that your opponent is in a weak spot, and also if you're Andy Burnham, who's obviously just proven he can beat reform in a by election, there will be people making that case. Especially if. As if. What I think will happen is that the Burnham bounce will not be as big as to say, let's go, and it won't be as small as to say don't. So I think we will have this conversation in October. Come and you have a good party conference, potentially, where everybody appears to unite and you have a new Cabinet and everybody seems a bit happier, the temptation will be there. And you mentioned the Gordon Brown comparison, and I spoke to somebody who was quite close to the Gordon Brown government at that time and was involved in making those decisions. And for what it's worth, they don't believe that Andy Burnham will call an election. So it's an interesting one, but I think that's what's going to dominate a lot of Team Burnham over the next few years. I think he will go long.

[B]

But why do you think Farage hasn't been as omnipresent as he used to be? Is it just this donation or. I mean, some people are speculating that he's not very well and this has

[A]

been a rumour that's been going around Westminster for a long time. You know, obviously furiously denied by the Reform leadership, but we haven't been seeing him out and about nearly as much. That's definitely the case. And he's not been doing as many press conferences. The last Reform press conference was about three weeks ago. Richard Dice took it and, you know, he did that media round as well a couple of weeks ago, where he was talking mostly, and he didn't do it in studio either, which sort of raised a few eyebrows because lots of people were saying, oh, why isn't he in the studios for this? He almost always does those in the studio and he's doing a lot more video messages from home. So it has led to a lot of speculation, like I say, should be denied by the Reform Party. But it is a bit unusual, but it's definitely raising eyebrows in Westminster.

[B]

What do you make of Andy Burnham's image at the moment? Because I think there's no doubt about it, he is more popular than other party leaders. New brooms usually are. But I must admit, some of the social media videos that I've seen him do, I mean, I can see why he's doing them, but I kind of wince at some of them. They're just a bit too. Well, I'm an ordinary person. I'm just like you. Well, no, you're not, mate. You're about to become Prime Minister.

[A]

There was a comedian that did a big skit on Russell Cain. Yeah, did you see that? That was very funny. I'm just anti Burnham. I'm a normal bloke. I'm gonna make some toast.

[B]

It's gonna be with gravy.

[A]

I like gravy. And I'm gonna, you know, do some. I'm only gonna have white bread, because that's a. Like. I think, you know, that obviously Andy Burnham is trying to make a big thing of that. Oh, I'm just Andy, like, that's the thing. And, you know, the posters in Make A Film were like that. Vote Andy for us. Like, you know, he's your best friend, he's your best mate. I'm not sure that's going to work when he gets into government, to be honest with you. It might work to an extent, but I. I do think. I think he's going to get back to Westminster and I don't know this, you know, from experience of speaking to his team, but I do think that he's going to get a little bit of a shock now he's back that things are not the same as they were 20 years ago.

[B]

He will be Prime Minister this time in two weeks.

[A]

Time, yes.

[B]

That's the 20th, we expect it is. Quite. Do you regard it as a bit of a constitutional outrage that this man has effectively come down to save us all from the Great north, that Labour couldn't find a single mp out of 400 MPs to take over? I mean, constitutionally, there's nothing wrong with it in some ways, but a lot of people are starting to say, well, I don't like the smell of this. It doesn't pass the political sniff test.

[A]

I think it's terrible for democracy. It's not how democracy should be run. We should have a contest where Andy Burnham's ideas should be tested and he shouldn't be afraid of. You know, I know he has done a few media interviews since winning Makerfield, but it was a long time where he wasn't doing any press conferences, wasn't answering any questions. And it's not just about the media, it's just about. So everybody else can plan. The Civil Service don't know what they're dealing with. I know those access talks have started and I'm told that, you know, Andy Burnham is putting forward quite a lot of ideas, especially on the economy, but there's lots of gaps and what we don't know about him and how is it right that a man should be able to become Prime Minister without facing any of this scrutiny?

[B]

I mean, some of these ideas, I can't really believe that this one could be implemented. He wants the mansion tax to start at 1.5 million million. Well, I mean, if you want to alienate labor voters in the south of England, fine, you go ahead and do that. But it's crazy. I mean, with the way house prices are now, 1.5 million doesn't buy you an awful lot. In London, where I live. It doesn't buy you. Well, it certainly doesn't buy you a mansion, let's put it that way.

[A]

Yeah. I mean, look, Anti Venom's going to have a lot of decisions to make on a lot of different policy issues and I'm sure he doesn't know what he thinks about quite a lot of them, in fact, specifically in terms of, like, defence, foreign policy. I think there's a lot we don't know about what Andy Burnham thinks about all of these issues, but.

[B]

Yes, well, does he? The problem is, I'm not sure he knows what he thinks about exactly it. You know, somebody described him the other day as like a lorry on ice. Career, was it? I think I heard it was a senior Labour politician that quoted another senior labor politician. Was it David Blunkett that said this? Something like that.

[A]

I don't think. I think. I agree. Well, he's not a shopping trolley of Boris Johnson and he's not a political chameleon of Keir Starmer.

[B]

Absolutely is.

[A]

Do you.

[B]

You look back and look at a lot of the positions he's taken on all sorts of things over the years. He's definitely been on a journey completely different.

[A]

But I think. I don't know, I think that speech that he gave last week in Manchester, which. Which I was at, where he gave sort of a. A bit of an overview of what Burnham is. Is that's arguably what Keir Starmer hasn't given to the nation for two years and what a lot of his MPs were crying out for, a vision of what Keir Starmer wanted to do with the country. And that was never properly delivered, at least not delivered in the. In the way that many people wanted to hear it. So I do think that Burnham is, as a concept, is much more adequately defined and has been more defined by Andy Burnham in the last sort of few weeks. So I, you know, I don't feel like you can accuse him of not having an ideology or not having. Having a sort of a vague structure of which to hang policies off. We now have the vision, it's now up to him to sort of set out how those policies hang off that vision that he, I think, has set out. I don't know him. I don't know him as well as you. I wasn't around in politics when he was a Health Secretary and Chief Secretary and an mp. So maybe I'm wrong.

[B]

Well, I don't know him well, I know him a bit. I've interviewed him on quite a few occasions. But it was like in the 2010-2015 period. And I watched back the leadership postings that I did in 2015 when he was one of the four candidates, and again, it. There was nothing that he said in that that was particularly memorable.

[A]

There was an interview, I think he was alongside Michael Portillo on Newsnight. There's a clip that's been surfacing recently of him of someone asking him just that, well, how are you different to any of the candidates? And he just goes, oh, I'm from the North, I'm from Manchester, I'm a different bloke. And that does only get you so far, doesn't it, in politics, being able to say that you're you're a northern guy, so therefore you're different. It's got to be more to it than that. And like you say, he's got to make sure that he doesn't alienate southern voters. This coalition that Labour brought together in 2024 is quite a fragile one and, and obviously relying on a lot of former Tory votes, which I'm sure the Tories will be able to to win back a good chunk of those come the next election.

[B]

Well, that's going to be quite interesting to see. How can we both deals with anti Burnham? Because Burnham has made it very clear that he wants to do politics very differently. Now again, loads of politicians say that before they get into power. David Cameron, I think, certainly did and he said he was going to do Prime Minister's questions differently. Well, is Andy Burnham going to do Prime Minister's questions differently? To that extent? And if he does, how will Kemi Badenoch react to that? Because Hirsch didn't is all guns blazing, lead from the front.

[A]

Yeah, I think that Andy Burnham will be better at Prime Minister's questions. He thinks quicker on his feet and I think that that will bode him well at pmq. So you saw it when he entered the chamber and someone said, you know the Monty Python reference, you're a naughty boy and you saw him quick that back instantly. I think he is much more like, say, agile with that sort of thing. I think he will do better at that sort of common stuff stuff. But yeah, will he? Will he do things differently? I note that the Tories over the weekend were saying, you know, we'll reach out to Andy Burnham, we want to work with him on welfare reform. That's obviously an olive branch that's been reaching out to the Labour Party for a year. But I could see Andy Burnham at least looking at that. I could see him, you know, wanting to. To make a case for welfare reform.

[B]

He has done it before, if you remember exactly when he was Health Secretary, he had a. He got Norman Lamb and Andrew Lansley in to try and come up with a solution for social care. Now, nothing happened in the end, but he did actually make an effort to do that. So.

[A]

Yeah, and the Hillsborough Law, which arguably, you know, politicians have come a bit together to work cross party on it. And I could see him doing a bit more of that cross party work. But equally, he's a very loyal, you know, he's, he's a. Would you call him tribal? Would you say that Andy Burnham is tribal politician? I'm not sure. I don't know I don't know. I can say I don't know when I left it be able to say

[B]

so but look, all politicians are tribal to, to one degree or another but he gets on well with people from other parties. He's, he's a likable character.

[A]

I could see it being a bit different but what does that mean in reality?

[B]

I don't know.

[A]

I think that PMQS will be just as rough and tumble as it potentially was under, under Kieran.

[B]

Nobody wants it to be boring, do they?

[A]

No one wants it to be boring.

[B]

No. Right, we are going to turn our attention to the travail of Prince Harry in just a few moments time.

[A]

So yes, Prince Harry I think is going to dominate the news agenda this week. Ian. Buckingham palace today have put out a statement saying Prince Harry will not be staying at the palace during his visit to London this week despite his team announcing just this morning that he hadn't accepted an invitation to do so. So it's, it's already going really well. Well it's called, you know, two basically teams of press people who are trying to brief different things and you know, only one of them can be right.

[B]

Either he did have an invitation or he didn't.

[A]

Well, that's the thing. I mean I imagine that teams would have been in touch about diaries, my

[B]

dear, I don't give a damn.

[A]

Well, I think people do care about this ongoing Prince Harry realm. We understand that Meghan and the children won't be coming because of this ongoing row about Prince Harry's security and he's obviously tried to fight for them to get taxpayer funded security while he's here here. He thinks that it's not safe for them to be here in the uk. So yeah, it's, it's, I think it's a row that's, that's, that's going to run and he's here because his court case against Associated Newspapers is due to be coming back. The court results due to becoming back this week and also the Invictus Games as well. So he's not just here to try and make amends with, with his, his father, Prince King Charles. But yeah, a lot of people will, will have a lot of thoughts about whether it's right that taxpayers should, should pay for Harry, Prince Harry funding. He's not a working member of the Royal family anymore. Equally if he wants to come and visit his family, you know, should he be put up in Buckingham Palace? Should he get that taxpayer funded security or not?

[B]

What's your view?

[A]

Should he get it should he get the taxpayer funding? I. I don't know. Because it's. If he's not a working royal, it's difficult, isn't it? Because it's difficult to justify that. And that's clearly what they. Where the government is coming from, because they, they argue because he's not a working royal anymore.

[B]

So what. I mean, Taylor Swift isn't a working royal either.

[A]

And does she get British taxpayers? She. Does she?

[B]

Yeah, absolutely.

[A]

This was after a terror plot against her concerts, wasn't it? So maybe that was the reason that the Met police stepped in and added extra security. But yeah. Does Prince Harry face the same sort of threats? I presume? Probably, yes. But it is hard to argue that financially, isn't it? Taylor Swift is bringing in billions for the UK economy.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Prince Harry is probably not.

[B]

Their problem is that they said they wanted a private life and if you say you want a private life, that,

[A]

that then you need to pay for it privately, I'm afraid.

[B]

And that they clearly didn't want a private life, otherwise they wouldn't be doing all these sort of Netflix things and selling jam and.

[A]

But people say that's about earning the money that they want to, to keep the lifestyle that they want rather than. Than the publicity that they want.

[B]

Fine.

[A]

But then it's a hard balance, as

[B]

you say, if they are earning all this money, and I'm not sure they are anymore, the Netflix deal seems to have gone for a burden.

[A]

So maybe that is why Harry is making this argument for security, because he doesn't or can't pay for that amount of security himself. But it is a sad state of affairs still, when we're in this rut between warring parts of the royal families where one of them is issuing a statement and the other one's issuing a statement saying, no, that's not true. And I think a lot of people were hoping that this visit was going to be more reconciliation between Prince Harry and King Charles, and especially following, you know, King Charles's illness. And a lot of people were hoping that this would be finally the chance that they would put all of this to bed, but I don't know, there's been so much between them. I'm not even sure if it's possible that obviously all of the revelations that came out in the book, the, the Oprah interview, there's been so much water under the bridge. Is it, is it ever possible to repair a parent child relationship like that? I don't know.

[B]

Well, I think, I think it is. I mean, probably never be the same, but You've got to have two to tango. And I do wonder sometimes whether the King has really played his part in trying to affect this reconciliation.

[A]

So you think it's Prince Harry's team trying to reach out the olive branch and he's not accepting?

[B]

I don't know and I, I can't. I sort of, I kind of want to read books on it but then I think I'll feel dirty if I do so I don't bother reading them at there's part of me. I mean obviously now as a chief Royal commentator for Channel 5 I should take more.

[A]

You should. Have you read Harry's book?

[B]

I've got it so that's a no.

[A]

And I started Chief Royal Correspondent I

[B]

started reading it but oh my God, it's just so self pitying. I wasn't enjoying it so I'm afraid I gave up.

[A]

I think I did feel sympathy for them, Harry and Meghan after the Oprah Winfrey and Church interview which I watched and I did read Spare and I thought that it did give an interesting perspective. But yes, I can't say I was as sympathetic to his case after reading the book. But I do have, I do have a lot of sympathy from someone, you know, growing up in the Royal family and all of what it had to, he had to put up with and entail have a lot of sympathy for that. I just think personally I would have handled it differently but it's hard. You know I could say that from a different position. Right.

[B]

I wonder what his two children will say when they get to like 15 or 16 and King Charles presumably won't be around by then and whether they say to their parents I do not understand why we were never allowed to meet him.

[A]

Well it's obviously the same with, with Meghan's father who she's estranged from as well. So they don't, I don't know how much Megan and I think Meghan's mother still in their lives but, but it's the same with her, with his, with her father, isn't it? There's a lot of different parts of the family that, that they're not in touch with and yeah you're right that might be the case that when they grow up and they will wonder why that was the case equally. I kind of thought that actually when, when Charles. Prince. Sorry when King Charles went over for the, the US celebrations there was a chance that they would, they would try and get something in the diary to try and meet then but that didn't happen either. So it does Feel like a bit of stalemate on both sides, doesn't it? And I just. Yeah, I just think when you wrote and you sort of said so much in the. In those interviews in that book about. About the relationships, I just, I. It's going to be really difficult to repair that relationship. And if you can't even get a date in the diary to have a conversation with each other, then I don't see how this. This relationship can ever be repaired.

[B]

Luckily, you and I don't have to worry about. We don't relationships, do we?

[A]

We don't have a relationship to repair. Our relationship is one.

[B]

That's not very nice.

[A]

No, it's in like.

[B]

We had a great. Sorry.

[A]

We don't have a damaged relationship. You know, there's nothing to repair because we have such a fantastic relationship.

[B]

So hurt.

[A]

Oh, no, of course not. Of course. We're friends and loyal colleagues.

[B]

Right. We are going to call it quits there. And we will reconvene on Thursday. You will get the podcast on Friday when Dr. Tessa Dunlop will be back. And I can crow over her failure to predict the result of the England Mexico game because she was sure that England would lose.

[A]

Do we need to predict? Oh, you can predict with Tessa on. Then you can predict them the next one with her later on this week because I think Norway, I think it'd be a. It'd be a big mistake for me as somebody who's not washed because any of the games so far to predict Norway.

[B]

If we beat Norway, do you know who we get next?

[A]

I don't. We. Norway knocked Brazil out, right. So that's a big beast gone. Who, who's left?

[B]

Argentina.

[A]

Oh, okay. That's gonna be tough.

[B]

Oh, my God. You say that, but they've had a very easy run so far.

[A]

Have they? Do you think they're not prepared?

[B]

They haven't played well. Messi has got seven goals and he's really bailed them out.

[A]

It's basically, we're the underdog.

[B]

We have the better team. If you look at the reaction of that team last night to the victory, I mean, they're clearly one team. And that. That, I think gives you that extra percentage that you need to win sometimes. And that's what got them through last night. So, yeah, we then play Argentina and then we will play France in the final if we beat Argentina.

[A]

Oh, that's going to be tough.

[B]

That, I think might be.

[A]

Could you imagine, honestly, England versus French final is. If that was the case. That's going to be wild, isn't it? You won't be watching that from a hotel room. You'll be wanting to watch that on a big screen.

[B]

I will be at my aunt's 90th birthday party. She'll gonna watch Devon. No shoot. It's a lunch. So we would. We will if it happens. I'll be in North Devon watching it.

[A]

That's good.

[B]

Fantastic. Right, now, do I have anything to plug today? Because Tessa hates it when I plug things.

[A]

But since she's away.

[B]

But since she's away, the mice will play. I'm now looking at my diary for this week. Well, Bradford Literary Festival on Saturday at 4:30. People always complain that I don't do enough events in the north. And I keep saying you've gone all

[A]

the way to Bradford.

[B]

Well, you do actually have to be invited to these events. I can't just turn up and deliver

[A]

a tour under an Andy Burnham government. You'll be up there all the time. Number 10 north.

[B]

So that's Saturday. And then if you want to catch me on on tv, I'll be on the Trevor Phillips show on Sunday morning at 8:30 throughout the whole show. And then the Camilla Tominey show talking about my autobiography at 10:45, I think, on Sunday. And I'm sitting in for Matt Fry on LBC on Saturday.

[A]

And your book, your book is out soon?

[B]

Well, the book is out next Wednesday.

[A]

That's exciting.

[B]

It is exciting. I've had lots of. I've spent most of the weekend packing them up for all the pre orders

[A]

forward to reading it.

[B]

And if anybody wishes to buy, will you sign mine? I will happily sign one. Just go to politicos.co.uk and order a signed copy and I'll try and get it to you before the official publication day next Wednesday. Right, that is all for today. Hope you've enjoyed a slightly different version of the podcast today. But Natasha is always good value. Well, she's good value because she doesn't cost anything.

[A]

Exactly. Not costing Global any extra pennies.

[B]

Bye.

[A]

Bye. This has been a global production.