Farage Beats A Bin

0:00Welcome to Navarre Live. Once again, not live because of the weather. Now if any of you are thinking, why have we not sorted this out by now? I mean, it's a reasonable question, but I will say we are moving to a brand new air-conditioned studio. So this will get sorted and from later this year, we're going to just have a brilliant set up that's all thanks to the kind supporters of Navarre media. If you are a supporter, thank you so much. You may call it this possible. You especially make our new studio possible. If you aren't a supporter yet, you can sign up at Navarre.com forward slash support. So what are we going to talk about today from my living room? Well, of course, Nigel Farage, Reigns, victorious over a bin, not much of a victory. We will also be discussing, of course, climate change and specifically Ed Miliband coming out in a much more noisy fashion than his boss Andy Bynum to say that climate change will be central to his role as foreign secretary. I'm joined by

1:04González Céquer-Kyé-Mé. Thank you so much for joining me. Is this the first time we've seen your background, González Céquer? I had a different background last time, but I've changed it and switched it just to keep things moving, keep things interesting at hand. My idea, of course, would be for us to be in an air-conditioned studio doing this show live as it's supposed to be, but I have to say the consolation is it's the first time that Moose has been able to appear on Navarre media. She's very fed up, so lying on the floor because it's the coolest part of the flap, but she might come to life at some point during the show, hopefully not to bark. Of course, this is the outcome that surprised no one. Reform UK leader Nigel Farage has beaten Count Binh Faye's to become once again the MP for Clackton. Let's look at the results. Turnout was 44%, so fairly low, but Farage did get a little

2:06over 22,000 votes around a thousand more than he did in the 2024 general election. That's actually quite significant. He got just under 63% of the vote, as I say, of course his only real competitor was Count Binh Faye's. He got just over a quarter of the vote share. He got 9,000 votes. So Nigel Farage increased the total number of votes and his vote share from that general election in 2024, although as I say he was only up against a bin. He did do slightly worse than the polls had predicted. So there was a poll from salvation during the campaign which put Nigel Farage on 73% and Count Binh Faye's on 20%. So Count Binh Faye has over performed. Of course, the main party didn't stand because they didn't want to suggest that this was a real bi-election. Nigel Farage resigned to make it happen because he wanted to avoid parliamentary scrutiny for various donations. We'll get to that in a moment because in fact within hours of being returned as

3:12Clapton's MP, Parliament's watchdog has now reopened its investigation with Farage potentially facing a suspension and another bi-election. If the committee finds he broke parliamentary rules. Of course, in question is 5 million pounds in donations from a tie-based crypto millionaire. I love saying that every time because it's so ridiculous for this to be the scandal of tie-based crypto millionaire, not very relatable. Last night Farage was asked about that investigation hours before the result was declared. Have you won? Yes. You have won. Yes, very convincingly. I've managed to beat the establishment candidate. You haven't yet seen off the threat of an inquiry into this gift you had from a crypto billionaire. What's the point of all this? Who cares? Who cares? The voters at Clapton don't care. Look, Labour, Lib Dem, Conservative, Canvases have been out for Binh Faye's. They're not going to win.

4:15The Uniparty aren't going to win. They will not call a second bi-election here. They'd be stupid to do so. It's just so lovable. The establishment, the way he calls it, with the one word as well. They've all been out for Binh Faye's. They've all been out for Binh Faye's. I'd your feed did Binh Faye's. It's just not very impressive. Although, him saying they'd be mad to call another bi-election. The one thing you can say for Nigel Farage is that he has increased the number of people voting for him since the last general election. If there were to be another bi-election call, just remind you how that could happen. If the Parliamentary Standards Committee suspends him for more than 10 days, I think, then there can be a recall petition. That would mean there would be another bi-election. The fact that Nigel Farage has increased his vote share, I think, suggests he probably would win a second bi-election. Maybe he would be able to make that one look more like it was a

5:17genuine sort of two fingers to the establishment because they're having anyone's impressed by beating Camp Binh Faye's if all the other parties were standing. I don't want to say impressive, because obviously being very popular in Clackton is not the same as being able to win a national general election. Everyone always knew that Nigel Farage was very popular in Clackton, but this election does somewhat reinforce that. Of course, this whole bi-election has been an embarrassment for Nigel Farage. Also, in many ways, an embarrassment for Britain, and there have been loads of international interest in this, actually. This is from LeMonde, UK far-right leader Farage, Beats Camp Binh Faye's to win bi-election. This is from ABC. Nigel Farage Beats Camp Binh Faye's in widely mocked election, and then Germany's speagle declared Farage the winner against a talking trash can. All of those associations haven't done much, of course, for Farage's particular brand outside of the UK. Binh Faye's, though, I mean, this has been great for him. He's broken records,

6:18becoming the UK's most successful novelty candidate ever, and gaining a larger vote share in this election than Farage did in his first six parliamentary attempts at the only ways up, perhaps. This was the count's take on that result. And I can officially say that I have no winning candidates of the candidates who bothered to turn up for the results. That's right, 9,455 actual votes, just eight weeks ago in Makerfield. I got 95. That means I've got against Nigel Farage, 10,000 percent more votes than I got against Andy Burnham. What does that tell you? Over one in four people in this constituency would rather have Camp Binh Faye's as their MP than the leader of reform UK. So that was Camp Binh Faye's saying of the candidates who turned up to the count. He got the most votes. This is key. Nigel Farage didn't even want to turn up. Right, so this was

7:23supposed to be him sticking up two fingers to the establishment. Now he found the whole thing. So embarrassing that he couldn't even turn up to the count. So that shows you to what degree this was a good gamble of Nigel Farage to call this by election. I presume when he called it, he thought that he would be able to stand defiant there. I beaten the establishment. It turns out he's only beaten Camp Binh Faye's and he was too embarrassed to even turn up. Now there's been some controversy as to exactly why he didn't turn up. Lots of different explanations from the reform camp will get on to that later in the show in the second part of the show because that's been one of the big stories from the broadcast rounds this morning. Back to the by-election though. So the clackton by-election broke a bunch of records. The ballot issued to voters was the longest ever listing 33 candidates and measuring three feet long. A fact that became very visible as polling start began counting votes last night. It also came in at a cost of more than a quarter of a million

8:26pounds to the British taxpayer and on News Night reform, Councillor Jamie MacGyver was asked to defend that spend. This by-election is estimated to have cost at least £250,000. He was already elected only two years ago. It is a total waste of taxpayers money, isn't it? Well, I think the total waste of taxpayer money is the obsession with using parliamentary time to talk about Nigel Farage in the way that it is being discussed at the moment. What really matters here is what the people have clacked and think. That is what is important. Why tax payers money being used to discuss it? Well, don't forget Nigel Farage has already offered to cover the cost of this by-election. That's down to the treasury to sort out. But we do know we have an accomplishment. Everybody knew that wasn't going to be possible. There is an obvious conflict of interest. There is a party pays for its own by-election. I am sorry to interrupt, but really everybody knew that wasn't going to be possible. So that argument doesn't fly, does it? Why isn't it possible? It is the learned helplessness that we have got an

9:28united kingdom that somebody offers to do something quite practical and proper and all of a sudden it is not possible. It is a conflict of interest, isn't it? I mean, it is about protecting democracy. I mean, it is obvious that political parties should not pay for elections. I think that actually political parties shouldn't be able to spend any money that isn't from the state. So I would have a system. George Monbiot talked about it on the show a while ago, whereby it wouldn't cost that much. You would publicly fund political parties to run their campaigns. So the money is just out of politics altogether. We wouldn't have to have parliamentary committee sessions over which MP took money from which millionaire or billionaire, we would just say you can't take money from anyone. It would be like in Singapore, actually, I think, where they are very, very strong. Any idea of politicians taking money from private interests because they see it quite rightly as corrupt. The claptain by-election maybe far from what Farage hoped for. It wasn't this

10:32big defiant stand that he had imagined. But reform UK still threw a party to celebrate. And GB News Christopher Hope was there to capture all the action. This is insane. I've been to Glastonbury once in my life. This is a political Glastonbury in the middle of Essex. It's called Farage Fest. I'll just show you around what we're seeing here. There's some marshmallows to be roasted on these fire pits. There's GB News up there. I'm about to see ourselves on that screen. That's a huge 40-foot high screen. If you come this way with me Alex, the overlooking shoulder room, there are about 15 yards here. People are going to stay the night here, have a sleepover with Farage by all accounts. This is utterly bonkers, quite unlike any political event I've ever been to. There's Jenga here, if you can see this Patrick. This is the fire pit. So I mean, it was a little bit like a music festival. Sleepover with Farage, I'm not really sure how that works as a political slogan either. A little bit like a music festival. Instead, there was

11:33another band-secker. This is probably the strangest by election in British history. How cheered will reform UKB by this result? It's quite strange, isn't it? There's an odd juxtaposition between the constructed cheeriness of that event that we saw at this kind of like by election Glastonbury. Is that what they were going for? Versus I think what is actually quite a kind of dour attitude overall that seems to be kind of capturing reform. I mean, my initial thoughts when we first had the news that this by-elections kind of ran. I thought it was going to be a big mistake potentially for other parties not to run actually against Nigel Farage, but because I assumed he'd just kind of have this dominance of the media space that would allow him to basically run quite unopposed without any alternative ideas. And I thought that was going to be quite bad. And maybe you can make a case that maybe it would have been worth some of the other parties running. Maybe it would have been worth it for the Greens, for example. But it does actually look like ultimately he has been made to look like a bit of a laughing stock for running against someone

12:37who is dressed as a bin. Somebody who is a satirical character who is kind of perfect because he is there to exemplify the ridiculousness and the silliness of our politics. And this was this was like the perfect by-election for him, you know, the stars aligned I think for the count bin face. So to waste of money I think as you've highlighted £250,000 to run an election that may well be triggered again in several weeks or several months time. But yeah, that event is very strange because to me Nigel Farage, he's lost his kind of joy, develop or whatever it's called. He's lost that thing that I think makes people feel quite attracted to Nigel Farage feel excited by the project of reform, you know, for a long time he was their biggest asset by far. Now he's maybe there a kill his heel because he seems to have this very dour down and now pull me. I'm a victim. It's me against this establishment. Everybody hates me kind of attitude. But I actually think it's getting quite a few people's backs up, including I think some reform voters as well. So it's not just

13:39eating into aspirational voters that reform might like to capture, but I think it's also eating into their base a little bit as well. The Sleeves allegations, you know, that's not going away anytime soon. And I think that's also had a big impact on how voters are looking at him. I think we'll probably talk about that a bit more in the latter section. But you know, the video clip where a colleague of his is trying to defend the idea that he would Nigel Farage could stump up the money for the buy election to save the taxpayer to £250,000 was absurd. So you're not going to beat the Sleeves allegations by coming up with so-called practical solutions like conveniently paying for an election when you're also a candidate. That's a glaring conflict of interest. It's very difficult. I think for anybody to to say is is is is is reasonable, even if you're quite reform pill, even if you're a Tory and you're tempted by voting reform, it's it's quite difficult to say that that doesn't seem like something that would be feeding into the corruption. So things seem to be really derailing. This has not been Nigel Farage's best summer. I'm going to guess, you know, things are kind of derailing a lot for reform for lots of different reasons, but this financial scandal,

14:43it's it's not going away. The investigation is going to be re-triggered. It looks like almost immediately now. He's going to be again. So we're just kind of back to square one. And this is really kind of kind of dodging Nigel Farage. He seems to be becoming more and more of a liability now for a form perhaps than he is an actor. Also, where would the £250,000 come from? They're like, oh, don't know where Nigel Farage is offered to pay for it via whom? Like, who is he going to offer favours to next? Right? So to protect democracy, Nigel Farage is willing to find a tie crypto billionaire who can pay for this election. And that should be reassuring to everyone involved. It's not. There's no finesse about any of this as well. You know, that there's a way in which politicians, I think if they're a bit smarter, a bit slicker about this, they can find ways to extract money from donors or from wealthy individuals in ways that make it look like they're not literally just being handed a suitcase full of cash. But that kind of feels like what we're seeing is this kind of cartoonish, very silly, almost way of accepting money that can't be explained by anything

15:47else other than a wealthy person just giving you a bunch of money and you looking compromised. And it's very difficult, I think, for lots of people to think that there's anything in the story other than that. I think the pick winner from this is Andy Barnum. I mean, for a couple of reasons one, when Andy Barnum won his by-election, it was a genuine risk that the polls were neck and neck, all the other parties stood and campaigned hard, obviously, especially reform. And he won, and that was a huge national toy because he then became prime minister. Andy Barnum came out of that by-election looking like not just a winner, but sort of heroic almost. He was the pretender. He was coming forward, challenging power, taking a big personal risk, and absolutely winning by landslide. Nigel Farage thought, I want some of that. Andy Barnum, he had this by-election and everyone was paying loads of attention to it and everyone was talking about Andy Barnum. Maybe I could have some of that for myself. And then he tries, and it's just a complete embarrassment. The other reason,

16:47I think this is a big win, I'm sorry for Andy Barnum is because when someone first becomes a party leader or first becomes prime minister as prime minister, it is in those first few weeks where it's I suppose the story about them gets a little bit set in people's minds. And Andy Barnum has been very successful, I think, constructing an image of himself. In my crumble, it's not necessarily going to stick with him, but the first few weeks he've had have been very successful, I think, on his terms. He's popular. People's views of him have actually improved since he became prime minister. And that's because he's been able to determine what are the leading issues on the agenda. Is it high streets? Because he's got this new policy. Is it energy bills? Because he's taken VAT off it. He has managed, I think, very successfully to construct the news narrative. And a big reason that's been possible is because Nigel Farage is main competitor if you believe the polls is missing in action. So the summer is normally reforms time to shine in a way, because

17:51they don't have many MPs. So sort of parliament sitting isn't really, I suppose, they're strong for it. They don't get to go up against the prime minister, whoever it is, here's Dama Randy Barnum at PMQ's. So they work much better when they're hosting in front of press conferences. They're using city season. They're using the time when there isn't that much to talk about for political journalists to set the weather last summer or the summer before. I think it's on crime, it's on crime or migration. Obviously, they have been small boat crossings this year. They have tried to sort of set the agenda and talk about migration. But it's been that the quietest summer ever from reform, probably partly because Nigel Farage is fighting this by-action, which means that Andy Barnum has just had a complete free reign to set the agenda. And it's gone well for him. So this is potentially, I mean, thank God, but a historic missed opportunity for reform. Is it not, Bonseca? Yeah, it certainly seems so. And I think you're completely correct about summer normally being there their time. That's the time when we do normally get these kind of,

18:53I would say, spontaneous, I suppose they're quite engineered really, but we normally, it does seem to be a season where we get more angst and more anger around particular hot button issues. That normally are very much playing to reforms politics, right? I mean, they've tried. I saw like a video of Layla Cunningham going down the London High Street and talking about how migration has ruined the High Street. And it didn't seem to be very convincing for example that they're sort of trying to get some of their ideas out there. But I think against a competitor like Andy Barnum, who's very different to Kirstalmer, there's a conversation to be had about the way in which the left and parties to the left respond to Andy Barnum. But the corresponding questions I suppose also apply to the right and to reform. Let's be honest, for a long time with Kirstalmer, they've had it quite easy. You know, they've had it quite easy with a very poor political communicator and someone with a very poor political strategy. They're not dealing with that anymore. Yes, there will be some continuities from the previous government, Kirstalmer's government into Andy Barnum's, I'm sure. It's not going to be a perfect government. Of course, there will be holes to picking. There will be areas for them to exploit, but they're going to have to be more strategic. You can go back to the

19:54drawing board. I think in terms of how they wish to do that, this drip of Andy Barnum's sort of Andy Barnum's government bringing out small but impactful, low-hanging fruit style policies that really with pincers are attacking the kind of cost of living crisis and addressing elements of that, you know, has been quite smart, I think, and it's allowed them to kind of dominate over quite a long stretch period of time. Over the summer, this issue around cost of living, which is something that's on everyone's minds, and I think reform has struggled apart from maybe the odd spike here around migration, what happened in the Spanish, Schmock and Border, for example, which the use of was very quick to try and exploit. They've not really had much traction at all to be quite honest. To be honest, I think Nigel Forge for a long time, he also did, whilst being a savvy political operator who I think I underestimated, I do think he also for a long time did just get a bit of an easier time in the media. He was this very entertaining guy who could generate interesting, very eye-catching stories, I think, for the media, and I think unconsciously or consciously, I think the media has enjoyed putting Nigel Forge in the spotlight, often in a way

20:59that was kind of mutually beneficial transactional between those two parties. Nigel Forge could give them stories, sensationalism, they like that because it meant that it could boost, you know, readership, boost readership of their platforms, of their columns, and in return Nigel Forge got to be splashed everywhere and be, you know, kind of sucked into the part of the media ecosystem of this country in a way that was beneficial for him building a political hegemony, and that contract or that agreement seems to now be breaking a bit. And it seems that the media is now turning a real eye of scrutiny to Nigel Forge in a way that it is not wishing to just kind of quietly let go of, particularly around the finance scandal stuff. And I don't know if he himself has found a way to operate around that or find a new way around, not just having a media that is actually a bit more compliant and quite happy to just uncritically have you on question time every other week or whatever. We're going to come back to this story, the final part of the show in particular the controversy over why Nigel Forge didn't turn up to the count, many reform politicians have been

22:02tying themselves in knots because they have been varying explanations. So we'll come back to that for now onto our next story. Heat waves and wildfires are on the top of the news agenda at the moment. On Thursday we saw the hottest day of an already record-breaking year. It was 38.1 degrees in Q in West London. And these were some of the dramatic scenes broadcast into our respective living rooms. Let's just bring you back to these live pictures that we are getting from the Sky News helicopter this evening. And they show serious fires that have broken out in Stauberidge in the West Midlands. And there was a fire that involved the golf course there and several fields there. But that fire, as you can see there, as crossed roads and is now

23:09seriously affecting, seriously impacting residential areas. Firefighters were called to this part of Stauberidge at about 130 yesterday afternoon. And what's really striking when you talk to people who live here is the speed at which the fire took hold. It started off in a field. Then blew onto the golf course which is next to us here. And then the wind changed direction and sent it towards houses down here. Now we know it's more than 10 houses that have been gutted by the fire that happened here yesterday. People who live here have been telling us it was carnage that they can't believe something like that happened in this country and it was more like being in a film. Okay, I've got to get out of here now. I've got to go. So let's do it. Let's do the house. Going up. That was footage from Sky, the BBC and social media of those, I mean really apocalyptic looking fires in Stauberidge on Thursday. Now you might have all seen like that would put

24:13fires front and center of the political agenda. You might have expected that Andy Bernan would use this opportunity to really talk about climate change and the threat of faces to our health, our safety, our living standards. However, the new Prime Minister has been very reluctant to talk about climate change. He doesn't think it fits with the messaging that he's trying to put forward in his new government. And we aren't the only people to have noticed this silence. Today, 50 green groups, including Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth have urged Bernan to break his silence on climate change. There is, though, one key figure in the new government who is speaking from a different script. Someone who hasn't decided that climate change are two words that shouldn't be set in public. This is Horace Secretary Ed Miliband. This is normal. All this, all this. These heatwaves are sending us a message. We can all agree that national security is the first responsibility of any government. And the climate crisis is now a serious national security threat

25:18to the British people. Heatwaves, wildfires, droughts are all going to become more common. The good news is we can act. As Horace Secretary, I will work with countries around the world to build a coalition for action. At the United Nations in September, I'll be bringing together foreign ministers to discuss how we respond to this new national security threat. And when countries work together, we can bring down emissions, slow temperature rises, and help people adapt to the warming world. I feel this so deeply. We owe it to future generations to act. Our planet is sending us a warning signal and we are going to listen. Now, for Ed Miliband, of course, foreign secretary was a bit of a consolation prize. He wanted to be chancellor of the ex-checker. And that was the job he'd been prepping for for years. I think he planned to go into the treasury and turbocharged Britain's transition to net zero. But can he now, as foreign secretary, make more of a difference than he could have done as chancellor? Are the opportunities even bigger, even wider? Well, earlier today, I

26:21spoke to Simon Lewis, his professor of global change science at UCL. It's much trickier, I think, to be impactful on the international stage if your government is not performing on the national stage. So it's going to be tough for Ed Miliband if these two new oil and gas licenses, Rose Bank and Jack Dawg get approved, and that could be very soon, then he's going to have a real trouble telling the rest of the world, hey, we need to get our emissions down. If they're also back home, granting new licenses for 25 years worth of new oil and gas emissions. And who would that matter to? Because obviously, the argument for Jack Dawg and Rose Bank, I mean, there are a number of arguments for it. But when it comes to climate, people say, look, Britain's emissions aren't that significant, even if they open these new oil and gas plants. And it's not as if Xi Jinping really cares what the UK government is doing and when it comes to the North Sea. I mean, do you disagree with that or who, what countries would be influenced,

27:22let's say, by us giving those to gas and oil fields that go ahead? So I think we all know that the UN process is quite bogged down because it is a consensus-based and real leadership is required. And there's a parallel process now with this road map to transition away from fossil fuels had its first conference in Colombia this year. And Ed could lead that. He could provide a real leadership role as a, you know, middle power country who has a good track record compared to other countries in terms of climate. You know, officially our emissions is 1990, 54% down by other measures, a quarter down, not enough. And certainly not in line with 1.5 to 3C, but significant would be better than many other countries. So could provide leadership there, but not if we're giving more than gas nice answers out to a hope. Could you give a bit more context to this treaty? It has been mentioned on the show before,

28:26but this is sort of coalition of the willing, isn't it? Separate from the COP process, and for countries who have committed to move away from fossil fuels. And I think to not sort of develop any new fossil fuel sites. That's right. There's a frustration in the climate talk steps things get bogged down by what, for example, Saudi Arabia is, is willing to sign up to, which is very, very little. So now we all agree that we need to get to net zero emissions as a world. And until that happens, the climate impacts get more and more. So, you know, I'm seeing sweltering here in the Thessie wave in a row in London. And that's going to get worse and worse on average until we get to net zero emissions and they'll stay at that point. And people know what the sides is, but there's a bunch of countries that want to get things done and want to lead the transition. And there are some countries that do not want to, and actively want to oppose it, particularly United States, Saudi Arabia. So therefore, the countries that want to get something done

29:31have moved to a parallel process, complementary to it, to work out actually how do we do this? That's economically feasible and practical and doesn't leave anyone behind. And what contrasts the part of that? Sorry, I know the first conference was in Colombia, who's part of the coalition of the winning? There were 57 countries. It was co-led by Colombia and the Netherlands. And then a bunch of countries from Europe, a bunch of countries from South America and of course, all the small island states are the kind of the major groupings. We often speak to you sort of at cops. So we're often looking for an expert to talk to at one of the big cops. And you're often there and great speaker, so we get you on. So suppose with that sort of perspective from recent history, what has the UK's role been when it comes to international climate diplomacy? Have you been one of the good guys or the bad guys somewhere in the middle? I would say overall one of the good guys on the spectrum. We obviously had a lot more power

30:35and leverage when we were part of the European Union. Now we're a bit isolated because we don't have this big group backing behind what the United Kingdom is saying. And very recently we've had much more problematic because we've had big cuts in the 8-budget. We're now down to 0.3% of GDP. And that's having big impacts because the UK can't or is unwilling to contribute to mitigation and to adaptation in particular and to the loss and damage fund so that these massive impacts in small island states that are very difficult to adapt to how we're going to pay for that. And we can see that adaptation problem here. We have enormous issues with adaptation of our hospitals, our farming, our landscapes, our homes. And who is going to pay for that? How is that going to be paid across the world? Is a very live issue and a very important one?

31:40From what you've said so far, it sounds like you're suggesting that Edmila Van might have his heart in the right place. He might, you know, I believe he genuinely cares about climate change and he's passionate about this. But the position he's going to have to put forward or the baggage he comes with when he goes to any meeting with a foreign leader or his counterparts, foreign secretaries of other countries is that we're a nation that's considering opening new oil and gas fields. We're a nation that's just cut our development budget from 0.7 to 0.5, then to 0.3%. And so in fact, you know, this is one of the worst situations Britain has ever been in in recent history when it comes to our ability capacity to pursue climate diplomacy. I would agree with that except Edmila Van is a very impressive political operator. And he's shown that in his previous role on net zero and climate. And before that, when he was in government in 2008. So if someone can do something about that, you know, he has great leverage in the Labour Party and in the cabinet

32:44to stop these two oil and gas fields and explain the kinds of impacts on the UK's standing for essentially almost no jobs, no impact on bills and very, very little income to the treasury. It doesn't make any sense for these to go ahead on their own terms. Never mind with the climate and the international perspective. And then I think on aid, the cut to 0.3% was supposed to be temporary. Now, I think we can get some commitment about how that turns round. That would be very good. And he can also use his considerable leverage to, you know, make the point as he sort of is implicitly say, what's the real threat here? Is it an invasion by Russia? I mean, currently in the UK at the moment, we've got huge fires. We've got people losing their homes to fire. We've got huge fires and agriculture and natural bits of the UK. We've got hospitals over the EU team. We've got

33:48train crashes. This is the kind of impact that Russia could only dream of. And it's here now because of climate change. And we're much better investing in reducing emissions and doing the adaptation and changing to electrification and renewable energy to produce that electricity and helping the world go on that direction rather than funding ever more armaments for a much more distant threat than climate changes, which is the Russian threat. In my opinion, it is. It's more distant than this very real, very now climate impact. And so does that mean you think it's smart for us in the video at Miloban release yesterday? He's always saying, my commitment is to national security. That's the highest priority of any government. But given my highest priority is national security. That's precisely why I care so much about climate change. Do you think that's the right framing? I mean, at the extreme end, this probably won't happen, but you could imagine him sort of saying, well, you've committed to 3% of GDP on defense. Maybe if we have a more expansive notion of defense, we can put some of that

34:55towards climate investments. I'm not sure if that would get past some of the right-wing newspapers, but I don't know what you think about that. Yeah, I'm not sure. I'm not sure it would get past, but I think that noting that it's a security issue for the UK, whether it's food security, whether it's our energy supply security, whether it's our ability to transport things in these new eye temperatures and under these new climate impacts, then I think, yes, it is a national priority. And that, by saying it's national security, that's how you get buy-in from senior civil servants, buy-in from GCATQ, buy-in from other ministries to be able to have the kind of comprehensive approach that's needed to adapt to these ever-changing conditions. Because I think we all just have to remember it. It's hard to remember that in 10 years' time, these conditions and

35:58these impacts are going to look good unless we do something about both the emissions and adapting to this new world that we've created. I want to talk to you, I suppose, more of the climate scientists now in terms of what we can expect for the coming 12 months. Because as far as I understand, the heatwave we're seeing at the moment is partly, it was largely, of course, driven by climate change, and then also driven by El Nino, which is a cyclical, natural phenomenon. And also my understanding is that we're kind of only in the beginning of the El Nino. So the worst could be yet to come, over say, the next six or 12 months. So what should we expect over the next six or 12 months? What will the rest of this El Nino have in store? One correction there is that the current heat waves are not related to El Nino. It's only just getting started. You know, these heatwaves are driven by more emissions in the atmosphere. And then we always have had heatwaves. But what we're having now is heatwaves on top of already much higher temperatures. And therefore the spikes that we're seeing

37:04are like outside the comfort zone, outside the tolerance that UK society was built for. We have hospital's that are built for a given temperature range. And now we're increasingly going outside of that temperature range. And that's the same for all of the infrastructure that's been built up in the UK over the last, I mean, you know, hundreds of years and certainly decades. So that it's no longer kind of exactly set for purpose. Because we're seeing is, you know, we have a band of tolerance. And we're now poking outside that band of tolerance. In terms of the El Nino, so it's unclear whether it's going to be this strongest ever El Nino or not quite. We're still seeing how it's evolving. And the UK is not massively affected by El Nino's. It's not the kind of place like California, which has like massive changes in weather patterns or

38:04Peru or East Africa and or parts of the Amazon. So what we'll mainly see I think is a huge impact on food production. Because we will have an abnormal weather in many places in the world. So we can expect further food price inflation. We can also expect more events like this typhoon in China where almost a million people were evacuated because they got third of the years rain in one day. So we just have more unusual extremes. And in some places it will be much drier and in some places much wetter. But the impact on the UK is most likely to be fire food. And 2027 will guarantee it be a record year for global temperatures, the most

39:08guaranteed because El Nino will go on top of existing climate change. And we'll see natural ecosystems, temporarily stop absorbing carbon. So we'll see a big increase in the amount of carbon that we put into the atmosphere, staying in the atmosphere because of the change in the ongoing. Essentially the tropics will absorb less carbon and normally turns. And why is that? I know you focus on tropical forests. So I mean maybe you're unrelated to that. But why is it that hot weather means that these places won't absorb carbon? Is it because the forest burned down or what's going on there? It will be partly, yeah. People will use the dry kind of, it's partly because it's hot but also dry. And the places where it's dry then you can convert the forest to other land uses. So some people will, so cattle ranchers in South America will take that opportunity to clear additional lands trying to consolidate

40:09lands for cattle production for example. And higher temperatures mean that respiration costs have plants are higher. So they are absorbing carbon from the atmosphere to be felt sensitive to then releasing it through respiration. And now respiration costs go up as the temperatures rise. So that's the kind of basic point. So I'm going to put this in really stupid persons sort of language but the plant is more, the plant is more stressed. It has to work harder therefore it absorbs less carbon. Exactly. Perfect. I'm happy that you've reinforced me. That was not completely ridiculous thing to say. Let's link this up as a final question. Sort of putting aside Rosebank and Jack Dore and I suppose putting aside the aid budget because those are both things that Ed Millivan is going to have to negotiate with Andy Bylam. It's going to sort of be about power struggles with being cabinet I suppose. Purely us foreign secretary.

41:13What are the things that Ed Millivan can basically do of his own accord just using his intellect and charm I suppose. Does it relate to sort of protecting tropical rainforests? I mean what can he do when he's going and meeting other global leaders? Well he's already announced that he's UK envoy for the World Bank and that he is personally going to do that job rather than giving it to a junior minister. So that's really important because the World Bank is under siege from the United States in particular to stop its climate related finance for global South countries. So that is a very important fight internationally that Ed Millivan knows about and has put himself in the centre of because he can do a lot of good there for the climate to be. I think that's one crucial thing and then obviously he will be able to

42:15provide some leadership because he's very able against Saudi Arabia and the other blockers in the international climate talks because he's got a lot of experience of how to do that and he was and he's been quite affected in the past and doing that but it's limited but it's important that someone does it and someone who's very passionate and able can do it. That was Simon Lewis speaking to me earlier today and we do have a bit of an update on the story because Andy Burnham has said the words climate change. Again, I was Professor Simon Lewis speaking to me earlier today and we do have an update for you because Andy Burnham has now today said words climate change. It was on a visit to Stauberidge. You know we have to face up to the changing climate and I think we need a different debate about that. There's no point denying where we are. We need to face up to it. We need more clean energy.

43:18We need to see that transition accelerate. Those are all of the issues that we're now in discussion but the co-bremeting early this week I think has enabled us to mobilize resource today to individuals to communities and to our foreign rescue services and we're very very grateful to them. So he does still seem pretty reluctant to talk about climate change. It was mentioned briefly he talks about clean energy but then he's obviously moving on quite quickly. Not especially things as as Prime Minister is visiting people who just sort of immediately lost their homes. He doesn't want to be seen to be making political points. Now I don't think talking about climate change should be seen as a political point but clearly some people do. But yeah, just for whatever reason, this has now become habitual. He does not want to talk about this. We should say that there has been another update which is that not only is he discouraging the use of disposable barbecues. He's banning the sale of disposable barbecues for the time being while we're still in drought. Lots of people suggesting still really vicious enough as a means

44:26to I suppose protect us from climate change. But also I mean I'm definitely not opposed to it. Disposable barbecues where we're in a drought do seem like an unnecessary risk. Obviously I advise everyone when you're out this weekend don't start any unnecessary work. Don't start any fires necessary or unnecessary. I have a picnic instead. Normally when a candidate stands in election they appear at the count. So you you attend if you win you get to make a lovely speech saying what you'll do for your constituents thanking the people who've canvased for you. That should be your moment to take the limelight I suppose. Well not Nigel Farage he was conspicuously absent from the lineup of candidates on Friday morning at the Clackton Count. So why why didn't you attend? Well speaking I'm to the so-called Farage Fest hours before the result was announced Farage had this to say. And I'm sad to say that after 33 years of he had candid it in action politics I've been advised tonight by SX please.

45:32There is an organised campaign to disrupt and degrade the result that will take place until a few hours tired. And once again it shows you the sheer intolerance, the sheer loss of fundamental democratic principles that those that went before us fought in world wars to fight for and preserve. And this shows you why the battle that we're engaged upon in this in this great party, in this great movement of ours is to get this country back to the values that it needs to be. And so I I regret to say and by the way I'm not scared of these people far from it. But I'm damned if I'm going to stand on a stage having won a resounding victory, a ringing endorsement of all that I've tried to fight for and you try to fight for and be

46:35demeaned and humiliated by nobodies and I will not sadly be attending the count. That was Nigel Farage saying, supposed frets to disrupt his candidacy would undermine the freedoms we won in the Second World War. Now of course it's unclear whose side Nigel Farage would have fought for in the Second World War. School mates of his have said that Hitler was right. Of course he's denied those claims but more than one person who went to school with Nigel Farage has suggested that he was a very far right racist young child. You can judge how much he seems to have changed over the course of his life. What are the facts of the matter? The statement was very clear there. Farage says that exxist Essex police sorry had warned him that there could be an attempt to disrupt the announcement of the winner and that he decided not to tie up because he didn't want to be humiliated. Over the course of the night, though, that story began to shift going from a risk of disruption to a full on security threat.

47:40A little later, GB News reported this. An official spokesman for the reform party said, Essex police advise Nigel not to attend the account tonight due to a credible threat against him. I'll repeat that Essex police advise Nigel not to attend the count tonight due to a credible threat against him. There was a problem though. Not a single media outlet was able to verify that claim. And Sky News reported the contrary shortly afterwards. Well, you recall a short time ago we had a statement for reform UK saying that there'd been Essex police had told the reform UK about a credible threat to Mr Farage. Well, we now understand that Essex police has not advised any of the candidates and remember that in 34, that they should not attend the count. So that does appear to contradict what reform UK are saying. But the story from reform politicians kept changing. This is how Richard Tyce

48:45explained Nigel Farage's absence from the count. Why was Mr Farage not at the count last night or the early hours of this morning? Because his security team were very concerned about a credible threat to his security. And with the greatest of respect, I didn't think anybody should have the temerity to question our judgments and our security team's judgment about security and safety. This appears also to be at odds because we heard Mr Farage said he would not be attending bills. He didn't want it to be demeaned and humiliated. So that's nothing to do with his safety. That's he doesn't understand it so someone dressed as a dustbin. Nigel is just one outstanding victory. He's got voters in Clackton have said we want more Nigel, not less Nigel. Is it because he didn't want to be demeaned and humiliators he said or you're now telling that is a security team who overrode Essex police? Which is it? I've just told you I'm delighted to tell you again I trust the judgment of Nigel's security team

49:46above everybody in the suggestion he could be demeaned and humiliated is not so cool. If you can ask me a question do you with a courtesy of letting me answer it? I've just told you let's trust Nigel's security team to keep him safe, secure, but under lock. Why did he say he would feel demeaned and humiliated and attending them? That's got nothing to do with the security point there. No, no, but why did he say that? I don't know, Nick. So we're getting a few different stories there. Why didn't Nigel Farage turn up? So Farage himself said the police warned him there would be destruction and he didn't want to be humiliated by the disruption then reformed tell GB news and a bunch of other journalists that the police told Nigel Farage not to turn up. Now in the morning Richard Tyne says actually I'm its Nigel Farage's security team who said he shouldn't turn up and we should do the police. It says we should trust Nigel Farage's security team. Why would we trust anyone involved in this party when the story keeps changing? There's a very clear and obvious explanation why Nigel Farage might not want to turn up which is that it's very embarrassing if you're sort of claiming

50:49to be a guy who's standing up to the establishment to have to be standing next to count bin face and a bunch of novelty candidates, right? It just inherently doesn't look very impressive. Now I don't know what disruption counts as. I mean I suppose you've got all these novelty candidates and their supporters. Are they going to cheer when Nigel Farage wins instead of cheering? I don't know. I mean he might find that humiliating that kind of sounds bit like democracy to me, especially if you've sort of brought about an unnecessary by-election just so you can try and escape any kind of accountability, right? If there are a few people cheering, you know I don't think that would be a particular concern. But then they have to sort of just lie, just keep getting exaggerated and exaggerated until the police told them not to turn up, which would by the way, that would be really worrying for democracy if the police were telling candidates that it was too dangerous for them to turn up. But that didn't happen, right? That was a post facto explanation which I then have to walk down to saying, Nigel Farage's security team said he shouldn't

51:49appear. Obviously there's also no evidence that your security team did say that, right? Seems like it might well have been a political decision not to turn up and you know it turned out that they couldn't lie about the police telling him not to turn up because the police are an independent organisation who can correct journalists. Whereas I don't think you're going to find Nigel Farage's security team telling any journalists actually we didn't tell him not to turn up because then they get fired, right? So it makes more sense, it's easier, it's less high risk to say this group of people who by the way we also happen to employ and who aren't going to say anything that contradicts what we say. It was the security team who said don't show up. Another reform MP Lee Anderson was asked about the alleged security threat on the BBC. Well, Nigel said during his speech, he said he said he'd been told not to turn up because they could have been a bit of bother there within inside the counting also. He's totally advised and the attic is done the right thing. I like his age, Charlie. I think his time is about to spend saying a massive thank you to the hundreds of people, the thousands of people that have turned

52:50up over the past month helping secure this historic victory. Understood. Essex, please, have we seen the BBC understands say they didn't advise anyone not to attend? Well, you know, sometimes some of these police forces that we've been dealing with recently are battered, honest as you and not, as a BBC. Okay, so you're saying that Essex, please, they're they're not telling it how it is when they say that there was no advice to your party leader not to attend. I'm not spoken to Nigel about this. I've not spoken to Essex police. If Nigel gets upon stage and says that he's advised not to attend the event, then I believe Nigel above the police and especially above you are at the BBC. So he believes Nigel Farage over the police, even though Nigel Farage's story changed from last night to this morning, was it the police who advised him? Was it his security team or advise him? Now, the fact that Richard Tys went on LBC and say it was actually Nigel Farage's security team, that makes it seem quite unlikely actually that it wasn't that the police that told Farage not to attend. And then the police lied to journalists

53:53for, I don't know what reason, but you now have, I mean, that's supposed to be a socially conservative law and all the party who are very clearly calling the police liars without any reason to do so. I mean, I know the police are capable of lying. They've done it before, but it seems like the best explanation of what happened here is that the police definitely did not tell Nigel Farage not to turn up. I can imagine the police saying, this is a controversial by election. We can imagine that there might be some gearing or shouting in the crowd, who knows. But I'm pretty sure that they didn't get what I'm certain. I'm 100% certain that they didn't tell Nigel Farage not to turn up. That was something that was made up. And now Leanderson is saying we should believe the original lie over what the police said. Again, it's supposed to be a socially conservative law and all the party, right? But they're causing these, just starting these stupid fights with the police force. And Farage's failure to turn up to the count appears to have turned off more than a few of the more reformed friendly parts of

54:54the media. Nick Ferrari made this uncomfortable comparison. Has the shine come off reform UK? And I have to say, I'm surprised, has the shine come off Nigel Farage? Now, it appears that some hours ago there was a suggestion that they had security concerns that they'd been advised not, for Mr Farage, not to attend. Essex police dismissing those suggestions saying that they had a robust police operation and had advised none of the candidates. No candidate had been advised not to attend. Then, of course, we heard that he failed. He might be the Farage fest. He might be demeaned and humiliated if he attended. Well, if we come back to the security, I remind you again. Margaret Satcher, 1979, on the 30th of March, one of her closest political allies, Aerie Nive, was murdered by the IRA when they blew up his car in the House of Commons. He really was very, very, very, very dear personal friend and political guide guide as well.

55:55Lost his life on the 30th of March. On the 3rd of May that year, so certainly weeks later, Mrs Satcher turned at despite death threats from the IRA. Mrs Satcher turned up in person at the fin- at the general election for the count of Finchley. And I say again, safety is of supreme importance for every politician, but in the face of no death threats for Mrs Satcher, and still mourning the loss of her close friend, she turned up for her count. Mr Farage couldn't for his. Bonsakor, it does make Nigel Farage look a little bit, I suppose dishonest, on the one level, but also just quite prophetic. So it sounds like maybe there would have been a few people jeering. I mean, I'm just, this is all just fine-turpentation, by the way. Like, maybe it wasn't even that. But it is think plausible to me that sort of his initial plan that the police said, maybe that could be some disruption, because what the police have denied is telling anyone not turn up to the count. So plausible they said there might be disruption. But not life-fretting disruption, a little bit of embarrassment is explicitly said he didn't want to turn up to be

56:57demeaned. And Nick Farage makes a decent point, right? Which is that it was often seen as a real strength of politicians that they were brave in the face of danger. And Nigel Farage cowers, when the possibility is some jeering or mere disruption. So very thin-skinned, really, isn't it? Which has been a running theme, I think, actually, with reform for quite some time, possibly maybe since that goughton indent in bi-election, when what's his name? Sorry, Matt. Matt, these magazines have done a lot of lossy election, and there was a lot of winging and whining. And I remember thinking that's not very appealing. I don't feel like that's the kind of, it's kernel or it's core, why people have come to reform in terms of the kind of overall vibes and the feeling. There's a very famous clip, actually, of Nigel Farage, back when he was an MEP, and he was making a speech in front of his colleagues. And I think Tony Blair was there. This must have been when Tony Blair was still quite ministering. Tony Blair kind of slaps him down publicly in front of hundreds of colleagues, appears in the European parliament.

57:59And Nigel Farage has sits there and laughs. He just sits there and grins, and it's like water for ducks back. And that's as much as I do not like the man would never vote for his politics. That's something I can definitely understand as being very appealing, that you can just kind of take it. There's a resilience to you, which I think has fed him really, really well. And now, that just kind of seems to be disintegrating a little bit. Tim Montgomery, a kind of conservative broadcaster and kind of very reformed, reform-filled journalist. I think he was condemning today, that that actually from Nigel Farage saying that there is this aggrieved tone, I think it was the phrase that he used to describe the overall vibes that reform seems to be giving, which is putting putting people off to be honest. It's kind of bad vibes. And I think it's drowning out possible policy positions and ways in which they could exploit from a policy perspective that the new Burnham government, now we're kind of fixated on the fact that these people seem to be a bunch of kind of winging, whining people. Strikes me as very sloppy communications, I think as well, around the inconsistencies with regards to why he didn't turn up to the count. It seems wildly

59:04kind of contradictory. I'm quite confused as well because in amongst all of this, there was of course the five million that he supposedly initially got for security. That was the original reason that we were given right, but why he had to be given this stonking great amount of cash from our type of this Thailand-based crypto billionaire. And where's that in the big J? You know, if you've got all this money, do you not have the money to then be protected in situations where you might be booed and jared a little bit, advice and coordinated members of the public. You know, it's really quite strange. And this playbook of, you know, they're not the only people using it. This playbook to whip out security, whether it's personal security of MPs, whether it's national security, I think this playbook that allows you to kind of get away with a lack of scrutiny. And the guys of so-called security concerns, you can kind of sometimes do whatever you want because that shield you from having to reveal more information and the so-called kind of safety reasons. Right. Well, there's a security issue, but really I can't tell you too much because that would

1:00:04then be compromising, of course, you know, the safety of X, Y and Z. And so they're trying to use that as a kind of shield or a bit of a guise to get back off some of these further questions, but it doesn't really seem to be working. We saw their Nick Ferrari, you know, he's no left-winger he wasn't particularly impressed by that performance and that strength that I think people on the right do quite like, you know, the whole concept of being a strong man in politics is kind of emblematic person of the right who's able to exemplify strengths and power. You're not really doing that when you're sort of carrying because you're worried that a few people in the public might be burying and jaring you on the stage. You should be used to that. That's me nothing to you. And so this winging and whining, it's putting people off, I suspect. And I mean, we should say again, because I do think it is worth sort of like reminding people that politicians who are fearful for their safety, I think is perfectly reasonable, right? And you know, the past 11 years, there've been two MPs who've been killed, Joe Cox and David Amos,

1:01:07and then obviously, you know, just in the past few weeks, a reform politician, Adwida was killed. We don't know the motives because it's still a live case, but those will become apparent. And I can see why any politician would genuinely be worried for their safety. And I actually think we should probably invest more security in looking after them, right? But Najir Farash, so clearly here, spun a story that it is just a discredit to any politician who does genuinely want the public to care about their safety, right? Because, you know, in a way, I also feel a bit sorry for politicians because there is a big, very, you know, understandably sort of anti-politics atmosphere in the country, right? People are very sympathetic to politicians when they say, you know, I'm wired for myself to you should feel sorry for me because I hate you, your politician anyway, what's this all about? If free people in your profession have been killed recently, I can see why you would feel worried. And also why you would maybe feel that you don't get enough

1:02:08sympathy for it because everyone hates politicians, right? So I understand that. But if what you then do is make up obvious tall tales about police warning you not to go somewhere when they didn't, then all that does is reinforce this idea that the only reason an MP would ever talk about security issues is to try and evade scrutiny. And I don't actually think that's true. I think that's true in this case, but I don't think that's true in every situation. You know, and if my loved one was a high profile MP, I think I would probably worry quite a lot about this kind of thing, right? I think that's publicly reasonable. But Nardy Farage is doing a disservice to that by, I mean, just making up stuff and then constantly changing the story as he did, by the way, with that 5 million pounds, which he said was for security, then he said, oh, actually, I haven't spent it. Then he said, oh, if I wanted to, I could spend it on cars. Like the whole thing is just so transparently a sham and a con, essentially. Ben, second, any final thoughts on this before we wrap up? Yeah, I mean, just to say, I mean, this feels like such silly story and in many respects,

1:03:12to be quite honest with you, our politics is dominated by by elections now. Every election feels kind of ex-essentially important, apart from maybe perhaps this one, because this was a bit silly, really. But I mean, I think reform, I run a real tight spot now, where I think they do need to go back to the drawing board and really think about what their positioning is here, with regards to lots of things. Andy Burnham's on the scene, you've got restored flanking you to the right now. And then they've got this financial scandal, which is dogging them. And I don't think is simply going to go away. I think they need to find a way to go beyond this kind of, almost like, permanent state of insurgency rhetoric that they have, which is to constantly say that they're the small, the little guy, facing up against the big bad establishment. I think they've got to find some other more coherent narrative to help people make sense of precisely why they are so flooded with all this cash, all this money from wealthy donors and wealthy individuals. Donald Trump gets to say, I'm a businessman. I do business. So this is actually just me doing business very good. And you know, that's not going to convince everyone of us, but if there's a certain global people who watch that, that applies to you. So I think they do need to go back and

1:04:15do a bit of a rethink. Otherwise, they really might find themselves on the back foot. Andy Burnham calls an election because there's a window there where his performance is just really strongly wants to capture that whilst he's strong in the polls. And reform can find themselves having lost a general election, gained more seats perhaps than they have now, but not having the outcome that they would like to have. So and Frank won't wish that that happens. I don't want to see them win. Obviously, maybe I shouldn't be giving them tips. But yeah, I think reform at strategic, they're going to have to do some big politics thinking, I think, you know, big boy politics thinking rather than just carrying on as they are. Otherwise, it's difficult to see how they move beyond this plateau that they are in or possibly even a descent downwards. Let's wrap up there, Bansi Kikeyambe. Thank you so much for joining me today. We do appreciate it. It's going to be slightly cooler over the weekend. So hopefully you can have a nice relaxing time. Thank you so much for having me. And thank you guys for watching. Before we go, I just want to because I'm so proud of her, I just give you a little shot of my dog looking

1:05:19very fed up, but also quite cute. Well, I said I'll take her out for walk, but actually it's too hot, so she's probably just going to stay lying there for a little bit longer. Thank you for watching Navara Live. Have a fantastic weekend. We'll be back on Monday. Presumably from the studio for an actual live show. For now, you've been watching Navara Live. Good night.