 Good evening. Welcome to this evening's edition of Tiskey Sal. My name is Aaron Mestano. You may be familiar with me already. This evening I have the immense privilege of being joined by two Paragons of the new left. That's fair to say, isn't it? I've got Adrin Billa, Labour for a Green New Deal. How are you doing? Pretty well. Thanks for having me. It's a pleasure to be here. What's your official title at Labour for a Green New Deal? Co-director or Policy Director, I guess. And James Medway. At Meadwatch. Have you considered changing your Twitter handle? It's too late now. It seemed like a good idea in 2009. I've no idea. I just thought I'd put down my surname and then messed it up slightly. Former Economic Advisor to John McDonnell. Are you writing a book? I'm trying to. I was meant to be writing a book, but the election has interrupted it. The plan was to get the book done before the election. The election has turned up. There might be another one. I suppose there is that. Before we go any further, you guys have been canvassing. How's it looking? What are your thoughts? Mixed bag. I guess I'm a perennial optimist. I think what I'm seeing more than anything is that very few people actually like Boris Johnson, if any. If they're not voting Labour, it's because they're just disillusioned more generally, which has been interesting. But climate seems to be cutting through that in the Green New Deal in particular, so it's been a bit uplifting. Do you think the Green New Deal stuff is good with non-Labor voters? So the Green New Deal, I think framing is particularly good with Labour voters because they're already aware of it. But when you actually get into sort of the nuts and bolts of it, it kind of cuts through to everyone, which is nice to see. James, you just came from Hendon, which I kept on getting confused with Hanley. No, they're quite different. Quite different places, I think. Yeah, it's a bit of a similar experience, I think, and it's why I was late getting here. Yeah, there's quite a lot of undecideds around. I think that's it. It's clear to me that Labour vote is holding up, and I think that's happening all over the place. But there's still, with some distance to go, there's still quite a few people you can go and talk to and have those conversations with. I mean, it was an impressive turnout. It must have been a good hundred people who turned up to go on campus in Hendon. Hendon? Yeah, they were out knocking on doors. And this is, you know, Hendon's a very, very marginal, the second most marginal seat in London. So the conservative majority there is 1,072, or possibly 1,027. And real enthusiasm, I think, on the ground to try and get a Labour MP there for the first time since 2010, because it's been backwards and forwards a little bit. As far as I can tell, people think that they're in with a shout. They think that this is, you know, it's obviously not in the bag, still a week or so to go, but this is somewhere that can turn Labour this time around. You seem dubious. Enough of the small talk. Let's talk about really important things, like the Queen's Christmas speech. Yeah, that is important, isn't it? Yeah, that seems to be the most important thing that's happened today. Look, forget democratic elections, forget climate systems breakdown. Do you watch the Queen's Christmas speech? It turns out Jeremy Corbyn probably doesn't. This was on the ITV today with, I forgot her name now, Julie, I think. Julie Sandringham. That would be fitting. Regardless, Julie Etchingham, my apologies. We're going to go watch that right now. Do you sit down to watch the Queen's speech, Mr Corbyn? It's on the morning. You usually have it on some of the time. It's not on in the morning, it's three o'clock in the afternoon. That's when everybody watches it. Well, is that okay for them? Our Christmas is sometimes... You don't watch it, do you, Mr Corbyn? There's lots to do. I enjoy the presence of my family and friends around, and Christmas, obviously, like everybody else does, and I also visit a homeless shelter. Are we back? So, we lost the sound here in the studio, so you guys didn't hear what she said or what Corbyn said. She said, do you watch the Queen's speech? He said, we watch it in the morning. She replied, well, it's not 3 p.m., so that's kind of hard. So, obviously, he doesn't watch the Queen's Christmas speech. Yes or no answer? Adrienne, do you watch the Queen's Christmas speech? I didn't know that that was a thing until today. I mean, I am a foreigner, but honestly, I had no idea. So, no? But you're a subject of her majesty, aren't you? Yes, from the Dominion of Canada. I don't know the official name, but yes, I am a subject. A bad one, apparently. James, do you watch the Queen's Christmas speech? Of course not. Farage-like in the back room over the sort of tumble dryer? No, not at all. Look, what was the viewing figures on it? It's about 6 million people watch it, 6.5 million people watch it. So, 90% of the country basically doesn't. And that is a down on a few years ago as well. So, this is not really watched by very many people. The idea that literally everybody gathers around to do this, I think, is just not fitting with how most people actually spend their Christmas day. I mean, Jeremy Corbyn says, all right, it's on in the morning. It looked to be on this week. He could have rolled with it and just said, you know, three in the afternoon is a pretty good sort of Christmas morning time to be getting up, right? So, that's how he could have approached that one if he wanted to make that case. But if he's not watching the Queen's speech, then neither are most of us. Well, that was Stephen Bush's thing. He just said, you know, just lie. That is the morning. We're going to just quickly go to some of the more unhinged tweets. So, I think actually if you just pull up Jim Pickard's tweet, Fox, what do we got up here? Jim Pickard, yeah, from the FT. The issue isn't whether Cornyn, this guy, by the way, was nominated for a national media prize just two days ago. The issue isn't whether Cornyn watches the Queen's Xmas speech. I mean, who does? But why he would kind of pretend he does? And then you have the transcript of the actual interview. Okay. And then who else have we got here? We had another one, which is great. John Stevens. We can pull that up. This is who's this guy? John Stevens. Daily Mail political editor that he watches the Queen on Christmas Day is something. Yeah, it's something he's just being perfectly honest about about life. What was instructive for me? The reason we're talking about this is it's obviously a ridiculous story. And yet it's led the news agenda for the day. And what this thinks of to me is basically the media, a bit like a footballer. After 18 minutes, you're one nil up. You want to wind down the clock. You fall over on a heap. You hold up your hammer string and claim you got cramped. They're kind of just trying to wind it down. Am I right? Is that the right kind of diagnosis here or is this actually a real story? I mean, absolutely right. I try not to get too conspiratorial, but the fact that it happened to have transpired on the day of what was a train wreck of an Andrew Neal interview for Joe Swinson. It's a convenient distraction. I think that's a pattern that we've seen throughout this entire election. Convenient distractions abound. The other bit that's striking in this is the distance between the sort of performance of what you are supposed to do to be like a normal person in Britain, which is presumably watch the Queen's Speech. But we know most people don't watch it, so they won't get a performance of, well, he's obviously completely out of touch with the wider country because he doesn't watch the Queen's Speech when no one does. I mean, frankly, if you look at his answers, he's been household, and at some point maybe the Queen's there, and at some point Jeremy vaguely notices this. But also, if you look at what he says he does on Christmas Day, he's out and about. He's down to the homeless shelter, that sort of thing. Which is striking, if you don't mind me saying, much more sort of, what would you say? Morally valid Christian virtue sort of thing to be doing on Christmas, rather than sort of like most of us loafing around eating too much. Well, I mean, I would disagree there, but you're quite right in terms of the charity. We're going to get a picture up of Jeremy Corbyn. Which is helping people at homeless shelters, spending time with his family. But apparently this is a sort of evil pariah. Awful man. Hopefully he's never Prime Minister. Next story. In other news, the new statesman has decided to be utterly ambivalent in the face of quite a clear choice, I would imagine, in the general election. The new statesman has obviously historically been aligned to the centre-left, although it was hard to say by eugenicists around 100 years ago with the webs. If we can just actually get a transcript of that up, maybe we'll get the tweet up first. Yeah, that's the article itself. I'm just obsessed with Twitter. Let's get the article up. Here's an excerpt from the editorial. And this is the important bit. This is the sort of home truth. It's an editorial, but it's written by Jason Cowley, just to be clear. We have resolved to endorse no party at this general election as a publication that is beholden to no party or faction that defends the intellectual traditions of skepticism, independence of thought, the spirit of criticism, and a willingness to debate. These aren't actually things, by the way. These aren't ends. These are all means. Those are all means to achieving ends. They're not actually ends. We believe that voters deserve better. However, we're not without hope of meaningful change, and I do all our readers to vote tactically if necessary. It's a pride of Mr. Johnson's hard Brexit conservatives of a majority. They then name a bunch of MPs who are primarily not particularly good. And this at a time when MPs, especially women, are subject to the most appalling intimidation and abuse, readers should judge their local candidates on his or her merits, and commit to social reforms, green public investments, civic values, and progressive politics. That's actually a Labour manifesto at the end, isn't it? That is literally just described that. Don't you think? Well, you tell me, Jason. What does the text say? Is it in favour of green investment? Green public investment? Black investment, yeah. Civic values, progressive politics. Well, that is literally social reform. That is the Labour manifesto. He's described in less than a sentence the content of the Labour manifesto. He summarised it. Yeah. So if you want to follow the new statement of advice, literally you should be voting Labour. Yeah, and I think the choice of the word, you know, loyal to no party or faction is particularly interesting there because, I mean, they're very clearly aligned with a faction, and that is the Labour right and or, you know, independent group at this point. But, you know, that's a very clear alliance there. It's right-leaning Labour MPs as opposed to the actual, you know, democratically elected Labour Party. That's a really... I hadn't actually even thought of that, but you're right, they list a bunch of MPs who would clearly be a sort of political faction. Yeah. For them, it's not a faction. It's just these are the normal people who are 80% of society, even though change UK is polling zero percent, even though the Lib Dems have been in free for the last two months. We won't talk about that. Twitter, as ever, had utterly mundane, idiotic or often interesting reactions. The first you're going to see is Matt Hancock, the Conservative MP. We've got him there. I agree with the new statesman. Jeremy Corbyn is not fit to be Prime Minister. Of course, Matt probably didn't read the article, because he didn't say the kindest things about Boris Johnson and the Tories. We won't think about that for a second. Tom Kibasi wasn't best pleased, former director of the IPPR. There are currently 4.1 million children living in poverty. It'd be 5.2 million by 2022, I believe. Yeah, this is up there. And yet the new statesman won't support change. And then finally, David Osland. This was a good take. We can see this. My favourite of the bunch. The irony is that the new statesman was founded by Sydney and Beatrice Webb, both notorious anti-Semites and famous admirers of the new civilisation they store in Saarland's USSR at the height of the purges. Delightful. Before we go any further, I'll obviously not give this the new waste man store any more coverage than it merits. There is a lovely piece. I don't know if you can actually pull this up now, Fox, from 2017. Would you believe it? That's just from a few days before the last general election, where the same man, Jason Cowley, says that the end is nigh. The Labour Party, I'm going to quote from that article, whether it loses 30, 50, or even 70 seats, the Labour Party is heading, and it gives me no pleasure to say this for a shattering defeat under Jeremy Corbyn, just when it should have been seeking to remake our politics for the common good. It's one thing being wrong, it's another being consistently wrong and that's it. So you could argue he's getting less wrong. There does seem to be some progress, small pig, between these two editorials. One is like, this is not a calamity, and we're heading for disaster. The other is like, well, we're probably not heading for disaster, but Jeremy Corbyn still doesn't deserve our esteemed support. So it's potentially a good view as an improvement. If we have another election two years' time, they might finally get around to saying, let's all support Labour this time. You know, the stakes are so high this time. Yeah, yeah, exactly. The problem with that theory is that in practice, losing would be an awful lot worse than losing in 2017 by this late-stage proceedings. Are the new statesmen melts, Adrian? Hard yes, I don't know. Hard yes, that's good. James? Melts. I actually don't really know what that means. They have lots of decent people writing for them. I don't know, they have great writers. They have an appalling editor-in-chief. I'll just clarify for the audience out there. No, there's some really good stuff quite often. It's a shame that it's marred by leaders like this. I don't think it's in keeping. There's a similar thing with The Guardian. There's great chunks of the sort of would-be left-ish media that are like this, where you have readers or potential readers who really want a magazine that's kind of a bit more in line with what they think about the world and their politics. They have a few people writing for them, which is like we basically hate everybody who actually reads our stuff. That has been The Guardian for quite some time now. The Guardian's a lot better than New Statesmen, come on. That is... OK, I'll be nice about The Guardian. The Guardian has a few errant sort of comment writers. It's been a long period of time being exceptionally bad about Jeremy Corbyn's labour. It's got better since. Who's better? The Guardian or New Statesmen? I can't be the final verdict on this. Come on. Financial Times? I quite like The Guardian. I mean, I've been blacklisted by them, but I quite like them, whereas I just find the New Statesmen's like, what's your project? I don't really get it. Yeah, it's probably similar. What's The Guardian's project? What are the projects of all these things? New Statesmen are obviously political intervention, so it needs a political project. The Guardian, because of the genre of the journalism, does reporting, and it does a wider-edged sport, it does business, whereas the New Statesmen's it has good tasteful writing for it. It's a political journal with no politics. It might as well be like The New Humanist or something. Well, The New Humanist has been quite, I don't know. It's quite good. No, but that's quite political. It's kind of like secular values and stuff like Richard Dawkins. What are you all about kind of thing? I mean, there's a wider thinking which is probably, there's a broader problem with trying to sell political magazines in this day and age anyway, although I suspect that's somewhat overdone. There is a bit of a, like, there is a wider social factor of like, who is your mass audience for the kind of politics that New Statesmen present? You know, who is the mass audience for the kind of politics the Liberal Democrats try to present? Like when it's actually confronted with a serious choice, all the evidence suggests it kind of melts away somewhere. So there isn't this social base for the kind of, you know, centerish, liberal-ish, let's moan about Jeremy Corbyn and Boris Johnson, because they're both equally bad sort of politics. You know, you know, you know, you know, you know, it's actually quite a slender section of British society that thinks like that. And I don't see that changing any time soon. What subscriptions do you have? Magazine-wise? All of my subscriptions are paid for by my employee, so loads. I actually just cannot afford to subscribe to anyone myself. Sorry, journalists, love you all. Except in our media, but, you know, that's fine. It's completely interest. James, any subscriptions you have? Subscriptions, well, I mean... I've read it in journalism these days for you. What publications? God, honestly, things I read really fairly rigorously, and this is quite dull, but it's predictable choices of the financial times, like absolutely every day, and then probably the times as well, rather, unfortunately. Simply because if you want to know what's happening in the Conservative Party, you read the times. That's how the thing plays out. In this section, the telegraph is still very good. The telegraph can be good for internal, sort of, Tory machinations. You get past a few pages. The Observer. The Observer has nothing in it. The Observer has nothing in it. Sometimes, bits and pieces. They're all like this. There's a generic problem in journalism, which is this disappearance of money to do lots of serious investigatory stuff. That's been the case for a good long period of time. So you get all the newspapers starting to look a little bit like battered by some of this, and then you feed in this sort of bizarre thing where chasing things on Twitter actually starts to become the news and feeds into the news cycle. There's a real, sort of, damaging impact, I think, on journalism overall. So partly it's a funding issue. Partly it's a lack of money issue, but partly I think it's just this strange interaction between the new media, social media, and the old. They're like the Observer, like, Toby Helm, Andrew Ronsley. If there's a Labour government in two weeks' time, I'm going to get to that in a bit. They don't have any contact with those people, generally speaking, in the way that they would have liked, and they would have had with Tony Blair with Gordon Brown. At times, I know they have some kind of a line to leading conservative politicians in a way that isn't really true for the Observer, and to a lesser extent, the Guardian. Some people do. They could have found those contacts. If you assume at some point this is all just going to collapse, everything will go back to what you think is normality, which would seem some point around about 1996. That's where normality kind of really reached its peak, as far as I think a lot of people are concerned. If you have that belief, then there's no point in making new contacts. I think that must be what they're thinking. At some point, this collapses. Everything gets back onto the sensible track and we're back in where we want to be, which is somewhere near the driving seat. That isn't going to happen. If anybody's calculation looks like that, we are no longer living in the world, certainly not in this little corner of it where that can happen. There will be no return to any kind of pre-Jeremy Corbyn's state of existence for anybody. Not because of Jeremy Corbyn, but because of the real, serious demographic economic shifts in how British society is organised, and anything you can see bearing down in the next few years does not point to a happy, settled state of existence. So why on earth would you think that we'll default back into Mr or Mrs Sensible running the Labour Party and it's all back to the 1996 will be do? It's just not going to happen. We're going to cut to the Joe Swinson story. In a second, before we do, a bit of light relief before we talk about the impending tragedy, which is climate systems break down over the next several centuries. But before we do all that, I just want to say, if you like what you're watching, go to support.nverami.com. I know you already like us on Facebook. I know you follow us on Twitter. You already look at all the posts on Instagram. You've probably subscribed to the Quartado newsletter. But, sadly, that isn't all yet free. We don't yet live in post scarcity. If you want to help us produce more of that content, go to support.nverami.com. Or take out a subscription. We generally ask for one hour's waged work a month. So, if you're paid £20 an hour, that would be £20, £10, £10, etc. Really appreciate it. And, hopefully, Gary's not going to let me say this. We've got a dream team tonight, by the way. We've got Gary and Fox by the computer. More reason to have a Fox and Gary camp so we can cut to their mid-show. We would like to do Tiskies every day, I think, in the next several months. Certainly, if Labour wins after next Thursday, everything cross the touch wood. But we can do it with your support. So go to support.nverami.com. Right. Joe Swinson. Just a few hours ago, was interviewed by Andrew Neal on the BBC. We're going to cut to a few very interesting, one rather not funny, darkly humorous because she looks ridiculous videos. The first one is on Joe Swinson's record on austerity. Let's watch that. Universal credit. Much better for people. In many ways, you're just reversing things you voted for. I mean, childcare is one of your flag-trick priorities. Yes. And you've got a lot in it in the manifesto. A billion pounds a year more. How many show-start centres were closed when you were a government minister? I don't know the numbers. The money that we are putting in maybe a lot more. More than replaces the money that was cut during that time. And we are identifying more than enough to put in. And when it comes to childcare, our biggest item within the manifesto spending plans is to help families who are struggling with the unaffordable cost of childcare by making sure that we can expand the number of hours, that we can expand when it kicks in so that they are able to wait until their child is two or three, they can get it at the point at which they think they've gone back to work. Seeing your voting record in the past to do all this, now saying you're going to reverse it all, we'll think, hey, why would we want someone who's responsible for these things in the first place? Look, we were in a coalition government. I do know that. Many of these things were a decade ago. We have got a plan for the future which identifies what a Liberal Democrat government would want to do, what our priorities are on childcare, on education, on mental health, on tackling the climate emergency. I encourage people to look at those plans to recognise that we are being upfront about where we would get the money for to pay for it, which you can't say about all the parties right now. That is the platform that we're standing for and that we're asking people to support. But when you look back now, was austerity a necessary evil or a terrible mistake? Clearly too much was cut. Clearly not enough was raised from taxation and certainly the investment should have kicked in earlier in terms of more borrowing for capital investment. Equally, you know, we implemented pretty much what Labour's proposed spending plans were from the 2010 election. And I'm not going to say that in a financial crisis that it was going to be possible with the deficit at the level that it was in 2010 not to make any cuts at all. So was it a necessary evil, unpleasant, difficult to do, but it had to be done or was it a mistake? The cuts were necessary but the shape of those cuts and certainly the balance between cuts and tax rises, I don't think was the right balance. So what did you guys make of that? Was it another Joe Swinson master class? Another media master class? It's getting painful, isn't it? There's a point at which I start to feel a bit sorry for someone and this is a roundabout now which is probably not a good look if you're aspiring political leader and that was a little bit on the painful end of things. The wider picture is austerity is basically by this point toxic death for any politician to be anywhere near it. You want to put as much distance between yourself and that whole last decade of absolutely unnecessary, pointless and destructive socially and physically destructive cuts. You want to put as much distance between yourself and all of that as possible which is partly why the only way Labour still looks like a viable option at all is because they have someone like Jeremy Corbyn doing himself an austerity and you can see what happens to Joe Swinson when you confront him with this. It's baffling to me also that she doesn't have a better answer for it at this point because if you have ever been on Twitter you see about a thousand videos of youths, the youth who give me so much hope in our future grilling her on her record on cutting, making tuition fees paid for, cutting all sorts of services for each and every time her response is there were some necessary evils and she did too many cuts but maybe some cuts are fine I guess and then she just trails off and there's really nothing better than that. It's kind of weird isn't it? They are a big organisation they haven't actually arrived at any better answers it's like when the woman was slagging her off on the BBC Question Time special and then everybody was like clapping and then she was clapping with them like you shouldn't be doing this you're really bad at this I'll go to another video where she and this is probably more important ultimately because they could be a variable in who governs and this is when she was asked about whether or not the Liberal Democrats would support a potential Jeremy Corbyn-led Labour Government I've been really clear about this Jeremy Corbyn and Boris Johnson, neither of them are fit to be Prime Minister I mean we saw you very powerfully put Jeremy Corbyn on the spot about his actions I hope you get the chance to put Boris Johnson on the spot but sadly at the moment that's not looking particularly likely but the truth is that neither of them are people who I think many in this country actually would like to see in those rules But that might be your only choice the Corbyn Government, Minority Government needing your support to deliver a second referendum that might be your only choice what would you do? I will vote for legislation to pass a people's vote of course I will and I would have done that previous Conservative Government just as I would do under any other Government but I will work with people on a cross-party basis if we can elect enough MPs who support a people's vote then we have the chance of delivering it Liberal Democrat MPs are the strongest advocates of remaining So it's not beyond the pill then that you would work with a Corbyn Government I'm not going to put Jeremy Corbyn in number 10 but if a Government of any colour puts down a bill in Parliament to have a people's vote then we will support having a people's vote to put a specific Brexit deal to the people with the option of remaining in the EU What did you guys make of that? Well it's it's look there's two things that the Lib Dems need Tory votes need a sort of vaguely or even quite solidly pro-EU softer sort of Tory votes and they have to look in favour of the EU and against Jeremy Corbyn if there is a political logic behind it one thought the Lib Dems might have is that they can turn around and insist that Jeremy Corbyn is no longer leader of the Labour Party in any kind of coalition or confidence in supply it won't be a coalition deal then that might be where they get to on this one that's the sort of logic behind what she's saying but this is determined by the need to get the particular set of voters that Lib Dems identify which then ties you up in all sorts of knots because what are you actually going to do what pans out as a hung parliament of some sort So if there's a hung parliament let's say Labour aren't the biggest party they get the SMP but they need the Lib Dems to get them over the line and they're relying on Lib Dem votes what do you think is the most likely arrangement to come out of that? Have you thought about it? Have you modelled it? You like James Midway? He's got his little toy soldiers out and he's like moving them around on this giant board I like to imagine that will never happen so I have to say I haven't spent a lot of time modelling it Am I not right? Maybe the SMP would be enough to get Labour over the line Well it's pure speculation at this point it's very very hard to draw any definite conclusions about where we're going to end up next sort of Thursday the polls are moving in the right direction there's an awful lot of very promising signs about where we're going to be so let's see where we end up on that one If other party leaders are making calculations about what they will and will not support then the Lib Dems appear to be having a position where they want to try and say to whoever wins potentially could be Tories or Labour get rid of your leader and put someone else in and then we can do a deal That's how it reads to me is they would potentially support a Tory government and you're saying lots of people on Twitter say you know, vote tactically to get the Tories out and it's like they haven't said this They will support a Tory government they may well try and put a condition which is you've got to get rid of Boris Johnson at which point like the Tories didn't in 2010 they'll laugh and get exactly what they wanted Boris Johnson will still be Prime Minister and the Lib Dems will be there supporting it there'll be some cooked up arrangement where they can make that kind of fly I absolutely quite certain that the Lib Dems will do this they are absolutely the experience of the last decade is that Lib Dems under not just this current leadership but its previous leadership and the turn they made against that kind of more social democratic Charles Kennedy version of the Liberal Democrats more sort of left-ish opposing the Iraq war kind of tuition fees the turn they made against that to be a sort of was it socially liberal, fiscally conservative the kind of clever people who aren't quite in the conservative party because they're not quite racist enough that's roughly how they're trying to position themselves they're completely untrustworthy like they much straight off to join a coalition with the Tories they didn't have to do anything like this where are other options available they didn't have to do this and when they joined it they completely stuffed up the negotiations they've always got basically everything they want the Liberals got virtually nothing they got signed up to austerity for the next few years I'm quite happy about that but it is as I said toxic death by this point so no completely not to be trusted there is no way that you can sit there and think you know the best thing to do to guarantee not having conservative government is to vote Liberal Democrat I know that people make different decisions in different constituencies I know that they'll have particularly MPs they really want to get rid of the Lib Dems will not end up with a conservative government somewhere down the line and I mean Joe Swinson is the most Tory Lib Dem leader they've ever had so there's nothing stopping her from just again voting in line with the conservative government more than Michael Gove did for example as she did during the coalition and also I think every time she gives one of these interviews it just belies how much her sort of passion for Remain pales in comparison to her hatred of Jeremy Corbyn and the agenda of just having anyone else but him in power and it's just like so transparent at this point in time I mean a smarter leadership to be blunt a smarter leadership would have been more open to the prospect of working with Jeremy Corbyn's Labour do you think Vince Cable would have because obviously he was their predecessor for example and there would have been you position yourself a bit more carefully in terms of whose votes you're trying to get you certainly wouldn't have done something daft like going oh well we'll revoke article 50 the position that's what I was going to tell has pleased precisely no one of the set of people that they want to actually appeal to because most people do have a sense of like it's not really very democratic just ignore the referendum most people who want Remain to happen realise you're probably going to have to go through another referendum to get there do you think they sort of confused Twitter for real life they're like a bunch of SBPE sort of hardcore people and they're like this is where we need to go now the whole girly swat thing with the spider I mean this is what happens on Twitter there's a thing the other day the average income of a Twitter user in the UK it's about £43,000 what's the average income of somebody in Britain it's about £29,000 this is what Twitter is like now I think that average is probably skewed there's probably a lot of somewhat less well off often students or recent graduates and that sort of thing but that tells you that you're not dealing with a particularly representative selection of British society at that point you're dealing with a very particular chunk of it who happens to be on Twitter which happens to include most of the journalists which is where the thing starts to get a bit of traction in the more sort of real world let's call it that but for you to base your political strategy around this stuff I thought it was crackers really you're from Canada you have a very successful Liberal Party with Justin Trudeau I'm so sorry are the Liberals in Canada like the Liberal Democrats here or are they more like the Tories can you sort of explain that the word deployed differently yeah it is so I'll say that the Liberal Party in Canada has it's actually quite different from at least this iteration of the Liberal Democrats in so far as I think some of their perspectives on taxation and public spending have been more farther to the left than this current Liberal Democrat Party but ultimately you know they're very similar in so far as they are devoutly centrist middle of the road to the extent that they would never compromise and sort of work with the New Democratic Party of Canada which is the sort of farther left party and also you'll have Justin Trudeau come out saying things like much like Jo Swinson and her sort of flip flopping on the fracking van and taking money from fracking lobbyists you have a Justin Trudeau on the one hand saying in a climate march and on the other hand going to an oil barons meeting in Texas and saying 180 billion barrels of oil in the ground and just leave it there haha I'm Justin Trudeau also I mean we're not even getting into the other sort of Halloween costume related issues I will say so you know some similarities some differences I think the voter base is actually more so than leadership what's different in Canada so my parents for example boring white people but they would never vote for the Liberal Democrats but they would absolutely vote for the Liberals because they offer sort of a different sort of lovely generic hopeful message yeah so it sounds they're a bit Trudeau's Liberals are a bit more like Charlie Kennedy's Lib Dems here see that's quite popular I don't know where the Lib Dems left that I mean that's what they basically built their political credibility in their brand by a long way I mean it's not that long ago that the Lib Dems it was Robert Pesson talking about the traditional centre party squeeze I mean it's traditional from the last election it never used to happen prior to that point the Lib Dems would not go into the election they'd only get squeezed and then we're back to a two party so true exactly you sound close to a three party sister or something like that they were squeezed from the left by the Lib Dems as they moved to the centre that was the story of the 2005 election exactly what would the Lib Dems get in 2001-2005 in particular 2005 it was up around what 20% maybe a bit under a bit more that kind of it's big right and now look at it so this is a terrible strategy for them to try to pursue it was quite deliberate you can drag out what's the book the orange book so-called the kind of program for a new kind of liberal democracy from the mid-2000s with David Law's I think Vince Cable contributed an article Nick Clegg certainly did and all these kind of wild ideas like privatised post office sell off the NHS that sort of thing and it's basically just you know it's social get rid of the fire service and that was their program for how we end up in government that was their program for what modern Britain now demands as it turns out the misperception of what modern Britain is actually like the gap between what these people thought and where they thought this was going to be in like 10 years time and where it actually is now it's a yawning chasm and Joe Swinson can't really feel that before we go to talk about A Green New Deal which is the base of the show it's a polar bear on the thumb we want to trail some audience questions so in the comments if you can just put any questions you want to ask with a little rocket emoji I appreciate it right now we've got around 1400 people watching but not many people have liked the video so like the video, hit the thumbs up hit the subscribe button as well Adrian so you're a co-founder co-director of Labour for a Green New Deal probably the most conspicuous political aspect of the Labour conference just a few months ago was the commitment to decarbonising by 2030 ahead of the manifesto being launched a lot of mainstream journalists were saying toad back on as somebody who was sort of key to getting that commitment down on paper what was it in September how do you feel about Labour's policies in this manifesto in relation to climate change so the coverage of the manifesto on climate has been they've really sought out some way to find a story of disappointment and division there so the union sabotage x, y and z and you're not getting what you want and the reality couldn't be farther from the truth so the target that actually came out of the agreed conference motion was to aim to achieve the vast majority of our emissions reductions by 2030 rather than a hard zero target and the manifesto strongly adheres to that so we have a commitment to achieve I think the wording is a significant majority of our emissions by 2030 but that for me is actually better than the alternative which is a sort of vague net zero commitment which can be manipulated for the better or for the worse so I'm actually excited by the fact that it contains a commitment that focuses on eliminating carbon emissions as fast as possible rather than a more arbitrary net by date target and the fact that it frames the entire manifesto the green industrial revolution is the first section of the manifesto it frames all subsequent policies that are in there and I think speaks volumes to the success of the campaign and zero carbon food by 2040 that's remarkable and going farther and using agriculture and land use as not only a zero but sort of a net carbon drawdown which is spectacular and having a plan for that James, you disappointed? No, I've got no, it's exactly as Adrian said after a long negotiations and discussions at conference I think it got to a policy and motion that was passed that had a very wide consensus there was some discussions about which one you go for and this one passed and people signed up to it and the texts in the manifesto and the commitments it lays out are completely in line with what was passed at conference so this sort of thing, you did see it in a few places the unions are pushed back, it's so disappointing I don't know, anyone's bought it It was an ask for an independent wasn't it? Yeah, in a few other places I've seen a few sort of pushing around that have taken over, sometimes one of the green candidates I think was trying to do this Molly Kato something Molly Scott Kato Molly Scott Kato Stroud, she's really doubling down on not standing aside in a Labour conservative marginal among marginals It's a Labour seat and the Greens were even saying the Labour candidate should stand it's like, it's a Labour seat Yeah, but the Remain Alliance Aaron, it's important I know that about It's important for the Lib Dems perhaps I don't think it's done the Greens any favours at all It's like really not worked out for them It was never going to It's not worked out for anybody really actually It was a bad idea but it's like flypaper and you'll buzz into it and you get stuck there sort of waving a leg for the rest of the election that's kind of what it's played out as but that was always going to happen I keep coming back to this, honestly we are in quite a polarised situation looking out the door here and realise that probably this is quite a polarised society one way or the other the election results reflect that I think the election result next week is going to reflect that it will be polarised with some variation but basically certainly in England and Wales between the two main parties that's how it's going to play out, particularly in England and everybody else gets pushed to one side by this, the underlying dynamic that drove the 2017 result is still there so setting up a Remain Alliance doesn't change that dynamic you're not going to do well out of this mystic made way, you were right about 2017 well I could be completely wrong, right but I think that's where we're going to be the line that sticks in my mind right at the beginning of the 2017 general election was when you went polls, schmoles and I'm holding to that and you were right we've got a great video from momentum featuring Navarra's Michael Walker he was doing a series of boxpops, I don't remember where it was actually a thorac with a cardboard cutter of Jeff Bezos attacking the billionaire class we're going to show you a brief excerpt of that and one woman's response and I think it's actually quite germane in regard to the climate debate, so let's watch that I think anybody in a bracket of money that he has should pay more tax, give to charities, they should help save the planet did the audience see that so what I was going to press to you is that wasn't being said five years ago so tax of wins was on the agenda or even austerity was on the agenda after 2010, although it's obviously become a bigger issue over time saving the planet wouldn't have been something that would get an voxpop on the street in thorac how widely spread is that is that something that people are encountering generally when they're talking to the public it has definitely sort of permeated the public consciousness and I think in this election in particular it's attributable to the Corbyn government not just now or the government wishful thinking Corbyn leadership because a few years ago you could see climate change in the environment as sort of a specific niche silent issue and then Corbyn entered the scene and suddenly we had an analysis we had why is climate change happening what is the reason behind this who is accountable for this change how do we make that happen and so he's successfully but also through the cabinet and through the membership connected climate change to class issues to economic issues as it needs to be and that message is really resonating and I think it's capturing imaginations and so not only are we seeing floods etc. people are realizing this in their real lives but we have a narrative now that just didn't exist before so the cancer argument would be she's saying that because of extinction rebellion because of school walkouts the climate strike etc but you think actually the role of having a leader of the opposition talking about these things should be placed alongside those is one of the reasons why people like her are saying these things yeah I mean credit where it's due I think that extinction rebellion has definitely I'll give them credit for changing the scope of conversation in the United Kingdom in particular but I think just highlighting that there is a crisis is one thing and providing a story for A why that's happening and B what we do about it is another altogether and that's what makes it stick because it's not enough to just say over and over again we have a problem, we have a problem that's important but it's one step among money yeah I mean clients agree but something like a Rupert Read for instance a green figure who's been on question time etc would say ridiculous labor have nothing to do with it this is because of direct action on the streets what's your conclusion what's the role of Labour in terms of because I think that like Adrian said I think that attaching the discourse of class to climate change actually that's primarily because of Labour that's primarily because of Jeremy Corbyn I think so because otherwise it's like a lot of issues where literally this affects the whole of humanity so therefore it's not obvious that there's any kind of class relationship in this the NHS is going to get closed down right this affects most people but there's a clear class thing there because if you're rich you can just go and pay for healthcare right you'll get that if human civilization as such is threatened then kind of that's everybody ought to want so it's not immediately obvious there's a class issue in there but in practice the way that plays out is of course distinct I mean decisive sort of class differences ultimately if you're a billionaire you can go and live in New Zealand or something and let the rest of the planet deal with the consequences the far sort of science fiction end of this but on a day to day basis who is it that gets affected most immediately by a changing climate and instability in the climate and weather patterns and the rest of it it is people who end up living for instance in cheaper housing on floodplains for example say this country or if you take the global south it's obviously people in the areas the most likely to flood they're going to be going to be poorest so you can see the class dynamics and the impact the hard task and the one that I think Labour's got a very long way towards doing and this is like the genius of the Green New Deal is taking this big thing with all these impacts and turning it into like well this is what we're going to do so instead of it just being something up here that's huge and terrifying it's actually we could do something about this both in terms of well mitigation on one side we can reduce our carbon footprint and actually increasingly I think adaptation that we can live differently because we're going to have to because the climate's changing and this is something we can do here and it means creating jobs and it means that okay we can live differently but better than we used to and I don't just mean the sort of classic greeny way where you know you're going to buy slightly more organic produce at the shop and that sort of thing and find if people are going to do this but actually we're going to live sort of fundamentally different lives because people have different jobs we will employ tens of thousands of people insulating lofts for example it's quite a simple thing but it makes a huge difference to carbon footprints of households and to their heating bills it's a bit of a win-win at that point so that's the kind of really obvious practical things you can see on the ground that it starts to turn climate change into a proper dorsep issue isn't it this is what you can do about it I actually know somebody I don't know them but I know of them they stopped hoovering to combat climate change they stopped hoovering the house I've also done that for years and I was at a demonstration somebody else she was a woman she was wearing a dress and she said this dress and it was full of kids it was one of the climate strikes she went this dress is 50 years old and I was like this isn't this isn't going to win I mean that's great it's a great dress but if Labour is in government the Green New Dealers obviously we can have that debate whether or not it's implementable but at least you know what they should be doing if Labour is in opposition after Thursday or people like yourself because obviously the politics of the Green New Deal are overwhelmingly about having an agenda in government does that mean that green activists then need to go back on the streets because we've won the policy debate within the Labour Party so what next in the worst case scenario in the worst case so I think we absolutely double down on the efforts that we made for six months prior to Labour Conference you know we having people visibly on the streets advocating not just for the Extinction Rebellion mantra but reminding people constantly that climate change isn't a technocratic issue this is a profoundly political issue and just like being visibly present will be huge and I think that sort of would be the game plan although again it's not what we're planning for now and I think also it would be I think a strategy of sort of reaching out to people who haven't yet engaged with the issues so people who may have been drawn into the Greens or the Liberal Democrats because they offer some nice flashy environmental or climate related policies but that haven't yet made that synthesis because connecting it to class issues to economic issues is absolutely necessary but you need to have everyone on board for that and so I think that would be sort of the project going forward is absolutely doubling down on that messaging I agree with that but when lose or draw I think people need to be on the streets and I think we need to get that sense of this is going to happen whatever the outcome of the election and whoever is in government and whatever they want to do I think that applies whatever the composition that government is and whatever they say they're going to do I think it's essential and I will say that we've already shifted the Overton window on climate change and what you need to be as a political party on climate environmental issues hugely just in the span of a few months or maybe a year we could keep doing that so we have an election where there's a race for how many trees you can plant and a race for your commitment to renewable energy and you have people fighting over how many gigafactories they're going to build I don't even know really what those are but there's a race to do it and so we've accomplished so much across the political spectrum just by agitating within labour and I think absolutely using sort of the same mechanisms and sort of people powered methods we could keep doing that that's a great question could labour for you could labour actually implement this because it's a huge programme I mean is there the policy cloud are there the think tanks are there the papers are there the technocrats etc because it could have to start off the next Thursday how doable is it I think it is incredibly doable and it's because all these things sort of sound radical when they're splashed across headlines from what we've seen for the past decade which has been just immiseration of the working class as well as England more broadly but ultimately they are things that are profoundly reasonable so we're talking about corporation tax rises at 26% that kind of puts it in perspective all of these things that we're advocating for are big departures from the normal now but have historical precedent and we've done this kind of mobilisation before we've had people get on board with a programme for change like this in the past of what's coming which is climate breakdown and suffering for hundreds of millions of people around the world I think that people will be on side and a lot of the elements that they've advocated for in the green industrial revolution for example they are long term projects admittedly these are five ten year time horizons but rather than just focusing on the impacts on climate in particular this whole thing is a programme of changing how our economy works and that starts on day one with things that are as small as the financial transactions tax and it goes all the way up to building 37 offshore wind farms they're all connected and I don't think can be seen as discreet policy elements James you're a former civil servant, how doable is it? it is doable it's challenging but it's doable there's a sort of Paul Johnson Institute fiscal studies line which is we cannot possibly spend this money which is just not going to be possible and it's sort of this lack of imagination apart from everything else and then see suddenly there's a lot of places where spending a large amount of money on capital investment let's take that part of the programme £400 billion over 10 years where that needs to happen you want to build Crossrail for the north then that's going to cost you what £32-35 billion you want to build the offshore wind farms all over the place that's another tens of billions you want to build tidal schemes that's tens of billions this adds up and you can do it and we should be thinking about doing it that this requires in the first instance spending the money and making it half do we have the industrial base? I mean that's the thing I'm curious about is do we have the domestic manufacturers supply chains etc parts of it we do and parts of it is where you then integrate this into a wider industrial strategy which is there in the manifesto as well that's where you need the series of interventions that start to make industries work in the way that you want to you start setting directives and getting industries to function as part of a system that will deliver large numbers of offshore wind turbines that can do this you need to expand that you need to expand it rapidly so there's a step by step process to get there and if you want to do it in a sustainable way that produces jobs and produces all the good outcomes as well that's how you get there is this a challenge for the civil service? yes because for like 30-40 years they've not really had to think about this we have bits and pieces of industrial strategy since 2008 it's not been on the scale maybe quantitative easing right quantitative easing was several hundred billion pounds that was basically given to banks it's a financial thing but the numbers involved were quite similar sure the numbers involved are similar but what happened to quantitative easing is overwhelmingly in this country it was used to simply buy government bonds so it's a purely financial sort of financial transaction it doesn't make much difference to the real world at that point and if you look at what banks did with the money it really didn't make that much difference to how many jobs people have and this sort of thing so you are asking government to do something I think there's an important part of Labour's programme which is getting hold of the operating system for the Treasury the Green Book and saying actually this needs to be written so it can be used to help deliver these wider goals rather than the very very limited sort of marginal adjustment process they got there but that can happen and there's no reason to think why a civil servant shouldn't be able to do that excellent right questions and keep on adding them by the way in the comments section the first is from Nyle Glyn, Nyle asks who is next in line for Lib Dem leader honestly it's not one I've really given that much thought to they just sort of pop up don't they Swinson could lose her seat I think it seems quite likely to actually I think it's really quite a high probability of this at the minute well let's say it's 50-50 but if it's that bad they would have had such a bad night that she can't really stay under the leader it's kind of different in Scotland right everybody gets a bad night except the SNP is roughly what the polling says at the minute and she lost it before didn't she it was 2015 so it's kind of backwards and forwards it's kind of marginal it's a bit you know you've elected a party leader with really quite a shaky seat there so she could well lose at which point there's a few of them knocking around she's pro trident which is weird because Scotland obviously is a big yeah but you need the Tory votes anti-nuke she's a credible leader because she'll press that big red nuclear button yeah that's true that's feminism Easton Barton she would nuke some people she would nuke America she said the United States would you nuke you don't see this when she was asked why do we need nuclear weapons she said the world's increasingly unstable Donald Trump's right in the White House we're not going to nuke the United States so you don't know absolutely no I really like it's quite high up in my list of questions we can't be too criminal because he won't win his seat he probably won't win either yeah well then who's left? there's a few of them what's his name? Ed Davy? is he at Lib Dem? maybe it'd be him I mean really I feel a bit like I would care Luciana Burgess they're putting up for lots of appearances you know in my fantasy world the Lib Dems swiftly go the way of the independent group or whatever their acronym was I mean they could could we see Lib Dem, White Pound I think they'll do better than they did in 2017 is my guess and there'll be some tactical voting as well Dominic Raab's seat leaps out as one where there's a great deal of tactical voting for Lib Dems but they got 7.5% in 2015 and got 8 seats and then they got 7% in 20 people can correct me if they like they got I think slightly less 7% in 2017 we've got 12 seats so they could have a higher percentage of the vote but actually end up with fewer seats it really this is going to be the sort of wild card throughout all of this is like what's actually going to happen in constituencies I think they're going to get around 10% which is a disaster for them it's less of a disaster so progress is being made comment who you think should be the next Lib Dem it's all they talk about in your comments section I'm sure this is from Josh Pym did you see the hilarious, embarrassing BBC article in The Guardian it's very peace claiming how important impartiality is to them aka the BBC, did you read that Andrea? yeah what do you think of it? I mean it's just, yeah, embarrassing is the right word I would say it's just like desperately clinging to the idea that this is something not only that they have always cherished but that people still believe exist when I think more, I mean the question of BBC impartiality has always been up for debate I think but more so than ever in the past month there have been very strong chips in the enamel James I just saw everybody else complaining about it and I thought perhaps I wasn't going to bother actually reading it myself and the complaints were from people I trusted on these things Tom Mills and people like that who were saying that this is another slightly pathetic effort by the BBC you're not actually wound me up I've seen people slagging off the BBC in the last week and they've said look, I'm not one of those cranks who normally slags off the BBC but and I said well look, I've been slagging off the BBC for a long time so anyway can we get up the tweets from Paul Mason and Irvin Welsh in regards to this they were brilliant I wouldn't normally say this here we go, Paul Mason, can you read that James? I can't my eyes are so bad so if you've now gone that's it, zoom in I need to wear my glasses if you've never worked the BBC this is a classic management brush off the solutions to the BBC's gross failure over the Johnson Neil interview is clear Neil should spend half an hour putting questions to an empty chair or Fran Hansworth should resign good old Paul why should Fran Hansworth resign and not Rob Burley I don't get it she wrote the article I suppose that seems a bit harsh isn't it literally shooting the messenger at that point Paul was an absolute legend if we can get the Irvin Welsh tweet up as well that was great we can come to that you know what basically he just said you're full of shit that's basically the tweet here we go, yeah zoom in I'm sorry he didn't say full of shit he said fuck off my apologies to Nick Robinson we and you have moved way past all that bullshit so I'm actually gobsmacked that you can even be asked to maintain this tepid pretense which is obviously done under grudging churras I mean Scots in particular have a real thing with BBC in partiality or the absence of it the kind of leading edge of it right was the coverage of the indie ref that was where a whole bunch of people in Scotland suddenly decided this wasn't really working out quite as they wanted or expected there's something similar going on now I think you can raise something it's been questionable indeed the decision on Andrew Neil not interviewing the Prime Minister and it was effectively a decision or lack of a decision this is pretty outrageous the editor for that producer for that program says that they at no point told the labour team that they had Johnson in the can whereas a labour source has told me that they were contacted and told precisely that somebody's lying I mean whether or not that's true if they were to be truly impartial they wouldn't have aired Corbyn's interview until they had done it or secured it it doesn't matter necessarily what they told the labour party although if they lied obviously that's hugely problematic and the reality is that you have an editorial responsibility not to broadcast that if you know that the conservative interview won't be aired but also it's literally next to Westminster I mean this is the easiest gig in politics to go to actually record and sit down yeah next question this is from Rainbow Truncheon I don't know that's their real name thank you for offering the question at Rainbow regardless what do you think will happen to the labour leadership if labour lose the election very important question well we're not going to lose obviously yeah but I mean if you're talking about what happens some leadership contest somewhere down the line then you know let's say after your first term of a gloriously successful Jeremy Corbyn Jeremy Corbyn prime ministership I think one of the things that's quite striking is as I said before there's not some going back to a pre-2015 point in all this the Labour party is a very different beast now the left is a different beast now the arguments that we've won and not just won the arguments but built institutions to carry on winning those arguments these are all in place, Navara is I mean it predates this but it's now part of the fixtures and the firmens and the setting that we have where there are a whole bunch of different institutions different media outlets, different think tanks large movement organisations think momentum, this sort of thing all of that is still there, that doesn't go away so the entire terrain that you're arguing about and you're choosing having to fight on in any future leadership contest has now shifted a long way from where it was pre-2015 yeah and then maybe I'm biased but I think the party machinery with respect to having the membership determined policy has been completely reawakened and revitalised Labour for a Green New Deal campaign you know being just one of many members this year that were headline drawing, that were successful and that have taken shape in the manifesto and that have you know it gives to me a sign that you know regardless of who is leader in the coming years, you've built a membership base that is active that is engaged and that will continue to define this agenda I have a feeling if if somehow the if the Labour leadership wasn't on the left there wasn't Corbynite which isn't going to happen I think that these things we're talking about this kind of ecology of actors would be a lot more powerful because it's a lot easier to be against stuff as we've seen with the Remain movement in the last two years to be against Brexit, they can mobilise far more people have far more anger than the people who wanted Brexit quote unquote to get done so if anything I mean I think it would be very interesting if you had a right wing Labour Party leader which isn't going to happen for a bunch of reasons because we're going to win the general election next Thursday to start and I think that would be a really I think they would be under far greater pressure from the left than pretty much anybody in the media realises Comparisons get made to the 1980s the real difference here is that if you take the 1980s basically the train is moving against the left and towards the right that isn't the case now, the train if anything is moving further to the left and that isn't because we've all gone crazy and a bit more left wing, this does genuinely reflect increasing divisions and massive social problems and polarisation in British society more generally. They appear in all sorts of different ways but one of the ways it appears is there is now a sort of viable functioning left in Britain the way that hasn't been for a very long period of time and that doesn't go away so whoever wins has to contend with that most likely it will be someone who is of that terrain who's grown out of it in some senses or has a relationship to it because that's the person that can appeal to the membership of the ecosystem. I think we're going to leave it there. I'll ask one more question, this is a good question it's not actually a question. British AOC would definitely motivate the youth which is probably true of all the MPs that could potentially be joining Parliament after Thursday, James is making a funny face now I'll ask you first Hadrian who do you think of the people that would help shape and push the debate in a particular way in a manner reminiscent of AOC, Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez in the United States? I mean we've already, we've obviously got Pidcock but in terms of new new MPs the obvious answer is Faisal Shaheen you know she is tremendously popular, you have hundreds of people going out to campus every night she's got all of the ideas and she has an incredible charisma and personality that people are just drawn to and also I mean she unseats Ian Duncan-Smith and bow down forever which she will so yeah that would be my best bet. David and assisted right now by the last British Prime Minister to win a winter general election which is of course Hugh Grant I was wondering where you were going with that also how weird if you get knocked on the door and you open it it's Hugh Grant canvassing for Labour I mean this is quite a strange moment for the good people of Chingford to be confronted by this it's a it's a sort of surreal element it's introduced to the entire election campaign but I mean genuinely I think Faisal it's a very very good shout out of winning by all accounts it seems very clear that she is and that would be quite a moment next week if it happens I don't think there's nobody else bigger than IDS who could fall I mean Dominic Raab's being talked about but ultimately Duncan-Smith was a was an architect of welfare policies etc there's a sort of there's a possibility that Boris Johnson loses his seat I think that's a much much harder I think there's a lot of enthusiasm to make it happen there's a lot of people going out there but it's a much tougher tougher thing to pull off whereas Ian Duncan-Smith is definitely and you can see this in a lot of London seats it's demography again it's just Chingford you know not that long ago was not somewhere the Labour was even remotely close to being in contention for but property prices in London the fact that so many people having to move out and go elsewhere this sort of thing shifting circumstances that people are actually in Chingford 10 years or thereabouts austerity of whose primary architect was Ian Duncan-Smith it's really shifted the terrain against not just him but some of the other sort of out of London seats as well I think there's a line here that says Johnson loses his seat re-smoke for PM hopefully not thank you both maybe we'll have you back before Thursday probably not you'll probably be canvassing like most people like we would implore you to I'm going to try and at least pretend that there's some sort of barrier here between media and journalism and not do a shout out to go to some sort of campaigning tool you can do that I would suggest you do that I'm going to be doing an election session on the Thursday evening I believe we're going live from 9pm is that right and obviously you're going to keep up with the latest coverage until then so subscribe to the YouTube channel you both have been great thank you so much I'll be back tomorrow again with Tisgy Sour so I'll see you then 8pm or probably just later if I'm honest no night