0:00

Page 94, The Private Eye podcast.

0:03

Hello and welcome to another episode of Page 94. My

0:05

name is Andrew Hunter-Murray and I'm joined by

0:08

Ian Hislop, Richard Brooks and Helen Lewis.

0:10

We're in the Eye's office and we're

0:12

here to discuss the news developments

0:15

that have occurred since the magazine last went to print and

0:17

everything that might happen before it next

0:19

goes to print. So as we're in

0:21

the middle of conference season, it's worth covering

0:23

the Conservative Party conference which did make it into

0:26

the last issue and which I

0:28

think there hadn't been the final confirmation

0:30

when we went to press that HS2 was being scrapped

0:33

because that was saved for the big

0:35

speech, you know, the great announcement of what

0:38

we're not doing. Rishi Sinha could film his video

0:40

saying that they were going to scrap it but hadn't yet seen fit to

0:42

share that with the rest of the class.

0:44

You're absolutely right. And had he been Boris he would

0:46

have filmed two videos for

0:49

either result but he didn't. I just

0:51

felt, you know, thanks to Richard Brooks who is

0:53

here, I'm in a position where I

0:55

have to say, well, you know, Rishi, scrapping

0:58

it, you know, quite a good idea because Richard said

1:00

for a long time we should

1:02

probably scrap nearly all of it due

1:05

to the fantastic overrun. So I blame

1:07

you. That's very kind of him. Actually,

1:11

I think he was waiting to see what we

1:13

had to say before deciding

1:14

what was going to be in the

1:16

speech because we came out,

1:18

I think, the day or the day

1:20

before the speech where he announced

1:22

pretty much what was written in the eye, which

1:25

was cancel what's left of HS2 or,

1:28

you know, what you haven't already committed

1:30

too much to and do the Euston

1:33

bit. He sort of

1:35

said he was doing both of those, although he subsequently

1:37

said on the Euston bit someone else is going to have to

1:39

do it. And they're going

1:41

to do it a bit like Canary Wharf,

1:44

which I think only went bust twice.

1:47

Oh, right. So that's impressive. It's a

1:49

plan. It's a plan. So

1:52

do you think it will actually happen now? The

1:55

Euston bit? Yes. Or

1:57

even the Birmingham bit? Any of it? We don't

1:59

know.

1:59

anything will happen. Obviously

2:02

the Birmingham to Manchester bit's gone. The question,

2:05

the big question is whether the other promised bits

2:07

will happen. It's the network

2:09

north. Yeah the network north which

2:12

is a bit like the northern rail

2:14

power, northern powerhouse rail,

2:16

that's it. Itself

2:19

was already been cut in half back

2:22

in 2021 so some of that's been reinstated.

2:26

There are all kinds of promises, some of

2:28

which I think have already been rode

2:30

back on once, reintroduced once, rode

2:32

back on again. It's sort

2:35

of shunting around a bit this rail

2:37

plan. But some bits already finished

2:40

of what was announced, some bits were opened several years

2:42

ago. The Manchester Metro link I think

2:44

is done. So it's not put it in the

2:46

plan. Yeah I was wondering

2:49

if he was going to announce that the channel tunnel was going

2:51

to be done because at least that's finished.

2:53

But okay so pessimism there from Richard

2:56

but not a bad decision

2:58

then. No overall I think the key

3:00

point was that just

3:03

because you've got spades in the ground you don't have

3:05

to keep digging. The 40 billion

3:07

quid or so that's gone into phase one while that's

3:09

gone, that you know will provide this

3:11

shuttle service. But it didn't mean

3:14

that you then had to do the next bit. The

3:16

reality is that the funds

3:18

will be constrained. What I liked about your take

3:20

Richard was

3:21

the fact that everyone else it seemed in the entirety of the

3:23

media was kind of rending their garments about this. And

3:25

mostly it seemed formatory leaders who'd stayed a lot

3:27

of political credibility on it existing coming out

3:29

to go I really think it's a very good idea you know.

3:31

It was my good idea in some way. So

3:34

I don't think I felt like I'd really heard much

3:36

of the counterpoint. And the bit that kind of got me

3:38

was the fact that the bit through the Oxfordshire countryside

3:40

was

3:40

going to be so expensive because it all had to be tunnels

3:42

because it didn't get anyone's view basically.

3:44

It's a kind of great nimby pageant.

3:46

What an a nodding. I know so not only

3:49

is that part of the reason why it's so expensive

3:51

there also won't be nice views on

3:53

the short bit that is going to be. Just the whole

3:55

thing. I have to say I was surprised

3:58

when I read Richard's piece partly because

3:59

I like kinds and you know anything

4:03

that has to the number of trains in the country I think is basically

4:05

a good thing and then I thought I'd look at the

4:07

cost overrun of HS1 so down

4:09

to Kent Channel Tunnel and

4:12

that was 6.2 billion pounds so

4:15

and it was a bit over budget it was 18% over.

4:19

That's not over budget. Of

4:22

course well yeah

4:24

I mean that's and what HS2

4:26

is now coming in at least double

4:29

already. I think it started

4:31

off at 35, 37 something like that and

4:33

it's now well

4:36

over 80. Yeah and so it's

4:38

not even it's infinity now isn't it? Oh yeah

4:40

yeah. Undeliverable and

4:43

my maths is that at no

4:45

possible amount of money can it even be done.

4:47

I mean that was the report wasn't it? Yeah

4:50

yeah it just would keep going up.

4:52

And the time for some people whose farm

4:55

had been purchased through a compulsory purchase order and

4:57

then actually gone through after Rishi said I

4:59

could film the video but not before he denounced it so

5:01

he kept spunking money

5:02

on it right up until the moment that

5:04

he stood up. Backing please. Sorry. Right up until the

5:06

moment he

5:08

stood up on the

5:09

podium. I think that's the other thing is and

5:11

I'm not going back to the jeweling of the A1 north

5:13

of Morpus which as you know I'm obsessed with but there

5:15

are similar situations where people know that their land

5:18

could be taken in a compulsory purchase order but

5:20

you don't get to find out when it is. Like so some of these

5:22

people have been living on this knife edge now on FHST

5:25

for years and that's what these projects mean

5:27

actually on the ground.

5:27

And some of them have sold massive

5:30

discounts to what they're worth because

5:32

they don't want to wait around. Yeah. And

5:34

now they're finding out they don't have to. I could still have had that else.

5:39

I mean some of the numbers are so big they're quite hard to get a handle

5:41

on. But so nice little instructive

5:43

difference here. Again HS1

5:46

cost per mile 51 million

5:48

quid per mile of that complete railway.

5:51

Which feels like a lot. And Helen you're looking. Well they're making

5:53

the rails out of gold. It's just

5:56

really expensive stuff. And not the fair is

5:58

it? Well. guarantee

6:00

Helen will seem like an absolute bargain whether you would anyone

6:02

like to guess the approximate cost of HS2

6:04

per mile?

6:07

Oh, three or four hundred. Yeah, 300

6:09

million pounds per

6:11

mile. That's the that's the kicker.

6:13

It is quite hilly up north isn't it?

6:15

Yeah.

6:16

Fades made of gold, diggers made of

6:18

gold, everything involved in this project must be made of gold.

6:20

It's impressive, yeah. No, I just

6:22

kept reading the reports thinking it

6:24

said spads on the graph. Yes,

6:27

I'm sure a lot of them have wasted a huge amount of

6:29

time. There's a lot of use. Yeah, I'm

6:31

in the kite. But this is

6:34

presumably Richard's pessimism extends

6:36

into another massive infrastructure

6:39

project which he's going to tell us is a waste of time.

6:44

Which one do you want? Richard made

6:46

a face that was like narrow it down. We're

6:49

heading northeast aren't we? We're heading a bit where

6:51

the HS2 wasn't going to go anyway. Well

6:54

this is a project that the Teesside

6:56

regeneration project at the center

6:59

of the flagship Freeport which

7:02

Rishi Sunak presents as the great future

7:04

for Britain outside Brexit. This

7:07

should go ahead just not the way

7:09

it is. Ah, right, okay. This

7:12

area really is ripe for regeneration. It's

7:15

got a long, at some stages, glorious

7:17

industrial history. It's got a steel industry,

7:20

chemical industry. It's in a great location.

7:22

It's got the Teess bit

7:50

takes the money out. You know they

7:53

often like to sort of present it as being

7:55

a bit like the PFI was the private

7:57

financial initiative that New Labor loved

7:59

so much. Why would you want the contract? Well,

8:01

compared to this, the PFI

8:04

is a sort of model of fiscal rectitude. Because

8:07

that at least involved the private sector

8:09

putting money in before it took money out.

8:12

I mean, it took too much out. And that was the scandal

8:15

there. But here, the private

8:17

operators aren't putting anything in. They're

8:19

just taking out. They have a lot

8:22

of contracts for things

8:24

like collecting scrap from the site,

8:26

scrapping a bit of a misnomer. It's very

8:29

valuable metal left over from the

8:31

steel industry that closed in 2015. They've

8:35

pocketed about 50 million quid from that

8:37

already. They have other

8:39

sort of commission agreements that we didn't

8:41

know about until

8:43

I went and looked at the books and asked some questions,

8:45

but which they won't explain, and

8:47

for which they don't seem to be doing anything at all. But

8:51

the main way they make their money is through

8:54

options to buy the land. There's

8:56

a sort of couple of thousand acres

8:58

worth of land there that needs

9:01

regenerating, which the

9:04

public sector, through the development corporation,

9:06

pays to regenerate, and

9:09

then allows the private

9:12

businessmen through a company

9:14

that they 90% own, called

9:17

Teesworx Limited, to buy the land

9:19

at one pound per acre. Plus

9:21

inflation from when they agreed that. Does

9:24

that seem very cheap to you? I'm just

9:26

guessing. I was just trying to look at how much of HFT you

9:28

could get for one pound. Well,

9:31

they also have to pay the costs of

9:34

remediating that bit of land to that point,

9:37

which work out that something like a typical 100

9:39

acre site

9:41

might have cost about 20 million

9:44

quid to get to the point where a business

9:46

can come in on it. But when it does

9:48

and

9:49

it has planning permission, it's

9:51

worth a lot more than that. Yeah. So

9:54

it's probably worth 100 million. But they

9:56

just have to pay the 20 million. Richard, you've been on

9:58

this show because of the terrier unbend.

9:59

Hooch and Stravaleg for this whole year. And

10:02

I have to ask you, what is it about it that sort of fascinates

10:04

you so much? On the surface

10:07

it's a story about kind of low-level

10:09

skull duggery, but there's

10:11

something about it obviously

10:12

that really has gripped hold of you.

10:15

Incidentally, Ben Houchin has got his own terrier

10:17

that he bought a few months ago,

10:20

a puppy and called it Boris. That's

10:22

weird. That's weird. Okay,

10:24

how on? That

10:27

is a big part of the story obviously.

10:29

And Boris then made him Lord Houchin. Not

10:32

the dog. I

10:35

think the dog just got a knighthood or something. Right,

10:38

it's on his leg. But

10:40

why I think it's important is

10:43

that almost all parts of the political

10:45

spectrum favour

10:48

regional devolution, devolution of economic

10:50

power, regeneration and

10:52

so on. And in principle that is a very

10:54

good thing. But this

10:57

illustrates a number of

10:59

problems, particularly in terms of accountability.

11:02

Because if you're going to hand that much

11:04

money over, and it's several hundreds of millions

11:07

of pounds now, over to a regional

11:09

authority which is

11:12

created with fewer checks

11:14

and balances than local

11:16

government traditionally has, then

11:19

there are real risks. No one's really

11:22

examining this in the way that other

11:25

centrally funded projects might be. For

11:28

example, the National Order Office doesn't have a remit

11:30

covering this. Nobody really does.

11:34

We're the only ones really. Right,

11:35

and the local press has been hollowed out as

11:37

well. Yeah. Local papers don't have the resources

11:40

to put into covering these stories. That's a massive

11:42

part of it. government

11:45

loves outsourcing, which is that when it goes horribly wrong,

11:48

it's someone else and you can go, oh, Capita,

11:50

I've done very bad job here. I of

11:52

course had nothing to do with this. And I suppose the same

11:54

thing is true. It's pronounced Crapita. Hello. Sorry.

11:58

I don't know how, you're fairly new to me.

12:01

But I guess the same thing is that, oh, if, you know,

12:03

if actually the worst comes to the worst and the

12:05

drum beat against Ben Howtian

12:07

becomes so terrible, then oh, dear,

12:09

he has to step down. But everybody in Whitehall gets to

12:11

say how terrible we could never have known. But

12:14

they really ought to have known if they've read every issue of Private

12:16

Eye for about a year, during which,

12:18

of course, they've continued

12:21

to boost him at

12:23

the Tory conference. Again, he got the name

12:25

check in the Sunak speech. In the Sunak speech,

12:27

yeah. This is the future. Ben

12:30

Howtian is the future. Is that

12:32

because it's a free port and Sunak is hell

12:34

bent on free ports becoming a thing? Because

12:37

it's a free port, because it's red wall, because

12:39

they're very short of other ideas. And

12:42

because on other stuff, people can point

12:44

at it and go, ha ha, it's not as good as you say it

12:47

is. Whereas here, nobody can quite understand

12:49

it as hard as we try to explain it. No

12:52

one's really sort of grit

12:55

the fact that the team helps. Yeah,

12:59

complexity is part of it. I mean, all

13:01

financial scams work on complexity.

13:04

So you have to keep pointing out

13:06

what the how they work in principle. And

13:09

in this case, it is that

13:12

these businessmen are getting rights to acquire

13:14

stuff for nothing while

13:16

putting nothing in. And more

13:18

importantly, the the Development Corporation,

13:21

Ben Howtian, are really misrepresenting

13:24

the picture seriously misrepresented. Well, they I mean,

13:26

how it's been interviewed lots, hasn't he? Yeah, sworn

13:29

blind that that these businessmen

13:31

are putting lots of money into the project that that

13:33

it's that it's a loan that you know, that yeah,

13:36

on that they'll pay back. Yeah, exactly.

13:38

The biggest part of the project

13:41

is a new key being built on

13:43

the South Bank of the River Tees

13:46

for about 113 million pounds, which

13:48

has been paid for by the Development

13:50

Corporation using money borrowed from

13:52

the

13:53

UK Infrastructure Bank. So the taxpayers paid

13:55

for it. Ben Howtian said repeatedly,

13:58

notably in a big news night in

13:59

if you did that, the businessman

14:02

he brought in had to repay that loan.

14:04

I went up to

14:06

the east side two or three weeks ago and

14:09

asked for the, under legislation

14:11

that allows journalists to inspect accounts, when

14:14

the Cameron government scrapped the local audit

14:17

commission, that you brought in some rules as

14:19

a bit of a sop saying that for a limited period,

14:21

journalists and local electors can look at the

14:23

books. So I went up there to look at the books, asked

14:25

them, well, can I see the details

14:27

behind, the documents behind what

14:30

you say is this agreement for the businessman

14:32

to repay the loan, there's nothing. They're

14:34

also given a concession to operate the key

14:37

when it's built. The documents show that they

14:39

have to pay a fee for operating it, but

14:41

that fees related to how much business there is,

14:44

and they'll get income from that business. So it's

14:46

only when there's good profit that they pay anything.

14:50

And if that doesn't equal what

14:52

the

14:53

public authority needs to repay the loan,

14:55

well,

14:56

the public authority's stuck with the cost.

14:58

So there's literally no risk for the businessman

15:01

at all. That's correct, yeah. And

15:03

it gets serious because they account

15:05

for this. It gets serious. Yeah,

15:09

that's a really fluffy bit.

15:12

The accounts misrepresent

15:15

this. In the accounts, they say the businessmen

15:17

have a contractual obligation

15:19

to repay the loan. And

15:22

they

15:23

don't.

15:24

They say they got independent accountancy

15:26

advice, which should be disclosed under

15:29

this local audit legislation,

15:31

and they promised it to me and then

15:34

refused to supply it. Well, it

15:36

does not look good. One of the founding

15:39

principles of Freeport is you are free

15:41

from journalists. Yeah, I

15:43

think it's important for you to remember that.

15:47

There's a serious point there. You

15:49

know, they are, the history of them. It's

15:51

free from regulation. It's free from

15:55

prying eyes, yeah. So this

15:57

is where this is a key point that needs, you

15:59

know. something should be done but

16:02

you know that's my somebody should be picking

16:04

up on that you can't just file

16:06

false accounts yeah I put it to

16:08

you that you can yeah but

16:10

my question

16:10

is could this happen somewhere else is it

16:12

happening other places or is there something unique about tea

16:15

side and the coalition of things that happened

16:17

that meant it's happened there

16:19

it's happening there because so much money has gone

16:21

in the same public money hasn't

16:23

gone in to the other three

16:26

port areas you know the more you

16:28

look into to this area and

16:30

the history of it it's quite a small

16:34

business world in which everybody knows everybody

16:36

that some of the cronyism

16:39

the nepotism is

16:41

extreme I mean how should you these businessmen

16:44

before all this this wasn't they

16:46

didn't approach him with the idea that's all a bit

16:48

shrouded in mystery whether he personally knew

16:50

them but they were very influential figures

16:53

there okay and at the same time as they

16:55

stepped in to this project

16:58

they also got a very

17:00

similar deal on a new business

17:02

park at the airport which could be worth just as

17:04

much money to them so the whole everything

17:07

about redevelopment on tea side was

17:10

handed over to these people who are

17:13

extremely well connected and often

17:16

not with the you know the most savory

17:18

characters one of the two main partners

17:20

there chap called Chris Musgrave has

17:23

worked a lot with chap

17:25

who's familiar to the I Ray Mallon Robo

17:28

cop up in Middlesbrough who's a bit of a

17:30

local fixer so this is sort of network

17:33

that holds sway exactly the sort of

17:35

place where you really need scrutiny it goes back to

17:37

what you're saying Helen you know people

17:39

aren't looking at it local media aren't looking at it in

17:42

the detail there are a few exceptions aren't there I mean hasn't

17:45

the Yorkshire Post done a job the Yorkshire

17:47

Post has picked up on it and is

17:50

asking some tough questions yeah but

17:52

the the two the local Gazette

17:54

and the Northern Echo are just mouthpieces

17:57

yeah I mean it's not the Northern Echo it's a houching

18:00

whatever he says, front page.

18:03

But there is work happening there at

18:05

the moment. I mean, they are doing this scrapping and remediating

18:07

right now. The key is under construction, right? Yep,

18:10

and it's nearly finished. Well, has

18:12

anyone proposed handing HS2 over to these guys?

18:14

They're making things happen. They're

18:18

actually very cheap. They can handle large sums

18:20

of money, public money. And

18:23

you're talking hundreds of millions. We're not interested.

18:25

We're on billions now. The story's

18:27

over, Richard. Could you do that? Yeah, make a houch

18:29

and transport secretary. Yeah, could

18:31

be done. We've been in lots now. They

18:33

literally get to know his empowerment. You certainly

18:36

heard it here first. Just quickly,

18:38

while we're on large projects that

18:40

soak up a great deal of money and don't

18:43

benefit normal people, Richard, you wrote

18:45

something for the latest issue about the post

18:47

office. Yeah,

18:50

things don't get much larger or more corrupt

18:53

than this, really, in the way that the post

18:55

office has dealt with this scandal

18:58

over more than 20 years

19:00

now. And for any listeners who didn't

19:02

hear, you and Nick Wallace, wasn't

19:04

it, on the last special episode

19:06

we did? This is past masters having their lives ruined

19:08

due to faulty IT. Yeah, yeah. And

19:11

some of them going to prison, some of them taking their own lives,

19:13

all due to dodgy IT, which accused

19:16

them of theft, basically, from the build of the

19:18

public. Yeah, several thousands and hundreds with

19:21

convictions on faulty evidence

19:24

on the basis that the computer system was flawless

19:27

when it wasn't. That's at the heart

19:29

of it, but there's any

19:29

number of scandals

19:32

coming off it as well. And the latest

19:34

really emerging is how the post

19:37

office approached this issue

19:39

internally, going back 20 years,

19:42

when they were made aware that

19:45

this computer system wasn't actually

19:47

perfect. There was an audit report

19:49

that said that we can

19:51

see examples of one

19:54

out not being matched by a corresponding in, that

19:56

kind of thing. So there were clearly bugs in

19:58

it. But. senior

20:01

post office lawyers who were prosecuting

20:04

individuals or involved

20:06

in civil action against them said look let's

20:09

keep that quiet because it threatens

20:11

our whole approach and it you know we've

20:13

got to pretend that this horizon system

20:16

this horizon IT system is

20:18

flawless when it absolutely

20:20

wasn't genuinely shocking even

20:23

now we've got an inquiry and

20:25

usually you know we have inquiries into

20:27

things when the heat's gone out of it no one cares

20:29

anymore this inquiry is still

20:31

going on it still turns up

20:33

stuff that makes you gasp yes

20:36

it does in the last couple

20:38

of weeks after the summer break the the

20:41

inquiry started hearing from people

20:43

within the post office senior lawyers and

20:45

both internal and and their external

20:48

lawyers and they were saying things

20:50

like you know when confronted with evidence

20:53

that the computer system didn't really work one of the

20:55

senior post office lawyers says there's a bigger picture

20:57

you know this is bigger than nailing someone

21:00

falsely there is a bigger picture either

21:02

the post office wishes to be seen to be taking

21:05

this claim very seriously to defend

21:07

the horizon system and to discourage

21:09

other sub postmasters from

21:11

pursuing similar claims this is when

21:14

someone had said well it's not me it's the computer

21:16

system yeah the bigger the

21:18

law is to defend the lie yeah

21:22

and the same lawyer said the safest way to manage

21:24

this which is was a similar case from someone

21:26

else it's to throw money at it and get

21:28

a confidentiality agreement signed

21:30

let's throw public money at it and

21:33

cover it up that was the approach what's

21:36

the story that they told themselves because this is I'm always

21:38

interested in when you look at people who are

21:40

villains in a story right most people have a cycle

21:42

they don't think ha ha ha ha look out I'm gonna

21:45

ruin the lives of some sub postmasters and mistresses

21:47

yeah they have a story that they're telling themselves

21:50

it's usually flattering to themselves what

21:52

do you think they they thought they were doing they

21:55

thought that these people were really and I think

21:57

I really wonder whether some of them still do I

22:00

think that these people, yeah, the computer system

22:02

might not have worked, but they were still guilty. They

22:04

were still at it. There

22:06

was a really vindictive culture

22:09

in the post office. It almost

22:11

goes back centuries. You know,

22:13

this was a very powerful institution.

22:16

When you go back to the, you know, the king's mail

22:19

being transported across the country, they had incredible

22:21

powers. You could execute

22:23

people for stealing a letter or something. Well,

22:25

so they got their own prosecutions, don't they? And

22:27

they conduct their own prosecutions. That was it. It became

22:30

even when most of the

22:32

rest of the government

22:35

or public bodies had to

22:37

have their prosecutions conducted by the Crown

22:39

Prosecution Service to give a bit of independence.

22:42

The post office retained the ability to prosecute.

22:45

And that's starting to come out that

22:48

there simply weren't the checks and balances. There

22:50

are lots of these cases when we looked at them some

22:53

time ago. It was clear that had an independent

22:55

prosecutor looked at it. They'd have said,

22:58

no, that evidence doesn't really stack up. So

23:01

it was an arrogance in the institution. Yeah,

23:03

an arrogance. And the way they treated

23:05

people during investigations was

23:09

quite abusive, really. They

23:11

would occasionally interview

23:13

them without representation, coerce

23:16

them into confessing certain

23:18

crimes in return for not pursuing more

23:21

serious ones, you know, getting

23:23

people to plead guilty in court so they would avoid

23:25

a present sentence. In one case, I think we reported,

23:28

I remember, they told

23:30

someone, well, plead guilty to this lesser

23:33

offense and you won't go to prison. The person did go to

23:35

prison. Yeah. And

23:38

I believe in the infallibility of the computer system,

23:40

right? In the same way that, you know, I think

23:43

there's

23:43

a real problem in court cases with forensic evidence,

23:45

which is often somewhat interpretable

23:47

and has problems with it. But it is seen as

23:49

a kind of deus machina, like it's spoken. The

23:51

computer system, well, that couldn't be wrong. Because

23:54

computer systems are never wrong, unlike people

23:57

who are wrong. Yeah, I mean, they

23:59

knew it was wrong.

23:59

as we're now starting to discover. Yeah,

24:02

they knew it was wrong. But you're right, and there

24:04

was this legal doctrine that

24:07

what a computer says is correct. It

24:09

was backed up by experts from

24:12

Fujitsu, the IT company that ran

24:14

this system, going into court and

24:17

saying, there's nothing wrong with it, even when they knew full

24:19

well that there was something wrong

24:21

there. The Met Police have

24:23

been

24:24

investigating people for perjury

24:27

now for two or three years, but nothing's

24:30

come of it yet.

24:31

Oh, right. And I guess also the idea

24:33

that if you... It's such a huge thing psychologically

24:36

to take on, isn't it? That these aren't ISAID examples

24:38

of something fundamentally rotten about the computer

24:40

system. I suppose that also, presumably, psychologically

24:43

people try to say, OK, in one or two

24:45

cases it might have been wrong, we don't need to look at the whole

24:48

thing. Because

24:48

once you've accepted that, it's kind of like staring

24:50

into a huge yawning chasm, isn't

24:52

it? Yeah, yeah. Nothing is certain anymore.

24:55

No, and finding that

24:57

out, admitting it would come with huge

25:00

costs. The backdrop commercially

25:02

was that the post office was on

25:05

a headlong drive to become self-sustaining

25:09

to not have to rely on government subsidies.

25:12

So the board were heavily incentivised

25:15

to make profit. All

25:18

their incentives were financial,

25:19

human. Yeah, but

25:21

in that way it reminds me of a medical scandal in some ways,

25:23

right? Which is like a drug company finding out their new wonder

25:26

drug that's making them billions suddenly, and

25:28

it's making people's legs fall off. And there's

25:30

obviously a few isolated examples, and

25:32

they're kind of arrogant about the fact that, oh, patients,

25:34

you know what they're like, they never tell the truth anyway.

25:36

So some of those, yeah, I think that's really interesting

25:38

to me that this is a dry financial scandal

25:41

in some ways, but there's a lot of human drama

25:43

in it too, of people making terrible mistakes

25:45

and lying to themselves, lying to other

25:47

people. Yeah, and

25:49

I don't think the post office have faced up

25:51

to the fact that they need to

25:54

address that side of it. We've looked

25:56

at a lot of the victims of this and

25:59

their stories.

26:00

Not all of them have come out, but lots have and

26:02

we can see what was happening there. But

26:05

I don't think we've really seen inside properly

26:07

yet

26:08

what was driving those people, as

26:10

you say. Do you think we will in the

26:12

course of this inquiry? I think it's starting to come out

26:15

with talking to lawyers, but they're so defensive.

26:17

I watched some of the sessions live

26:20

and there's a lot

26:22

of selective memory on

26:24

our current move. You know, even when confronted

26:26

with reports of what they'd said,

26:28

there's a lot of, I can't imagine

26:30

I would have said that. But the mindset

26:33

in the post office clearly hasn't changed

26:35

at all, because I mean, you pointed this out, but

26:38

they decided that they deserved a bonus

26:41

for looking into a previous miscarriage

26:44

as part of their job. They wanted more money, more

26:46

money. Yeah, that's the sort of perverse

26:49

world they operate in. They

26:51

would have answered that criticism,

26:53

that obvious sort of outrage

26:57

by saying, well, actually, that shows we're taking the inquiry

26:59

seriously, because our

27:01

bonus structure has to reflect our priorities.

27:04

So if we build in dealing

27:06

with the inquiry properly into our bonus system,

27:09

then actually that means we're

27:11

going to do it properly. As if, you know, if

27:13

you don't pay us a bonus, then we won't. Then

27:15

why not would any normal human being do anything?

27:18

But maybe they just plugged it into the computer system and the

27:20

computer said, oh, that's right, you wrote several hundred thousand pounds

27:22

of bonus. Now,

27:25

just to bring us up to date and to throw

27:27

in a bit of balance, we should cover the fact that

27:30

as we are recording this, the Labour Party conference

27:32

is currently in full swing up in Liverpool. I

27:34

guess the thing that I mean, I don't

27:37

want to predict a cover. And actually, the

27:39

next night is going to come out a week after the Labour conference

27:41

has ended. But I don't know whether Ian,

27:43

you feel a duty of balance to put the Labour

27:45

conference on as we've had a Conservative Party

27:47

conference on. Yeah, I'm slightly worried because

27:50

I read a piece saying that they are

27:52

deliberately trying to make this conference boring,

27:55

which may be just to cover up for the fact that

27:57

it is boring and they've tried really

27:59

hard. to make it interesting. I don't know, but yes,

28:02

clearly I feel a duty

28:04

of balance. And Helen, you've been doing

28:06

lots of this. Yeah, I'm sort of obsessed

28:08

with Keir Starmer because

28:10

I think he's got one of the most interesting stories

28:12

in British politics and like Ian's saying, he's camouflaged

28:14

it very carefully under sort of a tedium shield 30

28:17

miles thick. But he has changed,

28:19

he basically ditched all of his pledges that he

28:22

made to become Labour leader. So, you

28:24

know, he was going to end the cruel

28:26

sanctions regime and now they're keeping the two child

28:28

benefit caps. I mean, it's caused a lot of dissent within

28:30

Labour, defending migrant rights,

28:32

you know, whereas now he accepts the end of free

28:35

movement.

28:35

You know, there have just been this series of U-turns

28:37

and he's dragged Labour back into

28:39

this much more centrist, blary

28:42

position, all with, you know, a reasonable

28:44

grumbling, but not actually the civil

28:46

war that you perhaps would have predicted that would

28:49

follow that in 2020. So I

28:51

think, I think you're right. I think they'd love nothing more

28:53

than this to be an extremely boring conference where no

28:55

one says anything that makes any news and

28:57

they just quietly wait for the Tories to

28:59

tear each other apart and do weird things

29:02

like invite Nigel Farage to their conference and then

29:04

dance with him. That was very strange. But

29:06

is this not the time where they do announce the

29:09

positive vision for change that Britain

29:11

needs? I thought this would be as the last party

29:13

conference, probably before an election, the one in which they enact

29:15

phase three of the master plan.

29:17

There is a part of the, it was detox the party

29:20

and then phase

29:20

three, I can't remember, under pants names, but

29:22

phase two, point out Tories rubbish

29:25

and then phase three, you know, who's not rubbish us. Yeah.

29:27

Right.

29:27

And, you know, to some extent that's working. They had an

29:29

enormous by-election win in Scotland and that

29:32

seat that was vacated by Margaret Ferrier who break

29:34

the Covid rules with a 24% swing.

29:37

So I think they feel relatively confident about the fact

29:39

that they don't need to come out there and say, you know, free

29:41

bus passes for, you know, whoever

29:43

or whatever it might be. I think the trouble is

29:45

that journalists always demand that party leaders have

29:48

vision because it gives you something to write about in a column. And

29:51

I'm not sure that it necessarily, I think

29:53

actually people go, well, you're not going to get into parliament

29:55

just by not being the Tories. And

29:57

I think

29:57

it's just about possible that they

29:59

more.

29:59

quite actually. But

30:02

having a vision that is, my vision

30:04

of Britain is that it's not as bad

30:06

as it is now. Yeah. I

30:08

think that is alright. I think that

30:11

might work. My

30:11

cabinet is less weird than the current

30:13

cabinet. Yeah. And I'm quite boring

30:16

rather than being either crazy or a crook.

30:18

It's sort of a fairly powerful message I would

30:20

say. And is it working?

30:23

Well. And behind the scenes?

30:24

Is there anything I think is fascinating?

30:26

So Patrick McGuire of The Times did a very good profile

30:28

of Morgan McSweeney who is sort of the

30:31

dominant comings of this operation except

30:33

the exact opposite of dominant comings in that he hates

30:35

publicity and doesn't write 30,000 word

30:37

blogs. Which is the correct thing to do if

30:39

you're going to be the kind of, not the brains

30:41

exactly, but the kind of iron fist of

30:43

the operation because everyone will hate you and they can't

30:46

say that they hate the leader so they all say they hate you. But

30:48

he's a really interesting guy. He's from Cork

30:51

in Ireland. He lives in rural Anaksha.

30:53

His wife is standing actually for

30:55

the next door seat to the one that they won just

30:57

recently. And so you've ended up with, yeah,

31:00

this kind of Irish guy lives in Scotland really in

31:02

masterminding the English revival

31:04

as well as the Scottish revival of the Labour

31:06

Party, which is kind of a cute and interesting

31:08

thing. Someone described him in that piece

31:10

I think is dominant comings but not

31:12

crackers. Which is hard to consider what's

31:15

left.

31:17

But in the same sense that he is the one who has

31:19

kind of said, this is where the

31:22

country is and this is therefore where we have to be

31:24

on a whole range, like from welfare to

31:26

immigration. And they have been very ruthless

31:28

about selection, which we've covered several times

31:30

in HP source. And also about the fact

31:32

that, you know, conference, last year they were all buoyant.

31:35

It was extraordinary, very weird to see the Labour Party

31:37

happy. I didn't like it at all. But

31:39

this time what's really nice is that the businesses

31:41

have come flooding back. So Jim

31:44

Murphy's lobbying firm is there, you

31:46

know, they have got Labour Together has got, which is

31:48

the kind of starmore, I think tank, has

31:50

had a huge amount of money applied into it. Big

31:53

donors want to give the Labour Party money again,

31:55

which was not the case during the Corbyn years, although the

31:58

membership was, you know, a grand

31:59

streets membership was very healthy. And what happened

32:02

to this vast movement that

32:04

disapproved of care and centrism and Blairism

32:07

and Blair dad-ism and all

32:09

the other movements that

32:11

they didn't like?

32:12

There are some people who are really unhappy and

32:15

keep

32:15

writing you know about the broken promises

32:17

but weirdly not that many I feel like I'm sort of

32:19

more obsessed with

32:20

the broken promises than quite a lot of people

32:22

on the labour left. I think the thing that's really

32:24

obvious is that quite a lot of people who supported

32:26

Corbyn really bought the hope.

32:28

They really liked the fact that he was properly opposing

32:30

the Tories after the Miliband

32:33

era where you know it felt like a real near miss

32:35

in 2015 and in a different way, Stalmer

32:37

is doing that. It looks like he is 20 points

32:39

ahead and uncaused to form a Labour government.

32:42

So I think some people say okay so it might

32:44

not be the Labour Party that I would in my dreams have

32:47

but it's better than a Tory party and I'm surprised

32:49

by how many people have basically taken

32:51

that bargain.

32:52

Do you think that if

32:54

this business is breaking promises people actually

32:56

quite like it? They think that makes him look like

32:59

a Prime Minister for his continuity. Did

33:03

you have a few illicit parties in affairs? Yeah,

33:05

that's in phase two. I

33:08

do think the really weird thing about U-turns is that political

33:11

journalists are obsessed with them but you should always do

33:13

them

33:13

because people don't pay that much attention

33:15

to politics and it's much better to end

33:17

up with the right policy in the end than

33:19

to be you know you'll be mocked

33:20

at Prime Minister's questions for two weeks

33:23

but after that you're at you're essentially in the

33:25

correct policy space. Just always do it.

33:27

I wonder if they're in a way

33:29

triangulating themselves into a bit of a corner

33:32

when it comes to economically

33:35

what they can do they promise to improve all

33:37

sorts of things.

33:38

Everything's going to get better, education,

33:40

health service is going to have all

33:42

these problems solved and so on.

33:44

At the same time Rachel Reeves is

33:47

being extremely conservative

33:49

and promising that she's not going to raise any

33:51

taxes. So where does that lead?

33:53

That leaves them in a sort of Gordon Brown type

33:56

position in about 97 doesn't it? Needing

33:59

to look for other people.

33:59

sources of money which is how we got to the private

34:02

finance need which would be great

34:04

for us.

34:05

You're right, where it leaves them

34:08

is absolutely stuffed. They have essentially done

34:10

the same thing that Blair did in 1997 which was

34:12

say we'll stick to the Tory spending envelope. The

34:14

difference being that he was coming on the back of a, you know,

34:16

John Major left him a pretty decent economy

34:19

by that point and they were on a big boom.

34:21

Now it does not look like that

34:23

and so the line constantly from Keir Starmer and Rachel

34:26

Reeves is we won't put your taxes up. He came in with

34:28

a pledge to put up taxes on the top 5% of earners.

34:30

You know, even that is kind

34:32

of off the table now. So you're

34:34

right, there will be sneaky raids. I mean things

34:36

like pensions I would look at very carefully because

34:39

they want to do stuff like cut NHS waiting

34:41

lists by paying doctors overtime. Well, you

34:44

know, with what cash? And

34:46

there is, I think the next election is basically

34:47

going to be fought on a sort of giant lie that Britain

34:49

is a lot richer than it is and we've got a lot

34:52

more money to throw around and you won't have to pay higher taxes

34:54

or accept worse public services.

34:57

There's going to be a lot of work being done

34:59

by things like efficiency savings. That's

35:01

always where you turn for when you've really

35:03

run out of money. I was amazed

35:06

to see Starmer saying someone saying,

35:08

well, where's this money coming from? And

35:10

he's saying, growth. And I thought,

35:12

oh, God, he's turning into Liz and Ross.

35:15

You know, be careful. Yeah,

35:17

well, that was you're right. Exactly. The Gordon Brown thing was

35:19

we share the proceeds of growth. And then the next

35:21

question has to be now in 2023, 24, what growth? And

35:23

we're servicing

35:25

this very big debt at very

35:27

high levels of interest. Again, a different situation

35:30

to where we were even 10 years ago. And

35:33

but you're right, but it's not in the Tories interest

35:35

to bring this up because they don't have

35:36

an answer to that question. Apart

35:38

from going, you're right, actually, you've looked at it now it

35:40

does all God, well, this terrible

35:42

that is the Chancellor's position. Particularly if you

35:44

catch him slightly

35:47

off guard, he's just looking at God,

35:50

he's saying these figures. Right, he always

35:52

looks like he's just remembered. Yeah.

35:55

But but he's been so quiet and

35:57

the effort to make Sunak

35:59

presidents has been very concerted,

36:01

but he, I don't think, mentioned the cost

36:03

of living in his speech at

36:06

the Conservative conference, did he? Maybe briefly

36:08

in passing? Well, his big thing on

36:10

that is inflation, isn't it? That's one of his five.

36:13

Oh, that's a tax. He's going to bring

36:15

down inflation and that's a tax cut. Yeah.

36:18

So that's your cost of living dealt with. We're

36:20

going to have inflation of 5%, not 10%. And

36:23

the Chancellor got fine. 10, 15 minutes

36:27

at the conference. Right. He was quite a short

36:29

speech. The better, I'm the Prime Minister's wife, God. But

36:33

that is a kind of classic culture war play

36:35

in the sense of you've kind of given up the ghost economically, you

36:37

don't have anything to say, then you just retreat to

36:39

your comfort zone. Like, I felt looking at that Tory

36:41

Party conference a bit like I felt looking at Labour in 2015, where

36:44

they went, oh, it's all terrible. Why

36:46

don't we just have what we really want? Let's forget

36:48

about compromising the electorate. Can't I just have,

36:50

like, a government that's just David Frost

36:53

hugging Nigel Farage next to

36:55

Priti Patel and then Suella

36:56

Braveman shouting at people. That's just what I want

36:58

in my heart. And, you know, rather

37:01

than saying, what is a Tory Party that

37:03

could win a majority in Britain? What does that look like? What do

37:05

we have to do? And I think that they're going to

37:07

have to go through this sort of, if they lose the next election, which they're

37:09

uncoursed to, go through the kind of spin cycle

37:11

of just having freak

37:13

hour before they get back to

37:15

a position where they, sorry to be true. I'm

37:18

kind of talking about Ian Duncan's death, the last

37:20

freak hour. No, there was at a moment, I thought,

37:22

beginning to end up where GB News has more

37:25

members of Parliament than the Conservative.

37:28

The official opposition. There

37:30

was one Labour pledge I wanted to ask you about, Richard,

37:32

which is from Rachel Rees's speech. Oh,

37:35

yeah. We're recording this just

37:37

after that happened, and it's about cutting the use of

37:39

management consultants in government. Cutting

37:41

it by half,

37:42

I think?

37:43

She really has been reading the eye.

37:48

And because the rest of it through a kind of cost benefit analysis

37:50

to make sure it's going to be valued for money. Right.

37:54

Well, that would be a departure.

37:57

Yet again, this is your fault. We're going to be

37:59

saying politicians. was a right. Yeah.

38:02

This is exactly what David Cameron said

38:04

in 2010. Do you remember he came in and said,

38:07

we're going to end government by management consultant.

38:10

And he did cut it for a year or so, but

38:13

then it crept right back up. Right.

38:15

And we're back there. So they may

38:17

well, you know, really feel the heat for 12 months

38:20

or so. Frederic

38:22

has been chatting to George Osborne, which

38:24

is only a fact I learned from the Osborne

38:26

Balls podcast. Oh,

38:29

it's the listener. I've

38:33

written every single one of those lukewarm reviews

38:35

for us on iTunes. Yeah. But he just casually

38:37

dropped into the conversation. Well, in my conversations with

38:39

Rachel Reeves, I've made clear about how normal.

38:42

Yeah, but he was chanced for quite a long time. You might

38:45

not think he did a very good job, but he at least understands

38:47

what the job is. Right. And has tried to have

38:49

a go at it. I don't, I wouldn't have a go at over

38:51

that. I know I said kiss on was boring.

38:53

Yeah. I'm going to attract that because you know what he did that I

38:55

think is enormously banterous.

38:58

He made Boris Johnson's ex-wife his

39:00

advisor on social harassment in the workplace.

39:02

Yes. A genuinely good joke.

39:07

So yeah, I retract that he is,

39:09

he is a master troll and I

39:11

stam. I was thinking

39:14

Lord Byron's widow set

39:16

up a home for fallen girls in

39:19

honor of her husband. I thought that's about

39:21

the same level of joke. She

39:24

also announced an anti-covid

39:26

corruption commissioner. Have you seen

39:29

that? Yes. Excellent. That's

39:31

just government by private. I know. Your

39:35

Dominic coming for my name in terms of that Richard.

39:37

I mean, it's slightly sort

39:39

of anti horse bolting, uh, right. Commissioner,

39:42

um, several years after the event,

39:44

what we probably need is someone

39:46

with that kind of role in government, looking at all

39:49

the other scams going on. Some of which we just talked

39:51

about, uh, some of the more current ones. Give

39:53

them a few years. We

39:55

should mention the interest of balance that the

39:57

Lib Dems and the Greens also had a conference. SMP.

40:00

Yes. Although the SMP one is just them crying. No,

40:03

you're right,

40:05

we should mention that. And now we have. I've

40:08

read a couple of people saying that the

40:10

other thing about Kirstom is he's very lucky and

40:13

Corbin wasn't lucky and whatever else

40:15

you think about him and the SMP

40:17

deciding to entirely implode

40:20

is not necessarily to his enormous

40:23

political credit. Yes,

40:25

I don't think Kirstom has secretly sent Nicola Sturgeon

40:27

that campervern perspective saying, oh these

40:30

look nice,

40:30

when you like to spend some SMP money on these? And

40:32

actually he benefits from that enormously because if

40:35

you remember the 2015 election the idea of Ed

40:37

Miliband in the pocket of sermon and

40:39

Sturgeon, that was a very powerful Tory

40:41

message was if you vote for a Labour government

40:44

what you're actually gonna get is loads more money is gonna go

40:46

to Scotland and English voters didn't like

40:48

that. They were like what about my hospital? And

40:50

if Labour can make the case that it can win UK-wide,

40:53

I mean not excluding Northern Ireland, but if it

40:55

can make the case that it wins the rest of the nations

40:57

then that becomes that sort of nullified. And Kirstom

41:00

has from the start said I won't do any kind of deal,

41:02

I will not do a coalition with the SMP because he knows

41:04

how incredibly potent that attack line was. But

41:07

you're right, he has been handed the gift of at

41:09

the right time, the SMP

41:11

has sort of detonated itself. But

41:14

you know, Anna Sawa, the Labour leader in Scotland

41:16

is a genuinely I think good politician, he's

41:18

a smart guy, he's an improvement on the

41:20

run of you know, maybe rude, no

41:23

hopers, I don't know if he's slightly rude, but people

41:25

who really struggled to escape the orbit of the SMP

41:27

and the gravity, you know, the gravity of Scottish politics revolving

41:29

around the SMP for so long. So

41:31

I think you know, there's a smart alliance

41:33

he's made Stalmer and Sawa have

41:36

a kind of decent working relationship and that really

41:38

helps. But you're right, he has

41:40

been the beneficiary of timing,

41:43

he's also been the beneficiary of timing, let's be honest about the fact

41:45

that the Tories are just clapped out. You

41:47

know, I think it's a lot harder to win you know, for

41:50

people to be in opposition for one term and come back.

41:52

Whereas what we've done now is we've cycled through various iterations

41:55

of a Tory party and now as I say,

41:57

I think they've sort of just even they fail

41:59

themselves.

41:59

they've given up. You know if you look at the number

42:02

of Tory MPs who are retiring at the next election a lot

42:04

of them have gone 50 I think. Yeah 50 out of about 350. And

42:06

Chris Grayling for health reasons

42:09

has become the latest of those but there are a lot of people have

42:12

looked and gone I'll leave it.

42:15

Someone else can sort. I was personally

42:18

very excited to see the Prime

42:20

Minister doing a joke about

42:22

Nicholas Sturgeon which is straightforward contempt of

42:24

court as an active police investigation and

42:27

he's not being investigated so I'm just putting

42:29

it on record. The next time I am done

42:31

for contempt of court I will plead

42:34

what we call the Sunac defence is that

42:36

it doesn't matter. And it was the only joke

42:38

as well. The only joke is potentially

42:41

a breach of the law. He did one good joke

42:43

at the private Westminster correspondence thing where he talked about

42:45

what they're going to do at Karaoke and he said he was

42:47

going to do Tiny Dancer. Well that's just like

42:49

him reserving his best joke for the private sector. That's

42:52

it for this episode

42:55

of page 94. We'll be back again in a

42:57

fortnight with another one. Between now and then if

42:59

you find yourself wanting to read more of these

43:01

stories in print form subscriptions to Private

43:04

Eye are available. All you have to do is go to private-eye.co.uk.

43:08

There is a big red button there which says get a subscription

43:10

now. We warmly recommend you do that. Thanks

43:13

for listening and

43:13

see you next time.