Britain 'FLEECED' for BILLIONS on 'EU Army' as 'desperate' Starmer CLINGS to power: Gully Foyle

本站添加: 2026-05-11

[00:00:00]We have an elite who are just delusional. We're winding up the Americans. Their troops are on our soil.

[00:00:05]We rely on them for their intelligence.

[00:00:07]We rely on them for everything. The EU's done nothing for us. Yet, we're going to stick two fingers up to them.

[00:00:14]>> I I I find it amazing. Uh and and the scary thing about if you take part in these defense procurement schemes that the EU are proposing and that it looks like we're going to try and join is that it's effectively aligning your defense infrastructure with the EU. Once you've got that infrastructure in place, you've got that then you you've bought your weapons, you bought your tanks, you're using that platform there for the next 20 years.

[00:00:39]>> Do you think that this is the sign of some kind of intention for a European army that we will be a part of? We've signed this agreement with France which allows them to deploy their nukes on our soil. We're now coming into these defense funds. Labor are pushing the argument that we need to wed ourselves with the EU for our safety.

[00:00:58]Are the structures coming up from around us and we'll only realize when it's too late. So Gully, thank you so much for joining us on GB News Originals. We're coming up rapidly to 10 years since the Brexit vote which upturned our politics.

[00:01:12]We're seeing that that was probably the beginning of the breaking down of the two party system. Um that that big coalition who voted for Brexit have been disillusioned by what's transpired over the last 10 years. And especially since this Labor government have come in, they're wetting us back to the EU. Many think through the back door. And those people who put their hope in Brexit might start to look at it as though actually we're kind of in the worst of both worlds right now because we're having to take all of the rules from Brussels. yet we have no say over them.

[00:01:43]Um, do you agree with that or do you think that there are still some benefits to the situation that we're in?

[00:01:49]>> That is certainly uh what would be the worst case scenario to to not have any say in the rules but to be following them anyway. And the EU will charge us for the pleasure of following their rules as well. So still paying into the system, still following the rules but having no say at all is certainly the worst of all worlds. And that seems to be what um the the current Labor government want to achieve. And and it's a shame that they've they've gone down that road through through misdirection.

[00:02:17]You know, it would have been better to see them actually campaign on that and have that as their manifesto approach.

[00:02:24]Um but we are where we are and it seems that the the message that the the electorate are are seemingly sending overnight um is not being received and is being heard as a go faster. And I I think it's very difficult to be able to see the amount of reform wins and conservative holds and wins as well and to say oh this shows that the the country wants to do more EU.

[00:02:47]>> I know I'm seeing that now from some leftist commentators. It's reform have won against Labor in this seat and it's because we've hemorrhaged votes to the Greens. So we need to go further to the left.

[00:02:58]>> Yeah, it's it's a ridiculous interpretation and and I guess their jobs are on the line. So you have to you have to allow them a little bit of of room for I need to say this because if I don't then I'm just admitting defeat. Uh so so there is a certain amount of that in play there but I think there's a there's a strong case of denial as well that actually the country hasn't really changed very much as you say that there are there are Brexiters who are disillusioned and believe that we could have done more in the time that we had and I think that's a fair comment. um you know no one no one foraw a global pandemic turning up uh a month after leaving the EU and having to deal with that for for for two years but that is what what has happened and unfortunately the the timings of of global events have prevented a lot of the benefits from being able to be seen but also as as I've I've I've tried to cover uh and the whole reason and the purpose I I wrote a book was because there are many things that have changed that are for the better that are simply just not being mentioned and and my hope is that there is a there's a fair reflection that the public can take on actually some things have changed and have changed for the better. And we're starting to see some of that conversation coming through now with um with the Labor government's comments of we're going to take us back in to a certain extent. The number of industries are saying actually can you leave us out of that? We we'd rather not realign please or oh actually this would be a bad impact for our for our sector for our industry. So that is starting to come through now. Um but but it's been a difficult slog.

[00:04:34]>> Before we get into all of those kind of individual benefits in the ways that different groups and different industries might have seen that overall doesn't really get take place in the narrative. I do think it's important to cover the politics here because the EU hasn't go gone anywhere for now anyway.

[00:04:49]It's not going anywhere. And I think the fact that it exists and that it's quite clear that they've wanted to punish us for leaving. I think that there has to be taken into account for what we've been able to do and what we've not been able to do because they are bigger than us. They're on our doorstep and we haven't had an elite that wants that has the courage basically to take them on.

[00:05:07]I when I look at sort of our economic cycle and then the EU's economic cycle, it does seem that realistically we've never really been that aligned. We tend to go into recessions at different times. our economies are quite differently um put together. Um and I wonder whether there was this really this need for this great punishment because when you look at it, I mean, we didn't join the euro and we're not that dependent on the EU for goods exports.

[00:05:36]We're much more of a service export economy which wasn't really covered by our EU agreements anyway. Do you think realistically the UK was the only country that could could actually leave?

[00:05:48]>> You could certainly make that argument.

[00:05:49]Yes. And and the those who argue against having left in the first place, um I I've seen the argument made recently of well no other country is choosing to leave. I'm like well well actually many of the countries most of the countries in the EU are given more money than they put in. It is in their financial interest to be in the EU because it is a redistribution of wealth from the richer countries to the poorer ones. So of course there is a queue of poor countries trying to get into the EU because the the promise is if you if you join us you'll you'll get more money than than uh you you have to give to us.

[00:06:26]So of course that is an attractive proposition but with each of those additional mouths to feed the net contributors of which the UK was one of them has to put in more and get less out of it. That that is the the deal. So when I see that queue of countries of of um wanting to join, what I see is well that's the UK's contributions increasing and the UK's gains from from the economy decreasing and and and the the vote share and and and the ability to speak it it further diminishes. So I do think the UK is probably one of the only countries that could leave. I think France and Germany are too tied into it.

[00:07:02]though Macron said at the time of the Brexit vote himself that he would never give the French people that choice and that vote because they would choose to leave as well. So I think it's is it's the UK is one of the few countries I think it would be safe to say that would be able to leave as it isn't tied into the currency. So it does have one foot out the door anyway and so was able to.

[00:07:24]Um, and the thing I think we forget um, in the UK is that we essentially caused an existential crisis for the EU. If the UK was able to leave and and to be able to leave successfully without too much pain, then it calls into question the existence of the EU entirely. If we're able to cooperate without needing their rules in charge, then why have the rules? Why not have mutual recognition between all of the countries and and play nicely instead of having to have an overarching set of rules and regulations that govern all of us and we have to pay for the pleasure. It doesn't make sense.

[00:08:02]Uh and and you know the the original construction of the EU, the EEC as it was partnership and cooperation on goods and and services trade without it needing all of the extra bureaucracy was a perfectly fine concept. It was a perfectly fine workable system, a trade block, a trade partnership and the additional layers that have been added on since just make it more difficult to to excuse.

[00:08:28]>> Yeah. I mean, I think also one part that doesn't really cut through into the narrative is not just the threat of the UK's success showing that maybe the EU is not necessary. It's that the threat of the UK's success might show the populace of the EU that it's not necessary, who then might demand to leave, but then everyone realizes that their politicians have got them into the euro, which is basically irreversible and would destroy their economies if they tried to leave it.

[00:08:54]>> Yeah. Yeah. And we have been lucky, I think, to a certain extent with with the passage of time and then historical events that have allowed us um to avoid that consequence. you know, it wasn't it wasn't a a done deal. You know, we had political events that tried to take us into the EU. And frankly, it is it is a blessing that we managed to avoid that.

[00:09:15]And I I don't think um there are many arguing that we should have joined the euro. You know, that that that was something that we should have done and and thankfully we avoided it. Uh the interesting thing actually and and you see this in some polling uh there's just some polling in the last few days actually with uh servation on um the labor list readers. So so all labor um supporters they had a very high level in their polling of I want to rejoin the EU something ridiculous like 87 88%. But that figure reduced by 40% when they said you do know you'd have to take the euro don't you would you still want to rejoin the EU? So actually the euro and avoiding the euro has been a very major uh part of the differentiation between the UK and and and the rest of Europe. We have our own banking system. We are a global uh leader in in in financial services.

[00:10:09]Having our own ability to control our own currency is is a is a major plus for us and one of the reasons why we didn't really fit in the same way as the rest of the of the EU nations.

[00:10:21]>> Yeah. Um, so one of the big narratives that's come out since we left has been that it's cut our exports, that, you know, our exporters are desperate and they're clamoring to get back into the single market, customs union, whatever it is that week. But the UN conference on trade and development in 2024 said the UK had risen to be the fourth largest exporter, which I don't think anyone thought might even happen. Um, we're still the second largest exporter in services in the world. We've recently overtook India again to be the fifth largest economy. Um is is that down to Brexit or is it just coincidence?

[00:10:57]>> Uh there's a number of factors in play here. So so so first of all, there was always going to be a short-term impact of leaving. The argument was always about the size of what that was and whether it was worth doing. Um but there was always going to be some impact. You know that change always causes fluctuations and and and that was always going to happen.

[00:11:15]um the size of that impact has been a lot smaller. there there was a great study um that came out in December 24 and was refreshed uh in December 25 uh by the LSC on goods uh exports and imports and the impact of Brexit and instead of it being one of these forecasts that we see that the numbers banded around we've invented an alternative parallel dimension um UK that didn't leave the EU and and we've decided would have been 8% worse or 4% worse or or whatever the actual data and what that data shows is that for the most part the larger companies were able to adjust perfectly fine to um to the to the new regime to the new rules and have been carrying on as normal. Um smaller exporters have been more affected. Um but at most we we've seen an impact of perhaps 27 billion a year in reduction in goods exports. Um but that's not revenue, that's not profit from those exports, that's the value of those exports. So actually 40% of that would be how much the the Treasury would have seen at most. And so already the raw data says that the cost of membership to us which by the way the the cost uh of the the annual budget has doubled uh since we left for for the EU budget. So the cost of membership is already provably it's doubled. Yes. in in the next so in the they they set the budget for the EU in in seven-year batches the the the MFF um budget period the 2028 budget was meant to be 1.8 8 trillion and the EU parliament just voted that wasn't enough and increased it by another 10% to€2 trillion. when we left it was 900 billion. So it is over doubled since we left. But also there are more mouths to feed the the um so the net contribution that the UK would give would be higher and and our return on that so the net would be would be smaller and with the more countries queuing up to join as well you also have those that would require more contributions and we would get less in return as well. So, so all of these things add together to we've already shown that the impact on goods exports has been less than the cost of annual membership. Services exports have gone faster since we left because we have made improvements to make it easier for us to export our our services and the the cost is less than membership. For me, that's that's that's a done deal. the data already shows that actually yes there has been an impact but it is less than the the the cost of membership. So why why are we even why is anyone even saying it would be a good idea? And and I think that comes down to identity unfortunately.

[00:14:07]>> I think that's a really good point because people will look at the the budget contributions we were making back when we remember not not even thinking about the fact that they've gone up so much and also the other point is what about all this borrowing they've undertaken? would we have had to do this uh green reset big I think they borrowed what was it like 800 billion euros and they're trying to reel in um Armenia at the moment so how much money will they be throwing at that >> yeah and and that's part of the reason for the increase in the budget is that they have taken on hundreds of billions of debt partially through COVID partially through um wanting to reinvest in the defense uh industry of of Europe and so they've taken on hundreds and hundreds of billions of debt and that has to be repaid. And the piece that isn't uh explained, I think to the EU population, let alone to to to us sitting on the sidelines, is that the net contributor countries are the guarantors of that debt.

[00:15:05]So if the debt is taken out across all 27 countries and essentially the EU is taking on a loan on behalf of another country and then they're giving that money as a as a further loan to that specific country with the with the guarantee that they will pay it back but if they're not a net contributor they can just say sorry we can't afford to do this and the other countries will have to chip in. So the the the loans that the EU are taking out are effectively guarantors u by the countries who actually pay for the EU. So Germany, France, and it would have been the UK as well.

[00:15:41]>> Sounds like they're just layering debt in different layers of government. The question would be, I mean, we're on the edge ourselves. Could we even afford to go back in?

[00:15:50]>> That that is certainly a concern, but you mean you look at the the debt to GDP ratio of the UK, we're at close to 100%.

[00:15:57]So it's fair to just say we're around 100% of GDP as as as nation as national debt. It is higher in many of the western EU countries and and you know people comment on on Germany having a low debt. Actually the way in which they explain their debt is done differently as well. So their debt is a lot higher than they they admit to. They they fudge the numbers so that they don't have to admit that it is national debt. So >> how do they do that?

[00:16:22]>> It's just put it in a different column on on on the on the chart. Uh so you you see this in in multiple comparisons across the EU of of um you see it in healthcare statistics, you see it in debt statistics, you see it in in how uh they calculate trade uh and and goods and services. Depending on what column you put it in, you can say, well, this this this isn't a problem. You know, we we have better figures. But but actually when you dig into those numbers, a lot of them are a lot worse than they admit to.

[00:16:53]Um so let's get on to some of these benefits. Um one that is touted and I think is agreed across the political spectrum is that we've been able to move a bit quicker on AI and tech. There's a really exciting startup at the moment um that's thinking of using machine learning as an AI model. The UK government's invested in it and I think it's quite exciting for the prospects of the future of UK AI. Tell us a little bit about how we've been able to diverge there.

[00:17:19]So there's not so much divergence with AI as not implementing the bad ideas that the EU had. So divergence works in in two ways. Us us choosing to not do what the choosing to do something different to the EU that it was already doing and then also the EU diverging from what it was doing previously and us staying still. Both of those things have happened and both of them have had positive and negative results, you know, depending on on which thing you're looking at. with AI, the UK has taken a more pragmatic approach knowing that it is already a world leader in high-tech and in and in in computing. So, we are I think the latest figures the the the after the US the the global leader in AI development. Uh and now some people may see that as a bad thing, some some as a good thing, but it is a it is a an inevitability that the world is moving in that direction and it is better for us to be leading the way and putting in pragmatic rules that are going to help us develop those uh those technologies of tomorrow than it is to be stifling the industry and and letting the rest of the world grow around us and and effectively decide how the AI industry develops without us.

[00:18:29]>> Yeah. And that's exactly what that's exactly what you're seeing with the EU.

[00:18:33]So >> yeah, well I mean we've been able to increase our animal welfare standards, but Labor, the left, normally animal rights are really important to them, but then in their Brexit resets, they're trading them on. So it seems to me as though for some reason this globalist corporatist behemoth of the EU, it seems to be like the pinnacle of their belief system. And I don't quite understand why.

[00:18:57]>> No. And and even more of a hypocrisy is is the Green Party. I find it amazing that the Green Party on the one hand advocating we should just rejoin the EU, no questions asked, no referendum, we should just go straight back in. It's the best thing. when at the same time the changes that we've made since we've left, many of them have been uh for for animal welfare concerns, you know, um stopping the the fishery of of um sand deals to to protect the the puffin population, you know, the the the Danish over fishing of our of our sandals uh was killing our our marine bird life and and we've been able to prevent that. And the EU even took us to court for that to try and say that they still had the right to fish in our waters and we we couldn't tell them what they couldn't do. I I find that amazing that that actually happened. You know, we have animal cruelty um changes, you protections for for pets uh pet smuggling uh policies going through. Um we've had um there's a contradiction in EU law about testing of cosmetics on animals. So, it's been banned for decades. It's been banned in the UK first and then the EU followed suit and they banned it as well. But there are also conflicting chemicals regulations about protecting workers that mean that every chemical has to be tested and if you can't test it in any other way, then you have to test it on animals. And that's been tested in the in the the EU courts and they found the the chemicals regulations on workers rights override any uh animal welfare policies. And so for a very long time, we have been required to be testing cosmetics on animals. And this has just gone under the radar of the British public until after we left. And the UK government tried to stay aligned to the EU policies on on chemicals testing despite us having left. And there was a massive uproar of what you're going to test on animals. Like we already were, we've just been ignoring the fact that it's been banned for decades and we're doing it anyway. So now the UK laws have been changed again and we're now not testing cosmetics and animals again. The fact that that is continuing and the the the policy that the Green Party is suggesting is let's go do some more testing on cosmetics on animals. I find that amazing that that contradiction exists and that they're fine with it and and why we're not seeing animal activists, animal rights activists standing up and saying we don't believe in this. We we we we won't support uh the as as you mentioned with the EU reset the the government has had to drop its intent to ban fuagra naturally uh the the how do they call it um the original traditional methods of creating fuagra which is quite graphic and your your viewers can can look that up for themselves if they wish to. Um, and animal fur, the EU is one of the largest global producers of of of animal furs, and we've banned creating it domestically, but with single market rules, we couldn't ban the sale of it, as anything that is legal to sell in an EU country has to be legal to be sold in any other EU country. So, the fact that we've left, we can ban the sale of of animal furs if we wish to. Um, and we were going to, and Labour had the the policies already going through. They had a private members bill going through for it that was heavily supported by Labor and now they're going to can it because actually the EU says no. I find it I find it amazing that these things um that the Green the Green Party have abandoned its care about animal welfare on on on the on the altar of wanting to rejoin the EU. I find >> the Green Party has abandoned its environment agenda now that it's found Gaza.

[00:22:43]>> Yeah.

[00:22:44]>> It's almost as if they like to co-opt things when they're popular.

[00:22:48]Yeah, who who knew that that the political parties would do such a thing?

[00:22:52]But yeah, the there still riding on the coattails of having an actual green agenda and and that green agenda seems to have disappeared for for ideology mostly from the Middle East and and I simply do not understand why the the voting public have not caught up to that. can perfectly understand people wanting to vote for for green policies and environmentalism, but voting for the things that the Green Party now seem to support and not the green agenda, I I I don't it baffles me, unfortunately.

[00:23:24]>> Yeah. I mean, people forget that when we entered the EU, a lot of the opposition came from the left because they thought that workers were going to be undercut.

[00:23:33]>> Yeah. Absolutely. and and that is what we've seen the one one of the the great benefits that we have seen in certain industries anyway it hasn't affected the whole country but in those industries that were heavily um impacted by um EU workers so hospitality industry um hage uh and you these industries have seen massive pay increases because they're not competing with as many people who are happy to work for a lot less money >> and and that It's funny because it's the middle class professionals who are so uh emphatic about EU immigration and it's them who are paying the price for competing for graduate jobs with the whole of Europe while now we've got our you know tradies who don't have the competition from Eastern Europe anymore and they're earning like really good money.

[00:24:24]>> Yeah. Yeah. The the the holage industry saw a massive increase. I think this is something ridiculous like 20 23 25% pay increases and better working conditions.

[00:24:33]Uh and and that's to be expected. If if your workforce is happy to work for less money, then of course supply and demand, you know, you the prices aren't going to increase. So when you reduce the amount of of of supply, then then it is going to increase and and and it's a natural consequence. But but these things were argued against like they weren't going to happen. So, it's good to see that they have and and and and more feel to it.

[00:25:01]>> Yeah. I mean, voting to end free movement in a way was a proworker thing to do. The when when Tony Blair came in, one of the first things he did before he opened the floodgates was to create the minimum wage. To me, obviously, I can't prove intention, but it's it's coincidental that he knew that maybe wages would fall and they needed a flaw.

[00:25:23]And when Angela Merkel opened the doors in 2015 to all the Syrian refugees, what did she do just before she brought in a minimum wage? Um, one thing that we, there's no secret is that since 2021 when we left the transition period, the UK has struggled, but we had COVID and all the debt off the back of that. We've had Ukraine and the massive energy shock and that's affected all of Western Europe, especially Germany who is rapidly de-industrializing.

[00:25:51]Um it's especially on the right now there's an agreement that maybe we've gone too far with net zero and we need to get serious about our energy policy. Ed Millerand is refusing but that doesn't mean that he doesn't have the power to do something. Has leaving the EU made it easier to to turn this around?

[00:26:11]It certainly gives us the freedom to be able to to do more uh and and some of the things that that uh the government currently proposing, tying us into the EU's emissions trading scheme, for example, is going to make it more difficult to be able to to do these things. But you see story after story drip out into into the the mainstream and and it doesn't always get picked up by the public. But an interesting one at the moment is the the crisis in in in the Middle East and and the straight of Hormuz and and that affecting 20% of global jet fuel. Uh the EU put in a law to prevent tankering uh which is where you uh you fly your plane to another country, fill up there where jet fuel is cheaper, and then fly back with half a tank still left over because you've not had such a long journey, allowing you to to offset some of the costs and avoid some of the additional costs that the EU are adding to try and improve sustainable fuels. Um, but when you have problems uh with with jet fuel supply, having a law that says you can't fill up when you get when you can get your hands on it makes it more difficult. So, actually the UK because it doesn't have those laws against tankering is able to offset those those potential difficulties to mitigate some of those supply issues by filling up with with jet fuel in in other countries. Uh these sorts of things uh are happening on a on a daily and a weekly basis. these these these small gains, these these differentiations.

[00:27:38]And for me, the the argument of moving to um moving away from fossil fuels to move to to to to green energy sources, it is a noble intent and it is something that sooner or later we are going to have to do because fossil fuels are going to run out sooner or later. The problem we have is that the technologies that people are trying to roll out are not actually fit for the job yet. There is still more work to do. And part of that problem is the ability to store energy. So it's great that you can generate some energy when it's windy. Uh but if you haven't got a storage capacity for when it isn't windy, then it just doesn't work and you have to keep going to backups. So the the solutions that we have and the flexibility that we have is because we're not waiting for 27 other countries to decide on something and agree with us which takes years literally years for for for for the EU to to make decisions. We can move quicker because we're more nimble.

[00:28:40]There's only one government that needs to desire to do something and we can make a decision and move ahead with it.

[00:28:47]uh a a new technology comes along, we can approve it quicker and get it in.

[00:28:51]The the problem is we still seem to be trying to do the same thing as the EU all the time. And and actually cool heads and smarter heads would say, what are we trying to achieve here? And what is the best way for us to achieve our goals? If if the the goal we were trying to achieve was we want to stop using fossil fuels for electricity de development completely and for it to be a reliable fuel source that works 24/7.

[00:29:20]We would have plans in place to build 60 small nuclear reactors across the country and in 10 years we'd be solved and that that would last us for 50 years while we make the the wind turbines and the solar panels work better and and develop batteries that work better. But that that would be us done. Now, if if and the fact that we're not doing that when that is the obvious solution suggests that there are ulterior motives there, that there is something else governing what it is we're trying to achieve because the the end goal that is being aimed for doesn't align with what what we actually want to achieve.

[00:29:55]>> Yeah. Yeah, I mean forgive me if I'm wrong, but is it that we because we've left the EU, we're now free from the state aid rules which is allowing us to start investing in some of these modular nuclear reactors.

[00:30:05]>> There are certainly there are different ways that we can fund them. There are different funding methods and structures that we can use um which makes it easier for us to raise private capital to to to have better funding for for for small nuclear reactors because we've left the EU. That's certainly the case. But also again with single market rules, you have to give the same access to all suppliers across the EU for anything that you do.

[00:30:34]You have to treat every every supplier the same, whether it's in the UK or in Romania or whatever. You have to give them all the same access and ability to bid. So we're able to also prioritize UK suppliers for procurement decisions keeping that money within the EU economy. So the keeping it in the UK economy, sorry. So there are many nuances to to to to these decisions and and flexibilities that we now have that we didn't have before, but ultimately we are in control of our of our of our legislative book. We we can decide what the laws are. So if if we don't like something anymore, if we want to do something different, we can just choose to do it. We have a government that can choose if it wants to to change the laws to be able to do something in a different way. Whereas before we would not have had that flexibility at all.

[00:31:25]>> Well, when we started this conversation, I mentioned the the politics of it all and the fact of the matter is the EU is very powerful and it can it can do things to punish us. We saw that with the vaccines. You know, they tried to stop any export of vaccines into the United Kingdom. We were branded plague island.

[00:31:42]>> Does that cail our ability to move?

[00:31:45]>> Because in effect, we had a thousand years. Our strategic policy was no dominant power in Europe. What we then did was help grow this massive union of bureaucrats and then we've united them and then we've left them and we put ourselves at their mercy.

[00:32:03]So the interesting offset to that is the fact that the size of the EU suggests that it should be better at negotiating, should be better at at forcing things through, but it is the pace and the conflict and the bureaucracy of the EU that offsets that completely and makes it redundant.

[00:32:23]So, as as we saw with this the the start of the of the renewed conflict in Ukraine, we had weeks of of of EU member states not wanting to help out, not willing to help out. Um, whereas the UK was sending over arms the next day uh to to such an extent where where Germany was saying we couldn't fly through their airspace to to take weapons to Ukraine, which is ridiculous when you think of it now.

[00:32:48]>> Yeah. Yeah. we we we'll provide some secondhand helmets and we'll we'll we'll provide missiles, you know, we we'll we'll provide end-law rockets. The these these things unfortunately you see play out on a daily basis and and and there's been recent comments by the the German Chancellor Mertz. He he was saying just I think it's um only a few months ago uh at the the WF conference uh he was saying that Germany and Europe have have wasted incredible potential for growth and and and that um they've become world champions of overregulation. It the the things that we were saying 10 years ago as this is why we need to leave. We've been trying to change the EU. We've been we've been telling you that things could be better.

[00:33:36]the arguments that we were making uh in in 2014 before we even called the referendum when we were trying to renegotiate our position with the EU, all those arguments have come to pass.

[00:33:46]You know, the the the the asylum and immigration issues that we wanted to cail have have just become worse and become more of a problem for the EU since we left. And if if we would be in a different world right now if Cameron had gone and proposed changes that he wanted and had got them, we would still be EU members and the EU would have less immigration and asylum consents.

[00:34:09]>> I think what I'm getting at here is how much leverage do they have over us? We have walked a thin line since we left, especially since Boris left. Um, and I'm wondering if we went full out, you know, this the original idea of global Britain, Singapore on temps, whatever else, how realistic that truly would be.

[00:34:27]>> Um, how much leverage do they have over us? Have we now become this small country at the door of a bigger power that will meddle in our affairs and stop us from reaching our full potential? I think that's what I'm asking.

[00:34:41]>> It it depends. It depends on how you look at it because they are always going to be there. I I don't think the EU is going to survive in its current form for for much longer. I think that um their march towards federalism will will drive some of their members away. So perhaps they end up with a with a we end up with a United States of Europe on our doorstep that has 20 members or or or something along those lines. I don't think it'll stay the way that it is. And once that's created, the doors will close on on any new membership. So I think we see that over the next 10 or 20 years. But they they certainly have an ability because of our the the nature of our ties to the EU, an ability to to to make life difficult for us. You know, we we've seen suggestions from the French of uh if you don't give us access to your fisheries, we're going to cut off uh your electricity grid access. Threats of of that nature make things difficult because of our ties. But we should look at the other side of that and say if these are our allies, if these are the people that we're wanting to rely on and when we want to make a change that is better for the British people, we get threats as as you mentioned with with CO, you know, the one of the things that I didn't I think didn't get anywhere near enough attention in in in the press in the UK was at the start of the COVID um the the COVID panic.

[00:36:00]We had the RNHS had a supply deal with a major um PPE supplier in France. Uh and the French government cancelled that order even though it was a a specifically an order for if there's an emergency you are going to supply us with a bulk amount of XY Z and the French government stopped that and said no we want to keep it for ourselves.

[00:36:23]Now, if in times of struggle, in times of when you need your your allies to be there for you, if that is the behavior that you see, then we should take that as as as the message that it is of actually we we are still allies, but we're not as close as maybe we think we are.

[00:36:43]>> And and we should we should treat um we should treat our allies reciprocally.

[00:36:49]you know, if if if it the same we see with with um the treatment of our tourists at Egates. It has never been a problem for us to be able to use the E-gates. Uh and there are a number of EU member states that even just a year after we left, we're already allowing British citizens to go through the E-gates because we were major tourists in their areas. Spain and Portugal were were first out out the gate as it were to to to reintroduce that. But we're still seeing now EU member states choosing to not add British citizens to Egates and and that isn't a technical issue. That isn't a a legal issue. It is it's spite more than anything else. And and we should take that as the message that it is. We want to be good partners and neighbors of our EU friends. We don't want to have the same structures and to have an extra government for our government, but they're fine to have that. We just want to be a good neighbor and a friend who lives nearby and and and we work well with each other and and as I've mentioned that you know our leaving was unfortunately an existential threat for the EU and so their behavior is one of of malice and of spite at times and and EU members and and MEPs have said the same thing that actually we need to stop treating the UK like someone to attack because actually they're an ally and we need them on the same page.

[00:38:15]Yeah, I mean the French have formed for this. They did this in Napoleon Napoleonic times, didn't they? They tried to cut off our trade with all the Europeans and they lost then and hopefully they'll lost, they'll lose now. And what did we do? We went out and we traded with the world. Um >> yeah, >> a large part of the argument has been from the left, from the remainer side, that we should not diverge too much from the EU so that we can maintain our access to trade with our largest trading partner. Now what they don't tell us is that the EU is not the majority of our trade. So okay, it might be the largest trading partner, but then why would we cut our nose off from the majority of our trade and one thing that we've joined is the CPTP with the Asia Pacific countries. You know, this region with huge potential for growth if we actually look forward rather than look at where we are or look at the past for a change. How beneficial has that been and how much is the benefit that we get from that something standing in the way of them fully dragging us back in?

[00:39:15]I was quite optimistic actually about the CPTP. I and I and I still am that that it will be a a good barrier to going too far into back into the EU to prevent that sort of that sort of behavior. mostly out of it being further evidence that we can do better as the CPTP agreement with those now 12 nations as Costa Rica in the last few days has has come to an agreement to to join the CPTP as well. So there will be 13 nations and I think there's another eight that are in the queue. So the CPTP is on its way to be actually what the EU should have stayed being the the trade block that the EEC was of mutual cooperation and mutual recognition uh and free trade and and and and working collaboratively with every one of those countries. If the EU already had a deal with them, the CPTP agreement is better. And so for all of those nations, we have a better trade agreement than we did within the EU. But every trade agreement that we have that we've tried to improve since we left, we have successfully improved. And actually other countries were saying that before we left as well of of um Japan and Canada both said they the trade deals they were able to agree with the EU were more limited than they wanted them to be. They wanted to be more comprehensive. you just there are when you've got 27 or 28 countries trying to agree on a trade mandate, each one of those has vested interests. Each one of those has industries it wants to protect. And so you end up, and I've I've made this this this argument before and I give the example in the book, funnily enough, um if you tried to get 28 people to decide on what pizza they wanted, try and order a pizza for 28 people that they're all going to like, you know, one of them is going to be vegan, one of them's going to have a a a non-dairy uh you end up with nothing because every single one has got something they need to protect. And actually the UK was very different. You mentioned it earlier about as being a services economy, not a goods economy.

[00:41:24]So when you have 28 countries trying to agree on what toppings they want on their pizza, about the only thing that they can agree is, well, the UK wants this, but the rest of us don't. We're as an economy, we're closer to Switzerland and there is a reason why Switzerland is outside the EU and not inside because its economy doesn't match with the the aims and the and and and the targets of of of the rest of the nations.

[00:41:49]one I mean our largest livewire issue at the moment is immigration and the small boats crisis coming from Calala >> um well and the northern French coast really north Cali and moving into Belgium now apparently and everyone now on the left is saying that this has happened because of Brexit we don't have the Dublin agreement anymore we can't just send these people back to the country they came from I'm not sure how much we ever did that anyway and from what I know the problem with migrant camps in Calala has been going on for decades because they were just going through the tunnel before or on the trains or on lries. Um is that overstated then?

[00:42:28]So it's it's a complete fabrication is is is is the the the quick way of say so um the Dublin agreement only ever increased migration to the UK not decreased. So uh every year you saw more coming to the UK than from the UK as one of the the reasons for another country being suitable in within the Dublin agreement is they speak the language and we have one of the the biggest languages in the world. You more people speak English than I think there's only Spanish and Chinese. You know it's not they're not going to be turning up as French speakers. They're going to be turning up English speakers. So the other member states were saying this person would be better in the UK cuz they speak English and and by and large we have accepted that request. But when we've requested to send someone back somewhere else, the other countries just said no. There was no when when it said oh the Dublin agreement allowed us to send people to other countries. Uh the Dublin agreement allowed us to ask and the other countries would just say no. And there was no there was no ability for us to force people to be deported. It was a can you please take this person back?

[00:43:35]No. And then that was it. So we we were holding up our side of the bargain with that. And it is a godsend that we are not still in the Dublin agreement with the volume. You know the the UK is only seeing a small portion of the the uh immigration into the EU over the past decade. you know when when we talk about having received 50 or 60,000 people the French have seen 300,000 people so it it is a massive massive amount that that that have been arriving and the fact that all of those people would be more likely to to be speaking English you know we we would have seen huge increases in the amount of people requested but also the Dublin regulation is being replaced now with the the EU uh migration and asylum pact and part of that uh has um a solidarity mechanism to say well the the south of Europe is receiving most of the the inbound illegal migration and it is hard for those countries which it is for them to sustain that that volume of people arriving all the time. So every six months the EU is going to decide on a quot of that that population that has arrived and redistribute them around the rest of the EU. So if we were still in the EU right now in July this year they are redistributing I think it's 30,000 people to other member states and we would be taking I think it was 4 and a half thousand I worked out that's on top of everything else we're taking in July we would have 4 and a half thousand more illegal migrants uh coming into the UK and needing to be housed and fed and services provided for them. So, it is a good thing that we've got. And unfortunately, we see the argument being made, oh well, the small boats wouldn't be arriving if it wasn't for Brexit.

[00:45:20]Like, it's got nothing to do with Brexit. It's got to do with the fact that we secured Dover and Calala from people hiding in trucks. And as soon as they couldn't get on trucks, they were coming on dingies. And as as the home office has said in in committee hearings, they they project that actually the same amount of people were arriving every year, if not more, in the back of trucks who just didn't know it anymore. So So at least now we know the people are arriving. Uh whereas before they would they were hiding in the backs of trucks and we had no idea.

[00:45:51]>> Well, many people on the left or the remainers would argue, oh um it's fine if we were in we would just say no, we don't want to do this. But as you said before, a lot of the times the rest of the European countries are opposed to our position and we're opposed to their position. And what the EU is swiftly moving to because they recognize that it takes uh you know it's disadvantageous to move at a glacial pace is we take away the veto because it's going to have qualified majority voting. This it goes back to the themes that keeps springing up in our conversation is that the EU that people are wanting to rejoin is not the EU that there is now. is massively moving forward uh in a very undemocratic way.

[00:46:30]>> Yeah. Yeah. The the the calls for would you rejoin the EU are would you rejoin the EU? You remember in 2016 with all of the caveats and the opt outs that you had in 2016. That is not an option.

[00:46:43]There is there is no magic rejoin option for the UK. There is only applying to join joining that queue and going through the accession process. And there's no opt outs or carveouts there.

[00:46:54]There is just no rebate. Taking the taking the euro, taking shenhen, taking the migration pact as they are the the the they're not optional. And and as soon as you mentioned that you would have to take those things, the I wish we were in the EU disappears because actually the British people don't want to be in the EU. They don't want to follow all the rules. They want a special deal that allows them to follow some of the rules and get some of the benefits. And that isn't on an option anymore and and really was never going to be an option if we'd remained. It was only a matter of time before those carve out and opt out started to disappear.

[00:47:32]Wouldn't it be better if we were all together, one happy family, you should stop having a rebate. You should pay twice as much. All those things were going to disappear over time.

[00:47:41]One area that's becoming particularly uh important is which wasn't so much before um is defense and we've seen a a country like ours that's traditionally been very close to the Anglo countries and the United States but also had this foot in Europe has worked at the moment the EU and the US being torn apart. Now initially when we left we were under the tries we signed the orca deal. it seemed that we were going to pivot more towards the Anglo world that we knew and could trust. Um, but under Labor, it seems that they want actually to decouple slightly from the United States and move towards uh some kind of strategic deal with the EU. One part of the Brexit reset that I looked at that didn't really get traction uh in the national press and I wonder if you know about it and you can talk about it is that in part of the text there signed us up to alignment with EU foreign policy.

[00:48:38]>> Yeah. Uh it's it's it's it's a shocking sacrifice alongside everything else.

[00:48:44]>> Personally, that's probably the most shocking thing of it all.

[00:48:48]>> Yeah. the ability for us to make our own foreign policy decisions and to not tow the same decisions. We've only seen in the last week um that the EU have decided to put additional sanctions on China on on trade and and that the the Chinese government are going to uh retaliate with that. Now you may have a decision on whether or not that is the right thing to do and maybe the British government should do the same sanctions but at least we get a decision. we get we get the option to say and to choose we understand the ramifications of this decision. We understand what's going to happen. We're going to do it anyway because it's the right thing to do and not well we've been told we've got to do it so we've got to do it and take the hits, take take the take the pain. And and and I I I find I find why would we want to remove our ability to be in control of our own destiny? Why would we want to choose to not be able to make decisions that are in the best interest of the British people? I I find that the whole notion ridiculous. Um but but on the on the topic of defense, we've seen at the uh the summit in Armenia in the last few days um Starmer announced um alongside uh Ursula Vanderlayan that we were going to enter negotiations to join the Ukraine loan scheme. Uh, and that's essentially the um the EU banding together to provide a loan much as the COVID loans we talked about earlier. Um, providing a loan to the to Ukraine for them to purchase weapons with, but those weapons would have to be from EU manufacturers. So, it's we we'll give you the money as long as you spend it with us.

[00:50:26]And the difficulty with that is that you may remember some months ago there was some negotiations that fell through on a similar vein of a an EU loan uh hundreds of billions of of euros for purchasing weapons uh the safe scheme and that fell through because of the large amount of money that the EU wanted to allow us to take part even though it wouldn't actually benefit us that much as the percentages of um how much of those weapons had to be built in the EU, not in the UK, would mean most of our suppliers wouldn't have been able to benefit from it anyway. But they were looking to 5 to six billion of of uh contributions from us to be able to take part in that scheme. The Ukraine loan scheme is only open to people who are taking part in that other scheme. So the the the Labor government said, "Oh, we're not going to take part in this.

[00:51:20]the money, the price tag's too high. For us to be able to take part in the Ukraine one, we have to. And so what hasn't been picked up on in most of the the media is that that's just another U-turn that we've now accepted that we're going to pay that six billion price tag to be able to have the opportunity to loan money to Ukraine, which will also not be spent in the UK.

[00:51:41]So, you know, we we've seen the press of 1 billion a year contribution to the EU um for for being able to make the EU reset. Actually, when you add on the Ukraine loan, the uh the safe uh loan uh contributions, the Arasmus scheme, the um entrepreneurial investment scheme that also got announced, you're looking at potentially as much as 10 billion a year that Starmer is looking to agree to give to the EU. A and and it's it's shocking. You know, that's back to the amount that we were paying before for membership.

[00:52:18]We're being fleeced.

[00:52:21]To me, it seems that we have an elite who are just delusional. We're winding up the Americans. Their troops are on our soil. We rely on them for their intelligence. We rely on them for everything. The EU's done nothing for us. Yet, we're going to stick two fingers up to them.

[00:52:36]>> I I I find it amazing. Uh and and the scary thing about if you take part in these defense procurement schemes that the EU are proposing and that it looks like we're going to try and join is that it's effectively aligning your defense infrastructure with the EU. It's saying we're going to collectively buy things so we get a better deal. We're going to we're going to buy in bulk the Costco of of of defense purchases. But once you've got that infrastructure in place, you've got that then you've you've bought your weapons, you bought your tanks, you're using that platform there for the next 20 years because you've purchased it all. And so you are fundamentally realigning the defense infrastructure of the country against the EU systems which are not as good as the ones that we're currently using. They are not world leaders in defense industry.

[00:53:24]>> This is a bit of speculation, but I'm going to ask you. Do you think that this is the sign of some kind of intention for a European army that we will be a part of? We've signed this agreement with France which allows them to deploy their nukes on our soil.

[00:53:38]>> We're now coming into these defense funds. We are pushing at least Labor are pushing the argument that we need to wed ourselves with the EU for our safety.

[00:53:50]Are the structures coming up from around us and we'll only realize when it's too late?

[00:53:56]I think that that's that has always been the approach of the EU to introduce things slowly to such an extent that when people realize that this is this is where everything's going that it's too late then I mean you mentioned with the euro if other countries wanted to leave well tough your currency is our currency it's not you you can't leave easily um yeah so I I try to steer clear of the there being a a global like manufactured situation being constructed. I think I think it is a a natural consequence of the way in which the EU approaches regulation is that it knows that if it introduced all these things at once that the public would jump at it. You know, it's it's the the thing of putting a frog in hot water and it jumps out cold water and it sits there until it boils. So there there is there is certainly there seems to be an intent with our with our current government to realign overtime with the EU in like a two-stage fashion. You mentioned earlier is the worst of all worlds if we are following the rules but have no say in them. So first make us follow the rules again and then afterwards like well it would be better if we we just had a say in them as well. We're already following the rules. we may as well we're already paying and following the rules. Why not just have a say as well? So that that seems to be the the the process that we're going through. And I think that's part of the the unofficial 10-year plan of Labor. First one, make us follow the rules. Second five years, we're following the rules anyway. Let's let's let's go back in. And then the EU approach is certainly one of uh a federal union of a single nation state and having a single army that is defending it uh and procuring the same military technology to be able to to to do that. And so it makes >> way co-opt a nation's ability to defend itself, co-opt it military and you've got it.

[00:56:03]>> Yeah. I mean this is not at the very least this is not the policy of a government that intends for Britain to be a independent country that acts unilaterally on the global stage.

[00:56:15]>> Absolutely. Absolutely. And we are we are a global superpower whether we we like to think of it or not. We are a global superpower and that comes with a certain responsibility. And if we are choosing to neglect that responsibility, then we kind of need to let the world know that we don't want that responsibility anymore as we're expected to help. We're expected to be there in times of need. We have Commonwealth nations and uh overseas territories that rely on our ability to defend ourselves and project our strength across the world. And if we're not going to play that role anymore, then we need to send out that memo to let people know that we don't want that job anymore and we want to defer that responsibility to to the EU and and and that's an important message that that we need to send out if that's really what we intend to do.

[00:57:05]>> Some people who've been speaking to some Labour MPs is that they're telling some s some of their remainer constituents that they are looking to rejoin in 2031 if they're in power. um but they might not be in power and it might be reform or reformatory. Um if a pro-rexit government were to get into power, what would you be looking for them to do?

[00:57:29]>> So the groundwork was was for the most part laid with with our exit. Um and and so the the first part is to to finish that off properly and to to polish that off. We did leave a chunk of work behind in the argument about Northern Ireland.

[00:57:43]Uh and that needs to be solved. So, so the the Windsor framework, the the backs stop that that needs to go. We we need to find a better solution for that. That doesn't mean that um Northern Ireland is prioritizing trade with the EU over trade with with the UK. That is simply not something that you do as as as a as a nation. You don't carve off a part of your country and accept that you're going to have a worse relationship with one part of your country. So, so that needs to be solved and needs to be solved better. And and I think the the arguments that the EU made at the time that they were going to put up borders and then those borders would cause problems. Well, then don't put up borders. There's technical solutions that that can achieve all of these things. Uh and you don't need to do that. So why threaten something and then say that thing you're threatening would be a bad thing. Just don't threaten it.

[00:58:29]Uh and we can sort that now that we're out. Uh and and so to to to resolve that I think is an important thing. um to return to optimism and opportunity I think is very important that we have an opportunity to diverge. we have an opportunity to look to the future and to say well this this is where we're heading how do we best optimize our system our government our infrastructure to achieve those aims and those ambitions and that isn't to reject everything the EU does the EU comes up with a great idea we should absolutely copy it absolutely 100% the same way as if Singapore comes up with a good idea we should copy that too yeah I I'm an equal opportunities um play plagiarist if someone else comes up with a good idea let's do So there's obviously economies around the world that are doing things that make more sense and there's other ways in which we will look at things and say actually this doesn't fit us. We should do something differently. We have that opportunity. We should take that on full throat. Like this is what we want to do.

[00:59:30]We're going to optimize. We're going to be optimistic about the future. And there have been changes that have been made over the past few years that have tried to slowly encroach EU control over our systems. And again, those should be removed and and reset. And and and if that causes further arguments with with the EU, then so be it. But we need to get back to a point where we are acting as partners who are fully sovereign separate partners and we're treating each other with a mutual respect, not with the only way that we'll trade with you is if we control you. That that you can't work in that scenario. It doesn't make any sense to work in that world.

[01:00:12]>> Okay, thank you so much for your time.

[01:00:15]How absolute pleasure.