Why we need more drunk MPs | Last Orders

Hinzugefügt: 2026-05-09

[00:00:00]I've always said that the the optimal level of drinking for most things is not zero. It's not zero for doing this. It's not zero for doing interviews. It's not even zero probably for writing. Rent controls do not work, have never worked, will never work. And I think Rachel Ree understands enough about economics that she also knows um they they won't work.

[00:00:21]ally not give disability benefits, incapacity benefits, PIPs, to people who have mental health conditions unless those mental health conditions are extremely severe and acute.

[00:00:37]Hello and welcome back to Last Orders.

[00:00:39]I'm Tom Slater, editor of Spiked, joined as I am in every single episode by Chris Lan from the IIA. How you doing, Chris?

[00:00:46]>> I'm always nice to look at you head on these days. You're enjoying this new arrangement.

[00:00:51]>> I'm very impressed. Yeah, >> it's great to have you as always. Also great to have first time on the show, Michael Simmons, economics editor of The Spectator. How you doing, Michael?

[00:00:57]>> Very good. Thank you for having me on.

[00:00:58]>> Not at all. We talk about a lot today.

[00:01:00]Your benefits, treats, cover feature for the spectator a couple of weeks ago.

[00:01:05]We're going to check in with our old friend, the tobacco vapes bill. In a while, and also talk about the epidemic of drinking in Westminster, at least according to one Hannah Spencer MP.

[00:01:14]Before we get into all that, just want to give you your reminder about the Spike Summit coming up on Saturday the 27th of June featuring all those wonderful speakers you've already read about. Lionel Shrivever, Catherine Burbles, Constinger Own Brendon O'Neal, and more that we're going to announce shortly. So, if you want to get tickets to that, go to spikeenonline.com/events.

[00:01:32]And if you're a Spike supporter, you can get a very healthy discount. So, make sure you take advantage of that. So, Michael, let's start with you and this really interesting piece that you wrote a few weeks ago looking at these extra kind of treats and bonuses and offers which exist for people who are on benefits. I know that the benefits issue in general is something we can get into, but just on your piece um what did you find out and do you think many people were aware that this kind of thing was going on?

[00:01:57]>> So, it's a funny old piece because um what it's about is something that's not new at all. Um and actually when we when we put the piece up um my editor Michael Gove did this very kind tweet and he was like oh this is this is great uh investigative journalism and someone not unfairly pointed out how is this investigative journalism he's just done some googling and that that is completely true >> counts I think >> because what we've done is we looked at some of the most expensive tourist attractions in London so things like London Zoo the Tower of London Cutisark places like that um London Zoo For example, for a family of four to get in, it's £111.

[00:02:38]But what all of these places do is they offer concessions, but they also offer discounts for anyone who's on Universal Credit or various other benefits. And some of the differences are quite stark.

[00:02:50]So, Tower of London, that £11 example, um, if you're on UC, the same family is just £1 ahead. So, it's it's £4. And again, this is not a new thing, but it's one of these things where the story is not a story until it becomes a story. So the piece is is a lot more about, you know, the incentives and the benefit system, but we did this graphic just comparing these discounts and we put that out there and it went mad. And I think the reason there was such a reaction to it is, as I keep saying, not because this is a new thing, but because people are more aware than ever in this sort of of this broken incentive structure that we now seem to have in the wider economy where the state will protect almost anyone apart from people in sort of low paid or even average work. And I think that's why it's become a story now because people are, you know, just feel that this is is unfair.

[00:03:44]And I suppose the um push back that you naturally receive is is this really that much of a problem? The fact that people who might not have a hell of a lot be able to go to one of these attractions inexpensively. But I I get that you say that it kind of points to the wider injustice. But what would you say to those people that this is a kind of no big deal?

[00:04:00]>> I think they're right. And again, this this is this is the point that um if you looked at discounts like these, you know, 10 or 15 um years ago, I think most people, unless you're like a total Scrooge, would be like, you know, that's fair enough. If you really don't have a lot of money or if you've got some horrendous disability uh and it cost you loads to, you know, travel around anyway, then you should be getting these discounts. But it's because of what's happened since co, right? It's that um claims for universal credit, claims for disability benefits have exploded um because of things like mental health.

[00:04:38]And I think the volume of of what's being used now um is why it's not so much fair anymore. Um and these things are not well policed. I mean, you just have to show that you can get into the the UC portal from any of these places.

[00:04:52]And we didn't put this in the piece, but I know of examples of a flat share where three people in the flat were in, you know, standard like middle class jobs or one was a lawyer. I can't remember what the other two do, but you know, above average earning jobs and one of their flatmates was unemployed and on universal credit and all four of them got into the Tower of London for a pound. So part of it is, you know, just abuse of literally the discounts, but I think it's a wider issue of it just draws attention to how out of control um our benefit claimment counts and the the our benefit claimment count has got. And the other key difference here is is on what you can earn because when universal credit came in um and I say this in the piece the actual base payment you get I think it's just over £400 is not a lot at all by international standards. you know, universal credit is not actually a generate generous benefit system. But when it becomes really generous is when you can get all these topups. When you, you know, when you can add things like incapacity, when you can add PIP, um, when you can add the various aspects of child benefit, that's when you can earn actually quite a lot of money on these benefits. And so the benefit system goes from being one of the least generous in Europe to one of the most generous in Europe. And again, that's something that I'm sure 10 years ago most people would not object to. Why why shouldn't unemployed disabled people get more money. Um, but the issue since co is we've changed the definition of disabled. You know, disabled used to classically mean that um perhaps you had mobility issues, you need a wheelchair, something like that. Now it means you've got anxiety or depression. And I think that's why this is now kind of getting people's gears.

[00:06:33]>> Absolutely. Chris, anything you want to?

[00:06:35]>> Um, I went to Tail London last summer and I thought it was crap. I know that's not the main point, but I do think, you know, if anyone's considering it, you know, be prepared for disappointment. I didn't think it was that good. Can't remember how much it was, but quite a lot because I'm not on universal credit.

[00:06:50]I suppose the issue really with with these discounts is that it means that the price that people like me pay goes up because we're having to subsidize people. Um, and you're right, it's not the biggest thing in the world, but it does kind of open the door onto this kind of second tier of benefits that are not, you know, their value is not included in the poverty statistics or the income statistics or anything like that, but there's a whole load of them.

[00:07:12]All of which add towards this kind of incentive to go on benefits or disincentive to find work, poverty trap, welfare trap, whatever you want to call it. Um but as you say, Michael, the main thing really here is is the outright corrupt um disability payment system which everyone everyone knows it's it's wrong. It's been hugely exploited. Um I was on Panorama actually about this a few few months ago. Um I don't think they used my my quote where I say what should be done about it. I mean I think basically um the system can be reformed in a fairly simple way which is to simply not give disability benefits, incapacity benefits, PIPs to people who have mental health conditions unless those mental health conditions are extremely severe and acute like you know schizophrenia psychosis something like that. Um just stop it. Just don't pay anything. You can go on jobsekers allowance. You know there's plenty of people on jobsekers allowance. is not is not generous at all. No, I know it's not. Um, but you know, get a job basically, become a job seeker.

[00:08:19]>> And you just need to put the system back to what it was originally intended to do. I mean, whenever people talk about PIP, you always get all these, you know, people in the comments, activists or whatever saying PIP's an inwork benefit.

[00:08:30]PIP's an inwork benefit. And that's true. And that's because if you think about what PIP was designed to do, it's because, you know, somebody at some point whenever it was created realized that if we're to disability proof like every public building, it's going to cost a heck of a lot of money. We don't want to do that nationwide. So, let's just do this additional payment that addresses the fact that being disabled costs money. Now, that's that's totally true. If you're a wheelchair user, it obviously costs more money because you need a um modified car and all these things. What I would ask are the additional costs associated with having anxiety or having depression? As grim as those things are, what is the PIP payment covering there?

[00:09:11]>> I didn't know that. That's very interesting. Why in particular is someone with anxiety getting more money in general than someone who's just a normal job seeker? The other thing people to blame here because we always talk about, you know, politicians and the DWP, but I think GPS don't get enough stick for this.

[00:09:28]>> Chris hates GPS for reason.

[00:09:30]>> I mean, there was a there was a there was a survey done in the last couple of years about anti-depressants. And it was something like over 80% of GPS said that they prescribe anti-depressants for people that they don't think medically need them. is it's no wonder that if you're going into your GP because you're having these mental health struggles and rather than being told, you know, work might be good for you, exercise might be good for you, you're getting given a drug um you know, can be a pretty harmful drug um that um GPS apparently don't think you actually need. No wonder you get into the spiral where you think you're not capable of work and you need to get on benefits. So if you if you got depression, I'm not you I'm not knocking depression. It can be a very serious thing. But if you got depression and you get given anti-depressants, which presumably work, then you're not depressed anymore. So why can't you go back to work?

[00:10:17]>> Well, this is the thing. I think, you know, I think anti-depressants quite clearly work in the acute sense and when they're used in, you know, acute extreme situations. But I think the the the long-term evidence of of anti-depressants, you know, versus lifestyle stuff is is not actually that clearcut. And you know, if they were work, if they were a miracle cure, and I'm not saying depression is like an easy thing. Obviously, it's a horrible thing. Um, but if they if they were this miracle cure, that then, as you say, people would just surely just be back in work.

[00:10:47]>> Well, we're talking about um people a lot to be depressed about. Should we talk about Rachel Reeves briefly and this um story that we've seen in the past um 24 hours of uh whether or not she's going to consider bringing in rent control? Do you think there's anything to this story, Michael? I mean, I couldn't believe it when I saw it because um as much as I've been quite critical of Rachel Reeves. Um I don't think she's economically illiterate and economists disagree on lots of things, but well, let me go back.

[00:11:18]>> Let me finish my point. I think well, I'll just get to that straight away.

[00:11:22]Chris is getting excited. Um, I think a most of her policies are economically illiterate, but I think it's political weakness that has led her um to to making them. I mean, she she she had the right attitude about wanting to cut benefits, for example, but then was stopped by her her backbenches. And I think economists disagree on lots of things, but one thing they pretty much universally agree on is that rent controls do not work, have never worked, will never work. And I think Rachel Ree understands enough about economics that she also knows um they they won't work.

[00:11:56]So when I saw it, I thought this is complete nuts. But um the Treasury has has still not denied it. Um she was asked about it in parliament and and she didn't deny it. So, I can only think that this is being, you know, railroaded through by some nutter who thinks that they do work or it's a sort of brazen attempt to try and win back some green voters because, you know, I'm sure we're all going to agree they just do not work. And I I I really I really don't think Rachel Reeves thinks it's going to have a positive effect either.

[00:12:23]>> But we've got this um renters rights act now passed and coming into force Friday.

[00:12:30]As far as I can tell, that piece of legislation is going to effectively bring in rent controls anyway, right?

[00:12:36]Because it's all about so-called no fault evictions. One of the most misleading terms in polics in this, you know, the last 10 years. Why do you get so-called no fault evictions? Basically, because your landlord wants to put up the rent. You don't want to pay more.

[00:12:52]You can't pay more maybe. And so, he says, "Well, you got to get out because we've got somebody who's going to pay more." Right? That's the primary reason you would get so-called north eviction.

[00:12:59]There might be other things where you're not happy with how they're keeping their the the flat, but you don't you don't want to go through the courts to, you know, have to um have to prove that. But I think generally speaking, it's just rents are going up and up and up or have been until well, they aren't. They are again now cuz everyone's selling up. So, what the act is going to do is introduce some sort of bloody ombudsman who is going to decide what the correct rent is going to be. and these are all going to be a bunch of lefties and they're going to say, "No, I don't think you need to put up the the rent. Therefore, you can keep it the same and these people can carry on living in in the property."

[00:13:34]That is fundamentally the no fault vision thing comes down to what is the right rent and some government official is going to decide that. So, we're going to have rent controls in all but name anyway and it is going to be a disaster.

[00:13:46]I mean to to expand on what Michael says in case anyone doesn't understand what the problem is here. If you fix a price of something and it's actually worth more than that, you will end up having the quality go down to match what the value is as it were. In other words, you either get um a lot of landlords getting out of the market, which they've already done because of this no fault eviction nonsense, or you just get them not keeping not maintaining it properly. So the standard goes down to match the excessively cheap price that have been forced to charge. It's been, you know, they have been an unmmitigated disaster.

[00:14:22]Every single country that have ever been tried to my knowledge. Um like all price controls, they all lead to the same thing. They all lead to shortages fundamentally lower quality and shortages and exactly the same housing.

[00:14:32]It strikes me that the problem that the Treasury are apparently worried about, which is that everything that's going on in Iran will lead to higher mortgage costs for bylet landlords and then that and that will be passed on um to to renters. Even if that was true, it strikes me that this policy would make that worse because when landlords flee the market um you know, as you set out they would then these mortgage products are going going to become riskier anyway. Um, and presumably that will put the, you know, the the premiums, the interest rates up. Um, and that cost will just be passed on, fair enough, not during the year of the freeze, but they'll be passed on either as soon as the freeze ends or they'll be passed on if people want to move between tenencies. And we've seen this in Scotland where they they had a um in co they brought in some some rent controls and you know people were just trapped in their flats because yes your rent could not be increased but let's say you lived in Edinburgh and you wanted to move to Glasgow for a job. You would find an extortionate increase because that's the only place where landlords could um you know recoup their costs. And by the way like I'm a renter. I don't have really any sympathy for landlords but you just have to be realistic about it. I mean you you you might not like them and you might not like how this works but it's just a fact of life that the renter will end up paying the cost eventually.

[00:15:51]>> Can I add something? It's not directly relevant and it's a massive hostage to fortune but something I've been dwelling on. I think that a huge amount of what's being said about the consequences of this Iran war are exaggerated and hysterical and a lot of people are just trying to relive 2022 again. Uh I can just about see an argument that there it might have some knock-on effect to housing because mortgage rates are going to go up a bit or have gone up a little bit because interest rates maybe not going down. Yeah, it's pretty marginal stuff. We're not going to see inflation anything like 2022.

[00:16:23]Um I we'll have to see what happens with oil prices, but I don't think it'll go above 5% personally be my hunch and may well be quite a bit below that. Um I've seen all sorts of headlines about such you know we're going to have food shortages and this and that. I just don't believe it. Now, that might be incredibly pang glossy and I should probably never even say it, but I think a lot of it, assuming it does kind of die down, which I expect it to and doesn't escalate, I think um the economic consequences of it are going to be relatively mild.

[00:16:53]>> Play that again in 6 months time.

[00:16:55]>> Exactly. Viewers and listeners can bookmark this for future reference.

[00:16:58]>> Should we go on to talk about the alleged crisis of drinking in Westminster?

[00:17:02]>> People were drinking at work.

[00:17:04]Unbelievable, isn't it? This made me sick. these people. This is Hannah Spencer, the Green MP for Gorton and Denton, who gave an interview in which she expressed how shocked and appalled she was to find MPs enjoying a drink in between votes. Uh she could smell alcohol. She said, "In what other profession or job would this be acceptable?"

[00:17:24]>> I can't think of any.

[00:17:25]>> I think most people watching that could think of many, but that was uh part of what made these comments so strange.

[00:17:29]Michael, what did you make of this? And does does has she got a finger on something here or is this just sort of puritanism?

[00:17:36]>> I'm I mean I'm not the first person to say this, but this is just classic bi-election MP, right? I mean, I'm sure we've seen this before. Like um the one that strikes me that the memory of this is um Mar Black who was an SMP MP. I'm sure she'd said the exact same thing like, "Oh, it's it's an old it's an old um boys club. Um >> our hours are too late. There's not enough childare.

[00:17:58]>> It's not suitable for families or whatever." I mean, this is this is just the nonsense. And um I obviously understand why, you know, MPs are like the least one of the least popular um professions there is, although journalists are probably slightly less popular. So, I can understand why the public might think as well these people uh you know, shouldn't shouldn't be having a drink. But they are I do think you have to recognize there are not doing normal working hours. They are they are there quite late. They've got to hang around for these um votes. Um, so it seems fair enough and in the the wider profession, the wider, you know, economy, I'm a journalist, we all drink.

[00:18:36]Um, I don't think it gets away in the way of our work. Um, I think I think sometimes it helps your work. Uh, the other thing I would say on MPs that I think sometimes surprises people and this is not based on any data. This is just my anecdotes from uh, walking around parliament. I think the assumption of many people would be that the problematic drinkers maybe like the leches or the ones that are like really too pissed to be doing their work as an MP are MPs of the right of center. I would say in my personal experience the ones that can't handle a drink tend to be on the other side of the argument, but that's that's just perhaps an unfair observation.

[00:19:14]>> No, there many such cases in recent years. Chris, what did you make of this as someone who's been a long running champion of drinking while working and in most areas of >> Well, it's kind of a crystallizing moment because it's something that doesn't seem to become a national debate before and somehow this Hannah Spence has made it a national debate. Fair play to the Greens. They are good at the old populism and it's been very lively discussion about this on social media for the last few days and you kind of find oh something I need to pick a side on. are very firmly on the side of the long lunches, people drinking um in general. But it's incredible how many people are vehemently opposed to it genuinely seem to be I mean you go did the usual poll showing 90% of people think they should be banned from doing it and probably a lot of that is like Michael says we you know they politicians make our lives miserable.

[00:20:01]Let's make their lives miserable. Give them a taste of their own medicine. I totally get that. I I just don't think these people understand what politicians do. I think this they seem to imagine that politicians sort of go to the House of Commons at 9:00 in the morning, start literally writing legislation, typing it out, and then maybe in the afternoon, have a big debate about it, and they all think or go, I wonder how do I feel about this and then go off and and vote for it and back home by half 5.

[00:20:28]Obviously, that's not how it works. They get there about midday, don't they?

[00:20:31]Michael, generally >> it starts later later on in the week, but at the start they're given time to commute down from the constituency. So they they get going about midday.

[00:20:39]>> They get in when they want. They probably spend a bit of time with their spades discussing constituency affairs.

[00:20:44]Maybe they'll go out for lunch with with some colleagues, maybe have a glass of wine then. Uh maybe pop into parliament into the into the chamber possibly, but probably not. quite likely to then go down the terrace for some due that some charities put on or some trade or association, some drinks reception might have a drink then and then they're told they've got to be back at 10 p.m. to vote on some piece of legislation and they're told which way they're going to vote on it. Well, are you saying they can't have a drink before 10:00 just because some loser on Twitter thinks it's immoral and thinks that somehow their life is in these people's hands?

[00:21:19]Then this the comments I've had about this abs. Everyone seems to be comparing to brain surgeons for some reason. It's like do you would you like to have your you be operated on with a surgeon who's been drinking? Well, obviously not, but obviously politics is not surgery and politicians. I've never had politicians compared to brain surgeons before. And Hannah Spencer's claim was that in any area of work. Yeah, I mean given that she claim she identifies as a tra >> plumber and a plaster >> doesn't know any they never have a lunchtime drink >> plber plaster Bricky might have occasionally gone and had a few at lunch before coming back that's just completely alien and of course as many people would point out given her party wants to legalize all drugs >> oddly fairly recently until a few years ago my snooker club's busiest time of the entire week would be uh Monday lunchtimes and afternoon because mostly tradesmen there is true that the you The boozy lunch has gone out of fashion. But I think that's a bad thing, not a good thing. I think politi politics is better when you have people like Churchill and Asith and George Brown, you know, getting stoning drowning in the chamber, drinking in the chamber. You know, that kind of those days are over.

[00:22:28]>> These people, they're lobby foder. Most of them are not making any decisions over your lives. They're not that drunk anyway. They're just told what to do.

[00:22:36]Their job essentially is to meet people, a lot of them were strangers from, you know, lobbyists, charities and all this kind of thing. Their job is to meet people, talk about politics and walk through the right door and most people can manage after a few bits. I wonder if legislating is a bit like playing pool where I certainly find after the first point it makes you really good and then when you get sort of towards the end of number two, number three, you're then rubbish again. So maybe it's like that, you know, after 0.1 they can definitely go through the right lobby. After two or three, it might get a bit confused.

[00:23:12]Yeah, quite possibly. I mean that I I've always said that the the optimal level of drinking for most things is not zero.

[00:23:19]It's not zero for doing this. It's not zero for doing interviews. It's not even zero probably for writing.

[00:23:25]>> But obviously you can't >> brain surgery surgery possibly. Possibly. I'm not an expert, but >> the one I would hazard a guess >> the the one place I I might come down on Hannah Spencer's side and this is a question I don't know the answer to this or is are are is the booze subsidized because it definitely shouldn't be.

[00:23:44]>> There's been a hot it's been a hot topic as well. I've heard different things.

[00:23:48]It's definitely cheaper than it would be in a nearby pub, >> but presumably that's because the bars are not paying rent.

[00:23:55]>> They're not profit making organizations.

[00:23:57]I think that's what it is. So, I don't think they're subsidizing in the sense of taxpayers having to chip a bit in. I think they it's a bit like um a student union. I'm not sure student union beer is subsidized. They just don't make a profit.

[00:24:08]>> I guess that's fair enough.

[00:24:09]>> But yeah, I mean I'm totally against having it subsidized beer for them obviously or subsidizing anything else.

[00:24:13]Pay you away. But they should be able to drink. In fact, I think we need more booze in politics.

[00:24:18]>> Absolutely. There's our title for the podcast right there. Chris, we talk about the tobacco invades bill.

[00:24:22]>> It's clear parliament time. Yeah, it's clear parliament of course by a massive a massive landslide majority. It's only about 50 or 60 MPs voted against none of whom were Labor. Quite a few Tories voted in favor of it. Take their names down.

[00:24:36]>> Well, I have taken the I have take the names I put them on my >> names home addresses.

[00:24:39]>> Jeremy Jeremy Hunt was in there. Richie Sunnak obviously was in there. Quite a few. Bearing in mind Badnock on the spectator said that the least conservative policy of the last 14 years was the generation tobacco ban. to have so many traitors vote for it. Should Is there a case for kicking him out of the party? I think there might be.

[00:24:58]>> Yeah, >> I'd love to see Richie soon kicked out the Conservative party. I think he would as well to be honest with you. Go go go go go go go go about his you know talking nonsense about AI in California.

[00:25:07]Um what more can be said about the tobacco and vapes bill really other than again uh listeners do make sure you um click on the u the public consultation on the vaping ban which is all part of this and oppose it. Um, other than that, over to you, Michael. I got a take on the generational tobacco ban or anything else?

[00:25:25]>> There there's probably nothing I can say that you you guys have not said on this on this podcast uh many times. But um I was thinking the other day when Kier Starmer gave his first speech um in in Downing Street when he was elected, he said that he wanted politics to tread less uh to tread more lightly um on people's lives. And by that he meant he didn't want there to be scandals. Um but I wish he meant state intervention because it is >> well it was wrong either way isn't it?

[00:25:52]Yeah, it it's it's just silly.

[00:25:54]>> We speak of the week of Mand it's just silly and without getting into the techn technicalities of why this particular act bill whatever is dafted just just um just let people do what they want to do. And I just find the contrast of so many politicians across the country who seem to want to legalize drugs and things like that whilst prohibiting smoking and drinking. Uh just I don't know make it make sense.

[00:26:21]Indeed. Well, one thing I will say finally about this um tobacco ban is in the previous episode with GW, we were saying how no one understands what the hell it is, right? Because Farage came out saying we're going to repeal this and everyone's going like, "But I hate people smoking in pubs." I was like, "No, that's not what it's about."

[00:26:38]But now it's been in the media because it's been passed and it's been properly discussed on the, you know, talk radio and stuff. People are going, "Oh, well, it sounds a bit mental. Why do we do this?" So I'd be interested to see some poll in not from Yugov but from a decent pollster how people feel about it now.

[00:26:53]It's probably still a majority because that's just the country we live in these days isn't it? But I think he would have dropped off quite a bit now that people have thought about it and come next year when the first 18y olds are turned away by hless shopkeepers.

[00:27:06]Um we'll see. But then there could be you never know there could be a bit of momentum for getting it repealed by the time we get to the next election anyway.

[00:27:14]>> I would hope so.

[00:27:14]>> That's a good thing about this. You can get rid of it at any time. I suppose that's true of everything, isn't it? In a way. But this is one thing where it gets worse every year in a way. Do you mean? So there's more and more there's more and more people being affected by it. Infuriated by it. So it might have to wait a few years until you've got a cohort together who are willing to >> Yeah. It's going to take 20, 30 years to get a majority.

[00:27:33]>> Well, we wait and see. And do respond to that consultation if you've got the time. So Michael, we always like to ask our guests two final questions. Let's start with the theories. So, do you have a theory, a pet idea that you've been working on? Share it with the listeners here.

[00:27:56]>> Yeah. So, I've got one conspiracy theory that I'm totally convinced of and that is that jury selection is not random.

[00:28:05]And that is because uh in a previous life I was a civil servant. Uh and whilst being a civil servant uh you know not a year seemed to go by when I was not summoned for jury service. Never got to serve on a jury but you know got called up to sit in the court and then not get picked out >> when I found out about your string of convictions.

[00:28:25]>> But um it wasn't it wasn't just me. All my colleagues seem to always be getting um called up for jury service and my mother was also uh public sector for public sector worker for her whole career and she was always getting uh called up for jury selection. So I have a theory because obviously um it's if you get a jury summons you have to turn up but if you don't turn up I don't think it's actually prosecuted. there's no you know people are not actually be given these fines or being held in contempt or anything like that. So I have a theory that in whatever the office where they do the random draw from the electoral role for jury service they think you know civil servants uh people in the pay of the crown maybe uh certain industries in the private sector as well are more likely to be easy people that go along with this and turn up and makes the system run smoothly. So I suspect don't have any actual evidence for this of course but I suspect that jury selection is not random.

[00:29:28]>> That's a very interesting theory. I've been called up once in my 49 years. Tom told me you've been called up.

[00:29:34]>> No, but you said you got called up every year.

[00:29:37]>> Well, this was this >> Do you live in a very high crime area?

[00:29:40]>> Well, this was No, this was this for a lot of cases. This is when I I lived in Edinburgh in Scotland and when I I worked um for the Scottish government and it wasn't just you know you get called once but you're not actually used so you're on their radar because that is a thing even though they don't explain it to you but that is definitely a thing. Uh you know I was getting called up for different levels of court >> but he always turned it up.

[00:30:00]>> Um well so the first few times I went and was not selected the final time and didn't even have to go. So I never actually got to serve on a jury. But since leaving the public sector and joining the private sector um and admittedly also moving out of Scotland, so different system, I've never again been called up uh for jury service. So I don't have any hard data on this bit like any conspiracy theory, but it's um I feel there's more to dig there.

[00:30:26]>> Well, let us know below the lines uh viewers if you if you agree or have any reason to disagree with that.

[00:30:32]>> Absolutely. And then finally, Michael, if you had to have one ban, what would it be? If you are a dictator, >> I was thinking hard about this because obviously I wouldn't actually ban anything, but if I suddenly became >> We get that throat clear out the way.

[00:30:48]Now, let's talk about what really annoys you. H >> I would ban Sam Smith's pubs.

[00:30:54]>> Uh they are just absolutely Firstly, they're absolutely dreadful. Uh I I find this thing with like my my posh southern friends. They all love or pretend to love going to like these like groy old men pubs. They're actually grim. Just give me like a chain pub any day of the week. Uh point one. Point two, Tatty Lagger, which is the lagger they serve in them, is is fizzy and disgusting.

[00:31:17]>> The lagger is always well is worse than normal. Give me like a a fake continental lagger that's actually brewed in Burton on Trent or whatever.

[00:31:27]Yep. Instead, >> you also have no choice in there. It's the tally aral bust or that alpine one thing.

[00:31:31]>> Can't even get a Guinness in there. They got their own style.

[00:31:34]>> I just don't want their own style. I don't want their style in Guinness.

[00:31:36]>> And then they've got all these authoritarian rules. So you're not allowed to swear. You're not You're not meant to be on your phone. You're not allowed to swear in a Sam Smith pub.

[00:31:45]>> They haven't got I don't know how much they enforce it, but in theory, you can be kicked out of a Sam Smith's pub for swearing. You're not allowed to have your phone. This one I I don't know. I should I don't know.

[00:31:55]But no, I think this is true. They are told as a rule not to fill the pints unless the customer um says you have not filled this up and that's because the the current whoever the current leader of the the Smith family is has calculated that by saving about 6% on every every pint.

[00:32:15]>> No, no, no. It's it's to it's to save to get, you know, an extra few pints out >> doesn't go to the top of the glass doll even with the head. No, I won't go into this, but if you Google the man that's running uh Sam Smith, he he just sounds like a bit of a nasty piece of work. So, if I was to ban something, it' be Sam Smith Bobs, >> right? Well, there's no slander in there. Is there anybody?

[00:32:32]>> I don't think so. I'll double check on the edit.

[00:32:34]>> I've I've got a ban if I may.

[00:32:36]>> Yes, please.

[00:32:36]>> It's public transport related as per >> I would ban Wi-Fi on trains >> and this is because it never ever bloody works, but I always think maybe it'll work this time. When Wi-Fi first came in on >> So, it's the hope that kills you. Is that kind of what you're getting?

[00:32:52]>> Wasting my time.

[00:32:52]>> Yes. Okay. Right.

[00:32:53]>> When Wi-Fi first turned up on southern trains over a decade ago, it actually worked a decent percentage of the time.

[00:32:59]Probably at least half the time. Now, it never works. I have never been on a long-distance train in my life when the Wi-Fi has worked even for a minute.

[00:33:08]Every now and again, you lose a, you know, you lose connection with the 5G and you think, "Oh, well, I'll try the Wi-Fi and then put your email address in or this and it never works." So rather than go through this, you know, just get rid of the pretent and ban it so I'm never tempted to use Wi-Fi that doesn't work.

[00:33:24]>> Chris, Michael, thanks so much for joining us. Drink at work, ban Sam Smith, and we'll see you in 2 weeks. I hope you enjoyed this episode of Last Orders. If you're watching this on YouTube, make sure you subscribe and click the bell so you never miss another spike to video. If you're listening to this on your podcast app, make sure you subscribe there and give us a glowing five-star review. And if you'd like to get in touch with your questions or band suggestions, email us at last orders spikedonline.com.