Reform’s women rally round Nigel Farage: ‘He was set up!’

It's day two of the Reform Conference in Birmingham and we're going to be speaking to the women of the party. We are honoured to be joined by Nadine Dorries, by Sarah Pochin and by Leila Cunningham. Welcome to The Daily Tee with me, Camilla Tominey. And me, Tim Stanley. These attacks will keep coming. Everybody is attacking reform. It used to be the Conservative Party and the Labour Party attacking each other. There is this cosy consensus now that they don't. And I think that also extends to Restore. I think Restore, the Conservative Party, Labour, that they've all got one enemy and that is Nigel Farage. And you know, it's unprecedented. It is unprecedented. I don't think I've ever seen any political leader have to go through what Nigel Farage is not only going through, but will go through times a hundred moving forward. And I think that's what's going to happen. I think that's what's going to happen. Wonderful. A round of applause, if you will. Thank you. Absolute pride. I have just been told off by a Reform Party member for on this podcast not talking about Wales enough. Nadine, have you got something to say about Wales so we can get that out of the way? Beautiful, beautiful country. Actually, we went there for our holidays when I was a kid. Oh, Colwyn Bay. Rhyl. Yeah, I love North Wales. Love Triada Bay. That's when I first had my first kiss in Triada Bay. We're going to be. Oh, OK. We could spend half an hour on that. We could do. Who wins, do you remember? Yeah, his name was. Was it John Stevens? He worked for British Rail. Yeah, worked for British Rail. Tickets, please. Always travel first class. Indeed so. Nadine, we will get. That was too much information. We will get on to. All sorts of policy and other matters in just a moment. But we do need to ask you about the Channel 4 Stroke verbatim investigation from last night. It has resulted in the resignations of James Orr and Dan Dukes. Nigel Farage was on the broadcast round this morning, and I'm sure we'll continue to talk about it today when asked. Saying, listen, there's nothing to see here. And this was a couple of consultants who have now been let go of. But we know how close he was, particularly to Dan Dukes. This is a blow, right? Oh, look, there's no doubt that it's a blow. Obviously, it's a blow. But if I could just make, like, just a succession of small points on this, because I think it's important everybody knows this and understands it. Because even coming here in the car myself this morning, listening to LBC News, I heard a story that I just know isn't true. So, first of all, I think the most important point to make is, and some people are saying is, well, you know, isn't it. Obviously, these guys were global climate change activists. It was a sting. The party has taken no money. But, you know, if the poll was paid for, then it would have been right to declare it. So, my first point is, reform commissioned no poll. If reform had commissioned a poll that these people had paid for, then it would have been declared. What reform did, the most they did, was introduce the donor to, I think it's the jail partners, the polling company. They did it. It wasn't commissioned by reform. Now, lots of parties commission reforms, sorry, polls all the time. The Conservative Party did it regularly, on a regular basis. And quite often, that's paid for by people from abroad and in the UK. It's the declaration that's the issue. But you have to have commissioned the poll, and Reform UK did not. In fact, they were kind of stood back from it slightly. So, they didn't commission that poll. The other point is this. No money from abroad has gone into any bank account owned by Reform. And Nigel Farage was completely unaware that any discussions were even taking place initially. He knew, he had fired a meeting that they were going to do a, pay for a poll. And that was fine. I think his word was, boom, then that's fine. That's, that's, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. But what this is, is, it's a sting. And, you know, I've made this. I made this point this morning. Nigel Farage is public enemy number one to the Conservative Party, the Labour Party, who no longer attack each other. They just attack Reform, the Liberal Democrats, the Green Party, and most of the establishment. Because there is, there has been a very cosy consensus for 100 years in Westminster that there's just two parties. And there is a whole network of individuals around these two parties. You know, the reason why you see people like David Cameron and Michael Gove and others being the life out of Kemi, Beto Nock every time she does PMQs or does a major speech is because these people, this is their, their, their life's work, the Conservative Party, and they don't want to lose it. Nobody wants Reform, the emerging party to take control. And, you know, I hate to quote Dominic Cummings, but I'm going to have to, that, you know, it was him who originally said, they will throw everything at Nigel Farage, his, they will expose, bank accounts, they will, they will throw the kitchen sink at him to try and get rid of him because he is a genuine threat. And what you've seen with this story is just yet another sting. By the way, this company of a BATEM using these two climate change activists, which Channel 4 bought the package from, it was also Channel 4 who paid an actor two years ago at the Clacton by-election to do another sting on Nigel Farage. But these stings will keep coming. These attacks. The attacks will keep coming. I think Restore, the Conservative Party, Labour, that they've all got one enemy, and that is Nigel Farage. And, you know, it's, it's unprecedented. It is unprecedented. I don't think I've ever seen any political leader have to go through what Nigel Farage is not only going through, but will go through. Times a hundred moving forward. I've been with political leaders going back to the days of Ian Duncan Smith, Michael Howard, David Cameron, Theresa May, Boris Johnson. Did I miss anybody out from my party? I've been, I've been there throughout it all. And I've been in Westminster for 25 years and seen it all. And nobody, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, no leader has had to go through quite the degree, of attack that Nigel Farage has gone through and will continue to go through. And it's going to be tough. But what he's going to need is for every reform party member to stand strong with him. Because if we, if those people who come from the Conservative Party or the Labour Party into reform feel that they are risk averse and want to go back to the party they supported originally, then you're doing the wrong thing and making the wrong choice. Because reform is the only party that is going to protect our country, the interest of our citizens, and to do what's best for the country. And we need everybody to continue to support us to get there and do that. And now the counter argument will be that reform is only susceptible to these sorts of stings because it appeared in that film, they were willing to entertain taking the money. Uh, the fact that two people have resigned will be seen by some voters as an admission of guilt. The fact that in one section of the film, Dan Dukes appears to give a list of names of people who also donate, we don't know the conditions or who they are, but that suggests that maybe this is the tip of an iceberg. What do you say to those critics who say, look, this is because I know this will sound silly in a room full of thousands of people, but it's an astroturf party, which is reliant upon, well, is willing to take foreign money because it doesn't really have a necessary financial base of support within this country. Well, actually it does have a huge financial base of support in this country as the figures show and the donors show, but, um, to correct your point, which I think was quite a dangerous point, almost Tim reform, because it was a, you were implying that what reform do is illegal reform has taken no foreign money. We have a whole legal process in place. It would be political suicide for any party to take foreign donations. Political suicide, it is illegal. Yes, I know, but you take my point that in the film, we appear to see. So let me, let me take that point. People representing the party being willing to take them. No, no, no, no. So, okay, I'm going to cut some, just a little bit of slack here to both Dan and James. I think we are 18 months, a new party. There are people working in the party who may not be fully, uh, fully aware. Or appraised of the legality of the rules. But let me tell you this, if Dan in his naivety and James did entertain conversations, the moment those donations came to be made and went into the process, which is a legal process, those donations would have been rejected. Now, I think there are, I want to say on that point, Dan Duke has been involved in the party for a, and been involved with Nigel Farage for a very long time. He's been involved with Nigel Farage. In the documentary, James Orr describes himself as a leader. as actually having a lead on donations and finance raising. that's how he describes himself so if he doesn't understand how it should be done again if the charge isn't that you're willing to take foreign money the charge could be therefore one of amateurism so so the amateurism one that's that's quite a blood point because as i said it's it is a new party dan has been with nigel since he was a boy and kind of like a sidekick to nigel but not involved in the process of well somebody who carries nigel's bag and organizes his car and the media he says in the film that you're talking to the future chief of staff to a future prime minister that's how he's presenting i think that was done getting carried away with himself i'm afraid not for the first time yeah um let's leave that but can i just say the final point on that is though that the party has and the electoral commission have a legal process which is overseen by lawyers any money that comes into reform goes through that legal process overseen by lawyers and if there is anything wrong with that process if the donor is not an appropriate donor the money is not accepted i'm sure there may be people who tried i know there are certainly people who tried with the conservative party but if they do and the conservative party have the same process in place all parties do no foreign money has come to reform reform have commissioned no polls using foreign money they are the two substantive points all right okay let's park that there for now because we've got plenty more to talk to you about we haven't got that much time clear something up for us though nick candy the treasurer of the party said to us yesterday that kemi badenog asked boris johnson to stand against nigel farage in clacton the tories have described this claim as complete and utter nonsense you know boris well what's the truth of the matter nonsense it's nonsense yeah what's candy playing at telling us that yesterday i was no nick's not lying somebody's told nick a story okay and and nick's believed them he's probably felt they've been a legitimate source it's nonsense okay boris johnson i haven't discussed it with boris by the way did you ever discuss him coming across to reform that's a yes it's never it was no no i laugh because the idea of that is just ridiculous the idea is just you know i don't even know why why journalists even pose the questions sorry that's not to you camilla but laughs actually no okay because i laugh at how ridiculous it is there is no way boris johnson would ever join reform there is no way nigel farage would ever join the conservative party it's just it's just a nonsense um in your former tory guys you obviously still have friends within the movement and you appreciate that from the telegraphian point of view there's a frustration here and it's illustrated by the latest scandal because i think most people in this room obviously we're in a reform friendly and adjacent room but most righties in the country simply want to end this labor government and not have another labor government or god forbid something even worse some kind of lab lib green coalition of chaos axis of evil socialist evil and therefore they're getting pretty frustrated with reform attacking the conservatives and conservatives attacking reform not least because if you go by the current polling numbers your party does not have enough right now to form a majority you might have to do a deal and i know you don't like talking about deals oh we can't talk about it before the election i'm not bothered about talking about deals okay can we talk about deals then because if your number continues to start with a two you're going to need badenox help therefore what is the sense in farage continuing along with you and others in attacking the conservatives you all used to be one can't mean it's gonna need our help you've got that the wrong way around can we need help not if you've got nearly enough numbers but you need the tories to carry you over the three two six threshold that's what the electoral maths is saying right now and i'm not sure last night has helped your chances well i'm disappointed to discover camilla that you don't read any of my columns in the daily mail i do which i'll call them in the daily mail tuesday mail i'm there so i know it's a graph casper i'm really i really know your enemy has always been my uh motto go on don't think we're enemies i mean rivals in the news so i've always been for i've always known that the right has to unite i you know you described it as an axis of evil i'll probably write that in my next column actually i'll pinch that because because labor and greens they probably don't even need it and look at the coziness that's going on between the patheticness of a leader leader ed davy of the liberal democrats and and andy burnham at the moment that cozy consensus that's building between the two of them and and even polanski's openly saying i think we could work with but that would be an axis of i mean literally the last person if the country please switch the lights off if that happens because i think most of us will be out somewhere it's too appalling a prospect to think of and i've always been jacob reskog and myself i think jacob was the original i was probably the number two original unite the right we have to the right and this is a problem because the right has never been so divided and the left has never been so united and that is a massive problem while the left are co-coalescing together and coming closer together in their cozy little consensus we are dividing further apart now i happen to think and i happen to believe and maybe i might know that the conservative party are working quite closely with restore and with rupert low and because there's only one thing rupert low wants and that's a peerage and i think that they're working quite closely together regarding talking about them giving him that place on the select committee he's a deep player you will never hear rupert low and kemi bait knock attack each other ever i think and i i know from my own sources within you know you mentioned that i've got friends within the conservative party the most astounding thing to me that happened when i defected from the conservative party to reform and was quite rude about the conservative party at the time because i know a lot about it was how many people within the conservative party supported me and i and i think you know we can almost say with certainty that that the conservative party and restore are working quite closely together and that's because nigel is public enemy number one he's he's that to restore and he is that to the conservatives and and so they probably think that if they unite the right together the two of them at some stage in the future they can cut out reform and that is never going to happen and what we need to do moving forward as a party is to kind of expose that i think to a degree that that consensus that's building again and the reasoning behind it and to demonstrate why we are the only party that you know nigel farage i say this all the time has been saying the same thing for 30 years he is you cannot doubt his authenticity or his principle whereas leaders of the other parties they will shift whichever way they think is going to suit them at the particular time or their backbench mps are pushing them and any political leader is only as strong as their backbenchers will allow them to be so cammy cammy badenock will talk a talk she will never walk the walk because three quarters of her backbench mps are to the left of center they are remainers they will never let her do leave the achr the conservative party it would never happen because the mps would very clearly make it known they've removed leaders before and they would remove her again if she tried and she knows that and you know you will never see andy burnham cut welfare spending you will never see him cut taxes you'll never see him cut public spending because his backbench mps won't allow him to because they would probably remove him if he did the difference between those political leaders and nigel farage is this mps behind nigel farage support him party members support him because we know he is the real deal he's the man who took reform to the 20 30 plus in the polls that we've seen he's the man who says the same thing consistently over and over again and there is no doubt with the 100 day package that he's launched at conference today there is no doubt that he will deliver that because nobody will be elected to be a reform mp without committing to vote for and support him and he's not going to be elected to be a reform mp without committing to vote for and support all of those policies and to work seven days a week to deliver them so what we have to hope is that our risk-averse general public because we are the polling shows we are quite risk-averse will realize what's happening and will continue to support reform and i think over time that's what they'll see and that's what they'll do i'm interested what you say there are you saying that reform when it's selecting candidates is giving them a checklist of things they must agree to support only candidates who will support what nigel farage has been talking about for 30 years who will support the reform policy agenda as it stands today in this first hundred days we're not going to be like the conservatives we're not going to say oh we're a broad church if you're a hard line remainer if you want to see welfare spending increase if you're soft on immigration you can still come in because we're a broad church reform is not a broad church right reform is a party that wants to cut immigration that wants to stop the boats that wants to cut welfare spending that wants to increase defence spending, that wants to deliver for the people of Britain, make Britain a secure place again and protect Britain. Now, if you're coming to reform to be a candidate and you don't believe in any of those principles, then you probably won't get through the selection process. OK. This is Bill Does a Women of Reform event and we want to take the challenges and issues facing women very seriously. So I do want to ask, do you think Andy Burnham is good-looking? Well, I've known Andy Burnham since he was a boy. You know, I'll tell you a little-known fact. I'm going back to Wales. Andy Burnham. No, but Andy Burnham told me something I didn't know about my family. OK. In my first week. So I knew there was this, like, family secret about my great-grandfather and something to do with football and I didn't know what it was. And Andy Burnham walked up to me and went, do you know your great-grandfather was one of the founders of Everton Football Club? And I said, ooh. And he's in the official Blue Book and the first chapter of the book, there's a big section on him. Did you know that? And I said. No, I did not. It's always been, like, hush-hush. And he said, I'll bring it in for you. And he did. So a nice man, a personable man. So I've always said this about Eyelashes Andy. Eyelashes Andy is a nice guy. I've known him for a long time, 20 years, 25 years. He's a nice bloke. But he's not a man of substance. And he's not a man who. And I hate saying this about him, but he doesn't have the ability to. or the support in his party to deliver real change. And I think we saw exactly who Andy is on Monday and at Prime Minister's Questions when he made his statement and he was at PMQs. It was all about the vibes. It was all about the laughs. It was all about very slow delivery and very long questions and very long answers. But none of it was about substance because he cannot say the things that need to be said to lead our country into a better future. So I think he's a nice guy. He can't say I'm going to cut welfare spending. He can't say I'm going to cut taxes. He can't say I'm going to increase defence spending to 3% very quickly, which is what this country needs to keep it safe. He can't say any of those things. And the markets have reacted this week in exactly the way anyone would expect them to react, particularly in terms of guilt. And you don't think Number 10 North shifts the political dynamic in the Red Wall? Absolutely not. Not at all, no. It does, I mean, where he's based. I mean, if he's depending on people to vote for him for the vibes and because he's a nice guy, and if that's why people vote for Andy Burnham and Labour, then people deserve the government they get. Because I would say you need to vote for somebody and a party who are going to deliver what you need to address the economic problems we have coming down the lines in this country, particularly on the mortgage increases that we're going to face between now and next February. Particularly on the problems that we're facing from Putin and the warfare, the soft warfare, which is taking place already, particularly on welfare spending, which is spiralling out of control and is going to end up needing the UK to borrow more money just to meet our welfare bill, which is going to put us in an even worse economic position. If people don't care about that and they're just going to vote for a nice guy, then they really will get the government they deserve. I think they should vote reform because I think those problems affect not only them, but their children and their families and the future of this country. And that's fundamental. Our second reform woman is here. We thank you very much. Can we have a round of applause, please, for Nadine Dorris? Thank you. Thank you, Nadine. Thanks, both. Thank you. Sarah Pochin is just about ready to join us on stage. Come on board, Sarah Pochin, the reform MP, of course, for Runcorn and Helmsby. Lovely to see you. Hello, hello, hello. Hello, hello. I realise I should stand up, but I'm all wired up. First quick question. We've got Nadine to do the defence of reform in the face of the Channel 4 and verbatim investigation. So let's not go there, not least because this podcast is going out on Sunday and it may be fish and chip paper by then. But let's hope so. Are you sad to see Dan Dukes and James Orgo? Look, what I can see that's happened over the last few hours is that we've had a sting operation by a far-left organisation that have a track record at doing this sort of thing. And of course, we know, don't we, that the night before a conference, most political parties are just waiting for that grenade. And here we are. We had ours. But, you know, they should be ashamed of themselves, quite frankly. It looks like entrapment. This is a bit of a bloke's party, isn't it? Let's be honest. I was listening to. I know he's joking. I do find Lee Anderson very funny. But in the speech he was just delivering, he went through all the MPs and he referred to. He said, I suppose I better mention Sarah Pochin. She irons my shirts. I'm much better with an iron than Sarah is. So Lee irons. That's a good thing. I'm not sure he does, actually, the state of it when I had to take over. Well, he says, I'm much better with an iron than Sarah is. Check out her outfit. It's a mess. Now, it's not. Now, I know he's joking and it's a non-PC party and we're sick of woke one and all that sort of thing. But there are some people from the outside who would look in and say, it is a lot of blokes, including blokes making silly mistakes like Dan Jukes and James Orr. Where are all the women? Well, quite. You're looking at her. But, you know, the point is, my speech. I just heard someone say, I'm one. I'm one. Exactly. I tell you what we do know. We do know who is a woman and who is a man. There we go. At least we can tell the difference. We certainly do. But, yeah, look, joking aside, my speech this afternoon at quarter past three is. all about the equality and safety of women and girls at the moment in this country and the situation that we're in. And, in fact, at six o'clock tonight, you're all very welcome to come to the launch of Women for Reform. So we have finally got to the point where we are launching that special interest group. And it's entirely about having a platform and a mechanism to listen to what's important to women. women of all ages in order that we can feed into our policy team ideas and important issues that reflect what will help women, like I say, at all ages in their lives. So, for example, you know, I asked. I've got two young boys, two men. I should say they're 25 now, my sons. I still call them my young boys. So they've got. One's got a young wife. One's got a young girlfriend. And I talked to them about what young women are saying about reform and how reform is resonating with them. So it's a great window, actually, into what young women are thinking. And so, for example, you know, I said to them, you know, what kind of policy ideas would you like to see? They're starting to have children. I've got my first grandchild appearing, hopefully, in about two weeks. They're starting to have children, so they're juggling, you know, businesses, working and being mums. You know, and one of them said, wouldn't it be great to have tax-deductible childcare, for example? You know, and so I fed that in to. I did ask Robert if I could announce that. He said, oh, hang on a minute. I'm not sure I've costed that one. But joking aside, that is exactly what we want to hear and what we want to consider inside the policy team. At the other end of the scale, I had an older, much older woman come into surgery of mine, and she was talking about, how difficult it is. She got divorced at perhaps the age of 60. She'd been married to her husband for 30-odd years. Everything was in his name. The bank accounts were joint, all the bills. She didn't even have a utility bill in her own name. He paid for her phone bill and everything. And do you know what? When they separated, she was totally almost disabled, you know, in terms of not being able to pay for solicitors, and she just had nothing. And that's a very. At the other end of the spectrum, that's another interesting. That's an interesting thing to consider. Should we be looking at ways in which women can actually get divorced at the age of 60 without it being a huge problem for them financially? Things like that. So I get all sorts of ideas, and I want a platform. I want to be the platform that speaks up about these sort of important issues and gives women a voice in reform. Sometimes some of your statements have courted a little bit of controversy. Let's first of all deal with the suggestion that the burqa should be banned Can you be very specific about what exactly, in terms of Muslims' women's clothing, you want to ban? And are you differentiating here between hijabs and full body coverings? So what I find very uncomfortable when I see them a lot, particularly in London, are the sort of full coverings, faces covering, you know, just a place for the eyes. I don't actually think that has a place on our streets. I think all in our institutions, and I think it's threatening. But also, I made a very clear point when I asked that PMQ. It was my first ever question to the Prime Minister. I was only five weeks in. So, you know, I decided to not go in too gently. I thought I'd better make, you know, say something that somebody would would be meaningful. And I went in on very much the security aspect as well. Because if you remember in that question, I said in the interests of public safety, because I do think that's also how are we expecting our police and our um you know our counter-terrorism to operate and and be able to identify criminals on the streets if we've got full face coverings and i very quickly did extend it uh in interviews afterwards uh to full face coverings need to be stopped you know whether it's sort of you know balaclavas and listen i have problems in uh in my constituency of runcorn and helsby you know these e-scooters and e-bikes now very aggressive gangs riding them around they're all balaclavada baseball kept on it's got to stop it's also been a feature of some of the recent trouble in middlesbrough quite exactly it's very threatening behavior so going back to your question about the burka uh look um i want to my view my view uh is that uh anything that uh supports in any way the suppression of women in this country there's no place for it um you then had a bit of a row with zia yusuf who went onto social media to decry your call to ban the burka as quotes dumb he then i think retracted that and now also supports a burka ban can you just clarify zia yusuf your relationship with him and whether or not he is posing problems internally for other mps in the party so zia and i get on very very well you're probably anyone that sort of listens to me doing my media bit uh you know we both talk a lot about a similar area the justice brief which of course is my background 20 years in the courts as a magistrate so um you know so our areas sort of overlap but you know i'd very much hope that we would work closely together going forward um that particular uh weekend when uh zia did resign you know what he rang up he apologized i accepted his apology it's a very stressful uh job that we all do um and i'm sure it was just a moment of you know when he perhaps was just a little bit you know out of sorts whatever the point is that uh we're very good friends huge respect for each other and i have to say zia has been uh somebody who has always stood up for me always supported me uh and uh you know and you don't forget that in this world it's very it's very hard i've worked out in politics it's a brutal world and you don't have many people that you can trust uh but zia uh is great he's right there by my side but he does have a reputation for being hot-headed and trigger happy on social media doesn't he i'm referring to the recent tweet about a somalian potentially running in holborn and some pancreas and also the accusation that ben wallace who did serve queen and country was a traitor look i actually don't i don't look and read uh all of the twitter stuff i think it would send you mad if you get obsessed uh with reading twitter and i actually genuinely do not go i don't go there um and so i try and uh i do try and ignore all of that uh sort of like tittle tattle on on twitter because i think it you know send you nuts yes i am aware of course i'm aware of some of the things that have been said uh but what i would say about zia is he is one of our actually our best strongest media performers he's an excellent communicator and he's totally committed to uh to his mission and we i don't know if any of you have just come from the main stage listen to zia speak you know he's an impressive individual he's a high quality individual and you know he's a great asset to our team i think very quickly do you personally see a problem with a somalian immigrant running for parliament look uh the labor party i think it's a labor candidate isn't it they can they can put forward who they like you know we will turn choose our but i mean do you personally find it objectionable that someone who's first generation migrant should run for parliament i listen as i say it's a democracy people have a choice who they vote for if but would you vote against them because they're a first generation migrant running for parliament i will always vote for the person that i think will be best for the job and of course who represents the party that i believe in right and that's about democracy so in other words labor will put up who they want to as a candidate it's a democracy would it count against the candidate in your mind would it count against the candidate that they were a first generation migrant i will always say that it's up to the voters if they want to vote for that person if they think that person is the right person to represent what do you think they'll vote for it what would you think i don't know that person i can't comment on that particular candidate right the point is is that we live in a democracy and we should be proud of that democracy okay but at the end of the day it's all of us is we all have a vote we can vote for the person who represents us and we should be proud of that person that we think best represents our views and that is that is to be defended always you know so that there's there's always going to be a range of candidates look we there was a bin in clacton wasn't there for goodness sake you know i mean well quite ask me whether you know you think that we should have a bin standing in a by-election would reform consider having a first generation migrant as a parliamentary candidate well look at our we've just been talking about our wonderful leader zia i think it's all about being the right person for the job it's about a meritocracy okay it's about who is the best person for the job okay but it will always come down to the voters the voters of the labor the someone who was minded to vote labor will have an opinion about that they can or cannot vote labor there's a there's a paradox uh with the left that it has for a very long time been the movement of women's rights no denying that the many things it's achieved for women but it's also made at strange alliances one of them is transgenderism which is not uh is not friendly to women's rights and another is to conservative islam which again is not friendly towards women's rights has the left itself become a problem for women's liberties absolutely and i was desperate to say yes i'm so glad you raised this point because i don't understand why the left uh has been able to position itself as uh as the sort of flagship for for women's rights because you you raised two uh very important examples uh there you know so we have a labor government who is um only uh too um too happy to release early criminals on our streets uh that potentially are domestic violence offenders i worked in the courts for 20 years i know that domestic violence offenders are often going to re-offend um that puts immediately that is a labor party policy that puts the safety of women at risk we have the uh reluctance refusal of the labor party to enact the supreme court ruling of women's safe spaces another example of where the labor party is putting the safety of women at risk uh i you know i would be the first to say i would not be happy to go into a changing room and a trans man comes in and starts using that same changing room toilets i worry so much about um young women in schools you know young teenagers already battling the problems of being young young women um being in a unisex toilet at school where you know boys can come in and it's absolutely not appropriate labor are doing nothing to protect and defend women's rights and then of course we can go on to things uh like um their reluctance uh refusal to tackle the growing issue of a sharia law sharia courts in this country a parallel legal system designed to suppress the rights of women designed to uh enable or insist if you like that women stay in abusive relationships potentially that women don't have rights to their children if they wish to leave their abusive husband um you know that labor have done nothing uh to speak out about these issues well i will because those women are in this country and need defending as much as any other women and how will reform deal with sharia courts and sharia law i would like to see this is you know this isn't a an official policy i would like to see that where you have any form of extreme issue and i would like to see that where you have any form of extreme issue and i would like to see that where you have any form of extreme issue and i would like to see that where you have any form of extreme issue and i would like to see that where you have any form of extreme islam uh ruling uh and and and being established as a shadow court it needs to be banned it needs to go it is not part of our society back on a round of applause on that on that uh front do you have any opinions on halal meat what i would like to see without question is that it's properly labeled in our supermarkets so that we all have a choice and can i just tell you um a very practical example ongoing so i when my team um we have written to all the major supermarkets to ask them one whether they're how their meat is prepared and two whether or not it is clearly labeled now with that work is ongoing but we've we've got most of our responses but we're not going to be able to answer all of them so we're not going to be able to answer all of them so we're not going to be able to answer all of them so we're not going to answer all of them so we're not going to be able to answer all of them so we're not going to be able to answer all of them so we're not going to be able to answer all of them so we're not going to answer all of them so we're not going to answer all of them so we're not going to answer all of them answer all of them so we're not going to answer all of them back and can i tell you how shockingly back and can i tell you how shockingly back and can i tell you how shockingly vague those responses are and we know why vague those responses are and we know why vague those responses are and we know why in my opinion I would imagine there are instances and as I say, we're still at evidence gathering where we actually don't know what we're buying. That is what needs to be stopped. That we we absolutely deserve to know how our meat is prepared. I'm not saying ban halal or kosher meat. I'm saying label it so that we have a choice. Sure. On the women's equalities front, you do need to be careful you don't throw the baby out with the bathwater, to use a slightly mumsy analogy, because the suggestion about tearing up the Equalities Act has obviously been met with some concern that that might also indirectly trash women's rights. Women's rights to be considered for the same job as a man, to be paid the same as a man, to be protected when on maternity leave. Yes. And so on and so forth. Do you know the mechanics of how the. Scrapping of the act could lead to a new act and what that new act should look like so that it isn't then taken off and misinterpreted by people who want to, for instance, assert trans rights over women's rights. Yeah. I want to be very, very clear that reform are going to strengthen the Equalities Act. Scrapping the Equalities Act was was probably not not the best way of positioning what we want to do, what we want to do. The Equalities Act has morphed into something that is not. The Equalities Act has morphed into something like so many of our laws morphed into something that doesn't really actually represent women's rights anymore, because there are areas of the Equalities Act that insist on a certain quota, for example, of maybe ethnic minority or whatever it might be, trans or disabled. It doesn't matter. The point is what reform will say about any employer is that employers should have the right to hire the best person for the job. It should be that. It's not meritocracy. And I can pretty much guarantee there's not a single woman in this room that wants to be given a job because she's a woman and not because she's the best candidate for that job. I totally disagreed with all-female shortlists, which David Cameron actually introduced at one point. I thought that was shocking. You know, I would never, ever have wanted to be part of an all-female shortlist because I was a woman. I want to be on a shortlist because I am an excellent candidate. And then, you know, I'm not going to be part of an all-female shortlist because I was a woman. Do you see what I mean? So our positioning of the Equalities Act is that it needs to be rewritten, but fundamentally, absolutely all rights for maternity, equal pay, and of course, gay rights as well as part of the Equality Act. So all needs to be preserved but strengthened so that we compete in a meritocracy. There is no question at all that reform would ever do anything to lessen female. All rights, women's rights. On that point, we have some questions from the audience. And Anonymous, I don't know if it's Mr. or Mrs., says, If Nigel Farage were, for whatever reason, to depart as leader, should reform elect a woman as his successor? Well, I probably shouldn't possibly comment. What do you think? Sarah Pope, should we better let you go? Thank you so much for joining us. Thank you. Thank you, Sarah. Let's welcome to the stage Reforms Candidate for London Mayor, Layla Cunningham. Hi, hello. Hello. Lovely to see you. Thank you for doing this. Nice to see you. Welcome. Tim, are you going to kick off with Ms. Cunningham? Well, I will begin with, you are Reforms Candidate for London Mayor. There is now a potential rival from the Tory party, James Cleverley. How do you assess him? Is he a threat? I don't think I could have picked a better candidate. Basically, it's going to be two sirs and a Londoner. I'm going to be facing Sir Khan and Sir Cleverley. If ever there was an establishment stitch up against the little guy, this is it. You know, I didn't experience London through a ministerial car or an armoured Range Rover. I experienced London through my kids being victims of knife crime, through defending victims in courts, through being alone on a tube, as every woman has felt, thinking, should I get off? It's only me and another man. And if I do get off the carriage, is he going to follow me? Will there even be police outside? So they made the decisions. You know, one wrecked the country, the other wrecked the city. I don't think they're the answer. OK. The electoral maths in. Thank you. Thank you. The electoral maths right now in London is intriguing. So a Savanta poll for Queen Mary University Marland Institute, which was conducted just a few weeks ago, puts Labour on 30%. The Conservatives on 23%, Reform on 20%, and the Conservatives on 18%. So effectively, the righties are commanding more support in the capital than the lefties, although I suppose you could add the Greens and then that would put the lefty vote up. Is Cleverley a righty? I'm not so sure. Well, let's be honest. Once, as with the country, as in the capital, we've got a kind of right-left split. And what's problematic for you on the right is that your vote's going to be split if Cleverley stands or any Tory candidate. Cleverley comes forward that has a degree of recognisability. I know you're denouncing him as useless, but some people will vote for the Tories in the capital, as they have done at local elections and in the country. So this is problematic. How do you get to this magical number of managing to beat Sadiq Khan despite having righties on your flank? So I think the premise is wrong. I don't think London is divided amongst left or right anymore. I think it's divided amongst issue-based. For instance, in the local elections, everyone said we didn't do so well. But actually, if you look at what we did, embarking in Dagenham, which has not had a non-Labour councillor elected in 16 years, it's been run by Labour since 1965, we got nine in. The Tories wouldn't even dream of getting one elected. We are winning in left areas, so-called left areas and so-called right areas, with equal measure. And, for instance, my husband, Barbara, is a die-in-the-hard Labour voter, and she doesn't like us. And so my husband's like, you know, my wife. My wife is running for reform. And she goes, oh, I don't like reform. But she said, I'm a small business. If they put more money in my pocket, I will vote for them. And I think that's what you're seeing in politics. It is issue-based. It is no longer amongst right or left. It's, are my streets safe? Can my kids afford a home in London? Is the tube working? Can I bloody well drive without getting some sort of fine for something? It's all these things. And who do they trust to bring about that change? And also, I'll point out, it's very difficult to look at it electorally, because in the previous elections, obviously, there wasn't this fracturing of left or right or politics. We didn't exist. And just this time last year, I was the only reform councillor. Reform was non-existent in London. And we've gone from 13% in May to 20% now, despite reform not, you know, kind of stagnating nationally. So we're doing well in London. And, yeah, as I say, I don't think, I just don't think it's issue-based anymore. I think it's who do you trust to solve the issues. I want to pick up on what we were just discussing with Sarah. Zia Youssef expressed discomfort at Labour perhaps nominating a Somali first-generation migrant as its candidate for parliament. Now, one thing I like about reform is it's colour-blind, and it seems to me not to judge people on the basis of where they've come from. Hundred percent. And it also seems to me, in keeping with the spirit of Britain and London, that it should celebrate a migrant, a recent arrival, who works so hard and cares so hard about their community that they would want to put themselves forward for parliament. And she does seem a particularly good example of that. So can you explain what Zia is uncomfortable about? And are you uncomfortable with Zia's discomfort? I actually, I didn't understand what he meant by his tweets. We talk about integration and assimilation as vital for the success of immigration. And I think the candidate kind of represents that. I've heard her speak. She's the leader of Camden Council. Can't say I'm a fan of Camden Council, but. She's she's an example of someone who came here very young and became British. You know, I can't I can't fault that now. Good. OK, fine. I'm pleased to I'm pleased you said that, picking up on what you were saying earlier about your experience with crime and your family's experience with crime. Do you think that there's been too much of an expectation of women to adjust their behaviour in light of changing security in the capital, that now it's almost seen as incumbent upon them to protect themselves rather than the community protecting them and making sure there's no miscreants? Well, it was never up to the community to protect, right? Because, you know, you say government has monopoly of violence. So it is that is why protection of the public is the first duty of government. So I always expected the police to have my back if a crime happened. You know, I spoke to a lady whose son was stabbed to death and. She's like there wasn't even a police station for him to run to. You know, we don't have police stations. In London, we only in a city of nine million. We have a counter, only one counter, two counters, actually, for 24 hours. I spoke to a lady. She wrote to me in desperation. She was raped. And the police said they wouldn't prosecute because she was smiling on the CCTV before she went up. And I actually wrote to them after. And I have I have the receipts, as they say, on X. And and the police literally said, we're not going to invest. I'm not going to even investigate because we cannot be sure that a judge and jury would convict. Right. That is a trial matter. As you know, rape happens. In private, there are no witnesses. It becomes down to credibility. And so that is also explains why only six percent of rapes end up in prison. a charge despite one being reported every hour. So I think women have lost trust in police protection. But it's not only women changing the way they live. My kids change the way they live. We all do. You don't want to wear a nice watch. You don't want to take your phone out. When my kids are out, I track them. I can't sleep till my kids are home. And these are infringements on my freedom. It's not the law that told me to do that. It's the fact that there's crime. And that is a political decision. So when we talk about safety, we talk about freedom. There's a freedom to being able to walk at night. Or there's a freedom to be knowing, being the only woman in a carriage with a man in the tube and knowing, hang on, I'm not scared because there's a policeman at the next stop. Or if I report a crime. This was funny. So after Anne Widdicombe passed away, someone tagged my front door and then ripped my wing mirrors off. Initially, it actually didn't occur to me to report it to the police. That's how little trust I have. And I think a lot of Londoners feel the same way. But I did. And then I got a letter from the police. I don't know, a week or 10 days later. I got a letter from the police. I got a letter from saying we've exhausted all avenues of investigation. They hadn't even attended. No witness statement was taken. Nothing. So I wrote back. I go, what? What are you going on about? And they're like, well, you know, it's just limited resources. We can't investigate. And I'm like, do you think you should just take some forensics from my door? And they go, well, there's many people have touched your door. I'm like, yeah, but if they match anything you have on file in relation to Anne Widdicombe or whatever, because I was also getting horrible messages. And they said, no, just just no. So it's that. That reliance that not only should the police prevent crime, but if it happens to you, they should at least investigate it. Yes. And I think you're giving a very good diagnosis of the problem that many people here who have been the victims of so-called petty crime. I mean, there's no such thing as petty crime. You've been affected by it. You've had your stuff nicked or your phone ripped out of your hand or, God forbid, your watch stolen from your wrist. There's nothing petty about it. It's an assault. So it's it's it's a diagnosis. But what can what can you actually pledge to do? So say, for instance, if you became mayor of London, would you seek to reopen some of those police stations? Can you do that? Would you have the authority? What does zero tolerance, tolerance policing actually look like if you were to execute it? Yeah, let me explain it. So I would open the police stations. A lot of them are mothballed now and they're just then they're just sitting there. I would open police counters. In fact, when I was councillor in Westminster, I was discussing opening pop up police stations because when you speak to the police officers, safer neighborhood teams, they need a place to relax. Sometimes it's called a touchdown. And when they have to travel very far to a police station, it removes them from the ward and removes them from the community. They don't have anywhere to chill. It's not like America where they can go to a doughnut shop. So I was wanting to open pop up police stations, number one. So there is communication between, I don't know, probably none of you know your safer neighborhood team, right? And they are working really hard and the community doesn't know them. So I wanted to get to know them. So for me, it should be a very close relationship between the community and the police and that's been lost. But also say what you will, but we do not have visible policing in London. You know, I'm a on Oxford Street a lot. One of the highest crime areas in the London. I just don't see police. I play, I like to play a game. I'm like spot the police. There are no police and visible police is a deterrent. So we've got 35,000 officers and I've got a few of them speaking to me secretly and they're bogged down in paperwork. You know, he cancelled the Palantir contract, which would have removed a huge amount of contracts. As a result, actually 300 police officers are going to be cut. That's a dereliction of duty. His priority is to provide the most cost effective policing service. And the most effective and removing services like Palantir did not reach that does not reach that end point. So I would restore visible policing. I would also do an audit of where every hour of police is spent. You know, I spoke to a fireman who just moved back from New Zealand and he said he he's training firemen here and he's saying they have to do regular courses on toxic masculinity. Yet who doesn't want a masculine fireman like? Like you know what I mean? And and so so we've just lost the plot. Then he's then, you know, these guys want to do fire. They want to be firemen. They don't want to be like Anyway, I'm not going to say what they want to be, but but you know, and so so it's just restoring priorities and there is a huge managerial level that I've been told doesn't match what's needed on the ground. So it is a huge order and perhaps a clear out of what's going on. You know, a lot of police officers you've heard have been charged or convicted of sexual assault and that we're interviewing police officers on Zoom right now. You know, these are people who we entrust the safety of our children. Our community, ourselves, they need to be fully vested and they need to be fully, you know, watched. And I think we need to go back to that. Also, there's a huge retention problem in the Mets. And that is because I've spoken to people in the Mets and they've told me, you know, if there is a mob of white people, they'll use all the force necessary to contain it. If it's a mob of ethnic minorities, they will retreat. Because if they get any accusation of racism, they will be thrown under the bus by leadership. Sure. We need equality under the law. I know, but I'm asking in a way. So I would just go forward to yeah, but how much authority are you going to have over this? Because you're running to become Mayor of London, not the next Met police commissioner. He is the police and crime commissioner, the mayor. He sets the direction, the priorities and the budget for the police. So for instance, he's just spent 17 million pounds on workshops to tackle hate crime. I'm not going to City Hall to police opinions. I'm going into police crime. You know, that 17 million could have paid for police officers and police stations. And I think there has been a focus. And I've seen it as a senior prosecutor in London. There's been a focus on policing opinions. There's been a focus on policing opinions, offense, and there hasn't been a focus on policing harm. And I want to reverse that. Also, there are tools that can be utilized that are very underutilized. For instance, there's something called the criminal behavior order. So when you go to Oxford Street to steal from a shop, you get, you know, they arrest you, they take you to court, you might spend the night in prison, you're back on Oxford Street the next day. Sure. A criminal behavior order is something that bans you from the area. It's quite laborious to prefer to present to court. And I've spoken to many people in court and the we love to prepare, we just don't have the resources. Right? Something technology like Palantir could help with. Yes. So it's these kind of things where everyone, I don't know, I have in my area, you see the same people, you know, they don't necessarily live there, but they come to commit crime. They should not have the privilege of walking on my streets if they're coming to commit crime. But on my Met Police Commissioner point then, I mean, a lot of what you've cited has happened under Mark Rowley's watch. So would you look to replace him if you became the next mayor of London? Yes, if he's not effective. Also, I have a serious issue with the Sadik Khan and Rowley. They kept denying that the grooming gangs existed in London and they were, you know, they were unequivocal about it. And we all saw the tapes of both of them saying they just do not exist. Yet we have heard the BBC report, you know, I've read victim reports where girls from Oxford were driven to London and there were hundreds of men. And literally, she says, none of them were investigated. She wasn't even asked about it. You know, girls were driven from Midlands where they were driven to London to be gang raped overnight because their abuser owed someone in London. It is happening in London and it is being ignored. And that for me is an indictment on both of them. So unless they have a very clear explanation, anyone who's involved in covering it up, not only will they be fired, they'll be prosecuted for a dereliction of duty. It is an indictment on both of them. So unless they have a very clear explanation, anyone who's involved in covering it up, not only will they be prosecuted for a dereliction of duty. You know, I, I, I, I, A lot of them aren't British. No, as a mayor, I can't do that. As a mayor, I don't have control to do that. I think that's a council thing and a central government thing. Yes, but I make that point because a lot of the issues that reform campaigns on, the genie is already out of the bottle. Yeah. And it strikes me that in many cases it can't be put back in. So if you're talking about, particularly in the case of sort of lawfare and things, attempting to get people out of social and council housing because actually the British should be prioritised along with veterans, it's practically quite difficult to execute that. Do you agree? I don't think it's just like refugees have been prioritised. You're just going to reverse that priority. You know, how we deal with the backlog is something you're going to have to ask Zia about. But how we move forward, it will be people who arrive on boats will be damn sure that they will not have access to social housing or any kind of benefits and they will be detained and deported. But what you've seen is, with the prioritisation of refugees, you have seen a rise in demographic change in certain parts because they are housed in large numbers in certain parts of London and certain parts of the country. I grew up in Kilburn and it was all Irish. It is not all Irish now. It is very different demographic. And people in London have noticed that and it has changed the feel of London, the way it looks. It's changed the languages you feel. It's changed the way of life. London has changed. And there are some things, even if reform had a massive majority, it cannot change. The fact that capital is a different place. But you can stem the flow. Right. So you can stop it getting worse. As I said, I'm not in charge of council allocation as mayor. I'm not in charge of who's going to get it. But I know that under reform, social housing, which is one of the most limited social resources that is paid for by the taxpayer in this country, will be allocated to British citizens, which I think is just really, like, what any country should do. If I'm not prioritized by my own government, I mean, where do I go? Right. So if you prioritize British people for social housing, you will see a change in demographic moving forward. If you, right now, we have 20 to 40-year-olds who cannot own a home in London. You know, some of them are on 60K, 70K, highest earners. There's no way they can afford to have children. Whereas if that refugee wants kids, he's going to apply to have his dependents flown in and they're going to find him a bigger house in London. So someone who arrived illegally, has got more housing security than someone born and raised in London, did everything right and is working. Because when that person on 60K wants kids, they're not even looking at London. And that has contributed to demographic change. So another thing would also to build more houses. You know, for me, I feel like in London and I think across the country, when someone wants to build something, whether it's a business or a building, the government or the local authority will be like, you know what, I want you to go through hoops, spend hundreds of thousands of pounds and prove to me why this is necessary. You know, I spoke to a guy who was trying to get a planning in Croydon for seven years and I want to reverse that presumption. I think the city hall should be like, this is needed. I need to prove to you why it shouldn't go ahead. You know, there is a presumption that if it's needed or if you're going to build something in this city and you're going to bring thousands of jobs, investment, and you're going to contribute to the economy, I have to prove to you why I'm going to say no. I'm not going to ask city hall to regulate it or some complex policy. I'm going to be like, how the hell do we get this done? Right. Leila Cunningham, thank you very much. Thank you, Leila. APPLAUSE Leila, thank you. Thank you. Thank you to all of our guests today, Nadine Doris and Sarah Pochin. That's us done for the Reform Party Conference. We'll be back tomorrow, 5pm. We'll be right back.