Nigel Farage on Putin, Immigration and Taking Risks | The Mishal Husain Show
Summary
Political Landscape: Nigel Farage discusses his potential to become the UK Prime Minister, highlighting his party's recent lead in opinion polls and his experience in politics, despite limited governing experience.
Economic Policy: Farage emphasizes the need for economic reform, criticizing the current government's handling of Brexit and advocating for a renegotiation of the UK's relationship with the EU.
Financial Sector Insights: Reflecting on his past as a commodities trader, Farage critiques the UK's financial regulation, suggesting a need for innovation and a shift towards embracing digital currencies.
Immigration Stance: He advocates for stricter immigration controls, drawing parallels to the US's ICE operations, and emphasizes the need for risk-taking in both economic and political spheres.
Leadership Style: Farage positions himself as a risk-taker and disruptor, aiming to inspire a cultural shift towards entrepreneurship and innovation in the UK.
International Relations: He discusses his views on NATO and Russia, defending his stance against accusations of being soft on Russia, and outlines his approach to international diplomacy.
Regulatory Reforms: Farage calls for a radical rethink of financial regulation, criticizing the Financial Conduct Authority and suggesting a return of regulatory powers to the Bank of England.
Vision for Britain: He envisions a Britain that embraces its historical strengths in innovation and entrepreneurship, advocating for a forward-looking approach to national greatness.
Transcript
Hello and welcome. I'm Mishal Husain, and this show is a place where every weekend you can hear one essential conversation. I hope it provides some insight into the ideas and the people shaping our world. Now, when the Brexit vote happened, nearly ten years ago, you might have thought it was the career peak for those who had defined themselves by campaigning for the UK to leave the European Union. Now it seems. For Nigel Farage, it was the beginning of something else, something bigger. The leader of Reform UK is my guest this weekend. His party only has a few members elected to Parliament, but in recent months it's been ahead in the opinion polls ahead of both the parties that have dominated British governments for a century. Which is why people are starting to ask, Could he be prime minister? What would that look like? An election isn't due in the UK for another four years, but Nigel Farage has been good at spotting political undercurrents and he's at a transition point. Can he maintain this level of support? Can he capitalize on his links to the American right and import an American political playbook? This conversation is not our first. I've interviewed him a number of times over the years and he's known for his combative manner with journalists. 'Listen, love' is what he says to me at one point in this. Overall, what I wanted to know is who is Nigel Farage? Can he be a leader for the whole country? Welcome. Nigel Farage. Thank you. How are you? All right, yeah. But I mean, life is busy. Well, I want to start with a sense of the moment, actually, because I'm conscious that you are in the midst of a remarkable few months where your party has been leading in the opinion polls in a sustained way, which is why if there was an election today and we don't really have that kind of system in the UK, but if there was an election today, you'd be, you look likely to become prime minister. If there was an election tomorrow, we would win easily. But the trouble is it's a marathon to the next election. We've hit the 13 mile marker. We're a mile ahead. So it's a good thing we've done what we've done, but there's a long way to go. But also on you personally, the idea of being prime minister, are you properly adjusted to this idea? Because most people see you, this is what you're known for, campaigner, disrupter, someone who brings change from the outside. Actually leading for the whole country is a very different thing. Yeah, that's the point. We now need change from the inside. We've not had enough change. We are atrophying as a as a country we're declining economically, we're declining societally, we're declining culturally. People are leaving. We're in real, real trouble. So we don't need, we now need a disrupter, not from the outside to change perceptions, but from the inside to actually change things. Am I ready for it? Yes. But you've only been an MP for a year. I've been in politics for 30 years. In politics, yes. I was in the European Parliament for over two decades. I led a group in the European Parliament for over ten years. I've got a lot more experience than Keir Starmer or many of the other prime ministers we've had in the recent years. Political experience, but not governing experience, you've never been part of. And nor have they. You did once say that you you did once say that you couldn't imagine having a seat around the cabinet table, that it was not something that attracted you? You know what? The rank, the title, the position doesn't interest me at all. It doesn't interest me in the least. I couldn't care less about it. What interests me is what you can do with it. And there are fundamentally two types of people in politics. Those that wanna be something. And those that wanna do something. And I've always been a person that's wanted to do something. In the past, what I've done is helped change public opinion, helped shift national debate. I'm now moving that on to the next logical stage. Yeah, but I still wonder about the kind of work that in, that is involved in delivering for a country as the prime minister. It involves sitting there with the red boxes, going through the official government papers. What do you think I've been doing for the last 25 years. But you haven't been going through civil service papers every day. It is different. I'm the only living human being in this country who was built political movements on a table like this with a telephone, a piece of paper and a pencil. I can build things. I can do things. My track record says that. Okay, so you're ready for it? It is the job that you want to do. I mean, look, it's it's clearly an enormous job. And the scale of the problems that we face, the institutional barriers that will get put before us. I you know, I do understand all of that. I tell you what, if we don't do this, then by 2035, I shudder to think what this country will be, genuinely, what this country will be like. So we have to do this. But would you govern for all? Because you're not known as someone who brings people together. You're known as someone who chooses their issues, campaigns very hard on them, who's often predicted and made the political weather. But you're not a unifier. Doesn't a prime minister have to be that? I think we've had too many unifiers, and look where consensus politics has got us. Look at the mess it's got. So you would govern as a, as a divisive figure? You'd govern you'd govern as a majority government. You'd govern on a radical manifesto that says the country needs fundamental reform. And of course, some people won't like it, but that's the way it is. Okay. Well, we'll talk about the ways that you would reform. It is the name of your party, but it's also what you want to do. And we'll talk about that in a moment. But I want to go back in time, first of all, because you're recording with us here in our studios in the heart of the City of London, a place you know well. Absolutely. You used to be a commodities trader, a metals trader. You worked on the doorstep right around here. Yeah. How formative was that experience to who you are today? Yeah. My father was a stockbroker for over half a century. My grandfather was a stockbroker for over half a century. So a lot of our family had worked, in fact, on both sides in the city. I was here in the 80s. I was here in that transformative period where, let's be frank, what was a bit of an old boy's club, through Big Bang, became an international global center. Deregulation? Yeah. The city in its heyday, if you like, opening up, innovative, Thatcher's time. It was Thatcher's time. Yeah. And you were a Thatcherite. Oh, absolutely. I mean, back then I was. But I mean, you know, bear in mind we're talking 40 years ago. There were a different set of economic problems. We didn't have the social problems in Thatcher's time that we've got now, but that that's one aspect of life that's worse. So I was here when yeah, I mean, kind of by the mid-to-late 80s. I mean, it was the most exciting, incredible and fun place to be. We did have social problems, though. A lot of people got left. Nothing like this. A lot of people got left behind in that period. And some of them are supporting your party today. We had deindustrialisation. There were mining communities. They were mining communities who had a very bleak time. By the way, they had an even bleaker time in John Major's years when we unnecessarily closed pits. But what I mean is we were all British. There was a much bigger sense of togetherness despite the economic division that there is in the country today. And this has been a theme of what you've been saying. Essentially, you you look on migration as the source of all the country's ills. Well, that's a ridiculous thing to say. Well, you just pointed that we were we were more British. in the period you're looking at. We have all sorts of problems. We have massive economic problems now, falling GDP per capita being perhaps top of the list, although very rarely talked about in Westminster. No, the social problems we were having. Yes, there were divisions then. You're absolutely right. But the social problems that we face today are worse. Look, I the thing about the City was I can remember when the phone rang. That it occasionally was Paris, occasionally was Frankfurt, but much more likely to be Singapore or Santiago. This was a global trading center and I couldn't understand. The City of London is still a global trading center. Far less than it was, and I couldn't understand the political obsession with our next door neighbors, the little backyard market called Europe. Oh yes, it's a big market, blah, blah blah, but it's 15% of global GDP. So really when I saw the Single European Act coming in in '86, I was sort of like, what are we doing? And then I saw the British establishment preparing for us to join the Euro in 1990, we join the exchange rate mechanism. And then had to crash out of it two years later. Which I predicted. The pegging to the Deutsch Mark didn't work. Which I predicted. Yep, I predicted it the very night we joined. I was in a bar just over there saying this will never, ever work. And this is what really got me into politics. I couldn't understand what I saw in my day to day life here. what I saw government doing were two very different things. Hmm. So it was that, there's a direct link then between Brexit and your work in the city? Absolutely. Yeah. In the 1980s and 1990s, you came here at the age of 18 actually, straight out of school. When you look at Brexit today and what has happened in the last nine years, and you say that it's a poorer country today than it was, do you think it was worth having the referendum in 2016? Do I think freedom is worth it? Yes, absolutely. Do I think self-government is worth, governance, is worth it? Yes, of course I do. Do I think the ability to control your borders is worth having? Yes, I do. Now, have we exercised it? No. But that's why I ask the question, was it worth having it in 2016? The vote. Given what we know now, Sterling has never recovered its value. Stirling's been falling for decades. Business investment, which was rising steadily, has not, has stalled since then. No, I mean, look, you know, even as Keir Starmer himself says, the deep seated economic problems within the country pre-date Brexit, even predate the pandemic and our response to it. You know, our productivity problems being perhaps just one very, very good example. I am angry that a Conservative government with a whopping great majority didn't take advantage of it. And do you think you could have done better if you were prime minister? Oh miles better. Miles better. And I hate to see what's happening in the City. So then if you were prime minister, and I can ask you this question because the way the polls are looking right now. So today, if you became prime minister, would you rip up the treaty, the agreement that Keir Starmer made with the EU earlier this year? Well, the whole treaty is up for renegotiation anyway. It's a very poor treaty. We can do a lot better than that. We'll have to play hardball. If you play hardball, you have to mean it. That's the art of. I've heard this before. Well yeah, but from whom? Well, I've heard this before from, okay, from conservatives, not from people in your party, but from people who believed in Brexit. Weak people. They didn't believe in it. They didn't believe in it. Wait. They never, Mishal, they never believed in it. Let's just go back to what you would do then. They belatedly, they belatedly accepted Brexit, because if they hadn't, they would have faced political extinction. So if Brexit has never been done properly, you as prime minister would reshape our relationship with the EU. I wouldn't be running. I wouldn't be running. What do you mean? If Brexit hadn't happened. The reason I'm here. No, I mean, if you were prime minister, what would you do with the current alignment that we have with the EU on many areas? Well, look, we've been weak as hell. We've given in. We've given in. We've given in. We've expected favors in return. We haven't got any. It needs a tough renegotiation. And ultimately, even though we've got huge economic problems, they've got some pretty serious problems too. In fact, the French have an even bigger, not just not just economic, but constitutional crisis as well. You know, giving away all fish for the next 12 years, things like that. Completely outrageous. Total betrayal of what people voted for. But the focus. The focus. And yes, trade with Europe is important. Of course it is. But the real focus has to be what's happening internally within the UK economy. So you would rip up the Keir Starmer agreement with the EU. I think you're saying. The whole thing. It needs, it needs a rethink. Okay. But all Starmer has done. All Starmer has done is make concessions in. Nigel Farage That means you would be taking an economic risk right now. And that's and you have been known all your life for taking risks, right? It's in your book. Everything in life is about risk, and that you pride yourself on being a gambler. Can I read these words to you? Entrepreneurship's about risk. I love a gamble. Yeah. I love stacking up the odds. And it's only been through taking enormous risks that the party and I have got to where we are today. Is that the kind of prime minister you would be? A risk taking prime minister. We need far more risk taking. And, by the way, much more broadly than the prime minister. We need to encourage risk taking in the economy. So you take a risk with the relationship with the with the nearest nearest neighbor, the big geography that puts this big market on our door. You take a risk with that in the in the interests of a greater good? When you're in a bad relationship, you have to take risks to reshape it. So how would you reshape it? You'd end alignment, is that what you're saying? Alignment's catastrophic. So you'd end it? Catastrophic, moronic. You'd end alignment with the EU if you were prime minister? It's keeping us firmly hooked back in the 20th century not in the 21st. It makes no sense at all from any angle. Is that a yes to the question I've asked? You would end alignment with the EU as prime minister completely? 100% plus. Okay. So this is the point. You're still a risk taker? You were in your years as a trader in the City and you're still going to govern in that way if you were elected prime minister. I know you had two really traumatic experiences as a very young man. You were hit by a car and you ended up spending two months in hospital and you were then diagnosed with testicular. cancer. I was. When you're in your in your in your early 20s, and there's another and I know you said that this is part of why you you decided you needed to do things with your life. But there's a there's a different way that that story could have gone, which is that you conserve your energy and you prioritize your family and you think of all that's that's close to you. Instead, you had two failed marriages It's called living. And you went and you campaigned around the country. It's called living. Look I could be a boring so-and-so like most people in politics. I'm not. I've lived. I've had some huge successes. I've had some massive failures. I'm 61. I've got a vast experience of life. I've seen the good times, I've seen the bad times, I've seen success, I've seen failure. I think that makes me better qualified to be a leader than those that have lived steady, what I might describe as boring lives. So what have been your big failures? Well, I've made mistakes personally. Obviously, I've made I've been I've made I've had successes, too. But I've made mistakes financially. Look, I've lived the big I've lived the Big Dipper of life, but I've, in the end, been very lucky. I'm still here. I'm still alive, despite a couple of goes at not being. I think that's given me a couple of things. Number one, a pretty rounded life. And number two, I'm not actually frightened of anything. And that I think, and that I think, is a very, very valuable asset given what I may well be facing in two or three years time. So let's talk about your political instincts, then. Hmm. Can you take those headphones? Because I want to play you something that you said at CPAC, the big conservative political conference earlier on this year. You've been close to the American right for a long time. So you go to these conferences and this is what you said in February 2025, Suddenly, post November the fifth, America is optimistic. It's upbeat. It's the beginning of a golden age in America. That's not all of it. Oh, gosh. Sorry. Keep listening. In fact, in many ways, what we're fighting for is a very similar agenda to the one that you've just fought for and the one that you have just succeeded with. You're going to 'Make America Great Again', and we, in turn, will 'Make Britain Great Again'. Thank you. Well, look. Hang on. I've got. Wait. Listen Wait for my question, which is that you use these words to make Britain great again. And I know that you have a sense of history and I know the past important to you. And fun. Sense of fun. Is that? Yeah, say 'Make Britain Great Again' to an American audience, you've just elected a president on 'Make America Great Again'. It's quite funny. So you didn't mean it? Of course I meant it. But you know. So that's what I want to understand. But you know it's fun. What, what you mean by it. Because you have got a sense of history. I know your grandparents. spoke to you a lot about the past. Your grandfather had been wounded in the First World War. Yeah, that's true. What story did they tell you about Britain's past? What is it that you think of when you think of when Britain was great. We had a stable society, we had belief. Things that bound us. Perhaps religion being one of them. And by the way, government can't force people to believe, but there was a shared sense of religion. Are you a man of faith? Community. Yes. I mean, I'm I have to say, struggling a bit. Do you go to church? Well, of course. I'm an Anglican. It's been a catastrophe for 25 years. What the Church of England? Oh terrible Absolutely awful. So you believe? You believe, but there's no church that you feel like attending? Well, if I was a more regular churchgoer, I probably would have defected to the Catholics. But, you haven't? I haven't. I haven't. I've thought about it a couple of times. No, I think a sense of community, a sense of family. I mean, frankly, you know, the values around the meaning of family, community, country, those things were much stronger in years that have gone by. Which years? Which is the decade you're looking at? That's what I'm curious about. When you say the words when Britain was great. What is in your mind, which is the decade? Well Britain was great. Britain was great imperially. Britain was great industrially. Britain was great in terms of innovation. Britain was great in terms actually, in many ways, I think of taking some very good things the large parts of the world. Britain was great in leaving behind some amazing legacies, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore. Yeah, but those are issues. I'm wondering about what period when you when you look to the past, are you thinking about the 1980s and the period you were in the City, or are you thinking about the First World War and Britain as a great power. I think really what we did, I think really what we did since 1688, I think we were actually fortunate to have our civil war. But we're not going to go back to the 17th century. Well you asked me. I've just given you an answer. No, as a political leader when you think of when you want Britain to go back to because you. Don't want Britain to go Want Britain to be great again, what are you looking to as the model? I don't want Britain to go back anywhere. I want Britain to go forwards. And that's really the point. And it's one of the reasons why, you know, I've been very critical of the government, of the Bank of England, very critical of much of our economic policy. I think we are stuck in a rut. I think we're stuck with an old, out-of-touch globalist mindset about so many things. No, no, no, no. You can respect your traditions. You can respect your past. You can have a sense and a feeling of what history is. I'm not going back anywhere I want to go, I want us to be in the 21st century. We're not there. We're literally here, we are sitting. I mean, I can see St. Paul's as I'm talking to you. We're in the middle of the City of London. We have a revolution going on, an economic, a money, revolution going on with digital assets, crypto currency. It's real. It's growing very, very quickly. And what's happening here? Nothing. Literally nothing. But these are untested ideas in government, aren't they? I know you were talking the other day about wanting to have a national currency reserve. Sorry. We don't know what that looks like. No, because we're years and years behind the rest of the world. Go to Miami, Go to Miami, fly to Miami tonight and you tomorrow morning can go out and buy everything from a Starbucks coffee to a Ferrari with a card that you've loaded up from an ATM in the street with Bitcoin, Etherium or other currencies. And the world is changing and we're not changing. So if you think the Bank of England is. And, and, and if you think about, just one, one more point. Think about it. Actually, we have been great innovators, you know, whether it's the industrial revolution, whether it's the nuclear energy industry, which we led the world in just just a few decades ago, we're very, very inventive. We're very creative. We are naturally a very entrepreneurial country. I think I just believe we've lost a sense of all of that. So the Bank of England, if you think they're so out of step with where their focus should be, in your view, would you revoke their independence as prime minister? Well, I think the big, I mean, the bigger mistake was taking away banking regulation from them, from an organization that had been doing it since 1694, gave it a bunch of tick box bureaucrats down in Canary Wharf. Do you mean the Financial Conduct Authority? Yeah, look. So would you disband that? They are useless. They are utterly useless. We need a complete. Would you do away with then? We need a radical rethink of what they are, what they're for, who they serve, what their purpose is. Isn't the truth though, I mean, you don't really, it's not a question of who does the regulation. I think you instinctively don't like regulation or red tape. You see it as a hindrance, And other people might see it as the things that protect us from wrongdoing. Actually, you're wrong. You're wrong. You're wrong. Because my argument with crypto with digital assets is we need a regulated market. Again, you go back to the medieval times, it was all about having some basic framework of rules that consumers and market users can trust. So I'm not against regulation. I'm not a complete, you know, laissez faire merchant, but you have to get that balance right. But I think you also, as prime minister, you are signaling that you'd be prepared to do away with the Financial Conduct Authority. You would give those powers back to the Bank of England. I think we need a complete radical rethink. Yes, on many of these things. And the FCA has been a total failure. Would you sack Andrew Bailey as governor of the Bank of England? I was debanked. You know, I was debanked. I was rejected by ten other banks. I was literally being frozen out of the financial system to the point I might have had to leave the country, which indeed is what they wanted. And that became a big issue, you got your accounts back. Well, luckily, I'm big enough and ugly enough to fight my own corner. But there are thousands of people out there who've been debanked because of excessive rules or anti-money laundering directives or whatever else it may be who've got no voice for themselves. And what about the governor of the Bank of England? Well, he's a nice enough bloke, but. Would he keep his job if you were prime minister. Well he's had a good run. We might find someone else. Really? He's had a good run. So you are signaling you'd be prepared to sack him? I'm not signaling anything. I'm just saying. This is shades of President Trump and the Federal Reserve. If Andrew Bailey wants to get with the 21st century. And by the way, there's one encouraging thing, because I went to see him last month. He just put a limit on the number of stablecoins any individual can hold. I said, Andrew, this is ridiculous. This is dinosaur-like. Within a week he changed it. So maybe he was listening. But the Bank of England, the British government, the regulator, whatever shape that takes, they've all got to understand the world is changing, has changed very, very rapidly. Okay, so the world has changed. Not just the financial world, the world more broadly. And if you were prime minister, you'd have to have opinions and take advice and formulate policy on a whole host of areas which you're not known for talking about. Such as? Social care, how you'd fill vacancies in the social care sector, but, and national security and there are people in the political establishment, Labour figures, Conservative figures, including Boris Johnson, who think that you and your party are soft on Russia. Oh, poor old Boris. I feel sorry for him really. I guess if you fail that much, you have to lash out at somebody. Look, I mean. I mean, this is, of course, politics and narratives, isn't it? You know, just because 14, 13 years ago I said in an interview I thought Putin was a very effective political operator but not a nice human being. Suddenly you're a Putin supporter. Funny enough, the year after I said that the Queen met him. Now, whether she was seen to be a collaborator, I don't know. I think the accusations come from the fact that you've said things in the past. No. You think. How do you know, what I'm going to say? You've suggested that NATO provoked Putin into invading Ukraine. Oh the endless eastward expansion of NATO and the European Union. And Kissinger warned about this years ago. We shouldn't have done it, but that's in the past. We did it. Putin's invaded. I was really hoping that Trump could bring Putin to heel and that some kind of compromise could be struck as it's just been recently struck with Gaza and Israel. Clearly, that is not going to happen. Obviously, Putin is a very bad dude. Simple. Why hasn't President Trump put more pressure on him? Oh, he's putting huge pressure on he's putting pressure on India. He's putting pressure on. And I think what. And what about Putin himself I think Trump feels that Putin's made a fool of him. And clearly Putin is not a rational man. He wants to come to a logical deal. So the idea that I'm soft on this is just nonsense. Well, what what put a fire under the accusations was very recently when the former leader of your party in Wales pleaded guilty to eight counts of bribery, taking money from someone described as a pawn of the Russian secret services. Appalling. Appalling. And he will go to prison for a long time. At least I hope he does. But you know what? He was the leader of your party in Wales. For three weeks he was. Well, yeah, but hang on. For three weeks he was. He's been, he's been involved with UKIP, your former party. He was involved in Brexit, you, the Brexit Party, your former party with. He's been at your side for 25 years. I've known him for years. I've known him for 25 years. He was unbelievably, you perhaps don't know this, a bishop in the Mormon church. I mean, God fearing to a level I've almost never met, I mean, so uncorrupted. I thought he wouldn't even drink coffee. And there he was taking money to ask questions. Appalling. Well, is it just one bad apple? Without any shadow of a doubt. You can assure voters that there is no one else like Nathan Gil in Reform's ranks? I if if there were if I even suspected it, they wouldn't be let through the door. And you're sure that no, no one else has taken money from those kind of Russian sources? I'm sure that my mother's not a mass murderer. There's nothing. I'm as sure as that. You know, I mean, how can you be sure of anything in life? Well, you know, you know. The question itself is a stupid one. You didn't know? The question itself is a stupid question. You know that, and I know that. I believe 100% with all my heart there's nobody else. Okay. Can I just quickly then understand your instincts on Russia a bit more fully with a few scenarios? So if you were prime minister and NATO's jets entered, Russian jets entered NATO's airspace, where do you stand on that. Gotta shoot them down. Do you think they should be? Gotta shoot them down. No questions, Whatever that does? However much that inflames tensions? Listen love, you're trying ever so hard. Russia needs to be taught a lesson. Listen love, you're trying ever so hard. I'm the only person in the world I think that stood up in the European Parliament in 2014. And do you know what I said? There will be a war in Ukraine. It's coming. I'm the only person that got it right. I might have made one comment once, 13 years ago that said I admired him as a political operator but not as a human being. And I'd never live in Russia, period. Frozen assets, Russian frozen assets. Should be used to to help fight the war? You can go on as long as you like. I've made the position perfectly clear. No, what's the answer to that? They're in Belgium. They're in Belgium So they should be, they should be used? You better ask the Belgian government. But clearly, if they're there through illegal means, they should be. So your instincts is as British prime minister? My instinct is I think Putin's a really bad bloke. And you can sit me here for an hour, you're going to get nowhere. You'd put British troops on the ground in post-war Ukraine after a ceasefire. I'd be very cautious about doing that. But a UN force, might think about a Korean approach to it. Would I put the British army badges, badged as a British army? Be deeply, deeply thoughtful about that. Because you'd be worried about them being a target for the Russians? I'd be deeply thoughtful about doing that, and it wouldn't be a clever thing to do. You see, you see, exactly that kind of thing is what gives, hearing something caveated that way. Well, I'm not a warmonger. Is what, is what gives. No you are quite right. Russia, is what gives Russia courage. You are quite right. I'm not a warmonger, rather like President Trump. I'm not a warmonger. Those that went before have been persistent warmongers. I'm not. I happen to think that what the UN did in Korea was remarkable. And still over 70 years on has held. And South Korea has become just I mean, the most incredible country, which, by the way, does things far better than we do in terms of building nuclear energy and much else. That would be the right way to go forward. So let's talk about areas then, where your agenda, as you said in that clip we heard a moment ago, where your agenda is similar to the Trump administration's, for example, on migration. Yeah. Both your party and President Trump's Republicans feel very strongly about that. What he's done is amazing. So would you want ICE style raids taking place here to deport the 600,000 people in five years that you want to do? Well I think it's I think what I think they see this is, again, you know, I was with Tom Homan, who's his border czar a few weeks ago to try and find out what's really going on in America. It's really interesting. Border crossings are down 97% since Trump came to power. But the interesting thing is about deportations. So they have a thousand ICE squads out around America knocking on doors saying you're here illegally. And you've got two choices. Number one, you can go. We'll fund your return. We'll give you a few dollars. We'll say to you that you can legally, if you want, apply for a skills visa in the years to come, to come back to America. And if we think you're going to be a productive member of the economy and of society, we'll let you in. Is that what you want? The the ICE, the ICE raids are done by masked armed men who jump out of vehicles, grab people and go into workplaces. That's your media narrative. I've just told you what's happening and what is really interesting. They do have masks, don't they? And guns. And they do go into workplaces and homes. Well, I mean, I would hope if they didn't have guns, they'd be mad. Would you want that here? That's really because this interview is about what you would do as prime minister. What I want. Do you know how do you know how many people have voluntarily left America in eight months? 1.6 million. It is truly remarkable. 1.6 million people have peacefully, with incentives not just to leave, but potential. I want to understand what potential lessons you're taking for the UK. What I'm learning is if you do things well and do things properly, it can be highly effective. So is that a yes to ICE style raids in the UK? It's a look, we're not America. We'll do it our way, not the American way. What is that. Does our way involve the army? Our way will involve Border Force doing the job that they would so desperately like to do. That's the job they do now. No, they. How, how would it be different? Would you use the army? At the moment, Border Force are a taxi service and they hate it. So would you use the Army? They absolutely hate doing what they're doing, which is why I so many people resign. Sad. It's saving people. essentially. in the channel and bringing them to shore. You may see it that way. Is that what you mean by the. No. That's what I mean. I think that's what you're referring to when you say taxi service. French Navy, bring them across, escort them all the way, Border force, bring them out, pick them up, bring them in. They drop their passports in the sea. They drop their phones in the sea. We're supposed to just put up with it. But you know what? We're not going to. But I, I think what's really important is to understand how. Because the numbers you've said you would deport are really significant. 600,000 over five years. Which is why I'm interested in the methods. Look, I think the truth is that most people that were caught who were in Britain illegally, if we do it nicely and do it properly, would accept they have to go. It's about 9000 a year currently. And to meet your target, you'd be increasing that by ten times. Do you think you can? I think we can. You know, of course, theory, reality, being in government. I get all of that. I understand all of that. Is it doable? Yes, but but but there is a very important message here. Very. I mean, in most countries in the world. If you enter illegally, you are chucked in prison literally in a majority of countries in the world. Illegal entry means immediate imprisonment. So is that what you would do? People would arrive and they would be put in prison immediately. Detained and deported. Well that's what you. I didn't say it. You said it. That's fine. No you. You said it. You said it. What do you say? That's fine. I'm not playing games. I'm not playing games. People would be detained and deported. Dead simple. In prison? There are plenty of ex-military bases. We can keep them. But the point look, you know, it's very interesting. Australia had all this in 2012. They stopped it within a fortnight. Within a fortnight. No one came illegally. You know why? They were towed back to Indonesia. It can be done. It's about political will. It's about being tough for a short period of time. It can be done. It can be done. You've got a big pledge also to cut significant amounts of government waste. I know you're rethinking your economic plans, but there is a figure in your. Not the broad principles, Not the broad principles? Well, what about the amounts? So it says in this from last year that you would cut waste by the tune, government waste, to save £50 billion a year? Is that still the. Yeah, that was about. That's still the plan? That was about. Yeah, actually we'd probably go further than that. I mean. You, you'd get more than 50 million? Well I mean, you know, Milei in Argentina shows that you can do it, but you have to work out in doing it what the cost of that is. Well Elon Musk discovered that he couldn't cut nearly as much as he hoped to. Initially, he said $2 trillion, and he had to halve that. And then it went right down. To be fair, Milei has. But look, we test bedding this in the local councils that we won last May where we've cut about half a billion so far. You know, it's a very good start in six months. Okay. What happens if you were elected to government and you're prime minister and you find out that you can't find the savings you want? You're in the process of rethinking your economic plan. Well you can find the savings. All kinds of tax cutting plans which are now having to be rethought. Is that because they were unworkable? Net zero. £30 billion saved. Cutbacks in civil service. Tens of billions saved. But of course, the big one. The big one. And the thing that I've got to think out far more fully. Is the whole explosion of PIP, of disability payments. And you are in the midst of having a serious think. But what I want to ask you is that you people said about your plans to spend and to tax cuts, that they were unworkable and they were fantasy economics. And the fact that you're having to rethink them, suggest that they were right. No, I'm not rethinking them. I suspect what we come back will be a will be a lot more radical than what you saw there. More radical in which way you? More tax cuts or more austerity? Well, as I said to you before I came and did this, I'm going to be laying out some economic stuff between now and the budget in terms of speeches. What is for certain, I I tell you what is for certain with the economy, and we touched on this right at the beginning. We touched on this place in the 80s, but we could go more broadly across the country. In the 80s, there was an attitudinal change towards work, towards having a go towards risk, which I'm pro I'm very pro risk. I'm very pro individuals taking risk. I don't believe we should protect people from themselves. We should allow them to go out and have a go. We need an attitudinal change towards success, towards money, towards business, towards tax and incentives. And and this is stuff. That you can't necessarily write in a manifesto. Well, you're going to have to, though. No, you can't. You can't. Attitudinal stuff. You can't. You cannot write. This one was called a contract and there were promises in it that don't stand anymore. No I don't think. You've been at the BBC all your life. I don't think you understand what I'm saying. Alright. I'm talking about attitudinal change within society. You can't put any of that in manifestos. It's about a buzz. It's about a vibe. Yeah, it's about how a country feels. And you know, one of the reasons and you know, you played that tape to me earlier. You know what is interesting about Trump's America and there are bits of it you can dislike or like or whatever. What is interesting about Trump's America is a lot more people in America are having a go. They're setting up companies, they're borrowing money, they're taking risk. We need to get to that place. And as I say, you can't put it in a piece of paper. And the one thing I'm certain of. So you're going to have to inspire people, aren't you? That's right. That's exactly right. Which takes me back to where I started that, are you going to be someone who brings people together, because you're known for turning the fire on people. You're not known for being someone who appeals right across the country, and has a common message. I don't think that's fair. You know what? I don't think that's fair. So give me an inspirational message. Even in my time. What is great about Britain today? Even in my time, even in my time in the European Parliament where perhaps I achieved some level of infamy, was I turning my fire on people? No, I was just teasing them. I was just teasing them. They were turning their fire on me. I mean, we just had a party conference season where the levels of insightful abuse that have come from Starmer and his cabinet are off the scale. I've never behaved like that lot with anybody. I might have strong opinions about express what I believe in strongly what I'm against very strongly. I don't think if you look through my my political career that you will find personal invective, you will find teasing, and not much more than that. We have to we have to have a vibe, a buzz that says to young people, setting up businesses, taking risk, even having failures, even having failures along the way is a good thing, not a bad thing. And you know something? I might succeed. I might fail. I accept that. Yeah, but if. I'm going to have a go. If you don't succeed as prime minister, it's not the same as your personal success. That's about the fortunes of the country that are riding on that. Yes. So you're going to need more than a vibe. Well I think the two are the same thing. We're in that much trouble, we're in that much trouble. What? You as you as one man and the vibe you create will save the country? Well it's not just me, is it? There's a whole movement here now. There's a whole movement here now. And you've seen over, and I'm sitting talking to you. I don't do many interviews these days. I allow others to go and do it. There's a much broader range of talent. You know, that has, that has come on the scene for the party, for the party. We're building a mass membership very rapidly. You see, I know you're a risk taker, but I think the moment of real risk that exists for your party right now is that you've had this sustained period where you've been rising in the opinion polls while you've been making big promises on spending, on big tax cuts. And now you're at a point where having to rethink your economic policy and it's it's probably going to be much more like the realities that other parties face. We're gonna make bigger promises. We're gonna make even bigger promises. We're gonna make even bigger problems. That's not the signals that that your people in your party are setting out. They're saying you're going to have a fully costed manifesto. We're having a full rethink of everything. That you're facing the same realities that other parties do. Well, look, we're in government. Maybe you're not special. We're in government now. We're in government now in the counties. In local government. You know, we're going to do our damnedest to be in government in Wales next May. We may or may not succeed, but we're going to do our damnedest. I want to have to be judged by what we do. I accept that. So is Donald Trump a role model for you, for government? In terms of standing up for the national interest above all else. Yes. In terms of keeping promises that he made to the electorate. Yes. There are many other areas in which we might disagree or might do things differently. Which are the areas that you disagree? There are other areas we might disagree, social policy, etc. We might see things differently. But the fundamentalism of Trump is you tell the electorate, I'm going to do X and you actually do it. And that's what he's doing. And, you know, and we might look at I mean, look, you know, you and I could sit here over a cup of tea and talk about some of the tariff machinations and say to ourselves, what the hell is going on? Well, we could, you know, go back to the thirties and think about tariffs and damage has done to the economy, etc.. Do you think he's damaging the American economy with tariffs? It's irrelevant. It's irrelevant. It's irrelevant. But you don't like the tariffs? No, no, no, no. Listen to me. It's irrelevant. He promised the American public he'd use tariffs as a weapon. He's doing it. So he is. So is he, to a large extent, restoring faith in the democratic system? Yes. And we will have to if we succeed. There's a long way to go. But as I said, you earlier we're halfway through the marathon. If we succeed, we must do the same, because one of the reasons why Reform is doing so well is there is a complete breakdown of trust. No one believes a blooming thing the other parties say. And I think you could be part of that breakdown of trust, because this document which said, Our Contract With You, it's a contract with the voters. It's the document you stood on last year. I didn't write it. I inherited it. To be fair. You were the party leader standing on this document. Your face, your face is right there on the front. I came in after it was published. To be fair. We changed the front page. But look, are the principles right within it. Yes. Can we? Yeah, but there are numbers in it. It's put forward as a contract. I would very, very much look. But you're talking about a breakdown of trust, and you've been very much part of a breakdown of trust, haven't you? By going back. Have you seen what the Conservatives have? This is your interview. This is this is your interview. Hang on a sec. Hang on. If you complain about a breakdown of trust, don't you have to stick to your promises? No I stick to. I would like nobody in Britain to pay income tax until they earn £20,000. And when do you think you'd be able to deliver that in government? I dont I dont. I will answer that over the course of the next few weeks. Not today, as I told you before I came on here. But do I want to honour that? Yes. Is it realistic, immediately were in government? No. And those circumstances have changed. Are the principles, aspirations and even the numbers that are set out there wrong? No they're not, they're right. But it's all about getting things in the right order. Okay. Nigel Farage. This is the Bloomberg weekend interview. I wondered if you get one these days because you are more in demand than ever before. According to your team you're meeting presidents, prime ministers and kings from the Middle East these days. I wouldn't comment on that particularly. But are you meeting kings from the Middle East. Oh, I can't remember. And if I did, I wouldn't. I wouldn't tell you. I wouldn't. Do you know why? Is this inaccurate, that you're meeting presidents, prime ministers and king's from the Middle East? Do you know what? One of the reasons I've survived so long in public life is I'm very discreet. And, you know, if I have private meetings with people, I never discuss it. It's one of your senior supporters and donors who said this. Well, I don't know who he is or she is, but. Nick Candy. Well. Well, I wouldn't comment on it. I wouldn't comment on it. I don't comment on things like that. And people trust me because of that. You know, I keep confidences. But you are in circles you haven't been in before? That's fair. That's fair. And I mean, that is fair. Yeah. I think a lot of people around the world that we are going to win the next election just because they're people that you know, like this country, see what a mess it's got itself into. So it's a long haul, because technically it's not due for another four years and the current government has a large majority. Do you think you can sustain the level of engagement you'd need to to to still be in this position in four years time? You're not really known for, you stuck at the idea of wanting to be out of the European Union, but you've had a number of different parties over the years. I stuck at it more than anybody. I've been doing this since 1993. Did I finally retire on the 31st of January 2020? Yes, I did that. I was done with it. I came back into politics last year. It was probably the toughest decision of my life. You know, I turned 60 last year. Life pretty settled some good jobs, accompanied by being quite successful in a variety of areas. First couple of grandkids born. You know, life was pretty good. So I knew I was making a big sacrifice coming back into it. And I'm determined to make it a success. And. I think I've been very, we talk about persistence, but I've generally been pretty consistent in the kind of values and views and beliefs that I've had. And I can I sustain it for four years? Yeah, it's a long haul, but yeah. Can the government sustain it for four years? I think very unlikely. And I think, you know, just as you've seen Reform take over the centre right of British politics, I think was a massive change on the left about to come. And I think that I think that the government will be forced by '27 into a genuine austerity budget. I mean, a real austerity budget. Just the markets, you know, are going to demand that. And I suspect at that moment, the left of British politics splits in a very, very dramatic way. And I think the growth of the Greens. The Corbynites, the sort of urban left of politics, the the those who vote on Gaza and religion more than British issues. All of those things, I think they will struggle to see out. '27. That's why you think there'll be a general election then? I do. Yeah. Okay. I want to know what sustains you. Is it true you read constantly? I do read a lot. Yeah, I do read a lot. What are you reading at the moment? Well, I've that the last book I read was Mr. Balfour's Poodle, which was about the constitutional crisis between the Commons and the Lords. In the early 20th century? Yeah, the principles are exactly the same. And by the way, the Salisbury Convention has been there since 1911. And so why are you interested in that? Because say we get elected on a manifesto to say we're going to do X, Y and Z. What if the House what if the House of Lords were to block, what if the what if the civil service were to block us? These are all the things that we're thinking and going through at the moment. You're going back 100 years to try and find the answers to that. Principles don't change over centuries. What else are you reading? Over centuries principles don't change. I heard you like poetry? Yeah, like a little bit of poetry. I wouldn't say hugely. I read. I like biography. I like history. My current book, which I've barely started, is written by the former prime minister of Armenia, and it's about how small states can survive in the big, wide world. Sarkasanis is his name, who wrote it. Everything you're reading is kind of part of your homework, if you like, for government. Is that the case? What do you do to actually put your head in a different place? Yeah. I mean, I like to go out and walk. when I get time. I like to fish. I like a day at the races. I like. I like the odd day at the cricket. There are things I enjoy doing. No, the truth is. I mean, look, we're living in a we are living in a 24/7 media environment. I'm a political entrepreneur, even though I'm trying to shed responsibilities of the party for the moment. I'm still the main entry point for most new people that want to give money or stand as candidates. You've always kind of been there, haven't you? So most of my life these days, believe it or not, is focusing on what's beneath the bonnet, focusing on the structure of the party, focusing on the funding of the party, focusing on making sure that across all the regions of the United Kingdom, we're prepared. And I just sort of say this to you, sort of towards the end, that I don't think anyone's yet really understood. Next May, May the sixth, next year is the British equivalent of the midterms in America. These are elections of a magnitude and a significance that almost nobody understands. To close, I want to go back to where I began and the kind of person you're known for and the kind of person you'd have to be if you're to be a great prime minister. What would you say to someone who worries that you might deport their grandmother or you might not be a leader for them because they are not white or Muslim? What would you say to them? Oh come on, please. What? What would you say to them? There are people who think that. Give me a message for them. I would say the question's beneath you. But I would also say this. If you, the only people that call me racist tend to be called Jocasta and they've gone to St Mary's Ascot and be upper middle class and very snobby. Is that your answer to someone who would be worried about you as a prime minister? That's what I'm wondering. Well if people are worried. What is your message of unity? Do you have one? Our message is if you're in this country legally, whether you've been here for one generation or 150 generations, if you're paying your taxes, obeying the law, being part of our community, recognizing there is commonality between all of us, whilst we're different, things that we share, you're incredibly welcome. But are we here to be the dumping ground of the world? Are we here to be the food bank of the world? Are we here to have uncontrolled mass illegal immigration, changing our culture, endangering women in our streets? No, on that, we're going to get really, really tough. And I think you'll be very, very surprised how many people from all different backgrounds and religions from all over the world support that message and want that as the country that they've either been born into or chosen to live in. Nigel Farage, thank you.
Nigel Farage on Putin, Immigration and Taking Risks | The Mishal Husain Show
Summary
Transcript
Hello and welcome. I'm Mishal Husain, and this show is a place where every weekend you can hear one essential conversation. I hope it provides some insight into the ideas and the people shaping our world. Now, when the Brexit vote happened, nearly ten years ago, you might have thought it was the career peak for those who had defined themselves by campaigning for the UK to leave the European Union. Now it seems. For Nigel Farage, it was the beginning of something else, something bigger. The leader of Reform UK is my guest this weekend. His party only has a few members elected to Parliament, but in recent months it's been ahead in the opinion polls ahead of both the parties that have dominated British governments for a century. Which is why people are starting to ask, Could he be prime minister? What would that look like? An election isn't due in the UK for another four years, but Nigel Farage has been good at spotting political undercurrents and he's at a transition point. Can he maintain this level of support? Can he capitalize on his links to the American right and import an American political playbook? This conversation is not our first. I've interviewed him a number of times over the years and he's known for his combative manner with journalists. 'Listen, love' is what he says to me at one point in this. Overall, what I wanted to know is who is Nigel Farage? Can he be a leader for the whole country? Welcome. Nigel Farage. Thank you. How are you? All right, yeah. But I mean, life is busy. Well, I want to start with a sense of the moment, actually, because I'm conscious that you are in the midst of a remarkable few months where your party has been leading in the opinion polls in a sustained way, which is why if there was an election today and we don't really have that kind of system in the UK, but if there was an election today, you'd be, you look likely to become prime minister. If there was an election tomorrow, we would win easily. But the trouble is it's a marathon to the next election. We've hit the 13 mile marker. We're a mile ahead. So it's a good thing we've done what we've done, but there's a long way to go. But also on you personally, the idea of being prime minister, are you properly adjusted to this idea? Because most people see you, this is what you're known for, campaigner, disrupter, someone who brings change from the outside. Actually leading for the whole country is a very different thing. Yeah, that's the point. We now need change from the inside. We've not had enough change. We are atrophying as a as a country we're declining economically, we're declining societally, we're declining culturally. People are leaving. We're in real, real trouble. So we don't need, we now need a disrupter, not from the outside to change perceptions, but from the inside to actually change things. Am I ready for it? Yes. But you've only been an MP for a year. I've been in politics for 30 years. In politics, yes. I was in the European Parliament for over two decades. I led a group in the European Parliament for over ten years. I've got a lot more experience than Keir Starmer or many of the other prime ministers we've had in the recent years. Political experience, but not governing experience, you've never been part of. And nor have they. You did once say that you you did once say that you couldn't imagine having a seat around the cabinet table, that it was not something that attracted you? You know what? The rank, the title, the position doesn't interest me at all. It doesn't interest me in the least. I couldn't care less about it. What interests me is what you can do with it. And there are fundamentally two types of people in politics. Those that wanna be something. And those that wanna do something. And I've always been a person that's wanted to do something. In the past, what I've done is helped change public opinion, helped shift national debate. I'm now moving that on to the next logical stage. Yeah, but I still wonder about the kind of work that in, that is involved in delivering for a country as the prime minister. It involves sitting there with the red boxes, going through the official government papers. What do you think I've been doing for the last 25 years. But you haven't been going through civil service papers every day. It is different. I'm the only living human being in this country who was built political movements on a table like this with a telephone, a piece of paper and a pencil. I can build things. I can do things. My track record says that. Okay, so you're ready for it? It is the job that you want to do. I mean, look, it's it's clearly an enormous job. And the scale of the problems that we face, the institutional barriers that will get put before us. I you know, I do understand all of that. I tell you what, if we don't do this, then by 2035, I shudder to think what this country will be, genuinely, what this country will be like. So we have to do this. But would you govern for all? Because you're not known as someone who brings people together. You're known as someone who chooses their issues, campaigns very hard on them, who's often predicted and made the political weather. But you're not a unifier. Doesn't a prime minister have to be that? I think we've had too many unifiers, and look where consensus politics has got us. Look at the mess it's got. So you would govern as a, as a divisive figure? You'd govern you'd govern as a majority government. You'd govern on a radical manifesto that says the country needs fundamental reform. And of course, some people won't like it, but that's the way it is. Okay. Well, we'll talk about the ways that you would reform. It is the name of your party, but it's also what you want to do. And we'll talk about that in a moment. But I want to go back in time, first of all, because you're recording with us here in our studios in the heart of the City of London, a place you know well. Absolutely. You used to be a commodities trader, a metals trader. You worked on the doorstep right around here. Yeah. How formative was that experience to who you are today? Yeah. My father was a stockbroker for over half a century. My grandfather was a stockbroker for over half a century. So a lot of our family had worked, in fact, on both sides in the city. I was here in the 80s. I was here in that transformative period where, let's be frank, what was a bit of an old boy's club, through Big Bang, became an international global center. Deregulation? Yeah. The city in its heyday, if you like, opening up, innovative, Thatcher's time. It was Thatcher's time. Yeah. And you were a Thatcherite. Oh, absolutely. I mean, back then I was. But I mean, you know, bear in mind we're talking 40 years ago. There were a different set of economic problems. We didn't have the social problems in Thatcher's time that we've got now, but that that's one aspect of life that's worse. So I was here when yeah, I mean, kind of by the mid-to-late 80s. I mean, it was the most exciting, incredible and fun place to be. We did have social problems, though. A lot of people got left. Nothing like this. A lot of people got left behind in that period. And some of them are supporting your party today. We had deindustrialisation. There were mining communities. They were mining communities who had a very bleak time. By the way, they had an even bleaker time in John Major's years when we unnecessarily closed pits. But what I mean is we were all British. There was a much bigger sense of togetherness despite the economic division that there is in the country today. And this has been a theme of what you've been saying. Essentially, you you look on migration as the source of all the country's ills. Well, that's a ridiculous thing to say. Well, you just pointed that we were we were more British. in the period you're looking at. We have all sorts of problems. We have massive economic problems now, falling GDP per capita being perhaps top of the list, although very rarely talked about in Westminster. No, the social problems we were having. Yes, there were divisions then. You're absolutely right. But the social problems that we face today are worse. Look, I the thing about the City was I can remember when the phone rang. That it occasionally was Paris, occasionally was Frankfurt, but much more likely to be Singapore or Santiago. This was a global trading center and I couldn't understand. The City of London is still a global trading center. Far less than it was, and I couldn't understand the political obsession with our next door neighbors, the little backyard market called Europe. Oh yes, it's a big market, blah, blah blah, but it's 15% of global GDP. So really when I saw the Single European Act coming in in '86, I was sort of like, what are we doing? And then I saw the British establishment preparing for us to join the Euro in 1990, we join the exchange rate mechanism. And then had to crash out of it two years later. Which I predicted. The pegging to the Deutsch Mark didn't work. Which I predicted. Yep, I predicted it the very night we joined. I was in a bar just over there saying this will never, ever work. And this is what really got me into politics. I couldn't understand what I saw in my day to day life here. what I saw government doing were two very different things. Hmm. So it was that, there's a direct link then between Brexit and your work in the city? Absolutely. Yeah. In the 1980s and 1990s, you came here at the age of 18 actually, straight out of school. When you look at Brexit today and what has happened in the last nine years, and you say that it's a poorer country today than it was, do you think it was worth having the referendum in 2016? Do I think freedom is worth it? Yes, absolutely. Do I think self-government is worth, governance, is worth it? Yes, of course I do. Do I think the ability to control your borders is worth having? Yes, I do. Now, have we exercised it? No. But that's why I ask the question, was it worth having it in 2016? The vote. Given what we know now, Sterling has never recovered its value. Stirling's been falling for decades. Business investment, which was rising steadily, has not, has stalled since then. No, I mean, look, you know, even as Keir Starmer himself says, the deep seated economic problems within the country pre-date Brexit, even predate the pandemic and our response to it. You know, our productivity problems being perhaps just one very, very good example. I am angry that a Conservative government with a whopping great majority didn't take advantage of it. And do you think you could have done better if you were prime minister? Oh miles better. Miles better. And I hate to see what's happening in the City. So then if you were prime minister, and I can ask you this question because the way the polls are looking right now. So today, if you became prime minister, would you rip up the treaty, the agreement that Keir Starmer made with the EU earlier this year? Well, the whole treaty is up for renegotiation anyway. It's a very poor treaty. We can do a lot better than that. We'll have to play hardball. If you play hardball, you have to mean it. That's the art of. I've heard this before. Well yeah, but from whom? Well, I've heard this before from, okay, from conservatives, not from people in your party, but from people who believed in Brexit. Weak people. They didn't believe in it. They didn't believe in it. Wait. They never, Mishal, they never believed in it. Let's just go back to what you would do then. They belatedly, they belatedly accepted Brexit, because if they hadn't, they would have faced political extinction. So if Brexit has never been done properly, you as prime minister would reshape our relationship with the EU. I wouldn't be running. I wouldn't be running. What do you mean? If Brexit hadn't happened. The reason I'm here. No, I mean, if you were prime minister, what would you do with the current alignment that we have with the EU on many areas? Well, look, we've been weak as hell. We've given in. We've given in. We've given in. We've expected favors in return. We haven't got any. It needs a tough renegotiation. And ultimately, even though we've got huge economic problems, they've got some pretty serious problems too. In fact, the French have an even bigger, not just not just economic, but constitutional crisis as well. You know, giving away all fish for the next 12 years, things like that. Completely outrageous. Total betrayal of what people voted for. But the focus. The focus. And yes, trade with Europe is important. Of course it is. But the real focus has to be what's happening internally within the UK economy. So you would rip up the Keir Starmer agreement with the EU. I think you're saying. The whole thing. It needs, it needs a rethink. Okay. But all Starmer has done. All Starmer has done is make concessions in. Nigel Farage That means you would be taking an economic risk right now. And that's and you have been known all your life for taking risks, right? It's in your book. Everything in life is about risk, and that you pride yourself on being a gambler. Can I read these words to you? Entrepreneurship's about risk. I love a gamble. Yeah. I love stacking up the odds. And it's only been through taking enormous risks that the party and I have got to where we are today. Is that the kind of prime minister you would be? A risk taking prime minister. We need far more risk taking. And, by the way, much more broadly than the prime minister. We need to encourage risk taking in the economy. So you take a risk with the relationship with the with the nearest nearest neighbor, the big geography that puts this big market on our door. You take a risk with that in the in the interests of a greater good? When you're in a bad relationship, you have to take risks to reshape it. So how would you reshape it? You'd end alignment, is that what you're saying? Alignment's catastrophic. So you'd end it? Catastrophic, moronic. You'd end alignment with the EU if you were prime minister? It's keeping us firmly hooked back in the 20th century not in the 21st. It makes no sense at all from any angle. Is that a yes to the question I've asked? You would end alignment with the EU as prime minister completely? 100% plus. Okay. So this is the point. You're still a risk taker? You were in your years as a trader in the City and you're still going to govern in that way if you were elected prime minister. I know you had two really traumatic experiences as a very young man. You were hit by a car and you ended up spending two months in hospital and you were then diagnosed with testicular. cancer. I was. When you're in your in your in your early 20s, and there's another and I know you said that this is part of why you you decided you needed to do things with your life. But there's a there's a different way that that story could have gone, which is that you conserve your energy and you prioritize your family and you think of all that's that's close to you. Instead, you had two failed marriages It's called living. And you went and you campaigned around the country. It's called living. Look I could be a boring so-and-so like most people in politics. I'm not. I've lived. I've had some huge successes. I've had some massive failures. I'm 61. I've got a vast experience of life. I've seen the good times, I've seen the bad times, I've seen success, I've seen failure. I think that makes me better qualified to be a leader than those that have lived steady, what I might describe as boring lives. So what have been your big failures? Well, I've made mistakes personally. Obviously, I've made I've been I've made I've had successes, too. But I've made mistakes financially. Look, I've lived the big I've lived the Big Dipper of life, but I've, in the end, been very lucky. I'm still here. I'm still alive, despite a couple of goes at not being. I think that's given me a couple of things. Number one, a pretty rounded life. And number two, I'm not actually frightened of anything. And that I think, and that I think, is a very, very valuable asset given what I may well be facing in two or three years time. So let's talk about your political instincts, then. Hmm. Can you take those headphones? Because I want to play you something that you said at CPAC, the big conservative political conference earlier on this year. You've been close to the American right for a long time. So you go to these conferences and this is what you said in February 2025, Suddenly, post November the fifth, America is optimistic. It's upbeat. It's the beginning of a golden age in America. That's not all of it. Oh, gosh. Sorry. Keep listening. In fact, in many ways, what we're fighting for is a very similar agenda to the one that you've just fought for and the one that you have just succeeded with. You're going to 'Make America Great Again', and we, in turn, will 'Make Britain Great Again'. Thank you. Well, look. Hang on. I've got. Wait. Listen Wait for my question, which is that you use these words to make Britain great again. And I know that you have a sense of history and I know the past important to you. And fun. Sense of fun. Is that? Yeah, say 'Make Britain Great Again' to an American audience, you've just elected a president on 'Make America Great Again'. It's quite funny. So you didn't mean it? Of course I meant it. But you know. So that's what I want to understand. But you know it's fun. What, what you mean by it. Because you have got a sense of history. I know your grandparents. spoke to you a lot about the past. Your grandfather had been wounded in the First World War. Yeah, that's true. What story did they tell you about Britain's past? What is it that you think of when you think of when Britain was great. We had a stable society, we had belief. Things that bound us. Perhaps religion being one of them. And by the way, government can't force people to believe, but there was a shared sense of religion. Are you a man of faith? Community. Yes. I mean, I'm I have to say, struggling a bit. Do you go to church? Well, of course. I'm an Anglican. It's been a catastrophe for 25 years. What the Church of England? Oh terrible Absolutely awful. So you believe? You believe, but there's no church that you feel like attending? Well, if I was a more regular churchgoer, I probably would have defected to the Catholics. But, you haven't? I haven't. I haven't. I've thought about it a couple of times. No, I think a sense of community, a sense of family. I mean, frankly, you know, the values around the meaning of family, community, country, those things were much stronger in years that have gone by. Which years? Which is the decade you're looking at? That's what I'm curious about. When you say the words when Britain was great. What is in your mind, which is the decade? Well Britain was great. Britain was great imperially. Britain was great industrially. Britain was great in terms of innovation. Britain was great in terms actually, in many ways, I think of taking some very good things the large parts of the world. Britain was great in leaving behind some amazing legacies, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore. Yeah, but those are issues. I'm wondering about what period when you when you look to the past, are you thinking about the 1980s and the period you were in the City, or are you thinking about the First World War and Britain as a great power. I think really what we did, I think really what we did since 1688, I think we were actually fortunate to have our civil war. But we're not going to go back to the 17th century. Well you asked me. I've just given you an answer. No, as a political leader when you think of when you want Britain to go back to because you. Don't want Britain to go Want Britain to be great again, what are you looking to as the model? I don't want Britain to go back anywhere. I want Britain to go forwards. And that's really the point. And it's one of the reasons why, you know, I've been very critical of the government, of the Bank of England, very critical of much of our economic policy. I think we are stuck in a rut. I think we're stuck with an old, out-of-touch globalist mindset about so many things. No, no, no, no. You can respect your traditions. You can respect your past. You can have a sense and a feeling of what history is. I'm not going back anywhere I want to go, I want us to be in the 21st century. We're not there. We're literally here, we are sitting. I mean, I can see St. Paul's as I'm talking to you. We're in the middle of the City of London. We have a revolution going on, an economic, a money, revolution going on with digital assets, crypto currency. It's real. It's growing very, very quickly. And what's happening here? Nothing. Literally nothing. But these are untested ideas in government, aren't they? I know you were talking the other day about wanting to have a national currency reserve. Sorry. We don't know what that looks like. No, because we're years and years behind the rest of the world. Go to Miami, Go to Miami, fly to Miami tonight and you tomorrow morning can go out and buy everything from a Starbucks coffee to a Ferrari with a card that you've loaded up from an ATM in the street with Bitcoin, Etherium or other currencies. And the world is changing and we're not changing. So if you think the Bank of England is. And, and, and if you think about, just one, one more point. Think about it. Actually, we have been great innovators, you know, whether it's the industrial revolution, whether it's the nuclear energy industry, which we led the world in just just a few decades ago, we're very, very inventive. We're very creative. We are naturally a very entrepreneurial country. I think I just believe we've lost a sense of all of that. So the Bank of England, if you think they're so out of step with where their focus should be, in your view, would you revoke their independence as prime minister? Well, I think the big, I mean, the bigger mistake was taking away banking regulation from them, from an organization that had been doing it since 1694, gave it a bunch of tick box bureaucrats down in Canary Wharf. Do you mean the Financial Conduct Authority? Yeah, look. So would you disband that? They are useless. They are utterly useless. We need a complete. Would you do away with then? We need a radical rethink of what they are, what they're for, who they serve, what their purpose is. Isn't the truth though, I mean, you don't really, it's not a question of who does the regulation. I think you instinctively don't like regulation or red tape. You see it as a hindrance, And other people might see it as the things that protect us from wrongdoing. Actually, you're wrong. You're wrong. You're wrong. Because my argument with crypto with digital assets is we need a regulated market. Again, you go back to the medieval times, it was all about having some basic framework of rules that consumers and market users can trust. So I'm not against regulation. I'm not a complete, you know, laissez faire merchant, but you have to get that balance right. But I think you also, as prime minister, you are signaling that you'd be prepared to do away with the Financial Conduct Authority. You would give those powers back to the Bank of England. I think we need a complete radical rethink. Yes, on many of these things. And the FCA has been a total failure. Would you sack Andrew Bailey as governor of the Bank of England? I was debanked. You know, I was debanked. I was rejected by ten other banks. I was literally being frozen out of the financial system to the point I might have had to leave the country, which indeed is what they wanted. And that became a big issue, you got your accounts back. Well, luckily, I'm big enough and ugly enough to fight my own corner. But there are thousands of people out there who've been debanked because of excessive rules or anti-money laundering directives or whatever else it may be who've got no voice for themselves. And what about the governor of the Bank of England? Well, he's a nice enough bloke, but. Would he keep his job if you were prime minister. Well he's had a good run. We might find someone else. Really? He's had a good run. So you are signaling you'd be prepared to sack him? I'm not signaling anything. I'm just saying. This is shades of President Trump and the Federal Reserve. If Andrew Bailey wants to get with the 21st century. And by the way, there's one encouraging thing, because I went to see him last month. He just put a limit on the number of stablecoins any individual can hold. I said, Andrew, this is ridiculous. This is dinosaur-like. Within a week he changed it. So maybe he was listening. But the Bank of England, the British government, the regulator, whatever shape that takes, they've all got to understand the world is changing, has changed very, very rapidly. Okay, so the world has changed. Not just the financial world, the world more broadly. And if you were prime minister, you'd have to have opinions and take advice and formulate policy on a whole host of areas which you're not known for talking about. Such as? Social care, how you'd fill vacancies in the social care sector, but, and national security and there are people in the political establishment, Labour figures, Conservative figures, including Boris Johnson, who think that you and your party are soft on Russia. Oh, poor old Boris. I feel sorry for him really. I guess if you fail that much, you have to lash out at somebody. Look, I mean. I mean, this is, of course, politics and narratives, isn't it? You know, just because 14, 13 years ago I said in an interview I thought Putin was a very effective political operator but not a nice human being. Suddenly you're a Putin supporter. Funny enough, the year after I said that the Queen met him. Now, whether she was seen to be a collaborator, I don't know. I think the accusations come from the fact that you've said things in the past. No. You think. How do you know, what I'm going to say? You've suggested that NATO provoked Putin into invading Ukraine. Oh the endless eastward expansion of NATO and the European Union. And Kissinger warned about this years ago. We shouldn't have done it, but that's in the past. We did it. Putin's invaded. I was really hoping that Trump could bring Putin to heel and that some kind of compromise could be struck as it's just been recently struck with Gaza and Israel. Clearly, that is not going to happen. Obviously, Putin is a very bad dude. Simple. Why hasn't President Trump put more pressure on him? Oh, he's putting huge pressure on he's putting pressure on India. He's putting pressure on. And I think what. And what about Putin himself I think Trump feels that Putin's made a fool of him. And clearly Putin is not a rational man. He wants to come to a logical deal. So the idea that I'm soft on this is just nonsense. Well, what what put a fire under the accusations was very recently when the former leader of your party in Wales pleaded guilty to eight counts of bribery, taking money from someone described as a pawn of the Russian secret services. Appalling. Appalling. And he will go to prison for a long time. At least I hope he does. But you know what? He was the leader of your party in Wales. For three weeks he was. Well, yeah, but hang on. For three weeks he was. He's been, he's been involved with UKIP, your former party. He was involved in Brexit, you, the Brexit Party, your former party with. He's been at your side for 25 years. I've known him for years. I've known him for 25 years. He was unbelievably, you perhaps don't know this, a bishop in the Mormon church. I mean, God fearing to a level I've almost never met, I mean, so uncorrupted. I thought he wouldn't even drink coffee. And there he was taking money to ask questions. Appalling. Well, is it just one bad apple? Without any shadow of a doubt. You can assure voters that there is no one else like Nathan Gil in Reform's ranks? I if if there were if I even suspected it, they wouldn't be let through the door. And you're sure that no, no one else has taken money from those kind of Russian sources? I'm sure that my mother's not a mass murderer. There's nothing. I'm as sure as that. You know, I mean, how can you be sure of anything in life? Well, you know, you know. The question itself is a stupid one. You didn't know? The question itself is a stupid question. You know that, and I know that. I believe 100% with all my heart there's nobody else. Okay. Can I just quickly then understand your instincts on Russia a bit more fully with a few scenarios? So if you were prime minister and NATO's jets entered, Russian jets entered NATO's airspace, where do you stand on that. Gotta shoot them down. Do you think they should be? Gotta shoot them down. No questions, Whatever that does? However much that inflames tensions? Listen love, you're trying ever so hard. Russia needs to be taught a lesson. Listen love, you're trying ever so hard. I'm the only person in the world I think that stood up in the European Parliament in 2014. And do you know what I said? There will be a war in Ukraine. It's coming. I'm the only person that got it right. I might have made one comment once, 13 years ago that said I admired him as a political operator but not as a human being. And I'd never live in Russia, period. Frozen assets, Russian frozen assets. Should be used to to help fight the war? You can go on as long as you like. I've made the position perfectly clear. No, what's the answer to that? They're in Belgium. They're in Belgium So they should be, they should be used? You better ask the Belgian government. But clearly, if they're there through illegal means, they should be. So your instincts is as British prime minister? My instinct is I think Putin's a really bad bloke. And you can sit me here for an hour, you're going to get nowhere. You'd put British troops on the ground in post-war Ukraine after a ceasefire. I'd be very cautious about doing that. But a UN force, might think about a Korean approach to it. Would I put the British army badges, badged as a British army? Be deeply, deeply thoughtful about that. Because you'd be worried about them being a target for the Russians? I'd be deeply thoughtful about doing that, and it wouldn't be a clever thing to do. You see, you see, exactly that kind of thing is what gives, hearing something caveated that way. Well, I'm not a warmonger. Is what, is what gives. No you are quite right. Russia, is what gives Russia courage. You are quite right. I'm not a warmonger, rather like President Trump. I'm not a warmonger. Those that went before have been persistent warmongers. I'm not. I happen to think that what the UN did in Korea was remarkable. And still over 70 years on has held. And South Korea has become just I mean, the most incredible country, which, by the way, does things far better than we do in terms of building nuclear energy and much else. That would be the right way to go forward. So let's talk about areas then, where your agenda, as you said in that clip we heard a moment ago, where your agenda is similar to the Trump administration's, for example, on migration. Yeah. Both your party and President Trump's Republicans feel very strongly about that. What he's done is amazing. So would you want ICE style raids taking place here to deport the 600,000 people in five years that you want to do? Well I think it's I think what I think they see this is, again, you know, I was with Tom Homan, who's his border czar a few weeks ago to try and find out what's really going on in America. It's really interesting. Border crossings are down 97% since Trump came to power. But the interesting thing is about deportations. So they have a thousand ICE squads out around America knocking on doors saying you're here illegally. And you've got two choices. Number one, you can go. We'll fund your return. We'll give you a few dollars. We'll say to you that you can legally, if you want, apply for a skills visa in the years to come, to come back to America. And if we think you're going to be a productive member of the economy and of society, we'll let you in. Is that what you want? The the ICE, the ICE raids are done by masked armed men who jump out of vehicles, grab people and go into workplaces. That's your media narrative. I've just told you what's happening and what is really interesting. They do have masks, don't they? And guns. And they do go into workplaces and homes. Well, I mean, I would hope if they didn't have guns, they'd be mad. Would you want that here? That's really because this interview is about what you would do as prime minister. What I want. Do you know how do you know how many people have voluntarily left America in eight months? 1.6 million. It is truly remarkable. 1.6 million people have peacefully, with incentives not just to leave, but potential. I want to understand what potential lessons you're taking for the UK. What I'm learning is if you do things well and do things properly, it can be highly effective. So is that a yes to ICE style raids in the UK? It's a look, we're not America. We'll do it our way, not the American way. What is that. Does our way involve the army? Our way will involve Border Force doing the job that they would so desperately like to do. That's the job they do now. No, they. How, how would it be different? Would you use the army? At the moment, Border Force are a taxi service and they hate it. So would you use the Army? They absolutely hate doing what they're doing, which is why I so many people resign. Sad. It's saving people. essentially. in the channel and bringing them to shore. You may see it that way. Is that what you mean by the. No. That's what I mean. I think that's what you're referring to when you say taxi service. French Navy, bring them across, escort them all the way, Border force, bring them out, pick them up, bring them in. They drop their passports in the sea. They drop their phones in the sea. We're supposed to just put up with it. But you know what? We're not going to. But I, I think what's really important is to understand how. Because the numbers you've said you would deport are really significant. 600,000 over five years. Which is why I'm interested in the methods. Look, I think the truth is that most people that were caught who were in Britain illegally, if we do it nicely and do it properly, would accept they have to go. It's about 9000 a year currently. And to meet your target, you'd be increasing that by ten times. Do you think you can? I think we can. You know, of course, theory, reality, being in government. I get all of that. I understand all of that. Is it doable? Yes, but but but there is a very important message here. Very. I mean, in most countries in the world. If you enter illegally, you are chucked in prison literally in a majority of countries in the world. Illegal entry means immediate imprisonment. So is that what you would do? People would arrive and they would be put in prison immediately. Detained and deported. Well that's what you. I didn't say it. You said it. That's fine. No you. You said it. You said it. What do you say? That's fine. I'm not playing games. I'm not playing games. People would be detained and deported. Dead simple. In prison? There are plenty of ex-military bases. We can keep them. But the point look, you know, it's very interesting. Australia had all this in 2012. They stopped it within a fortnight. Within a fortnight. No one came illegally. You know why? They were towed back to Indonesia. It can be done. It's about political will. It's about being tough for a short period of time. It can be done. It can be done. You've got a big pledge also to cut significant amounts of government waste. I know you're rethinking your economic plans, but there is a figure in your. Not the broad principles, Not the broad principles? Well, what about the amounts? So it says in this from last year that you would cut waste by the tune, government waste, to save £50 billion a year? Is that still the. Yeah, that was about. That's still the plan? That was about. Yeah, actually we'd probably go further than that. I mean. You, you'd get more than 50 million? Well I mean, you know, Milei in Argentina shows that you can do it, but you have to work out in doing it what the cost of that is. Well Elon Musk discovered that he couldn't cut nearly as much as he hoped to. Initially, he said $2 trillion, and he had to halve that. And then it went right down. To be fair, Milei has. But look, we test bedding this in the local councils that we won last May where we've cut about half a billion so far. You know, it's a very good start in six months. Okay. What happens if you were elected to government and you're prime minister and you find out that you can't find the savings you want? You're in the process of rethinking your economic plan. Well you can find the savings. All kinds of tax cutting plans which are now having to be rethought. Is that because they were unworkable? Net zero. £30 billion saved. Cutbacks in civil service. Tens of billions saved. But of course, the big one. The big one. And the thing that I've got to think out far more fully. Is the whole explosion of PIP, of disability payments. And you are in the midst of having a serious think. But what I want to ask you is that you people said about your plans to spend and to tax cuts, that they were unworkable and they were fantasy economics. And the fact that you're having to rethink them, suggest that they were right. No, I'm not rethinking them. I suspect what we come back will be a will be a lot more radical than what you saw there. More radical in which way you? More tax cuts or more austerity? Well, as I said to you before I came and did this, I'm going to be laying out some economic stuff between now and the budget in terms of speeches. What is for certain, I I tell you what is for certain with the economy, and we touched on this right at the beginning. We touched on this place in the 80s, but we could go more broadly across the country. In the 80s, there was an attitudinal change towards work, towards having a go towards risk, which I'm pro I'm very pro risk. I'm very pro individuals taking risk. I don't believe we should protect people from themselves. We should allow them to go out and have a go. We need an attitudinal change towards success, towards money, towards business, towards tax and incentives. And and this is stuff. That you can't necessarily write in a manifesto. Well, you're going to have to, though. No, you can't. You can't. Attitudinal stuff. You can't. You cannot write. This one was called a contract and there were promises in it that don't stand anymore. No I don't think. You've been at the BBC all your life. I don't think you understand what I'm saying. Alright. I'm talking about attitudinal change within society. You can't put any of that in manifestos. It's about a buzz. It's about a vibe. Yeah, it's about how a country feels. And you know, one of the reasons and you know, you played that tape to me earlier. You know what is interesting about Trump's America and there are bits of it you can dislike or like or whatever. What is interesting about Trump's America is a lot more people in America are having a go. They're setting up companies, they're borrowing money, they're taking risk. We need to get to that place. And as I say, you can't put it in a piece of paper. And the one thing I'm certain of. So you're going to have to inspire people, aren't you? That's right. That's exactly right. Which takes me back to where I started that, are you going to be someone who brings people together, because you're known for turning the fire on people. You're not known for being someone who appeals right across the country, and has a common message. I don't think that's fair. You know what? I don't think that's fair. So give me an inspirational message. Even in my time. What is great about Britain today? Even in my time, even in my time in the European Parliament where perhaps I achieved some level of infamy, was I turning my fire on people? No, I was just teasing them. I was just teasing them. They were turning their fire on me. I mean, we just had a party conference season where the levels of insightful abuse that have come from Starmer and his cabinet are off the scale. I've never behaved like that lot with anybody. I might have strong opinions about express what I believe in strongly what I'm against very strongly. I don't think if you look through my my political career that you will find personal invective, you will find teasing, and not much more than that. We have to we have to have a vibe, a buzz that says to young people, setting up businesses, taking risk, even having failures, even having failures along the way is a good thing, not a bad thing. And you know something? I might succeed. I might fail. I accept that. Yeah, but if. I'm going to have a go. If you don't succeed as prime minister, it's not the same as your personal success. That's about the fortunes of the country that are riding on that. Yes. So you're going to need more than a vibe. Well I think the two are the same thing. We're in that much trouble, we're in that much trouble. What? You as you as one man and the vibe you create will save the country? Well it's not just me, is it? There's a whole movement here now. There's a whole movement here now. And you've seen over, and I'm sitting talking to you. I don't do many interviews these days. I allow others to go and do it. There's a much broader range of talent. You know, that has, that has come on the scene for the party, for the party. We're building a mass membership very rapidly. You see, I know you're a risk taker, but I think the moment of real risk that exists for your party right now is that you've had this sustained period where you've been rising in the opinion polls while you've been making big promises on spending, on big tax cuts. And now you're at a point where having to rethink your economic policy and it's it's probably going to be much more like the realities that other parties face. We're gonna make bigger promises. We're gonna make even bigger promises. We're gonna make even bigger problems. That's not the signals that that your people in your party are setting out. They're saying you're going to have a fully costed manifesto. We're having a full rethink of everything. That you're facing the same realities that other parties do. Well, look, we're in government. Maybe you're not special. We're in government now. We're in government now in the counties. In local government. You know, we're going to do our damnedest to be in government in Wales next May. We may or may not succeed, but we're going to do our damnedest. I want to have to be judged by what we do. I accept that. So is Donald Trump a role model for you, for government? In terms of standing up for the national interest above all else. Yes. In terms of keeping promises that he made to the electorate. Yes. There are many other areas in which we might disagree or might do things differently. Which are the areas that you disagree? There are other areas we might disagree, social policy, etc. We might see things differently. But the fundamentalism of Trump is you tell the electorate, I'm going to do X and you actually do it. And that's what he's doing. And, you know, and we might look at I mean, look, you know, you and I could sit here over a cup of tea and talk about some of the tariff machinations and say to ourselves, what the hell is going on? Well, we could, you know, go back to the thirties and think about tariffs and damage has done to the economy, etc.. Do you think he's damaging the American economy with tariffs? It's irrelevant. It's irrelevant. It's irrelevant. But you don't like the tariffs? No, no, no, no. Listen to me. It's irrelevant. He promised the American public he'd use tariffs as a weapon. He's doing it. So he is. So is he, to a large extent, restoring faith in the democratic system? Yes. And we will have to if we succeed. There's a long way to go. But as I said, you earlier we're halfway through the marathon. If we succeed, we must do the same, because one of the reasons why Reform is doing so well is there is a complete breakdown of trust. No one believes a blooming thing the other parties say. And I think you could be part of that breakdown of trust, because this document which said, Our Contract With You, it's a contract with the voters. It's the document you stood on last year. I didn't write it. I inherited it. To be fair. You were the party leader standing on this document. Your face, your face is right there on the front. I came in after it was published. To be fair. We changed the front page. But look, are the principles right within it. Yes. Can we? Yeah, but there are numbers in it. It's put forward as a contract. I would very, very much look. But you're talking about a breakdown of trust, and you've been very much part of a breakdown of trust, haven't you? By going back. Have you seen what the Conservatives have? This is your interview. This is this is your interview. Hang on a sec. Hang on. If you complain about a breakdown of trust, don't you have to stick to your promises? No I stick to. I would like nobody in Britain to pay income tax until they earn £20,000. And when do you think you'd be able to deliver that in government? I dont I dont. I will answer that over the course of the next few weeks. Not today, as I told you before I came on here. But do I want to honour that? Yes. Is it realistic, immediately were in government? No. And those circumstances have changed. Are the principles, aspirations and even the numbers that are set out there wrong? No they're not, they're right. But it's all about getting things in the right order. Okay. Nigel Farage. This is the Bloomberg weekend interview. I wondered if you get one these days because you are more in demand than ever before. According to your team you're meeting presidents, prime ministers and kings from the Middle East these days. I wouldn't comment on that particularly. But are you meeting kings from the Middle East. Oh, I can't remember. And if I did, I wouldn't. I wouldn't tell you. I wouldn't. Do you know why? Is this inaccurate, that you're meeting presidents, prime ministers and king's from the Middle East? Do you know what? One of the reasons I've survived so long in public life is I'm very discreet. And, you know, if I have private meetings with people, I never discuss it. It's one of your senior supporters and donors who said this. Well, I don't know who he is or she is, but. Nick Candy. Well. Well, I wouldn't comment on it. I wouldn't comment on it. I don't comment on things like that. And people trust me because of that. You know, I keep confidences. But you are in circles you haven't been in before? That's fair. That's fair. And I mean, that is fair. Yeah. I think a lot of people around the world that we are going to win the next election just because they're people that you know, like this country, see what a mess it's got itself into. So it's a long haul, because technically it's not due for another four years and the current government has a large majority. Do you think you can sustain the level of engagement you'd need to to to still be in this position in four years time? You're not really known for, you stuck at the idea of wanting to be out of the European Union, but you've had a number of different parties over the years. I stuck at it more than anybody. I've been doing this since 1993. Did I finally retire on the 31st of January 2020? Yes, I did that. I was done with it. I came back into politics last year. It was probably the toughest decision of my life. You know, I turned 60 last year. Life pretty settled some good jobs, accompanied by being quite successful in a variety of areas. First couple of grandkids born. You know, life was pretty good. So I knew I was making a big sacrifice coming back into it. And I'm determined to make it a success. And. I think I've been very, we talk about persistence, but I've generally been pretty consistent in the kind of values and views and beliefs that I've had. And I can I sustain it for four years? Yeah, it's a long haul, but yeah. Can the government sustain it for four years? I think very unlikely. And I think, you know, just as you've seen Reform take over the centre right of British politics, I think was a massive change on the left about to come. And I think that I think that the government will be forced by '27 into a genuine austerity budget. I mean, a real austerity budget. Just the markets, you know, are going to demand that. And I suspect at that moment, the left of British politics splits in a very, very dramatic way. And I think the growth of the Greens. The Corbynites, the sort of urban left of politics, the the those who vote on Gaza and religion more than British issues. All of those things, I think they will struggle to see out. '27. That's why you think there'll be a general election then? I do. Yeah. Okay. I want to know what sustains you. Is it true you read constantly? I do read a lot. Yeah, I do read a lot. What are you reading at the moment? Well, I've that the last book I read was Mr. Balfour's Poodle, which was about the constitutional crisis between the Commons and the Lords. In the early 20th century? Yeah, the principles are exactly the same. And by the way, the Salisbury Convention has been there since 1911. And so why are you interested in that? Because say we get elected on a manifesto to say we're going to do X, Y and Z. What if the House what if the House of Lords were to block, what if the what if the civil service were to block us? These are all the things that we're thinking and going through at the moment. You're going back 100 years to try and find the answers to that. Principles don't change over centuries. What else are you reading? Over centuries principles don't change. I heard you like poetry? Yeah, like a little bit of poetry. I wouldn't say hugely. I read. I like biography. I like history. My current book, which I've barely started, is written by the former prime minister of Armenia, and it's about how small states can survive in the big, wide world. Sarkasanis is his name, who wrote it. Everything you're reading is kind of part of your homework, if you like, for government. Is that the case? What do you do to actually put your head in a different place? Yeah. I mean, I like to go out and walk. when I get time. I like to fish. I like a day at the races. I like. I like the odd day at the cricket. There are things I enjoy doing. No, the truth is. I mean, look, we're living in a we are living in a 24/7 media environment. I'm a political entrepreneur, even though I'm trying to shed responsibilities of the party for the moment. I'm still the main entry point for most new people that want to give money or stand as candidates. You've always kind of been there, haven't you? So most of my life these days, believe it or not, is focusing on what's beneath the bonnet, focusing on the structure of the party, focusing on the funding of the party, focusing on making sure that across all the regions of the United Kingdom, we're prepared. And I just sort of say this to you, sort of towards the end, that I don't think anyone's yet really understood. Next May, May the sixth, next year is the British equivalent of the midterms in America. These are elections of a magnitude and a significance that almost nobody understands. To close, I want to go back to where I began and the kind of person you're known for and the kind of person you'd have to be if you're to be a great prime minister. What would you say to someone who worries that you might deport their grandmother or you might not be a leader for them because they are not white or Muslim? What would you say to them? Oh come on, please. What? What would you say to them? There are people who think that. Give me a message for them. I would say the question's beneath you. But I would also say this. If you, the only people that call me racist tend to be called Jocasta and they've gone to St Mary's Ascot and be upper middle class and very snobby. Is that your answer to someone who would be worried about you as a prime minister? That's what I'm wondering. Well if people are worried. What is your message of unity? Do you have one? Our message is if you're in this country legally, whether you've been here for one generation or 150 generations, if you're paying your taxes, obeying the law, being part of our community, recognizing there is commonality between all of us, whilst we're different, things that we share, you're incredibly welcome. But are we here to be the dumping ground of the world? Are we here to be the food bank of the world? Are we here to have uncontrolled mass illegal immigration, changing our culture, endangering women in our streets? No, on that, we're going to get really, really tough. And I think you'll be very, very surprised how many people from all different backgrounds and religions from all over the world support that message and want that as the country that they've either been born into or chosen to live in. Nigel Farage, thank you.