TRIGGERnometry Podcast: w/ Laila Cunningham (Transcript)

And I became, you know, I was known as a crime fighting counselor and I, you know, I said, I’m going to try and really do something with this.

Fighting Crime at the Grassroots Level

And so I held, you know, the first public meeting between the police and residents because you find there is a disconnect between the police and residents where they could actually hear from the police what they’re doing, because they do do good work, and they can tell them the issues.

And then I set up different WhatsApp groups where I’d feed intel from the residents to the police. You know, sometimes at four o’clock you have a dodgy car outside your window and you know it’s dealing drugs, but you can’t really call 999. They’d feed me those license plates. And actually, you know, we managed to kind of break up some organized crime operations in the area.

I went after criminals myself. I wouldn’t advise anyone to do that. You know, there were a bunch of Roma gypsies that would particularly come to the area. They’d have the women there who would beg for money and the men would come all dressed nicely and follow people and unzip their bags.

And so I would film them and say, listen, I’m with the police, I’m the counselor here. I don’t want to see you here. I know what you’re doing. And then I asked the police to do an undercover operation and catch them, and they did so. And that was my council work in terms of getting crime down in my area.

And as I was telling you before, crime is rampant in my ward. I had, you know, people were sending me literal photos of people hiring a prostitute and having sex in their courtyard, in their building on their way to school to take their children to school.

I had another one in a beautiful mews where the drug dealer would set up shop, you know, at about 1pm in the afternoon. Set up a whole, set up a clinic. And I had videos of this where the drug dealer, the drug addict would come, he’d be injured. The drug addict, the drug dealer would help heal him, give him drugs, all this. And, you know, in front of a CCTV, no shame in their game because there are no police.

And all this was happening and I couldn’t believe it. I had one truck that was inhabited by two foreign guys and they were running a brothel at night from it. So, you know, I would tell the council, please, can we do something about it? And they’d be like, well, you know, they pay their tickets, we don’t really tow.

And the police would be like, well, you know, it’s a council matter because they’re paying their tickets and we haven’t had any complaints of illegal activity. It was just back. It was infuriating. And so, yeah, that’s, but that was when I became a counselor. But I kind of started seeing all these things and I said, well, maybe I can run and try and do something about it.

London’s Changing Face

FRANCIS FOSTER: Laila, I’m really excited to have you on because we get to talk about London. I’m a Londoner. I’ve been a Londoner for all my life. Forty-three years.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: Where from?

FRANCIS FOSTER: South London, near Morden. Not the best.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: I like that. Okay, right. You’re a South London boy.

FRANCIS FOSTER: Yeah. But I’ve seen my city change and you’ve said that, so let’s actually talk about it. What does it mean that the city’s changed? And particularly, let’s look at crime, because if you ask the average Londoner, they wouldn’t be able to say, oh, stats have gone up by this percentage or that percentage or whatever else. But we all feel it’s a very different city.

The Crime Statistics Tell a Grim Story

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: Yeah, we do feel it’s a different city. And the thing is, so when I announced my candidacy to be mayor, you know, Sadiq Khan came out of hiding finally, all guns blazing, saying, actually, homicide rates are down. Homicide rates is the only stat that has gone down.

And knife crime’s up by 68% in the past 10 years. A rape is reported every hour. We are going through a robbery epidemic. You know, every crime metric is actually through the roof. Shoplifting, it’s literally a form of shopping. Robbery, knife crime, everything.

And what’s really upsetting to hear, I think even more than that is that the charge rate, the amount of offenses that end up in a charge, apart from homicide, which is obviously 95%, because you can’t really ignore a dead body, is 6%. So 94% of victims in the city do not even get a look in.

And I actually spoke to a lady who was raped and she told me that the police said, “We’re not going to investigate.” And I actually emailed the police for her and said, why aren’t you, why aren’t you putting this to charge? And they said, because she was smiling on the CCTV before she went up to his house.

And they said, “We are not confident,” this was the words, “that a jury would convict.” And I said, you are not to act as judge and jury. But that’s what’s going on. They are so focused on metrics, so focused on getting convictions, that they are not putting things to charge. And that is the police.

I said, are you not even going to send it to the CPS to charge? And they said, no.

FRANCIS FOSTER: And the CPS is a Crown Prosecution.

The Broken Social Contract

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: Yeah, yeah. So what normally happens, and I was a senior Crown Prosecutor in London, and what normally happens is the police collect all the evidence and they submit it to the Crown Prosecution Service if it’s deemed worthy of a charge. They’re not even doing that.

And that’s what I want to change. I just feel Londoners don’t feel the police have their back. I honestly speak to small supermarkets who tell me that the police are screening their calls. You know, they don’t answer their calls anymore because they’re calling every half an hour.

So now they, and I’m sure you’ve seen this in supermarkets where they have a who’s who of who’s robbing, who’s coming to steal from their shop because they feel they have to do it themselves.

The social contract between the police and the state and the people is broken because the only thing you can’t provide privately for yourself is the police. Right. Not everything else. You can, if you’ve got the money, do it. And that’s, I think that is why it’s first, it’s the government’s first duty and they failed.

Who’s Really to Blame?

FRANCIS FOSTER: And how much of that, because, look, I’m all for blaming Sadiq Khan, right? Let’s be honest. But how much of that is actually Sadiq Khan’s fault? And how much of that, look, I talk to coppers all the time. You only have to mention the words Theresa and May together, and they all collectively blow a gasket because of the way the police was defunded and the cuts. So how much can we really appropriate to Sadiq Khan and how much of this is just cuts that have happened to the police service generally?

The Impact of Austerity and Political Decisions on Crime

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: So let’s break it down. After 2008, after the financial crash, the criminal justice system did take the biggest hit in terms of lack of funding, and they did cut policing. And what Theresa made it even worse was that she really politicized Stop and Search and said it was targeting certain ethnic communities more and that we had to stop. Police forces had to reduce it.

And, you know, on any data, you know that Stop and Search prevents knife crime because you remove that knife from the person before they’ve committed the offence. So that is true. They shut a lot of magistrates courts down, which, in case your viewers don’t know, all criminal proceedings in this country start in the magistrates and then if it does go up to the Crown. So they cut them all.

For instance, I was a senior Crown Prosecutor about 10 years ago in Surrey, in Guildford, and I worked the courts were in Staines, Woking, Guildford, and I forget the other one. They were all cut. Only Guildford remains. And so, number one, people from other parts of Surrey don’t have representation in the magistrates. Victims have to travel a very long way to go to the magistrates and there has been a lack of focus on keeping people safe. So that is that one.

And then in terms of Sadiq Khan, he is the Police and Crime Commissioner and he sets the budget, he sets the priorities and he sets the direction. So he actually, all the blame lies at him. And he also appoints the Police and Crime Commissioner with the approval of the Home Secretary. But he set, you know, he created a specialist unit to fight hate crime.

KONSTANTIN KISIN: Right.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: While violent crime was going up, women were getting raped. He set up a unit to fight words, which he does very well. You know, he’s very good with his identity politics, but that’s not what matters to people. We’re not interested in division, we’re interested in unity because we all suffer the same crime. And I think people want him to police violent crime as opposed to words.

The Reality of Crime on London’s Streets

FRANCIS FOSTER: And I think one of the most frustrating things as a Londoner is obviously violent crime is awful, but it’s simple things like you’re walking outside Vauxhall Station, which is a major trains and tube station, it’s a major transportational hub, and you just see the kids with their faces covered, dressed all in black, the hoodie and, you know, and you see for yourself. They go around nicking phones and you’re going, where is the police? Where are the police?

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: Well, so my kids were targeted by those masked gang of youth gangs and you know, you can’t recognize. And I prosecuted people in masks, by the way. It’s very difficult to prove. So you go on clothes, you go on evidence that is not 100%. And you have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they committed it. So it does provide a cloak of anonymity and a protective cloak of anonymity against consequences.

In fact, last, you know, I said, one of my main policies, I want the police, if you are covering your face, for that to be a reason for Stop and Search. For precisely that reason. You know, they came out against me saying, and they said, “Would it be the burqa?” I said, “Yes, actually, I speak to some shops in central London in Mayfair, and they say people come in burqas and steal and leave,” you know, and it has to be indiscriminate.

If you cover your face in an open society, that has to be a reason for Stop and Search because the rest of us are suffering. And then they want to bring in facial recognition. Right. Labour has said across the country, what’s the point if people are, if they don’t ban face coverings, if they don’t make face coverings a reason for Stop and Search? Because you and I, the normal person, we’re going to be tracked for life. Right? Tracked. And criminals won’t.

The Shoplifting Crisis

FRANCIS FOSTER: And that’s a really good point because you look at the way things are going in London and you look like you said, I was in Finsbury Park recently, I saw people going to a Pret a Manger and quite literally stealing and walking out. And we were talking before this recording started about California, where it seems theft has been legalized. And I’m seeing the same thing happen to London.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: Yeah, I mean, so I was, so what happens is I was a senior Crown Prosecutor and we did a lot of theft, obviously in the courts. And what happens is…

KONSTANTIN KISIN: Prosecutor. Prosecutor. Yeah, sorry, sorry, I misread that. Yeah, sorry.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: And what happens is someone comes in, right, and they’ve stolen a bunch of stuff, the punitive element of it is almost removed because they try and look at the offender. “Oh, you know, he’s a drug addict, he’s trying to fund his alcohol addiction. He’s trying to fund his drug addiction. What can we do for him?”

And so the shoplifting, even if they are prosecuted, which, you know, only 6% are, it almost takes a back. It goes, it’s not prioritized. So you’re like, “Oh, you know what? I robbed it because I have a drug addiction.” So they’re like, “You know what? Let’s get you into a drug program and probation. Let’s see what we can do.”

And then I remember I once stood up and I said, “Hang on, you know, he hit a security guard.” And security guards are… And they’re like, “Okay, you know what? We’ll give the security guards £50 compensation.” Exactly, exactly that. It’s insulting. It’s insulting, right?

And then people, you do hear the police and politicians say, “Well, you know, security guards need to do their work. You know, they need…” Why should they? Because they don’t feel the courts have their back when it does come to prosecution.

But on the flip side, we do have a fundamental problem in this country where a big section of criminals are not really criminals. They’re drug addicts. And I think you probably have the same in California. And some of them come in the dock, some of them are veterans, and they say, “I beg you, I don’t want to be here. Help me.” You know, and it’s heartbreaking because there is no tool to help them.

What happens is you’re like, “Okay, you’re a drug addict. We’re going to give you a drug rehabilitation order.” That might sound effective, but all it means is, I think, you know, speaking to probation or an alcohol rehabilitation. They come in and they’re like, “Have you drank today?” They’re like, “No, have you had drugs today?” And they leave.

KONSTANTIN KISIN: Right?

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: And this is my personal opinion, it’s not Reform policy, but you would almost want a prison that’s like the Priory, you know, where you do not leave until you are clean. And they’d love that. It’s very hard to get pure drug rehabilitation on the NHS. I know because a friend of mine has a son who had it. She had to send him to Thailand. It was so expensive. And I think that could reduce a lot of the petty crime you see. And they’re desperate for help.

A Pragmatic Approach to Drug Addiction

KONSTANTIN KISIN: I mean, this is one of the big challenges, I think in policy we’re sort of going in direction I didn’t expect. But I think, no, no, but this is good because it kind of shows that you’ve got some original ideas, which I think is really great for when you’re talking to political candidates.

Because Francis and I have talked for a long time about the fact that treating drug addiction as a crime, rightly or wrongly, moral blah, blah, blah aside, it just doesn’t work in practical terms. And if you could treat people for their drug addiction, Portugal, for example, has done some good work on this, you’d find you’re solving the actual problem as opposed to, you know, one of the problems obviously we have is we don’t have enough prison places.

And that’s partly because there’s some people who really need to be in prison for a very long time. Far, far longer than they’re going there now. But there’s also a lot of people that are ending up there who just got a drug problem. And if they could get that help and get help with that and then be able to be reintegrated into society, we’d address a lot of those issues. So why isn’t that a Reform position?

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: Well, I think there’s costings involved. We haven’t discussed it. Obviously policy is being drawn out. But I do think that you’re right if you address some root cause. They’re just criminals and they’re just horrible people that need to be put in prison. Others, you know, it really is a drug addiction through circumstances of life.

You know, I speak to some veterans who say after, you know, PTSD they did become drug addicts. And number one for me, that’s shameful. You know, the fact that, the fact that our veterans are not put on a pedestal and treated like kings is a blemish on any country. But yeah, they deserve help to stop, to stop it as opposed to this roundabout of going to prison, going to prison.

And, you know, they go to prison for a day here, a day. There’s what they do really need is help with stopping drug addiction in San Francisco. I think they’re giving them the drugs, right?

KONSTANTIN KISIN: No, I don’t know exactly what the latest policy is, but I think it’s refreshing to hear because I think in this country in particular, there’s this sort of thing about being perceived as being soft on drugs by talking about the things that we’re talking about, whereas what we’re really talking about is pragmatic solutions to actual problems.

Going Hard on Drug Dealers

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: So you have the drug addicts who really are vulnerable victims, I think, sometimes, and you have the drug dealers. Right. And that’s what we need to go hard on are the drug dealers. And like you say, you know, they’ll serve half their time or they’ll deal drugs within prison. And that’s what you need to go after a lot.

And I know, for instance, that a lot of candy shops, souvenir shops across London, they are dealing drugs and they’re not being shut down, they’re not being shut down by the council, they’re not being shut down by the police. There is a massive proliferation of these kind of shops. And you’ve got to ask yourself there in central London, how are they affording rent? There’s no one in there. I mean, just in my area, I mean, there’s all. The high street’s full of it.

And so I think we have to have, I don’t feel there is a coordinated police emergency unit to deal with the massive proliferation of drug dealing.

KONSTANTIN KISIN: It does kind of feel like across the country now, but in London, I think it’s more noticeable than anywhere. There’s just a toleration of crime. There just is.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: Yeah. And what you find with the two other parties is it can no longer be business as usual. Right now, every party is like business as usual with a little tweak. It has to be a fundamental change.

I mean, my teenagers are approached regularly just when they’re in their school uniform. Guy in a Covid mask gives them a card with just a mobile phone number. “Any drugs you want,” you know, from the age of 13, they’re given that, you know, and he lists it, you know, ketamine, coke. I mean, people don’t realize. Actually, I had to prosecute a lot of like, delivery drivers who also deal drugs, you know, and a bag of coke is like £5 now.

You know, it used to be like, for the rich bankers, it’s actually so cheap and easy to get all across London. And no one’s dealing with that. No one’s dealing with actually breaking these kind of organized crime that has permeated everything. I mean, you’ve got kids in private schools, state schools, all doing drugs.

The Illegal Immigration Problem

KONSTANTIN KISIN: And you mentioned Deliveroo drivers. I mean, one of the things that anyone who’s ordered a Deliveroo in London has experienced is the person who turns up is not the person on the app who it’s supposed to be. And that’s, we know that’s illegal immigrants buying identities to then use within Deliveroo. How much of an issue is illegal immigration in London?

The Crisis of Illegal Immigration in London

LAILA CUNNINGHAM:

I think illegal immigration is a massive issue. Number one, London has the largest number of illegal migrants housed in hotels. The government likes to call it asylum seekers, but they entered this country illegally and they are illegal migrants. Just because you say the word asylum, it doesn’t kind of neutralize the fact that you enter the country illegally. And London has the largest share.

You know, where we saw a murder of the guy walking his dog in Uxbridge. Uxbridge, actually Hillington has the largest amount in hotels. And what’s really sad is that you have Londoners whose kids can’t afford to live in London, right. And yet they’re working in London, but they can’t afford it, are paying taxes for these people to stay in the hotels in the city that they can’t afford to stay in themselves. So illegal migration has a huge effect.

We’ve even got, you know, now we have council. So what the way it works is you’re an asylum seeker and then when you’re granted asylum, you’re deemed a refugee. And what we know is that the approval rate for certain countries is over 90%. You know, Somali, Ethiopia. I don’t have the facts here, but it’s a very high approval rating.

So what happens is you come on a boat, you’re an illegal entrant, you say the word asylum, this magic word, it’s like open sesame. It neutralizes illegal entry. You’re deemed an asylum seeker and you get all the benefits paid for by the British taxpayer. You’re put in a four star hotel and then your claim is again, all that public resources is granted, you become a refugee and you go to the top of the housing list in London because successive legislation, Theresa May is one of them, has said that you cannot discriminate for social housing on the basis of nationality.

KONSTANTIN KISIN:

It’s quite an extraordinary thing if you think about it. So I’m an immigrant. Your parents were immigrants. Francis’s mother came here as well. I have never understood why it is that anyone who is not a British national should get access to any benefits whatsoever.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM:

But also, if you’re not prioritized in your own country, where are you supposed to be prioritized? If your parents aren’t going to love you unconditionally, who is? It is shocking. And also when they say discriminate against nationality, fine, put foreigners in that bracket. But British people, of course, should be prioritized. And that’s not discrimination. If you flip it, discrimination is actually not prioritizing the people who built this city.

KONSTANTIN KISIN:

Wait, so are you in principle okay with foreign nationals getting benefits?

LAILA CUNNINGHAM:

No, I’m not. I don’t think foreign nationals should get any benefit. Yeah, of course not.

FRANCIS FOSTER:

Why?

LAILA CUNNINGHAM:

We have the highest tax burden since World War II and the lowest productivity in the public sector. So you’ve got us, right? No, I don’t think so. And as it stands, British people are not being prioritized for social housing in this city. And I actually make, it actually makes me angry because again, where are you supposed to, you know, I speak to people who are like, their son is on number 400th on the list, but someone who’s just arrived, doesn’t speak English, gets a three bedroom house for free.

And then if you say that you’re racist, by the way, which I did, I said at one of the council meetings I was called racist. So I think that there has to be. I think we’ve been led by political cowards. Political cowards who have been voted in to represent British people but have been too cowardly to do so.

KONSTANTIN KISIN:

You know what’s interesting, and I’m sure you know this, you’ve traveled extensively abroad. It’s funny, in this country, if you say that you might be called racist by some people. If you tell people in any other country that in Britain we actively discriminate against our own population in favor of foreigners, they all think we’re crazy. Everyone around the world thinks what we are doing is insane.

London’s Lost Identity

LAILA CUNNINGHAM:

I know, I know they do. And they also think, how do we put up with it? You know, and what is that? What is the aim? And that. But I think that’s why reform is doing so well, you know, and that’s why I think people are like, I’m so sick and tired of being put on the back. I’m so sick and tired of being divided. You know, they’re very good at dividing us as well.

And I think that’s why reform’s doing so well, because we’re unashamedly for British people. You know, I was on a. I don’t feel, when I say London’s changed as well. I go to certain parts of London and it doesn’t really feel like a British city. It really doesn’t. It doesn’t feel, it feels more like a Muslim city in some areas. You know, you go to Whitechapel, that.

FRANCIS FOSTER:

That feels like a Muslim city. That doesn’t feel like London.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM:

No, it doesn’t. And I speak to people who are from there who have moved out because they feel, you know, they grew up there, they feel they’ve been eradicated, you know, that their way of life, their values have been eradicated. And they’ve got burqa markets in Tower Hamlets, you know, and listen, I could do my parents Muslim and, but they didn’t move for that.

You know, so many was that we didn’t, they didn’t move to London to find some Egyptian village in London. No, they moved to London because it is the capital of the United Kingdom and everything that Great Britain represents. And I don’t feel the capital city represents that anymore. And I feel we’ve lost that identity and. Yeah.

KONSTANTIN KISIN:

What can you do about that though?

LAILA CUNNINGHAM:

Well, the mayor doesn’t really have any control over social housing. But you know, he has failed to build so much housing and I’d like to see more British workers have been priced out of London. So I’d like to see, you know, he has a huge mandate to build so many homes. You know, he has failed to build on all the brownfield sites that he could. He gets a huge allocation from local government, central government to build. He hasn’t.

For instance, there’s a lot of industrial sites in London that really house very low wage, low skilled work. And because of labor ideology that, you know, you can’t take this from workers. He has the power to make that into homes. He hasn’t. And that’s why you find people and the demographics because there’s such a big social housing and so many refugees are housed in London, in certain parts of London. And British people who work in London can no longer afford to live here.

You’ve found an influx of foreigners who don’t really want to live in a British, who want to live in Britain but don’t want to live in Britain, if you know what I mean. And British people are priced out of. After you came. I mean, you remember London. I remember growing up in London, Hackney was so cool. Do you remember? It was all the artists. Yeah, it was another capital. But, you know, we kind of put up with that. You go see studios, it was cool.

You know, I find that kind of coolness to London’s gone. You know, there’s no independent shops on the high street. No, it’s all, it’s either candy shops, vape shops, but you don’t get little cool boutiques or. Yeah, coffee shops have proliferated. I actually did the math. I think it’s a massive markup on coffee, and so I get that. But that eclectic element to London I find has changed.

KONSTANTIN KISIN:

Universities are a bad deal. Six figures of debt for a bachelor’s degree. That signals less every year. Four years spent navigating ideological rules instead of learning how to think. Grades are inflated, standards are lowered, and dissent is punished. We call it higher education, but it’s mostly expensive daycare with a credential attached.

University of Austin, also known as UATX, is different. Admissions at UATX are based on test scores alone. No essays, no resumes. Nobody cares who your parents know. If you’re smart enough, you’re in. UATX students turned down UChicago and fled Barnard to complete a demanding great books corps, including Aristotle, Shakespeare, Tocqueville, alongside real math, science, economics and AI.

Classes are small, professors actually know your name. Grades aren’t padded. Excellence is measured and rewarded from day one. Students work directly with top founders, investors and institutions, building companies, doing serious research and landing real internships. And here’s the part that changes everything. There is no tuition. Thanks to private donors. Every UATX student graduates debt free, free to take risks, start companies and build a life instead of paying off loans.

If you want a credential, look elsewhere. If you want a serious education that actually prepares you to lead, apply to the University of Austin. Visit youAustin.org that’s you, Austin.org.

The Threat to Trial by Jury

FRANCIS FOSTER:

Labor bringing in a lot of changes. This is something I’m actually very interested to talk to you about because when David Lammy announced this particular policy, my jaw was on the floor when they were talking about getting rid of jury trial. Yeah, so there’s a lot of people who haven’t heard about this. You work for the Crown Prosecution Service. What are David Lammy’s plans and why are they, in my opinion, so egregious?

LAILA CUNNINGHAM:

So as your viewers, I don’t know if your viewers know, but we create the Magna Carta created trial by jury, you know, to be tried by 12 of your peers, because let’s face it, the judge is part of the state, prosecutor’s part of the state. The only part of the judicial system that is really not part of the state is the jury. It protects you against the state.

And in this country we do have a magistrate system where up to 12 months there is no jury, but you do have a bench from lay people mainly, which is kind of like a mini jury. And what he’s saying is that to reduce the backlog, he’s going to remove jury trials. What he really is removing is people’s power, you know, because right now, what they’ve also done, and a lot of those three year trials, when you get a three year conviction, is when you say hateful content.

You know, look at people who’ve been prosecuted after the Southport trials and what you found is when it has been a jury, they’ve acquitted them in five minutes because they’re like, it’s ridiculous. And when you have had a judge, they’ve had a very, very harsh penalty. So they’re almost, they’re upping the chance of you being prosecuted for something they don’t like you saying and they’re removing the protection from you being acquitted.

And it’s draconian, but it’s all a form of control. You know, they don’t trust the people. And they even said actually that in fraud cases the jury’s too stupid, so they shouldn’t be on the panel. But the jury consists of people like you and me who’ve had families, who’ve had businesses, who’ve run a household, who’ve had. And they bring a wealth of life experience that a judge doesn’t.

And actually what they found is during fraud cases, the jury actually had very clever questions, very clever notes, but this just. It’s an authoritarian regime that doesn’t trust the people and wants to control every outcome. That’s why they’re bringing in facial recognition without removing face coverings. It’s all an excuse, it’s a guise. And when you lose, I think rights, fundamental rights under the guise of safety or convenience or expedience, you end up with neither.

FRANCIS FOSTER:

Now, David Lammy would go, well, hang on a moment, Leila. Because of COVID we now have cases that have years to be victims, have to wait years to get their moment in court. And these are very serious crimes. These people, this is suffering. These people are waiting years, literal years, for things like rape, murder, whatever. And it’s not acceptable. This is a policy that the government is doing. We’re going to streamline it. And we’re going to ensure that people get their day in court and victims get justice. What’s wrong with that?

LAILA CUNNINGHAM:

Because the judicial system only works if it’s fair and reliable, not if it favors the state. And when you remove jury trials, it will invariably favor the state and the government. You can’t remove people’s fundamental rights for expediency. It’s not our fault that there’s a backlog. That’s the government’s fault. They have to sort it out.

And, you know, what’s happened is. And I go back to hate crime because it’s a real bugbear of mine. So you have magistrates trials, which if you, let’s say I hit you, right, just push you. That’s an assault. Quite a minor thing. It goes to the magistrates. The magistrates are very quick. If I hit you and call you with a racial slur, it becomes an either way offense. And the criminal can then pick Crown Court. Right.

And you invariably picked Crown Court because of the massive delay. So then the victim pulls out, he’s got three years, it’s not an imprisonable offense. He’s on bail, he can relax. And that is a huge part of the backlog is that they’ve made minor offenses into more serious offenses if they’re racially or religiously aggravated. And that has to go back to the magistrates. It’s a huge backlog. And they really prioritize words over violent action.

FRANCIS FOSTER:

So that being the case, what is reform’s policy? How would you sort out this huge backlog that we now have in the Crown Prosecution Service?

The Challenge of Clearing Court Backlogs

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: I’d have Crown courts sitting in the weekend. You know, you clear the backlog, just like we did in the Southport trials. You clear the backlog, you have Crown Court in the weekends, you reduce all the minor offenses that are racially or religiously aggravated, go back to the magistrates. And that’s how you clear it.

But you don’t clear it, you never clear it by removing people’s rights. That’s not what a government does. And it wasn’t even in their mandate. You know, they’re bringing in incrementally more and more state control without ever asking us to vote on it. If they really believe that was the case, then we should have voted on it. And I can guarantee most people wouldn’t.

FRANCIS FOSTER: So there’s a lot of people going, well, what type? What do you mean by state control? Give me some examples. What is the Labour government doing to bring in state control?

Digital ID and the Erosion of Rights

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: So they’re bringing in a Digital ID, right. Initially they said it would be to, so illegal migrants couldn’t work. And then they realized that didn’t wash because they’re like, oh, hang on, we try that for a week or two. Obviously you can get away, you can get around with it. I mean, you know, if I’m hiring an illegal migrant, I’m not like, “give me your documents.” If you don’t have your documents, I’m not hiring you. Weak argument.

And then they actually said it was going to be easier to buy a house, right. And then that didn’t wash. And now they’re saying, you know, I don’t know, it’s just so you can have… Initially they said, you know, so you couldn’t work without getting it. And now it’s so you can get all your benefits.

And what happens is when you have a centrally controlled digital platform that dispenses all your rights that you now treat as rights, they will become privileges on the basis of you behaving, you know. “Oh, you didn’t, you didn’t. You said something against the government last year. We’re not sure if you’re allowed this. You didn’t pay your HMRC tax because you’re in dispute. Until you pay it, you’re not going to be allowed to get an NHS appointment.”

All the rights I think that we deem now as rights will become privileges on the basis of us behaving. No one asked again for this central control of everything we do. Why wasn’t it in the mandate? Why wasn’t it in their manifesto? I mean, the election was just 14 months ago.

Let’s look at how they’re canceling. They’re canceling trial, they’re canceling elections for 4 million people, 6 million people. On what basis? On reorganization. You reorganize after the election. You don’t reorganize before. And by the way, Reform’s polling to win every single one of those elections. And there’s nine mayoral positions as well.

This is a government that doesn’t trust the people. It only… It’s a status government. It’s a socialist state. They believe in a bigger, bigger state and they reward dependency. I mean, you’ve seen it in their budget. Well, the more you’re dependent on the state for welfare, that’s what they’re relying on. They’re relying on to grow the pie of people on welfare. Because if enough people are on welfare, they’re always going to vote for more government intervention.

FRANCIS FOSTER: But my pushback to that is Laila, yeah, but you can carry on doing that. Eventually we’re going to go bankrupt. And let’s be honest, this country is pretty close to, to put it bluntly, going broke.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: Yeah, of course we are. Because they, they also… Debt finally matters, right? Before, debt didn’t matter because it was at 0%. But debt, it’s not, it’s not free anymore. But they, they don’t believe in that. They just want more and more people. The more you’re reliant on the state, it’s like you’re reliant on drugs. You’re reliant on a drug addict, right? They want to get you hooked.

Once you’re hooked on welfare, you’ll vote for them for life. They don’t want you to own anything. They don’t want you to make money. That’s what they’re betting on. They’re not rewarding risk. They’re not rewarding people who are working. They don’t care about that.

Breaking the Welfare Dependency

KONSTANTIN KISIN: And how is reform going to fix all this? Because, look, I agree with you 100% about hooking people on welfare, but getting people off drugs is pretty hard, as we’ve discussed. How are you going to unhook Britain off the welfare?

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: Well, right now we have, in some cases, you earn more on welfare than you do working. And, you know, we have imported so much foreign cheap labor that wages have become stagnant since 2008. So you’re like, “what the hell am I working for? I’m not getting anything and there’s no reward. It’s like, I can’t own a home. It’s like 10 times my salary.”

So I think you have to make wages go up. And the way you make wages go up is that you stop importing foreign cheap labor. You encourage businesses to open. You know, we’re number 20 in the world to… Listen, your company behind Mexico, they take all their jobs, all their taxes, everything you deregulate. I mean, Revolut left us to go to France. As I’m sure you know, businesses aren’t really excited to open up shop here.

You know, I speak to young people. They’re leaving university. My teenage kids, friends, they’re not like, “oh, I’m going to, I want to stay in London. It’s so exciting. I want to stay in England and get a job.” No, they all want to leave. Yeah. And so we didn’t invest in skills, we didn’t invest in technology. We relied solely on foreign cheap labor. We’re the least automated country in the G7. We have the best universities in the world. Why is that?

And that’s what I think we need to do, we need to make work pay, not punish work.

FRANCIS FOSTER: And I mean, the problem is, Laila, and let’s be really blunt about this, is it’s not just Labour. It’s 14 years of a, I wouldn’t say useless, because that’s actually a compliment to the previous Conservative government. But let’s say you’re going to have another four or five years of Labour. So that’s the best part of two decades. I mean, if reform were going to come in, you were going to be faced with one hell of a challenge. It could be argued that it’s even more of a challenge than Thatcher faced.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: Massive challenge. Massive challenge. But you have to have someone who is… So we haven’t had a radical leader in such a long time. Thatcher was radical. She wasn’t scared to do what it takes. She wasn’t scared to stand up to the unions. She wasn’t scared to be unashamedly pro-capitalist.

And we have had leaders who are not like that. They’re internationalists. You know, they favor international relations. And I think that’s got to stop. You know, we had Brexit. I was a big Brexiteer because I do believe in a sovereign, free Britain.

KONSTANTIN KISIN: And you were married to a Frenchman.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: And I was married to a Frenchman. The less French the better. But we have a government, we have governments that didn’t believe in it. You know why? We should be, we should be a country that rewards companies. Come deregulate, allow the markets to pick the winners and losers.

Right now, we have government and regulation that are picking the winners and losers. I speak to young, small companies who can’t compete just because of regulation. They can’t compete with the big companies. And that’s a shame. That’s not a thriving economy. You do get monopolies at the top who can afford all the regulatory requirements that this government has imposed on them. And what you find is small startups are struggling to survive here.

FRANCIS FOSTER: I spend a stupid amount of time at a desk writing, researching and prepping for Triggernometry episodes. After a while, I realized the setup I had just wasn’t good enough. The wobble, the wrong height, the back pain. If your desk is making your day worse, you feel it. That’s what’s pushed me to upgrade properly. Anyone who works long hours knows that sitting all day is brutal. You need a workspace that adapts to you, not the other way around.

That’s why I switched to the E7 Pro from FlexiSpot. The E7 Pro is built for people who actually use their desks properly. It has a 440 pound static load capacity, a height range from 25 inches up to just over 50 inches, and a dual motor three-stage leg system that keeps the whole thing rock solid even at full height. You can tap on it, lean on it or load it with your gear and it doesn’t wobble. I tested it the way any normal person would. No movement, no flex, no irritation. It’s the first desk I’ve had that feels genuinely stable.

And with a 15 year warranty and a 30 day risk-free return, they clearly trust their own build quality. If you want a better workspace for yourself, something that actually fits your body and your day, check out the E7 Pro from FlexiSpot. Go to FlexiSpot.com and use our code Trigger30 to save an extra $30. They also offer special discounts for medical workers, students, graduates, teachers and military personnel. That site again is flexispot.com or click the link in the description of this episode.

The Conservative Legacy and Reform’s Future

KONSTANTIN KISIN: Laila, you talked, or Francis talked about the worse than useless Conservative government. You were in support of that party when it was useless.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: Sure.

KONSTANTIN KISIN: Several of your recent MPs were in fact ministers in that very useless government that we’ve just had 14 years of. And one of the talking points in the last few days has been the sort of the Toryification of the Reform Party. And a lot of people are, I think, wondering whether, you know, in supporting reform, they are effectively going to get more of the same.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: I understand the concern and I understand the concern when they see, you know, the people that they associate with a failed Tory government representing us. But I will tell those people there is one fundamental difference and it’s the same when you’re in a company and that’s leadership, right. It depends what leader you have.

They had a leader who didn’t really believe in anything. They had five leaders actually, right, who would sway with the wind. You know, you felt that they were serving a party, right. Now you have a leader whose convictions… I don’t think anyone can doubt Nigel’s convictions. They’ve always been the same and it’s always been to put British people and our country first and he won’t tolerate anything else.

You know, and we’re all, we all respect our leader. There’s no, there’s no chat in the back to get rid of him. And I think when you have strong leadership with strong convictions, strong priorities, whoever joins recognizes that that’s the aim of the party.

And I think that’s what the Conservative Party failed to do. They didn’t have… Nobody really knew what they stood for. You know, they’d look us and go, you know, “we’re the party of low taxation,” highest tax burdens since World War II. “We’re the party of home ownership,” lowest home, you know, if 30 and 40 year olds who don’t own a home never will. “We’re the party of law and order.” Law and order, as we just discussed, you know, crime was rife. You know, “we’re the party of business.” You know, they deliberately remove the non-dom policy just to beat Labour.

This was a party that was there to serve a party. They forgot to serve the British public. Their main aim was to stay in power.

KONSTANTIN KISIN: I agree with you, but the question I think people are asking is why would reform welcome so many of the people who were part of the very thing you were describing? And I take your point about Nigel’s leadership. I think you’re right about his convictions. We’ve had him on the show a number of times. Never basically changed his tune at all because he believes what he believes and that’s admirable in a politician. I totally agree with you.

But I also think a lot of people might be saying, well look, I think it’s quite obvious reform needs more high caliber people to stand in all sorts of constituencies around the country and then to form a cabinet. What happens when the party has 200 MPs, most of whom are formally part of the failed Tory party and the weight of the balance of power within reform has shifted so heavily towards those people?

Isn’t reform going to face exactly the same problem as the Tories where you effectively had a liberal wing of the party holding back actual conservatives? Well, now you’re going to have people will say Tory wets holding back those of you who are actually the sort of native reformers.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: So to be fair, Tory wets aren’t joining us.

KONSTANTIN KISIN: What about what’s his face, Jake Berry?

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: He’s a foot soldier.

KONSTANTIN KISIN: Hold on a second. Last time I saw Jake Berry we were on Question Time together and his exact words when I challenged the idea of net zero, which I think is economic suicide, and I’m sure you’d agree with me, he said, “you’re totally wrong, Constantine. Net zero is not the problem, it’s the solution.” That’s who you now have in reform.

The Challenge of Integration and National Identity

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: So anyone can join. I’m serious. It doesn’t mean that they’ll have a role in government and it doesn’t mean that they, you know, we have lots of ex-Tories who have joined us as foot soldiers. And you say, yeah, I was part of the Conservative Party because, number one, there was no other choice on the right. And although I don’t even think it’s right, I just think for me, I wanted a party that was patriotic.

Believe, you know, my mum always taught me, and I know it sounds corny, you work hard, you shall receive. You don’t work hard, you’re not going to get anything right. And I wanted that. I wanted that, you know, mirrored in a party where, you know, we will reward you going out, leaving your family at 5am. We will reward you putting half your savings in a company. We’re going to reward that risk and we’re going to reward that effort that you take to support yourself and not rely on the state.

But we’ve had the opposite. And I was part of the Conservatives because I think, and a lot of people who are still part of the Conservatives, who haven’t had the guts to leave is because we still think of it as the party of Margaret Thatcher. We really do. And we try and ignore everything it’s done and think that maybe, maybe, just maybe, they might become Conservative again.

And then you’re like, hang on, there’s this other party that is actually saying everything that I believe in and is the real Conservative Party with a small C, and that’s why they’re joining. But as I said, everyone who joins won’t be in government. But anyone can join. You know, we could have, we’ve had a Green councillor defect.

FRANCIS FOSTER: Because, look, I’ll be honest with you.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: Also, by the way, politics is not a permanent damnation.

KONSTANTIN KISIN: Right?

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: It’s not a life sentence.

FRANCIS FOSTER: It is, as far as I’m concerned.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: It’s not a life. Well, excuse me.

FRANCIS FOSTER: No, I’m joking.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: It’s not a life sentence. Right. So it’s almost like even in crime, you know, you can atone for your sins.

KONSTANTIN KISIN: Yes, but have these people atoned for their sins?

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: The party hasn’t atoned for its sins. But for instance, you mentioned Generic. I mean, one thing he did say, so I was quite skeptical, and then his speech, he said something that really resonated with me and he worded it better than I ever could, where he said, “They are so compromised that they can no longer speak to the people.” And that’s how I feel the Conservative Party is. They are so, they are the architects of all the issues we face now, but they can’t admit it because it’s like a criminal being caught red handed and saying I’m innocent. He can’t really admit it.

Welcoming Defectors: A Strategic Necessity?

KONSTANTIN KISIN: But what I, Laila, all I’m trying to get you to address is you’re welcoming these criminals into your party. According to some people. I’m continuing your metaphor. So it’s like a criminal has been caught red handed and what you now have is a criminal gang who is now bleeding former members to your party. That’s how some people see it.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: And I can understand it. All I can say is Nigel’s political view and sense I’ve always trusted and he made the decision. And I think it’s a good decision because what it signals, forget the reflection on reform which I can see some people have laid out, but what it does signal is that the Conservative Party is effectively finished. Right.

And if that thought process accelerates Nigel Farage being Prime Minister, then for me, anything that does that is in the national interest. And when you have big players, whether you like Generic or not, but he is a big player in the Conservative.

KONSTANTIN KISIN: I wasn’t criticizing Generic, I was talking about Jake Berry.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: Well, I didn’t, I mean, Jake Berry. Yeah, listen, I haven’t really heard what he said.

KONSTANTIN KISIN: That’s fine, carry on.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: But when you have big players joining and really eviscerating the Conservative Party, if that accelerates a reform government, then for me, it’s a patriotic duty for me to support it because it’s in the national interest for everyone that we do have a reform government.

FRANCIS FOSTER: There must be a part of you that is worried when you have someone like Nadeem Zahawi joining reform and particularly his behaviour during COVID with vaccine passports. We’ve spoken about civil liberties. That was one of the most egregious infringements of civil liberties that has happened in all our lifetimes. And I think we can agree with that.

The COVID Legacy and Civil Liberties

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: I agree with that 100%. I do, I do. I mean, my teenagers are not, my kids are not vaccinated. I remember I was pregnant during COVID and I had, I had every single strain, literally. And every two days I’d get a call from the NHS, please, can you get vaccinated? In the end, I’m like, for God’s sake, this is harassment. I’ve had it. They didn’t take in natural immunity at all. It was completely disregarded. Which is the most, you know, the most, anyway, as I said, and I think Nadim said in his press conference, he is a foot soldier.

Anyone can join. And I think Nadim is a very successful businessman. If you remove that aspect of his political career, which I agree, I did not agree with at all. In fact, it’s during that period that I started inching away from the Conservative Party and having my doubts. You know, I’d gone, we could only walk in those days, and I’d go on long walks. One of my closest friends is a real lefty. You know, she’s an Oxford grad and environmentalist.

And we used to have long, long, I think I did, like, literally half a million steps. And I’d be like, who the hell does this government think it is? You know, who are they to tell me what to do? And then you’d hear, you know, the number six was an arbitrary number that you could have at your house.

But he is a successful businessman, and I think successful businessmen who have created something from nothing could be a benefit. But again, he did say he was a foot soldier, and that’s how it is. As I said, anyone can join. You know, we’re not a closed shop.

The Last Chance Saloon

FRANCIS FOSTER: And I tell you why this is so important, Laila. And it’s because one of the great privileges of doing the show, both for me and Konstantin, is we get to talk to ordinary people about what’s going on in the world. And they invariably, a lot of the times, less so now, which is very heartening. It’s a look over the shoulder and then asking or saying something.

The reason we’re pressing you about this particular issue is because I feel the next general election, this is it. We’re drinking in the last chance saloon. We’re drinking in the last chance saloon, culturally, economically, societally. And one of my fears is that we’re looking at the same people coming in and going, we’re just making the same mistake here.

And when I talk to people on the streets, these are ordinary, regular people. They’ve lost faith in democracy. They’ve lost faith in democracy, they’ve lost faith in party politics, and they’ve lost faith in politicians. And that is a very dangerous place for society to be in.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: 100%. I mean, until reform, I’d lost faith in democracy, to be honest, because I felt I was voting for something and getting the complete opposite. And I campaigned under the Tory banner across the country and for the year before the general election. And the number one message I got, it wasn’t like, cost of living. It was, “You lot are in it for yourselves.”

And that really resonated with me. People really felt that politicians were doing politics for themselves and the Conservative Party was there to serve itself and people. That is, for me, the main difference between reform. We’re not some hundred year old, two hundred year old party that’s, you know, badge of honor to be. Reform is not why we’re there. We’re there because we really have had enough and we want what’s best for the country.

And people who come over from the conservatives are doing the same. You know, they want to fundamentally fix what they were part of breaking. And you know, who am I to say no to that? They’re like, yes, we messed it up, we got it wrong. Please can we help fix it?

The Question of Islamification

KONSTANTIN KISIN: Laila, one other issue I want to raise with you. You actually alluded to it a number of times. You talked about Berkus and you talked about parts of London feeling like a Muslim, I don’t remember the words you used exactly, but Muslim city, Muslim ghetto, whatever you want to call it. There’s obviously, I think if we look across Europe, there’s been a dramatic rise in the concern about what people might call Islamification. Why do you think that’s happened?

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: I think so. We saw it across the Middle East over the past few decades. You saw it in Egypt when my parents are from, you know, my mom showed me pictures where people were in bikinis, in swimsuits on the beach. Now you go to a beach, everyone’s in full burqa in the sea, all in black.

In the Middle East, it’s because they, there’s no social mobility at all. Wealth is really accumulated very much at the top. There’s no welfare, there’s nothing. And people turn to religion and it’s exploited by radical Islamic leaders in that sense.

And I think the reason it is here is because we have let people into the country in massive amounts of numbers with no filter who hate the country. You know, you have let people in. Some of the people we’ve let in would be considered radical Muslims in the parts they are and would be nowhere near government, be nowhere near local government. But we haven’t had that.

I mean we’ve let in, we let, Muslim Brotherhood is not proscribed in this country. We let in someone, a convicted bomb maker from Egypt and considered his claim and put him in a four star hotel in Ealing for 18 months, paid for by the taxpayer. This is someone who was part of the Muslim Brotherhood and convicted. Muslim Brotherhood for your viewers, they are the founding fathers of ISIS and Al Qaeda.

You know, you just say that word in some parts of the Middle East and you’re imprisoned. Here, we grant them asylum, put them in the middle of towns and villages. He went on to rape someone in Hyde Park. As I said, that is for me, that is treacherous from a government.

And that’s what you have. You have people. And I know Merkel led in all the Syrian refugees, despite other European countries begging her not to, into our country. We don’t have a government whose sole purpose is to protect the British public and the British way of life. We don’t. We don’t have that. And we’ve let in too many people from certain countries and certain cultures who not only hate the country, but want to change it.

KONSTANTIN KISIN: Why do they hate the country?

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: Because it’s not a Muslim country.

KONSTANTIN KISIN: They want it to be a Muslim.

The Reality of Immigration and Integration

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: I speak to some, I don’t speak, I hear some. They do want it to be a Muslim country, but not only that, they somehow blame Britain for all the woes of the Middle East or the woes of their country or what’s going on in Palestine or what’s going on, I don’t know where, and they blame it. And they don’t come with a love of country or Great Britain.

They don’t come being “I want to come, I want to embrace it. I want to work, I want to do well. I want my kids to grow up British.” That’s not why they come. They come and they’re like, “You know what? I can go there. I can bring in 20 of my family members. I can live for free. I can do what I want. I can say what I want.” And if the host nation, and if anyone from the host nation complains, they actually call them racist, they get the blame. That’s what’s going on.

KONSTANTIN KISIN: Do they think they see us as weak?

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: Do I think what?

KONSTANTIN KISIN: Do you think they see us as weak?

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: I think they see us as suckers.

KONSTANTIN KISIN: Yeah.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: You know, as big. I had to prosecute one guy literally had, like, receding hairline, almost white hair. And he’d come into the dock and he was from Kuwait. I was like, why the hell is someone from Kuwait as a refugee? It’s such a rich country. But anyway, no war there. And he would be charged with robbery, burglary in the house. Guess what he said. He’s 16 years old, right?

So he was treated as not an adult. And when you’re not an adult, you can’t be remanded in custody for a crime. So he’d commit crimes on a government. And the public prosecutor would stand up and go, “He’s a child.” And you could almost see him laughing. You could almost see him calling his mates in Kuwait going, “Mate, man, I come here, I’ve got a free house. I rob houses. And they’re arguing for hours over whether I’m 16 or not.” It’s farcical.

The public prosecutor would stand up and say, “He cannot be remanded in custody, he’s underage.” And then the judge would be like, “Well, we’re going to have to assign a publicly paid age assessor.” God knows what that entails. That’s how ridiculous it is.

And for your viewers, I was in court once, and a woman turns up in a burqa in the dock, and I make an application to the judge. I’m like, “Judge, could you please remove her burqa? I have no idea who this person is.” And the judge says, “No, these are religious sensitivities, Madam Prosecutor. We cannot allow her to remove her burqa.”

And at that moment, I realized we’re not equal under the law, actually. You cannot go to court with a hat, right?

FRANCIS FOSTER: This.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: This person, I don’t even know if it was a lady, sounded like one. Had her complete face covered. And I had to conduct a hearing with it. As I said, we have cowards running the whole system who are too cowardly to stand up for us and stand up for our country. And I think you have seen it in other parts of Europe as well. But I think people are recognizing they don’t want to be run by cowards anymore.

A Vision for Immigration Reform

KONSTANTIN KISIN: And when we’re not being run by cowards, what will our immigration and also domestic policy in this area look like to address these challenges that we now face?

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: So I think there will be, for instance, there will be no, if you’re a foreigner, you can’t access benefits.

KONSTANTIN KISIN: You’ll get rid of a lot of illegal immigration.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: A massive, massive amount. And who would want to get a lot of legal immigration as well?

KONSTANTIN KISIN: That’s not contributing. Yeah, of course, because so big tick. Congratulations.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: Also, we will not rely on foreign cheap labor, because what happens when you rely on foreign cheap labor? They come. Oh, yeah, they’re working, but their salary is so low, the cost of living is so high, they’re still in that drain that they’re getting benefits.

KONSTANTIN KISIN: Agreed. Okay, so sorted. No benefits, foreign nationals. What else?

Rebuilding Britain’s Economy and Industry

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: No benefits for foreign nationals. And when you remove that, you will have British people put into social housing. You will put British people at the top of the queue for everything. And I think you will see a fundamental change. You will remove ourselves from the ECHR. Because the ECHR was never meant to prevent us from deporting illegal migrants. It was never meant to undermine our sovereignty.

And I think that is, I think the world needs to know that we don’t really care. All we care about is what happens in our country. We don’t care what you think of us. And we’re definitely not going to let a judge in Strasbourg tell us what to do or who we can and cannot keep. And we want Britain to thrive again.

We have massively de-industrialized as a result of net zero. It’s madness. And China’s clever because it doesn’t go into war. It just slowly de-industrializes the world and supplies us with everything. We’re so reliant on it for things. We used to be the workshop of the world and now everything we used to make, we import from China.

So I think I’d like to see an industrial plan that puts Britain back on the industrial map. We don’t make anything. And I think once we have a thriving economy, we only, so I speak to farmers who are, we speak about the inheritance tax farmers, but there are also tenant farmers who had been told to stop growing food and start growing trees because the landlord gets more money for it.

And so we only realize 60% of our food is homegrown, 40% is not. And I’d like to see that flourish. I’d like to see us grow more food. I’d like to see less focus on environmental, almost removed because it’s weakened us. And a focus on what we can make, what we can grow. And British people focus on it. Upskilling British people.

If you need a coder right now or someone to build you an AI platform, you don’t look for someone in Britain, you look for someone abroad. It’s demand and supply, right? We don’t have enough. Even my kids who are taking computer science, let’s say in A levels or GCSE, they’re like, “Mum, it’s so bad.” Because those that teach it are not the best, obviously, because otherwise they’d be working in a high tech job.

So we’re not even teaching the kids the jobs of the future at all. My kids, I still get called because my kids’ handwriting is bad. I’m like, “Don’t tell me about his handwriting. I want to know how quick his touch typing is.” I want to see touch typing competitions, hackathons all across schools. We don’t have that.

In fact, I went to speak at the Adam Smith Institute last week and I spoke to amazing young guys who have hackathons across and they’re like, “We’ve spoken to the government, we want to support them, but they’re not.” And they’re like, “We’re getting poached from Dubai.”

I want us to be leaders in AI and technology, but I know that relies, we need obviously a new energy plan because that’s heavily reliant. But we also need to embrace that if you are disabled or if you cannot go into work, but you can learn technical skills, you can learn data analysis, you can learn AI engineering, you can learn all this at home. And that’s what I want to see. I want to see those 9 million people that cannot go to work back into work one way or another.

The Rise of Sectarian Politics

FRANCIS FOSTER: I think also one of the main, one of the, a real significant change, not the main challenge, but it’s a challenge that we see in our society politically is a rise of sectarian politics. And I find that terrifying, if I’m being honest with you. The fact that you get MPs in parliament talking about helping to build an airport in a remote region of Pakistan. Is this some kind of weird satire that I’ve found myself watching?

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: And that again goes in with immigration. You have put a certain demographic from a certain country, you’ve flooded a certain area that they’ve managed to control the electoral process of it. And that’s why it’s got to change.

FRANCIS FOSTER: It’s not just the electoral process.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: Well, they vote the people in.

FRANCIS FOSTER: Yeah, they vote the people in, but it’s also, you look at what’s happened with Maccabi Tel Aviv.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: I know. And then he gets to resign. He’s not even fired, the head of the police.

FRANCIS FOSTER: I think we should talk about it very briefly and you should tell people, because there’s people in America who are really interested in this and I don’t think it’s got enough coverage, if I’m being honest.

The Maccabi Tel Aviv Incident and Police Accountability

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: No, I mean, so what happened is the police canceled Maccabi Tel Aviv fans coming to a football match because they said that there’ll be fights, there’ll be riots, there’ll be protests. And they basically, the message they sent to Jewish people was, “If you’re in danger, we’re going to ban you. We’re not going to stop the danger that presents to you.” And that is a horrible message for Jewish people.

And the head of the police actually presented false evidence, lied about something that happened in Amsterdam and he admitted it. What would your viewers think should happen then? He should be fired with shame. What happened? He got to resign at 52. That is the problem. There is no accountability.

But even amongst MPs, they get it wrong and they’re like, “We’re really sorry we got it wrong. We’ll get it right next time.” But they still stay in their jobs. It’s the same with the gangs across the country. “Well, we’re really sorry. We’re going to do a review. We’re going to do this.” We’re only talking about going after the perpetrators. The perpetrators are one slice. I want to go after the social workers, the politicians, the police officers.

And now you learn, by the way, that Maccabi Tel Aviv, the head of the police, who was on his recruitment panel, who recruited him, the head of the local mosque. And it all starts to come into play that it’s all one cabal, right? What is the head of the mosque doing appointing the head of the police?

And then you think, “Well, hang on, there obviously was a police cover up of the grooming gangs.” If they’re so interlinked with communities that also covered up the grooming gangs, that their job relies on it. And sometimes you think about it, you think it’s so big and it’s so entrenched, there’s so much to do, but I think it has to come down to accountability. And that’s what I’d like to see in London. You get it wrong, you’re out. There’s no sorrys, because this is public money.

Not only public perception and public trust, but it’s also public safety. For instance, Mark Rowley looked us in the eye and so did Sadiq Khan and said, “There are no grooming gangs, there are no gangs in London. Nothing like that exists here.” Yet I read victims’ testimonials, one from Oxford saying that she was driven to London, there were hundreds of men and she was never asked about them.

Another woman, another girl said she was bundled up in the boot of a car driven to London from I think the Midlands, driven to a house because her abuser owed people in London and she was gang raped in that house. And yet, and that was in Sadiq Khan’s area just before he came to power. And yet they looked us in the eye and said nothing happened here.

But only under public pressure did they say, “Oh, hang on, we’re reviewing 9,000 cases” just because there was public pressure. How do you get 9,000 cases of sexual gangs wrong? How do you get that wrong? But he’s still in power, right? And the police is going to review the cases that they originally discarded. They’re doing their own homework.

And I think that’s what people feel is that there is no accountability. I don’t want to hear sorry anymore. I want people to lose their jobs. I want people to be prosecuted for their mistakes.

FRANCIS FOSTER: Because the fact that he said, “I wasn’t aware,” I was aware that he said something akin to that, but when I was teaching, I taught a victim of the grooming gang.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: Did you?

FRANCIS FOSTER: Yeah.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: Wow.

FRANCIS FOSTER: And that was in East London. That was in East London. And that was 10 or so years ago, maybe a bit more so that, and that was that we knew that because we were coordinating with social workers. So he must have known.

The Business of Division

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: Oh, he must have known. And I don’t know if you read the Express did an article, basically what happens is that they fly in men from a certain part of Pakistan to come and gang these girls. They send photos of the girls to the guys in Pakistan and they bring them in to gang the girls.

And that’s why I wrote an article saying if Shabana Mahmood is really serious, then she would… And Pakistan’s not taking back these people. If she was really serious, which she’s not, she would issue visa bans against Pakistan until they took these people back. We don’t want them in our country. But she hasn’t done that, obviously. And you’ve got to ask yourself why.

FRANCIS FOSTER: I mean, she talks a good game.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: It’s so easy to talk a good game. You know, she said, “Oh, you know, these are the toughest measures we’ve ever had.” And she issued visa bans from DRC, Congo and Angola. What? Why? Hardly any of those come on a boat. No, we want to see from Afghanistan, Somalia, Pakistan. But they’re not doing that. They always talk a good game.

And actually, you know what? You know what would be really a good game? Is that if you come on a boat, the moment you enter a boat in France, that you know that if you arrive here, you will be prosecuted. She said, “No, well, instead of a five year visa or, you know, we’ll give you a two year stay in a hotel and keep reviewing it.” That’s what they call far reaching.

They just tinker around the edges. You need someone to come and literally blow it up. Not, not, you know, just… It’s got to stop. It cannot be business as usual. And that’s what we have with the two parties. It’s just business as usual. Because the state is closed. Suits them.

A Call for Unity

KONSTANTIN KISIN: Laila, thank you so much for coming on. Before we head to Substack, where our supporters get to ask you their questions, what’s the one thing that we’re not talking about that we should be?

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: I think people are not talking enough about how successive governments have managed to divide us into different sections. You know, you’re Muslim, you’re Jewish, you’re Christian, you grew up in a council estate. You didn’t, you’re gay. You’re not. And that’s got to stop because…

FRANCIS FOSTER: In.

LAILA CUNNINGHAM: In London anyway, we’re all Londoners. And I want to be the candidate, the mayor that unites everyone under the banner of London. I don’t want to divide and conquer. And that’s what I think. That’s what they’ve managed to do in the past few years.

And you’ve seen it across the world. You know, we’re all put into our own little demographic box and we’re all meant to pit against each other for certain rights, certain privileges, or even just political attention. And that’s got to stop. We’re all human beings and I don’t want us divided anymore.

KONSTANTIN KISIN: Good message to end on. Thank you so much for coming on the show.

Related Posts

• TRIGGERnometry: w/ Sir Antony Beevor on Russian Mindset (Transcript)
• Transcript of John Kiriakou’s Interview: This Past Weekend #661
• PBD #812: w/ Mehdi Hasan – Iran War, Qatar/China DARK Money (Transcript)
• SRS #310: w/ Josh Duhamel – Survival Skills, Off-Grid Living, Billionaires Building Bunkers (Transcript)
• Diary Of A CEO: w/ Mathematician John Lennox – June 4, 2026 (Transcript)