I started by asking him about reform's

new tax policy announced today. Uh they

if they are in power will remove tax

that people pay on overtime as long as

workers are earning less than £75,000 a

year. But how would that work in

practice? Look, we want hard work to pay

and there are millions of people in the

country right now who are working long

hours, in fact going above and beyond

and taking on overtime and yet feel

they've got less and less to show for

it. They can't take their kids for a

meal, can't go on holiday cuz taxes are

going up and bills just keep on rising.

So a reform, we are for working people

and we want to change this. And so if

there is a reform government, you will

not pay any income tax at all. Zero on

overtime. It's a hard work bonus. It's

going to be a big change, but it will

boost the earnings of millions of the

most hardworking people in this country.

>> Is this because you want people in

Britain to be working longer hours?

>> Yeah. You know, we want to reward the

people who are working the hardest in

this country, particularly those on

lower incomes, the ones who are really

struggling at the moment. Uh this is

going to be applicable for 90% of

workers. And in particular, it's going

to help those people at the lower end of

the spectrum, you know, newly qualified

nurses, factory workers, people in

distribution centers, the people who are

doing their 40hour week and then

choosing to take on those extra hours

cuz they're saving for a deposit or uh

for a new car or a holiday or just to

buy Christmas presents for their kids or

their grandkids at the end of the year.

They will know that under a reform

government, they're going to keep all of

that money. None of it's going to go to

the tax man. They're going to keep all

of it. How much will that cost a tax

man?

>> It's it's it's expensive policy. It's

going to cost about5 billion pounds a

year. We're going to find that money

through savings in welfare in

particular. We're not going to pay

welfare to people who aren't British

citizens. And we're going to get

millions of people who are currently

choosing not to work back into the

workplace. That means reforms like

saying that you can't claim disability

benefit for mild conditions like mild

anxiety. you've got to have a facetoface

appointment with a clinic with a

clinician before you get to benefit from

that. I think that's fair, you know,

because these people who are working

anxiety want to know you wouldn't get

disability benefits. You had extreme

anxiety, you might a mild version of

anxiety or mental health conditions, you

shouldn't be claiming mental health.

>> If you went if you went and tried to

claim benefits now for PIP or whatever

for mild anxiety, you wouldn't be

accepted. There are people who are

claiming that today and the amount of

fraud is absolutely astonishing. I mean

the DWP itself estimates it somewhere

around 10 billion pounds. That is a

massive sum of money and you're able to

claim disability benefits today either

with a very short appointment maybe just

8 or 10 minutes with your family doctor

or even that's done over the phone.

There are even cases where it's done uh

by emails and letters. That's not good

enough. So by cutting out that waste and

other things as well like not paying

foreign aid to rich countries uh no more

net zero subsidies we can find the

savings that we need to give this big

tax cut to working calculate how much of

somebody's income has been overtime

because presumably that's going to be

another kind of piece of bureaucracy

that companies and small businesses

across this country are going to have to

deal with managing.

>> No it's very simple. you're going to

work your normal 40hour week and then if

you are somebody who gets paid for

overtime

>> then the tax treatment that will just be

different to the way it is today and it

will mean that you won't be paying any

income

>> but somebody's going to have to keep

track of what you do over time they do

they do today

>> so you're pretty confident this won't

add to any burden on employers

>> no I think it's simple there'll

obviously be things we'll have to work

through with HMRC and the Treasury when

we form the next government and we'll

put in place anti-avoidance measures so

that people can't game the system uh

100% but it's a very straightforward

policy. You know there are millions of

people in the country listening to this

program this morning who do their 40hour

week and then they get paid overtime.

They should know that under reform

government they're going to save a lot

of money as a result.

>> Let's talk more broadly if we could Mr.

J about your broader economic plans for

a moment. I think you know as I was

putting the chief secretary it's fair to

say the current chancellor has got a way

to go to meet her promises on economic

growth. What would you do to get this

economy growing? Well, firstly, we're

going to make sure that work actually

pays. And that's the root of this policy

today. You know, it's a massive mistake

of Rachel Reeves to hike taxes on

employers employing people through the

increase in national insurance

>> and you'd reverse those.

>> Well, we're going to take a decision

closer to the general election.

>> It's a huge mistake that you can't

commit to.

>> Well, because it wouldn't be credible

for me as reform shadow chancellor to

make that decision right now. We'll make

that decision closer to the general

election. But you can

>> you just made a 5 billion spending

pledge. Why can't you commit to refing?

>> I think I think the point is because

that's an even bigger cost. But what you

can see today is the direction of travel

that where we find waste, we're going to

root it out and we're going to use that

money to bring down people's taxes and

their bills. And the first port of call

will be taxes on work. And so if there's

an opportunity to reverse the national

insurance increase, then we'll certainly

take it. How else are we going to get

the economy going again? Well, we're

going to bring down people's energy

bills by having a much more sensible

energy policy where we go for cheap and

reliable energy for households, but also

for businesses because you can't compete

in a global economy when industrial

energy price are four or five times

those of other countries. We're going to

get the country building again. I want

to build more homes so young people can

get on the housing ladder, but also

factories, offices, data centers, roads,

railways. That will mean reform of our

planning system as well. and we're going

to ensure that we get people off welfare

and into the workplace. That's

absolutely critical. It's the root of

everything. It's only if we can get

those savings that are able to cut

people's tax. And unfortunately, under

this Labor government, they're clearly

not prepared to do any welfare reforms

at all. That isn't fair on working

people. And it's going to mean that

taxes will keep on rising back. Stop it.

Just very finally on this, just yes or

no. Will you stick to the current

chancellor's fiscal rules? Uh we haven't

set out yet what our fiscal framework

will be but I can tell you that it will

be a very robust one and if anything it

will be tighter than Rachel Reeves.

>> So this is it's it's to be decided right

now.

>> It's not it's not sensible for me to be

setting the fiscal rules that I would

apply as chancellor potentially 3 years

ahead of a general election.

>> You could tear them up in theory and

borrow a lot more than she is.

>> I'm not going to borrow more. No. Look,

we want to ensure that we bring the debt

right down and that's by rooting out the

kind of waste that we've said. Look, I I

I'm not like Andy Bernham. I don't think

that you can uh muck around with the

bond markets. I think the bond markets

are our friend. They are the people who

keep the government honest and I'm going

to ensure that this government under

reform will believe in sound money and

actually be about bringing down the

debt, reducing the size of the state

primarily by cutting out the tens of

billions of waste that there is.

>> Let's talk about other important

matters. Immigration obviously very

central to your message. You've long

been arguing we've got a an immigration

crisis, that migration is out of control

in this country. And yet a couple of

days ago, we got the the latest net

migration figures showing that

immigration has actually plummeted from

almost a million 3 years ago to 170,000

last year. If there ever was a crisis,

and that's to be debated, it's it's

clearly now over.

>> No, look, I find it astonishing uh you

know, mindboggling that you question

whether there was a crisis. We had over

a million people coming into the country

and look that was under my former party.

I was appalled by ultimately crisis was

on your ultimately well not my personal

watch. You were in the cabinet. It was

ultimately the reason I resigned.

Well, yeah. I put in place sat in the I

put in placeed over this. I put in place

the very changes that are actually

bearing fruit now. But I resigned.

Here's the point. I resigned because

they weren't enough. What we reform Let

me finish. Let me finish. You resigned

from a government that presided over a

crisis. We now have a government that

has reduced immigration to 170,000 for

all.

>> That's still way too many. That's still

way too many. Where do you think it

should be?

>> As close to zero as possible. In fact,

we want it to be less than zero.

>> But it's going rapidly in the right

direction, which undermines your

argument. We still have

>> Not at all. Honestly, look, I think

you're totally out of touch. We've got

to bring down immigration to the point

where more people are leaving the

country than are coming in every year.

We want to have net immigration a period

a long period maybe 10 years in which we

have that to give the country breathing

space.

>> Who do you think should be leaving?

>> Well, you can start with all the illegal

migrants in the country then included in

these fig get them out of the country as

quickly as possible. But this is legal

migrants

>> and then of those people who were let in

legally under the last government, the

so-called Boris wave. We want to get

those low wage lowskilled migrants out

of the country because they are not net

contributors. their people if they stay

here if they stay here for the rest of

their lives then these people are going

to be costing you and I the British

taxpayer hundreds of thousands of pounds

each in fact we've calculated this and

the cost of the Boris wave if it's not

>> but these are the people that are

keeping our NHS running these people are

caring for our elderly are disabled to

go you want them to leave

>> we've got almost 10 million people in

this country who are either out of work

claiming benefits

>> but they're not qualified as well let's

get them qualified then let's get them

qualified You'd rather a Brit was on the

scrap heap. There's a million.

>> No, I'd rather the person that cared for

my elderly parents wanted to be doing

the job and was qualified to do it.

>> Well, someone who'd be for them and they

had no skills to do.

>> Firstly, I think that's an insult to the

Brits who are working in this sector.

80% of the people working in social care

in this country are British people. And

I want more Brits to be doing that.

There's a million young people at the

moment who are not in work. They're not

even in education or training. That

number is set to rise. We've got to get

those people, British people, off

welfare and into the workplace. Not just

reach for this easy lever of foreign

labor coming into the country that

undercuts the wages of British workers.

And it puts massive pressure on housing,

on getting a doctor, getting a dentist,

and the social pressure of our country

changing before our very eyes. That is

what

>> What do you mean the social pressure?

Well, it's obviously impossible to

successfully integrate millions of

people in such a short period of time.

For most of our country's history, we

were a country marked by net

immigration. More people were leaving

than were coming in. It's only from the

late 80s and '9s that more people were

coming in every year. Then it was in the

tens of thousands. The kind of numbers

that we've had in recent years have made

it very very difficult to have a strong

sense of national identity. And that's

what reform believes.

>> If there was a crisis a few years ago,

and I take your point that a million is

certainly a lot of people, it's

plummeted to 170,000. The population of

this country, 70 million, increased by

0.25%.

The numbers that we're seeing the crisis

has finished, Mr. Crisis is over.

>> It has not. It has not. The numbers that

we are seeing today are still

unprecedented in historical terms.

>> But they're plummeting under Labor.

>> Well, they're your whole

immigration. Labor's already doing it.

They're succeeding where your party

failed.

>> No. Well, they are succeed. They're

doing more than the last Conservative

government did for sure. But that is not

good enough. That's not success. Success

is bringing this right down.

>> They are. It's gone from a million to

170,000 in 3 years. If that continues,

if that continues in a couple years

time, it will be the numbers you want to

see.

>> Well, come back to me if the numbers

were zero. They're not today. They are

far higher than they've been in most of

our history as a country. We've got to

get them down right the way. And I want

to get all the illegal migrants out of

the country. You know, it's completely

outrageous that we've got at least a

million, maybe more. Estimates vary.

>> Costings are down 40% as well. Labour's

doing

>> 70,000

people, mostly young men, are broken

into our country under this Labor

government. Undocumented men. They're

putting immense pressure on our country.

They're now being housed in bed sits on

people's streets. You know, do do you

want that on the street next to you?

Well, most people in our country don't.

That has to stop. It's clearly not going

to stop under this Labor government.

More people broke into the country over

the weekend. The weather is good. It's

it's quiet in the channel today. Maybe

more will come. Only reform has the

strength and the policies that are

needed to actually tackle that end the

fast of the small boat crisis.

>> We've been talking a lot about what

reform would do in power. I just want to

play you a clip of what happens when

reform gets into power in Kirkley's in

local government. Have a listen to this.

>> I don't understand the constitution. I

have not had sufficient time to read

that as yet. I don't understand what

standing orders are, what they're made

up of, nor do I understand what an

amendment is. I understand that

councelor Balt does and is a a

wellrespected counselor because he

actually knows all of those rules. But I

suggest there is a possibility that we

might vote for something that we don't

understand at the moment. And whereas

ignorance is not a defense, risk should

be mitigated. Is that what happens when

reform wins power? They turn up not

having done their homework, not having

bothered to done the basics about the

job that they've been elected to hold.

>> No. Look, I don't I don't know the the

clip you just you just played me, but it

sounds like very widely said.

>> It sounds like you're trying to mock uh

a decent

>> I'm not mocking anybody who's been

elected.

>> It's not a good look. She's your local

group leader in Kirk Cle. She's had two

bothered to read the constitution.

people who've been elected to councils

who are not from the old political

parties who come from all walks of life

bring common sense to the job and yes

some of them will take a bit of time to

learn the ropes but they bring a lot of

fresh thinking as well overall if you

look at reform councils they're

performing extremely well you know if

you look at council tax reform councils

are increasing council tax less than

their conservative or their labor peers

and that's only after being in place for

a year or more. You know, I I'm very

confident that the new councils that

we've just taken over

reform representative aspiring to lead a

council two weeks after being elected

ought to have read the rules of the

council she seeks to lead.

>> Well, look, if people really liked their

local labor or conservative council, why

have they ditched them all? People are

voting in their droves for reform

because they know the reformr run

councils well, that they bring fresh

thinking and common sense to the job.

And I put it to you that clip is not how

anybody

>> think you think that Labor and

Conservative Council run. I'm simply

saying that having turned up to City

Council almost

I haven't read the rules but make me

council leader is not a good look.

>> Using one example there were 5,000

council candidates at the last election.

Overall reform councils are clearly

doing a good job and that's why people

are voting for reform. The last council

elections just two weeks or so ago were

very clear. We want thousands of

counselors across country. You're not

going to get into power in nationally

and turn up and say, "Well, I I don't

know. I haven't read the rules. I don't

know what's going on."

>> That sounds It sounds like uh what this

Labor government did. They turned up

without any plan, did they? Smash the

gangs. Well, that didn't work out, did

it? Won't increase taxes. Crossings

increases increase taxes by 26 billion

pounds and rising. Andy Bernham says,

"Don't need to bother about there are

concerns about what reform would

actually look like in power." And I'd

put it to you just based on that clip

and others that some of your local

government representatives are not doing

much to reassure those concerns that

people have.

>> No, I fundamentally disagree. Look, I

understand the game that the media wants

to play. You want to criticize reform,

but it's clearly not working.

>> I don't want to criticize

that.

>> It's clearly not working with the public

because the public are voting for

reform. They did at the local election.

>> That doesn't mean we shouldn't hold you

accountable. They see reform in local

government. They want more of it. That

doesn't mean that accountability and

scrutiny aren't important when it comes

to what your representatives are doing.

FY final question. Nigel Farage claims

today that the disclosure about his 5

million pound gift from a crypto

billionaire in Thailand was obtained by

the Russian state hacking his phone. Um

if he believes that's the case,

presumably he'll be referring that to

the police and the security services.

>> Well, that's for Nigel. Uh but yeah, it

is a very serious situation and I would

like to think that the police and the

security services uh helped him in this.

It shows the amount of pressure that's

he's under both in terms of physical

threats and indeed we've seen cyber

threats now and I'd like to believe that

the government and the authorities would

do more to support him. You know, I've

for a long time thought it was

>> he will be he will be referring this

>> that you'd have to ask Nigel himself.

That's obviously his own. It

>> be very strange if he believes he' been

hacked by Vladimir Putin. It would be

very strange if he didn't see you're

trying to turn this around and make it

sound like Nigel's the one who's doing

something wrong. Not at all. I'm just

asking whether he'll be referring he's

the victim in this, you know, he's

somebody who's under a lot of physical

threats. He's also under, as you've seen

for this, cyber threats, including from,

in this case, hostile states like

potentially Russia. Incidentally, also

blows apart this silly argument that's

been put around by the Labour party that

somehow Nigel is close to Putin. It

sounds like it's Russia that was

actually trying to hack into his emails

and phone to actually

disputing whether or not he's the

victim. He says he is. He's told the

Mail on Sunday that he's told the media.

I'm just asking whether he'll be

reporting it to MI5 as well.

>> Well, look, he's he's had to because he

doesn't get any help from the

authorities. He's had to go and use a

private firm uh to find this out. It's

obviously up to him whether he does

that. Uh, you know, I suspect he will

be, but that's obviously up to him. The

bigger point is that he's under a lot of

pressure. He's got physical threats.

He's got these threats from hostile

states. Actually, the state should be

stepping up and trying to help