The whole frame of the migration crisis is a racist, fascist frame. The answer is not to blame the migrants. The answer is not to point at the small boats. The answer is to point at the private jets, the private yachts, and to multi millionaires and billionaires. So you're going to be the less answer to Nigel Farage for? Sure. I guess the one difference I would have is Nigel Farage is a one man show. If I'm a one man show, I've absolutely failed as the leader of the Green Party.
You are now going to be running head to head effectively with Jeremy Corbyn and his new party and you're going to fracture the left. Hello and welcome to the forecast. The Green Party of England and Wales has elected a new leader and the members, by an overwhelming majority, have voted for the candidate from the party's more radical left wing. Zach Polanski's campaign focused more on Palestine and poverty than plants and the planet.
He's a former actor, a member of the London Assembly, but not a member of Parliament. Is he the voice, the face of a new progressive populism that can take on Nigel Farage or, for that matter, Jeremy Corbyn? So very welcome to the forecast. Thanks so much for having. Me on very. First off, congratulations. I very much appreciate that. How does it feel still sinking in?
It's a little bit surreal if I'm honest, but also amongst all the elation and the celebration, and I'm sure there's lots of that to come, there's kind of the moment that we're in, which is a very particular moment. There's failing Labour government reform on the rise. Nigel Farage just this week in that awful press conference around migration. And then you had a Prime Minister who wasn't willing to not even condemn it, but actually implicitly condoned it.
So it's a mixed response. I feel really, really good to win the campaign. Of course I do. I've just worked really hard along with my campaign team. But there's also a sense of how big the challenges are ahead. But I think we're ready to take them on. OK, Well, look, you've just started there by talking about reform and migration during your campaign.
In fact, during your speech earlier, I heard an awful lot about the two child benefit cap, disability cuts, wealth taxes, a little bit about water and sewage. I didn't hear an awful lot about the planet in general. Are you now a party about social justice, international campaigning? Or are you still the Green Party about environmental issues? You can't have social justice without environmental justice. But which do you care more about
now? I think it's not about putting those on the binary, I think it's about recognising everyone knows the Green Party cares about the climate crisis. We live in one of the most nature depleted countries in the world and we've all got to care about nature. If nature collapses, we have nothing. At the same time, people know that about the Green Party. I don't need to keep repeating that.
What people don't know about the Green Party is we want to lower your bills, we want to nationalise the water companies, we want to take on wealth and power in this country and we want to make sure that we're working with trade unions so workers have proper pay, dignity at work and proper sick leave.
I think all of these things shouldn't be put in opposition to each other because actually it's the corporations who are destroying our environment, but they're also the same people or same companies who are destroying our democracy and destroying our communities. This is all part of the same
system. I think what's different though is I don't always come at it straight away from an environmental lens, I come at it from a social justice lens, but the environment is absolutely wrapped up in that. There's no way we can tackle the problems facing our environment and tackling the planet unless we have a more equal society. Is one of those voices on your shoulder louder than the other though? I think it depends on the day, and I think it depends on what's going on in the news.
I think a roundabout COP, for instance, this is the meeting that happens once a year of all the countries around taking global climate action. Then climate and environment clearly comes to the front of the things that I'm talking about. The rest of the time is are the times when we absolutely need to be protecting nature and restoring nature. When I'm not speaking about them, though, it doesn't mean we don't care about them.
And it's not that they're still not at the forefront of everything we're doing, it's just that we need to meet people where they're at. And if you're worried about putting food on your table, heat in your homes, whether you can get to work or even if you have a job, then the climate crisis can seem quite a distant thing now, given longer to talk about it. I can absolutely tell you how the climate crisis is going to exacerbate the inequality that
already exists in our society. The working class communities I'm talking about when I talk about social justice, we'll face the worst impacts of wildfires and floods. They're the people who are least resilient to it. And the horrible irony is they're the people who've done the least to 'cause it. That's both on the national level but also internationally in the global S. We've extracted them for oil and gas. So these conversations are all part of the same conversation.
The question though, is what's the first thing we talk about? And I want to talk about lowering people's bills. OK, let's talk about some of those, some of those things. Let's pick them, pick them apart. How do you actually start addressing those issues? Are you still, are you committed to Net 0 by 2030?
If so, how? Undoubtedly committed to it, and I think anyone who isn't committed to it, that's sociopathic politics, OK. Well, the polls would show that at the moment the vast majority of the public are agreeing with Nigel Farage and they're looking at net 0 by 2030 and say to do that you're going to raise our bills, not lower them. Well, I fundamentally disagree. I think actually when you see polling, 89% of people want to see stronger action on climate.
To come to your question though, so I'm answering it directly. People don't want to do it if it's going to cost them more money and I don't want them to do it if it's going to cost more money. At the moment it is costing people more money if you're asking them to install a heat pump or you're saying you need to insulate your own home to make it cooler in the summer and warmer in the winter at your own cost. These are the results of political choices from the government.
They're not natural order. We can make different political choices and right now the government is subsidising jet fuels. So if someone's getting a private jet that is cheaper in terms of a government subsidy than if someone gets a train, It is actually outrageous. I went to Sheffield recently. It would have cost me more to get the train than to get a plane. I obviously got the train, but that's the wrong way round.
Let's turn that round. But there are far fewer people getting private jets then there are hopping on trains. So yes, those two things, people might look at them and go, wait a minute, that's that's a bit rummy. But the numbers don't add up, do they? By cancelling one, you're not able to pay for the. Other Well, we saw this government freeze fuel duty, for instance. So that's incentivizing car use. That's deeply irresponsible when we have air pollution in our
cities. This often effects working class communities and minority communities even worse than anyone else. Again, that doesn't have to be a natural order. We can invest in public transport. We can make sure that we're electrifying our railway lines and also within our cities and particularly in rural communities. Some rural communities don't have a bus for days. That's absolutely outrageous. It's ridiculous if you want to get to work or even if you just want to see a friend.
Ultimately, again, political choices to incentivize car use and not public transport. Let's turn that around and make sure we're investing in the greenest, cheapest, most affordable option. The fuel duty freeze would impact an awful lot of working class people. Well, so first of all, most working class people who are truly working class don't own your car at all. They're often walking to work or they're struggling to even pay the bus fares. So I think that bit is
important. White Van Man would have an awful lot to pick up with you on this. They would disagree with you. And I'd want to have that conversation, that disagreement, because, you know, they'd partly be right. And this is exactly what it comes to what I'm talking about. They're not the enemy and people driving around are not the enemy. And again, as I've said, if you do not have an alternative, what do you expect people to do? I can understand why people
drive in rural communities. I'm fortunate enough to live in the centre of London. I can cycle around. Public transport is amazing. That's not most people's experience in this country, and I really mean most people. So then the question is, what are you going to do about it? And I think The thing is to make sure that the money is going to give people cheaper and better alternatives.
Now that's with transport, but you can take this across any measure whatsoever, any option where you want people to do the right thing for the planet and the right thing for the community. Let's subsidized good behaviour rather than subsidizing fossil fuel companies and oil and gas. And it's no coincidence that this Labour government took £4.1 million from Quadrature Capital. They're a hedge fund that have assets in oil and gas, arms trade and gambling companies.
I think it points to why Keir Starmer and the Labour government are making so many terrible decisions. They're doing what they've been paid to by their vested interests. I have two vested interests, people and the planet. I think Keir in, in fairness, I think Keir Starmer and the government would turn around and say no, they're making those decisions because of the economic black holes they've inherited. But that's just me doing my the. Economic black hole.
You know, we first of all knew about that before it even existed and they're making it worse. I almost feel sorry for Rachel Reeves that she's making disastrous decisions to appease the markets and even the markets aren't happy with the decisions she makes. There is plenty of wealth in this country. Since the pandemic started, billionaire wealth in this country has over doubled, whereas our public assets have
totally been stripped away. Let's spend money on our public services in our NHS, which, by the way, also happens to be good
for the economy. Is your answer then to many of the social policies that you've that you were talking about earlier on during during your speech So to any two job benefit cap reversing disability cuts, is your plan to pay for all of these policies out of taxing the wealthy more and more When it comes down to it where we're going to get the money from there we go them not they can pay for it.
So I think that's the first measure is to talk about the an extraordinary wealth in this country and the huge inequality gap. We don't need to change that inequality gap because we need the money. And I'll come on to that in a second. It's important to tackle inequality in and of itself because that's disastrous. So yes, to wealth tax or 1% tax on assets of £10 million or more or 2% on assets of a billion pounds or more could raise about £24 billion.
Alongside that we could bring capital gains tax in line with income tax. Now, the reason why that's important, other than to generate money, is right now we tax earned income more than we tax and earned wealth. I think to most people that's outrageous and a completely ridiculous way of doing things. It doesn't have to be done that way. That's a series of political choices, Thatcher, Blair and now Starmer and, you know, obviously some terrible prime ministers in between that have kept that
inequality. But also we talk often about tax and spend. But actually this is the other way around. You can spend on tax. You can make sure that you're spending money on the public sector because it's things called spending multipliers. Every pound we spend on the public sector ultimately throws throughout the rest of the economy. One of the number one things I want to take on as the leader of the Green Party is this myth that the national economy is anything like a household budget.
We hear these constant phrases about balancing the books or making tough choices. Why are these never tough choices for multi millionaires and billionaires? Why are they never tough choices for people earning extraordinary amounts of money while they sleep whilst for rest of the country with our hands, with our mouth or whatever you do to to work are paying more and more tax? That's deeply unfair and I'm not surprised people have had
enough. There's an easy choice for those billionaires and millionaires you've talked about, and that is leaving the country, which they could well do. Well, they can leave, but they can't take that asset. So the Duke of Westminster owns half of Mayfair. That's about £10 billion or more as as long with many other assets you just can't pick up those and leave. But also I think we should be more patriotic than that.
There's a group called the Patriotic Millionaires who are saying please tax us more because actually we live in this country because we want to invest in this country. Fairy land though, thinking, oh, wouldn't it be lovely if everyone was just giving more in their taxes? The truth is, people aren't going. To do that, no, I agree. And they give fairly land, which is why I'm saying let's tax for rich. Now, if they want to give that willingly, I really support the
patriotism of that. If they don't want to give it willingly, then it's government's job to make sure that we're taxing fairly. We're not asking for, you know, anything unfair here. We're saying if you have done extraordinarily well out of your business because we have a National Health Service, because we have a public education system, because of public services in this country, you should contribute to this country. And frankly, if you don't want to do that, then I'll happily
wave you out the door. Along with their tax revenues, they could be. Paid. I think if they're not paying tax anyway, we know they're offshore taxing actually they're just leeching off society as opposed to going. We are asking you, a very reasonable demand here, to pay a tiny amount on. Your but they do already pay. I know you would like them to pay more tax. They do already pay an awful lot of tax and they could be walking out the door with the tax that
they already pay. I think the awful lot of tax is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. If you look at most of Western Europe and most Social Democratic or socialist countries, they're not paying very much tax at all. And in fact I think most organisations recognize I'm not talking about a little bit of tax here. I'm not talking about someone who's running the corner shop or someone running, you know, who is self-employed or running a small business.
I'm talking about multi millionaires and billionaires. And even then I'm talking about a 1% tax on assets of £10 million or more. Now you could reasonably say to me, by the way, is that enough? And I think it probably isn't. And so I think I've got a role in the Green Party to go. Could we be bolder with this actually and tax the wealthy more? But the fact you get so much pushback on 1% shows you how much corporate capital and capture there is in this country.
That's such a basic suggestion that people should probably pay a little bit more in tax is received. I don't mean you're doing this, but just generally with such outrage and such kickback. Well, I think it's time that we stop cowering for that kickback and go, if you want to leave, leave. There are plenty of people in this country who are happy to pay tax. And I want people to live in this country who want to
contribute to this country. One other policy that you've already spoken about, you've released a very emotive video during your campaign on the White Cliffs of Dover, looking out at sea, saying, look, the people who are coming across from France in small boats, they've been demonised by Labour and by the Reform Party. But what we didn't hear from you is, well, what's your actual policy on migration? So what is your policy on the small boats crisis?
My policy is we can stop the small boats crisis. It's not a crisis, it's a manufactured crisis. And actually we could have safe and legal routes. This has been a manufactured crisis by the Conservative government and now the Labour government to create a backlog, to remove processing centres and to dehumanize some of the most vulnerable people in the world. Now I accept not everyone is fleeing for their life. I accept that not everyone is fleeing from persecution. But let's start there.
Lots of people are and lots of people who then get to this country having travelled on a perilous journey, then when they appeal for asylum, do receive asylum. So the idea that lots of people are coming here and they are not deserving of coming here is the first thing that needs challenging. I'll go further than that
though. If someone is coming to this country and they're an economic migrant, so they're not a refugee, they're not someone seeking asylum from a safe country, but they just want to come to this country because they want a better life or they see a better life in this country. What kind of message are we sending if we want this country to be so bad that we don't want these people to come here? I think we should want a country
that people want to live here. The legitimate question is, is are you going to pay money in tax? Are you going to work hard? Are you going to contribute to this country? And the answer, extraordinarily so when you look at data, is migrants are so much more like likely to put money into our taxation system than they ever are to take out in Social Security and welfare. And just the final thing is we have an ageing population. We have masses of vacancies in the NHS.
Sure, we need to train British people or people who were born in Britain for those jobs, but also, what is wrong with a migrant running their public services or contributing to this country? Again, as a patriot and someone who believes in progressive patriotism, I'm really proud that loving your country and loving your neighbor recognizes that so many black and Asian communities in this country right now are terrified. Now, they're not necessarily
even migrant communities. They might have been people who have lived here for generations, but they are still terrified because the whole frame of the migration crisis is a racist, fascist frame. And the Green Party are the party that will tell the truth on that. Now other people shout it racist or fascist, Absolutely not. Lots of them are very concerned that they can't get an NHS appointment, that they can't get a council house. So there's a sense the country's broken and you know what,
they're right. So the answer is not to blame the migrants. The answer is not to point of the small boats. The answer is to point of the private jets, the private yachts and to multi millionaires and billionaires and say we will fund our public services, we will build council houses, we will vest in our NHS. That was an awful lot of words, which effectively boils down to what sounds like an open door policy. Well, open door policy sounds like you're effectively saying
everyone come in and I just. That's what you are saying. You're saying if you're willing to pay tax and get a job, everyone come in, right? And so the thing here, Tony Blair was accused of doing this and actually a tiny, tiny percentage of what people expected came over.
Now the Labour government and Tony Blair, I think made their first big mistake other than the Iraq war, which you know, to call that mistake is is probably an understatement, but ultimately didn't take on the migration argument at that point. We know that Gordon Brown called Alison Duffy. I think it was a bigger and it's wrong. Gillian Duffy, thank you. For a politician to call any member of the public a bigger. You should engage with them with the arguments.
But the cowering and the kind of refusing to actually take a stance and actually win the argument through the storytelling and through the information, I think was the seeds of what Nigel Farage has exploited. And now we see Keir Starmer turbo boosting.
But effectively then those 50,000 people that have come over in small boats over the last year, provided that they went through a safe and legal route you're happy with, or if they're economic migrants were happy to pay tax, you're more than happy with those 50,000 coming to the UK and becoming a citizen here. With the caveats you gave, I think anyone would be foolish to give any other answer than
welcome to this country. If they are paying in tax and they're contributing to this country and they have fled their lives or they've come over as economic migrants, then what is the problem? The problem is the lack of housing. So let's make sure that at the same time as doing that, you're building the housing, which we need to do anyway. The polls would disagree with you here. Majority of people in the according to the latest polls, an overall people are saying no,
we do have an issue with that. We do think that there is an issue with too many people setting up home in the UK. And should we be surprised when for decades, and certainly in the last couple of years, we've had constant propaganda from the Tory Party, from Reform Party and Labour mimicking it, And that is telling people that people are a problem, that this is the thing they should be concerned about and whipping up
that storm. So we get to why I've just run for leader of the Green Party. We need to give bolder storytelling. So you talked about the video I did and described it as a motive. I think that's what we need. I think we need a motive, storytelling. When Nigel Farage stands on a platform and says these people, your problems, your lives are really difficult right now and they're to blame, I can totally understand why people get caught up in that.
I'm not blaming them for that. I'm blaming Nigel Farage, not the people who go along with that. We need bolder stories. We need to be based in facts and information rather than his misinformation and lies. We need to be based in unity rather than his division and actually make sure that it's not enough to have the spreadsheets
and the graphs or statistics. I could tell you, for instance, there's a stat that if you use the National Health Service, the person who treats or cares for you is so much more likely to be a migrant than anyone in front of you in the queue. I've been saying that for about 5-6 years and I know no one's listening. Any way that I'm really going to get that through is to tell a story about it, to have a narrative or whether it's a social media video, whether it's
a message or a story. And So what I really want to see the Green Party stepping up and doing is telling those stories. And that's not just me being the storyteller, but actually the people with the lived experience all around the country. There's amazing stories happening in the north of Wales and people doing extraordinary things. Let's hear those stories rather than the charlatans. So you're going to be the less answer to Nigel Farage?
For sure I I reject Nigel Farage's politics and everything he stands for. I think it's also undoubtedly true. We need communicators on the left. I guess the one difference I would have is Nigel Farage is a one man show. If I'm a one man show, I've absolutely failed as the leader of the Green Party. I want to raise, amplify and lift up the voices of other people. There's far too many people in this party, but more importantly in the country that we don't hear from.
I see my job as to yes, tell stories, but to use my platform to facilitate and amplify the stories that are happening around the. Country Are you worried that your style of storytelling is going to be drowned out by other voices on the left? You are now going to be running head to head effectively with Jeremy Corbyn and his new party and you're going to fracture the left.
I'm not worried about it all. I've been worried that my voice or the left voice might be drowned out by fascism and the far right. So if we end up in a place where me, Jeremy Corbyn or Zara Sultan or whoever it is are competing to be bolder, to be more progressive, to be able to offer even more tangible solutions to the country, I think that's all
really, really healthy. However, I think people are sick of people fighting and they're sick of competition in this country and they want a different kind of politics. Let's start with the fact I really like Jeremy Corbyn and Zara Sultan. Politics aside, I also really like their politics. Would you want them in the Green Party? Absolutely. I don't have to think for a second about that. It's not my decision. That would be up to a democratic
body. If you ask me a straight question, I'll give you a straight answer. I think in terms of what does that future look like, that will be up to our membership and potentially their membership, whatever it looks like in future. I'm not outsourcing that. I have an opinion, but it's important to say that, you know, we're a Democratic Party and
we'll make those decisions. I think when you've got brave politicians, whether they're Jeremy Corbyn or Zora Sultana or Faiza Shaheen for that example, there's lots of people I can name and they're saying the things that you agree with. I think it would be wild to do anything but welcome that. I'm so sick of being on panels where I argue with some fringe right winger. You know, previously it would have been about the climate crisis. Whether it exists or not, that's not balance.
And actually, I think it'd be a really healthy balance to have some more voices on the left that I don't have to agree with on everything. We just have to have a common cause. And essentially what we're saying is together, united, and I don't mean United necessarily in the parties, although maybe that's where we're going or maybe it's not. It's too early to say, but united in message, united in what we're trying to achieve in this country, I think that's brilliant.
And I, having just been elected today as leader of the Green Party, really welcome that. I want more diversity of messengers. So that sounds an awful lot like you would you would look at Intellectual Pact. It's not. A no though. It's not a no, but I'll give you an example of what would be a no George Galloway was anywhere to do with it. That would be enough for me to to step out. Now, I'm not slurring here. I have no idea if George Galloway is going to be involved or if he wants to be.
But it's just an example of I don't know enough about what that new movement is and they don't know enough about that new movement because they're not set it up yet. To answer that question in any satisfactory way. What I can offer you are my principles and the party's principles. We're a party that believes in cooperation, that believes in collaboration, that believes we are stronger when we work together, them being.
That all being said, the Green Party are at a moment now where we've just elected a leader on a very obvious platform, which is about challenging social injustice in this country and challenging the climate crisis, also the ongoing genocide in Gaza. These are all issues that we know people in this country care about. We got 39 second place finishes of the last general election. We got nearly 2 million votes in London in May.
I'm absolutely committed and determined to see lots more councillors also in Birmingham, S Tyneside and Greens in the centre for the first time. There's lots of other places too. That's a really exciting moment and what we're not doing at the moment is deciding what a platform is or deciding what our organization is. So this is no slight on anyone else. Anyone is entitled to do what they do.
But I would say to the country, if you want a bolder politics, if you want the kind of politics that is being talked about right now, you don't need to wait for it. Join the Green Party. The first real test of that could be the Senate elections in Wales. If Jeremy Corbyn's party gets off the ground and it looks like they're the sort of people you could be doing business with, Are you entertaining electoral pacts, non compete clauses with them to get more left wing voices into the center?
So again, the caveat, I'm afraid that will be up to the Wales Green Party, but I'm going to give you an opinion I actually would entertain, not necessarily electoral packs initially, but non compete clauses. I think that just makes sense that if you are targeting a certain group of seats and you're working with people who are also targeting a certain group of seats, why wouldn't you have that conversation? Now that doesn't need to be formal.
It doesn't need to be an electoral packed, it just needs to be the membership going. Actually, there's enough commonality here. What is the point in fighting each other when actually we could challenge the Labour government and reform? I think that'll be a positive conversation, but it'll be up to the membership.
Some people looking at this could say you might end up having more in common with Jeremy Corbyn and some other left wing groups out there than you do with some of your own M. PS I think that's a fundamental misunderstanding of the party.
In fact, I said today to Ellie, and I've said during the campaign many, many times that when she stands up and challenges the Foreign Secretary on the ongoing genocide in Gaza, never mind the fact I'm now Green Party leader, as a Green Party member, I couldn't be prouder. When Adrian is talking about NHS dentistry and the need for ultimately funding our public services, those are positions that I'm absolutely aligned with. I think you know, is there a difference in fact?
When Adrian was asked repeatedly interview whether or not he likes you and you couldn't say yes. I mean, it's absolutely ridiculous. I mean, people need to come up with an answer about whether people like each other or not. But I also think it's. It would help. There's only you've only got 4 MPs, right? So 1/4 of them can't say round and say yeah, no, the leader. Yeah, I like him. And I'm not going to like you, you know, I go what come up with
an answer. But I also think how irrelevant is that me and Adrian have worked with each other for the last three years in a leadership team. Not only if we work together, we thrive together. It's been some of the best election results for in fact, it has having the best election result the party's ever had. So I know that professional. Relationship.
I suppose the reason why some people look at this and say it matters is because when they look at the Greens in power, when they look at Brighton council, first council that you managed to to lead and then that didn't end terribly well. They look at you've got 4 MPs now in the last year, they look at they've got the new leader and one of the MPs kind of say
he likes the leader. An awful lot of people will be looking at it and saying actually how credible are these guys when it comes to lead leading. I reject that entirely. I don't think people in politics want to know that the politicians can go for a pint together. In fact, I think they'd be even more impressed if they go for whatever reason.
You're you're not best at friends, but actually you're working really professionally, incredibly together and you're going to turn this country around. I think that's what matters. In terms of Brighton, I'm really proud of some of the results in Brighton building record social housing, for instance, and some of the initiatives that were pushed I think were really successful. I also think there's a warning shot there for the exact
conversation we've been having. Labour were absolutely so determined and so ready to bring the Green Party down way and above than they've ever competed with any other political party. I don't want to create that relationship with parties on the left if Labour have chosen to do that. And in fact I, I only, I've not seen it myself. I've heard Labour have come quite hard for me today. I think it shows the pettiness of the fact I'm talking about inequality. I'm talking about the fact
lifting up working class voices. You would think a Labour Prime Minister or Sadiq Khan, who I work with regularly and I do challenge him, but also there's moments of cooperation there would go actually. I welcome the fact that there's a new left wing progressive voice in British politics for whatever reason. Here's why you should vote Labour and not Green. But they've not made that
argument. They have completely in the most petty tactics possibly, but gone for me and I think what that says is they are terrified and I couldn't be more pleased because right now they are more scared of losing votes and seats to the Reform Party than to the Green Party. What does success look like in the next few months? I want Keir Starmer to be more worried about the Green Party than Reform. Absolutely convinced we can do
it by growing on membership. Conscious of time, so let's go through a few months that hopefully will be a little bit quicker. And look, first of all, one policy issue, NATO. Are you committed to NATO? So the Green Party policy is to stay in NATO, but to reform it from within. So asking everyone to take down their nuclear weapons and not be a nuclear alliance. Now I think there's a legitimate. That's not going to happen. Well, I also agree.
And I also think since then, Donald Trump has been elected. This is a man who calls Vladimir Putin his friend, meanwhile, humiliates Zelensky in the White House. He's also threatening to annex Greenland. So if anyone supports NATO wholeheartedly, my question to you is, what are you going to do about that now? I think it's clearly not the time to leave NATO when all of this is going on. But what it is time for is to begin conversations about what does an alternative alliance
look like? We've gone through Brexit, an absolute disaster largely caused by Nigel Farage, a man with the audacity to then return to the mainstage and say I've got some other ideas of institutions you can leave. Horrendous. The difference there though was we could have reformed Europe from within. The question is, can we reform NATO from within with Donald Trump or not even Donald Trump? America is an imperial power with the increasingly erratic decisions it's made.
Is that the alliance in a special relationship we want? I think for now it's too soon to break away. But we should absolutely be talking to our European neighbors and saying what does an alliance look like based on peace and diplomacy, and that isn't reliant on a special relationship with a man who wants to turn Gaza into luxury condos. So at some point in the future you could conceivably see leaving NATO in favour of some other alliance with European partners.
Yeah. And it depends what sometime in the future means. That could be five years or 20 years. But what I'm arguing, and I don't think it's a contention position actually wants, is explained. I think many NATO members will see it at the contention issue and say that what you're saying now will make the world an unsafer place. Well, I'd look at the world right now and I don't think it
could be much unsafer. And I think it's them putting their heads in the sand if they think that the situation right now is OK. And the complete breakdown of international order where Israel are committing A genocide that's not being just talked about, but it's being live streamed. And then we have the head of NATO kind of nodding on along with Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu that is losing its moral authority. On Israel. Its moral authority. On Israel, you're the leader of
a major political party now. If you're right in the manifesto tomorrow, what is your Israel? Policy well, as well as being a leader of a major political party and one of only 5 Jewish leaders in the last 100 years. So that's a position I take seriously, both in challenging anti-Semitism and Islamophobia in this country at the same time, and it's in completely the
same breath. So the fact that David Lammy and Keir Starmer shrug their shoulders and make sad faces about the genocide, yet continue to sell them arms is an absolute moral outrage. So we must stop selling arms to Israel. We must stop sharing intelligence to Israel, and we must be arresting the people responsible for war crimes. That would be my policy on Israel. OK, Labour would say.
Actually, they are bringing up regularly all of Israel's transgressions with Israel and this is what they should be doing as a major Western. Power, I mean, I could bring up lots of things with you, but if I don't take the action necessary, then, you know, it's a bluff. And if you carry on doing that, then you might think we're in
cahoots. And so I think when people say, you know, that David Lammy and Keir Starmer are having strong words with Benjamin Netanyahu at the same time as we're seeing the charred out bodies of children and men and women, then I think it's time to it's long time to look at different policy more widely. It is time for a free Palestine.
It's time to to end the occupation and to recognise that we have an apartheid state clearly, and I think it's important that politicians do not waiver from the clarity and the necessity to make sure that's very clear. OK, an awful lot of interest to say it's not an apartheid state. There's a very clear definition around around that, and that isn't the case. As Ash Sarkar said recently, I could say I'm 6 foot 5 and I might want to believe it, but
it's not true. Also, we're speaking on a day where genocide scholars, again another set, are saying this is
undoubtedly a genocide. OK on another issue which could not be further apart but be remissive along you not to Lot's release address it OK Many years ago when you were a hypnotherapist, there was an undercover operation by a newspaper and you were filmed saying that it was possibly possible to grow a woman's breast by using the power of hypnotherapy and thought so. For the record, do you believe that you can grow breasts or any other body part through the
power of? Thought no, that's absolutely it, Said also I should say it wasn't an undercover operation. So way before I was a politician, a Sun journalist approached me and said could I do an article on body image? The article misrepresented me and I went out on record that day to say it's misrepresented me. I still apologize, though, and apologize back then.
I stand by that apology. One of my favorite politicians is Tony Benn, and he had a key phrase which is I'm not interested where you've been, I'm interested where you're going. And I think the fact that this story sometimes gets brought up largely by Labour, at the same time as I'm talking about taxing inequality, you can see why it
might be a distraction. But they've brought it up today and for a lot of people who, well, the best one in the world is that may have never have heard of you before, all right, But this will be their first introduction to you. And it'll be some story about, well, this bloke thinks that you can grow body parts by thinking about it. So. So how do you address it? Are you worried about how you get across to all those voters?
Well, it's why it's really important that I say this doesn't represent me and I've apologised. Here's a record I've had over the last few years as an elected member of the London Assembly, as deputy leader of the Green Party, and here's what I've done to represent the values. That article absolutely didn't represent me. It doesn't represent me today. It didn't represent me then.
I think, you know, I welcome if people are starting to pay attention to me for the first time and I think once we've dealt with that, then I'd hope they see all the other things I stand for and that's going to be an easier. Conversation Just lastly, it was it was notable in your speech. You look quite moved when you were talking about your partner.
Are you ready for the toll on your personal life that a career in national politics, not just local politics, albeit of of the capital, can have on someone's personal life and, and just how intrusive this is now going to be on your on your life? I'm not ready for it. And I suppose I'd turn that question around to any journalist and say, how can we make sure that we scrutinize politicians in a democratic and accountable way, but in a way that doesn't intrude on their
personal life? The reason why I got emotional is because Richie, my partner, means everything to me. It's also, I mentioned he works in palliative care. And I think it was both love for my partner, but also the recognition of, you know, I've just been elected to this amazing role. But there are people out there every single day doing amazing things and they don't have the title of the microphone that I do.
And so I think it was just a realization both that I could acknowledge my partner but also acknowledge the incredible people who do. So I'm feeling emotional again, incredible people who keep this country running every day, who are out there doing incredible things that we just often don't hear about. And I think that's pretty humbling. SAT Polanski, thank you very much for joining us. Thanks so much for having me. Thank you. That's it for this episode of
The FORECAST. Join us next time.