'HYPOCRITE' Sadiq Khan accepts House of Lords peerage on Starmer's final day as Prime Minister

If you're drinking your coffee perhaps put it down because Sir Sadiq Khan, Sir Sadiq Khan has only been a Knight of the Realm for a year, he is the Mayor of London sadly, has been elevated to the House of Lords of one of Sir Keir Starmer's final acts of lunacy as Prime Minister. 25 peers were announced even though Keir Starmer wants to abolish the House of Lords even though he says the fact that we've got more than 800 peers making it the second largest legislature in the world so it could be that Sir Sadiq Khan, Lord Khan could become a minister in Andy Burnham's cabinet. Well Reform UK have blasted the move accusing the Prime Minister of favouritism as it's revealed 16 of his appointments to the House of Lords will be Labour members. And no reform, that's the point, Starmer's pointed not a single reform a member to the House of Lords. Well we now speak to someone who knows Sadiq Khan very well having run against him as London Mayor, it is member of the London Assembly Susan Hall. Susan what do you make of this? I think lots of our viewers will especially those who live in London may be pretty astonished at this news because what exactly has Sir Sadiq Khan done to deserve a peerage? Nothing. Well I don't know, don't ask Andrew because I think he'd I don't know and it's amazing isn't it because he said himself that he thought it should be abolished but you see this is what these Labour politicians are like aren't they? They say all of these things but when they're offered these jobs they take them straight away. Can't believe a word they say. If he does go into the government as a minister for environment presumably, if he ends up doing that he will have to stand down as Mayor of London. The Mayor of London is in my view the best job there is in the country, it's a 22 billion pound budget, it's a massive thing. Sadiq Khan wants more and more devolution, he wants to be able to tax us all in London even more, although we're taxed to the nth degree at the moment. He can't do that and do a proper job in So as with everything at the moment we're going to have to wait and see, we don't know what the new Prime Minister's going to do, we don't know now what Sadiq Khan's going to do. This is no way to run our country, it's absolutely disgraceful. And Susan just a year or so ago he was made Sir Sadiq Khan, now he's Lord Khan. If he walked away from the Mayoralty there'd have to be an election, Andy Burnham's done that in Greater Manchester. My view is he'll pop in and out of the Lord's when it suits him and he'll become a part-time Mayor of London. Well that's right, we can't afford that at the moment Andrew, as you and Olivia know that London is in a terrible state and despite when he was fighting me for the election saying that he was going to produce more police officers, there's going to be less police officers soon than there were when he came into position 10 years ago. And we know we've got far more people in London and we know the police are in a terrible state, they're not funded as they should be, so he's made an absolute hash of this job. He can't then do something else without standing down from this, but I'd like you Andrew, I don't think he will stand down. He just loves collecting titles and he loves feeling important. I'm mystified by this but you know as with everything we're going to have to wait and see what happens. Well Susan I suppose Sadiq Khan's supporters to be fair to him would say that he has won multiple Mayoral elections, so perhaps that in itself is enough for elevation to the House of Lords. One theory I wanted to put to you, a little pet theory of mine, is that perhaps Keir Starmer did this as a final way to annoy Donald Trump who absolutely hates Sadiq Khan. What do you think about that? Yes, they do hate each other, that's true, and I think it was appalling. The way Sadiq Khan reacted to the most important politician in the Western world I would say was disgraceful and so I understand why Trump hates him. There's a lot of people in London that dislike Sadiq Khan. His whole attitude to ULEZ which hit the poorest the most, it was absolutely diabolical. The fact that he doesn't support the police service properly and the Metropolitan Police are lacking so much in funding and they don't get proper support from him either. I mean I could go on and I won't because you've got a whole program but he's pretty dire but he can't go into the Lords and then take another position from that. If he pops in and out, which is what Andrews suggested, he could do that. But as I said before he's got a 22 billion pound budget. There are lots of things going wrong in London. He has to stay focused on the best job in my view in the country. And Susan, we haven't even talked about crime. There's been a knife crime epidemic. You're running a big risk if you get your mobile phone out in the street in London. We've seen these muggers on those electronic scooters and house building. Isn't it at an all-time low in London and yet he pledged a major boom in house building? I mean on every level he's a failure. Well that's right and Andrew it's all soundbites isn't it? I often hear Olivia say it's soundbites. It's like Burnham coming in. All we hear are soundbites. We don't actually know anything. With Burnham we won't let proper press talk to him, journalists talk to him. Sadiq Khan's not much better you know. He'll talk to James O'Brien on LBC. Of course he will. You know we can all sit and have a chat and say how wonderful you are today Mr Khan. He doesn't get proper scrutiny from the Labour members on the London Assembly at all. They hand in gifts of questions. So you know God help us going forward. Prime Minister we don't know what he stands for and I've just seen that his new head of policy I think it is, political strategy, is going to be the chap that was head of comms for Hope Not Hate. Well God help us quite frankly. I mean those of us slightly on the right are going to be suffering really badly but at the moment we don't know how badly because none of us know any of the answers to our questions. Well Susan Hall thank you very much for joining us on Britain's newsroom. Hello now do you have concerns that the government want to impact every area of your life? There was a time when the state did what it needed to do, took a little bit of our money from our income and provided good public services and that was pretty much the remit not anymore. It can feel like we're living in an age of increased censorship in two-tier policing and this can also play into the freedoms that we have with our money. You might be worried that the government could debank you if your face doesn't fit or you say the wrong thing. So is there potentially a solution? I'm joined now by the founder and CEO of Tally Money Cameron Parry. You know we've been in a just over 51 year experiment now with fiat currency where our monetary systems that have been at national level haven't been anchored to anything. So there's no accountability in the number of units of currency that can be issued because there's no asset anchoring it to anything and also the people making those decisions don't bear any consequences to their decision making and so they can arbitrarily inflate the money supply, maybe support fashionable policies that are at least fashionable in Westminster but don't make a lot of sense to people outside of that bubble. I think of a couple off top my head. We need to have a choice. We need to be able to be in something else because up until now pretty much for all of our lives we've had a singular state run currency that we've relied on. Unfortunately I feel for the last couple of decades at least that that reliance and the credit of that has been used up for purposes that aren't necessarily to do with our benefit, being the earner of the money. I've already paid my tax. When my money goes into my bank account I shouldn't be getting taxed more through inflation and it certainly shouldn't be in some form weaponised against me through debanking or through programming money and what I'm allowed, what I'm permitted to spend it on. You can forget that for an idea. Couldn't agree more. Cameron Parry, good to see you. Thanks Beth. But it is first day in the office for somebody isn't it technically? Well it is. Andy Burnham. He's not Prime Minister till Monday but he becomes the new Labour leader today but it's already looking like he's not going to get a honeymoon period. Yes because reports have surfaced that backbenchers are already planning a rebellion. Their discontent is apparently over reports that the Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood is set to become Chancellor. Yeah those on the left of the Labour Party and that seems to be most Labour MPs are said to consider her too right-wing for the role. That's because she took a comparatively hardline approach to immigration. Well elsewhere in Parliament Sir Sadiq Khan has been elevated to the House of Lords as one of Sir Keir Starmer's final acts as Prime Minister. It means it is possible for him to be made a Minister in Andy Burnham's Cabinet but will it happen? A bit doubtful. Let's speak to former Labour Minister Bill Ramble. Good to see you this morning. Can we have a start with this Sadiq Khan business just because we've just mentioned it. What do you make of it? I mean in a way it's not a surprise he's getting such an honour despite the fact that Sir Keir Starmer wanted to abolish the House of Lords. He's quite happy to promote people into it. But it's not a precursor to a Cabinet position is it? I don't think so. I mean look I'm not Sadiq's biggest fan but it's not unprecedented for people to be made peers of the realm. But I think if I'm honest I think it is probably payback from Keir for support that Sadiq has given him whilst he's been Prime Minister. Nothing more nothing less. Jobs for the boys then? Well look until you abolish the House of Lords you need Labour representation within it and you know Sadiq is an effective figure but I don't think it's a precursor to him coming into the Cabinet and I don't think that would be a good move by Andy Burton were he to do it. Doesn't it make you a bit mad if all these people who say we need to abolish the House of Lords until they get in it and claim they're £400 a day tax free for turning up. You know then suddenly they change their mind. Well until you abolish it you need Labour representation within the House of Lords. I think the big stumbling block is how do you avoid an elected second chamber that will come head to head with the House of Commons and effectively create gridlock. So there needs to be a new way forward but until you do that you need Labour representation and Keir's entitled to appoint people as Labour peers as he's done with Sadiq. What do you make of this left-wing revolt brewing over Shabana Mahmood as Chancellor? I think it's overstated. I mean look we're at a historic moment, a new Prime Minister, Andy comes in with a broad coalition of support but he's going to have to hit the ground running and I think there are three challenges. One is appointing the Chancellor of the Exchequer. If it is going to be Shabana Mahmood I'm heartened because I think Ed Miliband would be a shift to the left and I think would alienate the markets and the stability that you need and Shabana Mahmood is a good policymaker, she's an effective communicator, she sticks to her guns and that's what you need in a Chancellor. But the left of the party don't like her and this is the challenge isn't it? If you want to have a broad church government you're going to run into problems. Yeah but look at the immigration reforms which again I think Andy is going to have to double down on. There were 80 Labour MPs who said they were going to rebel when it came to a vote, it was only 14 of them. So you know there will be some critics on the left of the Parliamentary Labour Party but I think this will be a good move. Secondly I think Andy is going to have to make clear that he supports the immigration reforms. There is progress being made on immigration but we need to go further and faster. But I also think he's going to want to give a strong indication on support for cost of living which is the big challenge that everyone's facing. I just wonder if Labour MPs are going to feel like they've been sold a dud on all of this because with the greatest of respect to Andy Burnham his position pivots right and he appears to be very much of the left while he's wanted to win over the left. I mean the reality is if you're going to actually, and he says he's going to transform the government, transform the Labour Party, if you're going to make it work you cannot pursue those very lefty policies and get the economy going. It's not going to work. So has he sold them this idea that he's going to be a very left-leaning Prime Minister but the reality is, as he knows, if he's going to make it work that's not going to be the case? I don't think he's sold himself as a very left-wing Labour leader. That's not who he is and if you look at his track record in Greater Manchester he's worked with business, he's got the best productivity rate in the country but I think it is a fair critique that he's been elected with a very very broad level of support. I think something like 90% of Labour MPs nominated him. That's almost North Korean in its impact and he can't satisfy all of them and I think that's going to be the challenge. In his favour is the fact that unlike Keir Starmer he's a really effective emotionally engaging communicator and he's going to have to explain every day, every week, what he's doing and why he's doing it and I think that's the bit that's been lacking from Labour over the last two years. We don't actually know what his policies are, we don't know who his Chancellor is going to be and I know it would be unprecedented to announce before he's even in number 10 who his top team are going to be. That would be, it's never happened before and there's an expectation to say well it shouldn't happen now except we're talking about a man who's been choppered into make a field, choppered into number 10, wasn't even a candidate at the last election, had nothing to do with the Labour manifesto, he's literally been plonked at the top of politics and we don't know what he stands for in terms of policy. I think you know the speech in Manchester a couple of weeks ago gave a strong indication of where he's coming from. What when he didn't take any questions? It's just soundbites isn't it? No no no it was really effective. Growth in every postcode. It was a really effective speech but I accept that he's going to come in and he's got to, in contrast to Keir in his first hundred days, he's really going to have to set out a series of changes, policy directions so that the country knows where he's going and I think he's capable of doing that and if you read the reports he's been thinking long and hard for over a year about what he would do in those first hundred days. Just won't tell us yet? Well but in a sense he can't because you know were he pre-announcing his Chancellor, were he pre-announcing specific policies before he's even been selected as Labour leader, I think the critique would be you're getting ahead of yourself and although I think the choice of Chancellor is really really important I still don't think you can do it until you become Prime Minister on Monday. But you would accept this is a really odd situation we're in? Doesn't feel very democratic does it? Well Stephen we've had 15 times in the last 150 years where Prime Ministers have changed mid-parliament, seven since the 1970s so it's not unprecedented. No it's not but every time it happens, especially when it's happened under the Tories, it's been the Labour Party and people like Andy Burnham yelling from the side saying we need a general election until they do it and then they say we don't need one. Well I hedge a bet, I think if the polls turn round which I think there's a strong chance they will and come October Labour is six seven percent ahead I think Andy's going to be very tempted to go to the country. All right.