Dining across the divide: ‘He said you need strong leaders. Then he referenced Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage'
Occupation Retired businessman, used to run a small tool-making company
Voting record Conservative for the majority of his life; now doesn't vote
Amuse bouche Bought a cabin in the Canadian mountains in 2010 and splits his time between the UK and Canada
Occupation Recently retired from the NHS
Voting record Lifelong Labour voter, often reluctant – in the last election, voted Green
Amuse bouche Is in a jazz group, singing John Coltrane, Stevie Wonder, anything from the canon and beyond
Bob One of the first questions out my mouth was, 'Do you work for the NHS?' And she said, 'Why would you say that?' And I said, 'It's just a feeling.' And she said, 'I've worked for the NHS all my life.' I'd just thought, I'm a small business owner, what would my opposite be? Probably a civil servant.
JC When he found out where I used to work, he sort of went, 'Huh, I would have thought so.'
Bob I had the roast beef.
JC I had the vegetarian roast.
Bob We talked about second-home ownership. I don't think you can stop that. You might think I'm biased because I'm guilty of it, but it's different for me and my wife, because one day we'll choose between living here or in Canada. Here, we're constantly told we can't afford this or we can't afford that. Do we have a need for social housing in this country? By the sounds of things, we have a need for quite a lot of social housing because, back in the 80s, Margaret Thatcher decided that every Englishman should have his own castle and flogged them all off.
JC For me, it's not so much about second or third homes, it's properties standing empty. I feel the same about landlords who don't maintain their properties. I gave passionate examples of younger colleagues of mine trying to find somewhere to live; just to rent, you have to bid over the asking price – it's a real Squid Game scenario. I think he approves of social housing, but wants to shrink the state.
Bob Surely we need a new social housing building programme? After the second world war, Winston Churchill got dumped out of office because the people of the country said, 'We've endured five years of hardship and war, where's our reward?' Suddenly Attlee comes in, and despite the fact that we were bankrupt, we managed to start the NHS and the biggest housing programme we've ever seen. Broke or bankrupt, it's all bollocks, isn't it? You just have to take the long view.
JC He said you need to be bold and take risks, and what you need for that is strong leaders. Then he referenced Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage, and I said, 'But those two are functionally useless.' Later, he referenced Churchill and Angela Merkel, who fit the 'leader' description a little better.
JC He said, 'I've been told I lack empathy,' and then he explained it's because he's an engineer, and you have to be very detached and focused on what you do. And I thought, listening to what he said, there's a lot of similarity between engineering and medicine: it has to be evidenced; the consequences of getting it wrong are significant. I found him to be quite compassionate and insightful, I wouldn't agree with the lack of empathy. I asked who said that, and he said, 'My wife.'
Bob As engineers, you've got to have a final physical thing that works. It's not a set of ideas, it's a finished item. So you're striving for the best way of doing something. And it does mean, particularly in manufacturing, you have to be looking over the next horizon. You can't take the short view.
Bob We discovered very early on that we had a lot in common during Covid.
JC He was making testing devices for frontline staff, I was working on a vaccine trial – we were working to the same ends.
Bob I think of all these wonderful people – engineers, research scientists – who spent hours and hours and hours sleeping under their desks, doing 80- to 100-hour weeks.
Bob It was delightful. We shook hands. I don't think we'll be seeing each other again.
JC It was curious. I think maybe he came ready for battle, then didn't find it.
Additional reporting: Kitty Drake
Bob and JC ate at The Fat Pig in Exeter
Want to meet someone from across the divide? Find out how to take part
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Leader Live
16 minutes ago
- Leader Live
Fact check: More people leave than arrive on current youth mobility schemes
Asked 'how do you know there will be fewer people coming here than leaving?' Mr Reynolds said: 'Well, I've got 13 schemes in action already and that's the evidence of them.' He later added: 'I tell you the evidence of the current schemes just so you know is that they're a net negative on immigration.' Around 24,400 youth mobility visas were issued to people wanting to come to the UK in 2024. Although figures are patchy for how many Britons go abroad, data from just three countries – Australia, New Zealand and Canada – suggests that 68,495 British citizens travelled to those countries in 2024 (the Australian data is for the 12 months to the end of June 2024). That would suggest that Mr Reynolds is right. However it does not take into account that Britons going abroad on these temporary visas will sooner or later come back, as will those who come to the UK. It is also not clear that this pattern will repeat in any similar deal with the EU. The UK population is much larger than those of Australia, New Zealand and Canada, so there are more Britons who can go to those countries than can come here. With the EU that is reversed. How many people come to the UK on a youth mobility visa? Government data shows there were 24,437 people who were handed a youth mobility visa last year. Most of these were from one of the 13 countries with which the UK has a reciprocal arrangement. A small handful of visas – 131 in total – were for people from countries other than the 13. The Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford has suggested that these are the result of errors in data recording, or due to people having dual nationalities. The top three countries that sent people to the UK on youth mobility visas between January and December 2024 were Australia (9,754 visas), New Zealand (4,304 visas) and Canada (3,060 visas). How many Britons go abroad on youth mobility type schemes? Figures are patchy on how many British people have gone abroad on a youth mobility scheme. The Department for Business and Trade was unable to share data. Australia publishes a twice-yearly report into what it calls its working holiday visa programme. That is the Australian equivalent to the UK's youth mobility scheme. The latest such report covered the 12 months to the end of June 2024. That report showed that Australia issued 48,973 working holiday visas to UK citizens. Data from New Zealand is available on the website of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment. Using its migration data explorer produces a spreadsheet which shows that there were 9,486 working holiday visas granted by New Zealand to UK citizens in between January and December 2024. Canadian data does not appear to be publicly available, but the figures were provided to the PA news agency by the Canadian Department for Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship. The data shows that in 2024 there were 9,972 work permits issued to UK and UK overseas territories citizens under the country's working holiday scheme, and a further 64 people had their permits extended. How do incoming youth mobility visas compare to outgoing? Net migration is a figure which subtracts the number of people coming into the country from the number of people leaving. The data cited above suggests that while 9,754 Australians came to the UK on youth mobility visas, 48,973 Britons went in the opposite direction. It must be noted that the time periods measured here are different, the Australian data is for the 12 months ending June 2024, while the UK data is for the 12 months ending December 2024. Meanwhile the data suggests that 4,304 New Zealanders came to the UK while 9,486 Britons went in the other direction. Data further shows that 3,060 Canadians came to the UK in 2024, while 9,972 Britons went in the other direction. This suggests that for each of these three countries the youth mobility schemes are – as Mr Reynolds suggested – reducing net migration. In fact Australia alone appears to receive twice as many Britons (48,973) as all people who the UK receives from all 13 countries added together (24,437). However, it should be noted that because youth mobility schemes are time-limited, Britons going abroad and people who have come to the UK on such visas will eventually be forced to return. This means the UK's inbound migration figures should take into account not just Australians and Canadians – for example – coming to the UK, but also Britons returning from Australia and Canada after their youth mobility visas expire. If it is assumed that everyone returns then over a longer time frame the youth mobility programmes will have a neutral impact on net immigration because every Briton who leaves the UK will come back and every non-Briton who comes to the UK will leave. This does not take into account the people – both Britons abroad and non-Britons in the UK – who apply for a different visa to stay in their adopted country. Do these conclusions also apply to the EU scheme? The impact on net migration of the potential EU scheme will depend on the details of the agreement between London and Brussels. Madeleine Sumption, director at the Migration Observatory, told the PA news agency that the size of the cap on the programme would be vital for the impact on net migration. She said the fact the UK sends more people to Australia, Canada and New Zealand than it receives from them 'probably results from the fact that the UK has a much larger population than they do, so we just have more young people potentially interested in moving'. With the EU scheme, Ms Sumption said, the population sizes are flipped – that is to say the EU's population is much bigger than the UK, leaving more young people who might be willing to come here. Therefore the smaller the cap on the number of visas is, the more likely both the EU and UK will fill their quotas. If both fill their quotas – and the quotas going both ways are the same – then the impact on net migration will be zero. However if the cap is large then it is more likely that there will not be as many Britons going to Europe as are coming in the opposite direction, which will bring up net migration. But, as with the existing schemes, both Britons in Europe and Europeans in the UK will eventually have to leave unless they find another visa, which over the long run should mean that the programme has a neutral impact on net migration. BBC – Today, 19/05/2025 Migration Observatory – What is the Youth Mobility Scheme and how does it work? (archived) – Entry clearance visas granted outside the UK (archived page and spreadsheet, using tab Data_Vis_D02) Australian Department of Home Affairs – Visitor visa statistics (archived) Australian Department of Home Affairs – Working Holiday Maker visa program report (archived) New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment – Migration data explorer (archived page and downloaded spreadsheet. To download the correct spreadsheet, instructions can be found at (archived): In dataset select 'W1 work decisions', in time period select 'calendar year' and in variables select 'application substream', 'application criteria' and 'decision type') Canadian data provided to PA news agency (archived) Madeleine Sumption profile (archived)
Leader Live
16 minutes ago
- Leader Live
Peers debate change to 105-year-old law so children can work on steam trains
Labour's Lord Faulkner of Worcester proposed an amendment to the Employment of Women, Young Persons, and Children Act 1920, which barred children from work in any 'any industrial undertaking', including in mines, construction or transport. If agreed, his change would have exempted voluntary work on heritage railways and tramways from the ban. Government whip Lord Katz cautioned there 'may be unintended consequences' by amending the 'old legislation', but Lord Faulkner indicated he could push for a vote on his proposal before the Employment Rights Bill becomes law. Supporting the proposals, independent crossbench peer the Earl of Clancarty said: 'Steam railways are an important part of this country's heritage, and as every year passes that importance surely grows. 'We are getting closer to a time when there will be no-one with a personal memory of such trains in their working life, so as well as being an enjoyable activity for interested, enthusiastic children and young people, this is also an educational opportunity for the next generation.' Lord Faulkner said the ban was from a 'very different era' and told the Lords it 'languished unknown on the statute book for many years'. He said: 'Heritage railways managers, not surprisingly, do not wish to break the law, even if it is moribund and other safeguards exist.' Training on heritage railways 'has led to many seeking careers on the national rail network and in some cases have provided training and apprenticeships appropriate to their future career choices', Lord Faulkner added. He warned that even where regulators have said they would not prosecute a child who volunteers on a heritage railway, a legal challenge 'could be brought by a local authority or by a relative of a young people, regardless of the assurances given'. Historic England chairman and Conservative peer Lord Mendoza said: 'One of the most difficult things in the heritage sector is to encourage young people to come into it, to learn the skills, to learn the trades that we need in order to keep our heritage environment going for as long as we can.' In his response, Lord Katz said 'regulators should and do take a proportionate approach to enforcement action'. He offered a meeting with peers who wanted to change the law, adding: 'The 1920 Act is old legislation and amendment of it should only be considered after a thorough review upon other areas of law, as there may be unintended consequences.' Withdrawing his amendment to the Employment Rights Bill, Lord Faulkner said he would 'take up the minister's kind offer' but added that without solution, he believed 'the House as a whole would like the opportunity to express its view on the report' as the draft new law progresses.
The Guardian
20 minutes ago
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on the Conservatives and international law: a party trapped inside its own destructive obsessions
Kemi Badenoch's announcement of a Conservative party inquiry into a British withdrawal from the European convention on human rights (ECHR) should fool no one. The working party under the shadow attorney general, David Wolfson, announced on Thursday, will not look dispassionately at whether the UK should withdraw. It will merely try to say why and how. The policy of withdrawal itself is almost, to coin a phrase, oven-ready. This back-to-front policymaking process exemplifies the party's rudderless drift under Mrs Badenoch. Tory policy is not now in the hands of the leader or the shadow cabinet. It is in the hands of Reform UK and the opinion polls. Mrs Badenoch is a follower of events. Hers is the approach of someone still trapped in a party bubble which is consumed by the belief that withdrawal is the key to regaining the Conservatives' squandered popularity. This is nonsensical politics for the Tories. But it is also dangerous for Britain. The UK's long commitment to international law is a cornerstone of this country's soft power standing in the world. Labour's reassertion of this approach, with its clear signal to the world that Britain can again be trusted as a partner, has generated national benefits since the party returned to office last year. This does not mean that every aspect of international law (of which the ECHR is part) is unchallengeable or holy writ. The primary responsibility for the rule of law and for human rights is at the national level. The states that signed international covenants and treaties after 1945 'did not give an open-ended licence for international rules to be ever more expansively interpreted or for institutions to adopt a position of blindness or indifference to public sentiment in their member states'. Those words come from the current attorney general, Richard Hermer. They were part of his lucid and balanced lecture on security to the Royal United Services Institute last week. To judge by the fury it unleashed among the Daily Telegraph and Spectator writing classes, you might think that Lord Hermer had insisted that only lawyers like him could solve the world's conflicts and injustices, and that anyone who disagreed with him was a Nazi. Lord Hermer said no such things. Those who read his lecture will instead find an explicit attempt to depolarise the debate. He criticises as 'romantic idealists' those who treat international law as the reign of universal moral principle and who abhor all concession to nation-state interests. But he also denounced the 'pseudo-realists' who argue, amid the current unravelling of the post-1945 order, that nation-state interests can now take precedence over law. This, he said, was Russia's argument in Ukraine (he was too craven to mention that it is Donald Trump's philosophy of government too). British politicians drawn to this exceptionalist thinking in the name of realism risked committing 'deeply unserious acts in a deadly serious age'. To leave the ECHR would be just such an act. But its consequences would be desperately serious. It would give succour to authoritarian rulers on all continents. It would drain Britain's reputation for reliability again, as Brexit did. And it would achieve none of the goals in national security, criminal justice and migration control that its supporters imagine. Lord Hermer is right that serious problems can ultimately only be resolved through negotiations, driven by politics, which are then knitted together in laws that must be upheld. You cannot have one without the other.
