Block, stock and two million smoking barrels

This recreational blasphemy got Trump so much heat

that he pulled the post down from social media,

and now people can only see it everywhere on the Internet.

Clearly, the damage has been done.

In fact, here's how offensive Trump's AI Jesus post was.

The Knight's Templar said they condemn it wholeheartedly

and ask for a public apology.

The Knight's Templar.

These anger, the Knight's Templar.

Well, it's official. We're trapped in a Dan Brown movie.

One right-wing podcaster, and Trump's supporter said,

in 18 months, I went from hesitantly voting for Trump

to thinking there's a decent chance he's the anti-Christ.

Welcome to Quiet Riot, the politics podcast

that's less about the noise and more about the nice.

I'm Alex Andreu.

And I'm Naomi Smith.

We're here to cut through the chaos,

like a fire in your belly,

and send you away with something you can actually do.

Because democracy isn't a spectator sport,

we all have to put on the jersey.

It's a pop on the kettle, get comfy,

and help us begin another Quiet Riot.

Hello and welcome to Quiet Riot, I'm Alex.

And I'm Naomi.

And I'm Kenny.

This week we're discussing the blockade.

The blockade of the blockade.

The diplomatic blockage resulting from the blockade of the blockade.

Italy blockading its defense deal with Israel.

George Robertson wanting to blockade benefits in favour of bombs.

And a big question,

will exotic silk tailoring become unaffordable

because of these blockades?

Sorry, drifted into blockade.

Plus, how big a moment was the end of Orban's regime in Hungary,

both for Hungary but also for Europe and the world more widely,

especially in the context of the war in Ukraine?

I spoke to Professor Andrew Ryder,

who teaches politics at Budapest University,

and is currently writing a book about that election.

We cannot wait to hear that,

but hopefully afterwards we can have a little chat about our own observations

of how it paid out and what it means,

and whether it was Putin or JD Vance,

who were crying hardest on Sunday night.

Well, I'm still whipping tears of utter and complete joy,

or it might just be that I'm still just sleepy

because we're recording this unusually early for us.

I, at our way, let's get going.

Quiet Riot.

After Iran effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz,

following the start of the war in late February,

charging vessels' tolls of up to $2 million a ship to pass through,

peace talks in Pakistan over the weekend ended without resolution,

and Trump responded by announcing that the US Navy

would begin blocking ships from entering or exiting Iranian ports.

The blockade will be enforced impartially against vessels of all nations,

entering or departing the ports and coastal areas,

including all Iranian ports on the Arabian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman,

though Centcom was careful to clarify it would not impede ships

transiting to and from non-Iranian ports.

So a blockade, a blockade, which a retired US admiral has pointed out

is technically speaking an act of war.

The crisis has also opened up a surprising new front

in the culture war around the conflict.

This time, centred on Rome.

Trump set off a fury by calling Pope Leo the 14th terrible

and later posted an AI image depicting himself as a Jesus-like figure,

sparking outrage amongst Christians who saw the image as blasphemy.

That forced George Amaloni's hand.

She was the only European leader, remember,

to attend Trump's inauguration back in 2025

and had hoped their friendship would boost her standing at home

and abroad, but was 66% of Italians holding a negative view

of the US leader,

post to say her ties to the White House may have been a factor

in her defeat last month in a referendum on judicial reform.

She called Trump's remarks unacceptable

and Trump has since turned on her publicly

and the two apparently haven't spoken for a long time.

Back home in Britain,

Starma has been walking a delicate line,

saying the UK will not support the blockade

and it's not getting dragged into the war

while also assisting it is vital to get the straightfully open.

So the UK as co-hosting talks with France

aimed at a peaceful multinational mission

to restore freedom of navigation,

but the wider backdrop is uncomfortable.

Lord George Robertson, the former NATO Secretary-General,

who himself authored the government's strategic defence review,

has delivered a wizarding verdict on Britain's readiness,

warning that Britain is underprepared, underinsured,

and under attack,

and that its national security is in peril

due to corrosive complacency at the top of Labour leadership.

Robertson pointed to the extraordinary detail

that Britain was only able to deploy a single warship

to the Mediterranean in the first fortnight of the Iran War

and that there is a reported 28 billion funding gap

in the existing defence plans

with the Ministry of Defence Treasury

and Downing Street unable to agree away forward.

Alex, on Tuesday morning,

against the backdrop of everything I've just rattled through,

of course, the IMF published their economic forecast.

Can you give us the headlines

and why everyone's got in a bit of a tears about it?

The first thing to say about it is that

I can't remember actually any other time

when the IMF has issued three forecast scenarios.

I'd struggle to think of two,

I think they did it once during the year as a crisis.

Yeah.

They're saying these are our forecasts,

depending on whether this is bad,

worse or catastrophic,

and they're using it both as a way to hedge, I guess,

but also as a signal to the Trump administration

that the more you continue this,

the worse it gets for everyone,

because effectively,

there are three different scenarios

are depending on how long the Iran situation

and the blockade of Hormuz continues for.

The UK, I should say, is particularly badly hit

from this in terms of forecasts.

Their forecast for 2026,

instead of 1.3% of growth for this year,

has been downgrade to 0.8%,

so half a percent downgrade,

which is significant,

but it's still growth during this year.

There are other economies

which were closer to the brink as it were

that have gone into reverse

and have gone into recession.

Not in the G7,

we're at the bottom of that league table,

according to IMA.

Japan has done even worse,

by another measure by GDP per capita,

we're doing worse than Japan.

So that's the headline that most newspapers

are running with as it were,

because it's more eye-catching to say

we're at the bottom of the league,

we're not in terms of growth,

which is what you would usually look at in those situations.

Anyway, the point is bad news for the whole world,

except for the US,

whose projection in the main scenario

is actually slightly better,

it goes from 1.92% to 2.3%.

Because we've got to buy all our jet fuel from America.

To start with,

and secondly, I think,

in a global competitive environment,

the more you squeeze

or your main competition,

the better it is for you.

But that's scenario number one.

It's scenario number two,

and scenario number three,

where this goes on for longer,

the US begins to be more and more affected,

and actually it goes in reverse.

Now, why is the UK so badly affected?

There are several factors,

but basically,

it's more exposed short term

to these kind of changes

because of its dependence on gas.

The moment the LNG price changes,

you see that reflected almost instantly,

the price is UK pays for energy.

That's not to do with the region of the world

from which the energy comes from,

it's to do with the energy mix in the UK, as it were.

And more generally, I think,

the UK is also more open economy,

especially post-Brexit,

where we're not part of a block

that has the ability to absorb

and kind of equalize that shock across member states.

We are adrift in the middle of the ocean,

and very, very open to that kind of market shock.

Hence, when a Europe is very, very firmly back on the agenda,

and everyone is talking about it,

you had Henry Seffman on the BBC,

you had Swinford in the Times,

all pushing out big pieces

around the government's approach to Europe

and having a much, much closer relationship,

which means, I think,

that number 10 have briefed them,

for them to write those kinds of pieces.

Let's go back to economic terrorism,

as the US has called Iran's closure of the straits,

but a retired American admiral has called

a naval rockade, an act of war.

Kenny Alex is Trump escalating his way towards the resolution,

or is this like a Hail Mary with no end game?

Did you see Europe is now drafting a program

and plan to open up the Hormuz Strait

without the United States?

It's so sad.

We're doing it now, by the way,

it's opening.

The ships are coming back and forth,

or without the United States.

It just shows you,

how can you have a country?

How can you have a group of countries with that attitude?

Look at Greenland.

We should have Greenland to protect the world

against Russia and China.

The mention of it, all of a sudden they get,

you, this country,

should not be paying trillions of dollars to NATO.

Look, if anybody could be accused of economic terrorism,

it's very definitely Trump himself.

You know, how quickly we forget

the Venezuela debacle, for example.

Parish day, liberation day.

Completely, and this administration's whole approach

has been to so chaos.

And while it looks to the outside world,

like they don't know what they're doing,

somebody is making a lot of money

out of this chaos somewhere.

And it's the whole planet that's paying the price.

It's really a classic example of what happens

when a very few people have got access

to a huge amount of wealth.

And when a very few people have access,

I'm going to sound quite Marxist here,

but to the literal means of production.

When things go wrong,

it's the ones who own all that stuff

that are in a position to really, really benefit

from the chaos.

So the terrorism is Trump.

It sits on his doorstep and his doorstep alone.

But the global reaction has been pretty swift

and hostile.

China is calling it a dangerous and irresponsible act.

Iran is accusing the US of committing piracy.

And of course, oil prices climbed towards the $100 mark.

They've retreated a bit.

And the IEA, the International Energy Agency,

has warned that the war has upended its entire outlook

for global oil demand.

So are they both trying to play the long game?

And is it a case of,

is it going to be Terran or Trump that blink first,

banking on the economic pain?

Each of them are causing by closing the shipping lanes

that will eventually fracture one side's resolve.

Like how long can the global economy continue

to absorb all of this?

And if you have to guess who do you think is going to blink first?

I think what's going on was that Iran was beginning to do deals

with countries individually and say,

we will allow your ships through.

And the US felt that it couldn't allow that.

After two months of saying,

reopen the state of hallmuse,

when Iran started to reopen the state of hallmuse,

they said, now we're going to close it.

It reveals the US to be out for what it did for itself.

Not that there was ever any doubt,

but this nakedly makes it plain

that the US doesn't want the state of hallmuse reopened.

It wants the state of hallmuse reopened on its terms

and probably getting a cut knowing Trump.

So we're now in this ludicrous situation

where it is quite literally the US holding the world hostage,

hand in hand with Iran,

until their demands to each other are met.

Can anyone pressure Trump to do something differently?

I think the pressure will come domestically.

Even though, as I said,

the AMF predicts slightly bigger growth

for the US out of this.

Actually, because that growth is so unequally

and unfairly distributed,

it doesn't mean it's good for the midterms.

It's still terrible for the midterms.

People will see those high prices at the pump,

at the gas station,

inflation will still be affected upwards.

The US is not a country where workers

have significant rights

and so the pressure for wages to follow inflation.

It's not as big.

The pressure will come for Trump

from within the Republican Party,

which is beginning to get.

I know we thought this would never happen,

but it seems to be starting to get ticked off with him

and there are more and more voices beginning to criticize

what he's doing,

but also from voters.

His polling is sliding at unprecedented rates,

and at this rate,

they're going to get absolutely battered in the midterms.

So actually, the pressure

for him to resolve this quickly comes internally.

I agree. And internally from America in the form

of a US citizen,

Pope, of course,

it's a religious country

and you now have one of,

if not the most famous religious figure in the world,

being overtly critical of Trump's position.

And now that's causing him to lose friends elsewhere

we touched on earlier,

and I think that the Maloney situation is fascinating.

She built her entire international brand

on being Trump's European ally.

He's now turned on her publicly over the Pope.

I mean, imagine being caught

between the president of the USA

and the Holy See,

if you are the Italian leader,

that is not somewhere you would want to be.

But also imagine thinking

that the political leader of Italy

has somehow influenced

that they ride the Pope's speeches at statements for him

as if the Pope were Charles.

An honourable figure.

So how temporary do we think the spot is?

Or is the MAGA adjacent European rights

finally now being forced to confront

and choose between Trump and their own voters?

We'll be talking about Hungary in a bit,

but that's obviously part of it.

I think the MAGA adjacent European right,

I've weakened up to the fact

that Trump's ended for himself and for himself only.

The contrast between what's going on

on Wall Street, for example,

and what's going on with the Pope

really, really helps us paint a picture

of Trump and those in Trump's circle

picking fights with allies,

picking fights with the Pope for crying out loud.

The politics of it always, to me anyway,

look to play second fiddle

to how can somebody somewhere make some money.

I think it's worth as highlighting at this point

some of the areas that are winning out of this.

So we know obviously we've seen plenty of stories

about the billions that Trump himself

and his family are making.

We're also seeing this week

the likes of BP,

forecasting an exceptional first quarter,

not surprising because BP

owns the stuff that everybody's panicking about.

JP Morgan Chase,

and a few of the other big operators in America,

they issued reports on Tuesday this week.

JPM, they had a really strong first quarter.

Their net income was up 13%.

Earnings for share smashed all the forecasts.

The revenues were up 10%.

Their banking phase were up 28%.

That's from rich people getting JPM

to make more money for rich people.

Their trading revenues were up a fifth.

So the bank benefited from a record trading also.

We know that on Wall Street

there are some humongous winners there.

At the same time,

there will be people who are losing money

because this is always a knife fight.

But somebody somewhere is making a fortune.

And then there are some real fascinating specifics.

Barry didn't the pentagon budget for next year.

Is 54.6 billion dollar line.

For something called the Defense Autonomous Warfare Group.

It's called Dog.

And they basically produce AI drones.

That 54.6 billion is a third more

than the entire Justice Department's budget.

It's knocking on the door of the Marine Corps budget.

It's bigger than Zimbabwe's GDP

in 2025.

So somewhere in the armaments industry

and somewhere in the world of tech bros,

one or two people are making an absolute killing,

both literally and metaphorically.

So yeah, to come back to the point you were making,

I really think that while we talk about

the political costs of what Trump is doing,

there is a real attitude in some corners

of fill your boots now

because this isn't going to last forever.

Quiet, quiet.

Starting or growing your own business

can be intimidating and lonely at times.

Your to-do list may feel endless with new tasks

and lists can easily begin to overrun your life.

So finding the right tool that not only helps you out,

but simplifies everything as a built-in business partner

can be a game changer.

For millions of businesses, that tool is Shopify.

Shopify is the commerce platform

behind millions of businesses around the world

and 10% of all e-commerce in the US

from household names like Gymshark,

Rare Beauty, and Hines

to brands just getting started.

Shopify has hundreds of ready-to-use templates

that can help you build a beautiful online store

that matches your brand style.

And you can tackle all the important tasks in one place

from inventory to payments to analytics and more.

No need to save multiple websites

or try to figure out what platform

is hosting the tool that you need.

If people haven't heard about your brand,

you can get the word out like you have a marketing team behind you

with easy to run, email, and social media campaigns

to reach customers wherever they're scrolling or strolling.

Start your business today with the industry's

best business partner, Shopify, and start hearing.

Sign up for your $1 per month trial today

at shopify.com slash realm.

Go to shopify.com slash realm.

That's shopify.com slash realm.

I also think that on the point of the Pope,

the Vatican's soft power isn't often seen in action

in the headlines in the way that we're seeing at the moment.

It clearly does have very significant soft power influence

in Africa and places like that.

But I think with this one,

it is cutting across the usual political lines,

obviously in Latin America,

the Philippines, much of southern Europe.

Governments are going to face genuine domestic pressure

when the Pope is explicitly anti-war

and they're sitting on the fence

or cowering from any backlash from Trump

that they think might come.

So I don't think Pope Leo is making foreign policy

but he is making it much harder for Catholic politicians

and politicians who lead Catholic majority countries

to be seen to be in any way

cheerleading Trump when their own church

is calling it morally indefensible.

And the reverse is also true.

For example, Spain,

who have taken a much more robust position

and all this stuff is boosted as a Catholic country

and a quite religious Catholic country,

especially outside the urban centres,

is boosted hugely by the Pope going well done

you're doing the right thing.

Yeah, yeah.

It's such an important point though

because what the Pope has done is give political cover

to leaders who actually do want to oppose the war

for various reasons without looking weak politically.

And I don't think you can underestimate the value

of that sort of cover in countries like Italy,

like Spain, like Poland, in Latin America.

Ireland.

And within America itself as well.

Coming back to the UK,

Stammer is threading a very narrow needle

at the moment,

not necessarily in the war,

not supporting the blockade,

but obviously he's co-hosting talks with France

and keeping minesweepers in the region.

We're going to come on in a minute

to the critique on defense spending,

but on the exact positioning of the UK's foreign policy approach

to the conflict,

do we still feel that it is a coherent position?

Do we worry it's going to become untenable

as the pressure is mounting

and more and more countries are beginning

to stand against Trump?

That is the direction of travel, isn't it?

And that is the ultimate destination

that longer this goes on.

I will go back to something I've said before.

The fact that there is a position for Stammer to take

that is much stronger doesn't mean people would think Stammer

if they saw him as undermining what they see

as the special relationship.

And so what is important for Stammer essentially

is to look like the reasonable party of the two

as the special relationship is destroyed step by step

to be able to show that they destroyed it.

It's the US that destroyed the special relationship

I did everything I could.

And that way it moves to the right position

without suffering the criticism of being seen

as taking precipitous steps

or escalating the situation in any way,

which I don't think voters were thinking for.

So everyone knows where this is heading.

Everyone knows what the ultimate position will be

and yet Stammer needs to look

as if despite every reasonable effort

he's been pushed into that by Trump's unreasonableness.

So it's a little bit of theatre almost playing out, isn't it?

Yeah, and of course we have the King's visit to Washington

imminently upon us and I suppose

the number 10 will be hoping that some kind of diplomacy

can happen there and maybe the King can walk Trump back

from the ledge on much of this.

And sticking with home then Kenny Robertson,

his critique has been brutal.

It's coming extensively from someone on Labour's own side

who wrote the strategic defense review

or at least co-wrote it.

Let's have a little listen.

Tell you now, bluntly, the conclusion of all of that work.

We are under prepared, we're under ensured,

we're under attack, we're not safe.

Bluntly, that is the underlying message that we got.

And the current conflict in the Middle East

has to be a rude wake-up call to this country.

On top of what we've already seen in Ukraine

that should remind us in the United Kingdom

of our vulnerabilities.

There is a corrosive complacency today

in Britain's political leadership.

Lip service is paid to the risks, the threats,

the bright red signals of danger.

But even the promised national conversation about defence

can be started.

So if Britain can only get one warship to the meds

in a crisis of this scale,

what does the UK actually bring to any coalition?

And is the government's defence spending plan

adequate for the moment in which we find ourselves?

From a defence perspective, wearing quite a deep haul.

We've been in quite a deep haul for quite a long time

because we've not had to spend on defence.

And the toys left the 28 billion black hole

in the current and existing plans

not once covered by the strategic defence review.

You can go back 20 years to look at where we really began

to rely on our European allies.

Remember them, as well as our allies across the Atlantic.

And this is something that Europe is finding out

really, very quickly as well,

that the fact that we're all plugged into the American defence world

intimately is hugely problematic when the US was rogue

and it's something we've discussed before.

But politically it's a huge, huge issue

because Robertson was very specific

about the costs of welfare.

This was very much bombs versus benefits.

And that's a hungard hard place

for a labour leader to find themselves.

It's not something that Tories are going to struggle with.

I mean, it is echoing the Tories line

for the last few months.

Yeah.

It's literally what came in Badenburg has been saying

for the last few months,

and being told by the labour side

that this is not a reasonable either or.

I mean, the planning that must have gone into George Robertson's

announcement, we know it is plugged in right at the top of NATO.

We know he's plugged in on both sides of the plant.

We know he's plugged in everywhere.

And he's also plugged into the arms industry, of course.

The temperatures that he must have taken

before detonating this statement,

they tell their own story, I think.

He's not done this off his own back.

He didn't wake up one morning,

knock this out and his laptop and then go off for lunch.

This has been building for a long time.

And there's a real opportunity for those

who view increased defence spending as being

the priority over the next few years.

And I think when some day of George Robertson standing

intervenes like this,

what it tells us is that there are some very, very powerful people

and some very, very powerful organisations

who are now confident enough to start putting pressure

right at the top of the political tree in this country

to change our spending priorities

and change them really quite seriously.

And so his argument is the Treasury,

rather than the Muslim directly, I would argue.

You know, he wrote the SDR, the plan exists.

It is all about modern warfare, how it's changed,

learned the lessons from Ukraine.

It's about money for drone swarms, laser weapons,

cyber warfare, autonomous ships,

digital targeting that connects sensors to weapons

and seconds, all of that.

And it's all posted up.

Starber is saying, I cannot publish a spending plan

that we cannot fund.

And there is this 28 billion black hole

for the existing defence expenditure,

not taking into account all of this modern warfare

that we will need.

And so it's the delay that's causing

the damage.

I don't think it's an unreasonable position

for the PM to say, I'm not publishing a spending plan

that I can't fund.

Listen, I don't think any of this is an unreasonable position

and yet I find it's timing

and the politics behind it very interesting.

In the middle of an election campaigning period,

essentially, where labour is predicted to do pretty badly.

In the middle of an international crisis,

I do find it quite extraordinary that someone like Roberts

decides to pop up and make this kind of red-hot intervention.

The language employed is quite incendiary.

And Joe Robertson may be plugged into NATO,

maybe plugged into all sorts of defence industry business interests,

but he's also plugged into primarily

the Blair side of the Labour Party.

And so what this says to me is that

the Blair side of the party has decided

that it's time to get rid of Starmer

and making sure that Labour do as poorly as possible

in the upcoming election even worse

than can be managed in terms of expectations

so that they can go for him right after the election.

That to me is the most natural interpretation of this intervention.

And the only other thing I would say is that

I think we are moving to this revisionist position,

this revision of history,

where it's being presented as somehow irrational

to not have been arming to the teeth for the last few decades.

And the question one needs to ask is,

in a world that was much more stable and much more peaceful,

would voting populations across Europe and across the West

would they have worn massive defence spending

instead of investment in services or infrastructure,

or whatever, of course they wouldn't,

especially if you look at the period of austerity,

like imagine during that period of austerity across the West

to also be squeezing services

because you're putting more into defence

at a time when there is no active threat.

People would have revolted against that.

So to pop up 15 years later and say

we should have been doing this all along,

well, yeah, sure.

That includes actually the Blair government.

If that's your attitude,

the government that took the most advantage

of that peace dividend was that Blair government.

Alex, we need to move to a call to action

and I think you have a particularly lovely one for us this week.

Yes, so this call to action is tangentially related

to what we were talking about.

It comes with an immense amount of love and respect

for our friend Jane,

who is a wonderful librarian

and one of the most tireless anti-hate campaigners

I think, not to mention keeper of far-right receipts

and human mean database.

She is an unsung hero, Jane is helping very much.

The librarians is a documentary

that charts how librarians have emerged

essentially as first responders

in the fight for democracy and First Amendment rights

in Trump's America.

And actually all over the world,

you can now watch it on BBCI Player

and find out more about the organisation behind it

and we will provide links for both in the notes

because we are in a near where access

to reliable and good quality information

and the people who gatekeep that

could not be more important.

Quiet, quiet.

And now it's that time of the week when Alex

falls into the murky waters

of the right wing quagmanya

to find out what's got the fash into a froth

it's time of course for Wokidoki.

Wokidoki.

What have you got for a Salix?

You have no idea just how apt your introduction was

to this film.

Wokidoki.

So there's a cyclone moving through

the Pacific called Vianno

and New Zealand leadership had declared

a series of national emergencies,

the emergency states basically for people

to prepare for that, etc.

As it happens, the cyclones

of course shifted away from Hawkes Bay

in that sort of area late on Sunday

and it's actually moved in a slightly different direction.

So it didn't impact New Zealand as badly as it could have

and was predicted to have.

Wairo Mayor Craig Little refused

to declare the local state of emergency

that the central New Zealand government had asked for,

saying that the states of emergency are woke.

You're going to say the cyclone was woke

and it's kind of what he said.

So he said, we're becoming woke

as a country when he comes to cyclones.

That's my favourite Wokidoki ever already.

It's very big.

Wokidoki is a country when he comes to cyclones.

Living woke.

Yeah, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has had

to respond and say, look, I love Greg

and we work very well together

but I'll happily wear a woke label

if it means we save lives.

Because all this, of course, has to be put in the context

of poor preparation for cyclone Gabrielle in 2023,

which cost almost $10 billion in damage

and 15 lives in New Zealand.

There's been an inquiring to that

and their report found that the government

did not respond adequately, did not warn communities early enough.

And so maybe they've swung slightly the other way now

and they're saying we'd rather do too much than not enough.

But still to turn around and say

that we're becoming woke as a country

when it comes to cyclones, especially when you represent

precisely that Hawkes Bay community

that suffered the most that really got battered

during Gabrielle in 2023.

I think he's really quite beyond the veil

and quite a notable Wokidoki.

Thank you, Alex.

Oh, cyclones are woke living with woke except death

or be woke.

They are not a twirly, aren't they?

You are so good at finding hilarious instances

of Wokidoki in this.

If you do, send them through to quietriapod.gmail.com.

This really does come from you.

I mean, this hunting of a Wokidoki came from listener Pete Husky.

So thank you for that, Pete.

It's quiet, quiet.

Sunday brought a moment that I, along with several million Hungarians,

thought I would never see Victor Orban

conceding the election to newcomer Pater Mojo.

I am reliably informed that he's the right pronunciation.

Pater Mojo, who only created the winning party Tissa two years ago

after resigning from the ruling Fides party.

In an election with an astronomical 80% turnout.

Tissa not only won, but it secured a two thirds majority

that means it can undo much of Orban's damage at the constitutional level.

Now, you have probably already read a dozen pieces warning progressives

that Mojo is not a bleeding heart liberal

and the road back from authoritarianism is a long and difficult one for Hungary.

All that is true.

But the po face refusal to take even a single moment to celebrate

what is undoubtedly a very good thing is one of the most annoying habits

of what little media there is on the left.

For 16 years, Orban's Hungary has been an obstructive force

within the year responsible for many of the delays

and divisions that critics in his camp love to point to.

A destructive Kremlin asset, the demise of which will be celebrated in Kiev

as much as in Budapest, not to mention a critical hub

for the European and American hard right to mingle.

Andrew Ryder is a British political scientist

who has made Hungary his home for many years,

teaches politics at the Otvush-Lorand University in Budapest

and whose books include the challenge

to academic freedom in Hungary, a case study in authoritarianism,

culture war and resistance in 2022.

He is currently writing a book on this election

who better to help me decode the result.

Hi, Andrew, thank you for joining us and quiet, Riot.

Yeah, thank you for inviting me.

It's really nice to join you today.

Can I just start by asking,

how is the atmosphere in Budapest in Hungary right now?

Is it still on a high?

You know, we saw wonderful scenes after the result was announced.

Well, on Monday, when I gave my classes,

the students were very tired.

And I think that was because many of them stayed up

through the night, partying, celebrating.

It was a huge moment.

Basically, I would say Hungary's been in a crisis situation

for about 20 years.

Actually, predating Orban's Premiership,

which recently ended,

and that started in 2010.

In 2006, there was a huge crisis in the country,

protests against the then government.

And Hungary had to go to the IMF for a bailout.

There was austerity.

And basically, there's been very difficult times in Hungary.

I can't remember the last time.

There was a kind of really positive mood for celebration.

So yeah, the mood and the atmosphere were fantastic.

And I get feeling that it's not just Hungary

that's been infused and excited by this result.

I can confirm that.

It really captured a lot of eyes around the world.

Now, where to start from?

After 16 years of Orban,

really quite extensively gerrymandering legislative changes

that sort of maximized his incumbent advantage,

help from Washington, help from Moscow,

after a sort of state-funded campaign of misinformation

and reports of regional intimidation at polling centers.

I guess the first question I have to ask is,

how did Orban lose at all?

Well, I think there are a number of factors that explain his defeat.

One was the economy.

Of course, there's a cost of living crisis across the world.

But it's particularly extreme in Hungary.

And I would argue it's particularly hard in Hungary

because of the level of cronism in the Hungarian economy,

which has created huge inefficiency.

Now, Orban, in the past, did very well with middle-class voters.

And they were happy to vote for the party Orban represents

when they felt materially okay.

But that packed, if you like, with Hungarian middle-classes,

increasingly fragmented because of the deterioration

in their living standards.

So that's one factor.

But I think the major turning point against Orban happened in 2024,

when there was a huge political scandal

because the president of Hungary and the former justice minister

gave a pardon to a pedophile enabler.

And many people believe that pardon was given

because of pressure coming from high-level political contacts

that wanted to protect this pedophile enabler.

And that led to the resignation of the president

and the justice minister who was going to head up

the Hungarian delegation in the European Parliament stood down.

That was huge.

And I think it never really left, and that scandal.

Sorry, can I ask, is that when Peter Mojoer also left Fides,

and said that, because that was also about two years ago, wasn't it?

Absolutely, yes.

In fact, Peter Mojoer's former wife was the justice minister.

Oh, wow.

Yeah, yeah.

So basically that was 2024.

Peter Mojoer decided on this point of principle that he would leave Fides

and form his own party.

And I think one of the reasons the victory was so large in Hungary

on Sunday night was Peter Mojoer has been very successful

in energizing the UFO.

It was a huge level of support coming from young Hungarians.

And you know, this sort of all ban rhetoric of nativism

and demonization of minorities

and being very difficult towards the European Union.

I think these things just didn't resonate with young people.

So he lost the youth of the country, I would say.

Yeah.

I mean, 80% turnout is astronomical by any standard.

Yeah.

How important will that two thirds majority be going forward

in sort of turning things around?

How much easier does that make life?

I think the two thirds majority is hugely, hugely important.

In Hungary, you can only change the constitution

if you have this two thirds majority.

And the Orban government had rigged the system so much

in its favor, including the constitution,

that there needs to be a wholesale rewrite.

But with that two thirds majority, Peter Mojoer also has the authority

to say to the large number of cronies

that Orban put into watchdog positions

and other positions of authority and importance in Hungary go.

And I think it would be difficult for them to defy that.

So this is huge, the two thirds majority.

Now, does Orban deserve some credit in the end

for conceding with such speed and grace

for not going down the Trump route and sort of trying to cause trouble?

Because he could have caused quite a lot of trouble.

Yes.

I'm incredibly grateful that Victor Orban had the dignity

to concede at an early point.

I was deeply fearful before the resolve

that a kind of January the slick moment

when, as people know, supporters of Trump rioted in Washington,

I was fearful the same might happen.

So I am grateful he conceded,

but serious, serious illegality has occurred in Hungary.

There's been systemic violation of the rule of law

and Victor Orban will need to face the consequences.

And I don't say that in a vindictive way.

I say that because I don't want to see this happen again

and standards have to be kept and maintained

and the best way to do that is to set an example

and prosecute the principal actors responsible for this illegality.

So in the short term, what happens next?

Fiddis is still in charge for a few weeks.

In fact, there is a national emergency status in the country.

There has been for a few months it recently got extended.

And that comes to an end on the last day by which the new parliament

must be sworn in, which is the 13th of May.

So are we looking at that as the key date for Mojo coming in?

I believe that he believed he should be able to take office within two weeks.

So probably earlier than that.

Asked the president and told the president,

Peter Mojoer has asked Orban loyalists,

including the president, all the way down to the hedge of the media regulator

and judges, public prosecutors.

He has asked them to resign.

And he has also promised to pursue really those who profited from corruption.

Let's have a little listen to what he said.

To uproot or to take out corruption.

Hungry cannot develop.

For some time it was almost like accepted.

We spoke about corruption like it's called theft

and the money that is stolen,

the thousands of billions of foreign through overpriced public procurement.

This is the money of the pensioner.

It's missing from child protection.

So this is not normal.

We should not accept that stealing public money is normal.

But we will restore the independence.

So no politically appointed leaders,

whether they were at the prosecution, police or inland revenue.

So is a purge, do you think smart politically?

Or is reconciliation more likely to bring unity?

What do I mean by that?

If he goes after some notable symbolic figureheads

and then let it go,

or is there a case for a sort of deep uprooting?

Well, I do think high standards need to be maintained

when it comes to the rule of law.

The price, the Hungarian people have had to pay for this illegality

is quite large.

So I do expect prosecutions.

And as someone who lives and works in Hungary,

and I'm a Hungarian taxpayer,

I would not be happy if people who have enabled and engaged in corruption

and broken the rule of law stay in office.

So I am in the camp that would like to see these people removed.

It would be great if they removed themselves,

if they just resigned.

I mean, the reason I'm asking is because my Greek experience of this,

corruption was so endemic in Greece,

that really it had become a way of life for tens of thousands,

if not millions of individuals,

especially people who worked in public services,

who were of the opinion that I was just doing

what I needed to do in that environment.

It had become very much a part of life.

And going into quickly and deeply and radically

was a little bit like the cave metaphor in Plato.

People were really jolted into discomfort

by not having the option to go and give a little envelope

to someone and get their license quickly.

It really turned a lot of people against the government.

Well, there won't be different levels of corruption in Hungary.

The principal actors in this corruption

were committing corruption on an industrial level

and becoming fabulously rich.

So a kind of oligarchy class,

including all am people around him,

became fabulously rich.

And that has denied life chances for many people

because of that corruption.

Hungary has poor hospitals.

The economy is weak.

Schools haven't been given the money they need.

People paid a high price in this corruption

and now the principal actors have to pay a price themselves.

Yes, we live in an age.

Unfortunately, where corruption has in some countries

become a kind of normal.

And I think this is one reason we see the populist phenomenon grow in

because people lost their trust in government and politicians.

They became cynical.

And I think we have to challenge that.

And in this sense, I think Peter Matjes

has taken a very radical and principled stat.

But he also has to apply those standards to himself.

And he will be judged by those standards.

But one of the reasons I also think they have to take action

is, as I say, there's a huge crisis in the country

with public services,

the infrastructure of the country,

and the new government under Peter Matjes

will need all the resources it can get to fix those problems.

Now, some of this money undoubtedly will have been moved abroad

and it will be quite difficult,

I imagine, to track down.

But whatever they can do, they should do their utmost to take out.

There's also a whole pile of money, really,

stuck in the pipeline from the EU

because Hungary is currently locked out of most of its allocation

of the RRF, the recovery resilience facility.

It's basically the COVID recovery fund that was set up.

And there's more money from the safe fund,

which is the defense one.

So will the change of regime

unlock things like that instantly?

Do you think, or will they need to see reform first?

Will it set conditions?

We'll have to see,

but I would imagine the European Union

will want to do its utmost to assist Peter Matjes

and help the new government get off to a good start.

This is probably one of the best moments

the European Union has had in a long, long time.

This is a real boost for Europe.

And as there's a slogan going around,

I voted for Europe.

The result was clearly a statement of confidence and belief

in the European Union.

But of course, we need to see democracy reestablished in Hungary

and this will be incredibly helpful to the European project.

So imagine they will try and be as flexible

and as helpful as possible.

But hungry, as we've already,

you member states, will be judged by its alignment

and conformity to the European Union treaties.

And that will apply to the new government.

But he's indicated, Peter Matjes,

that he's happy to follow those rules

and be a good member of the club

and not be awkward and obstructive

and destructive as all ban was.

Now, he was really part of the Orban foiled

until a couple of years ago,

he was an official fidious party.

And he has managed to bring behind him

really quite a broad voter coalition

that simply wanted Orban out.

So he's not a progressive by any stand

that he's a vast improvement

and that has to be acknowledged

because he's at least the way he has presented himself

a much softer centerite politician

with rule of law and pro-European

as the tent poles, really, of his program.

But we have seen those kinds of wide

but shallow support bases turn very quickly

the UK being a very recent example.

So how much leeway do you think voters will give him

to start to visibly turn things around?

I believe because of the size of the majority he achieved,

popular and wide support,

not just in the cities, but in the countryside,

he has a good and strong mandate.

I believe with time,

and it will take a long time for Matjes

to try and create the semblance

of a proper functioning democracy.

With time, what we may see

is the emergence of a more plural political system.

Wide range of people who are not conservatives,

the support is invoted, Peter Mangier,

some of the centre-left parties

didn't even field candidates

because they wanted to maximise support.

With time, they may re-enter political races

and it's not clear when that will be.

But I do think probably for a number of years

we will need to maintain this coalition

that's been created.

You could look at it almost as a national government emergency government

of unity with one range of political voices

and perhaps when the immediate crisis has been addressed,

people will look a bit more widely to the future.

It could even be until the next election that we see that.

It may take five, it may take ten years

to really repair the damage.

In fact, I've seen some analysis that suggests

that maybe the next election's big promise

will be the adoption of the euro.

And so there is a shape there, I guess,

for a two-term broad coalition

to really change things in Hungary.

Just instinctively, from having followed

the election, having seen his various statements

and understanding the pulse of Hungarian politics,

as people peel off to the left,

as voters peel off to the left,

is it smarter for him to appeal to more fetish converts

to replace those voters

or to pivot to a more centrist place

that might keep his current support intact?

I think, actually,

that many figures, voters,

have already switched to Peter Magyar,

but that process, I think, will continue.

The figures have only now got a small ramp of MPs

in a parliament of the 199 seats.

I think they have approximately 55.

So very small compared to the numbers of MPs they had previously.

But I suspect that in the inquest

that the Fidesz party will have,

there will be revulsion and disgust

at the level of corruption,

which will probably become more apparent,

once prosecutions start,

once the new government is able to get its hands

on what evidence there is left.

I suspect the Fidesz party will be in a deep, deep crisis

and conservatives within Fidesz,

who actually do believe in the rule of law,

they will move towards Peter Magyar,

but I don't think there's a huge number

of rule of law conservatives left in Fidesz now.

It started off as a centrist party, mainly for youth,

and it became a far-right party

and the youth of the country in the end, ironically rejected it.

Now, looking at the wider implications for a few minutes,

first of all, for Ukraine.

What does this mean, do you think?

I would hope that it would mean

that Hungary no longer vetoes loans

and aid coming from the European Union.

That will be one major difference.

I also am certain of this.

The viral propaganda

at the All-Bang government was churning out

on an industrial level against Selensky

and the Ukrainian government, that will end.

Literally, every way you looked on the street

in Budapest, where I live,

you could see posters showing President Selensky

with negative statements demonizing him.

This was deeply, deeply uncomfortable to see.

The fact that the government could demonize a neighbor

at war, fight him for its own sovereignty

and independence against Putin.

I found it deeply troubling,

especially considering the history of Hungary

and how in 1956, they were victims

of Soviet invasion and aggression.

And of course, that's one of the reasons

all banned last, because I think a lot of Hungarians thought

this was a kind of bullion against Ukraine.

They couldn't understand why all-Bang was so pro-Putin

and became known as Putin's best ally

within the European Union.

This totally went against the principles

and the traditions of 1956.

Yeah, there was that phone call

that was released between Orban and Putin,

where he was just incredibly sort of toadish

and describing Hungary as the mouse

that will help the Great Russian lion be freed

and things like that, talking about Putin.

I mean, Putin sent resources,

it sent a power broker Sergey Kirillenko

and a team of what they called political technologists

to help Orban win this election.

How will the Kremlin react to this result?

Yes, these reports of Putin sending in intelligence operatives

to assist the Orban government

in the dark arts of politics, misinformation, stirring up hysteria.

It seemed to be confirmed with the incident in Serbia

where near the oil pipeline between Serbia and Hungary,

explosives were found.

And then pro-Orban figures studied to speculate

that this could have been an action from Ukraine.

We were expecting more of this.

Some of us were even so nervous we thought

the Orban government would postpone the election

because of some force flag incident.

Basically, I think Russia is very nervous

because this election result is sending out

a ripple effect globally.

As I said earlier, this has been a huge boost

for the European project and the European Union.

It also shows that given a choice

between authoritarianism and liberal democracy,

most prefer liberal democracy.

And I think that's the same in Russia.

If they had a free choice,

they probably would have made a similar decision

to that of the Hungarians.

And I think Putin is worried, democracy and freedom.

These are incredibly powerful, powerful principles.

What does Putin have?

He has just fear, threat, force, corruption and illegality.

And the thrust of his argument has been very much

that Western liberal democracy doesn't work.

So if it seemed to work, that really goes against

the root of what he's offering.

Absolutely, absolutely.

I do think, though,

if the European project, the liberal project,

need to be rekindled.

I mean, partly the reason authoritarianism

has been able to flourish

is because there were imperfections in society

which facilitated the group of authoritarianism.

The economy of the transition period

of the 1990s and central eastern Europe,

including Russia, enabled onigarks to emerge,

deregulation and services deteriorated.

There was illegality also because of deregulation.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is

unregulated neoliberalism

of the kind of fundamentalist variant

basically destroyed transition,

not just in Hungary, but also in Russia.

Yes, so try to go back to something

we had in the early 90s won't work.

We need a more managed, balanced,

and fairer form of capitalism.

Before authoritarianism,

political leaders were becoming disconnected

from the public.

The last sections of the public

didn't understand how democracies work

and they felt there were small political elites

just out there for themselves.

And that has to change.

So it's not so much a case of restoring democracy.

It's a case of creating something infinitely better

than what existed before,

thick to all bad.

And I think that's a lesson

relevant to many, many other countries.

Looking the other direction,

Trump endorsed Orban very vocally.

And the vice president,

J.D. Van's, even visited days before the election

really participated in rallies

and engaged in outright interference,

while complaining about interference.

There's even some polling that seems to suggest

that J.D. Van's visit might have actually

cost Orban a couple of points.

Before I started my remarks,

I actually had a special guest

that asked that I give him a phone call.

And we'll see.

Let's hope he actually answers.

This is going to be very embarrassing.

All right.

I'm sorry.

The person you were trying to reach

had a voicemail box that has not been set up yet.

Okay.

Try one more time.

Hello, Mr. President.

How are you?

Hi, J.D.

Could you give me a second of just...

Oh.

Wow.

That's so...

You have an A.D.

Mr. President,

you are on with about 5,000 Hungarian patriots

and I think they love you even more than they love Viktor Orban.

Well, I can't believe that.

I can't believe that because I love Hungary

and I love that Viktor.

I'm telling you, he's a fantastic man.

We've had a tremendous relationship

and he does a job.

So, how much of a blow is this

to MAGA's explicit aim

to boost the far right in Europe,

which we saw in their security strategy document?

This is a huge blow, I think, for Trumpism,

especially with the midterm elections on the horizon.

And it will boost and encourage democratic forces in America

that you can take on these authoritarian populists

and you can beat them.

Hungary became a kind of poster boy

for the new right authoritarian populists,

whatever you want to call them, in America and in Europe.

And I'm quite certain a lot of them

are going to be incredibly worried now

about this reaction.

I think it's clear that with these authoritarian forces,

there is a tendency

because of their disrespect for the rule of law,

to corruption, to cronism,

to polarisation.

I do have confidence in human nature.

I think this is not what the majority of people want.

They want to see fairness, they want to see dignity,

they want life chances for them and their families.

And I don't think authoritarian populists can deliver on that

because they look more at the end of the day

towards the circles around them

and looking after their own elite.

What I wanted to ask you to round things off, I guess,

is the recent political trend around Europe

has been fragmentation

in a sort of centrifugal movement to the edges.

You get Donald Tusk in Poland

who bucked that trend

by uniting moderate voices behind him.

Mojo could be seen as having achieved a similar sort of

centripetal effect,

even to a greater extent,

considering the majority he has secured.

So others just blips,

or are we seeing a genuine counter trend,

a sort of blueprint that says

the way to beat the populist right is to consolidate.

Yeah, I mean, one of the reasons I think

the Peter Magioth victory is so important

is this could

with Donald Tusk in Poland

revitalize what we could call

the centrist political position.

Peter Magioth describes himself as a conservative.

I would call him a kind of one-mation conservative

because he does support the European Union.

He does support the ruler law.

Now that kind of conservatism has gone into a decline

and increasingly populism has filled that vacuum

or in the case of America and Britain,

it's colonized the Conservative Party in the UK

and the Republican Party in America.

But I do think the tide is turning against the authoritarians

and maybe there will be people in those parties

the Conservative Party and the Republican Party

that will look at the Peter Magioth victory

and say, look, we could reclaim our parties.

We could be conservative in a different way.

You know, I have a lot of respect and a lot of time

for one-mation conservative,

even though I'm not a conservative.

I would say this is a great thing if it could be revived,

but again, they've got to look more to the future

but also perhaps look a bit at the past.

You had a one-mation conservatism in the post-war period

at least up until the early 70s

that supported Keynesian economics,

the welfare, state, full employment.

I think that's the way conservatism needs to go.

It needs to tone down the kind of market fundamentalism

that we saw with the Fatcherite Premiership in 1979

and which influenced many other conservatives globally.

So this could be an exciting moment.

I say this as a non-conservative.

This could be the rebirth, the renaissance of conservatism.

I mean, a democracy you've got to have a range of parties.

Professor Andrew Ryder, it's been an absolute pleasure

and an education to have you on the show.

Thank you very much for giving us your time.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

I very much enjoyed it.

So how relieved will Brussels be about this?

And what stands should it adopt?

Should it instantly adjust its pose

or should it wait to see practical reforms?

Brussels is going to have to move, I think,

much more quickly than Brussels is used to moving

because there's 17 billion of EU funds that Hungary can grab

but it needs to start moving now

because there are deadlines starting to arrive sort of in August.

And there's also another, I think, much the same amount.

I'm not a 17 billion for the...

I think it's a security action for Europe plan.

That's the EU's defense focus.

Yep.

So there's basically both RRF money,

the recovery fund post-COVID basically that's blocked

and there's new money coming from the safe fund.

So there is a lot of money to be had there.

But as well as having to move fairly quickly

to hit these deadlines within Hungary itself,

really very gnarly problems to deal with.

This tension between moving fast enough to meet

those funding deadlines,

but at the same time being seen to be inclusive enough

to build some sort of democratic legitimacy at home

is very, very difficult.

And the EU needs to be very, very aware of this

and it needs to calibrate its expectations accordingly.

The other thing that I'm watching out for with twisted amusement

is how awkward a certain issue start to become

or some European leaders

who have been able to use Orban in recent years as a cover.

It's been politically much, much easier

to let Orban take all the heat

for some very difficult decisions.

So it's very definitely not all roses,

but my goodness made.

It smells a whole lot better than it did a couple of weeks ago.

It doesn't take a lot better.

Before I comment on the EU reaction,

can we just talk about his name?

So he's Peter Mujor.

That just means Peter Hungry.

It would be like us resoundingly defeating Nigel Farrow

as with a candidate called Johnny Englisch.

Otto.

Jimmy Scottish.

I want to be Jimmy Scottish.

Exactly. Absolutely.

Love it.

He is unashamedly committed to the EU,

to NATO, to Hungarian democracy.

And I was really moved by a shell of underlies reaction

in her saying tonight, Hungary chose Europe.

It's extremely emotional on Sunday night watching the scenes.

This will hopefully now unlock the 90 billion euro loan

for Ukraine.

And Kiev should be receiving that pretty swiftly.

We'll have a huge thawing of tensions between Brussels

and Budapest that could unlock about 17 billion in EU funds

that have been withheld because of concerns over corruption

in Orban's regime.

And that's about 10% of Hungarian GDP.

It's not a huge country.

It hasn't got a huge population.

So I think that will provide a shot in the arms of the new

administration.

And the big loser is the Kremlin.

Because they are the biggest loser of the night.

Arguably also JD Vance.

But they've been bullied by all of the recent energy price

searches because of Iran.

And they'll be ruined the removal of the closest ally

from that very nerve center of NATO and Europe.

And I also just wanted to reflect on how he won.

Because I think that is critical for us here.

And I think it's very important that we are fighting

with our right and don't want them to take hold in in our own

country.

And how did Tizzah do it?

Well, brilliant social media.

I mean, all media channels were blocked to government

opposition so they created their own.

And I think when you look at the content that Mojo and Tizzah

candidate did, it makes a lot of UK politicians,

social media, it looks quite stale.

They won because of high turnout.

And the young were hugely inspired to vote.

And he visited every small town, every rural seat.

And he won that simple cost of living argument.

And avoided being dragged into culture wars.

He didn't fight them on the terms of their own debate.

He created a different one talking about the economy.

And then he let his social media army do all the culture

of war stuff.

So he kind of outsourced that to them.

And they saw the signal and ran with it.

And so all vans Ukraine and Zelensky conspiracy theory

that hungry would be going to war just felt very distant

and alien.

Effectively they were forced into innovation by the fact that

Orban had such a grip on traditional media.

Exactly.

Exactly.

There is another way in which he won.

I know one data point is difficult to read.

But if you combine it with Donald Tusk's victory in Poland

a couple of years back, fragmentation is a sort of gift

to right-wing populists.

And what we've seen is that to defeat that,

you need to find a way to consolidate behind one option

as an effective way of resistance.

So how can countries that are in the fragmentation parts

of that political cycle find a place of consolidating

because really the distinguishing characteristic

is that you see consolidation happen to get rid of a regime

that is in power, but then fall apart very, very quickly

as soon as the new government is in the chair.

The paper, the Hungarian parliament, that has just been elected

is the most right-wing that there's been since democratization

back in when was it 1990.

There's been plenty of comment about this.

I think looking forwards, we're all going to be watching

Hungary now very closely to see whether that sort of sense

of winning from a democratic perspective can continue

because there may well be very, very valuable lessons

for other countries who are experiencing

a rightward drift amongst the electorate.

And I think there is fracturing happening on the right

of British politics.

We've now got Restore Britain regularly being added

to the polling prompts that the main pollsters are putting out.

Politico, and now including Restore Britain in their poll polls,

it doesn't seem to be shaving much off the reform lead at the moment,

but it has certainly a bit and reforms polling

isn't heading ever further in an upward direction

and they do seem to have a ceiling.

And of course, Kemy Baynock is forever trying to win some

of those votes back.

So there is in the UK context of fracturing

to a much lesser extent on the right,

but of course there is a huge one on the left.

At the last election, we saw a very efficient distribution

of progressive votes by the Lib Dems and Labour really not

fighting in each other's targets.

That is highly complicated at the next election by the Green Party

who are going to fight Labour very, very hard.

In at least 50, I would imagine, constituency seats

and the S&P similarly north of the border against Labour.

So it is a difficult picture.

So then you have to think, OK, what is the unifying policy position

that Green voters, Pride voters, Labour voters,

Green voters, Lib Dem voters can all coalesce behind,

and it won't be a surprise to anybody listening to this show

to hear me say, well, membership of the EU is quite clearly

one that voters across the majority of those parties

would get behind.

Reform are now polling between 24 and 25,

which is six to seven points behind their peak a few months ago.

And if you follow the polling trend,

you're almost heading towards five parties getting 20% each

with notable exceptions in Wales and Scotland.

And obviously Northern Ireland, which has completely different parties

competing, we know what we need to do,

but how to get there is a completely different matter.

So Alex, our second call to action for the week?

Yeah, so I would ask you to please support the Hungarian LGBT Alliance.

We will drop a link in our show notes.

They are a sort of umbrella organisation that coordinates

all of Hungary's LGBT charities

and a key pressure point, because as Peter Modjör

concentrates on constitutional change,

economic change, et cetera, it's very easy for minority interests

that have been really badly affected by 16 years of urban

to drop off the edge of what's interesting

and what's politically expedient.

And so giving them the means and the funds to fight this fight

in the next few years and really try to influence this new government

coming in is absolutely key.

And Andrew has also written a book,

analysing the psychology of Brexit,

which I had read but hadn't connected with him before the interview.

And that's now available in our bookshop, so...

Quiet, quiet.

And now, with all those clouds to choose from,

it's time to find one with a silver lining.

It's time to grin and share it.

Good news is welcome to me.

Bad news is how come to me.

Good, good news.

Throw your locked on your door.

Throw your locked on your door.

I want good news.

What have you got for us Naomi?

Year in.

I am.

I'm all in.

But what have you got for us Naomi?

Well, the spring has sprung,

which can only mean one thing.

We are rapidly approaching music festival season.

Well, not wireless, but all the other ones.

Which also means that hundreds of viruses of Brits

will be swimming bottle boos and feels all over the country.

And then having to queue up to use incredibly questionable

portable toilets.

But this year,

pisshead piss is going to be put to good use.

A new forest is going to be grown with fertilised nutrients

recovered from urine collected from said festival to

toilets.

So the woodland in Wales is going to feature four and a half

thousand native British trees,

including beach,

grown with fertiliser made from pee from the boom town

festival Bristol pride and even the London Marathon.

And behind this great innovation is the green

fertiliser company NPK recovery.

So they are a woman led Bristol based on a top that collects

thousands of litres of urine.

From portable composting toilets at festivals and gigs.

And transforms them into odeless fertiliser.

And so they extract the nitrogen and other nutrients

like phosphorus and potassium from our wee.

And then produce fertilizer on site in a natural

bacteria driven process.

And it's just as effective apparently as synthetic

and commonly used fertilisers,

most of which are now of course all hold up in the

shape of hormones and unable to get through.

The first seed is a scots pine and that was planted

in February on the Brecken Beacon National Park,

which was a trial funded by the UK Forestry Commission.

And NPK have got plans to grow this forest in Wales.

They've partnered with a Welsh nonprofit called Stump Up

for trees and the outskirts of Abergavelli.

And they're just going to grow thousands of native trees

from seed in a project that's been backed by nearly

five million pounds worth of cash from the Forestry Commission's

tree production innovation fund.

So, both of you, this week, we ask everybody to grin

and share peepies on it.

Okay, now you'll be well.

Thank you for the peepie pines, the Maustard and the bulk trees.

Listeners, as ever, we will drip a link into the show notes

so that you cannot just grin but also share it.

Quiet, quiet.

And that's the end of the show.

Thank you all so much for tuning in

and lending us your ears once again.

We'll be back on Sunday as usual

and with a very exciting update from Naomi

about Best for Britain's mega new report on UK EU relations

which launches tomorrow, that's Friday.

So, make sure you sign up to bestforbritten.org slash join

for the preview.

But not before you've headed over to KO-FI.com slash quiet

ride pod to sign up as a quiet ride supporter

for as little as a five or a month

to help us keep on bringing this show to everyone

at the same time regardless of their ability to pay.

And if you need something to keep you going

until then, don't forget to catch up on both our sister shows,

Poddicey and behind the lines.

So, until Sunday, stay happy, stay focused

and keep on riding just to it quietly.

We live, we laugh and we love you.

Bye.

Bye.

Bye.

Bye.

Quiet ride is an audio production by Kula Heads

with Naomi Smith and Alex Andre produced by Kenny Campbell,

Music by Marianna Sangeeta, hard work by Simone Canelo

and edited by me Alex Reese.

Quiet, quiet.

Bye.

Bye.

Honestly, I almost my mouth went to almost say

regardless of their ability to pee.

Stop.