Free YouTube Transcribe

Video transcript

The Biggest Crooks on the Planet – Norman Baker

The Daily Heretic · 2,146 words · 10 min read

Want to search this transcript, jump the video from any line, or download it as TXT, SRT, or VTT?

Open in the transcript tool

Full transcript

0:00Tell me a little bit about your book

0:01before we get going.

0:02>> Royal and national debt. This is about

0:05the finances of the royal family and

0:07really it poses the questions to how it

0:08was

0:09that a family which was bankrupt in 1760

0:13is now worth billions.

0:16Where does that money come from? It

0:17hasn't come from betting on the horses.

0:19So, where does it come from? So, the

0:20book goes into the various ways in which

0:22they've accumulated wealth. Most of

0:24which is frankly from the public purse.

0:26>> Mhm. One of the people that we've been

0:28looking into, everyone's been looking

0:29into, is Prince Andrew, of course. Uh he

0:31now has no title, no anything really.

0:34So, how is he affording to get by?

0:37>> Well, we don't know that really, but

0:38obviously he had some money given to him

0:40in in in in a trust.

0:42>> Mhm.

0:43>> Um I think from the Queen Mother

0:44originally and then I think probably

0:45from his mother. But it's true that the

0:48amount of money he spends

0:51uh is uh in excess of what he clearly

0:53earns. I mean, all he's entitled to now

0:55is a naval pension, which is about

0:5620,000 lb a year.

0:58>> Mhm.

0:58>> When uh the Queen was around, he got a

1:00quarter of a million a year in from uh

1:03through the Duchy of Lancaster. But even

1:05so, that was well below what he was

1:06actually spending. We do know that in

1:09his time as trade envoy, he was very

1:11busy

1:12um arguing for uh deals for himself

1:15rather than arguing for deals for

1:16Britain. Mhm. And in my book uh I set

1:19out some examples of of the dodgy

1:21dealing which he had, which

1:23proved to be quite lucrative for him.

1:25>> Mhm. So, he was on 250 grand a year,

1:27basically. That's And it wasn't

1:29>> naval pension and 270 was all we

1:31officially know about.

1:32>> But that pension, was he Was he getting

1:34that?

1:34>> He was getting that from his time in the

1:35Royal Navy.

1:36>> Oh, right. For since he was what, 20

1:38something?

1:39>> Yeah, I mean, that that he was obviously

1:40in the Falklands War and everything

1:41else. So, 20,000 lb a year is what he

1:43got from that. I mean, that's peanuts.

1:45>> Mhm.

1:46>> Particularly when he's half supporting

1:48Sarah Ferguson.

1:49>> Mhm.

1:50>> Whose tendency to spend money is

1:51legendary.

1:52>> Still a good deal of money though, isn't

1:54it, for the average person?

1:56>> What, 20,000?

1:57>> Well,

1:57what, 270, yeah. Well, it is. I mean, he

2:00he he he used to live within his means

2:02now because the king, I think, has cut

2:04him off

2:05from uh that the the royal finances. Uh

2:08and I think that was done to try and

2:09force him out of um his property in

2:11Windsor.

2:12>> Mhm.

2:12>> Um and clearly cuz Charles wants to

2:15distance himself from Andrew and say,

2:17"Nothing to do with me, mate." Uh which

2:19is easier said than done, actually. We

2:21can go on to that if you like.

2:22>> Mhm.

2:23>> Um but, you know, he's clearly had money

2:25from other sources. I mean, let's face

2:27it, he had this chalet in Switzerland, a

2:29ski chalet, which cost um I think about

2:3315, from memory, 15 million pounds.

2:35Um where's that come from? How can you

2:37afford to do that? Sarah Ferguson bought

2:39a house in Mayfair for 4.2 million.

2:41Where are all these money pots of money

2:42coming from?

2:43>> And they don't just inherit money, the

2:45royals. They don't just sort of wake up

2:46or be born and have millions in their

2:49bank account.

2:49>> Well, I mean, I think that there's a

2:51tendency to make sure that when children

2:53are born,

2:54um trust funds were established for them

2:55to make sure they're not poor and keep

2:58them going. That's one thing that they

2:59do internally.

3:01Uh the royal family also has great

3:02investments in offshore uh businesses,

3:06uh sometimes in very dodgy regimes,

3:08uh which are frowned upon in terms of

3:11where money should go.

3:12And they say they get no particular

3:14benefit from that, in which case the

3:15question is why don't they just go down

3:16to Barclays and put it all into

3:17Barclays? Um they must get some benefit

3:19from it. And this came out with the

3:21Paradise Papers and so on, which showed

3:23some of the investments that that they

3:24had made. So, that's one source of of

3:26money they get,

3:27uh which helps them along the way.

3:29And of course, beyond that, uh we know

3:31that, for example, Andrew and Sarah

3:33Ferguson got money from Epstein.

3:34>> Ah. So, that's yeah, that's the big

3:36part, isn't it? And how how much was he

3:38getting? Do we know?

3:39>> Well, we don't know definitely. We know

3:40that she borrowed borrowed money and

3:42Ratcher Comers borrowed money uh from

3:44Epstein, uh never gave it back as far as

3:46we can tell. Uh we also know that um

3:49Andrew was involved in various deals

3:51with people around the world which

3:53sometimes

3:54involved Epstein.

3:56Uh and at least Epstein got the

3:58information back and we're to ask what

4:00what he gave Andrew by way of return.

4:03And of course that's the matter which

4:05the police are currently looking at. Uh

4:07the misuse of public money public

4:09office.

4:11Um and in fact that the allegation from

4:13the emails which came out in in the

4:15states

4:16was that Andrew was passing on highly

4:18sensitive financial information from the

4:21British government at a very very

4:22challenging time for this country at the

4:25time of the banking collapse in 2000 and

4:27eight, passing it to Epstein who would

4:29then pass on to his mates in the

4:31American banking industry. And as as I

4:33made clear in the article I wrote for

4:35the for the Daily Mail, if you pass on

4:37sensitive information to a a party

4:39outside this country,

4:41potentially damaging this country,

4:42there's only one word for that, treason.

4:45>> And is that one of is that Do people

4:47still go to prison for treason? Cuz that

4:48was the one that you can get executed

4:50for.

4:51>> Well, you could get executed until 1998

4:53um

4:54when the Labour government came in under

4:56Blair abolished the death penalty.

4:57Hadn't been used of course since um 1945

5:00when Lord Haw-Haw was executed, you

5:03know, the the traitor who um

5:05did radio broadcasts with the Nazis.

5:07He was the last one to be executed. But

5:09it still was on the statute book as was

5:11um I think piracy in the high seas. But

5:13all these offenses which were there

5:15historically were abolished in

5:171998. However, it's still a crime. Of

5:20course it's a crime,

5:21uh treason.

5:22>> With a long sentence?

5:23>> Yes, absolutely. And the the thing is

5:26that I understand the police are now

5:27looking at whether that would apply in

5:29Andrew's case

5:30because the offense which he has been

5:33interviewed for, arrested for,

5:36with this um uh maladministration in

5:38public office,

5:39um that's reasonably difficult to prove.

5:42Um treason's much less difficult to

5:44prove.

5:44>> Oh man. It's an interesting one, isn't

5:46it? Cuz like all all the newspaper uh

5:48the headlines were all about the the sex

5:50stuff and the

5:52abuse of of of, you know, underage girls

5:56and things on on Epstein Island. And

5:58what he's actually maybe going down for

6:00is is maybe Would you say it's less uh

6:03sensational in in sort of newspaper

6:05terms?

6:05>> Less sensational newspaper terms, but

6:07actually in some ways, and I don't wish

6:09to minimize the impact on the

6:11on on the uh on the women and girls who

6:13were exposed by Epstein.

6:14>> Mhm.

6:15>> But the fact is that uh Andrew's

6:17treatment of public money and the way he

6:19behaved as trade envoy was absolutely

6:21scandalous in my view.

6:22And uh I've said for a long time that

6:25the big scandal in the royal family is

6:26finance, not anything else.

6:29Uh and I was asking questions about this

6:31when I was a member of parliament back

6:32in the 20 years ago. And in my book, in

6:35fact, at the back, there's a

6:36parliamentary answer which lists all the

6:38countries Andrew had been to

6:40between 2001 and 2008 at that point uh

6:43as trade envoy. And what you see from

6:45that is a huge number of visits to a

6:47very small number of countries,

6:49all of which are in the Middle East or

6:50the Stans,

6:52all of which have dodgy regimes,

6:54and all of which are are are uh ones

6:56which value contact with the British

6:58royal family. Well, put two and two

7:00together, and what do you get?

7:01>> Bloody hell. It's crazy it went on that

7:03long. And were you Were you doing the

7:04FOIs and things as well? I know Andrew

7:06Lownie was doing those and wasn't

7:07getting any answers.

7:08>> No, Andrew did Andrew Lownie's done some

7:10fantastic work on FOI, but I mean, I

7:11have to say that the amount of money

7:12he's the amount of stuff he's got back

7:14in terms of answers is pretty pitiful,

7:16which shows the Freedom of Information

7:18Act doesn't work when it comes to the

7:20royal family. No, I was asking

7:21parliamentary questions, which are more

7:23difficult to evade than Freedom of

7:25Information questions. So, much more

7:27immediate, because you get an answer in

7:282 weeks or even less in a parliamentary

7:30question.

7:32And the fact of the matter is that and

7:33this is a great

7:35issue which Andrew and I share a view

7:36on,

7:38which is that the

7:39exemption, effectively exemption of the

7:41royal family from freedom of information

7:43is a disgrace.

7:45They are part of the public sector. They

7:47have public money. They perform public

7:49duties. And anybody who does those

7:52things, whether it's a local counselor,

7:54or whether it's a member of the

7:56head teacher in the school, or whether

7:58it's someone in the health service, or a

8:00government minister, they are

8:01accountable. And you can ask about those

8:03particular functions. There's an

8:05exemption for the royal family.

8:07And it's got worse over 20 years because

8:10back in 2000 or thereabouts, when the

8:12act was being put together,

8:14I asked the relevant minister

8:16um at the time in a parliamentary

8:17question um whether the royal family

8:19would be treated the same as any other

8:21bit of the public sector. And I was

8:22assured he would be.

8:24I was assured he would be. Well, that's

8:25all gone by the board. And at the same

8:27time as the Freedom of Information Act

8:30has widened in terms of

8:32what's caught by it. For example,

8:33Network Rail never used to be there and

8:35it's now been brought into the act.

8:38The only body to go in the opposite

8:39direction is the monarchy.

8:42And why has that happened? Because The

8:44Guardian

8:45pursued uh these so-called spider

8:48letters, which Charles had written to

8:50government ministers. Spider letters

8:52were in Charles quite improperly was

8:55writing to ministers

8:56making the highly political points and

8:58arguing for political positions. For

9:00example, in favor of fox hunting, in

9:02favor of um homeopathy,

9:05uh saying there wasn't enough money

9:06spent on this particular area of of

9:07defense. You know, absolutely outside

9:10what he should have been doing. It's

9:11meant to be non-political at all. And

9:13The Guardian

9:15got hold of these letters and wanted to

9:16publish them. And there was a big fight

9:18with the government as to whether or not

9:20they would have access to those letters.

9:21Well, The Guardian won. Well done, The

9:23Guardian. And we saw 30 or 40 of those

9:26letters finally published, which is when

9:27we know that uh Charles was making these

9:30uh improper invest improper uh

9:32suggestions to government. Well, what

9:34was the reaction of Charles at that

9:36point? Was it to say

9:38hands up, I'm sorry, I shouldn't have

9:40done that. I became too political. I

9:42won't do it again. No, his response was

9:44to go to the government and say

9:46I've been found out. Can we now change

9:48the Freedom of Information Act so people

9:50can't find out in future?

9:52I I in other words, I'll carry on, but I

9:53want it to be I want to be tech

9:55protected so people can't find out. And

9:57that's what the government did. And the

9:59the act was changed to give him and

10:01William blanket exemption from

10:04from information release. And it's not

10:06just those two.

10:08Let's think about

10:10Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor

10:12and his famous expedition to either a

10:15nightclub in London or the Pizza Express

10:17in Woking, depending on your point of

10:19view.

10:19>> Can I ask you a favor? Please subscribe.

10:2190% of you are not subscribed, so if you

10:23sub, it will help the channel and I'll

10:25keep making these clips.

This transcript was generated from the captions YouTube publishes for this video. Get the transcript of any YouTube video atfreeyoutubetranscribe.com: free, unlimited, no sign-up.