1 00:00:00,120 --> 00:00:04,000 It's extraordinary how much trouble they've got themselves 2 00:00:04,000 --> 00:00:07,800 into in this period of time. Winter fuel around what was 3 00:00:08,160 --> 00:00:11,400 looking at, and I think even Rachel herself might probably 4 00:00:11,640 --> 00:00:14,120 admit this now. No, it was a tactical disaster. 5 00:00:14,120 --> 00:00:17,440 The single biggest disaster? Rachel Reeves and Keir Starmer, 6 00:00:17,760 --> 00:00:21,280 can they be prized apart? Can he sack her if the spending 7 00:00:21,280 --> 00:00:22,200 review goes? Badly. 8 00:00:22,200 --> 00:00:24,240 Look, he can sack her. Really sack her. 9 00:00:24,240 --> 00:00:26,880 I don't think he will. Looking at Keir Starmer in a 10 00:00:26,880 --> 00:00:29,960 political setting, he is utterly ruthless. 11 00:00:30,520 --> 00:00:36,120 So will he sack Rachel Reeves? I think he's still quite loyal 12 00:00:36,120 --> 00:00:38,920 to her, but could he? Yes. 13 00:00:44,280 --> 00:00:46,040 Hello and welcome to the forecast. 14 00:00:46,080 --> 00:00:48,320 Does Labour have a week to save its government? 15 00:00:48,600 --> 00:00:50,960 Does Rachel Reeves have a week to save her job? 16 00:00:51,320 --> 00:00:54,040 Ahead of next Wednesday's Make or Break spending review, The 17 00:00:54,040 --> 00:00:56,840 Chance lays out and about splashing the cash on 18 00:00:56,840 --> 00:01:01,160 infrastructure projects in reform leaning areas, funnily 19 00:01:01,160 --> 00:01:03,320 enough. So why has it come to this? 20 00:01:03,320 --> 00:01:06,040 Why does it seem to have gone wrong for Keir Starmer and his 21 00:01:06,040 --> 00:01:08,120 new government surprisingly quickly? 22 00:01:08,440 --> 00:01:11,160 Well, one person who might have a clue is Anushka Astana, about 23 00:01:11,160 --> 00:01:15,080 to be Channel 4 News US editor but finishing off a 20 year 24 00:01:15,080 --> 00:01:18,200 stint at Westminster with an update to her book chronicling 25 00:01:18,200 --> 00:01:22,760 the inside story of Starmer's Labour taken as read out this 26 00:01:22,760 --> 00:01:24,760 week. The contrast with the early 27 00:01:24,760 --> 00:01:26,680 months of the last Labour government is stark. 28 00:01:26,680 --> 00:01:29,640 But given the dire economic circumstances, could Tony Blair 29 00:01:29,640 --> 00:01:31,160 and Gordon Brown have done any better? 30 00:01:31,440 --> 00:01:34,800 Well, one man who was there and is still here is the political 31 00:01:34,800 --> 00:01:37,440 commentator Andrew Rawnsley. He joins us as well. 32 00:01:37,440 --> 00:01:41,800 Welcome to you both, Anushka. Today, big numbers splashed 33 00:01:41,800 --> 00:01:44,280 about. Yeah, for buses, trams and all 34 00:01:44,280 --> 00:01:46,520 sorts of things, not in London, but outside London. 35 00:01:47,080 --> 00:01:48,840 And will that kind of stuff make a difference at all? 36 00:01:49,120 --> 00:01:52,280 Well, they're really hoping that this will be the narrative of 37 00:01:52,280 --> 00:01:55,960 next week and they are next week of next week when the spending 38 00:01:55,960 --> 00:01:58,480 review gets published. They want the amount that they 39 00:01:58,480 --> 00:02:01,480 are spending on capital to be the thing that we all focus on. 40 00:02:01,680 --> 00:02:04,520 They are very frustrated inside the Treasury because they keep 41 00:02:04,520 --> 00:02:08,360 getting attacked for refusing to change their fiscal rules, which 42 00:02:08,360 --> 00:02:11,760 basically means that they need to balance day-to-day spending. 43 00:02:12,080 --> 00:02:15,200 And they're frustrated because they said last year we tweaked 44 00:02:15,200 --> 00:02:18,680 our fiscal rules and we allowed ourselves to spend loads of 45 00:02:18,680 --> 00:02:21,040 money on capital all over the country and we're not getting 46 00:02:21,040 --> 00:02:23,480 any credit for it. And so the race has started 47 00:02:23,480 --> 00:02:26,800 today to try and make that the narrative of the next week. 48 00:02:27,000 --> 00:02:29,920 The problem they've got is that the decisions facing Rachel 49 00:02:29,920 --> 00:02:33,480 Reeves when it comes to the spending review, how much she 50 00:02:33,480 --> 00:02:36,560 spends on the NHS, whether and how quickly they're going to 51 00:02:36,560 --> 00:02:39,760 reach 3% on defence and what it means for all the other 52 00:02:39,760 --> 00:02:43,160 departments are. It's not where they use 53 00:02:43,160 --> 00:02:44,760 normally, but I would say ghastly. 54 00:02:45,040 --> 00:02:47,280 Ghastly. Ghastly because it just isn't 55 00:02:47,280 --> 00:02:49,840 enough. Whatever you do, it's really 56 00:02:49,840 --> 00:02:51,160 difficult. I've been looking at the figures 57 00:02:51,160 --> 00:02:55,960 this morning, you know, is she going to spend 3.4% increased on 58 00:02:55,960 --> 00:02:59,080 the NHS every year? To do that would be only 59 00:02:59,080 --> 00:03:00,880 sticking with the average so far. 60 00:03:01,240 --> 00:03:04,400 To do it would mean real terms cuts for all other departments. 61 00:03:04,400 --> 00:03:10,160 If you add in going to 3% on defence, then transport crime, 62 00:03:11,280 --> 00:03:15,600 you know everything to do with local government is going to be 63 00:03:15,600 --> 00:03:18,120 slashed or or going to be squeezed. 64 00:03:18,120 --> 00:03:19,440 They wouldn't like the word slashed. 65 00:03:19,440 --> 00:03:22,520 So when they wouldn't and they say it's not austerity, it. 66 00:03:22,520 --> 00:03:25,040 Is of course, it's because the overall numbers going up, yeah. 67 00:03:25,200 --> 00:03:28,400 But whether you call it slashed or salami, sliced or just 68 00:03:28,400 --> 00:03:30,720 chopped or amputated, I mean, it's it's awful. 69 00:03:30,840 --> 00:03:31,600 Yeah. So I want. 70 00:03:31,600 --> 00:03:34,480 So, given the fact that the numbers are so dire, what any 71 00:03:34,480 --> 00:03:37,800 good leader needs is a really good story to tell. 72 00:03:38,280 --> 00:03:41,000 Do they have a story to tell? Well, some of them do. 73 00:03:41,000 --> 00:03:44,520 I mean it's become a sort of consensus I think in our 74 00:03:44,520 --> 00:03:47,440 profession as journalists and among a lot of Labour MPs. 75 00:03:47,680 --> 00:03:50,680 What's the story? What's Starmer really stand for? 76 00:03:50,680 --> 00:03:53,400 What is Starmerism? In fact, there are things you 77 00:03:53,400 --> 00:03:56,840 can say they're doing, you know, whether you agree with them or 78 00:03:56,840 --> 00:03:59,320 not. They do have a story on the the 79 00:03:59,320 --> 00:04:04,440 big bill on employment rights, which is ending hire and refire 80 00:04:04,440 --> 00:04:08,360 and banning 0 contracts. And he's probably the biggest in 81 00:04:08,360 --> 00:04:10,880 advance for employment rights in a generation. 82 00:04:10,880 --> 00:04:14,040 They've hiked the minimum wage by more than they needed to and 83 00:04:14,080 --> 00:04:16,760 a big hike, particularly for younger workers. 84 00:04:17,040 --> 00:04:19,839 But are they very good at telling a story? 85 00:04:19,839 --> 00:04:23,960 I would agree with those who say no, they're not particularly. 86 00:04:23,960 --> 00:04:26,560 And that's one of the big contrasts with the New Labour is 87 00:04:26,800 --> 00:04:29,160 because whatever you thought of Tony Blair and in fact Gordon 88 00:04:29,160 --> 00:04:31,960 Brown in a rather more prudence for a purpose. 89 00:04:32,440 --> 00:04:36,240 So the way they were actually very good at conveying the big 90 00:04:36,240 --> 00:04:40,120 picture story and I think both the Prime Minister and the 91 00:04:40,120 --> 00:04:43,000 Chancellor who are the principal storytellers or supposed to be 92 00:04:43,000 --> 00:04:45,960 anyway of the government, neither of them are particularly 93 00:04:45,960 --> 00:04:47,680 good at portraying of issue, but. 94 00:04:47,840 --> 00:04:50,640 But why would so just remind us why Blair and Brown were better 95 00:04:50,640 --> 00:04:54,000 telling stories is they had more adjectives and adverbs in their 96 00:04:54,000 --> 00:04:56,880 coffers? Some of it's just that it also 97 00:04:56,880 --> 00:04:59,800 to be absolutely fair to this government, you always got to 98 00:04:59,800 --> 00:05:02,280 put it in context. They did the one. 99 00:05:02,440 --> 00:05:05,840 It is absolutely true. They inherited a pretty awful 100 00:05:06,120 --> 00:05:08,160 situation. I mean, compared with when new 101 00:05:08,280 --> 00:05:12,400 they became to power in 1997, you know, Tony Blair and Gordon 102 00:05:12,400 --> 00:05:14,920 Brown inherited a growing economy. 103 00:05:14,920 --> 00:05:17,760 The Tories have got thrown out nevertheless for other reasons, 104 00:05:17,760 --> 00:05:22,160 but and a growing economy, a pretty stable economy and a much 105 00:05:22,160 --> 00:05:24,600 lower national debt than we've got now. 106 00:05:25,040 --> 00:05:29,120 And also say compared with 2010, Gordon Brown bequeathed public 107 00:05:29,120 --> 00:05:33,280 services in the general public realm in a much better condition 108 00:05:33,280 --> 00:05:37,960 to David Cameron than they've received from the Conservatives. 109 00:05:37,960 --> 00:05:42,000 But they found quite quickly the current government that blaming 110 00:05:42,000 --> 00:05:45,720 the last lot only gets you so far and the the public's 111 00:05:45,720 --> 00:05:48,560 patience, unreasonably or not, is already running. 112 00:05:48,560 --> 00:05:50,880 Out because the public already knew that the old lot were to 113 00:05:50,880 --> 00:05:52,520 blame for the situation we were in. 114 00:05:52,640 --> 00:05:55,960 They looked at 2010 when they shouldn't have looked at 2010 115 00:05:55,960 --> 00:05:58,040 because in 2010 we had a hung parliament. 116 00:05:58,400 --> 00:06:01,160 The country wasn't sure whether or not they blame Labour. 117 00:06:01,440 --> 00:06:04,600 It's very clear if you look at 2024 that the Conservatives have 118 00:06:04,600 --> 00:06:06,200 been blamed. And what's extraordinary is if 119 00:06:06,200 --> 00:06:09,160 you look at the polling now, people and Keir Starmer and 120 00:06:09,160 --> 00:06:11,520 Rachel Reeves more than the last one. 121 00:06:11,520 --> 00:06:13,760 Which is astonishing. Already, and just on the telling 122 00:06:13,760 --> 00:06:17,160 of a story, I'm not entirely convinced that it's about a 123 00:06:17,160 --> 00:06:20,680 communication thing here. I think it's about the fact that 124 00:06:20,680 --> 00:06:23,480 the more I've delved into Keir Starmer, the more I'm convinced 125 00:06:24,560 --> 00:06:28,880 that he isn't an ideological politician, he is a pragmatic 126 00:06:28,880 --> 00:06:29,520 politician. But that. 127 00:06:29,520 --> 00:06:31,520 Doesn't necessarily mean that you can't tell a story well. 128 00:06:31,800 --> 00:06:35,080 It does mean that it's not easy to find out what he believes in, 129 00:06:35,280 --> 00:06:39,840 because what he believes in is doing the pragmatic thing at the 130 00:06:39,840 --> 00:06:42,040 right moment. In some ways, a bit like Rishi 131 00:06:42,040 --> 00:06:44,920 Sunak perhaps I see more parallels with with them. 132 00:06:44,920 --> 00:06:49,000 What I mean is if when he was in opposition, Keir Starmer was 133 00:06:49,000 --> 00:06:52,320 asked by Peter Hyman, who was an advisor to him, what do you 134 00:06:52,320 --> 00:06:54,040 stand for? What's your vision? 135 00:06:54,560 --> 00:06:56,280 And Keir Starmer says in response. 136 00:06:56,280 --> 00:06:59,160 I don't have AI, don't like that word vision. 137 00:06:59,240 --> 00:07:01,240 It's vague. I just don't like it. 138 00:07:01,240 --> 00:07:03,560 That's how they ended up with the missions, because he 139 00:07:03,560 --> 00:07:06,560 thought, OK, let's have concrete things that we're aiming towards 140 00:07:06,560 --> 00:07:09,280 that are our missions rather than Keir Starmer's vision. 141 00:07:09,560 --> 00:07:13,360 And the reality is in order to win elections, which is 142 00:07:13,360 --> 00:07:15,840 basically been the thing he's been very good at, he won the 143 00:07:15,840 --> 00:07:19,280 2020 leadership. He then won the 2024 general 144 00:07:19,280 --> 00:07:21,520 election. Keir Starmer has done what he 145 00:07:21,520 --> 00:07:23,880 believes he has to do to win over that electorate. 146 00:07:24,200 --> 00:07:27,480 And in in 2020, it was to tell them, I support Jeremy Corbyn, 147 00:07:27,720 --> 00:07:31,480 I'm Jeremy Corbyn in a suit, I'm really left wing, I believe in 148 00:07:31,480 --> 00:07:34,400 nationalizations across the board and so on. 149 00:07:34,520 --> 00:07:38,720 And in 2024, it was to tell them, even though they knew that 150 00:07:38,720 --> 00:07:40,920 the economic situation was pretty bad, although it was 151 00:07:40,920 --> 00:07:43,760 perhaps worse than they thought it was, to tell them we're going 152 00:07:43,760 --> 00:07:45,960 to be able to do it probably without raising taxes. 153 00:07:46,200 --> 00:07:48,800 So people don't know and they're trying to understand, who are 154 00:07:48,800 --> 00:07:50,120 you? And is the other problem for 155 00:07:51,240 --> 00:07:53,760 Stam at the moment is it we don't really care that much what 156 00:07:53,760 --> 00:07:56,000 stories the Tories have got because they really haven't got 157 00:07:56,000 --> 00:07:57,840 a clue what their story is. They're still trying to work 158 00:07:57,840 --> 00:07:59,280 that out and they're licking their wounds. 159 00:07:59,280 --> 00:08:01,440 They're so busy doing that they can't focus on the other. 160 00:08:01,680 --> 00:08:04,040 But there is one bloke who has got a story and that's Nigel 161 00:08:04,040 --> 00:08:06,960 Farage and they he seems to be the person they're most worried 162 00:08:06,960 --> 00:08:08,760 about, hence the announcements today. 163 00:08:08,800 --> 00:08:12,080 We don't know what he believes. It yes, at at the moment they 164 00:08:12,080 --> 00:08:14,000 are obviously they're quite right to be. 165 00:08:14,360 --> 00:08:17,320 Well, it's a good question because I mean you said right at 166 00:08:17,320 --> 00:08:20,760 the beginning, is this the the make or break or beginning or 167 00:08:20,760 --> 00:08:23,640 end of this government time purposes, I mean? 168 00:08:23,840 --> 00:08:26,000 For broadcasting, keep those purposes so. 169 00:08:26,040 --> 00:08:28,440 Now, now we've got. To the discussion here. 170 00:08:28,440 --> 00:08:30,000 We can do a few caveats. We can go. 171 00:08:30,040 --> 00:08:32,120 New we can do new. And conditions, I mean, there 172 00:08:32,120 --> 00:08:34,679 are still potentially more than four years. 173 00:08:34,679 --> 00:08:37,919 The next election doesn't legally have to happen until 174 00:08:37,919 --> 00:08:41,919 August 2029, by which time Donald Trump may or may not. 175 00:08:41,919 --> 00:08:44,880 If the Constitution applies, he will no longer be the US 176 00:08:44,880 --> 00:08:46,800 president. Russia could have made peace 177 00:08:46,800 --> 00:08:48,840 with Ukraine. Looks unlikely, but they could 178 00:08:48,840 --> 00:08:51,920 have done and then reinvaded them by, yeah, at this point 179 00:08:52,160 --> 00:08:54,520 that far ahead. So I wouldn't hang my hat too 180 00:08:54,520 --> 00:08:57,680 much, too much on what opinion polls are saying. 181 00:08:57,680 --> 00:09:00,880 But it's certainly true that Labour seems to have come to a 182 00:09:00,880 --> 00:09:04,920 strategic decision, rightly or wrongly, that they want Farage 183 00:09:04,960 --> 00:09:07,640 to be their main opponent. So extraordinarily, in some 184 00:09:07,640 --> 00:09:11,000 ways, you've got the Prime Minister talking down the Tories 185 00:09:11,000 --> 00:09:13,320 saying they're brain dead, They're heading for a a 186 00:09:13,360 --> 00:09:17,640 Bolivian. And now Farage is the it's me 187 00:09:17,640 --> 00:09:19,640 versus Farage. I think this is based on a 188 00:09:19,640 --> 00:09:24,000 calculation A, it helps squeezed dissolutioned progressive voters 189 00:09:24,000 --> 00:09:26,960 back into the Labour column ultimately, because whatever 190 00:09:26,960 --> 00:09:30,000 they think of Starmer, they prefer to have him in #10 than 191 00:09:30,000 --> 00:09:33,120 to have Farage there. I think it's also to sort of 192 00:09:33,240 --> 00:09:37,000 instill a bit of fear in the hope that that leads to unity in 193 00:09:37,000 --> 00:09:41,000 Labour's own ranks. And also to be fair, I mean, the 194 00:09:41,000 --> 00:09:44,760 day after he became Prime Minister, I think Starmer made a 195 00:09:44,760 --> 00:09:48,080 speech saying this is a challenge of our time, Radical 196 00:09:48,080 --> 00:09:50,000 right wing populism. And if you look at Christ, is 197 00:09:50,000 --> 00:09:53,280 there a fair West of Europe like Afd, Le Pen, all sorts of 198 00:09:53,280 --> 00:09:55,840 places? Why should Britain be be immune? 199 00:09:55,960 --> 00:10:00,080 But if but if taking on Nigel Farage means taking on some of 200 00:10:00,080 --> 00:10:02,800 his language, right. So the Island of Strangers, all 201 00:10:02,800 --> 00:10:05,360 that stuff that we had a couple of weeks ago, is that a danger? 202 00:10:05,360 --> 00:10:08,320 Well, that's an interesting one because that's a actually, if 203 00:10:08,320 --> 00:10:11,800 you read the actual speech, he goes out of his way talking 204 00:10:11,800 --> 00:10:15,280 about how, you know, migration has enriched this country in all 205 00:10:15,280 --> 00:10:18,040 sorts of ways. But of course, that's the bit 206 00:10:18,200 --> 00:10:20,880 everybody landed on. And no wonder, because it was an 207 00:10:21,160 --> 00:10:25,000 extraordinary thing for a Labour Prime Minister to say, I would 208 00:10:25,000 --> 00:10:28,040 say not a wise thing. I mean, he doubled down on it 209 00:10:28,120 --> 00:10:31,000 for the 48 hours afterwards, but he's not repeated it's. 210 00:10:31,000 --> 00:10:32,160 Let's be absolutely clear, right? 211 00:10:32,160 --> 00:10:35,280 First of all, they did not expect people to say it had 212 00:10:35,280 --> 00:10:39,120 echoes of Enoch Powell, Which? I think did they really not 213 00:10:39,120 --> 00:10:41,720 know? Quite naive because it's a very 214 00:10:41,720 --> 00:10:45,160 famous speech. I believe that they didn't know 215 00:10:45,240 --> 00:10:48,320 or that they didn't want that to be the thing that came out of 216 00:10:48,320 --> 00:10:51,080 it. I also believe that they put it 217 00:10:51,080 --> 00:10:53,800 in deliberately because they were worried about the story not 218 00:10:53,800 --> 00:10:57,000 remaining in the news cycle for a number of days, even if it. 219 00:10:57,000 --> 00:10:58,320 Remains there for the wrong reasons. 220 00:10:58,600 --> 00:11:01,240 I mean, people told me explicitly it's there, it's 221 00:11:01,240 --> 00:11:03,480 going to stay there. That's why they did it. 222 00:11:03,480 --> 00:11:06,120 But I think they are upset or certainly a lot of people in 223 00:11:06,120 --> 00:11:07,840 Downing Street are upset about the idea. 224 00:11:08,080 --> 00:11:11,400 And, and I'll tell you what, Labour MPs, including many who 225 00:11:11,400 --> 00:11:14,160 are from ethnic minorities, are distraught about it. 226 00:11:14,160 --> 00:11:16,040 Not just upset, distraught about it. 227 00:11:16,360 --> 00:11:19,440 And, and I get it, you know, of course there was lots else in 228 00:11:19,440 --> 00:11:21,720 that speech. But obviously you understand 229 00:11:21,960 --> 00:11:23,560 what you're doing in those situations. 230 00:11:23,560 --> 00:11:27,000 Now what what Labour MPs say to me is, yeah, but we can't have a 231 00:11:27,000 --> 00:11:30,200 reformed government next time. So we have to do what we can to 232 00:11:30,200 --> 00:11:32,240 stop that. And obviously we need to talk 233 00:11:32,240 --> 00:11:34,080 about immigration. That doesn't mean they're happy 234 00:11:34,080 --> 00:11:36,680 with the language, but we need to talk and they're obviously 235 00:11:36,680 --> 00:11:37,880 trying to find their way on that. 236 00:11:38,160 --> 00:11:39,680 But he's. Defined the battlefield. 237 00:11:39,680 --> 00:11:42,280 Nigel Farage on that issue is to find the battlefield for the 238 00:11:42,280 --> 00:11:43,960 Labour Party. And is that a wise thing to? 239 00:11:43,960 --> 00:11:47,080 I think the biggest risk here is, you know, obviously there is 240 00:11:47,080 --> 00:11:49,120 a problem in terms of the numbers on immigration. 241 00:11:49,320 --> 00:11:50,680 Obviously you need to reduce them. 242 00:11:50,680 --> 00:11:55,280 But if you look at polls, 85% of people say anything above 243 00:11:55,320 --> 00:11:58,520 100,000 people. Net migration is unacceptable. 244 00:11:58,760 --> 00:12:02,080 At the moment we're at over 400,000 with it having halved. 245 00:12:02,600 --> 00:12:06,480 I think they could end up as a hostage to fortune and also Keir 246 00:12:06,480 --> 00:12:09,120 Starmer is talking up an issue and therefore talking. 247 00:12:09,120 --> 00:12:11,080 Up it saying this is always the problem. 248 00:12:11,120 --> 00:12:13,040 I mean, and it's been a problem for years. 249 00:12:13,040 --> 00:12:15,000 Actually it was a problem with the Conservative leaders as 250 00:12:15,000 --> 00:12:17,160 well. Sealing vote, dealing with 251 00:12:17,160 --> 00:12:20,320 somebody like Nigel Farage, you know, if you don't address him 252 00:12:20,320 --> 00:12:24,200 on his his natural territory, he says, ah, they won't talk about 253 00:12:24,200 --> 00:12:26,560 it. Classic establishment elitist 254 00:12:26,560 --> 00:12:29,560 uni party plot. And then if you do try and go 255 00:12:29,560 --> 00:12:33,080 head to head with him, he says, oh, look, I'm setting the agenda 256 00:12:33,080 --> 00:12:35,240 now, I'm winning. And so do your critics within 257 00:12:35,240 --> 00:12:36,760 your own. But I mean, it's a really, 258 00:12:36,760 --> 00:12:39,560 really difficult one. Just on, just on immigration and 259 00:12:39,560 --> 00:12:42,120 no one talking about it. As you said, I've been doing 260 00:12:42,120 --> 00:12:45,240 this for 20 years. As far as I can tell, everyone 261 00:12:45,240 --> 00:12:48,320 has talked about immigration endlessly over that entire 20 262 00:12:48,360 --> 00:12:50,200 years. I look back at a Tony Blair 263 00:12:50,200 --> 00:12:52,920 speech, which was like, people say we can't talk about this. 264 00:12:52,920 --> 00:12:54,640 We can. It's, it's always been a thing. 265 00:12:54,640 --> 00:12:56,600 But just on Farage, can I just talk about him just for a 266 00:12:56,600 --> 00:13:00,160 minute? Because he has things that Keir 267 00:13:00,160 --> 00:13:03,600 Starmer struggles with somewhat, which is really appealing to 268 00:13:03,600 --> 00:13:07,400 voters. One of them is authenticity and 269 00:13:07,960 --> 00:13:11,400 you totally, totally know what he believes. 270 00:13:11,880 --> 00:13:15,360 And that is the thing they are grappling to try and achieve 271 00:13:15,360 --> 00:13:17,880 inside Downing St. and struggling with and their gamble 272 00:13:17,880 --> 00:13:20,760 is we don't. In the end what people will care 273 00:13:20,760 --> 00:13:22,280 about is that we deliver for them. 274 00:13:22,280 --> 00:13:24,640 And that's why you began with the capital spending on roads. 275 00:13:24,840 --> 00:13:27,760 That's the thinking there. They're thinking if we can make 276 00:13:27,760 --> 00:13:32,120 the NHS better then people will just one thing, then people will 277 00:13:32,120 --> 00:13:34,000 go for us. But on just on Nigel Farage, I 278 00:13:34,000 --> 00:13:36,600 interviewed him for the book and I just think there are some 279 00:13:36,600 --> 00:13:37,880 things which they should be really worried. 280 00:13:37,960 --> 00:13:40,160 Worried about which makes it different to what? 281 00:13:40,160 --> 00:13:41,440 Farage should be worried about or Labour. 282 00:13:41,440 --> 00:13:44,040 Labour should be worried, but people who do not want Nigel 283 00:13:44,040 --> 00:13:46,160 Farage to be the next Prime Minister should be worried about 284 00:13:46,440 --> 00:13:50,160 which was that when I spoke to him he was thinking so 285 00:13:50,160 --> 00:13:53,960 strategically and organizationally about how you 286 00:13:53,960 --> 00:13:55,840 crack our first past the post system. 287 00:13:56,080 --> 00:14:00,440 UKIP did very well in local and European elections in 2013 and 288 00:14:00,440 --> 00:14:05,120 14 and then only got 1 MP. Reform have reached a completely 289 00:14:05,120 --> 00:14:08,280 different tipping point. They got 32% of the to vote in 290 00:14:08,280 --> 00:14:11,760 local elections and translated that into 40 plus percent of 291 00:14:11,760 --> 00:14:14,920 seats. And when I asked Nigel Farage 292 00:14:14,920 --> 00:14:17,800 what he was thinking about, this was before any of this, he was 293 00:14:17,800 --> 00:14:21,760 looking back to Paddy Ashdown in the 1990s and he was saying, I'm 294 00:14:21,760 --> 00:14:25,600 really interested in what he did organizationally to get the Lib 295 00:14:25,600 --> 00:14:28,440 Dems to start to win more seats in our system. 296 00:14:28,440 --> 00:14:30,720 Well, that's why he wants count. I mean, he's never been very 297 00:14:30,720 --> 00:14:33,440 interested in local government previously, but that's really, 298 00:14:33,440 --> 00:14:37,560 he's actually in some ways mirroring himself with a very 299 00:14:37,560 --> 00:14:40,360 different an ideology obviously on the Lib Dems. 300 00:14:40,360 --> 00:14:43,560 So if you build up a counsellor base that builds up your 301 00:14:43,560 --> 00:14:48,000 activist base, then you use them as a beachhead into Parliament. 302 00:14:48,000 --> 00:14:49,880 But we shouldn't get too carried away. 303 00:14:49,880 --> 00:14:52,720 I'm a bit cautious by getting too carried away with for artism 304 00:14:53,000 --> 00:14:55,600 because they're we don't know quite what it is. 305 00:14:55,600 --> 00:14:59,440 But there is a ceiling to his support because there are people 306 00:14:59,640 --> 00:15:02,240 and there are some people who say, although we appear to live 307 00:15:02,240 --> 00:15:05,480 in this multi party politics, say actually, and I think this 308 00:15:05,480 --> 00:15:08,400 is part of Labour's long term calculation will be a very 309 00:15:08,400 --> 00:15:10,960 binary election. If Labour has its way, it'll be 310 00:15:10,960 --> 00:15:13,880 do you want Starmer? If you don't, you better vote 311 00:15:13,880 --> 00:15:16,000 tactically for Labour where it's going to make a difference. 312 00:15:16,360 --> 00:15:20,560 Or do you want Farage or maybe Farage Coalition, right. 313 00:15:20,640 --> 00:15:22,000 You really? Want Marine Le Pen to be? 314 00:15:22,000 --> 00:15:23,960 I mean, it has, it's sort of worked. 315 00:15:23,960 --> 00:15:26,440 It even worked in his disastrous election. 316 00:15:26,440 --> 00:15:30,040 The risk the disastrous election Macro most recently called that. 317 00:15:30,040 --> 00:15:32,600 Actually, if you say to people that's the alternative, you may 318 00:15:32,600 --> 00:15:34,800 not like me, but they're a lot worse, you better vote the. 319 00:15:34,840 --> 00:15:36,200 Risk. The risk though, and This is why 320 00:15:36,200 --> 00:15:38,760 I asked you whether it was reckless, is that you talk down 321 00:15:38,760 --> 00:15:41,800 the Conservatives. The Conservatives are killed off 322 00:15:41,920 --> 00:15:44,360 in the idea that you're putting forward. 323 00:15:44,560 --> 00:15:49,120 So you create reform as the alternative, whilst there is for 324 00:15:49,120 --> 00:15:52,800 Labour an opportunity in the fact that the right is split and 325 00:15:52,800 --> 00:15:57,560 if the Conservatives remain with some strength, then reform and 326 00:15:57,560 --> 00:15:59,480 Conservatives. I don't think they are going to, 327 00:15:59,560 --> 00:16:01,960 I don't think they are going to obliterate the Tories in the 328 00:16:01,960 --> 00:16:05,160 end. But this gets back to the to the 329 00:16:05,160 --> 00:16:07,760 original, to the starting point of this conversation is, you 330 00:16:07,760 --> 00:16:09,760 know, where does their soul reside? 331 00:16:09,760 --> 00:16:12,960 So I can't think, I can't remember a single government 332 00:16:12,960 --> 00:16:15,280 that has managed to upset, you know, poor people and rich 333 00:16:15,280 --> 00:16:17,240 people. I don't know if that's a recent 334 00:16:17,240 --> 00:16:18,560 thing. I mean, if there is such a 335 00:16:18,560 --> 00:16:19,920 thing. But it's amazing how they've 336 00:16:19,920 --> 00:16:22,840 upset people with tons of money who they then try to win back. 337 00:16:22,840 --> 00:16:24,920 You know, we want rich people to invest in Britain, but we just, 338 00:16:25,240 --> 00:16:29,000 you know, encourage so many of them to to go to Italy or to the 339 00:16:29,000 --> 00:16:31,680 United States or elsewhere. And then the winter fuel 340 00:16:31,680 --> 00:16:33,800 allowance as well. I mean, this is a a disastrous 341 00:16:33,800 --> 00:16:36,600 bit of even though it makes economic sense, there's an 342 00:16:36,600 --> 00:16:38,680 argument for. It well the winter fuel 343 00:16:38,680 --> 00:16:42,600 allowance what was looking back and I think even Rachel herself 344 00:16:42,600 --> 00:16:45,960 might probably admit this now No, it was a tactical disaster 345 00:16:45,960 --> 00:16:50,160 in that Max it will save the government about 1.4 billion a. 346 00:16:50,160 --> 00:16:51,840 Year, but look what a cost of political. 347 00:16:51,840 --> 00:16:54,440 Well, it's cost them in terms of political capital, and now 348 00:16:54,440 --> 00:16:56,240 they're going to have to reverse on it anyway. 349 00:16:56,240 --> 00:16:59,560 Who knows what savings they'll end up with in the end. 350 00:16:59,560 --> 00:17:01,160 There would have been better ways to and you've. 351 00:17:01,320 --> 00:17:03,120 Got lots of detail about this in your book I mean. 352 00:17:03,160 --> 00:17:04,520 It's the single biggest disaster. 353 00:17:04,520 --> 00:17:06,480 Right. So, so tell us how this came to 354 00:17:06,480 --> 00:17:07,760 be. And, you know, the kind of 355 00:17:07,760 --> 00:17:11,040 entrance of how the government started to work or not work, you 356 00:17:11,040 --> 00:17:14,319 know, flush with victory in the initial weeks and months is 357 00:17:14,319 --> 00:17:17,040 really fascinating. Yeah, so basically Rachel Reeves 358 00:17:17,040 --> 00:17:20,240 and her team get into the Treasury on the Friday after the 359 00:17:20,240 --> 00:17:23,480 election victory. They're absolutely knackered, as 360 00:17:23,480 --> 00:17:26,680 is everyone across government. So many people said to me, this 361 00:17:26,680 --> 00:17:29,040 is not a sensible way to go into government where people 362 00:17:29,040 --> 00:17:32,000 basically start running the country on no sleep whatsoever. 363 00:17:32,240 --> 00:17:36,920 They get pulled into a room to be shown the full disaster of 364 00:17:36,920 --> 00:17:39,400 the economic situation. Although I should say sources 365 00:17:39,400 --> 00:17:41,800 tell me they were very much offered to be shown that before 366 00:17:41,800 --> 00:17:44,520 the election. Rachel Reeves team say no, no, 367 00:17:44,520 --> 00:17:46,360 we were only ever told broad brush. 368 00:17:46,800 --> 00:17:49,360 Sources say to me they wanted them in the room. 369 00:17:49,440 --> 00:17:51,920 Rachel Reeves herself only went to one Access talk. 370 00:17:52,760 --> 00:17:54,880 There were many others that she could have attended. 371 00:17:54,880 --> 00:17:56,320 So maybe they didn't want to know. 372 00:17:56,320 --> 00:17:58,400 Maybe they didn't want to. Know because then when Matt say 373 00:17:58,400 --> 00:18:01,920 it's interviewing Rachel Reeves and she can honestly say, well, 374 00:18:01,920 --> 00:18:03,520 I think it's bad. And then after the election. 375 00:18:03,520 --> 00:18:05,040 So it's much worse than I thought. 376 00:18:05,040 --> 00:18:07,400 I think that I actually am less cynical than you on that, 377 00:18:07,400 --> 00:18:09,200 Andrew. I think that they took advice 378 00:18:09,200 --> 00:18:12,280 apparently from Gordon Brown, who himself said it's not that 379 00:18:12,320 --> 00:18:14,720 useful for the shadow chancellor to be at loads of access talks 380 00:18:15,040 --> 00:18:18,320 and they were so focused on winning the election that they 381 00:18:18,320 --> 00:18:21,440 didn't put enough into planning. So much so that every permanent 382 00:18:21,440 --> 00:18:26,360 secretary met in Ditchley Park in the east of 2024 to discuss 383 00:18:26,360 --> 00:18:29,560 how the access talks were were going on and the overwhelming 384 00:18:29,560 --> 00:18:32,280 conclusion was they were wholly under prepared for government. 385 00:18:32,920 --> 00:18:35,120 They did have quite a lot of time in opposition to think 386 00:18:35,120 --> 00:18:37,600 about what they would do and the opinion polls are pointing in 387 00:18:37,600 --> 00:18:39,880 One Direction. It's true and opinion polls 388 00:18:39,880 --> 00:18:41,680 saying you're going to become the government. 389 00:18:42,600 --> 00:18:45,400 It's a terrible mistake. I mean, those in there would 390 00:18:45,400 --> 00:18:48,360 blame Sue Grey who had been brought in, they would say, to 391 00:18:48,360 --> 00:18:51,120 prepare for government her her allies. 392 00:18:51,160 --> 00:18:52,280 Well. Yeah, no. 393 00:18:52,280 --> 00:18:54,800 Well, we'll come that. But her allies would suggest 394 00:18:54,800 --> 00:18:58,920 that she wasn't able to actually focus them in on it because they 395 00:18:58,920 --> 00:19:01,240 were so obsessed with winning and getting over the line that 396 00:19:01,240 --> 00:19:03,560 they weren't willing to do the preparatory that that their 397 00:19:03,560 --> 00:19:06,320 attitude was similar to the 2020 Labour leadership. 398 00:19:06,680 --> 00:19:09,120 We need to win and then we'll fix the country. 399 00:19:09,240 --> 00:19:10,920 We need to win, then we'll fix the party. 400 00:19:11,600 --> 00:19:13,480 But obviously to them guys, you're going to win this 401 00:19:13,480 --> 00:19:15,680 election, but not because you're necessarily winning because that 402 00:19:15,680 --> 00:19:17,160 lot that are currently in power are really. 403 00:19:17,160 --> 00:19:19,240 Good at losing. In hindsight, I definitely think 404 00:19:19,240 --> 00:19:21,560 they would have won if they'd been a bit more honest about 405 00:19:21,680 --> 00:19:23,480 some of the decisions they were about to make. 406 00:19:23,720 --> 00:19:25,640 But I think that is easy with hindsight. 407 00:19:25,840 --> 00:19:28,600 And I think at the time they genuinely believed that it would 408 00:19:28,600 --> 00:19:31,720 massively reduce the majority. And if it did, they would have a 409 00:19:31,720 --> 00:19:34,240 lot less political stability when they came into power. 410 00:19:34,400 --> 00:19:37,720 So their gamble was we want political stability, that the 411 00:19:37,720 --> 00:19:40,040 thing that has happened is they've lost public trust. 412 00:19:40,320 --> 00:19:42,760 But on Winter Fuel, they're brought into a room. 413 00:19:42,880 --> 00:19:45,400 Apparently they're sitting there and the marching band is going 414 00:19:45,440 --> 00:19:48,360 past outside preparing for the State opening of Parliament in 415 00:19:48,360 --> 00:19:50,040 Rachel Reid. Where there are only urinals 416 00:19:50,040 --> 00:19:51,440 apparently. Urinal, yeah. 417 00:19:51,520 --> 00:19:52,560 So that. Was an interesting detail 418 00:19:53,440 --> 00:19:55,920 because 'cause it's assumed that no one would ever have that job. 419 00:19:56,040 --> 00:19:58,840 Chancellors have only ever been men, and there is, yeah, a 420 00:19:58,840 --> 00:20:00,920 moment where they're all stood. Around, but you're still there, 421 00:20:00,920 --> 00:20:02,080 though isn't? It yeah, I think they. 422 00:20:02,080 --> 00:20:04,960 Spanish you want to get rid of it, but they can't be in the. 423 00:20:04,960 --> 00:20:06,640 End. Probably a protected or 424 00:20:06,640 --> 00:20:07,720 enlisted. Heroin. 425 00:20:08,800 --> 00:20:10,760 Ready, Ready for the next man who takes over. 426 00:20:11,880 --> 00:20:14,560 I obviously not suggesting that's what will happen, not for 427 00:20:14,560 --> 00:20:17,480 once. And they, they're told these, 428 00:20:17,480 --> 00:20:19,920 this is the situation, things are dire and actually the 429 00:20:19,920 --> 00:20:22,640 markets need a signal that there's going to be stability. 430 00:20:22,760 --> 00:20:24,600 Here are the options of things you can do. 431 00:20:24,840 --> 00:20:30,040 And on that card was take away winter fuel payments which lots 432 00:20:30,040 --> 00:20:32,000 of civil servants have wanted to do for a long time. 433 00:20:32,320 --> 00:20:35,760 On it was also get rid of free school meals for infant age 434 00:20:35,760 --> 00:20:39,240 children, which I think the attitude was no way we can't do 435 00:20:39,240 --> 00:20:42,040 that maybe post Marcus Rashford and so on. 436 00:20:42,280 --> 00:20:45,200 And there were things like cut all the non core budget from 437 00:20:45,200 --> 00:20:48,800 schools so sports, music and so on on the list. 438 00:20:48,840 --> 00:20:51,720 They thought the least bad thing was to do winter fuel. 439 00:20:52,000 --> 00:20:54,640 And as you say there is a principal argument that 440 00:20:54,640 --> 00:20:56,320 millionaires shouldn't be getting this. 441 00:20:56,520 --> 00:21:00,560 The problem was never the principal, it was the execution 442 00:21:00,760 --> 00:21:03,240 because the means test was terrible. 443 00:21:03,520 --> 00:21:06,880 And actually, from what I've heard, Rachel Reeves tells the 444 00:21:07,320 --> 00:21:10,400 welfare secretary Liz Kendall, only the weekend before that 445 00:21:10,400 --> 00:21:13,240 this is happening and letters are coming in from Liz Kendall 446 00:21:13,240 --> 00:21:16,840 warning there are going to be worthy pensioners who lose out 447 00:21:16,840 --> 00:21:20,000 here. So it was known that this was 448 00:21:20,000 --> 00:21:22,120 going to be a problem, but they thought it was too expensive to 449 00:21:22,120 --> 00:21:24,280 do any other means test. I mean, I think the other 450 00:21:24,280 --> 00:21:27,600 interesting thing about this whole thing is how disengaged 451 00:21:27,680 --> 00:21:33,440 aged #10 I mean, you know, my sort of specialist area of New 452 00:21:33,440 --> 00:21:36,840 Labour, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown had constant battles with 453 00:21:36,840 --> 00:21:40,480 Gordon often concealing things from Tony to the last minute on 454 00:21:40,480 --> 00:21:42,720 the ground. So #10 would leak them or 455 00:21:42,720 --> 00:21:44,600 object. But Tony Blair was at least 456 00:21:44,600 --> 00:21:46,080 quite interested in what's going. 457 00:21:46,080 --> 00:21:49,840 I think Kia Kia Stara made an almost deliberate decision and 458 00:21:49,840 --> 00:21:52,960 some people find this admirable. Rachel Reeves is the chancellor 459 00:21:52,960 --> 00:21:55,680 and broadly she should be allowed to get on with it. 460 00:21:55,680 --> 00:21:59,880 But a more political #10 end of that period and a more political 461 00:21:59,880 --> 00:22:02,840 engaged Prime Minister would surely have said, hold on a 462 00:22:02,840 --> 00:22:04,840 minute, this is a very good idea it. 463 00:22:04,840 --> 00:22:07,280 Was dysfunctional because they had this situation where you had 464 00:22:07,560 --> 00:22:10,440 Sue Gray as chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney as chief 465 00:22:10,440 --> 00:22:13,160 political adviser. The political team, I don't 466 00:22:13,160 --> 00:22:15,120 think knew about this until the last minute. 467 00:22:15,360 --> 00:22:18,360 But extraordinarily, someone told me the only thing Keir 468 00:22:18,360 --> 00:22:21,400 Starmer was shown was the scorecard and he nodded it 469 00:22:21,400 --> 00:22:22,800 through. It and then come back to one 470 00:22:22,800 --> 00:22:24,520 sorry, just say does it come back to 1? 471 00:22:24,520 --> 00:22:27,880 Fundamental problem with Keir Starmer is that you know, he's 472 00:22:27,880 --> 00:22:29,720 smart. That's what everyone tells me. 473 00:22:29,760 --> 00:22:31,920 He's got integrity. That's what everyone, even the 474 00:22:31,920 --> 00:22:35,240 people don't like him say. He's not a political animal. 475 00:22:35,560 --> 00:22:38,000 He doesn't do retail politics. You watch him at a party 476 00:22:38,000 --> 00:22:40,320 conference, Is he schmoozing with all the MPs? 477 00:22:40,320 --> 00:22:43,120 Is he having a pint? No, there's that. 478 00:22:43,120 --> 00:22:44,800 Great. Story when he was meeting Trump 479 00:22:45,160 --> 00:22:47,760 you know before Trump became president with with David Lammy 480 00:22:48,320 --> 00:22:50,720 that they were offered chicken in Trump Tower and he says I 481 00:22:50,720 --> 00:22:53,440 don't eat chicken and pushed it away I mean I would have for the 482 00:22:53,440 --> 00:22:55,520 sake of this special relationship I would have 483 00:22:55,600 --> 00:22:57,960 swallowed that chicken you would have eaten I wouldn't eat the 484 00:22:57,960 --> 00:23:00,400 chicken but then David Lammy apparently said I'll have yours 485 00:23:00,600 --> 00:23:02,080 that's. That's good Starmer's value. 486 00:23:02,080 --> 00:23:03,840 Good, good of Lanny to take one for the. 487 00:23:03,840 --> 00:23:05,320 Team it it. It's true. 488 00:23:05,320 --> 00:23:06,640 I mean I. See Vegetarian. 489 00:23:06,800 --> 00:23:10,000 Too, I think one of actually Starmer's best moments. 490 00:23:10,000 --> 00:23:12,320 Let's try and find something to give him a foreign policy. 491 00:23:12,640 --> 00:23:15,160 Well, he's actually been given the Yang got much of A foreign 492 00:23:15,160 --> 00:23:16,840 policy background. He's been good on that. 493 00:23:16,840 --> 00:23:19,640 And, and, and weirdly, even though he's the least sort of 494 00:23:19,840 --> 00:23:23,720 MAGA crowd guy you could imagine, I mean, him and, and 495 00:23:23,920 --> 00:23:26,360 Donald Trump are clearly not twins separated a bird. 496 00:23:26,680 --> 00:23:30,920 He seems to have found a way of getting on friendly terms. 497 00:23:30,920 --> 00:23:33,040 You know why? Because Donald Trump loves the 498 00:23:33,040 --> 00:23:34,840 title. I interviewed John Bolton last 499 00:23:34,880 --> 00:23:37,920 year, who hates Trump, you know, with a passion. 500 00:23:38,080 --> 00:23:40,680 What he did say is that he really likes Keir Starmer, 501 00:23:40,920 --> 00:23:43,720 although he did call him Keith for quite a long time, because 502 00:23:43,720 --> 00:23:45,760 he's a Sir. And that was it. 503 00:23:45,800 --> 00:23:46,880 And I thought, are you kidding me, right. 504 00:23:46,880 --> 00:23:49,680 He said no, it's true, he's a Sir and and Trump loves the 505 00:23:49,680 --> 00:23:51,560 title. And also he and he won a big. 506 00:23:51,600 --> 00:23:53,280 Win and he's a win and he's a win as well. 507 00:23:53,440 --> 00:23:55,400 Well, apparently there's this phone call between them. 508 00:23:55,400 --> 00:23:58,600 You know, Donald Trump had the assassination attempt. 509 00:23:58,960 --> 00:24:02,600 And I think the next day, Keir Starmer rings to say, I hope 510 00:24:02,600 --> 00:24:04,480 you're OK. You know, how are you? 511 00:24:04,480 --> 00:24:07,520 And apparently Trump's like none of that, None of that, according 512 00:24:07,520 --> 00:24:09,240 to people who may have heard this phone call. 513 00:24:09,480 --> 00:24:12,520 But he's like, you got a massive majority. 514 00:24:12,520 --> 00:24:14,280 You're a winner, man. You're a winner. 515 00:24:14,480 --> 00:24:17,920 And it was always the case that they were kind of going to go 516 00:24:17,960 --> 00:24:18,920 on. And I, I think they're really 517 00:24:18,920 --> 00:24:21,400 happy with the way he's done on foreign policy, although some 518 00:24:21,400 --> 00:24:24,120 would say it's a bit ingratiating, although I do can. 519 00:24:24,120 --> 00:24:27,600 I met, there's the relationship with Elon Musk was something 520 00:24:27,600 --> 00:24:31,560 that I found really fascinating because, and this is where you 521 00:24:31,560 --> 00:24:34,320 see Keir Starmer's values. Actually, he comes back. 522 00:24:34,960 --> 00:24:38,000 He's, you know, they're preparing for Trump and seeing 523 00:24:38,000 --> 00:24:40,360 Trump and they feel it's all going quite positive. 524 00:24:40,360 --> 00:24:42,560 And then Elon Musk suddenly starts attacking him. 525 00:24:42,840 --> 00:24:44,840 I think it was on the 2nd of January. 526 00:24:44,840 --> 00:24:47,720 I'd just come back to work. He's attacking him about 527 00:24:47,720 --> 00:24:50,000 grooming gang. But it was absolutely 528 00:24:50,000 --> 00:24:52,640 astonishing. And behind the scenes they're 529 00:24:52,640 --> 00:24:56,840 planning for a speech I think on elective targets in the NHS, 530 00:24:57,160 --> 00:25:00,240 which is going to happen on the Monday after New Year. 531 00:25:00,520 --> 00:25:02,960 And they just can't. They're just kind of completely 532 00:25:02,960 --> 00:25:05,000 taken about by this in Downing St. and they don't know what to 533 00:25:05,000 --> 00:25:06,000 do. He's the richest guy in the 534 00:25:06,000 --> 00:25:08,000 world. He's also incredibly at this 535 00:25:08,000 --> 00:25:11,720 stage, close to Donald Trump and he's attacking Jess Phillips, 536 00:25:11,720 --> 00:25:14,480 the Labour MP, really badly. And apparently behind the 537 00:25:14,480 --> 00:25:16,920 scenes, Keir Starmer says the attacks are ethic being 538 00:25:16,960 --> 00:25:19,880 outrageous, right? And actually says we've got to 539 00:25:19,880 --> 00:25:21,080 come back on this. And then he did. 540 00:25:21,080 --> 00:25:23,720 And, and he did. And I have to say on that Monday 541 00:25:23,960 --> 00:25:28,000 in his, you know, they knew it would wipe the NHS stuff off the 542 00:25:28,000 --> 00:25:30,440 front page. He did come out quite hard 543 00:25:30,440 --> 00:25:32,480 against Elon. See the other example I was 544 00:25:32,480 --> 00:25:35,400 gonna give was in in the summer, which was quite soon after he 545 00:25:35,400 --> 00:25:38,440 become Prime Minister. So there's some are riots in the 546 00:25:38,440 --> 00:25:42,600 wake of the yeah, he did well, murders. 547 00:25:42,600 --> 00:25:46,080 He did very well because I think he'd sort of been there before 548 00:25:46,080 --> 00:25:50,200 as DPP similar disorder. He sort of knew how to respond 549 00:25:50,800 --> 00:25:52,240 very tough. He thought we'd got to get a 550 00:25:52,240 --> 00:25:56,320 grip on this and very quickly because he went his in natural 551 00:25:56,320 --> 00:25:58,600 element. Other areas where he's not sure 552 00:25:58,600 --> 00:26:01,760 what instinctively he thinks, which means the rest of the 553 00:26:01,760 --> 00:26:05,400 machine can't say what does the Prime Minister think? 554 00:26:05,400 --> 00:26:08,120 And we'll work towards that. We'd better wait until we hear 555 00:26:08,120 --> 00:26:11,360 from #10 what he wants to do. And the other thing I would say 556 00:26:11,360 --> 00:26:13,920 where your point, Matt, he's not very political. 557 00:26:14,240 --> 00:26:16,800 He can be. But when he U turns, it's 558 00:26:16,800 --> 00:26:19,640 excruciatingly slowly. Just going back to Winterfield 559 00:26:19,640 --> 00:26:21,280 again. Once you've decided you're going 560 00:26:21,280 --> 00:26:24,120 to U-turn, you have to be quick and clean about it. 561 00:26:24,160 --> 00:26:26,960 You say which pensioners are going to get it back and are 562 00:26:26,960 --> 00:26:29,520 they going to get it back this winter, Rather than say, well, 563 00:26:29,520 --> 00:26:31,560 OK, we're going to have another look at it, but I can't quite 564 00:26:31,560 --> 00:26:36,080 tell you what we're going to do. Yeah, because then you're still 565 00:26:36,080 --> 00:26:38,640 looking a bit floundry. By the way, they thought about U 566 00:26:38,640 --> 00:26:42,720 turning in the summer, last summer in August, so not long 567 00:26:42,720 --> 00:26:45,560 after they've done it. And someone who was in there 568 00:26:45,560 --> 00:26:48,040 described it to me like a hurricane in Downing St. 569 00:26:48,040 --> 00:26:50,440 They were so worried about it and they had all these meetings 570 00:26:50,720 --> 00:26:53,880 and apparently the view was especially from the Treasury, we 571 00:26:53,880 --> 00:26:57,520 cannot U-turn on this because it'll look like we will flex on 572 00:26:57,560 --> 00:27:00,000 any pressure. And the attitude that was 573 00:27:00,000 --> 00:27:02,800 described to me by someone as basically like fight, fight, 574 00:27:02,800 --> 00:27:05,040 fight. And they even describe Rachel 575 00:27:05,040 --> 00:27:05,760 Royds going. To. 576 00:27:05,760 --> 00:27:08,040 See MP. They called her a boxer in the 577 00:27:08,040 --> 00:27:11,160 ring and someone said to me even more recently, not long before 578 00:27:11,160 --> 00:27:12,880 they were starting to decide to U-turn. 579 00:27:13,160 --> 00:27:15,040 You can't U-turn on a decision like that. 580 00:27:15,200 --> 00:27:17,800 I yeah, that's this obsession about clarity and not U-turn. 581 00:27:17,800 --> 00:27:19,840 I think it's completely overrated by politicians. 582 00:27:20,040 --> 00:27:22,840 And when I end on a couple of quick fire questions, Rachel 583 00:27:22,840 --> 00:27:26,120 Reeves and Keir Starmer, can they be prized apart? 584 00:27:26,120 --> 00:27:28,960 Can he sack her if the spending review goes bad? 585 00:27:28,960 --> 00:27:30,840 Look, look, he can sack her. Really. 586 00:27:31,000 --> 00:27:33,880 I don't think he will because, well, A, as they lash to the 587 00:27:33,880 --> 00:27:37,480 same mass, broadly her economic policy is his economic policy, 588 00:27:37,800 --> 00:27:40,920 and B, who would he appoint? Who would actually run a 589 00:27:40,960 --> 00:27:43,360 different policy? I mean, any of the names rooted 590 00:27:43,360 --> 00:27:47,000 about like Pat McFadden would broadly run the same policy, 591 00:27:47,000 --> 00:27:50,520 partly because actually, you know, they are walking quite a 592 00:27:50,520 --> 00:27:52,480 narrow path between. I know they've got a lot of 593 00:27:52,480 --> 00:27:55,920 angry voters, but they've also got pretty angsty markets and 594 00:27:56,320 --> 00:28:00,520 the the yield on a 10 year UK gilt is currently higher than it 595 00:28:00,520 --> 00:28:03,960 was during the Liz Trust madness for slightly different reasons. 596 00:28:03,960 --> 00:28:07,040 But when whenever they don't sweat, they're sweating for a 597 00:28:07,040 --> 00:28:09,680 reason and they have fiscal rules for a reason. 598 00:28:09,800 --> 00:28:12,440 Anushka, the spending review, can it make a big diff? 599 00:28:12,440 --> 00:28:15,400 Can it in theory make a big difference next week on the 600 00:28:15,400 --> 00:28:17,200 positive side and the negative side? 601 00:28:17,440 --> 00:28:20,160 Well, if they can get their narrative going about the amount 602 00:28:20,160 --> 00:28:22,680 of capital spending, they will hope that it they can. 603 00:28:22,680 --> 00:28:25,000 But I do think the decisions they're going to have to make 604 00:28:25,440 --> 00:28:29,160 are incredibly difficult. The thing I think that they're 605 00:28:29,160 --> 00:28:31,680 not going to back down on, but I think it's a problem for them, 606 00:28:31,760 --> 00:28:34,200 is the welfare changes. I've spent a lot of time around 607 00:28:34,200 --> 00:28:35,920 the country talking to people about those. 608 00:28:36,160 --> 00:28:38,760 They think they're popular with reform voters. 609 00:28:39,080 --> 00:28:42,640 I was in Hartlepool the other week talking to the local MP 610 00:28:42,640 --> 00:28:43,840 who's going to vote against them. 611 00:28:44,400 --> 00:28:47,280 Quite loyal but going to vote against them in part because 612 00:28:47,400 --> 00:28:50,640 they've just had a by election in a council seat safe. 613 00:28:50,640 --> 00:28:54,200 Labour area lost a reform form and they said welfare was coming 614 00:28:54,200 --> 00:28:57,080 up continuously on the doorstep. This is called the forecast, so 615 00:28:57,080 --> 00:28:59,040 we do some forecasting here at your peril. 616 00:28:59,040 --> 00:29:01,800 Andrew Ronsey Will Kier Starmer fight the next British election 617 00:29:01,800 --> 00:29:05,120 as Prime Minister? Well, in so much as one can make 618 00:29:05,120 --> 00:29:08,960 any of these predictions so far out, yes, at the moment I'd say 619 00:29:08,960 --> 00:29:10,640 yes, he will. What about you? 620 00:29:10,760 --> 00:29:13,040 I, I think more likely than not he will. 621 00:29:13,040 --> 00:29:16,920 He's got a massive majority. They don't do a regicide, as 622 00:29:16,920 --> 00:29:20,040 somebody said the other day in the Labour Party very often, and 623 00:29:20,040 --> 00:29:21,200 they will. Discover the joy. 624 00:29:21,520 --> 00:29:26,080 I was getting messages today from MPs saying W streeting is 625 00:29:26,200 --> 00:29:28,720 definitely charming them all a huge amount. 626 00:29:29,360 --> 00:29:30,720 Is that news? I mean, come on. 627 00:29:31,000 --> 00:29:34,080 But in a quite active way. Look, I don't, I don't think 628 00:29:34,240 --> 00:29:37,280 it's likely that he doesn't fight the next election, but I 629 00:29:37,280 --> 00:29:41,280 do think it's extraordinary how much trouble they've got 630 00:29:41,280 --> 00:29:44,000 themselves into in this period of time. 631 00:29:44,000 --> 00:29:47,200 It is incredibly hard because of the economic situation. 632 00:29:47,760 --> 00:29:50,240 Some would argue there are things they can do to make it 633 00:29:50,240 --> 00:29:51,720 easier, but there have been missteps. 634 00:29:51,880 --> 00:29:54,720 But just very finally, the other big thing I discovered from, 635 00:29:54,720 --> 00:29:58,040 well, not discovered, but you may know as well about looking 636 00:29:58,040 --> 00:30:01,560 at Keir Starmer. He is, because on a personal 637 00:30:01,560 --> 00:30:03,880 level, his friends tell me he's completely unruthless. 638 00:30:03,880 --> 00:30:06,920 He's a lovely guy in a political setting. 639 00:30:07,160 --> 00:30:11,040 He is utterly ruthless at every single stage. 640 00:30:11,200 --> 00:30:16,760 So will he sack Rachel Reeves? I think he's still quite loyal 641 00:30:16,760 --> 00:30:20,200 to her, to the frustration of some colleagues around him. 642 00:30:20,440 --> 00:30:23,520 But, but, but could he? Yes. 643 00:30:23,920 --> 00:30:26,560 Anushka Astana, our new Washington US editor. 644 00:30:26,680 --> 00:30:28,400 Welcome to the Welcome to the Madhouse. 645 00:30:28,800 --> 00:30:30,560 Andrew Ronsley, welcome back to THE MADHOUSE. 646 00:30:30,960 --> 00:30:32,520 Thank you very much. That was fascinating stuff. 647 00:30:32,800 --> 00:30:34,440 That's it from this edition of THE Forecast. 648 00:30:34,560 --> 00:30:35,840 See you next time. Goodbye.