I can't see how he can survive. Most of the public just think that the past week or so has confirmed everything that they thought that there's one rule for the rich and powerful and another rule for everyone else. We're in real danger now of a fundamentally decent Prime Minister being ousted for an error judgement which he made, along with almost every national newspaper writer, lots and lots of columnists, on the base of the same facts that are available at time.
It makes it very important that the next leader who comes in comes in absolutely determined to clean up politics. If there is a leadership contest, is it conceivable that Angela Rayner can be forgiven for having broken the rules on tax and brought back as Prime Minister? Hello and welcome to the forecast. The government is in full on leadership crisis with pressure building on Keir Starmer to resign.
The Scottish Labour leader Anas Sawa was the first major figure to go over the top, saying there have been too many mistakes and Starmer should go. A lot of the cabinets are out declaring their support for the PM now, but it is clear things are moving fast. Starmer's chief of staff Morgan McSweeney quit on Sunday over his advice to appointing Peter Mandelson as U.S. ambassador. Today, the number 10 director of communications, Tim Allen, also quit.
So what next? And if Starmer is going, what and who should follow? Joining me, Polly Toynbee, a columnist at The Guardian, Tom Baldwin, former Labour communications chief, who has also written a biography of Sir Keir Starmer and Luke Trill, executive director of the more in common UK think tank Polly. I mean, first of all, in terms of what should happen, I mean, you are, you are sort of with a heavy heart now saying Starmer's got to go. I've always been a strong supporter of his.
I thought he was going to be the great stabiliser but I think as we've reached this point I can't see how he can survive. How do you campaign in Scotland when the well respected head of the Scottish Labour Party has called for him to go? I think you know as one you've got one resignation after another. There's a way you reach a tipping point, and I think we're at it. So it's inevitable now in in your mind. Well, nothing's ever inevitable in politics, but it looks that
way. Tom, I mean you, you have been one of the few voices out there saying he shouldn't have to go, he shouldn't be blamed. It it looks like one way or another time is up, isn't it? I don't know one of the few voices, as you just said, yeah, there's got a lot of the cabinet coming out. That's just today, but it's taken a while. Yeah, well, I think there's probably more support for Kirstan remaining than you would think from I have a sort of quick view of the media at the
moment. You know, there is this sort of excitement and Glee at the idea we're re entering that cycle of getting rid of our Prime Minister every one to two years. I think the rest of the world must think we're nuts. We begin to look like Italy or something in the 1980s and 90s. And yeah, we have a government with a majority, 260 working majority 263 1/2 years ago to the next general election, less than 1/3 of the way for his apartment.
And we're in real danger now of a fundamentally decent Prime Minister being ousted for an error judgement, which he made along with almost every national newspaper writer, lots and lots of columnists. Nigel Farage named a few on the basis of the same facts that are available at time. And that's pretty identifying, I think. But but do you, do you feel it slipping away now?
I think it's becoming more likely that Keir Starmer is going to go. I'm not saying I think people are expressing certainty about what happens next. So usually very often end up looking foolish. It is looking more likely you have to go and be replaced. As I said, a piece of reputable observer the other day, but simultaneously find it make it harder. This the nature of the scandals make it harder to find someone
to replace him. The idea that if the great sin is being too close and too trusting a Peter Madison, you go for where streeting might seem that odd. The idea that at a time when you know, ethics being raised in public life again, the automatic choice then is Angela Rayner, who had to resign, well five months ago over an ethical issue. Now let's not have a go at
either of them. But I think there is there's something weird about this particular story which makes it more likely that Kier goes and harder to replace him. Luke, I mean, the public are often ahead on these kinds of questions. Where are they on on this?
I think most of the public just think that the past week or so has confirmed everything that they thought about politics, that the system is rigged, that there's one rule for the rich and powerful and another rule for everyone else, and that the system itself is addicted to chaos. So and I think the interesting thing is when we talk to people in focus groups, it's quite clear this goes beyond, in the public's mind, one Prime Minister or one government.
It's a sense that politics, you know, is chaos Now. It can't deliver that. The government isn't in control of events and that is what is driving people to say, do you know what? We've had enough of trying to preserve and improve our institutions. We want to roll the dice on something new and we don't mind if it burns it all down. I mean, Alastair Campbell has sort of raised this question in the last 24 hours about, you know, is Britain becoming ungovernable?
I think that's the right question to ask. As Tom said, Keir Starmer, a very decent man. Nobody is impugning his morals, abusing his judgement and whether he's made the right calls. But a thoroughly decent man who was uncontaminated by any kind of the kind of filth people suspect about about politics.
And you do wonder whether in fact whoever takes over will, within a short time, they might get a little bounce, within a short time, find themselves also caught by this public spirit of hating politicians, hating Westminster, refusing to be governed in a way. But to what extent, I mean, let's jump if you like to say, OK, it looks like Keir Starmer might have to go. So, so let's talk about the what next and the the people who might might be in the line as
Tom says. I mean, you know, this scandal is going to keep unravelling for quite some time. How does a new leader avoid being drowned by it as well? Well, it's quite unlikely that a new leader will be involved in the particular mandals and scandal and the papers that come out, it's all referred. But isn't it beyond the specifics? I mean, it isn't. I mean, you know, as, as everyone has said, you know, Keir Starmer's mistakes with Mandelson are, are limited.
You know, it's not that he was part of that scandal. The the point is that the scandal is so vast and so grubby and so awful that it is tainting the whole government kind of no matter what, because most people don't go into the, the reeds of exactly who said what, who knew what, who recommended who, who is Morgan McSweeney. It's just this is a massive scandal and it taints the Labour government. How is that not going to affect the next leader as well?
It makes it very important that the next leader who comes in comes in absolutely determined to clean up politics. Labour said it in the manifesto, Keir Starmer said it, but they've done very little. Not the sort of things people notice whoever comes in has to say, right? Take money out of politics. Really dramatic.
You know, trade unions won't fund Labour, business won't fund Tories. From now on we're going to have only small donations from members and of course a certain amount from the government as well to support. I mean, isn't, isn't not enough money in politics one of the reasons Mandelson was doing what he was doing? Well, you know, Mandelson felt he wasn't paid enough, you know, as a, as a, as a minister. That's why he always wanted these lavish houses that he couldn't really afford.
Well, that's Mandelson's character. I think a lot of people in politics don't expect to be very rich, but he plainly expected himself to be filthy rich. He thought it was just fine and most people don't. I think that whoever is the Labour leader has to make their signal a clean up and it's not that difficult to do, you just have to be brave. Is it? Is it, you know, is it doable, you know, in a way that the public will believe, do you think?
I mean, we heard Gordon Brown at the weekend talking about his plan for decontaminating politics. It was a plan for Keir Starmer. And Keir Starmer hasn't done it all. Well, strangely, I think, you know, I was thinking this in September, there's a sort of departure of Peter Mamus and Angela Rayner in quick succession were an example, I think of a Prime Minister who actually does hold have very, very high standards.
When new facts to come before him, he says, right, well, you're out the door rather than clinging to people out of loyalty. And and so I, I think there is a sort of different ethical standard to this Prime Minister. But you're right. I don't think that's how this terrible world of perceptions that that that we live in.
He, he, he, he, he's being seen. My worry about dedicating the next three years to sort of a degree of constitutional change and clean up of politics is that sounds great now. It sounded great when we were talking about the expenses scandal. In the end, I don't think that's what most people care about at home and what most people vote on in the next election. I think people are worried about, you know, paying electricity bills.
They're worried about their schools, they're worried about their NHS, they're worried about what's happening abroad. And, you know, part of the problem with politics is, is actually the way it's eating itself, because only ever talking about politics rather than about the people. So yes, I am in favour of higher ethical standards. I am in favour of saying, you know, we'll have stronger rules. I don't think that should be the definition of what Labour does
for the next three years, but. Is it politics easing itself when Keir Starmer, as you say, was totally focused on the cost of living in recent times? But that's not how. He is perceived and the world outside, yeah, which is very, very dangerous. And yet when Luke does his focus groups, he comes out as absolutely untrustworthy and unpopular. It is quite difficult to be perceived as focused on these really important policy issues when no one's reporting them. I mean, yeah.
There's, there's. It's just not true. Well, I mean, it is. It's kind of true that that that you know. I would His message is constantly on the news every day. But if if you see he does events, you know, did an event on Thursday, it's actually quite an important speech about prime place, about national identity. Nothing. It was all about Peter Manson. Peter Manson. And he knew that. He knew that wouldn't make the front pages. But I think it.
Was the middle of the storm. Yeah, but but there is a degree to which every policy announcement now it's reported on by the lobby rather than specialists. It's done on the basis of what is the cunning strategy behind us, how they're tricking you? Or does this help bolster someone's leadership prospects or who's up, who's down? Not about the outcome on people out there. And that is one of the things that that separates people from
politics. They look at this village going on talking about itself endlessly. And I think they're not talking about me. They don't care about me. Luke, I mean, why do you think people don't respond to Starmer's message over the last few months and don't seem to believe it? Well, I just, I think there's a couple of things. I think firstly, the government got off to a very bad start.
I think the combination of the Rose Garden speech, which seemed to promise more of the same freebie gate, which made it look like the promise to be a different kind of politics, and the Winter fuel allowance basically tainted them from the outset. You've got quite a short window to connect with the public now. And what that did was it made it much more difficult to communicate the positive agenda
because Tom's absolutely right. When we poll on things like workers rights, renters rights, the cost of living measures in the budget, so prescriptions, train fares, energy levy, they are popular, but they have nowhere near the level of cut through of those negatives. So things like as I said, the winter fuel, farmers, inheritance tax, National Insurance. So I think it's a combination of
self-inflicted wounds. But then also, you know, I thought one of the most baffling things to happen was the briefing before Christmas when just sort of out of nowhere this attack was launched on West Streeting. Because when we then split people in focus groups to say why are they fighting amongst themselves again, it sounds like the Tories all over again. So I think it's a combination of things not cutting through but not having helped themselves
either. I agree that, and I think almost the original sin of this government was the noise coming out down St. in those first few weeks wasn't about changing the country. There's all this background anonymous briefing against Sue Grey about where their desks are, what their job title was, what their pay levels were. And I think that gives the impression to the public that you're interested in yourselves, not them.
And so, so I, I do think there's a kind of culture running through the advisor class, journalists, politicians now where honestly, you know, they're talking to themselves about themselves and they get very, very excited about it and the public look at the spectacle and are recoil from it. And I don't, I don't, it doesn't really mean sort of populist thing. It's just, why are you always obsessing about what happens in Westminster and what happens in
my life? There is one quite exceptional thing about the times that we're in now which effects absolutely the way Labour people think, the way anybody who's not on the right thinks, which is the fear that Farage will take over, that the far right, the hard right, will take over at the next election. And the idea that and a very unpopular leader can go on just because he's decent, they've got to find somebody who has a good chance of preventing that.
That that's what makes this urgent for you, is it? It makes the the threat for Nigel Farage. Urgent. Why he's under such pressure. More pressure. He, he, he hasn't been given time. He might have been, if it weren't for the sense of emergence. Just in terms of the lessons, Luke, I mean for, for you know, whatever comes next. I mean, you mentioned these early mistakes, winter fuel payment, farmers, inheritance
tax. Can you explain why these are nationally so unpopular when actually they didn't affect huge numbers of people? They were both policies that could have been intellectually defended. You know, you've got a huge gap between the young and the the old, where the young are the ones who are struggling and the old are the ones who are doing pretty well off. Why were these not policies that could have been justified and been successful and suddenly made him unpopular with
everybody? Yeah. So I think, look, I mean, let's take winter fuel allowance for instance. I think there's a perception, particularly in wonk world that there are lots of young people like hoping to stick it to the oldies. And actually when you speak to young people, I'm worried about my Gran, I'm worried about older people.
And I think the problem with the winter fuel was it struck at the heart of that in every focus group it was older people have put into the country, they've worked hard. And people saying things at the time, like why are they going after the elderly who can't fight back now as it actually happens? You know, older people are very good, I think making the case. But it was to go after such a politically salient popular group to put the threshold so
low. I think if you'd started with a higher threshold, you could have got it a lot of. US had said that at the time, for heaven's sakes, lift the threshold and then it would have been different. You'd have said, well why am I getting a winter fuel allowance? Exactly. And farmers, but farmers was the same like really politically popular group. People like farmers, they're seen as, you know, custodians of the countryside and our food supply, particularly since the
pandemic. And I think if you go back to the original reason why this has happened, it's because of that manifesto pledge on tax. So they boxed themselves in, unable to do income tax, National Insurance or VAT, which meant they had to target specific groups, all of whom elicit a certain amount of public sympathy. Could a new leader, could a new leader, break with that and say that was a manifesto for different times? I'm going to come in with a different economic policy.
I think it's hard to do it without an election. I just pick up on this because I think the the, the other problem with it, a lot of the mistakes they've made is they've sort of thrown themselves or inserted themselves into what they think is an existing media controversy because that's kind of what you do in opposition to get noticed without a sense of who they are, what they're defending, what the governments about.
So things like winter fuel allowance seen as tough and but you didn't have a story about yourselves there. I think the ID cards are a perfect example here. You've got a piece of perfectly good sort of technocratic mutton, if you like, which they dressed up in this really scary ways. It's going to be a way of hammering illegal working by illegal immigrants.
And and it isn't really. And you managed to alienate almost everybody right across the political spectrum because you were sort of playing to these little Daily Mail Day, Telegraph, Times, Sun Express tropes, you know, disability reforms. Disability reforms were the same. It was playing into the game that, you know, we're all going to be tough on strangers. We've actually. Having isn't this about the lack of their own story to tell? And this is the problem that we
highlighted. It's. For the election that they they only focused on winning the election. They didn't focus on what they were going to do afterwards and how they were. Going to I think it's not just the absence of a story to tell. It's actually I come back to this point, try make about our political culture. It's enough to be getting column inches and being, you know, playing into sort of an existing
controversy. That's the temptation of politics rather than actually building an argument and an identity about who you are. But isn't there also something particular to Kia Starmer which he has deliberately eschewed, this Starmerism kind of vision? And actually it means when you speak to the public, they've got no idea what he stands for. And he becomes defined by these U turns.
Whereas at least if he'd come forward and said this is my vision for Britain, this is what I want to achieve, he'd have something to sort of stand behind and really. I don't think, I don't think it's vision because as you know, vision is a weird word of politics. And you know, we are a lot of people don't have visions. Why should politicians? But but, but, but, but, but he,
I think he does have values. I think he could have done much, much more and, you know, should do much, much more to project those values in his decision. Sometimes we just get these CA bullet points and I and I, I, I, we don't have that connected. But this keeps kind of. You keep talking about how important the values are. The most important thing was a plan for how you were going to transform Britain and they didn't have one. A lot of the things they do are
very transformative. The tragedy of this is that people may just forget because they've hardly noticed. The best things that Labour have done, which is rent controls, it is workers rights. You know, the the unions have not come forward and praised Labour enough for the most radical working rights. We're about to have the biggest fall in child poverty that's ever happened within one government, within one parliament. You know, a great deal of good has been done, but some.
Because of the two child benefits. You never, yes, you're never quite sure whether Keir Starmer wants to talk up the good he's done for fear exactly of the right wing press. OK, well, I mean, you know, right now if Starmer goes, there are two big figures who are in play, Angela Rayner and we're streeting. I mean, Tommy, you say, you know, the trouble with Angela Rayner is that this is a, you know, we're in the middle of a, a resignation crisis caused by probity in politics.
I mean, is it conceivable that somebody who had to step down because she couldn't follow the rules on tax comes back not just to government but to be Prime Minister? Well, I get the sense from Angela Reagan's people that she doesn't particularly want to even talk about Labour leadership until she's got that tax issue sorted out. So there is a reason for delay here.
At the very least, I get a sense from West treatment people that, you know, right now, sort of, you know, they don't particularly want to have Rez's links with Peter Manderson examined too closely. Well, he he's. Now said that he's going to publish everything. Hasn't he? But it does it does it does it does it does mean there's a reason for delay here. And I think people are sort of jumping over themselves in their excitement to see how soon they can get a leadership contest
underway. I'm not sure it's actually in the interest even of the people who want to replace him to have an imminent 1. If there is a leadership contest, is it conceivable in the background and context of a scandal caused by politicians being forgiven and brought back the way Manderson was, that Angela Rayner can be forgiven for having broken the rules on tax and brought back as Prime Minister? I I like Angela Rayner a great
deal. I happened to think that her resignation was a very harsh one. I think she was held to a much higher standard in terms of ethics. Peter Mandleson was when he was appointed as U.S. ambassador, so I think that she has a good reason to be resentful about being forced out of the cabinet in the first place. I'm not paying.
Well, I, I, I, I, I think even the Ethics Commissioner thought that she was a bit unlucky, but she, she was held to a very, very high standard by, by, by the Prime Minister and by the ethics, by, by the government's ethics advisor. But when you ask me, do I think it's conceivable she can be promised in these circumstances? I think it does make it messier. And as someone who doesn't actually think Keir Starmer should be replaced, I think it does make it harder to find that
replacement, yes. Holly, I think it's plausible. I think it's possible she's well liked it depends of course, what HMRC says. We haven't had the verdict yet and it may be that you know, it was a, a, a technical error of not great importance, in which case perfectly possible. But what we what we have to? Like the whole problem that we're in, we're in a political culture in which people say, oh, people get excused if they're in power.
It wasn't that big a deal. If I hadn't paid 10s of thousands of pounds in tax, you know, I'd be in court, is what most people are thinking. And it might be bankrupt, but if it's Angela Rayner, not only can she come back, she can come back in the top job. We haven't had the verdict yet. Let's wait and see what's said we. Don't we know she didn't pay the right tax? Well, we don't know what HMRC, it's got to say about it.
That's what we're waiting. But anyway, I suspect that there will be more candidates coming forward if we have a little while, if he doesn't stand down immediately, I think we might find quite a lot of people coming forward who maybe haven't been mentioned. And until we see a hustings of those people, their strengths and their weaknesses, I think it would be foolish for anyone to immediately call out who they think should be the next Prime Minister.
Well, what about Wes Streeting? I mean, Tom says, you know, there are concerns about his links with Mandelson. Now he his people are saying there's very little contact. We're happy to publish it all. We'll see. Yes, he said today, anyone who wants to see all of my correspondence you can look at, which means that he's pretty sure that there's going to be nothing embarrassing there, which is, you know, a good thing to be that open. And I think he he has strong supporters.
He's very clever, he's very politically agile. He's been a very good health secretary, but. But a lot of people don't like him in the Labour Party. People say, you know, he's much too Blair, right and on the right of the party. The question is whether he can escape that. I don't think he is sort of bogged down in Blairism, but we shall see. Luke, I mean, how much of the public know Angela Rayner? And we're streeting, for a start.
Reasonably little. I mean, they know more about Angela Rayner because she was Deputy Prime Minister and before the scandal you would get a lot of people in focus groups who said I really like her. She seems different. She seems authentic. I think the challenges speaking to people since then is you get versions of, in fact, we got it from someone just the other week who said I used to really like her and then she got power and now she just looks like the rest
of them. And I think she's going to have to do something to overcome that because there is that challenge of perception. Similar to what people have said about Mandelson in focus groups. Why was this guy even given 1/3 third chance, regardless of the Epstein thing? He'd been, you know, booted out of cabinet twice. In this sense that politicians get endless go. I think he's really difficult. I mean, we also haven't heard
from her. I mean, she hasn't done, you know, big TV interviewing like that since she had to resign. We don't really know what she thinks about most of politics at the moment. No. And I think if she were to come in, she would have to do something that, you know, both distanced herself from what came
before. I think she probably would have to have that focus on some kind of watershed, on cleaning up politics, but also would have to, you know, there would need to be some kind of mea culpa for what she did as well. And I think that would be quite. And can you have a big change in direction from whoever may take over given the election was fought on the manifesto? You know, they, they will all want to come in and say we need a massive reset. I need to come in with a load of big new ideas.
Is there any mandate for big new ideas that weren't in the election manifesto? Well, I. Think part of the thing was there weren't that many big ideas in the manifesto itself. And because it was a safety first manifesto, it was hard then to take the public on some of those difficult decisions. But the only thing I actually think what matters more with the public is having a sort of sense of coherent determination that you are going to do what it
takes to improve their lives. You're going to be focused on them. You're going to move beyond at the psychodrama and I actually think, you know, you should be, you know, the the public will want to know that someone can
deliver. I mean, you know, people are talking about outcomes and I mean people, most people have never heard of suddenly being projected into #10 Downing Street. Is that remotely tenable in the in the middle of a government's term to sort of put somebody in who isn't even a senior minister? No, I, I don't, I don't think it is. You know, people expect people to have a track record. They expect to know that they can do stuff.
And I actually think it would be a risk for Al Khans or whoever and not having done a big ministerial job to suddenly go in. You're untested, you know. Probably. I mean, you're the one sort of raising this idea of sort of there will be other people who. Well, I think that one of the things that people will blame Keir Starmer for for a long time is the fix by which he kept Andy
Burnham out of this. It may be that if this takes a little bit longer, there will be time perhaps for Andy Burnham to have another chance at another by election. But it was a pretty savage thing to do. It was kind of dirty Westminster politics. And so for Keir Starmer to be totally Mr. Clean after that doesn't look so good. I.
Mean I'll take issue with that. I mean, I like Andy Burnham, but the world is dog knew Andy Burnham was coming back to Parliament in order to challenge Keir Starmer for the leadership. I don't think any leader of any major political party in the world would say, come on in, we'll give you special permission. No, that'd be great. That's just that's just it's nuts. I couldn't I really understand why it was seen as so
controversial at the time. My worry, and I think Keir's worry about this is that the the party that deserves to win the next general election is the party which is not staring at its navel, which is not invaded, engaged in factional battles between Angela Raine is left and where's Treaty is right or you know, or this or that. It's the party that's focused on the needs of the British people at this incredibly fragile,
dangerous time for the world. And I really, I'm concerned now that, yeah, it was rubbing hands weekly. Great. We're gonna get a leadership election. Yeah, we just talk about Labour Party, this faction or that faction and the public will turn away. Haven't already? And. Isn't that the problem? But Keir Starmer has taken Labour to 16 to 20% in the polls. The public have already turned
away from his his his brand. Look, the third away for a Parliament with a big majority thing to be doing now is focusing on governing to actually bring about some of the changes that you can in very difficult circumstances. That level of unpopularity. Any sort of change, getting any sort of focus on the British people rather than politicians will become progressively harder if we engage in a factional battle over the succession. And that's the prospect.
Now look. I think the problem is that that for a lot of the public, certainly, you know, I was in Greater Manchester last week doing focus groups. And they were. Furious about Andy Burnham being blocked someone who had delivered for them and it looked like the politics of self-interest that someone who had done so much for Greater Manchester. Well, but I mean Tommy, you slightly said it is he was going to come and do and lots of the public would if.
Starmer doesn't want to talk about at least she wants to talk about governing for the country. What if Keir? Starmer had said Run Andy and I recognise you're a strong player who's delivered for Greater Manchester. Let me he bring you into the tent, give him a cabinet job that would have been seen by the public as strength that would have helped. I mean, it's not for, you know, me to start dictating reshuffles, but you know, reshuffles happen fairly regularly.
There would have been he could have brought him in. He could have looked stronger. And the problem when we did those focus groups in Greater Manchester, you've got you could see people making the contrast. This guy, Peter Mandelson, he gets all these chances. Andy Burnham, who's improved our transport, who's got construction going up across Manchester, he's blocked. That don't make sense.
The idea that it's good for the Labour government to introduce someone into Parliament who sole purpose of giving up what he said was the best job in the world. He wasn't interested to go to Parliament. He wanted to go back to Parliament and challenge Keir Stan for Labellation. I don't don't resent him for that. You know, that's the job he wants to do. But I don't think it's Keir Starmer's job to say come on in, let's have six months
leadership. Speculation that that would be nuts for any Prime Minister anytime. It's happening now partly because of that decision he made. An awful lot of people at that point switched against. People are looking for these triggers and I think you to some extent, you know, looking for a bit of a trigger because you think, you know, you think he's not going anywhere. But the people are looking for an immediate reason to say that's it.
I've had enough that, you know, you know, straw in a camel's back. I do think the individual examples of these triggers bear don't really bear too much examination. So are you, are you saying that if he stays he he doesn't need to do a big research, he should just carry on as he was because he was on the right line?
I think the whole philosophy of resets is, is sort of part of the problem of these sort of the sort of cycle of drama and chaos and crisis that the best thing that Keir Starmer could have been could be is the person who's actually more concerned what happens out in the country than the Westminster. His distaste for politics should have defined him. In fact, it at a moment he's being defined by the sort of politics he's subcontracted out to other people.
That's on him. That's a mistake he's made. But are you saying the government was basically on the right lines in order to win the next election? I'm saying you. Know there's somehow it would come good in three years time. No, no, what I'm, what I'm saying is that the right way to win the next election is to stop focusing on your internal anonymous briefing which characterises government too much. I'm talking about this. I'm talking about what they're doing. Well, not all of that.
You, you, you keep talking about that policy says policy says there's lots of good policy. I think they haven't connected into story. I think the long term investment for the future is a very Labour story, stuff they're doing opportunities, a very Labour story. I think they have to open out to that Labour electorate rather than sort of constantly looking over the wall to, to reform voters they can't reach. I think they've made lots of strategic errors. I think they've made some
governmental errors. Do I think that the difference between the Labor government and the alternative is stark and obvious? Yes. Does the government succeed if it's facing the British? People Talk about what matters to the most, yes. Does the government fail if it turns in on itself, talks about the Labour Party, does factional stuff and you know, it's just turning away from a bunch of. People, Tom, let's ask Luke, has any leader ever come back from such a negative rating as Kia
has now? I mean, a lot of people who like Kia just say there's no way out. Well, no, but what I would what I would also say is we know we're in quite a volatile period at the electorate change of mind. I find it difficult to see how he recovers. And I think my worry from the public's perspective is to go back to what Tom said. That speech he gave last Thursday was a really important speech, you know, and actually one that the public care about pride in place, tackling
extremism. The problem is, is he no longer going to be a Prime Minister who's listened to who can get those important messages across. And if that moment if the door or has shot there than it would I think from a confidence in the system tie a piece be time for him to move on. But I I don't think we know that equivocally, but the window is
closing. Look, I'm not pretending that this government is not in huge difficult and as this Prime Minister is not in huge difficulty, I just say lightly that you're right that this is a volatile time. In next week we could have some major International Crisis. At which point do people want to the Labour Party to be leadless, this Prime Minister to be gone? I think it's that you know this, you know, I do not understand this sort of addiction.
We've got turmoil and crisis and chaos, which is self fulfilling. What I'm trying to get at is, I mean, yes, fine, you're in the middle of a leadership crisis and now it's all about personality and all the rest of it. But the crisis was here before in terms of Labour unpopularity. You know, Luke, Luke's, Luke's evidence. We have a Prime Minister. You can go. Round and bring together a coalition are willing to defend liberal democracy at a. And none of that.
Existential genuine crisis for liberal democracy. And Despite that, they're on course to massively lose the next election reform. So the question is Britt Starmer or somebody else, do things need to change? Now, Polly, I, you know, I presume any other leadership candidates are going to come in and say we need massive change because that wasn't working. I think they'll have to. I don't think anybody's going to be able to say steady as she
goes. The question is how much they can break away from the straitjacket of that manifesto. You know, a lot of people will be saying you must have a general election. Well, we didn't have a general election for Prime Minister after Prime Minister after Prime Minister under the Tories. So I don't think that's the answer. But I do think people have to come up with a a very strong idea of how to clean up politics first, but also, you know, how to get growth going, which is
very difficult. All of Europe struggling to get growth going. I mean, all, all the cabinet who aren't declaring support for Starman now are also saying there needs to be change. I just saw, you know, I think it was Bridget Phillipson on the TV saying we need to keep clear but we need to be better. We need, you know, think we need change. So it is clear that the government, as it was set aside all the scandals, just wasn't
working, was it? I, I, I think the government were pitching things in the wrong way and I, I, I generally think that what Polly says about, you know, building a coalition against the really terrifying threat, the new threat pros by Farrah's like which we've not seen before is really important. I don't think they've ever done that properly in terms of their language, in terms of the way they present policies and in terms of their own discipline.
That is not the same as saying you need some sort of intangible change in, in the, the actual substance of the policy they're doing. I do think a lot of this is the kind of the sort of voters they've been aiming at. I think there's a lot to be said for this block theory of politics now that the, you know, 2019 the right got the block out and won the election. 2024 the left got the block out and won
the election. And we spent too long kind of appearing over the wall at the right wing bloc and not enough paying, not paying nearly enough attention to to left to centre voters. And I think they need to be reunited with a story which they can understand. That's a question of reaching out to them rather than turning inwards to ourselves. So if Keir Starmer goes, I think it's really important that this does not become a factional
leadership election. And it's, you know, it's a process which is done with an eye to the public rather than to the party. I very much fear it will not be. Yeah, I mean it, It is impossible for him not to be a factional leadership election, isn't it, when you got a candidate from the soft left and the candidate from the centre
right? But the the the the I think 1 of Keir Starmer's achievements when he first became leader was to turn the party inside out, away from itself towards the public. I think the danger of him departing now would be the party turns back in on itself. You said something very important about the importance of the bloc, a right block and a left block. Within that left block it is essential that everybody within that is willing to vote tactically to make sure that they keep the right out.
There is a danger that with Keir Starmer as hated, I don't think it's fair, but as hated as he is, that the Lib Dems and the Greens might not throw their vote to Labour when they need to in the seats where they need to, and that would be a disaster. So there needs to be a leader who is at least more or less acceptable for tactical voters from those two. Are you saying a Labour leader should reach out to those other parties and maybe bring them into the tent before the next
election? I don't know about bringing them into the tent, but at least have somebody acceptable enough that they are willing to vote tactically as they did at the last election. And at the moment, it looks as if a lot of them are saying, sorry, couldn't vote for Keir Starmer, there's Gaza, There are a whole lot of things for some reason, and we have to get over that to a point where they are at least acceptable to each other.
Are we already at that point where you're looking at a coalition of the centre and the left trying to take on reform? Yeah, look, I think one of the best chances that Labour will have at the next lecture, which is a long time whistle lots may
change in between. But even looking forward to May's elections is a sort of Macron strategy which is you have to vote for us to stop reforms and that's Macron trying to stop National Rally. The difficulty comes and This is why I think Gorton is more dangerous. The by election in Gorton and Denton is more dangerous than people think for Labour's longer term prospects.
If Labour no longer look like the vehicle that can stop reforms, if the Greens win that by election, it becomes much harder to say to the left bloc you must vote for us in order to keep out Reform UK and I think that could be a real challenge for them. That said, I do think you can slightly overplay the Bloc stuff that actually, if you look at most voters, they broadly do want life to be more affordable, public services to work, a greater degree of control over
immigration. And I come back to again, when we're in Manchester, there was one woman and she's sort of summed up what I think the central paradigm of electoral politics is at the moment. She says, Luke, I'm really scared at the next election, I'm going to have to vote reform. And I just thought it was such a sort of telling sort of. And she went on to explain, you know, I've seen what's happened in the US with ICE. I worry he'd be like Trump. But I'm just so worried we need to.
I also think we need something different that I'm worried I'm going to put. My cross there. Can you explain why? You know, if we're in a world in which untrustworthy elites doing dodgy things, mysterious sources of funding for politics is what's driving this dissatisfaction amongst the public, Why? Why a reform not caught by that? Why do people not say that's what they do? Well, A, because people think they're all at it and they're all tainted by the same brush.
And secondly, it's, you know, any doubts people have at the moment, well, for 30% of the electorate is being overpowered by a sense we just can't go on like this. So there are lots of people, particularly in the voters reform of one since the election or one ever since then, who are like that woman who think I just got to roll the dice on something new because we can't go on like this. And that's what Labour has to do. Labour has to does have to reassure people like that that
government can deliver. One of the many incoherences we've had into the political strategy from Labour Party recently is they don't even know how to attack reform. So, you know, Keir Starmer made a big speech last year's party conference saying that they're a threat like we've never seen before. It's a different battle. Within a couple of days the Labour Party were putting out tweets from Labour Party's headquarters saying same old
Tories now. You literally cannot be a new threat like we've never faced before and the same old Tories now. That incoherence I think is part of the kids problem in that, you know, that was a speech which was very personal to him and yet. There are people who sort of seem to think when the Prime Minister sends a big signal that that it can be ignored or it's merely the starting point for a bigger discussion.
That is that's, you know, it's been quite hard for him actually to drive through his own values and his own personality into this government. Some of that's on him. Some of it's actually on the people around him. Also, Polly isn't isn't it that, you know, he has a habit of saying things and then it just disappears.
That's the nothing happens. That exactly the trouble and and that's a very good example, this contradictory attitude towards reform and often when he says things and for instance on ID cards, that was a very popular policy until he put it forward and the moment he put it forward, it became an unpopular. Policy, the way you put it forward. Which is quite which, sorry. It's the way he put it forward. But it's the way he put it forward. But it should have driven everything.
It should have been talking about about benefits, about immigration. It should also have been talking about entitlement. This will these are the things it will give you. And if, for instance, we wanted to make foreigners pay for our museums and galleries, this card will show your British and you can go in everywhere free.
I mean, there are all kinds of positive ways it could be done and he just never seems to have that consistent follow through or to be able to say to his cabinet, I want each of you to find a good reason why ID cards are a good thing for. Instance OK, so so I just want to end with sort of the lessons for whichever government is going to be running the country next week. And I I accept that you wanted to be Keir Starmer. But you know what?
What does this period, I accept, Tom, that you wanted to be Keir Starmer? What does this period tell you? Two or three things that we must learn in terms of making government work and connecting with the people. I think staring at your own navel is not a great day way of of of reaching the public at Westminster. Politics which is in shrill to an idea of perma crisis, perma chaos is a politics beginning to eat itself and making this country increasingly difficult to govern.
And I just sort of think from the international perspective here, yeah, you've got a government, a Labour government elected with a big stable majority acting like the Conservatives did when they were falling apart. And it's happened after within 18 months. And this is a world which really is in crisis. The challenges facing us on climate, technology, Russia, China, Trump are so enormous that here we have a Prime Minister who's not even mentioned in the Epstein files.
There's lots of rich, powerful Americans who I haven't been brought down, we have promised, not even mentioned there. Nigel Farage mentioned 40 times who somehow is going to be cast out because of his secondary relationship with Across. That happened last night. We go, I think it's nuts, I think our politics looks nuts. And the big lesson here is if we want to have democracy to kick around, we have to start thinking and treating it a little bit more tenderness
because it's fragile right now. Luke, what do you think they need to understand if they're going to get out of this mess? I think the biggest thing is to show that government is in control of events, that, you know, there's a reason to take back control was such a successful election slogan because it goes to the heart of what people want.
And I think too much of the early part of this government has made it seem powerless to events or without a narrative of control and what they want to achieve. I mean, I go back to that. I think it was such a silly comment that the Prime Minister made before the Liaison Committee when he talked about pulling levers and nothing happening because all that does that sort of things it reinforces to the public, oh, maybe we do need someone totally different who can make the system work.
So I think it's a about showing control. And then BI think it's one of the clips that I played before the election to a focus group of Keir Starmer people like the most was him talking about the politics that treads more likely on people's lives. You know that that people that that is exactly what we want and they have to find a way to get
back to that. So showing government is in control and could do stuff and then getting back to politics is something that people don't have to stay glued to the TV folder. They should obviously all be listening to the forecast. Polly, what? What does whoever is running the government in the future need to understand about what's gone
wrong? It's a huge opportunity for somebody with a political imagination, with somebody with bravery, with somebody who's not going to spend their whole time listening to focus groups and just decides what they want to do. They've got three years with an unchallengeable authority of a huge majority. They can just say in those three years I'm going to get done the things I most think the country needs and wants. I'm, you know, I'm not going to be blown one way and the other
by endless criticism. And if you had somebody with that sort of nerve and that sort of hope, I think Labour could get back on its feet and do very well. But it's a big ask. Probably Tom and be Luke Trill. Tom Baldwin, thank you all very much indeed. And that's the forecast for today. Who knows where we'll be tomorrow. We'll see you then. Bye bye.