Can Britain’s Politics Cope: David Dimbleby Thinks Not

Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.

We're in a dire state. You can explain how awful things are and say we'll do our best, but you have to have a degree of charisma to do it, and one thing our present prime minister does not have is charisma.

David Dimbleby, who anchored ten general elections on the febrile atmosphere in UK politics, would you say to the Labor Party, don't change your prime minister.

No, absolutely not. I'd say change him. I think you've got a dud there. A nice man, and no doubt, very intelligent man, but a man so overcautious, seemed public with somebody who decides something and then once he gets a bit of opposition, turns back.

From Bloomberg Weekend, this is the Michelle Hussein Show. I'm Michelle Hussein. As we go into this episode, I want to say that if you're from the UK, then David Dimbleby is not going to need an introduction. You'll know him, or at least you'd recognize him. He was for decades the face of election programs on the BBC, the person who said which party had won, who announced on air in the middle of the night in June twenty sixteen, nearly ten years ago that the UK had voted to

H thank you for tempting me and you only got me here by grotesque flattery.

I like to think of it as persuasion, but you're someone who's observed beginning, I am think we were already recording. How am we going to talk for I think we'll talk for forty minutes? Jesus, Yes, okay, it'll go y quickly. I promise that's what they say. Yeah, it's just flattery to you. You might even enjoy it, you know. No, let's we'll revisit that question at the end. So with

Well, the churn in prime ministers has really been Tory, hasn't it. Cameron May Johnson Trusts for God's sake, And then soon I Kuberli had a chance and then there was a general election. So it's the Tories who've been doing the churning, not Labor. I do remember there was a famous thing Harral Wilson always said, which was the way to lead the Labor Party when they're in government is to keep driving so hard that everybody is clinging on for dear life, not to fall off the Labor wagon.

But the fact that it is happening now to a UK Prime Minister being questioned and more than question from within his own party, doesn't that show that there is something wider afoot than these two dominant parties, that there's something about our political firmament or the appetite of our public that seems to engender this.

Well, there's certainly an electoral system, and I don't want to go into constitutional things that absolutely doesn't reflect opinion in the country and so a lot of people feel that they vote in a general election and it doesn't get represented. I mean, if you look at the last general election, reform got I think more votes than the Liberal Democrats. They've got a tiny number of seats. The

By election, the one that may bring the likely next Prime minister to.

Parliament, though Reform one of the vote there in the local elections in that area, so nobody knows quite what will happen. But I mean, if you took that and just examined what individual voters thought and then ask them whether they felt they were represented, that's why they're voting for reform. Because they didn't feel what is that word heard,

Yes, but I remember the time, and I'm sure you remember as well. Where you know, in the British political established more widely the public, you'd look at the many prime ministers somewhere like Italy and you'd feel quite superior about it that that was not the kind of thing that happened in the UK. Do you think that we are heading for a multi party system that will mean the only way to govern will be to be in coalitions, and that will need a different mindset, certainly on.

The present form of reform. I mean, if the local election results were at a general election, and of course you know there are all sorts of caveats you have to put in about what would it be exactly the same if it had been reformed. Wouldn't have a working majority in the House of Commons, so of course there would have to be yes. And I mean it's easy, you know, I mean, it's easier to mock countries like Italy where it was all chaotic and now seems to

If you're saying should one be steady at the moment then and would you say to the Labor Party don't change your prime minister?

Absolutely not, I'd say change him. I think you've got a dud there. I mean a nice man, and no doubt, very intelligent man, but a man so overcautious and so seen publicly, I don't know what to be a is privately, but seen publicly. Somebody who decides something and then once he gets a bit of opposition, turns back. Unlike Thatcher, unlike Blair, who were kind of bold statement politicians. In times of crisis you need that. And at the moment the Labour Party is in complete disarray about what it

So if it is Andy Burnham who comes to Parliament and then is in a position to challenge the Prime minister, do you think he would be different in substance or is it the case that he'd be a better communicator and that is crucial in our age.

I think he'd be a far better communicator. I don't know what his views are. I mean I've had him on programs often and have never quite been able to work out what he stands for. To tell the truth, I think it comes and goes a bit. I mean, you know that we've now got this thing that he wants to go back into the EU. Oh no, I don't actually no, I don't want to get back into

He's not going to win election in that particular area.

Yeah, and in that area, I mean, which was a reform area. So how would he be different? I think he has on his side the kind of political patterner of energy, youth enthusiasm, and the so called success of Manchester which is compared to the UK as a whole, tiny microcosm, but nevertheless generally seem to be successful that they brought in, they got industry to come to Manchester.

Andy Burnham's people have told Bloomberg that he would not change the current fiscal rules which essentially limit borrowing, which leads to the question of how differently he may or may not govern. Would he be a better communicator but a prime minister with a similar policy agenda, which leads me to wonder, is there something more fundamental to do

Well, we're pretty well taxed, don't we. We're fairly highly taxed. But we're up with the European averages. I think we're in a position of stagnation on government borrowing, on taxation, and on GDP growth. I mean there's been since Brexit, what does it fall on prospective growth of eight percent? So people are genuinely feeling hard pressed, hard done by.

And what is the impact of that on the social fabric.

I don't know. They don't riot. Well, they do riot actually, as we saw this week, I mean the two massive demonstrations in London, which mostfully didn't end up in the thousand deaths. And I think people who voute reform, I don't know quite what they're after, but it's certainly, I think probably above all greater prosperity. That's I mean, that's

About and you need the leaders who are fit for the.

Most Yes, I mean maybe I put too much on leadership, but I do think that acknowledging. You know, you can't just be medi mouthed and say things are going to get better and then actually do nothing very much. If you want to, you can explain how awful things are and say, well, we'll do our best, but you have to have a degree of charisma to do it. And one thing our present prime minister does not have is charisma. I mean, he mutters, he mutters, are you? I mean,

Are you worried about what the future holds for the country.

Yes, yes, but I've always been. I've always been worried. I was worried when we had the three day week. I was worried when the offshoot of the Iraq War. I'm worried about the Iran War. Of course, I'm worried about the future in that sense. But if you mean, am I worried about whether our politics can cope with the crisis we're in, yes, i am, because I think in some ways it's unfitted to cope. For the reasons that I was explaining.

What do you think about the prospect of Nigel Farash being the next Prime minister?

I well, I don't think. Can I say this, I don't know. I'm not sure he's temperamentally suited to the job and I haven't yet seen any signs around him of people of caliber to act as chance the exchequer, foreign secretary, Home secretary until we see them and how competent they are at the moment. It's a bit of a sort of mix and match leftovers, seems to me. I don't yet feel that Farage is presenting other than himself and some bold ideas which may or may not

We know that they've got a big policy on mass deportations. That's what they have promised if they come to government. And that does mean that given they want to abolish the indefinite leave to remain state where people can be here without being British citizens if they've fulfilled the requirements, I mean the prospect of policies like that, instinctively, how do you respond to them? What do you think they would mean for the Britain We know, I.

Think instinctively that they would be totally disastrous because I think that the ramifications would go well beyond the few who may be here because they've cheated about their circumstances or you know, have got definitely to remain improperly. But overall, I think it would be I think it would have a terrible effect on communities that for twenty thirty or forty years have lived side by side. I think it would be devastating. But I also don't think it would

I mean, well, I've asked Nigel Fowers this question because he's been on this podcast. Yes, and he said, we do it in all way that Ice is not the comparison, because you know, Ice armed and obviously they exist in the United States and have done for a long time before Donald Trump. But he was very clear that he would that a reform government would do it in their own way.

So and what did he mean by that.

I think he means that there would be that they would actually deport people in high numbers in a way that he would say previous governments haven't.

Had a bottle to do well. Good question.

We didn't get that far.

I don't know.

Well, they would, they would leave it.

But you look at the process for that, leave the EHR. They've got to change the law, they've got to get the judges out of their hair, and then how many people are they going to deport? I mean million, half a million.

I don't know what the plan is, but he's made other things happen, as like leaving the EU, as you witnessed over many years when he came on Question Time, the program that you presented for so long, do you think that that exposure on television helped him become the national public figure that he now is. That people knew him because they saw him on television. They liked the way he came across, and you know the program that you fronted was part of giving him that kind of

It brings us to the whole business of social media and the way people communicate nowadays. And in two minds about under BBC rules, once he had become a UKIP representative in the European Parliament, he had a right, the party had a right. I can't remember how many times, two or three times a year out of twenty six programs, but then the question always was, well who do we put on? And they were all such drong Goos. Apart

They're definitely now trying to build up others.

Yes, but he's not very good at the relationships. To see. He calls out with people quite easily. He's quite he's quite thin skinned in a funny way. I guess, well, if you're going to lead a new party, you've got to be quite broad shouldered about who you bring in.

I'm conscious that we're now ten years on from the EU referendum and you were the voice who said that night on the airwaves were out the people are voted to leave the EU. But you would also in nineteen seventy five anchored the results coverage and.

Of the we've left Farage now have we well, I mean his big cause was his big cause has before this before the country as whole was the EU.

And it just made me think, with this ten year anniversary, you've been a witness to many big political moments, anchoring all those general elections and the voice of the referendum in twenty sixteen when the results came, and you played a similar role back in nineteen seventy five when the UK voted to stay in the European Economic Community as it was. Then, how do you reflect on seeing that total expanse of time and two different decisions by the British public.

Why did they vote for and then vote against.

Or how did it feel both of those nights to you having seen that the entire.

Sectory the first one was virtually was a foregun conclusion. Really, Wilson had been aware, and I mean, unlike Cameron, who you remember, came back before his referendum, which I think, actually think was a disastrous mistake to call it because it became something quite different. But he came back from Russell's with one or two minor concessions that had been offered,

If a future prime minister wants to take us back into the EU or even a single market, do you think there should be another public vote? Absolutely so that's the only way to undo Brexit. To actually have another.

Public I think it'd have to be. But I think having had the fifty two forty eight, which we now know incidentally, if they're where a vote would be reversed pretty.

Well as opinion stands at the moment, Yes, as opinion stands.

But that's quite interesting because there's not been a case being made for going back in just a lot of regretful noise. But yes, I think there should certainly be, but it won't be in my lifetime. Well I hope I may live long enough to see it.

I'd love David to talk a bit about you as I don't want to be too grand about this, but you have been a witness to history and that you have seen from the anchor's chair these moments where political power shifts or we leave the EU. And I'm of course conscious that that was part of your father's life too, not just famously being at the liberation of Belson, but even before that. I think this was just before you

No? No, think so.

I'm surprised because you obviously grew up to be a journalist too. It's an incredible moment to have seen.

I don't think most reporters, and you're a reporter, do talk very much about what they've done, because they're always in the present, and they don't. I didn't talk to my father about about anything about it. He didn't like politics for a start. He wasn't interested in politics at all.

Really, why wasn't he? He thought it was messy or dirty.

Messy Charlatan's couldn't believe a word they said, all that kind of thing.

He'd be perfect for the moment, I think.

Yes, but he didn't know. He didn't really it wasn't interested in the machinations of politics. He did one two general elections, but he sort of did it as an observer rather than he wasn't really interested. And then his wartime and this being out in the desert during the war, and then I think the bravest thing he did when he came back was to fly with bomber Command. He

Now I get that I did well. I wondered if it was because he didn't want to center himself, that what was more important was with the actual events and the observer's perspective is less important.

Yes, absolutely, which is a good.

Good way to tack and again is probably something we've.

Done lost right, been saying any of the things I've been saying to you this morning.

But the observer's eye is important to make sense of what's happening. Because he didn't.

Do observation of politics. He did occasional political interviews and famously, I think the when the BBC Panorama program got huge audiences, which you know, in those days eight ten million, during the Cuban missile crisis, he had a defense expert on and his last question was, well, we've had a question sent into us from somebody who says is it safe to go to bed tonight because they thought there might

But on the whole you've had to find the right words for the moment in live commentary on royal occasions. I'm thinking particularly about the funeral of Diana, which was a mense shock, and I still remember lines from your from your commentary.

Then I don't what do you remember?

I remember. I remember the coffin coming out of Kensington Palace that morning, and it was the first moment that people had seen a coffin, and it was very quiet, and you picked up, you know, after everyone watching had had a chance to absorb just the pictures. And I remember, you know, learning a huge amount from that that when are the moments where you should not speak rather than speak?

It's one of the great you Well, it's interesting that the BBC, in the week after Dana was killed in the car crash, met every day and they're always angst thing about what tone should we take for this funeral? And I said, just learn your business. You don't adopt a tone, you reflect a tone. And so and I remember as that coffin came down from Kensington Palace, the hearse and turned, there was a shout. Two women in the crowd at the gate just shouted, God bless you, Dana,

It's obvious you you were not happy about the king

I thought it was handled impeccably, really, and I was surprised by that. I mean, Trump didn't take advantage of it in the way that I thought he might, and the politics of the Iran War were kept out of it as far as possible. But I thought that, and maybe this was wrong. I thought that by postponing the visit, we'd put pressure on Trump, though actually nobody puts much pressure on Trump, not until the midterms. That may put pressure on I thought it might just distance us from it.

The one Congress, Yeah.

And people said, amazing, twelve standing ovations. Actually, you can't say good morning in Congress if you're a visitor without getting a standing ovation. They're all getting up at every turn. But that was a very clever and subtle speech about the relationship. It doesn't change the relationship, but it And I don't know what purpose it actually serves for Britain, because I mean, the Scotch whiskey got a cut in

I mean, is it not change policy? But perhaps there's a value and a purpose in the fact that he is uniquely played and use the opportunity to talk about the courage of the people of Ukraine or the importance of checks and balances in front of lawmakers and a president, some of whom don't generally want to hear any of that and won't hear any of it said to their face.

Well, the mystery is the mystique of monarchy, because if the French president had gone and said it, or if German president had gone and said it, or Malonia or anybody else. Nobody has taken a bit of notice. But the Americans have partly because they many of them have their history as in Britain, this huge respect for hereditary monarchy, which is I agree, it's a mystery and it's worth trading on.

Are you a monarchist yourself.

I'm a monarchist, but I think I'm in favor of a monarchy that adapts. I remember that South Africa the way when Aparthe collapsed, the Africana prem minister tell the Africanas adapt or die. That was their slogan, adapt or die. And I think with our monarchy just adapting is very important and the signs is actually happening because I think, rather to the discomfiture of the king, William has said, change is on my agenda. He said, it's a Canadian comedian,

And the King himself the changes he's made, particularly the way that he took his brother's title away from him over the Epstein affairs.

Yes, that was inevitable, wasn't it.

Well, we can say it's inevitable now. For a long time it looked like something impossible to take away a title he that is his birthright. How much damage do you think has been done to the family and the institution through Andrew?

I think I don't know. You can say way would Sun, but actually the palace as a whole failed to do anything to control his you know, when he was I mean this ridiculous thing that had been made a UK ambassador for trade, which is absurd, and everybody knew it was crazy and that he wasn't actually doing anything for trade at all, but it was sort of connived at So there's a The thing I'm against is the lack of openness in the royal family, and I think they

An elected head of state.

Yeah, when it works there, because you know, it's much much smaller country, much more cohesive. I mean, it's accepted. But think of a president that would work for England, for another country, Wales for a third country, Scotland for a fourth, Northern Ireland. I mean, I think it would

Do you miss being part of those kinds of occasions and commentating on them, No, A moment that's passed.

Well, I'll tell you what. I've always stopped doing things when I thought I've sort of done them as well as I can. I mean, I did Question Time for twenty five years and I was coming up to eighty auto recommend was and I thought, actually, this is only going to go downhill from here. One day someone is going to come up and say, do you know, I think it's time you're stopped doing this. So I stopped

Go out on a high.

But is why I like doing podcasts and this and that. I mean, when an election comes up, I have to say I still think, hmmm, I wonder whether I couldn't do that better than terrible arrogance. But I've always I enjoy broadcasting. So if you enjoy it, and it's my it's in my blood. I mean, I see an election broadcast and I want to be there commanding the stage. I like it and I like question Time for that reason. So if another vehicle came start all over.

Again, who knows. David Dimblebigh, thank you so much.

Thank you for attempting me, and I enjoyed talking to you.

And that's where we left things. I did think he would enjoy it in the end. Most importantly, I hope you found the conversation valuable. Dimblebee's verdict on Ki Testarmer is harsh and for that reason, in particular the Prime Minister's record, the fact economic growth has risen this year. That's all in my notes at Bloomberg dot com. Forward slash Michelle, Thanks as ever to the team producers Jessica Beck and Chris Martlou guest booker Ilan Bird, video producer