WEBVTT - Taming Labour and Facing Down Farage: Steve Richards on Burnham's Plan 0:00:02.759 --> 0:00:07.680 Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. 0:00:09.160 --> 0:00:12.800 The last few weeks have been kind of spellbinding. Andy 0:00:12.880 --> 0:00:15.720 Burnham won a by election, he became an MP, and 0:00:15.760 --> 0:00:18.079 within weeks of that he's going to be Prime Minister. 0:00:18.480 --> 0:00:21.800 We're in an extraordinary period and because it's moving so fast, 0:00:22.160 --> 0:00:24.520 you can lose how astonishing it is. 0:00:26.640 --> 0:00:32.640 Steve Richards, podcaster and UK political commentator Nigel Farage has 0:00:32.680 --> 0:00:35.440 definitely been an actor in this Labour drama. 0:00:35.479 --> 0:00:38.479 Hasn't he reform of being ahead and opinion polls in 0:00:38.520 --> 0:00:41.839 Britain for a long time now, and part of his 0:00:42.000 --> 0:00:45.640 task is to turn that round. I think what he 0:00:46.120 --> 0:00:50.400 will try and do is become the figure all those 0:00:50.520 --> 0:00:56.000 who want to stop Farage becoming Prime minister feel okay 0:00:56.080 --> 0:00:57.880 about coalescing. 0:00:57.360 --> 0:01:03.560 Around on Bloomberg Weekend. This is the Mishal Husain Show. 0:01:04.440 --> 0:01:12.200 I'm Mishal Husain. We did a UK politics episode here 0:01:12.280 --> 0:01:15.319 a few weeks ago, but so much has happened since 0:01:15.760 --> 0:01:18.800 that it was time to return a new prime minister. 0:01:19.080 --> 0:01:22.520 Andy Burnham looks set to soon be seen walking up 0:01:22.560 --> 0:01:26.600 Downing Street and taking the reins of power. Part of 0:01:26.680 --> 0:01:29.960 the background to that the Labour Party deciding to replace 0:01:30.040 --> 0:01:33.840 its leader mid term has been the rise of Nigel Farage, 0:01:34.400 --> 0:01:36.480 and this has been a week when he has again 0:01:36.600 --> 0:01:41.800 dominated the headlines. There's been scrutiny of his donors, his benefits, 0:01:41.840 --> 0:01:45.520 his property portfolio, and he has responded to that by 0:01:45.560 --> 0:01:49.040 calling for a rerun of the contest for his parliamentary seat. 0:01:49.800 --> 0:01:53.960 So there is a lot happening in British politics right now. 0:01:54.840 --> 0:01:59.480 Labour is hoping to look refreshed and revived through bringing 0:01:59.520 --> 0:02:03.560 in Andy Burnham, someone who was until recently the mayor 0:02:03.600 --> 0:02:07.040 of one of England's great cities. I interviewed him when 0:02:07.080 --> 0:02:10.000 he was in that role in Manchester. He talked about 0:02:10.040 --> 0:02:16.240 his ambition, his responsibilities, his sense of mission. He was 0:02:16.560 --> 0:02:20.600 very far then from being a national leader. I've been 0:02:20.639 --> 0:02:25.600 thinking too of the change in Keir Starmer's fortunes from 0:02:25.639 --> 0:02:28.800 the moment that we stood together on a TV debate 0:02:28.880 --> 0:02:32.959 stage days before the last UK general election only two 0:02:33.040 --> 0:02:35.840 years ago. But he had the wind in his sales 0:02:35.880 --> 0:02:40.600 then he was the coming man taking us through all 0:02:40.639 --> 0:02:46.239 of this. Is Steve Richards' longtime political commentator and now podcaster, 0:02:46.760 --> 0:02:50.120 host of Rock and Roll Politics, a podcast with a 0:02:50.160 --> 0:02:54.919 loyal army of listeners who he calls the cooperative. Steve 0:02:55.040 --> 0:02:58.960 is particularly knowledgeable about Labour politics and leaders. He's the 0:02:59.000 --> 0:03:01.200 author of many books, some of them are on the 0:03:01.240 --> 0:03:03.640 table when he came into the studio, and I've put 0:03:03.639 --> 0:03:07.120 details in the show notes, and do have a look 0:03:07.160 --> 0:03:11.040 at Bloomberg dot com forward slash Mitchell, because that is 0:03:11.080 --> 0:03:13.960 where you will find my notes and reflections on each 0:03:14.040 --> 0:03:17.640 and every episode, including what I read before and after 0:03:17.720 --> 0:03:21.840 the conversations. And this time with Steve, we begin with 0:03:22.000 --> 0:03:29.040 his writing and a very early observation of British politics. 0:03:29.919 --> 0:03:32.400 I'm sure we're going to talk about characters in the 0:03:32.400 --> 0:03:34.359 present day one in particular. 0:03:34.480 --> 0:03:36.760 Yeah, exactly. 0:03:37.160 --> 0:03:41.520 There's a great story that you share about Wilson and 0:03:42.000 --> 0:03:44.080 seeing him have an egg thrown at him and the 0:03:44.120 --> 0:03:47.040 way he responded to it. 0:03:46.160 --> 0:03:52.440 It's an absolutely for me, a moment where politics came alive. 0:03:52.600 --> 0:03:57.200 I was there and I was very young, and it 0:03:57.360 --> 0:03:58.080 was just so. 0:03:57.920 --> 0:04:02.680 Exciting and life. It seems to bring him alive horribly. 0:04:03.480 --> 0:04:08.840 He looked about ninety and this happened, and he changed, 0:04:09.440 --> 0:04:13.600 came about thirty years younger, and the whole mood of 0:04:13.640 --> 0:04:16.880 the hall changed. And I was about ten or eleven, 0:04:16.960 --> 0:04:19.599 but I found it fascinating. I can do it with 0:04:19.640 --> 0:04:22.360 the Harold Wilson impersonation, but it will be lost on 0:04:22.480 --> 0:04:23.120 most of your. 0:04:23.000 --> 0:04:25.479 Audience, or share it with me now though he's. 0:04:25.320 --> 0:04:27.800 Sort of looked up with this egg down and I said, 0:04:28.520 --> 0:04:31.640 now here we have six months of a Labour government, 0:04:31.960 --> 0:04:34.360 which goes to show you could only afford to throw 0:04:34.400 --> 0:04:38.080 eggs under a Labour government. And the whole audience laughed 0:04:38.120 --> 0:04:42.039 and erupted, and the I say, Wilson looked about fifty 0:04:42.160 --> 0:04:46.520 compared to ninety. And it's the humor as a power 0:04:46.560 --> 0:04:47.880 of leadership. 0:04:47.400 --> 0:04:49.280 And the presence of mind. 0:04:49.360 --> 0:04:50.360 And to act quickly. 0:04:50.640 --> 0:04:54.240 Exactly right, because he's before the social media era. But 0:04:54.520 --> 0:04:58.400 hearing you describe that, I can imagine him in the 0:04:58.440 --> 0:05:01.880 era of being door-stopped with the camera and having phones 0:05:01.880 --> 0:05:05.600 in your face all the time. Yeah, exactly, exactly, Steve. 0:05:05.800 --> 0:05:09.719 I wanted to start with the theme of your latest book, 0:05:09.960 --> 0:05:13.960 Turning Points, because it is about moments of crisis or change. 0:05:14.080 --> 0:05:17.520 Some of them are British political crises, some of them 0:05:17.520 --> 0:05:20.000 are international, the decision to go to war in Iraq, 0:05:20.120 --> 0:05:23.440 the pandemic, the global financial crash. But it made me 0:05:23.520 --> 0:05:28.200 wonder about something relating to now. Technically, what we're about 0:05:28.240 --> 0:05:31.279 to see is effectively a handover from one Labour prime 0:05:31.279 --> 0:05:33.760 minister to another. But do you think it could be 0:05:33.800 --> 0:05:36.160 more than that? Do you think that this transition could 0:05:36.200 --> 0:05:37.839 actually be a turning point for Britain. 0:05:38.880 --> 0:05:42.560 I think it could. And it's not automatic. When there 0:05:42.600 --> 0:05:46.800 is a change of prime minister mid term. The external 0:05:46.960 --> 0:05:51.400 challenges remain the same, a lot of the government remains 0:05:51.440 --> 0:05:56.000 the same. But in this case, the rise of Andy Burnham, 0:05:56.320 --> 0:06:00.480 it could be because he has got a very clear 0:06:01.080 --> 0:06:06.080 agenda for what has gone wrong with the British state 0:06:06.200 --> 0:06:09.520 and how Britain is governed and how he wants to 0:06:09.520 --> 0:06:13.920 put it right now. If he and it's a big if, 0:06:14.360 --> 0:06:19.000 if he implements his plan, this will be a turning point. 0:06:19.320 --> 0:06:23.359 And no one quite knows in advance how a prime 0:06:23.360 --> 0:06:28.880 minister is going to perform, but certainly his ideas partly 0:06:28.960 --> 0:06:32.440 learned from when he left Westminster many years ago, has 0:06:32.480 --> 0:06:34.719 the potential to be transformative. 0:06:34.880 --> 0:06:39.440 This great rebalancing of power, the biggest rebalancing of power 0:06:39.480 --> 0:06:43.719 in British history or recent British history, which he has stated. 0:06:43.760 --> 0:06:46.920 And we don't have very much detail on that, and 0:06:47.000 --> 0:06:49.800 I have, and you have much more than me heard 0:06:50.720 --> 0:06:53.480 people are about to lead or want to lead, you know, 0:06:53.560 --> 0:06:58.040 making these big speeches, I'll reduce welfare spending, I'll build 0:06:58.080 --> 0:07:00.800 more houses. But you think there is something fundamental that 0:07:00.839 --> 0:07:01.400 he wants to get. 0:07:01.839 --> 0:07:07.279 So one qualification in British politics. Quite often leaders who 0:07:08.200 --> 0:07:12.200 are about to become prime minister, whatever the context, often 0:07:12.480 --> 0:07:16.440 claim their big idea is a change in the way 0:07:16.600 --> 0:07:21.440 power is exercised. I think the difference here is Andy 0:07:21.480 --> 0:07:25.640 Burnham means it. I think his experience of being a 0:07:25.720 --> 0:07:31.160 mayor of Greater Manchester, where he saw certainly in transport, 0:07:31.960 --> 0:07:40.840 the power of local leadership translating into an actual policy development, 0:07:41.600 --> 0:07:44.120 means that he thinks this is a way forward, and 0:07:44.160 --> 0:07:47.320 I think he's got views also on the way the 0:07:47.360 --> 0:07:52.040 British state has become pretty dysfunctional, more widely beyond the 0:07:52.120 --> 0:07:55.320 need to devolve power. He calls it the outsourced state. 0:07:55.480 --> 0:08:00.360 A lot of Britain is run by unelected agents, these 0:08:01.520 --> 0:08:07.920 private companies, and the paths of accountability and responsibility are 0:08:07.960 --> 0:08:11.840 so blurred it's very hard for a government to get 0:08:11.880 --> 0:08:15.240 anything done. Now, how he finds the money to deal 0:08:15.240 --> 0:08:17.360 with this is a huge, huge question. 0:08:17.120 --> 0:08:18.680 And we're going to dig into all of that, the 0:08:18.760 --> 0:08:21.760 ideas and how to implement them and what they'll cost. 0:08:21.800 --> 0:08:23.800 But I want to talk for a moment about how 0:08:24.240 --> 0:08:26.480 the UK got to this point in time where a 0:08:26.520 --> 0:08:30.320 prime minister who wanted huge majority less than two years 0:08:30.320 --> 0:08:33.080 ago ends up being booted out by his own party. 0:08:33.120 --> 0:08:37.600 Now you're really plugged into Labour politics, in particular your son, 0:08:37.720 --> 0:08:40.240 your son in law of both MPs. Your daughter is 0:08:40.280 --> 0:08:44.680 a political advisor too. When did you first start hearing 0:08:44.800 --> 0:08:48.559 that Starmer was in serious trouble with his own MPs, Well. 0:08:48.400 --> 0:08:50.920 Not from any of them. 0:08:51.120 --> 0:08:54.280 I find that hard to be seriously seriously they careful. 0:08:55.120 --> 0:08:57.520 It ends up on air, really really careful. 0:08:58.200 --> 0:09:01.440 I think they see me as irritant to be honest, 0:09:01.520 --> 0:09:04.960 because I just have my own views, I mean, and 0:09:05.000 --> 0:09:09.920 my view is that he was in trouble from quite 0:09:10.360 --> 0:09:15.960 early on. Leadership requires sort of titanic qualities and he 0:09:16.000 --> 0:09:21.400 came into politics very late and didn't have many of 0:09:21.440 --> 0:09:25.920 those titanic qualities. He had a few resilience when he 0:09:26.080 --> 0:09:29.480 chose to to have a dogged attention to policy detail, 0:09:30.880 --> 0:09:33.920 but I don't think he understood how you had to 0:09:35.080 --> 0:09:38.480 work a government, how to liaise with his MPs who 0:09:38.520 --> 0:09:43.280 became antagonistic quite early on some of them. 0:09:43.320 --> 0:09:46.640 Anyway, should Starmer ever have been leader of the Labour Party, 0:09:46.679 --> 0:09:48.360 then what would you give him credit for. 0:09:49.360 --> 0:09:53.840 Well, on one level, it's fascinating because here is someone 0:09:54.480 --> 0:09:57.600 who not only led Labour to a victory, but a 0:09:57.720 --> 0:10:02.800 landslide election victory, and Labour don't win many general elections 0:10:02.800 --> 0:10:07.080 in Britain. So that was an achievement, There's no doubt 0:10:07.360 --> 0:10:10.559 about it. And if you step back from all the noise, 0:10:11.120 --> 0:10:16.839 there were also policy reforms of some considerable significance. The 0:10:16.960 --> 0:10:20.240 National Health Service is in a better place now measurably 0:10:20.400 --> 0:10:24.600 than it was, and I think the economy is more 0:10:24.800 --> 0:10:29.280 stable than it was. But you know, to be honest, 0:10:30.040 --> 0:10:34.240 after the fourteen years of pretty wild rule, the Liz 0:10:34.320 --> 0:10:39.040 Truss premiership, the Boris Johnson premiership, I think the anti 0:10:39.120 --> 0:10:43.080 Tory mood was set. And he'll hate me for saying this, 0:10:43.280 --> 0:10:46.240 but the degree to which Keir Starmer brought about that 0:10:46.360 --> 0:10:50.440 victory is questionable. I think Boris Johnson, Liz Trusts and 0:10:50.520 --> 0:10:54.040 others helped Labour return with that landslide. 0:10:54.040 --> 0:10:56.679 He lost the election. Conservatives lost the election more than 0:10:56.720 --> 0:11:02.040 Labour winning it. He did, however, transform the party in 0:11:02.120 --> 0:11:04.319 the minds of those were very against it during the 0:11:04.400 --> 0:11:09.320 Jeremy Corbyn years and that period Andy Burnham sat out 0:11:09.480 --> 0:11:14.280 because he was running Greater Manchester in that time. Is 0:11:14.320 --> 0:11:17.040 that an achievement in your view? That Starmer did put 0:11:17.080 --> 0:11:19.280 the party in a position where people who had turned 0:11:19.280 --> 0:11:20.040 against them compared. 0:11:20.120 --> 0:11:23.439 It was partly an achievement and partly a problem. Here's 0:11:23.440 --> 0:11:27.920 why the achievement was very quickly he took control of 0:11:27.960 --> 0:11:31.680 the Labour Party. The Labour Party is really hard to control. 0:11:32.640 --> 0:11:35.920 And I see Neil Kinnock who led Labour in the 0:11:36.000 --> 0:11:40.080 nineteen eighties and really had to change Labour from the 0:11:40.120 --> 0:11:45.760 doldrums of absolute election slaughters. And Neil Kinnock says, I 0:11:45.800 --> 0:11:48.040 won't use the swear words he put in as well, 0:11:48.040 --> 0:11:49.560 but he said, oh the hell did he do this? 0:11:49.679 --> 0:11:53.920 You know? Took Neil Kinnock at nine years very quickly kissed. 0:11:54.000 --> 0:11:58.040 Armer had the leavers of power in the Labour Party. However, 0:11:58.640 --> 0:12:04.800 in the way he became a very authoritarian leader, expelling 0:12:04.960 --> 0:12:09.880 people who challenged what he and his then chief advisor, 0:12:09.920 --> 0:12:14.839 Morgan Sweeney regarded as the only acceptable route to take. 0:12:15.440 --> 0:12:19.040 The sort of sacking of various ministers on the so 0:12:19.120 --> 0:12:23.160 called soft left of the Labour Party ended up giving 0:12:23.240 --> 0:12:27.320 those very victims more power than they've ever possessed before. 0:12:27.880 --> 0:12:30.760 I remember from of them end up being key at 0:12:30.960 --> 0:12:33.640 Burnham supporter. He made enemies that way, but he say, 0:12:33.640 --> 0:12:37.520 wouldn't he steve that he was standing up for principles 0:12:37.520 --> 0:12:39.760 that after that time under the Tories, where it seemed 0:12:39.760 --> 0:12:42.439 that you could get away with anything as a as 0:12:42.440 --> 0:12:45.960 an MP or a minister. He wanted to uphold standards 0:12:45.960 --> 0:12:48.520 in public life and therefore if people made mistakes, they 0:12:48.520 --> 0:12:48.959 had to go. 0:12:49.240 --> 0:12:51.679 I think it was broader than that. So for example, 0:12:51.800 --> 0:12:55.280 in the build up to the election, they blocked certain 0:12:55.360 --> 0:12:58.360 candidates from standing not for making mistakes but for what 0:12:58.440 --> 0:13:01.760 they believe. And speaking to Kis Starmer about this when 0:13:01.760 --> 0:13:04.760 he was in opposition, you know, I said to him, 0:13:05.120 --> 0:13:08.120 because you just end up with a perception of a 0:13:08.160 --> 0:13:11.839 party that's pretty weird. You know, there is forty points 0:13:11.880 --> 0:13:15.280 ahead in the opinion polls, sort of turning in on itself. 0:13:15.800 --> 0:13:18.800 But his view was, or the view of his advisors, 0:13:19.000 --> 0:13:24.280 was you get credit for taking on elements of your party, 0:13:24.520 --> 0:13:27.120 and I'm not sure whether that's the case. 0:13:27.559 --> 0:13:31.120 He also would appear blocked Andy Burnham from returning to 0:13:31.200 --> 0:13:32.880 Parliament earlier than he had. 0:13:33.000 --> 0:13:35.000 That was for a different reason, of course. 0:13:35.280 --> 0:13:38.600 Because he didn't want him in parliament able to stand 0:13:38.640 --> 0:13:40.760 against him, able to stand against it has now come 0:13:40.800 --> 0:13:41.640 to pass, Which. 0:13:41.480 --> 0:13:45.559 Has now come to pass. It is the most extraordinary 0:13:45.880 --> 0:13:50.600 sequence of recent times. Just a few months ago Kirs Starmer, 0:13:51.640 --> 0:13:57.880 with an absolute, overt ruthless determination, went to the meeting 0:13:57.920 --> 0:14:01.640 of Labour's governing body and per personally put the case 0:14:02.320 --> 0:14:06.000 for blocking him and succeeded because he had complete control 0:14:06.080 --> 0:14:08.839 of the Labour Party. And yet a few months later 0:14:08.920 --> 0:14:11.680 and this was a sign that was over for Kirs Starmer. 0:14:12.120 --> 0:14:16.480 He was too weak to repeat the exercise. And Addie Burnham, 0:14:16.480 --> 0:14:19.400 who looked as if there was no route into the 0:14:19.400 --> 0:14:23.400 House of Commons, found a route. And the last few 0:14:23.440 --> 0:14:27.920 days weeks have been kind of spellbinding. From he was 0:14:28.000 --> 0:14:30.160 outside the House of Commons, he won a by election, 0:14:30.360 --> 0:14:33.760 he became an MP, and within weeks of that he's 0:14:33.800 --> 0:14:36.239 going to be Prime Minister. It's extraordinary. 0:14:36.280 --> 0:14:39.040 But even the circumstance of that seat becoming available, the 0:14:39.040 --> 0:14:42.800 one he stood in, was because a Labour MP gave 0:14:42.920 --> 0:14:45.600 up their seat in order to make way for him, 0:14:45.600 --> 0:14:47.520 which I haven't seen happen before. 0:14:47.600 --> 0:14:50.760 It's never happened before. And this MP was a very 0:14:50.800 --> 0:14:51.840 ambitious MP. 0:14:52.080 --> 0:14:55.040 Who presumably will now come back, who. 0:14:54.240 --> 0:14:57.360 Will come back in some shape or form. Absolutely there 0:14:57.400 --> 0:15:01.440 will be a reward for that sacrifice. And what a sacrifice. 0:15:01.480 --> 0:15:03.920 You know, it's hard work getting a seat and he 0:15:04.760 --> 0:15:08.880 gave it up and in a way it was it 0:15:08.920 --> 0:15:13.360 was like an episode of sort of Faulty Towers, you 0:15:13.360 --> 0:15:17.840 know where number ten and Kissama thought, yeah, we've got 0:15:17.880 --> 0:15:21.000 through it. And then it was announced this MP was 0:15:21.080 --> 0:15:25.360 standing down for Andy Burnham and that was it. They 0:15:25.400 --> 0:15:26.320 couldn't block him. 0:15:26.800 --> 0:15:29.440 In your book, The Prime Minister, you have a very 0:15:29.560 --> 0:15:32.520 useful checklist for if the country is looking to elect 0:15:32.520 --> 0:15:35.400 a prime minister, he or she must have the following qualifications. 0:15:35.640 --> 0:15:37.400 And the first one you put on the list is 0:15:37.480 --> 0:15:40.960 he or she must be a political teacher, which I 0:15:41.000 --> 0:15:44.080 thought teacher was a really interesting word to use here. 0:15:44.520 --> 0:15:46.640 What do you mean by it? And is Andy Burnham 0:15:46.680 --> 0:15:47.920 a political teacher? Yeah? 0:15:48.000 --> 0:15:54.800 A political teacher is absolutely essential because policies rerupt around 0:15:55.040 --> 0:16:01.600 voters all the time and what many inspiring leaders forget 0:16:01.720 --> 0:16:06.080 to do is explain why they are doing what they're 0:16:06.240 --> 0:16:10.600 doing and more widely. You have to then explain how 0:16:10.680 --> 0:16:14.880 that policy fits into the rest of your government's policies, 0:16:15.400 --> 0:16:20.200 and then frame an overall sense of purpose and mission. 0:16:20.760 --> 0:16:24.440 And teaching can take kind of many different forms. President 0:16:24.440 --> 0:16:28.280 Trump is a teacher in his own way, in. 0:16:28.160 --> 0:16:31.400 His mastery of social media. 0:16:31.240 --> 0:16:36.640 In his hunger to be the main commentator on his 0:16:36.680 --> 0:16:42.640 own leadership, and so he is an around the clock commentator. 0:16:43.440 --> 0:16:47.960 Now he does it in a very eccentric way, but 0:16:48.640 --> 0:16:52.320 he is there explaining what he's doing and why he's 0:16:52.360 --> 0:16:55.640 doing it all the time. Now, Addie Burnham is a 0:16:55.680 --> 0:17:01.000 completely different political character, but he too is I think 0:17:01.480 --> 0:17:04.879 a teacher. I say I think because you never wholly 0:17:04.960 --> 0:17:08.880 know until they get into the position of ultimate power president, 0:17:08.960 --> 0:17:12.520 prime minister. But I think he is one of those 0:17:12.680 --> 0:17:16.280 who is conscious all the time. He needs to be 0:17:16.359 --> 0:17:20.520 in a never ending dialogue with voters. His social media 0:17:21.280 --> 0:17:25.680 videos are brilliant. Now whether it's going to be quite challenging. 0:17:25.720 --> 0:17:29.840 So devolution his big theme is a quite dry topic, 0:17:30.920 --> 0:17:34.240 so he has to make it exciting. So the big 0:17:34.280 --> 0:17:38.040 test of his teaching capacity is to come. But the 0:17:38.080 --> 0:17:41.280 great election winners and those who remain in power for 0:17:41.320 --> 0:17:43.800 a long time are political teachers. 0:17:43.920 --> 0:17:47.200 So it's interesting that you think he is that. And 0:17:47.720 --> 0:17:52.800 obviously he's had a significant experience in Greater Manchester for 0:17:52.840 --> 0:17:56.240 nearly a decade. He's grown in that job, no doubt. 0:17:56.240 --> 0:18:00.200 But it's worth reminding everyone that he ran for the 0:18:00.240 --> 0:18:04.280 Labour leadership twice before and lost. And you when you 0:18:04.359 --> 0:18:07.320 interviewed him a couple of years ago, now you did 0:18:07.560 --> 0:18:09.920 put this criticism to him that he has been seen 0:18:09.920 --> 0:18:12.720 as a bit of a shape shifter, loyal to Tony Blair, 0:18:12.720 --> 0:18:16.000 loyal to Gordon Brown, not necessarily willing to go up 0:18:16.000 --> 0:18:19.680 against Jeremy Corbyn. Yeah, he had an answer. 0:18:19.280 --> 0:18:22.480 For you, Yeah, I mean it was quite interesting. He said, 0:18:22.920 --> 0:18:25.879 I was always to the left of New Labour. 0:18:26.200 --> 0:18:28.159 This means essentially to the left of Tony Blair. 0:18:28.359 --> 0:18:31.760 Yeah, yeah, So this is his own definition of who 0:18:31.880 --> 0:18:36.480 he is and always was. And I have some sympathy 0:18:36.480 --> 0:18:38.320 with him about this. As you know, there's a joke 0:18:38.440 --> 0:18:42.399 doing the rounds about someone going into the pub who's 0:18:42.440 --> 0:18:47.000 a Blairite a brown eye at Corbn easter Hallo, Andy Burnham. 0:18:47.560 --> 0:18:51.320 But looking back to that period, there were lots of 0:18:51.359 --> 0:18:55.760 people who came into Parliament during the Tony Blair period 0:18:56.400 --> 0:19:00.600 who were ambitious and wanted to get into Tony Blair's government, 0:19:01.000 --> 0:19:05.040 and they hadn't always been where Tony Blair was, and 0:19:05.080 --> 0:19:07.680 they moved with the times and then they moved again. 0:19:08.080 --> 0:19:11.240 Lots of people do that. So I think probably his 0:19:11.359 --> 0:19:15.960 self description of being to the left economically but small 0:19:16.040 --> 0:19:20.840 c conservative on issues like crime and immigration is probably 0:19:21.080 --> 0:19:42.360 an accurate place to start in trying to understand him. 0:19:42.440 --> 0:19:46.480 So let's dig into what he's done in Manchester, his 0:19:46.600 --> 0:19:50.160 record and the idea that manchester Ism is the new 0:19:50.240 --> 0:19:53.359 political philosophy that he will bring to the government of 0:19:53.400 --> 0:19:56.760 the UK, a version of what he's achieved in Manchester. 0:19:57.000 --> 0:20:00.199 Can you explain it with reference to the buses? What 0:20:00.240 --> 0:20:01.080 did he do? 0:20:01.680 --> 0:20:02.160 Yeah? 0:20:02.240 --> 0:20:04.200 The terminology is significant. 0:20:04.560 --> 0:20:07.639 Yeah, the terminology is really significant. And I made a 0:20:07.680 --> 0:20:09.640 mistake in that interview idea and I said, so you've 0:20:09.680 --> 0:20:14.720 become much more enthusiastic about public ownership. He uses the 0:20:14.840 --> 0:20:19.679 term public control. So what happened in Greater Manchester and 0:20:19.760 --> 0:20:22.720 it had already begun before he got there, and he's 0:20:22.760 --> 0:20:25.960 been criticized for that as well, But I think that's 0:20:26.080 --> 0:20:29.560 unfair because you know, it's not his fault that good 0:20:29.600 --> 0:20:32.640 things were happening. It's how did he adapt to it 0:20:32.680 --> 0:20:37.199 when he got there. And so the buses were privatized, 0:20:37.600 --> 0:20:41.479 which meant only the routes that were profitable were run 0:20:41.760 --> 0:20:45.639 with any kind of regularity. There's trams in Manchester. They 0:20:45.640 --> 0:20:51.200 were completely disconnected from other transport services. So they connected 0:20:51.440 --> 0:20:56.040 the whole thing and they regulated. Fairs were kept to 0:20:56.400 --> 0:20:59.080 a minimum. You could have a ticket where you could 0:20:59.119 --> 0:21:02.040 go from one form of transport a bus to another 0:21:02.160 --> 0:21:05.359 the tracks as happens in London. And I remember the 0:21:05.400 --> 0:21:07.919 day it all was interconnected. He did one of his 0:21:08.080 --> 0:21:12.560 very clever pieces to camera on social media and it 0:21:12.600 --> 0:21:18.119 felt exciting. Now that's not the same as renationalization because 0:21:18.160 --> 0:21:20.400 the private sector is still involved. 0:21:20.960 --> 0:21:21.480 Franchise. 0:21:21.520 --> 0:21:27.200 They get a franchise, but it's it's regulated and coordinated. 0:21:26.440 --> 0:21:28.840 And it they're forced to go to places which they 0:21:28.920 --> 0:21:31.200 might not have chosen to go to route wise because 0:21:31.200 --> 0:21:34.880 it wasn't profitable exactly. And I think passenger numbers have risen, so. 0:21:34.840 --> 0:21:38.680 Passenger numbers worked in have risen. Revenue therefore goes up 0:21:39.320 --> 0:21:44.000 and it generates growth because people can move around more efficiently. 0:21:44.600 --> 0:21:46.840 And the key thing, and this is where it works, 0:21:46.880 --> 0:21:50.280 I think, is these mayors are accountable for this, so 0:21:50.359 --> 0:21:52.840 if it had gone wrong, Vernon would have been a 0:21:52.880 --> 0:21:56.359 disaster area. The fact that it worked meant he was 0:21:56.440 --> 0:22:01.080 incredibly popular in Greater Manchester and so it is about 0:22:01.119 --> 0:22:04.880 how you work with the private sector in different ways. 0:22:05.320 --> 0:22:07.679 Now the big test is whether you can extend it 0:22:07.760 --> 0:22:12.440 across a whole country with different sized conurbations and all 0:22:12.440 --> 0:22:14.800 of that, and that's a huge question. 0:22:14.560 --> 0:22:17.080 And not just in transport, in lots of other areas. 0:22:17.160 --> 0:22:20.840 This exactly pamphlet that was released in this critical period 0:22:21.160 --> 0:22:23.600 a few weeks ago as Labour was mulling a new 0:22:23.680 --> 0:22:26.080 leader called the Productive State, which I think is known 0:22:26.200 --> 0:22:28.560 to be an influence. It comes from a group of 0:22:28.680 --> 0:22:32.440 MPs and Andy Burnham's endorsed this position. The Productive State 0:22:32.480 --> 0:22:35.280 of Framework for manchesteris and which says that what's been 0:22:35.320 --> 0:22:38.080 done with buses could be done for water and energy. 0:22:38.680 --> 0:22:42.359 I mean, the idea is not just to make services better, 0:22:42.400 --> 0:22:45.240 but also to bring down the cost of living again, 0:22:45.320 --> 0:22:47.919 something that everyone wants to do everywhere in the world. 0:22:48.240 --> 0:22:51.040 I think what's interesting about this paper, and which I 0:22:51.040 --> 0:22:53.439 hadn't really thought about in this way till it's spelt 0:22:53.480 --> 0:22:56.880 it out, is that it says that the high cost 0:22:56.880 --> 0:22:59.320 of essentials in the UK is not just about individual 0:22:59.359 --> 0:23:03.600 household It puts pressure on public spending because the welfare 0:23:03.640 --> 0:23:07.280 state has to cushion the blow of that. But the 0:23:07.280 --> 0:23:09.840 money it spends on housing benefit goes to landlords, or 0:23:09.880 --> 0:23:11.919 the money it might spend on energy bills goes to 0:23:11.960 --> 0:23:16.360 the energy companies. The state ameliorates without ever being permitted 0:23:16.400 --> 0:23:19.320 to cure directly. This is the fiscal escalator we are 0:23:19.359 --> 0:23:22.199 trapped on. Yeah, there's clearly a problem there, but it 0:23:22.200 --> 0:23:25.160 feels like an immense one to solve. 0:23:25.040 --> 0:23:27.080 It, really does. I think this is what he means 0:23:27.080 --> 0:23:32.879 by this phrase the outsourced state, because how do you 0:23:33.720 --> 0:23:37.760 to use another very popular phrase in British politics, take 0:23:37.880 --> 0:23:41.840 back control or a degree of control and your right 0:23:41.920 --> 0:23:47.040 to suggest or imply that. With transport, to some extent, 0:23:47.200 --> 0:23:52.600 it's easy because the sums involved aren't huge. I mean, 0:23:52.640 --> 0:23:56.840 buses are relatively cheap to run. The challenge with something 0:23:56.920 --> 0:24:00.960 like water is massive because the truth is there has 0:24:01.040 --> 0:24:06.480 been under investment in water since the privatization and before 0:24:06.600 --> 0:24:07.640 they were privatized. 0:24:08.000 --> 0:24:10.760 Where do you think those sums that will be necessary 0:24:10.800 --> 0:24:13.960 will come from? Because the choice could largely be taxation, 0:24:14.080 --> 0:24:17.800 or it could be borrowing. He has said he will 0:24:17.840 --> 0:24:21.399 stick to the current government's rules which limit borrowing for 0:24:21.480 --> 0:24:25.280 day to day spending. So I mean, what are you expecting, 0:24:25.359 --> 0:24:27.600 more taxation or more borrowing or a mix. 0:24:28.000 --> 0:24:30.320 There's going to have to be more taxation. I mean, 0:24:30.359 --> 0:24:33.280 if you look at what he has been saying, and 0:24:33.320 --> 0:24:35.359 I think at this point we do have to follow 0:24:35.480 --> 0:24:38.040 what he has been saying and assume he means it. 0:24:38.560 --> 0:24:40.920 So one of the things he has said is that 0:24:40.960 --> 0:24:44.520 he's going to initiate the biggest council house building program 0:24:44.680 --> 0:24:49.960 for decades. We know he wants to speed up plans 0:24:50.000 --> 0:24:54.000 for a national social care system. When he was Health Secretary, 0:24:54.119 --> 0:24:57.679 he had devised one and was going to fund it 0:24:57.760 --> 0:25:01.200 through various means, which got labeled as the death tax 0:25:01.320 --> 0:25:03.199