WEBVTT - Daybreak Weekend: US Jobs, UK Elections, RBA Decision 0:00:00.240 --> 0:00:07.680 Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news. 0:00:10.320 --> 0:00:13.360 This is Bloomberg Daybreak Weekend, our global look at the 0:00:13.360 --> 0:00:15.960 top stories in the coming week from our Daybreak anchors 0:00:16.040 --> 0:00:18.439 all around the world. Straight Ahead on the program, we 0:00:18.520 --> 0:00:21.440 look ahead to April jobs numbers in the US. I'm 0:00:21.520 --> 0:00:23.119 Nathan Hager in Washington. 0:00:23.160 --> 0:00:25.640 I'm Calaine Hebga in London, where we're looking ahead to 0:00:25.680 --> 0:00:30.120 an un usually important set of UK local elections. 0:00:30.440 --> 0:00:33.360 I'm Doug Prisner looking at how higher oil prices will 0:00:33.360 --> 0:00:36.000 affect the thinking at the Reserve Bank of Australia. 0:00:38.159 --> 0:00:42.200 That's all straight ahead on Bloomberg Daybreak Weekend on Bloomberg 0:00:42.240 --> 0:00:45.920 eleven three yeh New York, Bloomberg ninety nine to one, Washington, DC, 0:00:46.440 --> 0:00:51.559 Bloomberg ninety two nine, Boston, DAB Digital Radio, London, Syrias 0:00:51.720 --> 0:00:55.240 XM one twenty one, and around the world on Bloomberg Radio, 0:00:55.280 --> 0:00:57.520 dot Com and the Bloomberg Business app. 0:01:02.360 --> 0:01:05.120 Good day to you. I'm Nathan Hager. We begin today's 0:01:05.160 --> 0:01:09.120 program with some key economic data in the US. On Friday, 0:01:09.200 --> 0:01:11.760 we get non farm payrolls for the month of April 0:01:11.880 --> 0:01:15.120 at eight thirty am. Wall Street Time Here with us 0:01:15.160 --> 0:01:17.479 for more what to expect on jobs Friday and how 0:01:17.480 --> 0:01:20.720 that data could affect FED policy is Stuart paul Us, 0:01:20.840 --> 0:01:24.480 economist with Bloomberg Economics. Stuart, great to speak with you. 0:01:24.680 --> 0:01:26.520 I mean, it seems like we've been in this low 0:01:26.600 --> 0:01:30.000 higher low fire environment for a while now. Are the 0:01:30.040 --> 0:01:31.600 April numbers going to change that? 0:01:33.000 --> 0:01:34.640 You know, I don't think that the April numbers are 0:01:34.640 --> 0:01:36.920 going to change the thematic view that this is a 0:01:36.959 --> 0:01:41.640 low higher low fire situation, a low higher low fire environment. 0:01:42.160 --> 0:01:45.319 Right now, the consensus expects about sixty thousand jobs were 0:01:45.360 --> 0:01:47.840 added during the month of April, and that's a notable 0:01:47.880 --> 0:01:50.520 slowdown from the hiring pace registered in March, when about 0:01:50.520 --> 0:01:54.000 one hundred and seventy eight thousand workers were added to payrolls. Now, 0:01:54.400 --> 0:01:58.120 sixty thousand would still be a relatively strong reading the 0:01:58.160 --> 0:02:01.520 break even hiring pace, That hiring pace that's needed to 0:02:01.520 --> 0:02:04.760 hold the unemployment rate steady is likely closer to about 0:02:04.840 --> 0:02:07.680 thirty five thousand jobs added, So sixty k is a 0:02:07.680 --> 0:02:10.720 healthy print. It's even probably enough to push the unemployment 0:02:10.760 --> 0:02:13.679 rate down to four point two percent from four point 0:02:13.720 --> 0:02:16.880 three percent in March. That said, Nathan, when we look 0:02:16.919 --> 0:02:20.640 at alternative data sources, we're actually a little bit more cautious. 0:02:21.080 --> 0:02:23.960 High frequency and private sector data suggests that the hiring 0:02:23.960 --> 0:02:27.000 pace was a bit slower than the consensus expects for April, 0:02:27.480 --> 0:02:30.480 but the timing of Easter, which was celebrated during the 0:02:30.480 --> 0:02:33.680 payroll reports survey window, will definitely add a lot of 0:02:33.720 --> 0:02:36.639 noise to the data. So when we zoom out, when 0:02:36.680 --> 0:02:39.240 we think about the labor market and its totality, when 0:02:39.280 --> 0:02:41.520 we filter out the noise and account for the month 0:02:41.560 --> 0:02:44.360 to month volatility that we've seen throughout the start of 0:02:44.360 --> 0:02:47.160 this year, what we're basically seeing is a hiring pace 0:02:47.200 --> 0:02:49.920 that's just a little bit faster than we saw throughout 0:02:50.000 --> 0:02:54.480 last year. That's despite policy uncertainty, despite the war in Iran, 0:02:55.000 --> 0:02:58.960 and it's a healthy enough hiring pace to weigh on 0:02:59.000 --> 0:03:04.480 the unemployment rate. Like you say, it's relatively low hiring, 0:03:04.680 --> 0:03:07.799 but we also have a low enough degree of firing 0:03:08.440 --> 0:03:10.360 that the unemployment rate could be entering down. 0:03:11.120 --> 0:03:14.280 How do you account for the relative resiliency that we 0:03:14.320 --> 0:03:18.919 are seeing in this labor market despite all the uncertainties 0:03:18.960 --> 0:03:21.040 and all the pressures that you were just talking about. 0:03:21.639 --> 0:03:23.600 There's a lot of investment going on. We saw in 0:03:23.600 --> 0:03:28.160 the first quarter that investment plans and an actual investment 0:03:28.200 --> 0:03:31.720 that was laid out during the quarter was really strong. 0:03:32.520 --> 0:03:34.560 And when you have a lot of investment, you're also 0:03:34.639 --> 0:03:39.000 going to have some demand for workers to work those machines, 0:03:39.560 --> 0:03:42.040 and I think that that's part of what's sustaining the 0:03:42.120 --> 0:03:45.000 labor market right now. Beyond that, we're also getting a 0:03:45.000 --> 0:03:48.760 little bit of fiscal thrust. We had the distribution of 0:03:50.040 --> 0:03:54.960 relatively high, relatively large tax refunds throughout the first quarter 0:03:55.080 --> 0:03:58.560 and also obviously through April. And when that's the case, 0:03:58.600 --> 0:04:02.240 you have strong enough demand, you have enough going on 0:04:02.680 --> 0:04:07.240 in terms of total economic activity that workers are going 0:04:07.280 --> 0:04:10.720 to find places to land, they're going to find jobs 0:04:10.760 --> 0:04:14.200 to serve that demand. And so right now we have 0:04:14.240 --> 0:04:16.839 a little bit of fiscal thrust, we have a lot 0:04:16.880 --> 0:04:19.719 of cap X coming online, and we have enough labor 0:04:19.760 --> 0:04:22.719 demand to serve both of those needs to sustain the 0:04:22.760 --> 0:04:25.400 labor market where it is and to prevent any sort 0:04:25.400 --> 0:04:28.919 of fallout and ramp up in hiring. 0:04:28.640 --> 0:04:29.240 So to speak. 0:04:29.440 --> 0:04:32.520 Do you expect that to be able to continue to 0:04:32.520 --> 0:04:35.719 be sustained if we continue to see a conflict in 0:04:35.760 --> 0:04:39.240 the Middle East continuing. I expect so. 0:04:39.320 --> 0:04:42.599 At least for some time. It doesn't look to me, 0:04:43.160 --> 0:04:47.720 like the stimulus and the stimulative effect from the One 0:04:47.720 --> 0:04:50.120 Big Beautiful Bill Act and the tax refunds that people 0:04:50.160 --> 0:04:52.240 are seeing, it doesn't look like that's going to be 0:04:52.279 --> 0:04:56.200 depleted by high energy prices at least through the summer. 0:04:56.640 --> 0:04:58.960 It looks like consumers at least have that long of 0:04:58.960 --> 0:05:02.320 a runway. Consumption can last that long that I don't 0:05:02.320 --> 0:05:04.240 think that firms are going to be retrenching in their 0:05:04.279 --> 0:05:08.919 demand for labor, at least not immediately. And again, it 0:05:08.960 --> 0:05:11.480 looks like we're just in that low, higher, low fire, 0:05:12.560 --> 0:05:18.720 relatively undynamic labor market right now where enough workers are 0:05:18.839 --> 0:05:21.560 landing on their feet and finding jobs to keep the 0:05:21.640 --> 0:05:26.480 unemployment rate relatively low. It's not screaming labor market dynamism, 0:05:27.520 --> 0:05:30.720 but again it's enough to create smooth enough sailing in 0:05:30.760 --> 0:05:33.440 the near term despite the kinetic conflict in the Middle 0:05:33.440 --> 0:05:37.720 East that for example, the FED can stay on hold. 0:05:37.800 --> 0:05:40.960 It has enough time to wait it out and make 0:05:41.000 --> 0:05:43.479 a more deliberate decision in the second half of this year. 0:05:43.920 --> 0:05:46.880 Yeah, we just came out of a FED decision just 0:05:47.040 --> 0:05:49.599 last week where they did decide to stay on hold. 0:05:49.640 --> 0:05:52.920 But we did get those descents from three policy makers 0:05:52.920 --> 0:05:57.480 who say they oppose the language that hinted at interstraight 0:05:57.560 --> 0:06:00.960 cuts down the road. Do you expect this jobs report 0:06:01.120 --> 0:06:03.599 to shift that bias in any way? 0:06:04.000 --> 0:06:08.479 It's interesting when we look at the labor market, we 0:06:08.560 --> 0:06:12.159 look at which direction the risk cuts for the unemployment rate. 0:06:12.560 --> 0:06:16.360 Odds favor the unemployment rate coming down, and I expect 0:06:16.400 --> 0:06:19.200 that the central banker is in the room last week 0:06:20.040 --> 0:06:23.400 understood that same reality that the risk is skewed towards 0:06:23.440 --> 0:06:26.360 the unemployment rate coming down. And when that's the case, 0:06:27.360 --> 0:06:30.240 to the three relatively hawkish members who did not want 0:06:30.279 --> 0:06:33.240 to include a dubbish bias in the FMC statement, it's 0:06:33.360 --> 0:06:36.640 very understandable why they wanted to strike a more neutral tone. 0:06:36.920 --> 0:06:40.560 If you expect the labor market to be improving modestly, 0:06:40.600 --> 0:06:43.480 and you expect the unemployment rate to inch down, why 0:06:43.640 --> 0:06:46.200 suggest that the next move is going to be an 0:06:46.200 --> 0:06:49.080 interest rate cut. So I totally understand that, and I 0:06:49.160 --> 0:06:52.880 expect that this April Jobs report is going to affirm 0:06:53.000 --> 0:06:56.320 exactly what those relative hawks on the committee we're saying, 0:06:56.520 --> 0:06:59.240 where they should be striking a relatively more neutral tone 0:06:59.279 --> 0:06:59.839 at this moment. 0:07:00.200 --> 0:07:04.480 Appreciate this, Stuart, as always, that's Stuart paul Us economist 0:07:04.600 --> 0:07:07.920 with Bloomberg Economics. Let's take a look now, add some 0:07:07.960 --> 0:07:10.360 stocks making news in the week ahead. I'm Nathan Hager, 0:07:10.440 --> 0:07:14.360 joined by Bloomberg Equities reporter Matthew Griffin with more earnings 0:07:14.360 --> 0:07:16.920 to stay on top of this week. Matthew, maybe the 0:07:16.960 --> 0:07:19.840 biggest name that we're looking at is the biggest name 0:07:19.880 --> 0:07:23.920 in entertainment, Walt Disney reporting earnings on Wednesday, the first 0:07:23.960 --> 0:07:26.840 one under the new CEO, Josh Tomorrow, if I'm not mistaken, 0:07:26.920 --> 0:07:27.320 Is that right? 0:07:27.720 --> 0:07:27.960 Yes? 0:07:28.240 --> 0:07:30.880 And Nathan, I think that's going to put a lot 0:07:30.960 --> 0:07:35.760 of focus on what the company says here, on the 0:07:35.880 --> 0:07:38.840 questions that they take from analysts, and on what the 0:07:38.880 --> 0:07:42.960 new CEO has to say. You do have relative optimism 0:07:43.040 --> 0:07:46.520 among analysts who expect single digit growth in both adjusted 0:07:46.600 --> 0:07:49.240 earnings per share and revenue. So that's a dollar fifty 0:07:49.280 --> 0:07:53.240 one in EPs and nearly twenty five billion dollars in revenue. 0:07:53.480 --> 0:07:57.600 But if you think about the news for this company 0:07:57.680 --> 0:08:01.240 in recent months, a lot of it has again been 0:08:01.320 --> 0:08:03.320 about what the company has to say. So on the 0:08:03.320 --> 0:08:05.840 financial side, you had to share sell off after the 0:08:05.920 --> 0:08:09.240 last earnings, Disney said they expected only modest growth in 0:08:09.280 --> 0:08:12.400 the March quarter. As they, for example, had trouble getting 0:08:12.440 --> 0:08:16.040 international visitors to come to their parks. It's getting more 0:08:16.080 --> 0:08:21.040 expensive to air live sports. Now under Josh Tomorrow's tenure, 0:08:21.320 --> 0:08:24.560 you have this dust up with the Trump administration yet 0:08:24.600 --> 0:08:28.040 again over Jimmy Kimmel. I think analysts are really going 0:08:28.120 --> 0:08:29.880 to pepper this company with questions and are going to 0:08:29.960 --> 0:08:32.160 be listening closely as our investors to what they have 0:08:32.240 --> 0:08:32.520 to say. 0:08:32.760 --> 0:08:37.640 I mean, what is the pressure on Tomorrow to outperform 0:08:37.679 --> 0:08:39.600 given the stock performance so far this year? 0:08:40.960 --> 0:08:44.600 Yes, you know, it's interesting. I do think investors had 0:08:44.760 --> 0:08:48.440 some level of patience with Bob Iger, even though the 0:08:48.440 --> 0:08:52.080 company wasn't necessarily seen as innovating or as growing to 0:08:52.120 --> 0:08:56.000 the extent that people wanted. So he may have a 0:08:56.000 --> 0:08:58.199 bit of runway, and he's making some moves. The company 0:08:58.280 --> 0:09:00.559 does have plans to cut jobs in an attempt to 0:09:00.600 --> 0:09:03.000 cut costs. But I do think there's going to be 0:09:03.040 --> 0:09:06.800 an expectation eventually of better results in better stock performance 0:09:06.920 --> 0:09:09.720 than Eiger delivered in his second tenure at the company. 0:09:09.960 --> 0:09:12.440 The stock was up during his time as CEO, but 0:09:12.559 --> 0:09:14.560 badly trailed the broader market. 0:09:14.360 --> 0:09:16.280 All right, So that could be the marquee event. This week, 0:09:16.440 --> 0:09:19.200 we hear from Disney on Wednesday, but before that, after 0:09:19.240 --> 0:09:21.200 all the tech earnings we saw last week, we hear 0:09:21.240 --> 0:09:24.559 from one more name in the chip space on Tuesday. 0:09:24.600 --> 0:09:26.920 What are we looking for from Advanced micro Devices? 0:09:27.440 --> 0:09:31.199 Well, Nathan, I think investors are going to be expecting 0:09:31.280 --> 0:09:35.000 a lot from the chip maker. You have the shares 0:09:35.040 --> 0:09:37.440 trading at all time highs, and if you think about 0:09:37.440 --> 0:09:40.080 what we've seen in recent weeks, you had blockbuster outlooks 0:09:40.080 --> 0:09:44.480 from Intel, from Texas Instruments share reactions to match. Now 0:09:44.559 --> 0:09:48.600 you've had the sort of hyper scaler technology companies such 0:09:48.640 --> 0:09:52.600 as Meta raise their expectations for capital expenditures this year. 0:09:53.600 --> 0:09:56.400 If you look at the actual numbers that analysts are 0:09:56.440 --> 0:09:59.640 looking for, they're looking for just under nine point nine 0:09:59.679 --> 0:10:03.160 billion dollars in revenue. That's in the range that AMD 0:10:03.640 --> 0:10:08.040 gave when they last reported earnings. That being said, that 0:10:08.200 --> 0:10:10.640 was seen as disappointing at the time, you had the 0:10:10.840 --> 0:10:13.560 stock's steepest drop in years after that, and if you 0:10:13.600 --> 0:10:17.160 look at the stock rally now, investors may be looking 0:10:17.200 --> 0:10:18.280 for some upside there. 0:10:18.720 --> 0:10:21.680 Yeah, I mean there's a lot of upside already with 0:10:21.880 --> 0:10:25.240 this stock. It's been surging since the start of the year. 0:10:25.559 --> 0:10:29.440 Is this almost a price to perfection moment for AMD so? 0:10:29.880 --> 0:10:32.520 Yes, this stock up sixty two percent year to date, 0:10:32.600 --> 0:10:36.600 and it does feel like the entire semiconductor ecosystem is 0:10:36.720 --> 0:10:40.760 price to perfection. You had the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index just 0:10:40.840 --> 0:10:44.560 went on a record long winning streak. You just look, basically, 0:10:44.600 --> 0:10:48.880 there's green across the board. And yet at the same time, 0:10:48.960 --> 0:10:55.959 there are questions about the profitability of investments in artificial intelligence. 0:10:56.040 --> 0:10:58.920 Investors just constantly have their eyes on that, and I 0:10:58.960 --> 0:11:01.520 do think each and dual company is going to be 0:11:01.559 --> 0:11:04.360 expected to deliver something concrete for investors to chew on. 0:11:04.840 --> 0:11:10.920 Also on Wednesday, we hear from Marriott International, always curious 0:11:10.960 --> 0:11:14.480 to see how travel names are doing given all that's 0:11:14.520 --> 0:11:15.840 going on in geopolitics. 0:11:16.640 --> 0:11:20.640 Yes, and the really interesting thing here with Marriott International 0:11:20.679 --> 0:11:22.720 is that this also looks like a stock that may 0:11:22.760 --> 0:11:25.360 be priced for perfection. Even during the war in Iran, 0:11:25.840 --> 0:11:30.680 the stock is trading close to all time highs again, 0:11:30.880 --> 0:11:33.800 even though hotels in the Middle East, many of them 0:11:33.840 --> 0:11:37.880 are near empty. Even though consumers are facing pricier airfares, 0:11:38.200 --> 0:11:41.960 are facing higher fuel costs that are eating into their budgets. 0:11:42.400 --> 0:11:47.360 Right now, investors are positioned in hotel names as if 0:11:47.440 --> 0:11:49.800 that's not going to matter, as if there's going to 0:11:49.840 --> 0:11:54.439 be enough upside, especially from for example, higher income consumers, 0:11:54.840 --> 0:11:57.960 to wash all of that away. But we've started to 0:11:58.000 --> 0:12:00.960 see some weakness showing up, for example in outlooks from 0:12:01.080 --> 0:12:05.400 Hilton and elsewhere in travel from booking holdings. I think 0:12:05.679 --> 0:12:08.320 investors and analysts want to know whether Marriott's under some 0:12:08.360 --> 0:12:09.160 of that same pressure. 0:12:09.400 --> 0:12:11.640 All right, well, we'll be watching for it all with 0:12:12.040 --> 0:12:15.840 earnings coming up later this week. That is Matthew Griffin, 0:12:15.960 --> 0:12:20.240 equities reporter for Bloomberg News. Coming up on Bloomberg day 0:12:20.240 --> 0:12:22.640 Break weekend, We're going to look ahead to an unusually 0:12:22.679 --> 0:12:26.760 important set of local elections in the UK. I'm Nathan 0:12:26.800 --> 0:12:41.679 Hagar and this is Bloomberg. This is Bloomberg day Break weekend, 0:12:41.679 --> 0:12:44.240 our global look ahead at the top stories for investors 0:12:44.240 --> 0:12:47.080 in the coming week. I'm Nathan Hager in Washington. Up 0:12:47.160 --> 0:12:49.559 later in our program will look to a monetary policy 0:12:49.600 --> 0:12:53.320 decision from the Reserve Bank of Australia. But first, voters 0:12:53.360 --> 0:12:56.200 across the UK go to the polls May seventh, in 0:12:56.280 --> 0:12:59.000 the biggest test for political parties at the ballot box. 0:12:59.240 --> 0:13:02.280 Since keer Starmers left leaning Labor Party won the UK's 0:13:02.320 --> 0:13:05.040 general election in July of last year. We get more 0:13:05.080 --> 0:13:08.520 from Bloomberg Daybreak europe banker Caroline Hepger in London. 0:13:08.880 --> 0:13:12.679 Nathan Local councils are in charge of providing care for 0:13:12.760 --> 0:13:17.760 the elderly and disabled, fixing roads, collecting rubbish and dealing 0:13:17.840 --> 0:13:23.640 with planning applications. Usually local elections are well local, but 0:13:23.800 --> 0:13:27.120 this set of elections is going to be much more significant, 0:13:27.480 --> 0:13:31.800 with voters in Scotland and Wales also electing representatives to 0:13:31.880 --> 0:13:36.640 their national parliaments. Not only are local council taxes going up, 0:13:36.679 --> 0:13:40.400 but this could also be a hugely significant moment when 0:13:40.640 --> 0:13:45.079 UK politics shifts decisively from the dominance of a few 0:13:45.240 --> 0:13:50.280 parties to fracturing into possibly as many as seven. Barely 0:13:50.320 --> 0:13:54.079 two years since the Labor Party won a landslide election 0:13:55.320 --> 0:13:58.240 with five thousand council seats up for grabs in England, 0:13:58.240 --> 0:14:01.360 here are the five main parties in England talking about 0:14:01.360 --> 0:14:02.000 their hopes. 0:14:02.800 --> 0:14:07.320 More right, more security for renters, lifting half a million 0:14:07.400 --> 0:14:08.559 children out of poverty. 0:14:08.840 --> 0:14:11.920 That's our mandate, that's our mission, and nothing's going to. 0:14:11.920 --> 0:14:12.640 Hold us back. 0:14:12.800 --> 0:14:18.679 It's been one disaster after another, cronyism, jobs for friends 0:14:18.720 --> 0:14:23.640 of convicted pedophiles, peerages for other friends of convicted pedophiles, 0:14:23.920 --> 0:14:28.120 broken promises on taxes, you turn after U turn after 0:14:28.200 --> 0:14:28.680 you turn. 0:14:29.320 --> 0:14:31.000 Just a few years after we went through all this 0:14:31.560 --> 0:14:34.960 under Bryce Johnson and the Conservatives, in less than two 0:14:35.040 --> 0:14:38.600 years after British people voted them out of office for 0:14:38.680 --> 0:14:42.600 indulging in this sort of chaos and distraction, here we 0:14:42.760 --> 0:14:43.720 are again. 0:14:44.280 --> 0:14:47.120 I genuinely believe that reform are going to do so 0:14:47.280 --> 0:14:49.920 well in the Midlands, the North, South Wales that it 0:14:49.960 --> 0:14:51.920 will be the end of the prime minister. And frankly, 0:14:52.400 --> 0:14:54.520 you know, I'm of the view that this is the 0:14:54.560 --> 0:14:59.280 most unpatriotic, Unbritish, dissembling prime minister that the country's ever had. 0:14:59.440 --> 0:15:01.040 I think one of the reasons we're seeing the rise 0:15:01.080 --> 0:15:02.920 of the far right in our communities or some of 0:15:02.920 --> 0:15:05.680 our communities, is because people feel, in fact, they don't 0:15:05.720 --> 0:15:09.240 just feel they know that politics is being done to 0:15:09.280 --> 0:15:11.880 them rather than with them. People feel like they're not 0:15:12.000 --> 0:15:15.440 involved in decisions, money is being spent, and they feel 0:15:15.440 --> 0:15:17.720 like the communities are disintegrating, that they're being afraid of 0:15:17.760 --> 0:15:18.280 the edges. 0:15:18.520 --> 0:15:22.400 So that was Labor, the Conservatives, the Greens, Reform UK 0:15:22.600 --> 0:15:28.120 and Liberal Democrats talking about their hopes for the local elections. Well, 0:15:28.200 --> 0:15:31.600 joining me now is Irena Angel, our UK Economy reporter, 0:15:31.720 --> 0:15:35.840 and James Walcock, ore UK Politics reporter, just lay out 0:15:35.920 --> 0:15:39.000 how big these elections actually are. I mean, as I say, 0:15:39.360 --> 0:15:42.680 local elections are usually about potholes, but perhaps not this time. 0:15:43.080 --> 0:15:46.080 That's right. So this round of elections is big in scope, 0:15:46.120 --> 0:15:48.480 so they will determine they might determine the fate of 0:15:48.520 --> 0:15:51.080 Prime Minister Cure Starmer. But they are also very big 0:15:51.120 --> 0:15:54.080 in size. So on May seven, the same day that 0:15:54.160 --> 0:15:57.360 Scotland and Wales vote for new governments, we have over 0:15:57.440 --> 0:16:00.480 five thousand seats up for grabs in why one hundred 0:16:00.480 --> 0:16:03.640 and thirty six of England's almost two hundred local councils, 0:16:04.040 --> 0:16:07.480 and that's predominantly in London and the Southeast. So compared 0:16:07.520 --> 0:16:10.640 to the last years, these elections are taking place on 0:16:10.720 --> 0:16:14.360 much more labor territory and that's what makes them essentially 0:16:14.400 --> 0:16:16.480 a referendum on Starmer's leadership. 0:16:16.640 --> 0:16:20.520 Yes, that's interesting. You've been looking at the data. These 0:16:20.720 --> 0:16:25.840 elections are then showing also quite a fracturing. It's not 0:16:25.920 --> 0:16:30.200 actually about just the traditional opposition party, the Conservatives, It 0:16:30.320 --> 0:16:32.720 might be about many more parties this time around. 0:16:33.240 --> 0:16:36.280 That's right, Labor and the Conservatives. So the two parties 0:16:36.320 --> 0:16:39.800 that have dominated the British politics, they've been losing support 0:16:40.120 --> 0:16:43.400 in all directions really in recent years, you know, amid 0:16:43.400 --> 0:16:46.760 the cost of living crisis, political scandals on popular fiscal 0:16:46.800 --> 0:16:49.960 measures and lots of other things. But at the national 0:16:50.080 --> 0:16:53.960 level we now have five parties, so Labor, the Conservatives Reformed, 0:16:54.000 --> 0:16:58.920 the Greens and the Liberal Democrats pulling in the double figures. 0:16:59.080 --> 0:17:01.960 And you know, the local level, together Label and the 0:17:01.960 --> 0:17:05.479 Conservatives only hold just over half of all council seats 0:17:05.880 --> 0:17:08.719 and that's the lowest since at least the nineteen seventies, 0:17:08.760 --> 0:17:11.359 after the last year's locals, so that proportion used to 0:17:11.359 --> 0:17:14.879 be around seventy eighty percent over the last fifty years. 0:17:14.920 --> 0:17:17.199 And the thing is it could go even lower. So 0:17:17.680 --> 0:17:20.679 pulling ahead of the May seven locals shows that a 0:17:20.760 --> 0:17:23.520 good night for Labor and the Tories would mean losing 0:17:23.640 --> 0:17:26.880 hundreds of seats each, but on a good night performing 0:17:26.960 --> 0:17:30.320 the Greens could win over one thousand seats each. So 0:17:30.520 --> 0:17:33.240 the two party system has been fracturing for a while now, 0:17:33.280 --> 0:17:37.520 but this round of local elections might deliver the final blow. 0:17:38.000 --> 0:17:40.720 Yeah. Absolutely, And we're going to be watching lots of 0:17:40.720 --> 0:17:44.240 different regions, aren't we. The Nations regiency as Scotland and Wales, 0:17:44.280 --> 0:17:48.000 but also the West Midlands and London, London's mini traditional 0:17:48.080 --> 0:17:51.320 stronghold of the Labor Party. You know they control twenty 0:17:51.359 --> 0:17:56.080 one out of thirty two boroughs in London. James, let 0:17:56.119 --> 0:18:00.119 me return to you. We have seen kistom in troll, 0:18:00.119 --> 0:18:03.120 but a lot of trouble. Why though, you know, as 0:18:03.160 --> 0:18:05.800 we think about this set of local elections as being 0:18:05.840 --> 0:18:09.520 a major test for Keir Starmer and his government, why 0:18:09.600 --> 0:18:10.480 has it come to this? 0:18:11.240 --> 0:18:14.879 I think if there ever were a honeymoon for winning 0:18:14.880 --> 0:18:17.480 the Lands election twenty twenty four, it's it's not just ended, 0:18:17.480 --> 0:18:20.640 it's gone down in flames. Now with politics, it's all 0:18:20.640 --> 0:18:22.520 messy and interlinks with each other. But if you're trying 0:18:22.560 --> 0:18:26.320 to condense this into three reasons, Starmer is the most 0:18:26.400 --> 0:18:29.040 unpopular prime minister in modern politics, not just in the 0:18:29.080 --> 0:18:31.919 extent of popularity, but in the speed of which he 0:18:31.960 --> 0:18:36.120 has become unpopular. He is scandal prone and I say 0:18:36.160 --> 0:18:38.240 this because he has lost two of his chiefs of staff, 0:18:38.240 --> 0:18:41.000 the most recent one just this January. He has lost 0:18:41.160 --> 0:18:44.280 two heads of the civil servants and one step down naturally. 0:18:44.320 --> 0:18:47.000 Simon Casey Lorn was sacked, Chris Wormold he's on his third. 0:18:47.000 --> 0:18:50.399 Antonio Romeo. He's lost his deputy Prime Minister Anderna and 0:18:50.480 --> 0:18:53.520 had to replace her as well. There has been multiple 0:18:53.600 --> 0:18:56.639 chopping and changing this government and that has led to him, 0:18:56.640 --> 0:19:00.800 amongst other reasons, being seen as weak. In January, Labor's 0:19:00.960 --> 0:19:03.960 head in Scotland, Annas Starwak, disowned him and said he 0:19:04.000 --> 0:19:06.560 should leave Prime minister. All this sounds up to say 0:19:06.640 --> 0:19:11.359 there are clear rumblings now from sort of leadership rivals 0:19:11.680 --> 0:19:15.560 who can all, like me Karine's reader calendar, see sort 0:19:15.560 --> 0:19:17.600 of the writing on the wall for the next week 0:19:18.280 --> 0:19:21.600 and are starting to sort of wonder if this might 0:19:21.640 --> 0:19:24.520 be the moment they step into the limelight and say 0:19:24.520 --> 0:19:26.120 they could do a better job. 0:19:27.000 --> 0:19:30.840 So Irena. Lots of anticipation then on what the results 0:19:30.920 --> 0:19:34.400 might actually show, because that's going to be key. You know, 0:19:34.680 --> 0:19:38.919 just how badly Labor does will be important. One of 0:19:38.920 --> 0:19:43.280 Britain's most well known polsters, John Curtis, talking about the 0:19:43.320 --> 0:19:49.719 elections posing a potentially remarkable calamity for the government and 0:19:49.800 --> 0:19:52.560 also for the Conservatives. So what are we thinking about 0:19:52.920 --> 0:19:57.200 and expecting in terms of results, any clear winners and losers. 0:19:57.440 --> 0:20:01.000 Well, so, if you ask voters themselves, they expect a 0:20:01.000 --> 0:20:04.760 power shift towards the insurgents, towards reforming the Greens. And 0:20:04.920 --> 0:20:07.359 you know, they do blame labor for the decline in 0:20:07.400 --> 0:20:09.880 public services, both with the national edit. 0:20:09.760 --> 0:20:10.680 The local levels. 0:20:11.440 --> 0:20:12.400 However, there is not. 0:20:12.560 --> 0:20:15.520 One party that's seen as the replacement. You know, when 0:20:15.560 --> 0:20:18.520 asked who would be the best at running the local council, 0:20:18.640 --> 0:20:21.200 a quarter of voters say they just don't know, while 0:20:21.240 --> 0:20:24.000 the rest are split between the five parties. So, you know, 0:20:24.040 --> 0:20:26.800 Gideon Skinner from IPSU said that we're in this sort 0:20:26.840 --> 0:20:30.320 of multi party system where no one convinces the majority. 0:20:30.480 --> 0:20:33.040 So if there was, if there is a winner, a 0:20:33.080 --> 0:20:35.199 clear winner from these local elections, it might not be 0:20:35.640 --> 0:20:38.040 an actual party. It might just be the new multi 0:20:38.080 --> 0:20:38.800 party system. 0:20:39.119 --> 0:20:43.080 Okay, Yeah, which I suppose is quite European in some ways, 0:20:43.119 --> 0:20:46.080 isn't it. I mean, if you compare the number of 0:20:46.080 --> 0:20:50.280 parties in many European countries, James, how quickly do you 0:20:50.320 --> 0:20:53.840 think that this could unravel the local elections are on 0:20:53.920 --> 0:20:57.159 a Thursday, take some time to get the results. What 0:20:57.280 --> 0:20:58.720 could be the fallout. 0:20:59.440 --> 0:21:04.000 All the pens on if one of these leadership contenders 0:21:04.040 --> 0:21:07.639 in Labor chooses to say this has gone terribly we 0:21:07.720 --> 0:21:11.240 need a change of leadership. If that sort of boulder 0:21:11.440 --> 0:21:14.760 starts going down the hill, it can happen very quickly. Indeed, 0:21:14.800 --> 0:21:17.679 I mean I look back to Boris Johnson when he 0:21:17.760 --> 0:21:22.240 left office, the Conservative Prime Minister. All it took was 0:21:22.800 --> 0:21:25.440 the then Chancellor She's sunac saying sort of his confidence 0:21:25.520 --> 0:21:28.240 was up, and then like a sort of tide bursting 0:21:28.240 --> 0:21:31.640 a bank, so many more politicians joined in behind him. 0:21:32.000 --> 0:21:36.120 On the other hand, increasingly now it's looking like there 0:21:36.119 --> 0:21:39.679 are multiple different factions inside Labor, some sort of in 0:21:39.720 --> 0:21:41.840 the sort of center right unite behind say where's streeting 0:21:41.840 --> 0:21:43.879 the health sefety some prefer and as the rain of 0:21:43.920 --> 0:21:46.640 the former deputy Prime Minister, like Andy Burnham, the current 0:21:46.640 --> 0:21:49.760 mayor of Manchester. No one is yet seemed to sort 0:21:49.760 --> 0:21:51.920 of have a quorum, at least based on what we're 0:21:51.920 --> 0:21:54.760 seeing in public, and that might mean that with no 0:21:54.960 --> 0:21:57.240 everyone sort of struggling to get on top, no one 0:21:57.280 --> 0:21:59.200 says anything, and then we could be in the position 0:21:59.280 --> 0:22:01.280 for months that could still be in office by the 0:22:01.359 --> 0:22:04.680 end of this year. It could just gum up the system. 0:22:04.920 --> 0:22:07.360 But currently, what you've got to understand about local elections 0:22:07.440 --> 0:22:11.680 is it is no MPs are lawmakers in Parliament are 0:22:11.680 --> 0:22:14.160 on the line here, but all their counselors are, all 0:22:14.200 --> 0:22:16.320 the people who've backed them for their seats, are, all 0:22:16.359 --> 0:22:19.359 the people who campaign for them are there. And it 0:22:19.480 --> 0:22:22.960 is a real psychological loss for a lot of these 0:22:23.200 --> 0:22:26.639 MPs if they lose all of their people who go 0:22:26.680 --> 0:22:28.600